23 ms·

Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage. For many people, the very term EV itself is still ubiquitous to Tesla. An

Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage. For many people, the very term EV itself is still ubiquitous to Tesla. And somehow Tesla is still worth more than every other non-Chinese automaker combined. $1.5T. GM? $80B. Stellantis? $40B. Toyota? $280B. Mercedes-Benz? $60B. BMW? $55B. Volkswagen Group? Also $55B. I’m sure I’ve missed plenty of others, but I could miss some 18 $50B automakers, and Tesla would still be worth more than all of them combined. If Tesla was valued fairly, it would probably be at the tune of $5B. But I’ll never bet against it, because the markets can remain irrational for longer than I can remain solvent. And for some unbeknownst to me reason, the markets value Tesla as a hot tech company, not a 3rd rate automaker, which is what it actually is. And to add insult to injury, even GM Super Cruise is widely renowned as better and safer than Tesla’s current “FSD”.

Traster 8mo ago
I think you're totally wrong on this. Tesla didn't waste the first mover advantage. They benefitted from it whilst it existed, but Electric vehicles turned into a commodity, which was entirely expected and there's no moat. You've explained yourself why it would be untenable for Musk to pursue becoming the biggest car manufacturer in the world - if he succeeded in that goal... he would have succeded in shrinking the value of the company significantly. It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that.
- epolanski 8mo ago
  Bingo.
- breve 8mo ago
  Why is making humanoid robots a moat? Other companies have been making robots for longer, humanoid and otherwise, and doing it better. Has Optimus signed up for any sports yet: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/02/china/china-humanoid-robot-sports-intl-hnk-dst https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/02/china/china-humanoid-robo... Is Optimus close to what Boston Dynamics is doing with Atlas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIhzUnvi7Fw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIhzUnvi7Fw
  - SideburnsOfDoom 8mo ago
    > Why is making humanoid robots a moat? It really isn't. (1) Also, what's the first billion dollar market for humanoid robots? Industry? "lights-out manufacturing" exists already, and doesn't require humanoid robots. Hyundai and BYD (among others) say they're going to put humanoid robots in their factories (2). They won't be Tesla robots. Is this really such a huge use? 1)https://www.topgear.com/car-news/tech/here-are-nine-humanoid-robots-used-carmakers-and-no-were-not-scared-all https://www.topgear.com/car-news/tech/here-are-nine-humanoid... 2) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgjm5x54ldo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgjm5x54ldo
    - edmundsauto 8mo ago
      I want my laundry robot!
      - SideburnsOfDoom 8mo ago
        Is that a billion dollar market, is it within reach, and does it require a humanoid? And if so, will any 1 company have a lock on it?
      - omilu 8mo ago
        Yes I would easily pay 20k for a robot to fold and put away laundry.
        marssaxman 8mo ago
        Where I live, wash/dry/fold service costs ~$3/lb including pickup & delivery, so depending on how many clothes you wear in a week you'd be looking at 5-10 years before that robot even starts to pay for itself - without even accounting for the cost of the laundry machines it'll need to use or the water and power to run them. Laundry machines are expected to last 10-15 years; will the robot last so long?
  - dstroot 8mo ago
    Anyone who owns a tesla vehicle with "full self driving" is probably chuckling to themselves about Tesla ever making useful general purpose robots any time soon. Disclaimer, I own two tesla's with FSD and it's far from "full" or "self". I am very sceptical of robotaxis unless they have the appropriate sensors & SW (e.g. Waymo) which Elon has not done. Finally, I know lots of people who own cars, but none who own robots. Many friends will not have Alexa in their homes due to privacy concerns. How many people will trust Elon to have a robot in their homes and assume he's being benign and safe with your personal data?
- sgjohnson 8mo ago
  > It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that. But it's make-believe. Tesla is a car manufacturer. They haven't shipped anything else other than cars. And they even suck at making cars these days. Tesla Semi? All but dead. The new roadster? Also dead. Full Self Driving? Doesn't exist. Robotaxis? Even if they got them to work, at this point the brand is too toxic for widespread adoption of those. They could have persisted at being a disruptive car manufacturer and still held a several hundred billion dollar valuation. Now they are a very mediocre car manufacturer, with their only actual success being conning everyone into believing that they are a bleeding-edge tech company so their $1.5Bn valuation seems justified.
  - dannyfritz07 8mo ago
    A quick search verified they also manufactured batteries, solar modules, and solar shingles.
    - gamerdonkey 8mo ago
      Ford Motor Company manufactured charcoal, but in the end it stayed a car company. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsford_(charcoal)#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsford_(charcoal)#History
  - testing22321 8mo ago
    I know it’s popular to hate on Elon and therefore Tesla, but you need to be accurate when doing so. They’re still chipping away. > Tesla Semi?All but dead. They’ve been running a pilot all this time, and the factory in Nevada to mass produce them is on schedule. Production ramp is second half of this year. The factory is ginormous. > The new roadster? Also dead. Elon said yesterday the unveil is in April “hopefully” > Full Self Driving? Doesn't exist. Robotaxis? Cars are driving passengers around Austin now with nobody in either front seat. It takes automakers almost a decade to bring a new vehicle online, Elon just does it all publicly while everyone else doesn’t take the wraps off until the final 6 months. Obviously everything is way behind elons hype timelines, but I do still think it’s all coming.
- JumpinJack_Cash 8mo ago
  > > It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that. You can pursue everything with words, even you can pursue Sydney Sweeney but then you have to show the receipts. The receipts of Tesla (Factories, lines of production, expertise of people hired, 25 years of history...) are one of car company. But of course, it's all narrative so people will keep outbidding each other to own a piece of this company. The financialization of hope, that's what it is.
- freakynit 8mo ago
  Everything tends toward commodification in a hyper-competitive, hyper-connected world. The only variable is time... and this "time" keeps shrinking. As commodification accelerates, consolidation follows. In the current landscape, where private capital and state power are deeply entangled under the banner of national security, this consolidation no longer stays economic. It becomes geopolitical. The end result... it translates to not just corporate monopolies, but geo-monopolies... enforced not by markets alone, but by coercion, conflict, and control over resources.
