Is Tesla a good investment?

[achvfi]

I think it has been a toxic place for a while now. Layoffs will make morale worse.

I was interviewed for a role at Tesla a while back. Person interviewing me was doing similar as what I do but at Tesla and wanted to hire someone to help him. The guy was asking me how my work is done in a large organization like where I was at. I explained to him and mentioned we have a team employees working together to accomplish our work. He was clearly frustrated to hear that. It seemed to me he alone was to do entire teams worth of work, seemed overworked and exploited at Tesla..

I don't do very well with toxic bosses or environments. I knew right away that role was not for me

I recommend the Elon biography by Isaacson. It's a good read. Musk is incredibly demanding, impulsive, unpredictable and unfair. A flawed genius, no doubt.

Working at Tesla doesn't sound all that far off from my own experience when I first came to the USA. It was great for a young, single, hungry engineer, willing to put work first and go where they sent me at a moment's notice. Tesla could be like that, only with far better tech. It would be great experience. Yes, you might get fired so save like a fiend, which won't be too difficult because you'll have no time to spend money anyway.

I wouldn't do it now. I would advise my kid to try it, or Space X preferably.

Seems like the people willing to sacrifice years of their early lives on the alter of work might be better off as entrepreneurs.

The people getting shitcanned at Tesla are left with nothing. The people keeping their jobs - also get no significant equity in a business. Entrepreneurs at least have a chance of owning a growing business, and the ones who fail are often no worse off than the laid-off employee workaholics.

I can relate to that as well. I am still young I think. But used to be younger, single, hungry. Eager to take on every challenge and work 24/7. It was fun and exhilarating for a while, no question..

But it was also stupid and was a trap in retrospect. Especially more so when you are at unfair and toxic place.

Also it doesn't do organization any good either. When you are not resourced properly you are also setting up your service to fail within the organization.

[mistymoney]

I think it has been a toxic place for a while now. Layoffs will make morale worse.

I was interviewed for a role at Tesla a while back. Person interviewing me was doing similar as what I do but at Tesla and wanted to hire someone to help him. The guy was asking me how my work is done in a large organization like where I was at. I explained to him and mentioned we have a team employees working together to accomplish our work. He was clearly frustrated to hear that. It seemed to me he alone was to do entire teams worth of work, seemed overworked and exploited at Tesla..

I don't do very well with toxic bosses or environments. I knew right away that role was not for me

I recommend the Elon biography by Isaacson. It's a good read. Musk is incredibly demanding, impulsive, unpredictable and unfair. A flawed genius, no doubt.

Working at Tesla doesn't sound all that far off from my own experience when I first came to the USA. It was great for a young, single, hungry engineer, willing to put work first and go where they sent me at a moment's notice. Tesla could be like that, only with far better tech. It would be great experience. Yes, you might get fired so save like a fiend, which won't be too difficult because you'll have no time to spend money anyway.

I wouldn't do it now. I would advise my kid to try it, or Space X preferably.

Seems like the people willing to sacrifice years of their early lives on the alter of work might be better off as entrepreneurs.

The people getting shitcanned at Tesla are left with nothing. The people keeping their jobs - also get no significant equity in a business. Entrepreneurs at least have a chance of owning a growing business, and the ones who fail are often no worse off than the laid-off employee workaholics.

my first post-masters job was similar in expectation - but data analysis not tech. gruelling hours around quarterly reports for clients and not great pay. Young workforce that was really trying to get experience and start a career. A lot of really great people it was great to work with. Management not so much! Looking back definitely feel they took advantage of us!

But I don't think you are seeing this clearly. What exactly would people be entrpreneurs of? For a tesla engineer - Evs are out I think as too big to take on. Small ideas? apps? household robotics? what would they do?

A failed business usually leaves you in the hole after scrapping by for months if not years to try to build the business. I would think a laid off tesla engineer was getting at least a decent regular paycheck even if underpaid, benefits, 401k match etc. company stock?

Someone with a failed business was likely not saving, matching retirement, etc. People I know who had a failed business were usually left thousands in debt from trying to make it work rather than someone laid off suddenly who is going to get vacation days paid out (no severance?), transfer their 401k into a rollover, and if they have a chunky EF fund that was on them to save for. Some one who's business trully bottomed is in a not very good spot.

[AdrianC]

I think it has been a toxic place for a while now. Layoffs will make morale worse.

I was interviewed for a role at Tesla a while back. Person interviewing me was doing similar as what I do but at Tesla and wanted to hire someone to help him. The guy was asking me how my work is done in a large organization like where I was at. I explained to him and mentioned we have a team employees working together to accomplish our work. He was clearly frustrated to hear that. It seemed to me he alone was to do entire teams worth of work, seemed overworked and exploited at Tesla..

I don't do very well with toxic bosses or environments. I knew right away that role was not for me

I recommend the Elon biography by Isaacson. It's a good read. Musk is incredibly demanding, impulsive, unpredictable and unfair. A flawed genius, no doubt.

Working at Tesla doesn't sound all that far off from my own experience when I first came to the USA. It was great for a young, single, hungry engineer, willing to put work first and go where they sent me at a moment's notice. Tesla could be like that, only with far better tech. It would be great experience. Yes, you might get fired so save like a fiend, which won't be too difficult because you'll have no time to spend money anyway.

I wouldn't do it now. I would advise my kid to try it, or Space X preferably.

Seems like the people willing to sacrifice years of their early lives on the alter of work might be better off as entrepreneurs.

The people getting shitcanned at Tesla are left with nothing. The people keeping their jobs - also get no significant equity in a business. Entrepreneurs at least have a chance of owning a growing business, and the ones who fail are often no worse off than the laid-off employee workaholics.

Sure, but you need some experience first. That's what I did. Worked hard for someone else for a few years. I went off on my own as soon as I was able. Haven't had a job since. 70% of my career has been running my small firm or as an independent contractor. My dad was a hard-working serial entrepreneur, so that was definitely a factor.

I took a tour of a company only this week that makes equipment for vehicle manufacturing lines. Very interesting. That's the kind of area an ex-Tesla employee could get into. Or software, of course.

But what about that Tesla? $148 premarket. Getting interesting again.

[FINate]

But what about that Tesla? $148 premarket. Getting interesting again.

Is it? Maybe if one is only looking at price. But margins and revenue have declined as well. As of today, FPE is remains at around 50. It seems likely that the Model 2 has been cancelled/de-prioritized, which was the main thesis for growth justifying a sky high multiple relative to other automakers.

