4 ms·

This article seems to be saying that Tesla is in a good place because they build good, popular cars and electric vehicles are the future. Maybe, I'm reading di

This article seems to be saying that Tesla is in a good place because they build good, popular cars and electric vehicles are the future. Maybe, I'm reading different news stories than the author, but I don't feel like those are criticisms of Tesla that I'm seeing anymore. Pretty much every current news story I'm seeing is either focusing on Tesla running out of money because their cars aren't profitable enough, or the fact that Elon's behavior on Twitter is hurting the company. The author addresses neither of these points. Sure, maybe a few years ago I could get behind the idea that the Koch bothers are spending billions of dollars to try and suppress the electric car industry. But currently, pretty much every major car company has some sort of electric offering and many are making commitments to be fully electric in the near future. Even if the Koch's are spending money to hurt the electric car industry, it seems like they are fighting a losing battle. Honestly, this whole article reads like a straw man argument.

jsight 8y ago
I am a fan of Tesla who feels like a lot of the coverage has been really unfair. I still largely agree with the point that you are making, and I don't really consider this article to be better than some of the "bear" case articles that I have seen from time to time for the past few months. Having said that, I think it is also a little unfair to imply that the work that the (???) are doing to try to push a false narrative and to get that narrative into the press has been unsuccessful. I'm honestly not even sure what to call these people. Are they really shorts in all cases? Maybe call them the twitter-geniuses-who-use #tslaq a lot? An example is this article: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/business/tesla-cars-questions.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/business/tesla-cars-quest... Despite the title, did that article actually unravel the mystery? Or did it just devolve into unsupported claims of soft demand and quality issues, along with a poor job of setting an appropriate baseline for how much inventory a typical auto-maker would have in-transit? I wouldn't attribute it to malice, but would these poorly researched articles exist were it not for the "tslaq" crowd stuffing "tips" to friendly reporters? And do they have something to gain from such mediocre work?
agumonkey 8y ago
The Tesla profitable article wave seems done. They seem to have managed to scale just enough and just stable enough to unfold orders which was already a risk a year ago.
crunchyfrog 8y ago
Of course the narrative has changed because Tesla's success has forced it to change but the underlying conclusion (i.e. "Tesla is doomed") has remained the same through out. It would be ridiculous if they were still running articles about how Tesla will never build the Model S or the Model 3 or reach 5,000 cars a week or are always bursting into flames or whatever because reality has proved them wrong time and again. Saying this new narrative is plausible unlike all those previous narratives ignores that all those previous narratives where plausible and wrong when they were pushed.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  Tesla still hasn't consistently hit 5000 cars a week. They've so far only managed this for about 3-4 weeks, split up between two roughly fortnight-lengths periods at the end of quarters. It's possible they managed to hit this milestone in Q3, but based on past PR behavior if they had they would have let the world know by now. The naysayers were never saying that Tesla would never build a Model S or Model 3, you're just creating false strawmen to tear down. The naysayers were always saying that Tesla wouldn't be able to make cars profitably, which to date it has not by industry-standard metrics or the generally accepted accounting principles (i.e., GAAP) most companies use (and definitely not under IFRS standards, which most non-US companies use).
  - prostoalex 8y ago
    The 5,000 mark seems to be a red herring, though. Tesla has lined up European and Chinese factories (latter one seems to be accelerated due to tariffs) and copying existing processes to new factories is something that seems doable. So even if Fremont stays at 4,500 forever, they could double or triple worldwide weekly production by just completing the factory build outs.
- superfrank 8y ago
  The validity of previous criticisms of Tesla don't negate current criticisms of Tesla. You don't get to say, well the media was wrong about Tesla last time, so they will be wrong about it next time. Sure, if there is a history of them being wrong (which the author claims there is), it can be part of your argument, but it can't be the entire argument. It seems we both agree that not many people are currently criticizing Tesla for making bad cars, or not being able to hit production goals, or that electric cars aren't useful, yet this whole article focuses on refuting those points. IMO, it seems most of the current criticisms of Tesla are that Elon Musk's antics on Twitter are hurting the company and that they aren't yet profitable and have some big debt payments due in the near future. The author of the post has done nothing to respond to those points, which is why I feel this is a straw man. Look at it this way, even if you think there is a media campaign to make Tesla and Elon look bad, and all these criticisms are just pulled out of thin air, a broken clock is still right twice a day. You can't just say, well they are out to get Tesla because, even if they are, that doesn't mean what they say isn't true.
0x54D5 8y ago
Everyone focuses on car production volume while completely ignoring the battery production & solar panel production volumes. Tesla is more of a battery company than a car company. In that regard their products always have waiting lists and are certainly very profitable. Their car business is simply a way to increase demand for their batteries.