- sosomoxie 8mo ago
  Pure logic would dictate that Tesla has a market cap of around $5B. It's actually fraudulent that it's not, and for some reason the SEC allows Musk to lie on every earnings call without repercussion.
  - elzbardico 8mo ago
    Welcome to 2026: Companies routinely, exaggerate, obfuscate and mystify investors. Most of investors don't care. The SEC is a joke.
  - FuriouslyAdrift 8mo ago
    Seems low on a company that is profitable and consistantly has around a $100B a year in revenue with only $13B in debt...
    - dmbche 8mo ago
      more like 12b in 2022 and less every years since down 30% in 2025
    - bratwurst3000 8mo ago
      vw has over 300 billion revenue and way more profit then tesla. still not worth 1/10 of it. 5 billion sounds good for tesla
      - FuriouslyAdrift 8mo ago
        VW is carrying $221B in debt and just closed their main plant in Germany because BYD is eating them alive.
        ahartmetz 8mo ago
        VW just closed a very small plant (165k cars in 24 years) in Germany, the one in Dresden. The largest ones are probably Wolfsburg and Emden, these are running. VW is in trouble, not in terminal decline.
- jordanb 8mo ago
  Tesla's original "secret plan" (published on their website) was to become a commodity car manufacturer faster than electric cars became a commodity. Such that the other manufacturers would find them selling obsolete vehicles and Tesla just becomes the new General Motors. This was the justification for their stock price for quite a few years: "It's logical that Tesla is worth more than all other automakers combined because it will soon be the only automaker." Then in 2022 Elon basically admitted that they couldn't win on production and had to continue to win on technology and they'd do that with self driving. [https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-worth-basically-zero-without-self-driving-2022-6?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-worth-basica...] But now Tesla is way behind on self driving (which was oversold by the whole industry tbh). So what's their new plan? Now they're no longer a car company and will make robots!
  - Deklomalo 8mo ago
    [dead]
  - misiti3780 8mo ago
    way behind compared to whom ?
  - whaleofatw2022 8mo ago
    Your take makes sense. i.e. the GigaPress for frames but it just didnt scale like they hoped.
- jcranmer 8mo ago
  Brand value is definitely a moat. Not the deepest of moats, but it is a moat nonetheless. > It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that. Tesla is valued as if it is a tech company with a car business as a side gig. Its balance sheet is a car business, and I'm not even sure it spends enough on tech to have tech qualify as a side gig. And the other tech avenues it has been pursuing (autonomous vehicles, humanoid robots) are areas that other people have been doing for better and longer. Hell, Honda had autonomous (not tele-operated) humanoid robots working 20 years ago. To be honest, at this point, I mostly consider the other bets that Tesla is pursing are just passion projects to keep the stock price artificially high. Were Tesla more realistically valued, it would lose probably 90% or more of its value, and Musk would be a much poorer man.
- outside1234 8mo ago
  Tesla's moat is constantly moving to the next thing and claiming it has a moat before moving on to the next thing. Elon's business model is moving from one government subsidized thing to the next (see SpaceX now bribing for tax dollars to go to Mars).
- Deklomalo 8mo ago
  [dead]
- arbor_day 8mo ago
  It's not that EVs are a commodity. Competition and speculative production capacity buildouts combined with lower than expected consumer demand made the market less profitable.
- neogodless 8mo ago
  > Electric vehicles turned into a commodity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity > a resource, that specifically has full or substantial fungibility: that is, the market treats instances of the good as equivalent or nearly so with no regard to who produced them Uhh.. not sure where you live or what your local / regional market is like. I'm in the United States, where what car you drive is a really big decision. Many people share on social media what car they bought, and tell people around them about the new car they bought. I've yet to witness a situation where someone said "I bought an electric car" and the response was something like "Why are you telling me you bought toilet paper?" (Even toilet paper has brand names and advertising.) That isn't to say that the car market hasn't shifted over time. Cars began as "engine to move wheels plus a few other things" and evolved so that the engine seemed less of the central reason why you bought a specific vehicle. An electric powertrain does take things a bit further, in that most EV buyers know very little about the motors, though they certainly know a thing or two about the battery. Batteries are generally a commodity at smaller scales, but in a car, they matter significantly. Still, brand matters, too. Ask Lucid or Rivian or Porsche how they sell their electric cars for $70K - $160K. How is it that a commodity available to purchase for ~$30K can be sold for $130K additional? (That's not how commodities work.) No, electric cars are not a commodity. It's just a difficult market with a lot of players, and a broad market with constantly evolving tastes. Ask Toyota why they have half a dozen different SUV models. Or why the Ford F-150 comes in 200 configurations. (That's not how commodities work!) Just because the gasoline-burning engine was replaced with electric motors and batteries, the car didn't turn into a commodity overnight. I'm open to counterarguments and persuasion to the contrary.
- Fischgericht 8mo ago
  If you do not want to run a car company, maybe do not... run a car company? Get an ice cream truck. It absolutely makes no sense to convert a car manufacturer into an AI company. Or a robotics company after you have build CAR FACTORIES around the planet. If you as a CEO don't like the business you are running for your shareholders, it is time to get a new CEO that does. There still are managers that really like running car companies. I don't get the feeling that BYD management is bored about the EV business...
- theshrike79 8mo ago
  The competition was this: Tesla had a very good computer, they were learning how to put a car around it. Traditional manufacturers (German mostly) had good or very good cars, but they sucked at the computer stuff. --- And unknown to all, the Chinese learned how to make good cars with good computers built in as those two were trying to achiever their respective goals.
- AtlasBarfed 8mo ago
  Yeah there's no margin in being a luxury car builder And of course you're just going to pretend what the mission statement was.
- CRConrad 8mo ago
  > It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that. Isn't this in reply to a post (or was that another reply just below it?) about how other, "traditional", car companies are valued at 55, 60, 80, and 280 billion dollars...? Seems being a car company and having a billion dollar valuation isn't all that incompatible.
jacquesm 8mo ago
Tesla benefited from tax payer subsidies.
- ben_w 8mo ago
