Tesla protests gain momentum while the hate is dividing Tesla owners(electrek.co)
electrek.co
Tesla protests gain momentum while the hate is dividing Tesla owners
https://electrek.co/2025/02/24/tesla-protests-gain-momentu-while-the-hate-is-spreading-tesla-owners/
117 comments
Here in the PNW we pay $5 for a full charge of our leased Model 3 at home vs $50 for a tank of gas for our ICE car. Switching to EV has saved us about $150 / month (plus all the other benefits).
Never going back to ICE (though we're keep our Subaru Forester for camping, etc.), but buying another brand when our Tesla lease runs out; there are other great options out there. (I would try to find someone to take over our Tesla lease but when I spoke to a dealer about this he said that lots of people are trying to do this now so I'm not likely to succeed.)
Never going back to ICE (though we're keep our Subaru Forester for camping, etc.), but buying another brand when our Tesla lease runs out; there are other great options out there. (I would try to find someone to take over our Tesla lease but when I spoke to a dealer about this he said that lots of people are trying to do this now so I'm not likely to succeed.)
It’s probably closer to $15-20 for a full charge here but the catch is, a full tank of gas will get you a full solid 450-500 miles of range whereas a full battery on a LR Model Y will likely only get you 250ish, sometimes more sometimes less.
BC more specifically I take it?
We have EVs in California (no Teslas) that support two long-ish commutes.
With solar panels, we’re paying close to nothing for electricity. The panels and batteries cost about as much as an EV when we got them, but manufacturing costs have dropped and keep dropping.
Starting roughly this year, vehicle to home (V2H) will be mostly standard. That will let you use your car battery to top-off the house battery. That’ll make full-off-grid much more practical, which puts a ceiling on PG&E’s abusive rate hikes.
With solar panels, we’re paying close to nothing for electricity. The panels and batteries cost about as much as an EV when we got them, but manufacturing costs have dropped and keep dropping.
Starting roughly this year, vehicle to home (V2H) will be mostly standard. That will let you use your car battery to top-off the house battery. That’ll make full-off-grid much more practical, which puts a ceiling on PG&E’s abusive rate hikes.
I find that most people don’t actually include the cost of solar fairly when making statements like this.
Maximum solar that fit on my roof, no battery with 1 EV with maybe 2 hours of driving per weekday - $250 minimum electric bill plus the cost of the solar system ($250 over 10yrs) = $500-$600/month. I almost never use AC or heat.
Maximum solar that fit on my roof, no battery with 1 EV with maybe 2 hours of driving per weekday - $250 minimum electric bill plus the cost of the solar system ($250 over 10yrs) = $500-$600/month. I almost never use AC or heat.
This isnt very helpful without your solar cost or electricity rate.
Parts of California are at $0.50/kwh and going up. Electric cars are ~0.35 kwh/mi.
A 60 mile both way commute is 21 kwh/day = 420kwh/month.
a 21kwh/day system has a huge range in price depending on how much you are being gouged by your state and contractor. Panels themselves are dirt cheap.
Parts of California are at $0.50/kwh and going up. Electric cars are ~0.35 kwh/mi.
A 60 mile both way commute is 21 kwh/day = 420kwh/month.
a 21kwh/day system has a huge range in price depending on how much you are being gouged by your state and contractor. Panels themselves are dirt cheap.
Yes there are a lot of variables. That said, the point is, no one should be buying a Tesla specifically for cost savings. There are plenty of reasons to buy a Tesla and plenty of reasons not to.
Tesla or EVs in general?
I think the numbers can work out for either, but depend largely on your solar install cost and rate.
I think Teslas in particular are hard to justify purely financially. They’re not alone; Lucids, Rivians, some VWs fit in that category as well. Of course there are many other reasons to choose those cars but it’s not really to “save” money necessarily. They’re still cool cars with a lot to like. It just ends up being pretty close to a wash at the end of the day.
With access to Tesla’s charging network, that makes literally all other cheaper EVs significantly more appealing for me. I love the convenience of EVs personally and don’t see myself switching back to gas regardless but hybrids lately have been looking more attractive given the price of electricity in CA lately. Having a full solar system already, there’s not a lot I can do to ease the pressure.
With access to Tesla’s charging network, that makes literally all other cheaper EVs significantly more appealing for me. I love the convenience of EVs personally and don’t see myself switching back to gas regardless but hybrids lately have been looking more attractive given the price of electricity in CA lately. Having a full solar system already, there’s not a lot I can do to ease the pressure.
