4 ms·

If the people who've made the singular successful US automobile manufacturer & US space travel company in decades are bullshit artists, yet still obviously the

by s5300 5y ago

If the people who've made the singular successful US automobile manufacturer & US space travel company in decades are bullshit artists, yet still obviously the best we have going for us, then damn we in for a bleak future aren't we... I think that may be false and you might just not like Elon though.

shmoe 5y ago
Boeing can't even get off the ground without checking the hardware clock, and Blue Origin has never made it to orbit. I hate people who discount the achievements of SpaceX/Tesla because they tend to make this look easy.
andyxor 5y ago
it’s a common mistake to extend expertise in one domain to other completely unrelated domains A good example is Noam Chomsky and his political ramblings
- staunch 5y ago
  Chomsky is just not as smart as effective as some other people. Many people thought: 1. Elon Musk was a Silicon Valley software guy that couldn't possibly build electric cars or rockets. 2. The Wright brothers were a couple of bicycle mechanics that couldn't possibly build a real flying machine. 3. Steve Jobs was a right-place right-time washed up has-been that could not revive Apple and certainly could not make it the most valuable company on earth. History is full of examples of smart and effective people transferring their abilities to new challenges.
- s5300 5y ago
  This is true, but one should still consider that Musk tends to attract some of the best, brightest, and highly motivated engineers and scientists (despite those who would argue this is false, I think it's quite clear who is correct when looking at the ventures of Alumni of his companies and what his companies have produced so far...) As well as a good amount of non-bureaucratically/red-tape-restricted financial backing. Those conditions seem highly likely to be able to produce results compared to other companies in the space - but I guess only time will tell. For a funnier and maybe slightly less related example like yours though... There is a surviving Japanese company that made samurai swords for a few centuries or so - they now make nail clippers, and they're some of the best damn nail clippers one can buy on this planet. They then ventured into making tweezers as well. You would expect that if they can make such amazing and highly acclaimed nail clippers, they can probably make damn good tweezers as well. Their tweezers are absolutely awful and they've never revised them for as long as they've been selling them.
  - andyxor 5y ago
    That’s a very good example) As for “best and brightest” that won’t help as in terms of understanding cognition we are in pre-science stage, missing that qualitative jump from alchemy to chemistry so to speak. all you need is a philosopher’ stone and a solid round of financing
AlexandrB 5y ago
> If the people who've made the singular successful US automobile manufacturer Tesla shipped 500,000 cars last year, Ford shipped 2 million[1]. I know Tesla's valuation is sky-high, but I think that is the bullshit OP is referring to. To call them the singular successful US automobile manufacturer is ridiculous. [1] https://s23.q4cdn.com/799033206/files/doc_news/2021/1/06/Ford-Q4-2020-Sales-Release-Final.pdf https://s23.q4cdn.com/799033206/files/doc_news/2021/1/06/For...
- borkyborkbork 5y ago
  I googled this for you: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=how+much+debt+is+ford+in https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=how+muc...
- panick21 5y ago
  There is a reason the evaluations are different: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E9FARebWUAYd5NI?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E9FARebWUAYd5NI?format=jpg&name=... Many of the production facilities that Ford uses, and huge sunk cost in things like engine production, are not an asset, but a cost in the long term. Ford will not be making its own batteries, meaning somebody else will make a large part of the profit from each car. Ford will not make its own self driving tech, so some other company will make that profit. Ford will not sell its own cars, meaning they will lose large part of the margin on dealers. Ford is massively invested in things that will be negative assets and has very, very little investment in the things that will matter in the next 5-10 years.
  - AlexandrB 5y ago
    There's "differences in valuation" and then there's Tesla's >300 PE ratio.
    - Seanambers 5y ago
      There's also significant difference in debt levels across the auto industry which also influences valuation. https://mobile.twitter.com/jpr007/status/1405525073218314248/photo/1 https://mobile.twitter.com/jpr007/status/1405525073218314248... With 50% CAGR the PE ratio does not seem so crazy, if growth were to stop, then yes it is crazy.

by s5300 5y ago

shmoe 5y ago

Boeing can't even get off the ground without checking the hardware clock, and Blue Origin has never made it to orbit. I hate people who discount the achievements of SpaceX/Tesla because they tend to make this look easy.

andyxor 5y ago

it’s a common mistake to extend expertise in one domain to other completely unrelated domains A good example is Noam Chomsky and his political ramblings

staunch 5y ago
Chomsky is just not as smart as effective as some other people. Many people thought: 1. Elon Musk was a Silicon Valley software guy that couldn't possibly build electric cars or rockets. 2. The Wright brothers were a couple of bicycle mechanics that couldn't possibly build a real flying machine. 3. Steve Jobs was a right-place right-time washed up has-been that could not revive Apple and certainly could not make it the most valuable company on earth. History is full of examples of smart and effective people transferring their abilities to new challenges.
s5300 5y ago
This is true, but one should still consider that Musk tends to attract some of the best, brightest, and highly motivated engineers and scientists (despite those who would argue this is false, I think it's quite clear who is correct when looking at the ventures of Alumni of his companies and what his companies have produced so far...) As well as a good amount of non-bureaucratically/red-tape-restricted financial backing. Those conditions seem highly likely to be able to produce results compared to other companies in the space - but I guess only time will tell. For a funnier and maybe slightly less related example like yours though... There is a surviving Japanese company that made samurai swords for a few centuries or so - they now make nail clippers, and they're some of the best damn nail clippers one can buy on this planet. They then ventured into making tweezers as well. You would expect that if they can make such amazing and highly acclaimed nail clippers, they can probably make damn good tweezers as well. Their tweezers are absolutely awful and they've never revised them for as long as they've been selling them.
- andyxor 5y ago
  That’s a very good example) As for “best and brightest” that won’t help as in terms of understanding cognition we are in pre-science stage, missing that qualitative jump from alchemy to chemistry so to speak. all you need is a philosopher’ stone and a solid round of financing

AlexandrB 5y ago

> If the people who've made the singular successful US automobile manufacturer Tesla shipped 500,000 cars last year, Ford shipped 2 million[1]. I know Tesla's valuation is sky-high, but I think that is the bullshit OP is referring to. To call them the singular successful US automobile manufacturer is ridiculous. [1] https://s23.q4cdn.com/799033206/files/doc_news/2021/1/06/Ford-Q4-2020-Sales-Release-Final.pdf https://s23.q4cdn.com/799033206/files/doc_news/2021/1/06/For...

borkyborkbork 5y ago
I googled this for you: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=how+much+debt+is+ford+in https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=how+muc...
panick21 5y ago
There is a reason the evaluations are different: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E9FARebWUAYd5NI?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E9FARebWUAYd5NI?format=jpg&name=... Many of the production facilities that Ford uses, and huge sunk cost in things like engine production, are not an asset, but a cost in the long term. Ford will not be making its own batteries, meaning somebody else will make a large part of the profit from each car. Ford will not make its own self driving tech, so some other company will make that profit. Ford will not sell its own cars, meaning they will lose large part of the margin on dealers. Ford is massively invested in things that will be negative assets and has very, very little investment in the things that will matter in the next 5-10 years.
- AlexandrB 5y ago
  There's "differences in valuation" and then there's Tesla's >300 PE ratio.
  - Seanambers 5y ago
    There's also significant difference in debt levels across the auto industry which also influences valuation. https://mobile.twitter.com/jpr007/status/1405525073218314248/photo/1 https://mobile.twitter.com/jpr007/status/1405525073218314248... With 50% CAGR the PE ratio does not seem so crazy, if growth were to stop, then yes it is crazy.