  An important question is therefore: why didn't anyone else?
  - relaxing 8mo ago
    Of course they did.
  - deleted 8mo ago
    [deleted]
- andruby 8mo ago
  That's true for a lot of (most?) car manufacturers? I fully agree that TSLA is madly overpriced as a car company, and too hyped as any other type of company.
- WarmWash 8mo ago
  Trust me, I hate Tesla and Elon as much as the next naysayer But just to keep the story straight Tesla received ~$3 billion in subsidies. When Elon exercised his Tesla options in 2021, he paid $11 billion in taxes on it. By all accounts those subsidies were an incredibly good use of taxpayer money, and similar subsidies should keep being handed out, even if the byproduct is another big troll on twitter.
  - jordanb 8mo ago
    Dunno where that $3 billion comes from; tesla made 11 billion in regulatory credits alone: https://insideevs.com/news/767939/tesla-regulatory-credit-11-billion/ https://insideevs.com/news/767939/tesla-regulatory-credit-11...
    - WarmWash 8mo ago
      Perhaps you are confused, the regulatory credits were sold by Tesla to other car makers so they could meet their emissions requirements. That $11 billion came from other automakers, not taxpayers.
alex1138 8mo ago
That valuation is sure interesting considering the people killed in crashes from Tesla's self-driving thing Edit: I love making legitimate points and instantly accruing downvotes from 'Valley VC types. Look yourself in the mirror.
- jlongr 8mo ago
  Oh their self-driving thing...Full* "Self" Driving (supervised)(see notes)(not liable for anything)
  - alex1138 8mo ago
    Sorry, I didn't remember what it was called. FSD, I think
gwbas1c 8mo ago
> And to add insult to injury, even GM Super Cruise is widely renowned as better and safer than Tesla’s current “FSD”. My Huyndai's Autopilot equivalent (I don't even know what they call it) is better than the enhanced Autopilot in the Model 3 that I traded in. It actually changes lanes when I put on the blinker, instead of only changing lanes 70% of the time, and the other time just sitting with the blinker on and a clear lane.
- not_ai 8mo ago
  I did not know this and explains why I see so many teslas with their blinkers on and not maneuvering despite having ample room and time. Ultimately this behavior makes them unsafe for their occupants as well as others around them. Cars only work because we can predict driver behavior, if they break that prediction that’s when bad things are likely to happen… Lately I’ve started to ignore Tesla blinker.
  - smotched 8mo ago
    Autopilot doesnt turn on the turn signal or change lanes, what you are dealing with is humans.
    - gwbas1c 8mo ago
      Enchanced autopilot and self-driving do.
  - jordanbeiber 8mo ago
    This is most likely due to the fact that it is really bad at resetting blinker when the steering wheel is straight’ish again. Extremely annoying as any other car is much more sensitive (and sensible). In a tesla an on-ramp to straight highway is rarely enough to stop the blinker, something I’ve never experienced in any other car. Couple this with, IMO, the best baseline speaker system of any manufacturer… I’ve been driving with the blinker on for several kilometers at times!
- philistine 8mo ago
  Most probably because it has a radar that the Tesla lacks. That means your car has two sources of truth and can very efficiently and quickly make an informed decision about whether or not there's anything in the way.
vladms 8mo ago
> If Tesla was valued fairly I think it's a wrong mental model to think of stock market value as "fair" or "unfair" (or maybe it's just me thinking of "unfair" when I see the word "fair"). My impression is that if Tesla would be valued based on quantifiable things it would be much much lower (production costs, competition, revenues, potential, etc.). Of course, you shouldn't value something only based on quantifiable things, but in Tesla the "wishful thinking" part seems to be much larger than for others.
- radlad 8mo ago
  I assume OP meant something closer to "fair market value" than "fair vs. unfair." Tesla is not priced according to its underlying assets or technical analysis (e.g. P/E ratio), but solely based on hype/sentiment. Interestingly, retail investors and company insiders collectively own more of Tesla than institutional investors.
  - marcusverus 8mo ago
    Fair market value: the price at which a thing would change hands between a willing and informed buyer and seller. A company's market cap is, by definition, its fair market value. > Tesla is not priced according to its underlying assets or technical analysis (e.g. P/E ratio), but solely based on hype/sentiment. You're right that it's not priced according to underlying assets, but it doesn't follow that it is priced on vibes. Its price is based on potential future earnings; the expectation that Elon can pull off his plans for a robotaxi fleet or building an Optimus robot that might unlock the massive demand for household and/or general use commercial robots. Both offer the prospect of being the first mover into markets which could be worth trillions. It's speculation, sure, but not mere "vibes". The company is also led by a man who has made and delivered on massive, seemingly impossible promises, which adds credibility to the idea that Tesla might actually bring these markets into existence.
    - Calavar 8mo ago
      Talk about market cap, especially meme stock maket cap, reminds me of that old XKCD comic on extrapolation. Market cap is what you get when you extrapolate the fair market value for the 1% of a company's shares currently on the market all the way out to 100%. But demand doesn't work that way - it doesn't scale linearly.
asah 8mo ago
SpaceX will acquire Tesla and save the shareholders, just like Tesla acquired SolarCity.
- extraduder_ire 8mo ago
  Can they afford to do that? I would assume it would be the other way around unless the valuation of either/both changes drastically. XAI acquiring twitter is probably a better recent example than solarcity.
outside1234 8mo ago
We are in a time when people are in cults. Trump is a cult. Elon is a cult. Tesla is a cult. Cults do not operate on logic, but almost always result in a mass casualty event of some sort.
- notabee 8mo ago
  It's baked into the foundations of the U.S. While perhaps not a cult as we describe it today, even the first puritans that settled here were considered extremists not welcome in their home countries. For such a young country, we have always had a burgeoning industry in upstart cults, grifts, and religions (but I repeat myself).
jmyeet 8mo ago
> Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage. It's a study in many things. Tesla only exists because of the transfer of wealth from the government. DOE loans, EV tax credits and other incentives are the difference between existing and not existing. That's not necessarily bad. The problem is the government really gets nothing for their money. Look at how China incubates their businesses. As an example, imagine where we'd be if the government had insisted on standardized charging infrastructure instead of Tesla's originally proprietary Supercharger network. > If Tesla was valued fairly, it would probably be at the tune of $5B. I could see it as high as $100B but not $1.5T. Not even close. And I, too, would never bet against it. Nothing fundamental is behind Tesla's valuation. It's just gambling.