Which comparable EV is cheaper than Model 3 and Model Y? I bought a 3 row AWD Model Y for $49k (excluding tax credit), and I didn’t see any other EV that came close in terms of performance, battery, space, and track record relative to price.
Throw in the $7,500 tax credit, and I would love to see an alternative with CarPlay at $42k that can seat 5 adults and 2 kids.
Throw in the $7,500 tax credit, and I would love to see an alternative with CarPlay at $42k that can seat 5 adults and 2 kids.
apparently a partial off-grid is a collective nightmare situation, as coal/nuke can't be turned off so opex remains constant, but the revenue goes down, so unit prices has to go up to make up for it. noisy electricity that is "sold back" to the grid is also hard to synchronize and basically wasted, and so that cost is further added into the bills.
I tend to agree. Rooftop solar is a collective disaster and doesn't make sense as anything greater than a niche solution.
Commercial solar already struggles from seasonal variation requiring you to over build by 5X to get reliable power. Residential PRooftop takes it up a notch by costing 10x more than commercial.
California Power policy is so backwards it makes my head spin.
I can't believe they made rooftop solar a requirement for new houses when daytime spot prices are often negative. It's common for new houses to come with solar leases with negative savings. This is the type of thing the government should be preventing, not mandating
Commercial solar already struggles from seasonal variation requiring you to over build by 5X to get reliable power. Residential PRooftop takes it up a notch by costing 10x more than commercial.
California Power policy is so backwards it makes my head spin.
I can't believe they made rooftop solar a requirement for new houses when daytime spot prices are often negative. It's common for new houses to come with solar leases with negative savings. This is the type of thing the government should be preventing, not mandating
Rooftop solar is perfect.
The lack of a full, east/west ultra high voltage
transmission line to connect markets......like the one China is building out, is the issue.
Once a grid is connecting time zones, rather than "regions" then the whole peak demand thing, just goes away, add batteries in the gaps, and for remaining peak clipping, and then averages start to become much closer to real world demand.
That doesn't solve the cost issue. Rooftop is at least 10X as expensive as plopping down panels on flat land, even before taking into account the efficiency of doing it in a desert vs rainy SF.
Same for home battery storage. A Powerwall ~$1000/kwh, grid storage is $250/kwh and can actually stabilize the grid.
Incentivizing it is a massive waste of public money. It is mandating citizens spend $1, when a commercial operation can do it for 10 cents.
Same for home battery storage. A Powerwall ~$1000/kwh, grid storage is $250/kwh and can actually stabilize the grid.
Incentivizing it is a massive waste of public money. It is mandating citizens spend $1, when a commercial operation can do it for 10 cents.
The problem is the regulatory environment, not the technology.
Battery costs are dropping below 50$/kWh in China and will drop to 30$/kWh in a few years.
Distributed solar and storage is already economic the issue is the utilities and grid operators have captured the regulatory framework.
See Australia for an example of what California could be at 1/10th the cost.
Battery costs are dropping below 50$/kWh in China and will drop to 30$/kWh in a few years.
Distributed solar and storage is already economic the issue is the utilities and grid operators have captured the regulatory framework.
See Australia for an example of what California could be at 1/10th the cost.
agreed. Legally requiring home builders to include rooftop solar, and providing tax rebates doesn't address the fundamental challenges. In fact, it makes it worse.
[deleted]
> we’re paying close to nothing for electricity.
>he panels and batteries cost about as much as an EV when we got them, but manufacturing costs have dropped and keep dropping.
So basically you prepaid.
$20-40k buys a LOT of electricity. I live in a real dump of a state with insane electric prices (only reliably exceeded by Hawaii) and I can't make a privately owned system pencil out. Even with the credits the amortization time is on the order of 20yr +/- a few. I get the draw of spending a ton up front to eliminate a bill and have better cashflow but I just can't justify that with tens of thousands of dollars.
>he panels and batteries cost about as much as an EV when we got them, but manufacturing costs have dropped and keep dropping.
So basically you prepaid.
