4 ms·

> Because people (for the most part) aren't fools, especially on here. But even if it were true and those revenues wouldn't exists and Tesla would have 0 profi

by nickik 5y ago

> Because people (for the most part) aren't fools, especially on here. But even if it were true and those revenues wouldn't exists and Tesla would have 0 profit, it wouldn't actually change that much about the overall position. If you want to make the argument that Tesla is not worth 600B then just make that argument. Rather then endlessly trying to make an incredibly marginal argument about Quarter to Quarter possibility. Literally nobody that owns Tesla stock believes this Quarter profits are what gives the shares the value. > They all earned their significance by touching so many lives No they don't. In fact most people don't have a clue about what Salesforce is or how IBM touches their lives. They are valued because of their financial data, predictions about and predictions about future potential data. > Musk has been able to answer to such question up to now with: At this point you are just making things up. Musk has not said any of these things and seemingly isn't very interested in answer that question. > People are more and more asking questions though, and he keeps answering with postponements and future deadlines, while Teslas are still less common than Porsches No in fact people are asking less and less questions. The FUD about Tesla was 100x larger a few years ago. Also, even a 14 old should figure out that a product that has 20-30 year utility will be more common then a competitors product of a company that started less then 20 years ago and didn't even growth to any relevant size until less then 5 years ago.

maverick-iceman 5y ago
> No they don't. In fact most people don't have a clue about what Salesforce is or how IBM touches their lives. False, regular people were so confident in IBM that it became a catchphrase in IT departments around the world: "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM!" Meaning the products not the stock. A scenario where you make 150B based on future hypothetical execution which you can always postpone because your cult followers will always give you more time....that is bound to cause an opposite reaction of equal strenght among those who are not part of the cult and see this very suspicious allocation of wealth playing out. It's just what it is, people are suspicious about unjustified enrichment, always have and always will be. The owners and founders of the other companies that I mentioned saw their fortune rise in lockstep with the real life relevance of their company. I mean concrete and tangible relevance, quality of life being produced in a way which is proportional to the rise in wealth, not future projections of infinite growth based on up & to the right charts. Gates first made Windows 3.1 and then became a billionaire, he then made Windows 95 and then became a multibillionaire. Same goes for Rockefeller, Ellison , Buffett and so forth > No in fact people are asking less and less questions. The FUD about Tesla was 100x larger a few years ago. It's not FUD, it's FACTS. As of today Tesla doesn't produce any tangible quality of life, whereas the guy who sued for the title of owner of the company is pocketing quality of life with a shovel, matter of fact he needs thousands of bulldozers to pick up all that quality of life. People look around, see suspicious stuff and sound the alarm, it's just what people do. That's the reason why people report suspicious activity and denounce cults such as Scientology, NXVIM etc and I am sorry but this is one of those cases. You should not be upset about it, you should ask yourself why so many people are sounding the alarm.

by nickik 5y ago

maverick-iceman 5y ago

> No they don't. In fact most people don't have a clue about what Salesforce is or how IBM touches their lives. False, regular people were so confident in IBM that it became a catchphrase in IT departments around the world: "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM!" Meaning the products not the stock. A scenario where you make 150B based on future hypothetical execution which you can always postpone because your cult followers will always give you more time....that is bound to cause an opposite reaction of equal strenght among those who are not part of the cult and see this very suspicious allocation of wealth playing out. It's just what it is, people are suspicious about unjustified enrichment, always have and always will be. The owners and founders of the other companies that I mentioned saw their fortune rise in lockstep with the real life relevance of their company. I mean concrete and tangible relevance, quality of life being produced in a way which is proportional to the rise in wealth, not future projections of infinite growth based on up & to the right charts. Gates first made Windows 3.1 and then became a billionaire, he then made Windows 95 and then became a multibillionaire. Same goes for Rockefeller, Ellison , Buffett and so forth > No in fact people are asking less and less questions. The FUD about Tesla was 100x larger a few years ago. It's not FUD, it's FACTS. As of today Tesla doesn't produce any tangible quality of life, whereas the guy who sued for the title of owner of the company is pocketing quality of life with a shovel, matter of fact he needs thousands of bulldozers to pick up all that quality of life. People look around, see suspicious stuff and sound the alarm, it's just what people do. That's the reason why people report suspicious activity and denounce cults such as Scientology, NXVIM etc and I am sorry but this is one of those cases. You should not be upset about it, you should ask yourself why so many people are sounding the alarm.