gkfasdfasdf 8mo ago
> And to add insult to injury, even GM Super Cruise is widely renowned as better and safer than Tesla’s current “FSD”. Do you have any sources for that claim? I can attest that current iteration of FSD is very, very good, and very likely is a safer driver than I am. At least one major insurance company agrees [0]. I don't have any experience with Super Cruise though. [0] - https://www.lemonade.com/fsd https://www.lemonade.com/fsd
- root_axis 8mo ago
  > Do you have any sources for that claim? I can attest that current iteration of FSD is very, very good, and very likely is a safer driver than I am. That's a damning statement about your driving skills, and probably not true or you'd have had your license revoked by now. I've had FSD for five years, and even today it regularly makes dangerous mistakes. For example, left turns and roundabouts are the equivalent of Russian roulette, but just last week my FSD started driving through a red light because it interpreted a green left-arrow as a sign that it could proceed forward. If you need to do 50 miles on the interstate it's pretty solid though.
  - IncreasePosts 8mo ago
    If your Tesla is 5 years old aren't you getting a degraded FSD model due to weak hardware?
    - root_axis 8mo ago
      I took it in for a HW update in 2023. I do believe there is an even newer hardware stack since then, but as far as I'm aware the HW doesn't impact the supported capabilities.
      - gkfasdfasdf 8mo ago
        Congrats on the upgrade - what exactly did they upgrade and what version of FSD are you running? Hardware and software definitely matters. My FSD experience applies to 2026 Model Y, latest FSD (v14.x).
dstroot 8mo ago
And Elon canceled the S and X models but not the Cybertruck? C’mon…
- hnburnsy 8mo ago
  I wonder if they reconfigure it and tone down the look to something more traditional.
Multiplayer 8mo ago
GM Supercruise on my 2024 Silverado RST is a joke compared to Tesla FSD. It's not even remotely comparable. Supercruise only works on freeways/highways, does not understand ANY navigation. It's a better cruise control, that's about it. I own 2 Tesla model S of different vintages and FSD is a completely different animal. My 2017 model s can navigate from my house to, well, anywhere, with no intervention. I have been very disappointed in how long it took Tesla to get here based on the promises they made 10(!) years ago, but they are there now. Even a year ago FSD used to scare me frequently and cause me to disengage but that never happens now.
- pants2 8mo ago
  The only thing remotely comparable in the US is probably a Comma 4 with a forked OpenPilot build on a well-supported vehicle
memish 8mo ago
1. Tesla has $40B in cash and is profitable. To say it's worth $5B is beyond absurd. 2. The market determines what is a fair value, not rando haters on the internet. Even professional Wall Street consensus is that it's fair value at approximately $1.2T market cap.
- rkagerer 8mo ago
  $40B in cash/equivalents, minus some $13-20B in debt (depending what source you pick).
  - hnburnsy 8mo ago
    Plus assets
esseph 8mo ago
> And for some unbeknownst to me reason, the markets value Tesla as a hot tech company, not a 3rd rate automaker, which is what it actually is. Cult. It's a cult. There's a contingent of tech bros that think they're "smart" because they latched on to Tesla and have been riding its nuts through Elon's political stunts without a care in the world. Tesla failing would mean to them that they failed. They can't fail, they're too smart. If they just HODL for a little longer, then he'll get something magical out and validate their decision making. Sunk cost running wild.
misiti3780 8mo ago
I was with you until you compared super cruise to FSD. not even comparable
insane_dreamer 8mo ago
I think these days you have to look at Tesla stock more like crypto -- you're betting on the hype and hope to ride the wave and exit before it crashes.
stinkbeetle 8mo ago
> Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage. I doubt that because Tesla was not a first mover, established automotive companies were. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_R%27nessa#Nissan_Altra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_R%27nessa#Nissan_Altra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ranger_EV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ranger_EV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_EV_Plus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_EV_Plus Etc. The innovation/imitation/commoditization cycle is not really new or limited to Tesla, it applies to everything from robot vacuum cleaners to CPUs. Whether Tesla survives or not probably depends a lot more on boring things like economic and trade policies of large countries. The much more interesting thing to study would be how ice auto manufacturers not only completely wasted their first mover advantages, but also their long established brand value, supply chains and distribution and sales networks when it came to EVs. It was not many years ago, industry "experts" were still going on about how Tesla could never hope to build cars at scale, that their "build quality" would sink them, etc. Whereas many people have rightly identified this commoditization and threats from Chinese manufacturers as being one of the biggest risks to Tesla from the beginning. Surely it's more interesting to study the things that were not obvious or well predicted?
NoPicklez 8mo ago
How would GM Super Cruise be renowned as better when it is only compatible with highways? You can't use it around town or in the city. Sure, it might be considered safer because it only allows itself to work when its on a controlled highway in a straight line.
bmitc 8mo ago
> Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage. Did they ever have a first mover advantage? They had first mover hype, but did they really have an advantage? Companies like Kia and Hyundai had an advantage. They already had logistics, design, R&D, manufacturing, supply chains, etc. all figured out from decades of building and improving cars. Tesla had NONE of that. All Kia and Hyundai had to do to get into EVs was add another few models to their lineup with some iteration on all their existing processes. And immediately, these models became hot sellers. Tesla had to literally reinvent (but to themselves invent) what it takes to design, build, and sell a car. This writing has been on the wall for years. Tesla has less than a handful of models and can't even iterate on them in any substantial way. Other car makers make dozens of models and rev them every year and do a design refresh every five to ten years. Tesla never had any advantage or key selling point outside of hype.
vagab0nd 8mo ago
I feel like there's this weird information gap that shouldn't be there in this day and age. FSD drives me around every day. 99% of the time, I don't touch the steering wheel for the entire trip, both city and highway. It's obvious to me that it is working well and has tremendous value. As far as I know, no other car on the market can do this. But apparently this info is not reaching a large number of people. I'm genuinely confused.