$20-40k buys a LOT of electricity. I live in a real dump of a state with insane electric prices (only reliably exceeded by Hawaii) and I can't make a privately owned system pencil out. Even with the credits the amortization time is on the order of 20yr +/- a few. I get the draw of spending a ton up front to eliminate a bill and have better cashflow but I just can't justify that with tens of thousands of dollars.
in my case the panels came with a home which was already a very special deal to begin with. I'd be surprised if over this decade those panels haven't more than paid themselves off.
the inflationary measure probabyl doesn't help either. I can't say for sure how much the panels themselves cost, but given the crazy times I wouldn't be surprise if they were as low as 40% cheaper back then.
the inflationary measure probabyl doesn't help either. I can't say for sure how much the panels themselves cost, but given the crazy times I wouldn't be surprise if they were as low as 40% cheaper back then.
Is there no opportunity cost for your solar?
In Denmark, electric is about 5-10% cheaper with my hybrid compared to gasoline. It also has the convenience that my car can charge at the car park without me doing anything.
Interestingly, the savings from parking fees are a thousandfold more worth it than the gas stuff.
Interestingly, the savings from parking fees are a thousandfold more worth it than the gas stuff.
I’m getting downvoted but the truth is In California, hybrids make way more financial sense. For one, the cars themselves are significantly cheaper. With a Tesla, I definitely pay more per mile when you factor in the significantly increased registration and rising electricity costs which will definitely be increasing more after annual wildfires.
I've been pretty happy with my plug in hybrid, you get the convenience of charging at home so most day to day miles are electric with no carbon emissions, but without having to worry about where to charge on road trips.
Yeah that’s what I’ve been thinking about getting for my next car too. I need something that comfortably seats 7 that isn’t 100k. You get some decent local electric range for shuttling around town and with gas as a backup for long excursions into remote areas. Even with a Tesla, it’s still challenging to find reliable charging in some areas.
hintywinty(2)
rayiner(2)
Maybe I'm getting old and jaded, but I don't really care about what the CEO or company does.
Nearly every time I (and likely you) buy something, it's produced by, transported by, funded by, owned by a company or in a country that has been found guilty of repeated human rights violations. Literal genocides in an alarming number of instances.
It almost feels cathartic for the externalities of the society we've built to be burdened by us, rather than someone in another country.
That being said, I agree with the self-interest aspect and would also prefer not to be targeted by extremists on either side. The real trick is figuring out who that's going to be ahead of time - my money would have been on Chinese EV's being hit before Tesla.
Nearly every time I (and likely you) buy something, it's produced by, transported by, funded by, owned by a company or in a country that has been found guilty of repeated human rights violations. Literal genocides in an alarming number of instances.
It almost feels cathartic for the externalities of the society we've built to be burdened by us, rather than someone in another country.
That being said, I agree with the self-interest aspect and would also prefer not to be targeted by extremists on either side. The real trick is figuring out who that's going to be ahead of time - my money would have been on Chinese EV's being hit before Tesla.
So you rule out Tesla and Chinese EVs. That leaves most available. It’s not really that complicated to at least try to avoid the most problematic companies.
All those other companies are just as amoral or problematic as Tesla and any Chinese manufacturer (and by extension their respective governments).
The only thing that differentiates them in my eyes is price relative to performance, and I buy accordingly.
The only thing that differentiates them in my eyes is price relative to performance, and I buy accordingly.
> All those other companies are just as amoral or problematic
Doesn't it seem weird and suspicious to you that every company is EXACTLY the same level of immoral? I suppose it could happen, but most industries I've studied have a pretty broad variation. I can't speak for the EV market, but there's plenty of companies in other markets that care about doing the right thing and try to avoid these sorts of problems.
Doesn't it seem weird and suspicious to you that every company is EXACTLY the same level of immoral? I suppose it could happen, but most industries I've studied have a pretty broad variation. I can't speak for the EV market, but there's plenty of companies in other markets that care about doing the right thing and try to avoid these sorts of problems.
Really? When did the CEO of Honda or Toyota spend immense amounts of wealth and influence to promote fascism and cripple America's strength in a multitude of ways? I suspect they haven't and you're exaggerating to make this an all sides thing to try to excuse Elon's behavior.
Scale matters. A CEO being sleazy to a supplier or a some employees, or whatever it is you have in mind, isn't nearly as harmful as everything Musk is doing.
Scale matters. A CEO being sleazy to a supplier or a some employees, or whatever it is you have in mind, isn't nearly as harmful as everything Musk is doing.
I'm so tired of lazy "both sides" dismissals. It's a boring position to take at this point and only reflects lack of care to research, empathize, and dig into society.
Just admit your apathy and say You don't care about society. Don't assume everyone subscribes to your world view.