The latest FSD is good, but nowhere near fully autonomous. Waymo is already doing a real robotaxi service that is expanding to some other cities. The problems they've encountered along the way are things Tesla will also need to sort out, assuming they get there at some point. Tesla is also pretty far behind in robotics, e.g. it doesn't compare favorably to Boston Dynamics. Solar and energy storage are decent businesses, but these are under pressure at the moment.

As discussed on this thread previously, Gigacasting and a highly automated and vertically integrated production line was supposed to significantly drive down costs. Which would enable Tesla to undercut the competition while maintaining margins. That's a growth story. Cybertruck is a huge distraction from this, and it's doubling down on the early days of niche vehicles for a small number of wealthy buyers... no way this is going to scale. And then canceling the Model 2 in favor of robotaxis continues this trend. It doesn't make sense.

Perhaps the earnings call next Tues will clear everything up and Musk will lay out a solid vision for the future. If he does the stock price should stabilized or even get a nice bump. But if he doesn't it's going to be a bloodbath.

[ChpBstrd]

But what about that Tesla? $148 premarket. Getting interesting again.

Is it? Maybe if one is only looking at price. But margins and revenue have declined as well. As of today, FPE is remains at around 50. It seems likely that the Model 2 has been cancelled/de-prioritized, which was the main thesis for growth justifying a sky high multiple relative to other automakers.

The latest FSD is good, but nowhere near fully autonomous. Waymo is already doing a real robotaxi service that is expanding to some other cities. The problems they've encountered along the way are things Tesla will also need to sort out, assuming they get there at some point. Tesla is also pretty far behind in robotics, e.g. it doesn't compare favorably to Boston Dynamics. Solar and energy storage are decent businesses, but these are under pressure at the moment.

As discussed on this thread previously, Gigacasting and a highly automated and vertically integrated production line was supposed to significantly drive down costs. Which would enable Tesla to undercut the competition while maintaining margins. That's a growth story. Cybertruck is a huge distraction from this, and it's doubling down on the early days of niche vehicles for a small number of wealthy buyers... no way this is going to scale. And then canceling the Model 2 in favor of robotaxis continues this trend. It doesn't make sense.

Perhaps the earnings call next Tues will clear everything up and Musk will lay out a solid vision for the future. If he does the stock price should stabilized or even get a nice bump. But if he doesn't it's going to be a bloodbath.

I would bet he's been playing with his Twitter rather than working on the vision.

[The Hin]

As an investment TSLA did something like 20x from the time this thread began in 2018 to the peak in early November 2021... and if you got in back then you're still looking at 8x - 10x on your money. On the other hand, from the vantage point of TSLA today, the stock price is lower now than it was 1, 2, and 3 years ago. If you bought any TSLA after early November 2020 and held it to now, you're likely sitting on a loss (potentially as much as 60% down). TSLA made many fortunes on the way up - hopefully it doesn't destroy too many on the way down.

Personally, I don't hold out much hope for FSD as the magic bullet for TSLA, and my best guess is that TSLA steadily converges as a stock with other automotive companies as its earnings growth slows and p/e compresses closer to the industry averages (and I'd be worried about Elon-related risks, like his push for a new $40B+ comp package and his continued efforts to alienate the core market of EV purchasers). That said, as a consumer (and fan of the environment) I'm grateful for the kick in the pants TSLA gave the car market and I hope that TSLA continues to push other car companies to provide better EVs and EV infrastructure.

[ColoradoTribe]

Tesla are the cheapest cars to maintain according to consumer reports. Cost of ownership is exceptional between fuel and maintenance costs.

https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-maintenance/the-cost-of-car-ownership-a1854979198/

[ChpBstrd]

Tesla's Q1 report is out:
https://digitalassets.tesla.com/tesla-contents/image/upload/IR/TSLA-Q1-2024-Update.pdf

Highlights (lowlights?):

• -13% YoY automotive revenue
• -9% YoY total revenue
• +37% YoY expenses
• -18% YoY profit
• -55% YoY net income for shareholders
• -90% YoY operating cash flow
• -674% YoY free cash flow (not a typo)
• -2% YoY total vehicle production
• -9% YoY total vehicle deliveries
• +87% YoY inventory growth
• YoY R&D spending as % of revenues increased from 3.3% to 5.4%
• YoY SG&A spending as % of revenues increased from 4.6% to 6.45%
• YoY Debt/Assets decreased from 43.3% to 40.3%.
• YoY Current Ratio increased from 1.57 to 1.72

Yet TSLA stock rose 1.85% on the news, to a PE ratio of 33.57, reportedly because the report mentioned the launch of "new models ahead of our previously communicated start of production in the second half of 2025".

Tesla continued: "These new vehicles, including more affordable models, will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms, and will be able to be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up. This update may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected but enables us to prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a more capex efficient manner during uncertain times."

So maybe expect what is basically a cheaper Model 3 rather than a completely new platform. And it'll be out within 12 months if you'll believe that. And it hasn't been designed yet.

[reeshau]

I have long been waiting for redesigns of their models to judge Tesla's longevity.  The auto industry has had many "it" cars, that could never repeat their success, and faded away.  (I'm looking at you, Viper)  Tesla is a super-sized version of that, but this might be the last true existential test.

[mistymoney]

Tesla's Q1 report is out:
https://digitalassets.tesla.com/tesla-contents/image/upload/IR/TSLA-Q1-2024-Update.pdf

Highlights (lowlights?):

• -13% YoY automotive revenue
• -9% YoY total revenue
• +37% YoY expenses
• -18% YoY profit
• -55% YoY net income for shareholders
• -90% YoY operating cash flow
• -674% YoY free cash flow (not a typo)
• -2% YoY total vehicle production
• -9% YoY total vehicle deliveries
• +87% YoY inventory growth
• YoY R&D spending as % of revenues increased from 3.3% to 5.4%
• YoY SG&A spending as % of revenues increased from 4.6% to 6.45%
• YoY Debt/Assets decreased from 43.3% to 40.3%.
• YoY Current Ratio increased from 1.57 to 1.72

Yet TSLA stock rose 1.85% on the news, to a PE ratio of 33.57, reportedly because the report mentioned the launch of "new models ahead of our previously communicated start of production in the second half of 2025".

Tesla continued: "These new vehicles, including more affordable models, will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms, and will be able to be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up. This update may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected but enables us to prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a more capex efficient manner during uncertain times."