Traster 8mo ago

I think you're totally wrong on this. Tesla didn't waste the first mover advantage. They benefitted from it whilst it existed, but Electric vehicles turned into a commodity, which was entirely expected and there's no moat. You've explained yourself why it would be untenable for Musk to pursue becoming the biggest car manufacturer in the world - if he succeeded in that goal... he would have succeded in shrinking the value of the company significantly. It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that.

epolanski 8mo ago
Bingo.
breve 8mo ago
Why is making humanoid robots a moat? Other companies have been making robots for longer, humanoid and otherwise, and doing it better. Has Optimus signed up for any sports yet: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/02/china/china-humanoid-robot-sports-intl-hnk-dst https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/02/china/china-humanoid-robo... Is Optimus close to what Boston Dynamics is doing with Atlas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIhzUnvi7Fw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIhzUnvi7Fw
- SideburnsOfDoom 8mo ago
  > Why is making humanoid robots a moat? It really isn't. (1) Also, what's the first billion dollar market for humanoid robots? Industry? "lights-out manufacturing" exists already, and doesn't require humanoid robots. Hyundai and BYD (among others) say they're going to put humanoid robots in their factories (2). They won't be Tesla robots. Is this really such a huge use? 1)https://www.topgear.com/car-news/tech/here-are-nine-humanoid-robots-used-carmakers-and-no-were-not-scared-all https://www.topgear.com/car-news/tech/here-are-nine-humanoid... 2) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgjm5x54ldo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgjm5x54ldo
  - edmundsauto 8mo ago
    I want my laundry robot!
    - SideburnsOfDoom 8mo ago
      Is that a billion dollar market, is it within reach, and does it require a humanoid? And if so, will any 1 company have a lock on it?
    - omilu 8mo ago
      Yes I would easily pay 20k for a robot to fold and put away laundry.
      - marssaxman 8mo ago
        Where I live, wash/dry/fold service costs ~$3/lb including pickup & delivery, so depending on how many clothes you wear in a week you'd be looking at 5-10 years before that robot even starts to pay for itself - without even accounting for the cost of the laundry machines it'll need to use or the water and power to run them. Laundry machines are expected to last 10-15 years; will the robot last so long?
- dstroot 8mo ago
  Anyone who owns a tesla vehicle with "full self driving" is probably chuckling to themselves about Tesla ever making useful general purpose robots any time soon. Disclaimer, I own two tesla's with FSD and it's far from "full" or "self". I am very sceptical of robotaxis unless they have the appropriate sensors & SW (e.g. Waymo) which Elon has not done. Finally, I know lots of people who own cars, but none who own robots. Many friends will not have Alexa in their homes due to privacy concerns. How many people will trust Elon to have a robot in their homes and assume he's being benign and safe with your personal data?
sgjohnson 8mo ago
> It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that. But it's make-believe. Tesla is a car manufacturer. They haven't shipped anything else other than cars. And they even suck at making cars these days. Tesla Semi? All but dead. The new roadster? Also dead. Full Self Driving? Doesn't exist. Robotaxis? Even if they got them to work, at this point the brand is too toxic for widespread adoption of those. They could have persisted at being a disruptive car manufacturer and still held a several hundred billion dollar valuation. Now they are a very mediocre car manufacturer, with their only actual success being conning everyone into believing that they are a bleeding-edge tech company so their $1.5Bn valuation seems justified.
- dannyfritz07 8mo ago
  A quick search verified they also manufactured batteries, solar modules, and solar shingles.
  - gamerdonkey 8mo ago
    Ford Motor Company manufactured charcoal, but in the end it stayed a car company. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsford_(charcoal)#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsford_(charcoal)#History
- testing22321 8mo ago
  I know it’s popular to hate on Elon and therefore Tesla, but you need to be accurate when doing so. They’re still chipping away. > Tesla Semi?All but dead. They’ve been running a pilot all this time, and the factory in Nevada to mass produce them is on schedule. Production ramp is second half of this year. The factory is ginormous. > The new roadster? Also dead. Elon said yesterday the unveil is in April “hopefully” > Full Self Driving? Doesn't exist. Robotaxis? Cars are driving passengers around Austin now with nobody in either front seat. It takes automakers almost a decade to bring a new vehicle online, Elon just does it all publicly while everyone else doesn’t take the wraps off until the final 6 months. Obviously everything is way behind elons hype timelines, but I do still think it’s all coming.
JumpinJack_Cash 8mo ago
> > It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that. You can pursue everything with words, even you can pursue Sydney Sweeney but then you have to show the receipts. The receipts of Tesla (Factories, lines of production, expertise of people hired, 25 years of history...) are one of car company. But of course, it's all narrative so people will keep outbidding each other to own a piece of this company. The financialization of hope, that's what it is.
freakynit 8mo ago
Everything tends toward commodification in a hyper-competitive, hyper-connected world. The only variable is time... and this "time" keeps shrinking. As commodification accelerates, consolidation follows. In the current landscape, where private capital and state power are deeply entangled under the banner of national security, this consolidation no longer stays economic. It becomes geopolitical. The end result... it translates to not just corporate monopolies, but geo-monopolies... enforced not by markets alone, but by coercion, conflict, and control over resources.
sosomoxie 8mo ago
Pure logic would dictate that Tesla has a market cap of around $5B. It's actually fraudulent that it's not, and for some reason the SEC allows Musk to lie on every earnings call without repercussion.
- elzbardico 8mo ago
  Welcome to 2026: Companies routinely, exaggerate, obfuscate and mystify investors. Most of investors don't care. The SEC is a joke.
- FuriouslyAdrift 8mo ago