Just admit your apathy and say You don't care about society. Don't assume everyone subscribes to your world view.
I am apathetic and don't care about society beyond my own timeline.
The only difference between you and me is that I'm honest about it - actions speak louder than words and I'm not seeing much action on that front. Why would I waste my limited time on this earth struggling against something that everyone seems so apathetic about?
The only difference between you and me is that I'm honest about it - actions speak louder than words and I'm not seeing much action on that front. Why would I waste my limited time on this earth struggling against something that everyone seems so apathetic about?
Musk is a bit unusual in that he is so associated with Tesla and its image. On the other hand I have no idea who is the ceo of the company that made my car (old merc).
We have one story https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43175023 about a startup promising to identify factory workers giving, by management definition, less than 100% and yet CEOs can run multiple companies, take board seats, and oversee the American government. Of course the last one of those is so far adding huge value to all the others…
It's very interesting who's allowed to do what...
- CEO running multiple companies: "Genius! Superstar! Incredible!"
- Working class guy working multiple jobs: "Hard worker! Hustler! Lifting his family out of poverty!"
- Office worker with more than one full-time job: "Overemployed! Fraud! Double-dipping!"
- CEO running multiple companies: "Genius! Superstar! Incredible!"
- Working class guy working multiple jobs: "Hard worker! Hustler! Lifting his family out of poverty!"
- Office worker with more than one full-time job: "Overemployed! Fraud! Double-dipping!"
Yeah. They don't care what you do outside of work until you're salaried. But that goes away too once you're paid to "supervise" instead of work. It's a weird valley.
> yet CEOs can run multiple companies, take board seats, and oversee the American government
...don't forget also playing Path of Exile 2 80 hours a week...
kinda funny that even after that came out and everyone had a laugh nobody really asked if maybe his real contributions on the business side of things are just as illusionary as his gaming accomplishments.
He seems to have a default assumption himself that if left unchecked each IC in his companies and the federal government aren't providing value commiserate with their compensation... and these days when it comes to people involved in politics I just assume based on accumulated evidence that every accusation is a confession.
...don't forget also playing Path of Exile 2 80 hours a week...
kinda funny that even after that came out and everyone had a laugh nobody really asked if maybe his real contributions on the business side of things are just as illusionary as his gaming accomplishments.
He seems to have a default assumption himself that if left unchecked each IC in his companies and the federal government aren't providing value commiserate with their compensation... and these days when it comes to people involved in politics I just assume based on accumulated evidence that every accusation is a confession.
just a magnified and more common trend of managers taking credit for the actual work done by their subordinates
In today's news Tesla sales dropped 45% in Europe in January while overall electric cars sales were up 37%. TSLA was down 8% just today.
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/teslas...
I'm sure the stockholders will take a strong stance and replace him as CEO... when he eventually loses favor with the White House. Until then, the brand nose-dives.
The dark humor part is, it's the car owners who are going to suffer most. Stockholders and executives probably already sold enough stock to land on a soft pile of money.
The dark humor part is, it's the car owners who are going to suffer most. Stockholders and executives probably already sold enough stock to land on a soft pile of money.
He will never be replaced as the CEO IMO. His cult like following is why the share price is what it is. It's unusual but it was only valued so highly because of him. The shareholders would rather see the company bankrupt than lose his "value add". They believe he will turn it all around, maybe he will?
The only question that remains is whether or not his brand is still salvageable. I'm leaning towards "no", he has taken things really far now. People are pretty fickle. But he is doing some really extreme things and I think it's going to be hard to walk back. Personally I think the emperor has no clothes but let's see.
Based on what China has been doing with EVs, I'm even questioning the narrative that he actually had much to do with kicking off the EV revolution, or whether or not it was going to happen regardless. I think it's the later. China was already going to be the dominant player and was already moving in the EV direction because their dependence on foreign oil wasn't to their benefit.
The only question that remains is whether or not his brand is still salvageable. I'm leaning towards "no", he has taken things really far now. People are pretty fickle. But he is doing some really extreme things and I think it's going to be hard to walk back. Personally I think the emperor has no clothes but let's see.
Based on what China has been doing with EVs, I'm even questioning the narrative that he actually had much to do with kicking off the EV revolution, or whether or not it was going to happen regardless. I think it's the later. China was already going to be the dominant player and was already moving in the EV direction because their dependence on foreign oil wasn't to their benefit.
