4 ms·

As a data-point, Amazon lost $3b over their first 6 years before turning a profit (citation: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/dotcom-delight-as-a

by halo 17y ago

As a data-point, Amazon lost $3b over their first 6 years before turning a profit (citation: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/dotcom-delight-as-amazon-makes-first-profit-after-3bn-losses-665950.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/dotcom-delig...) .

yahoog 17y ago
Apples and oranges. Amazon put profits back into their company. They had a business model that worked. Tesla doesn't.
- jbooth 17y ago
  Argument by assertion? You can't just state something like that and not back it up. Unless you want to look ignorant. Tesla sells cars. After building them. For more than it cost to build the car. That's a business model. And they're profitable as of this year, as I cited above, and you keep refusing to acknowledge.
  - yahoog 17y ago
    1. Tesla is not profitable. 2. Tesla currently has no profitable business model. If you want facts, please Google them. Here's a start that's titled "Tesla Motors Files For IPO - So Much For The Profits": http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2010/01/29/tesla-motors-files-for-ipo-so-much-for-the-profits/?mod=rss_WSJBlog http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2010/01/29/tesla-motors-...
    - jbooth 17y ago
      Well, there's different ways to calculate those numbers. If I had to guess, Tesla was referring to EBITA and the WSJ is calling them unprofitable after interest and taxes. At any rate, it's ridiculous to try and claim that they don't have a business model. If they're selling the cars for more money than the incremental unit cost, then they do indeed have a profitable business model. They may not be selling enough of them yet to have a profitable company but claiming that they don't have a business model is just being obtuse. Are you claiming that in 2001, Amazon had no business model? Because that would be the same thing.

4 ms·

As a data-point, Amazon lost $3b over their first 6 years before turning a profit (citation: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/dotcom-delight-as-a

by halo 17y ago

yahoog 17y ago
Apples and oranges. Amazon put profits back into their company. They had a business model that worked. Tesla doesn't.
- jbooth 17y ago
  Argument by assertion? You can't just state something like that and not back it up. Unless you want to look ignorant. Tesla sells cars. After building them. For more than it cost to build the car. That's a business model. And they're profitable as of this year, as I cited above, and you keep refusing to acknowledge.
  - yahoog 17y ago
    1. Tesla is not profitable. 2. Tesla currently has no profitable business model. If you want facts, please Google them. Here's a start that's titled "Tesla Motors Files For IPO - So Much For The Profits": http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2010/01/29/tesla-motors-files-for-ipo-so-much-for-the-profits/?mod=rss_WSJBlog http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2010/01/29/tesla-motors-...
    - jbooth 17y ago
      Well, there's different ways to calculate those numbers. If I had to guess, Tesla was referring to EBITA and the WSJ is calling them unprofitable after interest and taxes. At any rate, it's ridiculous to try and claim that they don't have a business model. If they're selling the cars for more money than the incremental unit cost, then they do indeed have a profitable business model. They may not be selling enough of them yet to have a profitable company but claiming that they don't have a business model is just being obtuse. Are you claiming that in 2001, Amazon had no business model? Because that would be the same thing.