  Seems low on a company that is profitable and consistantly has around a $100B a year in revenue with only $13B in debt...
  - dmbche 8mo ago
    more like 12b in 2022 and less every years since down 30% in 2025
  - bratwurst3000 8mo ago
    vw has over 300 billion revenue and way more profit then tesla. still not worth 1/10 of it. 5 billion sounds good for tesla
    - FuriouslyAdrift 8mo ago
      VW is carrying $221B in debt and just closed their main plant in Germany because BYD is eating them alive.
      - ahartmetz 8mo ago
        VW just closed a very small plant (165k cars in 24 years) in Germany, the one in Dresden. The largest ones are probably Wolfsburg and Emden, these are running. VW is in trouble, not in terminal decline.
jordanb 8mo ago
Tesla's original "secret plan" (published on their website) was to become a commodity car manufacturer faster than electric cars became a commodity. Such that the other manufacturers would find them selling obsolete vehicles and Tesla just becomes the new General Motors. This was the justification for their stock price for quite a few years: "It's logical that Tesla is worth more than all other automakers combined because it will soon be the only automaker." Then in 2022 Elon basically admitted that they couldn't win on production and had to continue to win on technology and they'd do that with self driving. [https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-worth-basically-zero-without-self-driving-2022-6?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-worth-basica...] But now Tesla is way behind on self driving (which was oversold by the whole industry tbh). So what's their new plan? Now they're no longer a car company and will make robots!
- Deklomalo 8mo ago
  [dead]
- misiti3780 8mo ago
  way behind compared to whom ?
- whaleofatw2022 8mo ago
  Your take makes sense. i.e. the GigaPress for frames but it just didnt scale like they hoped.
jcranmer 8mo ago
Brand value is definitely a moat. Not the deepest of moats, but it is a moat nonetheless. > It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that. Tesla is valued as if it is a tech company with a car business as a side gig. Its balance sheet is a car business, and I'm not even sure it spends enough on tech to have tech qualify as a side gig. And the other tech avenues it has been pursuing (autonomous vehicles, humanoid robots) are areas that other people have been doing for better and longer. Hell, Honda had autonomous (not tele-operated) humanoid robots working 20 years ago. To be honest, at this point, I mostly consider the other bets that Tesla is pursing are just passion projects to keep the stock price artificially high. Were Tesla more realistically valued, it would lose probably 90% or more of its value, and Musk would be a much poorer man.
outside1234 8mo ago
Tesla's moat is constantly moving to the next thing and claiming it has a moat before moving on to the next thing. Elon's business model is moving from one government subsidized thing to the next (see SpaceX now bribing for tax dollars to go to Mars).
Deklomalo 8mo ago
[dead]
arbor_day 8mo ago
It's not that EVs are a commodity. Competition and speculative production capacity buildouts combined with lower than expected consumer demand made the market less profitable.
neogodless 8mo ago
> Electric vehicles turned into a commodity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity > a resource, that specifically has full or substantial fungibility: that is, the market treats instances of the good as equivalent or nearly so with no regard to who produced them Uhh.. not sure where you live or what your local / regional market is like. I'm in the United States, where what car you drive is a really big decision. Many people share on social media what car they bought, and tell people around them about the new car they bought. I've yet to witness a situation where someone said "I bought an electric car" and the response was something like "Why are you telling me you bought toilet paper?" (Even toilet paper has brand names and advertising.) That isn't to say that the car market hasn't shifted over time. Cars began as "engine to move wheels plus a few other things" and evolved so that the engine seemed less of the central reason why you bought a specific vehicle. An electric powertrain does take things a bit further, in that most EV buyers know very little about the motors, though they certainly know a thing or two about the battery. Batteries are generally a commodity at smaller scales, but in a car, they matter significantly. Still, brand matters, too. Ask Lucid or Rivian or Porsche how they sell their electric cars for $70K - $160K. How is it that a commodity available to purchase for ~$30K can be sold for $130K additional? (That's not how commodities work.) No, electric cars are not a commodity. It's just a difficult market with a lot of players, and a broad market with constantly evolving tastes. Ask Toyota why they have half a dozen different SUV models. Or why the Ford F-150 comes in 200 configurations. (That's not how commodities work!) Just because the gasoline-burning engine was replaced with electric motors and batteries, the car didn't turn into a commodity overnight. I'm open to counterarguments and persuasion to the contrary.
Fischgericht 8mo ago
If you do not want to run a car company, maybe do not... run a car company? Get an ice cream truck. It absolutely makes no sense to convert a car manufacturer into an AI company. Or a robotics company after you have build CAR FACTORIES around the planet. If you as a CEO don't like the business you are running for your shareholders, it is time to get a new CEO that does. There still are managers that really like running car companies. I don't get the feeling that BYD management is bored about the EV business...
theshrike79 8mo ago
The competition was this: Tesla had a very good computer, they were learning how to put a car around it. Traditional manufacturers (German mostly) had good or very good cars, but they sucked at the computer stuff. --- And unknown to all, the Chinese learned how to make good cars with good computers built in as those two were trying to achiever their respective goals.
AtlasBarfed 8mo ago
Yeah there's no margin in being a luxury car builder And of course you're just going to pretend what the mission statement was.
CRConrad 8mo ago
> It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that. Isn't this in reply to a post (or was that another reply just below it?) about how other, "traditional", car companies are valued at 55, 60, 80, and 280 billion dollars...? Seems being a car company and having a billion dollar valuation isn't all that incompatible.

jacquesm 8mo ago

Tesla benefited from tax payer subsidies.