> I'm even questioning the narrative that he actually had much to do with kicking off the EV revolution
I detest Musk, but Tesla was/is one of CATL's largest customers. Without Tesla, the capital to jumpstart the EV Battery industry within China wouldn't truly exist.
I detest Musk, but Tesla was/is one of CATL's largest customers. Without Tesla, the capital to jumpstart the EV Battery industry within China wouldn't truly exist.
There is no question that Tesla helped accelerate EV adoption in China but BYD's significant battery R&D was already underway and would have happened with or without Elon
I rode in an EV BYD taxi in 2016. However, I don’t think EVs would have caught on as fast in China without the Model S setting an example that EVs were viable as full ICE car replacements (they definitely were already there before the Model 3 validated mass market adoption).
You have to admit though, there's a difference between saying "never" or "as fast".
I think the comment I replied to was edited.
Yeah, they would definitely be there eventually but I doubt they would be there now without Tesla, there just wasn't much interest in electric cars back then.
Come on.
The CCP would have backed CATL and BYD regardless, like they have with silicon solar panels and hundreds of other manufacturing segments.
The CCP would have backed CATL and BYD regardless, like they have with silicon solar panels and hundreds of other manufacturing segments.
> I'm even questioning the narrative that he actually had much to do with kicking off the EV revolution
I would argue that Tesla did absolutely push the EV industry in the US. China would have dominated outside the US regardless but Tesla's involvement in China probably moved that timeline forward by a few years.
I would argue that Tesla did absolutely push the EV industry in the US. China would have dominated outside the US regardless but Tesla's involvement in China probably moved that timeline forward by a few years.
> His cult like following is why the share price is what it is. It's unusual but it was only valued so highly because of him.
Putting up impressive net income figures better than the other car companies and making the best selling car in the world also helps. Plus SpaceX and Starlink are a success. That kind of track record within 15 years could portend more success in the future.
It does not excuse the other failings, but business wise, I don’t see what trepidation shareholders would have had (prior to the recent Nazi and destroying US civilian institutions actions).
Putting up impressive net income figures better than the other car companies and making the best selling car in the world also helps. Plus SpaceX and Starlink are a success. That kind of track record within 15 years could portend more success in the future.
It does not excuse the other failings, but business wise, I don’t see what trepidation shareholders would have had (prior to the recent Nazi and destroying US civilian institutions actions).
What about blatantly lying and charging customers money for things that don't even exist?
It's probably not hard to scam people out of money when you're committing fraud.
It's probably not hard to scam people out of money when you're committing fraud.
I don’t think they are moving millions of Model Ys because people think they will drive themselves.
On his CV it reads as
- increased gross margins
Wait, what? Scanning every recent year for individual model and/or company total sales Tesla doesn’t even crack the top 10 in any given year. How does Tesla make the best selling car? What am I missing…
Edit: I didn’t scan close enough… in 2024 the Y was around the 4th best selling Model.
Edit: I didn’t scan close enough… in 2024 the Y was around the 4th best selling Model.
In 2023, the Model Y was the best selling car.
https://www.jato.com/resources/media-and-press-releases/tesl...
>As anticipated in JATO’s preliminary 2023 results, released in February, the Tesla Model Y made history last year. The midsize SUV secured top position in the global ranking as the first ever pure electric vehicle to lead the global market.
And from a business perspective, it was the best selling car amongst the portion of the world with the most money to spend. That is a pretty impressive achievement for any business.
>Impressively, the Model Y secured this position without a presence in most emerging markets, where it continues to be unaffordable for the majority of consumers.
And Tesla indicates it sold a similar number of Model Ys in 2024, so it very well could hold the same title again.
https://ir.tesla.com/press-release/tesla-fourth-quarter-2024...
https://www.jato.com/resources/media-and-press-releases/tesl...
>As anticipated in JATO’s preliminary 2023 results, released in February, the Tesla Model Y made history last year. The midsize SUV secured top position in the global ranking as the first ever pure electric vehicle to lead the global market.
And from a business perspective, it was the best selling car amongst the portion of the world with the most money to spend. That is a pretty impressive achievement for any business.
>Impressively, the Model Y secured this position without a presence in most emerging markets, where it continues to be unaffordable for the majority of consumers.
And Tesla indicates it sold a similar number of Model Ys in 2024, so it very well could hold the same title again.
https://ir.tesla.com/press-release/tesla-fourth-quarter-2024...
Tesla Y was best-selling car worldwide in 2024, followed by Toyota Corolla: https://www.statista.com/statistics/239229/most-sold-car-mod...