So maybe expect what is basically a cheaper Model 3 rather than a completely new platform. And it'll be out within 12 months if you'll believe that. And it hasn't been designed yet.

at close - currently it is up another 10% post market.

[FINate]

Tesla's Q1 report is out:
https://digitalassets.tesla.com/tesla-contents/image/upload/IR/TSLA-Q1-2024-Update.pdf

Highlights (lowlights?):

• -13% YoY automotive revenue
• -9% YoY total revenue
• +37% YoY expenses
• -18% YoY profit
• -55% YoY net income for shareholders
• -90% YoY operating cash flow
• -674% YoY free cash flow (not a typo)
• -2% YoY total vehicle production
• -9% YoY total vehicle deliveries
• +87% YoY inventory growth
• YoY R&D spending as % of revenues increased from 3.3% to 5.4%
• YoY SG&A spending as % of revenues increased from 4.6% to 6.45%
• YoY Debt/Assets decreased from 43.3% to 40.3%.
• YoY Current Ratio increased from 1.57 to 1.72

Yet TSLA stock rose 1.85% on the news, to a PE ratio of 33.57, reportedly because the report mentioned the launch of "new models ahead of our previously communicated start of production in the second half of 2025".

Tesla continued: "These new vehicles, including more affordable models, will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms, and will be able to be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up. This update may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected but enables us to prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a more capex efficient manner during uncertain times."

So maybe expect what is basically a cheaper Model 3 rather than a completely new platform. And it'll be out within 12 months if you'll believe that. And it hasn't been designed yet.

at close - currently it is up another 10% post market.

Never a dull moment! Which is guess is part of the reason this thread won't die :)

Market reaction would seem to indicate results weren't as bad as feared, or maybe Musk reassured investors about the near-term future, or both. Interested to see how this is digested in the days ahead.

[mistymoney]

Looks like the post earnings call bumb held into the regular trading day.

Guess we will see how it all pans out next quarter.

[ChpBstrd]

more on their new, cheaper products:

[GuitarStv]

more on their new, cheaper products:

I like that it's more practical and understated than the cybertruck.

[dividendman]

more on their new, cheaper products:

I like that it's more practical and understated than the cybertruck.

And mass transit is better for the environment.

[GuitarStv]

more on their new, cheaper products:

I like that it's more practical and understated than the cybertruck.

And mass transit is better for the environment.

Musk is famously anti-mass transit.  This would likely be a single person vehicle.

[Paper Chaser]

Since this thread is full of people that follow Tesla more closely than I do, I'm curious what you guys think about the recent Supercharger group layoffs? Musk tweeted (X'd?) that the network would continue to grow more slowly but the focus is shifting from growth to reliability/uptime. On the surface, this seems like an odd time to dismiss a big chunk of talent in this part of the organization.

[NorCal]

Since this thread is full of people that follow Tesla more closely than I do, I'm curious what you guys think about the recent Supercharger group layoffs? Musk tweeted (X'd?) that the network would continue to grow more slowly but the focus is shifting from growth to reliability/uptime. On the surface, this seems like an odd time to dismiss a big chunk of talent in this part of the organization.

I think this is going to be a slow-moving disaster.

It would completely make sense to downsize the team and slow supercharger growth giving the slowing growth decline in Tesla sales.

It makes zero sense to let the entire team go.  There's a lot going on in the charging world right now.  Ford and Rivian drivers are just getting their adapters to use the Supercharger network.  Car makers are going to start including native NACS ports next year.  Little information is available, but it does seem like there's some fairly complex software integration work to get this working with each car maker.  Some metro-areas have heavily congested chargers because of incentives to get ride-share drivers into EV's.

The Tesla supercharger network has a LOT going on. 

It won't take much in the way of maintenance issues or congestion to completely ruin Tesla's reputation for seamless charging.  And this reputation is the largest reason people choose Tesla over other brands. 

Meanwhile, the non-Tesla charging networks have gotten a lot better in just the last 6 months.  A year ago I couldn't go on EV forums without multiple stories about broken or inaccessible chargers.  Those stories have nearly all disappeared in the last 6 months.  Electrify America and EVGO seem to have mostly put their maintenance issues behind them, although they've raised prices to compensate. 

[GuitarStv]

I suspect that Musk did it as a 'See, nobody is safe!' move to try to squeeze more productivity out of employees through fear.  He tends to do these things would any concern for impact to the company.

[FINate]

Since this thread is full of people that follow Tesla more closely than I do, I'm curious what you guys think about the recent Supercharger group layoffs? Musk tweeted (X'd?) that the network would continue to grow more slowly but the focus is shifting from growth to reliability/uptime. On the surface, this seems like an odd time to dismiss a big chunk of talent in this part of the organization.

I'm kinda waiting to see what actually comes of this over the next few weeks. Since Tesla has no press/PR dept. it's difficult to know what's going on other than rumors and reading between the lines of Musk's Tweets. That said, I seems likely that Tesla (Musk really, same thing) is betting the entire company on AI and robotics. Which is a head scratcher for sure. I mean, they have/had a winning formula and did what many thought impossible by creating the EV market. They just needed to keep iterating and improving...

This, along with other recent moves, makes it abundantly clear that Musk is not interested in running an established business. He's chasing the next shiny thing, what he thinks can create 10x, 100x, 1000x the value. He's chasing $5000 stock prices. I don't think this is going to end well, which is frustrating and painful to watch.

Business schools will be talking about Tesla for decades, the company that threw it all away to chase trends. The real lesson learned will be the importance of corporate governance. A thoroughly boring subject that doesn't seem important until it is. What Musk likely views as strength -- having the board in his pocket and essential control of the company -- is actually a huge weakness. He has no accountability and is at least 2 years past expiry. An independent board would have booted him a long time ago. But instead he has free reign to sacrifice the company at the alter of his ego. This is the future for the company unless enough shareholders force change.

[ChpBstrd]

Since this thread is full of people that follow Tesla more closely than I do, I'm curious what you guys think about the recent Supercharger group layoffs? Musk tweeted (X'd?) that the network would continue to grow more slowly but the focus is shifting from growth to reliability/uptime. On the surface, this seems like an odd time to dismiss a big chunk of talent in this part of the organization.