ben_w 8mo ago
An important question is therefore: why didn't anyone else?
- relaxing 8mo ago
  Of course they did.
- deleted 8mo ago
  [deleted]
andruby 8mo ago
That's true for a lot of (most?) car manufacturers? I fully agree that TSLA is madly overpriced as a car company, and too hyped as any other type of company.
WarmWash 8mo ago
Trust me, I hate Tesla and Elon as much as the next naysayer But just to keep the story straight Tesla received ~$3 billion in subsidies. When Elon exercised his Tesla options in 2021, he paid $11 billion in taxes on it. By all accounts those subsidies were an incredibly good use of taxpayer money, and similar subsidies should keep being handed out, even if the byproduct is another big troll on twitter.
- jordanb 8mo ago
  Dunno where that $3 billion comes from; tesla made 11 billion in regulatory credits alone: https://insideevs.com/news/767939/tesla-regulatory-credit-11-billion/ https://insideevs.com/news/767939/tesla-regulatory-credit-11...
  - WarmWash 8mo ago
    Perhaps you are confused, the regulatory credits were sold by Tesla to other car makers so they could meet their emissions requirements. That $11 billion came from other automakers, not taxpayers.

alex1138 8mo ago

That valuation is sure interesting considering the people killed in crashes from Tesla's self-driving thing Edit: I love making legitimate points and instantly accruing downvotes from 'Valley VC types. Look yourself in the mirror.

jlongr 8mo ago
Oh their self-driving thing...Full* "Self" Driving (supervised)(see notes)(not liable for anything)
- alex1138 8mo ago
  Sorry, I didn't remember what it was called. FSD, I think

gwbas1c 8mo ago

> And to add insult to injury, even GM Super Cruise is widely renowned as better and safer than Tesla’s current “FSD”. My Huyndai's Autopilot equivalent (I don't even know what they call it) is better than the enhanced Autopilot in the Model 3 that I traded in. It actually changes lanes when I put on the blinker, instead of only changing lanes 70% of the time, and the other time just sitting with the blinker on and a clear lane.

not_ai 8mo ago
I did not know this and explains why I see so many teslas with their blinkers on and not maneuvering despite having ample room and time. Ultimately this behavior makes them unsafe for their occupants as well as others around them. Cars only work because we can predict driver behavior, if they break that prediction that’s when bad things are likely to happen… Lately I’ve started to ignore Tesla blinker.
- smotched 8mo ago
  Autopilot doesnt turn on the turn signal or change lanes, what you are dealing with is humans.
  - gwbas1c 8mo ago
    Enchanced autopilot and self-driving do.
- jordanbeiber 8mo ago
  This is most likely due to the fact that it is really bad at resetting blinker when the steering wheel is straight’ish again. Extremely annoying as any other car is much more sensitive (and sensible). In a tesla an on-ramp to straight highway is rarely enough to stop the blinker, something I’ve never experienced in any other car. Couple this with, IMO, the best baseline speaker system of any manufacturer… I’ve been driving with the blinker on for several kilometers at times!
philistine 8mo ago
Most probably because it has a radar that the Tesla lacks. That means your car has two sources of truth and can very efficiently and quickly make an informed decision about whether or not there's anything in the way.

vladms 8mo ago

> If Tesla was valued fairly I think it's a wrong mental model to think of stock market value as "fair" or "unfair" (or maybe it's just me thinking of "unfair" when I see the word "fair"). My impression is that if Tesla would be valued based on quantifiable things it would be much much lower (production costs, competition, revenues, potential, etc.). Of course, you shouldn't value something only based on quantifiable things, but in Tesla the "wishful thinking" part seems to be much larger than for others.

radlad 8mo ago
I assume OP meant something closer to "fair market value" than "fair vs. unfair." Tesla is not priced according to its underlying assets or technical analysis (e.g. P/E ratio), but solely based on hype/sentiment. Interestingly, retail investors and company insiders collectively own more of Tesla than institutional investors.
- marcusverus 8mo ago
  Fair market value: the price at which a thing would change hands between a willing and informed buyer and seller. A company's market cap is, by definition, its fair market value. > Tesla is not priced according to its underlying assets or technical analysis (e.g. P/E ratio), but solely based on hype/sentiment. You're right that it's not priced according to underlying assets, but it doesn't follow that it is priced on vibes. Its price is based on potential future earnings; the expectation that Elon can pull off his plans for a robotaxi fleet or building an Optimus robot that might unlock the massive demand for household and/or general use commercial robots. Both offer the prospect of being the first mover into markets which could be worth trillions. It's speculation, sure, but not mere "vibes". The company is also led by a man who has made and delivered on massive, seemingly impossible promises, which adds credibility to the idea that Tesla might actually bring these markets into existence.
  - Calavar 8mo ago
    Talk about market cap, especially meme stock maket cap, reminds me of that old XKCD comic on extrapolation. Market cap is what you get when you extrapolate the fair market value for the 1% of a company's shares currently on the market all the way out to 100%. But demand doesn't work that way - it doesn't scale linearly.

asah 8mo ago

SpaceX will acquire Tesla and save the shareholders, just like Tesla acquired SolarCity.

extraduder_ire 8mo ago
Can they afford to do that? I would assume it would be the other way around unless the valuation of either/both changes drastically. XAI acquiring twitter is probably a better recent example than solarcity.

outside1234 8mo ago

We are in a time when people are in cults. Trump is a cult. Elon is a cult. Tesla is a cult. Cults do not operate on logic, but almost always result in a mass casualty event of some sort.

notabee 8mo ago
It's baked into the foundations of the U.S. While perhaps not a cult as we describe it today, even the first puritans that settled here were considered extremists not welcome in their home countries. For such a young country, we have always had a burgeoning industry in upstart cults, grifts, and religions (but I repeat myself).

jmyeet 8mo ago

> Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage. It's a study in many things. Tesla only exists because of the transfer of wealth from the government. DOE loans, EV tax credits and other incentives are the difference between existing and not existing. That's not necessarily bad. The problem is the government really gets nothing for their money. Look at how China incubates their businesses. As an example, imagine where we'd be if the government had insisted on standardized charging infrastructure instead of Tesla's originally proprietary Supercharger network. > If Tesla was valued fairly, it would probably be at the tune of $5B. I could see it as high as $100B but not $1.5T. Not even close. And I, too, would never bet against it. Nothing fundamental is behind Tesla's valuation. It's just gambling.

