3 ms·
Yes of course, but theres a very big difference between a direct subsidy with hard cash (or a loan guarantee) and an open-to-all incentive system, not last in p
by revelation 13y ago
Yes of course, but theres a very big difference between a direct subsidy with hard cash (or a loan guarantee) and an open-to-all incentive system, not last in public perception.
Your wording simply suggested to me that you thought these were somehow backed with government money. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted here.
Musk has said in conference calls that their 25% margin target is not predicated (at all) on credit revenue, but he can't magically make money appear, so that remains to be seen.
There is a very worthwhile recap of the regulatory credits systems here:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/16357-Regulatory-Credits-How-BMW-and-Daimler-Will-Fund-Tesla-s-Conquest-of-the-World http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/16357-Regulato...
- damoncali 13y agoIt's semantics. The net effect is that the government forces the transfer - It's no different than if they had taxed it and granted it.
- revelation 13y agoHuh? Much everything the government does to markets is incentive based regulation. The whole tax-code might be considered such.
- damoncali 13y agoIf it weren't for government force, those credits that netted Tesla millions would never have been purchased. Therefore, they have the same net effect as if the government had taken the money from the buyers and given it to Tesla. That is logically equivalent to a government subsidy for Tesla (or any company in their position).