I'm kinda waiting to see what actually comes of this over the next few weeks. Since Tesla has no press/PR dept. it's difficult to know what's going on other than rumors and reading between the lines of Musk's Tweets. That said, I seems likely that Tesla (Musk really, same thing) is betting the entire company on AI and robotics. Which is a head scratcher for sure. I mean, they have/had a winning formula and did what many thought impossible by creating the EV market. They just needed to keep iterating and improving...

This, along with other recent moves, makes it abundantly clear that Musk is not interested in running an established business. He's chasing the next shiny thing, what he thinks can create 10x, 100x, 1000x the value. He's chasing $5000 stock prices. I don't think this is going to end well, which is frustrating and painful to watch.

Business schools will be talking about Tesla for decades, the company that threw it all away to chase trends. The real lesson learned will be the importance of corporate governance. A thoroughly boring subject that doesn't seem important until it is. What Musk likely views as strength -- having the board in his pocket and essential control of the company -- is actually a huge weakness. He has no accountability and is at least 2 years past expiry. An independent board would have booted him a long time ago. But instead he has free reign to sacrifice the company at the alter of his ego. This is the future for the company unless enough shareholders force change.

I agree @FINate this will be used as a textbook illustration of how one can win the technology innovation game, the VC game, the manufacturing operations game, the free marketing game, and also somehow find a path to profitability - and yet still destroy a company with bad governance and dictatorial decision-making.

Really wish Musk would step aside and let Tesla produce products that don't rely on the sort of rich car enthusiasts who bought the original roadster, or which don't make economic sense after the subsidies run out.

The now-7-year-old model 3 is not that product, with ownership costs similar to a BMW or Mercedes. Tesla's growth is getting absolutely murdered by a market full of $30k hybrids and even some $35k EVs like the Hyundai Kona, Hyundai Ioniq, Chevy Bolt, Chevy Equinox, Fiat 500e, etc.   

[soulpatchmike]

The now-7-year-old model 3 is not that product, with ownership costs similar to a BMW or Mercedes. Tesla's growth is getting absolutely murdered by a market full of $30k hybrids and even some $35k EVs like the Hyundai Kona, Hyundai Ioniq, Chevy Bolt, Chevy Equinox, Fiat 500e, etc.   

Best-Selling Cars Of 2024

    1. Ford F-Series - 152,943 Units.
    2. Chevrolet Silverado - 127,563 Units.
    3. Toyota RAV4 - 124,822 Units.
    4. Tesla Model Y - 109,000 Units (Est.)
    5. Honda CR-V - 95,038 Units.
    6. Nissan Rogue - 90,804 Units.
    7. Ram Pickup - 89,417 Units.
    8. Toyota Camry - 78,337 Units.
    17. Tesla Model 3 - 42,000 Units (Est.)
If Tesla's growth is absolutely gettting murdered, why are these hybrids and other EVs you mention not in the Car and Driver top 25 of best selling cars of 2024(so far) list?

[soulpatchmike]

Since this thread is full of people that follow Tesla more closely than I do, I'm curious what you guys think about the recent Supercharger group layoffs? Musk tweeted (X'd?) that the network would continue to grow more slowly but the focus is shifting from growth to reliability/uptime. On the surface, this seems like an odd time to dismiss a big chunk of talent in this part of the organization.

It is a non-story in my view.
1. 80%+ of Tesla users charge at home. i.e. you are unique if you don't/can't charge at home (therefore supercharger's primary use case is for distance traveling)
2. The charging network covers the full interstate network with superchargers within 100miles of each other on every interstate in the country.
3. This reduction will only reduce the speed of building new charger locations, that at this point, will largely be used by non-Tesla EV owners.  Why invest heavy in a segment of your business that doesn't directly benefit your primary(80%+) customers?

[FINate]

The now-7-year-old model 3 is not that product, with ownership costs similar to a BMW or Mercedes. Tesla's growth is getting absolutely murdered by a market full of $30k hybrids and even some $35k EVs like the Hyundai Kona, Hyundai Ioniq, Chevy Bolt, Chevy Equinox, Fiat 500e, etc.   

Best-Selling Cars Of 2024

    1. Ford F-Series - 152,943 Units.
    2. Chevrolet Silverado - 127,563 Units.
    3. Toyota RAV4 - 124,822 Units.
    4. Tesla Model Y - 109,000 Units (Est.)
    5. Honda CR-V - 95,038 Units.
    6. Nissan Rogue - 90,804 Units.
    7. Ram Pickup - 89,417 Units.
    8. Toyota Camry - 78,337 Units.
    17. Tesla Model 3 - 42,000 Units (Est.)
If Tesla's growth is absolutely gettting murdered, why are these hybrids and other EVs you mention not in the Car and Driver top 25 of best selling cars of 2024(so far) list?

Tesla is essentially a 2-vehicle company. The S, X, and CT are niche vehicles, and the vast majority of Tesla shoppers choose between the 3 and Y. Legacy companies utilize a different strategy making many different vehicles for numerous market segments. E.g. Ford has the F-Series (which is really a family of various vehicles, which is why it tops such lists), the Ranger (mid-size pickup) and the Maverick (compact pickup). The legacy makers are competing to sell the most vehicles total.

Looking at the number of vehicles sold by brand makes this all very clear: https://www.statista.com/statistics/264362/leading-car-brands-in-the-us-based-on-vehicle-sales/

Tesla is still a relatively small car company despite having some of the best selling models. But because it's not diversified across many models even small dips in demand for the 3 and Y have major consequences for the company.

[soulpatchmike]

The now-7-year-old model 3 is not that product, with ownership costs similar to a BMW or Mercedes. Tesla's growth is getting absolutely murdered by a market full of $30k hybrids and even some $35k EVs like the Hyundai Kona, Hyundai Ioniq, Chevy Bolt, Chevy Equinox, Fiat 500e, etc.   

Best-Selling Cars Of 2024

    1. Ford F-Series - 152,943 Units.
    2. Chevrolet Silverado - 127,563 Units.
    3. Toyota RAV4 - 124,822 Units.
    4. Tesla Model Y - 109,000 Units (Est.)
    5. Honda CR-V - 95,038 Units.
    6. Nissan Rogue - 90,804 Units.
    7. Ram Pickup - 89,417 Units.
    8. Toyota Camry - 78,337 Units.
    17. Tesla Model 3 - 42,000 Units (Est.)
If Tesla's growth is absolutely gettting murdered, why are these hybrids and other EVs you mention not in the Car and Driver top 25 of best selling cars of 2024(so far) list?