Tesla Y was also the best-selling car worldwide in 2023 (model 3 was in position 10) https://fiatgroupworld.com/2024/06/16/the-worlds-top-500-bes...
Tesla Y was the 4th best-selling car world wide in 2022 (model 3 came in at position 7) https://ptcgroup.global/top-10-best-selling-cars-worldwide-i...
Tesla Y was also the best-selling car worldwide in 2023 (model 3 was in position 10) https://fiatgroupworld.com/2024/06/16/the-worlds-top-500-bes...
Tesla Y was the 4th best-selling car world wide in 2022 (model 3 came in at position 7) https://ptcgroup.global/top-10-best-selling-cars-worldwide-i...
The most important word: "WAS".
And even with that, the valuation of TSLA assumes geometric growth in sales to subsume legacy ICE consumer transportation with EVs.
2024 was flat at best, where the market DID expand geometrically for EVs. Those numbers also represented a "segment monopoly" by Tesla. If you wanted an EV in those years, you bought a Tesla.
That is OVER. EVs and charging infrastructure, particularly in Europe are now fully competitive with Tesla. With "European" brands, and generally speaking full access to the superior Chinese models.
What Tesla needed to do in 2022, 2023, and 2024 wasn't the techboy Cybertruck, it should have been Minivans, Delivery vans, a real pickup, compact car, euro compact car, large / medium / small SUVs (Model Y is a medium/small crossover), station wagons.
They should have had cabin options, launched additional brands for ultraluxury and for more consumer price points.
Can't do all that inhouse? They should have acquired a struggling ICE company for stock swaps and gained access to more production and platforms and parts suppliers, and could have released long range PHEVs using their battery packaging for additional scale/demand.
Because Tesla no longer has any drivetrain or battery packaging advantages. Whatever profit margin they've enjoyed will be destroyed in competition. Arguably they have too much cylindrical NMC investment that they are behind the curve in battery supply and packaging with high density LFP and Sodium Ion being superior paths to a cheaper EV battery pack (greater cell to pack density, no wasted weight/space on cooling since LFP/Sodium Ion are much more stable than NMC).
Tesla needed a huge amount of product diversification about five years ago when the Model Y was launched.
And even with that, the valuation of TSLA assumes geometric growth in sales to subsume legacy ICE consumer transportation with EVs.
2024 was flat at best, where the market DID expand geometrically for EVs. Those numbers also represented a "segment monopoly" by Tesla. If you wanted an EV in those years, you bought a Tesla.
That is OVER. EVs and charging infrastructure, particularly in Europe are now fully competitive with Tesla. With "European" brands, and generally speaking full access to the superior Chinese models.
What Tesla needed to do in 2022, 2023, and 2024 wasn't the techboy Cybertruck, it should have been Minivans, Delivery vans, a real pickup, compact car, euro compact car, large / medium / small SUVs (Model Y is a medium/small crossover), station wagons.
They should have had cabin options, launched additional brands for ultraluxury and for more consumer price points.
Can't do all that inhouse? They should have acquired a struggling ICE company for stock swaps and gained access to more production and platforms and parts suppliers, and could have released long range PHEVs using their battery packaging for additional scale/demand.
Because Tesla no longer has any drivetrain or battery packaging advantages. Whatever profit margin they've enjoyed will be destroyed in competition. Arguably they have too much cylindrical NMC investment that they are behind the curve in battery supply and packaging with high density LFP and Sodium Ion being superior paths to a cheaper EV battery pack (greater cell to pack density, no wasted weight/space on cooling since LFP/Sodium Ion are much more stable than NMC).
Tesla needed a huge amount of product diversification about five years ago when the Model Y was launched.
It’s because Tesla doesn’t have many models whereas other can makers have tens of models
How’s that going to happen… he largely controls the board, owns over 10% of issued shared, people like Ellison own another huge chunk and there’s a bunch of Elon fanbois who own much of the retail stock
It takes a supermajority to oust the board or the CEO.
Must controls about 12% of the company, so the remaining 88% of the stock needs to produce the 2/3s majority. So you effectively need 75% of voters to vote against him.
TSLA probably has a large retail segment, and they can't be organized to vote, and generally the TSLA retail crowd is full of Elon fanbois. That leaves institutional investors, and with Musk's alignment with the Trump administration, they are terrified of getting their institutions investigated or harassed.