gkfasdfasdf 8mo ago

> And to add insult to injury, even GM Super Cruise is widely renowned as better and safer than Tesla’s current “FSD”. Do you have any sources for that claim? I can attest that current iteration of FSD is very, very good, and very likely is a safer driver than I am. At least one major insurance company agrees [0]. I don't have any experience with Super Cruise though. [0] - https://www.lemonade.com/fsd https://www.lemonade.com/fsd

root_axis 8mo ago
> Do you have any sources for that claim? I can attest that current iteration of FSD is very, very good, and very likely is a safer driver than I am. That's a damning statement about your driving skills, and probably not true or you'd have had your license revoked by now. I've had FSD for five years, and even today it regularly makes dangerous mistakes. For example, left turns and roundabouts are the equivalent of Russian roulette, but just last week my FSD started driving through a red light because it interpreted a green left-arrow as a sign that it could proceed forward. If you need to do 50 miles on the interstate it's pretty solid though.
- IncreasePosts 8mo ago
  If your Tesla is 5 years old aren't you getting a degraded FSD model due to weak hardware?
  - root_axis 8mo ago
    I took it in for a HW update in 2023. I do believe there is an even newer hardware stack since then, but as far as I'm aware the HW doesn't impact the supported capabilities.
    - gkfasdfasdf 8mo ago
      Congrats on the upgrade - what exactly did they upgrade and what version of FSD are you running? Hardware and software definitely matters. My FSD experience applies to 2026 Model Y, latest FSD (v14.x).

dstroot 8mo ago

And Elon canceled the S and X models but not the Cybertruck? C’mon…

hnburnsy 8mo ago
I wonder if they reconfigure it and tone down the look to something more traditional.

Multiplayer 8mo ago

GM Supercruise on my 2024 Silverado RST is a joke compared to Tesla FSD. It's not even remotely comparable. Supercruise only works on freeways/highways, does not understand ANY navigation. It's a better cruise control, that's about it. I own 2 Tesla model S of different vintages and FSD is a completely different animal. My 2017 model s can navigate from my house to, well, anywhere, with no intervention. I have been very disappointed in how long it took Tesla to get here based on the promises they made 10(!) years ago, but they are there now. Even a year ago FSD used to scare me frequently and cause me to disengage but that never happens now.

pants2 8mo ago
The only thing remotely comparable in the US is probably a Comma 4 with a forked OpenPilot build on a well-supported vehicle

memish 8mo ago

1. Tesla has $40B in cash and is profitable. To say it's worth $5B is beyond absurd. 2. The market determines what is a fair value, not rando haters on the internet. Even professional Wall Street consensus is that it's fair value at approximately $1.2T market cap.

rkagerer 8mo ago
$40B in cash/equivalents, minus some $13-20B in debt (depending what source you pick).
- hnburnsy 8mo ago
  Plus assets

esseph 8mo ago

> And for some unbeknownst to me reason, the markets value Tesla as a hot tech company, not a 3rd rate automaker, which is what it actually is. Cult. It's a cult. There's a contingent of tech bros that think they're "smart" because they latched on to Tesla and have been riding its nuts through Elon's political stunts without a care in the world. Tesla failing would mean to them that they failed. They can't fail, they're too smart. If they just HODL for a little longer, then he'll get something magical out and validate their decision making. Sunk cost running wild.

misiti3780 8mo ago

I was with you until you compared super cruise to FSD. not even comparable

insane_dreamer 8mo ago

I think these days you have to look at Tesla stock more like crypto -- you're betting on the hype and hope to ride the wave and exit before it crashes.

stinkbeetle 8mo ago

> Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage. I doubt that because Tesla was not a first mover, established automotive companies were. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_R%27nessa#Nissan_Altra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_R%27nessa#Nissan_Altra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ranger_EV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ranger_EV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_EV_Plus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_EV_Plus Etc. The innovation/imitation/commoditization cycle is not really new or limited to Tesla, it applies to everything from robot vacuum cleaners to CPUs. Whether Tesla survives or not probably depends a lot more on boring things like economic and trade policies of large countries. The much more interesting thing to study would be how ice auto manufacturers not only completely wasted their first mover advantages, but also their long established brand value, supply chains and distribution and sales networks when it came to EVs. It was not many years ago, industry "experts" were still going on about how Tesla could never hope to build cars at scale, that their "build quality" would sink them, etc. Whereas many people have rightly identified this commoditization and threats from Chinese manufacturers as being one of the biggest risks to Tesla from the beginning. Surely it's more interesting to study the things that were not obvious or well predicted?

NoPicklez 8mo ago

How would GM Super Cruise be renowned as better when it is only compatible with highways? You can't use it around town or in the city. Sure, it might be considered safer because it only allows itself to work when its on a controlled highway in a straight line.

bmitc 8mo ago

> Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage. Did they ever have a first mover advantage? They had first mover hype, but did they really have an advantage? Companies like Kia and Hyundai had an advantage. They already had logistics, design, R&D, manufacturing, supply chains, etc. all figured out from decades of building and improving cars. Tesla had NONE of that. All Kia and Hyundai had to do to get into EVs was add another few models to their lineup with some iteration on all their existing processes. And immediately, these models became hot sellers. Tesla had to literally reinvent (but to themselves invent) what it takes to design, build, and sell a car. This writing has been on the wall for years. Tesla has less than a handful of models and can't even iterate on them in any substantial way. Other car makers make dozens of models and rev them every year and do a design refresh every five to ten years. Tesla never had any advantage or key selling point outside of hype.

vagab0nd 8mo ago

I feel like there's this weird information gap that shouldn't be there in this day and age. FSD drives me around every day. 99% of the time, I don't touch the steering wheel for the entire trip, both city and highway. It's obvious to me that it is working well and has tremendous value. As far as I know, no other car on the market can do this. But apparently this info is not reaching a large number of people. I'm genuinely confused.