Tesla is essentially a 2-vehicle company. The S, X, and CT are niche vehicles, and the vast majority of Tesla shoppers choose between the 3 and Y. Legacy companies utilize a different strategy making many different vehicles for numerous market segments. E.g. Ford has the F-Series (which is really a family of various vehicles, which is why it tops such lists), the Ranger (mid-size pickup) and the Maverick (compact pickup). The legacy makers are competing to sell the most vehicles total.

Looking at the number of vehicles sold by brand makes this all very clear: https://www.statista.com/statistics/264362/leading-car-brands-in-the-us-based-on-vehicle-sales/

Tesla is still a relatively small car company despite having some of the best selling models. But because it's not diversified across many models even small dips in demand for the 3 and Y have major consequences for the company.

What consequences to a small dip in demand should we be expecting?

[bacchi]

The now-7-year-old model 3 is not that product, with ownership costs similar to a BMW or Mercedes. Tesla's growth is getting absolutely murdered by a market full of $30k hybrids and even some $35k EVs like the Hyundai Kona, Hyundai Ioniq, Chevy Bolt, Chevy Equinox, Fiat 500e, etc.   

Best-Selling Cars Of 2024

    1. Ford F-Series - 152,943 Units.
    2. Chevrolet Silverado - 127,563 Units.
    3. Toyota RAV4 - 124,822 Units.
    4. Tesla Model Y - 109,000 Units (Est.)
    5. Honda CR-V - 95,038 Units.
    6. Nissan Rogue - 90,804 Units.
    7. Ram Pickup - 89,417 Units.
    8. Toyota Camry - 78,337 Units.
    17. Tesla Model 3 - 42,000 Units (Est.)
If Tesla's growth is absolutely gettting murdered, why are these hybrids and other EVs you mention not in the Car and Driver top 25 of best selling cars of 2024(so far) list?

Tesla is essentially a 2-vehicle company. The S, X, and CT are niche vehicles, and the vast majority of Tesla shoppers choose between the 3 and Y. Legacy companies utilize a different strategy making many different vehicles for numerous market segments. E.g. Ford has the F-Series (which is really a family of various vehicles, which is why it tops such lists), the Ranger (mid-size pickup) and the Maverick (compact pickup). The legacy makers are competing to sell the most vehicles total.

Looking at the number of vehicles sold by brand makes this all very clear: https://www.statista.com/statistics/264362/leading-car-brands-in-the-us-based-on-vehicle-sales/

Tesla is still a relatively small car company despite having some of the best selling models. But because it's not diversified across many models even small dips in demand for the 3 and Y have major consequences for the company.

What consequences to a small dip in demand should we be expecting?

As seen on April 23.

[FINate]

The now-7-year-old model 3 is not that product, with ownership costs similar to a BMW or Mercedes. Tesla's growth is getting absolutely murdered by a market full of $30k hybrids and even some $35k EVs like the Hyundai Kona, Hyundai Ioniq, Chevy Bolt, Chevy Equinox, Fiat 500e, etc.   

Best-Selling Cars Of 2024

    1. Ford F-Series - 152,943 Units.
    2. Chevrolet Silverado - 127,563 Units.
    3. Toyota RAV4 - 124,822 Units.
    4. Tesla Model Y - 109,000 Units (Est.)
    5. Honda CR-V - 95,038 Units.
    6. Nissan Rogue - 90,804 Units.
    7. Ram Pickup - 89,417 Units.
    8. Toyota Camry - 78,337 Units.
    17. Tesla Model 3 - 42,000 Units (Est.)
If Tesla's growth is absolutely gettting murdered, why are these hybrids and other EVs you mention not in the Car and Driver top 25 of best selling cars of 2024(so far) list?

Tesla is essentially a 2-vehicle company. The S, X, and CT are niche vehicles, and the vast majority of Tesla shoppers choose between the 3 and Y. Legacy companies utilize a different strategy making many different vehicles for numerous market segments. E.g. Ford has the F-Series (which is really a family of various vehicles, which is why it tops such lists), the Ranger (mid-size pickup) and the Maverick (compact pickup). The legacy makers are competing to sell the most vehicles total.

Looking at the number of vehicles sold by brand makes this all very clear: https://www.statista.com/statistics/264362/leading-car-brands-in-the-us-based-on-vehicle-sales/

Tesla is still a relatively small car company despite having some of the best selling models. But because it's not diversified across many models even small dips in demand for the 3 and Y have major consequences for the company.

What consequences to a small dip in demand should we be expecting?

As seen on April 23.

Exactly. It's fascinating that many Tesla fans don't see it.

One of the things I love about long running threads is going back to see how the conversation evolved.

Remember when Tesla was the only game in town? They were going to crush the legacy companies. It was winner-takes-all. Conventional wisdom was that Tesla had such a commanding technological lead that the competition would never catch up.

Well, they caught up. Turns out it's not that difficult, relatively speaking, to design and build an EV. Even lumbering Ford surprised everyone with the Mach E... don't get me wrong, it has lots of problems, but really good for a first iteration. Kia and Hyundai are really nailing it, but many other legacy brands are producing really solid options. Tesla is no longer the only game in town.

Cybertruck was supposed to crush the ICE pickup market. In reality it has crushed no one, except possibly Tesla. It's a decent vehicle (other than having an unnecessarily difficult manufacturing process due to its design) and probably okay off-road with the recent OTA update. But it's highly niche and zero threat to the pickup market. The F-150 Lightning is fine for being the first full-sized EV pickup to market, and the R1T is big with the outdoorsy set, but the real winner here will be the Silverado EV.

Then the Model 2 with Gigacasting was going to greatly reduce COGS and undercut the competition while maintaining high margins. As far as anyone can tell, M2 is effectively dead and Tesla has also given up on Gigacasting the entire underbody. My guess is that, as predicted, they had difficulty controlling the flow and temperature of metal in such large castings and the inability to correct minor imperfections resulted in a very high reject rate.

We can't forget what has often been called Tesla's greatest asset: the Supercharging network. Even if the cars had some QC issues and one found the CEO repugnant, these were overcome by their network. Now that Elon has laid off the entire Supercharging team and non-Tesla's have access to the network this is no longer the selling point it once was.

It's worth noting that all the arguments for investing in Tesla have centered on their ability to win in the automotive space. Yet now Elon has made it very clear, in word and deed, that Tesla is an AI and robotics company. So investors need to evaluate the company as such. What's the thesis for Tesla to win the AI and robotics race? And is this market large enough to support a much higher valuation?