The only way Musk gets ousted is for the stock to drop so far that a margin call is issued on the loans he has taken on the stock. I don't know what that is, but I suspect it is under 100$/share.
That might force a selloff by Musk, which combined with the price collapse chasing retail investors away, may provide enough voting power for institutions. Still a big IF.
The only other thing would be if board members start resigning, but most of the board is sufficiently amoral and well compensated that it is unlikely.
Regulatory intervention isn't happening for four years. Lawsuits? Probably would need executive branch enforcement, and there's always the Trump pardon to wipe anything away.
Must controls about 12% of the company, so the remaining 88% of the stock needs to produce the 2/3s majority. So you effectively need 75% of voters to vote against him.
TSLA probably has a large retail segment, and they can't be organized to vote, and generally the TSLA retail crowd is full of Elon fanbois. That leaves institutional investors, and with Musk's alignment with the Trump administration, they are terrified of getting their institutions investigated or harassed.
The only way Musk gets ousted is for the stock to drop so far that a margin call is issued on the loans he has taken on the stock. I don't know what that is, but I suspect it is under 100$/share.
That might force a selloff by Musk, which combined with the price collapse chasing retail investors away, may provide enough voting power for institutions. Still a big IF.
The only other thing would be if board members start resigning, but most of the board is sufficiently amoral and well compensated that it is unlikely.
Regulatory intervention isn't happening for four years. Lawsuits? Probably would need executive branch enforcement, and there's always the Trump pardon to wipe anything away.
The thing is, the actual value of ownership the TSLA represents in way over valued. At $100/share a market cap of ~$300B would be set, which is still over valued for a mid sized car manufacturer with a distressed brand. The $200B required to secure a 2/3 majority it would take at $100/share could be better invested else where in the automotive industry.
The reason for the current high valuation is because people were betting Tesla would be first to another major tech innovation. Self driving taxis, or electric 18-wheel trucks, or some other new market. The more time Elon spends in Washington DC, the slower Tesla is going to be at realizing these advancements.
For $200B you would have a decent shot of actually making a major tech leap in automative and partnering with an existing manufacturer.
The reason for the current high valuation is because people were betting Tesla would be first to another major tech innovation. Self driving taxis, or electric 18-wheel trucks, or some other new market. The more time Elon spends in Washington DC, the slower Tesla is going to be at realizing these advancements.
For $200B you would have a decent shot of actually making a major tech leap in automative and partnering with an existing manufacturer.
All those events are strongly correlated with each other, so I don't think it's that unlikely. Especially since Tesla sales are plummeting in Europe right now.
I'm surprised how many people overlooked the "pedo guy" incident.
Personally, this isn't about Tesla—sorry for the slight tangent. I never considered Tesla, but not because of Elon Musk; rather, EVs simply don’t work for me. I’ve always tried to separate the person from the service they operate (e.g., not judging art by the artist). For what it’s worth, I’ve acknowledged Musk’s accomplishments. Yes, some of the things he has said are deeply disturbing and indefensible, but I’ve generally tried to maintain that separation.
However, his collusion with the administration to actively make people's lives miserable—without proper oversight, due process, or accountability—has been a breaking point for me. The blatant conflict of interest has led me to significantly reduce my activity on X. This creates a dilemma, as many of the people I interact with are in Japan, where X remains extremely popular since the Twitter era. Most of them are unlikely to migrate elsewhere simply because they aren’t directly affected by his political actions.
The situation might be different for Tesla owners, but I’m not sure they were necessarily “overlooking” his statements. People have varying levels of tolerance when it comes to "canceling" products due to the actions of their owners.
However, his collusion with the administration to actively make people's lives miserable—without proper oversight, due process, or accountability—has been a breaking point for me. The blatant conflict of interest has led me to significantly reduce my activity on X. This creates a dilemma, as many of the people I interact with are in Japan, where X remains extremely popular since the Twitter era. Most of them are unlikely to migrate elsewhere simply because they aren’t directly affected by his political actions.
The situation might be different for Tesla owners, but I’m not sure they were necessarily “overlooking” his statements. People have varying levels of tolerance when it comes to "canceling" products due to the actions of their owners.
drawkward(1)
Elon's biggest concern for Tesla isn't their stock price. He has an outstanding record of surviving the hits. He can't change a free market, but he also won't be scared until TSLA falls below 100. Protests tend to fizzle and die after the social influencers (online news) moves onto something else. Therefore, its a very, very long way to go before the protesting hits him where it actually counts.