jsight 8y ago

I am a fan of Tesla who feels like a lot of the coverage has been really unfair. I still largely agree with the point that you are making, and I don't really consider this article to be better than some of the "bear" case articles that I have seen from time to time for the past few months. Having said that, I think it is also a little unfair to imply that the work that the (???) are doing to try to push a false narrative and to get that narrative into the press has been unsuccessful. I'm honestly not even sure what to call these people. Are they really shorts in all cases? Maybe call them the twitter-geniuses-who-use #tslaq a lot? An example is this article: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/business/tesla-cars-questions.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/business/tesla-cars-quest... Despite the title, did that article actually unravel the mystery? Or did it just devolve into unsupported claims of soft demand and quality issues, along with a poor job of setting an appropriate baseline for how much inventory a typical auto-maker would have in-transit? I wouldn't attribute it to malice, but would these poorly researched articles exist were it not for the "tslaq" crowd stuffing "tips" to friendly reporters? And do they have something to gain from such mediocre work?

agumonkey 8y ago

The Tesla profitable article wave seems done. They seem to have managed to scale just enough and just stable enough to unfold orders which was already a risk a year ago.

crunchyfrog 8y ago

Of course the narrative has changed because Tesla's success has forced it to change but the underlying conclusion (i.e. "Tesla is doomed") has remained the same through out. It would be ridiculous if they were still running articles about how Tesla will never build the Model S or the Model 3 or reach 5,000 cars a week or are always bursting into flames or whatever because reality has proved them wrong time and again. Saying this new narrative is plausible unlike all those previous narratives ignores that all those previous narratives where plausible and wrong when they were pushed.

gamblor956 8y ago
Tesla still hasn't consistently hit 5000 cars a week. They've so far only managed this for about 3-4 weeks, split up between two roughly fortnight-lengths periods at the end of quarters. It's possible they managed to hit this milestone in Q3, but based on past PR behavior if they had they would have let the world know by now. The naysayers were never saying that Tesla would never build a Model S or Model 3, you're just creating false strawmen to tear down. The naysayers were always saying that Tesla wouldn't be able to make cars profitably, which to date it has not by industry-standard metrics or the generally accepted accounting principles (i.e., GAAP) most companies use (and definitely not under IFRS standards, which most non-US companies use).
- prostoalex 8y ago
  The 5,000 mark seems to be a red herring, though. Tesla has lined up European and Chinese factories (latter one seems to be accelerated due to tariffs) and copying existing processes to new factories is something that seems doable. So even if Fremont stays at 4,500 forever, they could double or triple worldwide weekly production by just completing the factory build outs.
superfrank 8y ago
The validity of previous criticisms of Tesla don't negate current criticisms of Tesla. You don't get to say, well the media was wrong about Tesla last time, so they will be wrong about it next time. Sure, if there is a history of them being wrong (which the author claims there is), it can be part of your argument, but it can't be the entire argument. It seems we both agree that not many people are currently criticizing Tesla for making bad cars, or not being able to hit production goals, or that electric cars aren't useful, yet this whole article focuses on refuting those points. IMO, it seems most of the current criticisms of Tesla are that Elon Musk's antics on Twitter are hurting the company and that they aren't yet profitable and have some big debt payments due in the near future. The author of the post has done nothing to respond to those points, which is why I feel this is a straw man. Look at it this way, even if you think there is a media campaign to make Tesla and Elon look bad, and all these criticisms are just pulled out of thin air, a broken clock is still right twice a day. You can't just say, well they are out to get Tesla because, even if they are, that doesn't mean what they say isn't true.

0x54D5 8y ago

Everyone focuses on car production volume while completely ignoring the battery production & solar panel production volumes. Tesla is more of a battery company than a car company. In that regard their products always have waiting lists and are certainly very profitable. Their car business is simply a way to increase demand for their batteries.