[ChpBstrd]

The now-7-year-old model 3 is not that product, with ownership costs similar to a BMW or Mercedes. Tesla's growth is getting absolutely murdered by a market full of $30k hybrids and even some $35k EVs like the Hyundai Kona, Hyundai Ioniq, Chevy Bolt, Chevy Equinox, Fiat 500e, etc.   

Best-Selling Cars Of 2024

    1. Ford F-Series - 152,943 Units.
    2. Chevrolet Silverado - 127,563 Units.
    3. Toyota RAV4 - 124,822 Units.
    4. Tesla Model Y - 109,000 Units (Est.)
    5. Honda CR-V - 95,038 Units.
    6. Nissan Rogue - 90,804 Units.
    7. Ram Pickup - 89,417 Units.
    8. Toyota Camry - 78,337 Units.
    17. Tesla Model 3 - 42,000 Units (Est.)
If Tesla's growth is absolutely gettting murdered, why are these hybrids and other EVs you mention not in the Car and Driver top 25 of best selling cars of 2024(so far) list?

Tesla is essentially a 2-vehicle company. The S, X, and CT are niche vehicles, and the vast majority of Tesla shoppers choose between the 3 and Y. Legacy companies utilize a different strategy making many different vehicles for numerous market segments. E.g. Ford has the F-Series (which is really a family of various vehicles, which is why it tops such lists), the Ranger (mid-size pickup) and the Maverick (compact pickup). The legacy makers are competing to sell the most vehicles total.

Looking at the number of vehicles sold by brand makes this all very clear: https://www.statista.com/statistics/264362/leading-car-brands-in-the-us-based-on-vehicle-sales/

Tesla is still a relatively small car company despite having some of the best selling models. But because it's not diversified across many models even small dips in demand for the 3 and Y have major consequences for the company.

What consequences to a small dip in demand should we be expecting?

As seen on April 23.

Exactly. It's fascinating that many Tesla fans don't see it.

One of the things I love about long running threads is going back to see how the conversation evolved.

Remember when Tesla was the only game in town? They were going to crush the legacy companies. It was winner-takes-all. Conventional wisdom was that Tesla had such a commanding technological lead that the competition would never catch up.

Well, they caught up. Turns out it's not that difficult, relatively speaking, to design and build an EV. Even lumbering Ford surprised everyone with the Mach E... don't get me wrong, it has lots of problems, but really good for a first iteration. Kia and Hyundai are really nailing it, but many other legacy brands are producing really solid options. Tesla is no longer the only game in town.

Cybertruck was supposed to crush the ICE pickup market. In reality it has crushed no one, except possibly Tesla. It's a decent vehicle (other than having an unnecessarily difficult manufacturing process due to its design) and probably okay off-road with the recent OTA update. But it's highly niche and zero threat to the pickup market. The F-150 Lightning is fine for being the first full-sized EV pickup to market, and the R1T is big with the outdoorsy set, but the real winner here will be the Silverado EV.

Then the Model 2 with Gigacasting was going to greatly reduce COGS and undercut the competition while maintaining high margins. As far as anyone can tell, M2 is effectively dead and Tesla has also given up on Gigacasting the entire underbody. My guess is that, as predicted, they had difficulty controlling the flow and temperature of metal in such large castings and the inability to correct minor imperfections resulted in a very high reject rate.

We can't forget what has often been called Tesla's greatest asset: the Supercharging network. Even if the cars had some QC issues and one found the CEO repugnant, these were overcome by their network. Now that Elon has laid off the entire Supercharging team and non-Tesla's have access to the network this is no longer the selling point it once was.

It's worth noting that all the arguments for investing in Tesla have centered on their ability to win in the automotive space. Yet now Elon has made it very clear, in word and deed, that Tesla is an AI and robotics company. So investors need to evaluate the company as such. What's the thesis for Tesla to win the AI and robotics race? And is this market large enough to support a much higher valuation?

Good points @FINate .

Very much fits the bill of a heavy manufacturing corporation with no real moat* being valued like a tech company. But then again they are a tech company in the sense that they invest heavily in self-driving and have solid L2 tech. So what is it?

The end of the supercharger network as a growth direction is only the latest in a long line of "next big things" that didn't become the next big thing. The cybertruck was the previous example. The risk is that after a series of next big thing fails, the company gets perceived as primarily a producer of its own hype rather than an engine of profit growth, and it gets slapped with a PE ratio of 15 or 20. The acceptable answer to "from where does the growth come from here?" was not the cybertruck, a probably-money-losing niche product that distracted the company's engineers for years.

*as evidenced by the arrival of competition selling more affordable products in Tesla's niche, except with better distribution networks

[FireLane]

Here's a story about how the Supercharger layoffs are already having an impact:

https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/3/24147402/tesla-supercharger-layoffs-stalled-ev-infrastructure-projects

Tesla is pulling back on plans to install Superchargers all over the country. Property owners who were in the middle of getting chargers installed, with contracts already signed, have been left hanging because their contacts at Tesla were fired. They can't get in touch with anyone and e-mails to support addresses are bouncing back unanswered.

[ChpBstrd]

Here's a story about how the Supercharger layoffs are already having an impact:

https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/3/24147402/tesla-supercharger-layoffs-stalled-ev-infrastructure-projects

Tesla is pulling back on plans to install Superchargers all over the country. Property owners who were in the middle of getting chargers installed, with contracts already signed, have been left hanging because their contacts at Tesla were fired. They can't get in touch with anyone and e-mails to support addresses are bouncing back unanswered.

Sounds almost Twitter-like.
Service your customers or someone else will.

[bacchi]

Here's a story about how the Supercharger layoffs are already having an impact:

https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/3/24147402/tesla-supercharger-layoffs-stalled-ev-infrastructure-projects

Tesla is pulling back on plans to install Superchargers all over the country. Property owners who were in the middle of getting chargers installed, with contracts already signed, have been left hanging because their contacts at Tesla were fired. They can't get in touch with anyone and e-mails to support addresses are bouncing back unanswered.

Sounds almost Twitter-like.
Service your customers or someone else will.

Bizarre. Did Elon get pissy because someone questioned his genius?

"Tinucci met with Musk privately before the layoffs to express her opposition to the magnitude of the layoffs. "

Is this his poor management (or ketamine) getting in the way? Or is he pivoting to an AI company entirely?

If Tesla is becoming an AI company, a sale of Tesla manufacturing could be in the medium-term future. Why bother making cars when you can sell the software that runs the cars?

