I hope that Tesla will change its top management asap.
Imagine a situation where you have a new 800V infrastructure already applied to cybertruck and decide to update the Model Y with just “minor” adjustments. Which means that both M3 and MY will get 800V/48V when? 2/3 years minimum.
> I hope that Tesla will change its top management asap.
Change it to who?
Their price to earnings is like 100x. The entire market cap is built by Elon's non-stop hyping of FSD / Robo-Taxi / etc. We gunna resurrect Billy Mays here to do the marketing?
The entire executive office is just dumping their Tesla stock, they know the company has no value and if they get rid of Musk it's probably a nail in the coffin for the stock price.
> if they get rid of Musk it's probably a nail in the coffin for the stock price.
It's already significantly off its peak, and Musk is now so unpopular because of his political interventions that people are firebombing Tesla dealerships and vandalizing the cars. I can't really see how that's going to be good marketing.
Valuing it like a regular car company will bring share price below 50. Anything above requires faith that it will transform to some AI, energy, fsd transport company.
Good marketing for who? It's not like the cars themselves suddenly got worse. I think most people don't engage in victim blaming when someone or some group are targeted by domestic terrorists, which is definitionally what is happening (Oxford Languages: "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims").
The people who should worry about the marketing problem here are the Democrats. They're directly funding this violence and vandalism via their NGO network, don't seem to be condemning it and it's their inverted rhetoric claiming Republicans are Nazis that has now created a left-wing street army physically attacking anyone who supports the opposition: exactly the tactics used in the Weimar Republic. Irony is surely dead.
Also, a lot of the people getting vandalized or pressured to inconveniently sell their car at a loss are Democrats themselves, many of whom will certainly be wondering why they're supporting the team that would directly attack innocent people in such horrible ways.
It's unlikely Musk would care even if Tesla really suffered. His biographies make it clear enough. Getting rich has never been what motivated him, and he owns private companies that are basically terrorism-proof. They spin off enough money to sustain his often rather spartan lifestyle in any case. All these attacks will do is build sympathy for him, for the right, and radicalize them still further.
>So market cap is based on exaggerations and lies.
Market cap is defined by whatever stock buyers decide to justify their purchase. If people keep buying the stock to get it to the moon because of whatever hype, what else matters?
False claims would be good criteria. Tesla’s stock price massively benefited from “Full Self-Driving” hype over a decade of unkept promises; having penalties for misleading investors would help a lot of industries.
OK, what false claims did crypto make to justify its valuation? What false claims did tulips make?
What if a large part of the stock market is more people gambling or FOMO herd mentality rather than calculated choices? You don't have to justify stock valuations the same way you can't rationalize peoples' behavior and that's what stock values reflect. Just stay way from high risk meme stocks.
>Tesla’s stock price massively benefited
You mean the investors have benefited. Which is why they invested in Tesla stock to begin with.
Cryptocurrencies aren’t regulated securities. They arguably should be but this is a weird distraction from the question of whether someone who did make false claims in a regulated context should be held accountable.
You don't stop the buyer from buying on speculation about what the business might become. The buyer can do whatever they want based on whatever rationalization they want.
You stop the seller from pumping up the stock price based on lies.
According to Lars Moravy, the front gigacasting and steer-by-wire were not implemented for the new Model Y due to them having trouble switching the supply chain over [1]. I guess the 800V is for the same reason. Lars said it was much easier for the Cybertruck to change to the newer systems because they expected lower sales numbers. The Model Y on the other hand has to go into mass production straight away at 3 different factories, and they wanted to keep the production process the same at all three (he talks about this at 28:50).
I mean, we all know who the driver is to launch 'cybertrucks' and 'robotaxis' instead of more affordable variations.
Also, not sure what the whole 800v hype is about. I rent EVs for roadtrips and Tesla's are basically the fastest charging ones with current architecture, haven't had a need for 800v since at the cell level the charging speed is already maxed out.
Re: the Y, even though they won't sell because some hand gestures and behaviors, they did almost every complaint people have about the old model Y.
Looking at EVDatabase, it seems like the 800v cars charge quite a lot faster? The EV6 manages 205kW average compared to 124kW for the long range Model Y. From my experience, the EV6 hits those charging speeds very reliably.
Everything I've seen is that Hyundai/Kia's charge noticeably (though not massively) faster than Tesla's. I've never DCFC a Tesla to compare but my Ioniq is usually under 20 mins in practice
Imagine a situation where you have a new 800V infrastructure already applied to cybertruck and decide to update the Model Y with just “minor” adjustments. Which means that both M3 and MY will get 800V/48V when? 2/3 years minimum.
It recalls me a Nokia moment.
Meanwhile China is running.