Elons financial engineering works until it doesn't.
It wouldn't be the first time the worlds richest mans house of cards comes crumbling down due to over confidence and over exposure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivar_Kreuger
It wouldn't be the first time the worlds richest mans house of cards comes crumbling down due to over confidence and over exposure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivar_Kreuger
>Protests tend to fizzle and die after the social influencers (online news) moves onto something else.
it's a good thing Elon is addicted to the limelight and won't let them move on. Makes his eventual downfall faster.
> its a very, very long way to go before the protesting hits him where it actually counts.
What counts if not the one thing he brags about. I'm sure the first blow to his ego is no longer being the richest person on the planet. Well, 2nd blow. Getting ratio'd on his own platform was probably the first stone cast.
it's a good thing Elon is addicted to the limelight and won't let them move on. Makes his eventual downfall faster.
> its a very, very long way to go before the protesting hits him where it actually counts.
What counts if not the one thing he brags about. I'm sure the first blow to his ego is no longer being the richest person on the planet. Well, 2nd blow. Getting ratio'd on his own platform was probably the first stone cast.
92 jeeto namber trick app
Musk has SpaceX, he doesn’t care about Tesla
I don,'t know what you base this on? Most of his wealth is in Tesla.
Book wealth is in Tesla. SpaceX is private but represents a large amount of inherent wealth that he could borrow against.
SpaceX will be hard to disentangle from Musk. The sad fact is that it needs to be torn down as well. Musk has already started this in the last week with the war of words with the ISS astronauts and the cancellation of the NASA next gen rockets.
He also is saber rattling the Ukrainians with Starlink service dismissal. This highlights to world governments that a Starlink competitor is a top security priority.
Sure Musk gets four years to tear apart NASA, but that will have a lot of consequences. I predict that Bezos's rocket companies and others will start to get substantial support from EU and japanese and other funding sources.
Musk may in theory become radioactive enough that SpaceX loses private and world government contracts that it gets seriously crunched even with preferential treatment from the Trump administration.
If I were the EU, I would drop billions of dollars to pick off as many SpaceX rocket engineers as possible and relocate them to the EU and have them recreate SpaceX rockets in a european company. Kick off the inevitable economic cold war between the EU and USA. Heck, you can relocate them to Vancouver, I'm sure Canada would play ball at this point.
I was a starlink customer practically from day one, and I'm cancelling my service this month. It's sad.
SpaceX will be hard to disentangle from Musk. The sad fact is that it needs to be torn down as well. Musk has already started this in the last week with the war of words with the ISS astronauts and the cancellation of the NASA next gen rockets.
He also is saber rattling the Ukrainians with Starlink service dismissal. This highlights to world governments that a Starlink competitor is a top security priority.
Sure Musk gets four years to tear apart NASA, but that will have a lot of consequences. I predict that Bezos's rocket companies and others will start to get substantial support from EU and japanese and other funding sources.
Musk may in theory become radioactive enough that SpaceX loses private and world government contracts that it gets seriously crunched even with preferential treatment from the Trump administration.
If I were the EU, I would drop billions of dollars to pick off as many SpaceX rocket engineers as possible and relocate them to the EU and have them recreate SpaceX rockets in a european company. Kick off the inevitable economic cold war between the EU and USA. Heck, you can relocate them to Vancouver, I'm sure Canada would play ball at this point.
I was a starlink customer practically from day one, and I'm cancelling my service this month. It's sad.
Elon Musk has borrowed a lot of money with Tesla stock as collateral. If Tesla tanks, he is in deep trouble.
There is no conceivable universe where Musk will ever be "in deep trouble," as in: a normal person struggling to make rent. It's hard to even visualize the size of "hundreds of billions." Even if he suddenly lost 99.99% of his wealth, he'd still be worth almost $40M, which is generational wealth for at least a few generations.
It’s not about losing 99.9% of his wealth, conceivably, he could end up billions under water.
It has happened before. Ivar Krüger, then the worlds richest man, ended up dead by suicide. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivar_Kreuger
It has happened before. Ivar Krüger, then the worlds richest man, ended up dead by suicide. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivar_Kreuger
[deleted]
[deleted]
drawkward(3)
[deleted]
I’m still a strong supporter of EVs but I’m frustrated that EV owners still pay at least as much for electricity and registration as ICE cars pay for gas (in California). Hybrids still make more financial sense in California.