[FINate]

This has the feeling of a Stalinesque purge -- Musk getting rid of everyone who may be a threat to his position while also ensuring senior executives with lots of voting shares dump their holdings. These shares will perhaps be bought by the faithful, which may help Musk in his efforts to relocate the company and negotiate his pay package.

... the above is the most charitable interpretation I can come up with. Because the types of moves Musk is making are typical of companies in extreme crisis, i.e. in immediate danger of running out of capital. If this is the case then there's been extensive "creative" accounting, which would mean a rapid collapse and criminal charges. This would be terrible for the EV industry, so I find myself hoping that this is merely a case of Musk being a petty power hungry narcissist.

[waltworks]

My son voted his single share against everything the board wanted and for everything they were against. He's not pleased.

So shape up, Elon, there's a 12 year old not very happy with you out there.

Seriously, I want to hear @ColoradoTribe chime in on this one. I'm not sure how to find a silver lining in much of what's happened recently but if anyone can...

-W

[jinga nation]

My lizard brain is saying that Elon's decisions are thought out like this:
1. Tesla made NACS the industry standard.
2. Supercharger network opened/opening up to accept other brands. 1 & 2 got them other EV manufacturers hooked.
3. Cut costs by getting rid of the policy team. And the supercharging team. Objectives achieved.
4. Get that huge stock bonus/ pay rise/ whatever you wanna call it, WSB Regards.
5. When supercharging infrastructure needs repair and maintenance, go to the Uncle Sam and beg for handout.
6. At some point, sell out to another manufacturer.
7. Leave this mess behind, profit from 4 and 6. Focus on SpaceX and the X shit burger and AI boom and other pursuits.

I'm just thinking of it in simple terms of a strategy to exit and privatize those profits for Musk; when losses happen, socialize them. Ain't 'Murican capitalism great, Elon?

[2sk22]

This has the feeling of a Stalinesque purge -- Musk getting rid of everyone who may be a threat to his position while also ensuring senior executives with lots of voting shares dump their holdings. These shares will perhaps be bought by the faithful, which may help Musk in his efforts to relocate the company and negotiate his pay package.

... the above is the most charitable interpretation I can come up with. Because the types of moves Musk is making are typical of companies in extreme crisis, i.e. in immediate danger of running out of capital. If this is the case then there's been extensive "creative" accounting, which would mean a rapid collapse and criminal charges. This would be terrible for the EV industry, so I find myself hoping that this is merely a case of Musk being a petty power hungry narcissist.

Coincidentally I am now reading a biography of Stalin by Simon Sebag Montefiore and this analogy is apt. Stalin liquidated enormous numbers of people on a whim.

[EchoStache]

One thing is for sure, it will be interesting to see how things play out for Tesla over the next 6-12 months.  I'm still under the belief(mostly, not that I'd stake my life on it), that Elon's main goal is to transition the world to renewable energy.  Tesla is a big part of that plan.

[maizefolk]

Here is my best attempt to frame laying off the supercharger team as something other than a power struggle or firing people arbitrarily out of spite/to goose the profit per share:

When Tesla started, EVs were seen as cars you could only use for local commuting. You would need to have a second ICE car for any road trips. Tesla spent a lot of money building out the super charger network to change that perception and reality. They succeeded. Even the anti-EV trolls don't talk about needing to own an ICE for longer trips anymore.* The supercharger network was never a major profit center and, once the NACS charging standard was opened up, it was never going to be one. In the long term Tesla tried to charge enough over their cost of construction + electricity to make significant amounts of money, they'd be undercut by third party chargers who could offer the same charging experience with the same plug.

If what Tesla has publicly said is true, that the super charging network doesn't exist to make money but to address one of the barriers to EV adoption, then their company's motivation to build charging stations no longer exists. In the last year we've essentially every car manufacturer in the USA adopt the same NACS standard. Combine that with the Biden subsidies for charging stations which will now almost certainly find a way to support the plugs every future EV is going to have and the number of charging stations open to Tesla owners across the USA is going to continue growing rapidly in coming years even if Tesla never opens another super charging station. Once you take away the NACS port that is now an industry standard, Tesla doesn't actually have any special competitive advantage at charging. They just realized that having a long of charging stations, and making sure the chargers actually WORK, was important for getting people to buy EVs earlier than others. Third party networks can and will compete on availability, price, speed, uptime, and convenience of location they offer to both Tesla and non-Tesla EVs.

Anyway, I took a shot. What do you folks think?

*The anti-EV folks just talk about how a 30 minute charging stop is so much more inconvenient than a 5 minute stop for gas.

[FINate]

^That's a possible explanation. It fits with "we're an AI and robotics" strategy. What I don't understand, however, is why he would trash a bunch of value in the process. SC was profitable and well liked. Musk could have spun it into a subsidiary or sold it off. Cutting almost all the institutional knowledge is likely to result in quality issues that will ultimately further tarnish the Tesla brand.

ETA: I agree a big part of this is fast charging largely being a solved problem. Which means Musk finds it boring, kinda like the EV market in general. Yet it's possible a power struggle was also in play, these are not mutually exclusive. Musk, bored with charging, may have demanded 50% cuts (or whatever) in the SC division. It's rumored that Tinucci pushed back and so Musk may have cut the entire team in retribution.

[bacchi]

maizefolk's explanation is a good one. Why have a large SC staff when everyone else is getting in on it and it's turning into a commodity business? It seems abrupt, though. It takes months and months to get a SC/DCFC permitted and installed. As FINate suggested, why not just sell off the profitable unit when it's currently the recognized leader?

The layoffs also left suppliers in the lurch and the Tesla email is just...odd.

I understand that this period of change may be challenging and that patience is not easy when expecting to be paid... [...] If currently working on an active Supercharging construction site, please continue. [...] Additionally, hold on working on any new material orders. [...] If waiting on delayed payment, please contact [email redacted] for a status update.

(bolded)

If you were a sub working on a new SC and received that email, would you continue working on it? (Did Musk fire the Accounts Payable department too?)

[mistymoney]

I have no doubt that elon is a real asshole. How much good business sense the layoffs are vs pettiness on his part is anyone's guess. It appears that SC group was going to have a high percent of layoffs anyway and then that turned into everyone. Again - he is not a nice person at all. No news there.

In addition to what Maize said - there is also the aspect that Tesla is currently focusing hard on increasing range. So higher range means more distance between needing a supercharger on road trips and so I can see where there was a dimishing return on adding in there. And wasn't there something about gas stations adding in a few chargers? (not necessarily SC, but someone's EV charger?). Since a person can drive a tesla anywhere in the us right now with existing charging adding more SC locations for convenience given other potential charging opprotunities may not have been the biggest priority.

elon has talked up a bunch of new important stuff as upcoming very quickly, so I do agree the next year or so will be very telling in terms of what is happening. I wonder if he has learned his lesson on making promises before something is ready? Or not.....

As a shareholder, I have a lot of concerns. Principally is his threat to take the AI/robotics out of tesla if he isn't given 25% ownership. I hope that he would somehow be blocked in doing that either at the point of trying it or via a lawsuit.

[mistymoney]

maizefolk's explanation is a good one. Why have a large SC staff when everyone else is getting in on it and it's turning into a commodity business? It seems abrupt, though. It takes months and months to get a SC/DCFC permitted and installed. As FINate suggested, why not just sell off the profitable unit when it's currently the recognized leader?

The layoffs also left suppliers in the lurch and the Tesla email is just...odd.

I understand that this period of change may be challenging and that patience is not easy when expecting to be paid... [...] If currently working on an active Supercharging construction site, please continue. [...] Additionally, hold on working on any new material orders. [...] If waiting on delayed payment, please contact [email redacted] for a status update.

(bolded)

If you were a sub working on a new SC and received that email, would you continue working on it? (Did Musk fire the Accounts Payable department too?)

As a contractor - payment delays are not unheard of. Although certainly not welcome! My guess would be that there was some person who got laid off that facilitated invoices going to AP and it wasn't realized until some payments were late so now they are attempting to fix that glitch and sent out an email. I wouldn't think that it meant I would not be paid so unless I had an alternate gig I could work on with more immediate/guanteed payment, I would keep working and contact the email provided for the update.

[bacchi]

maizefolk's explanation is a good one. Why have a large SC staff when everyone else is getting in on it and it's turning into a commodity business? It seems abrupt, though. It takes months and months to get a SC/DCFC permitted and installed. As FINate suggested, why not just sell off the profitable unit when it's currently the recognized leader?

The layoffs also left suppliers in the lurch and the Tesla email is just...odd.

I understand that this period of change may be challenging and that patience is not easy when expecting to be paid... [...] If currently working on an active Supercharging construction site, please continue. [...] Additionally, hold on working on any new material orders. [...] If waiting on delayed payment, please contact [email redacted] for a status update.

(bolded)

If you were a sub working on a new SC and received that email, would you continue working on it? (Did Musk fire the Accounts Payable department too?)

As a contractor - payment delays are not unheard of. Although certainly not welcome! My guess would be that there was some person who got laid off that facilitated invoices going to AP and it wasn't realized until some payments were late so now they are attempting to fix that glitch and sent out an email. I wouldn't think that it meant I would not be paid so unless I had an alternate gig I could work on with more immediate/guanteed payment, I would keep working and contact the email provided for the update.

Yes, good point. The top HR exec also resigned and maybe that's a part of it. It sounds like chaos over there right now.

[FINate]

In addition to what Maize said - there is also the aspect that Tesla is currently focusing hard on increasing range. So higher range means more distance between needing a supercharger on road trips and so I can see where there was a dimishing return on adding in there. And wasn't there something about gas stations adding in a few chargers? (not necessarily SC, but someone's EV charger?). Since a person can drive a tesla anywhere in the us right now with existing charging adding more SC locations for convenience given other potential charging opprotunities may not have been the biggest priority.

I don't think increased range moves the needle on the fast charging network. My understanding is most people charge at home, and fast charging is primarily for road trips. Beyond the initial charge what needs to happen is getting enough energy into the battery over a period of cycles to complete the journey. So longer range may slightly increase the distance between recharging, but with more energy demand at these farther apart locations. If demand (or demand growth) is decreasing for superchargers this is an indication that the EV market is slowing and/or competing networks are stealing share from Tesla.

It's also possible that fast charging has hit a tipping point and there's enough competition that Tesla has no pricing power. Electrons are electrons whoever supplies them, so if you can save a few bucks using the EA charger across the street, why not? Ironically, de facto standardization on NACS accelerates the commodification of fast charging. In such an environment margins are increasingly squeezed making it a very low profit enterprise. Yet it's still in Tesla's best interest to ensure the charging network matures and grows since this increases the value of their core product, EVs.

[2sk22]

Another massive, round of layoffs at Tesla today. Three Mondays in a row!

[GuitarStv]

Is Musk still pushing to receive a 56 billion dollar pay package this year?

https://qz.com/tesla-elon-musk-investors-approve-compensation-pay-plan-1851415316

[ChpBstrd]

Yea, I think Tesla sees charging as a low-margin, no-moat, commoditized business that needs to consume lots of capital rather than develop new technologies. They are making a choice to divert cash flows into AI R&D. Tesla might eventually sell their supercharger network to raise cash, but in the meantime all those salaries they're not paying are freeing up millions per month for the robotaxi lab.

As prices and margins plummet, this might be Tesla's last chance to apply free cash flow to creating a distant technological lead, or a patent-protected moat. Once their financials converge with other car companies, it will be hard to raise the kind of cash required to not be disrupted by the next VC-funded upstart.

It's not an irrational strategy. It's straight out of business textbooks.

But the reason not to invest is still Elmo. There's a roughly 9% dilution on the way when his captive board finally awards him those shares, and then you have to wonder about the next round. As others have noted, there's something Stalin-esque about the purges and power struggles. It's hard to imagine morale being very high in that organization.

[sonofsven]

Elon soliciting Warren Buffet to buy shares of TSLA- do opposites attract? https://www.investors.com/news/warren-buffett-fsd-elon-musk-buy-tesla-stock/

[reeshau]

Why would Buffett buy shares in Tesla, when he already owns BYD?

[GuitarStv]

Because Tesla is an AI company now, not interested in cars or batteries?

[2sk22]

...
It's not an irrational strategy. It's straight out of business textbooks.
...

I am reminded of this bit of dialog from the movie Apocalypse Now

Kurtz: Did they say why, Willard, why they want to terminate my command?
Willard: I was sent on a classified mission, sir.
Kurtz: It's no longer classified, is it? Did they tell you?
Willard: They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.
Kurtz: Are my methods unsound?
Willard: I don't see any method at all, sir.