Tesla and Uber Unlikely to Survive...
Discussion
Subsidies... spacex has had $5bn in contracts not subsidies.
Tesla had government loans which they have been replayed and incentives which every company gets.
Big auto were bailed out for tens of billions recently..
The falcon heavy is a major achievement, worlds most powerful rocket, entirely developed by a private company, cost them 1/2bn and its reusable for the most part. First private company to put a liquid fuelled rocket into orbit, first to land an orbital booster. Undercutting every other launch company.
The model 3 was original slated for 2020, its only their bullish attitude that brought that forward a few years so a few months here and thee are nothing.
Tesla had government loans which they have been replayed and incentives which every company gets.
Big auto were bailed out for tens of billions recently..
The falcon heavy is a major achievement, worlds most powerful rocket, entirely developed by a private company, cost them 1/2bn and its reusable for the most part. First private company to put a liquid fuelled rocket into orbit, first to land an orbital booster. Undercutting every other launch company.
The model 3 was original slated for 2020, its only their bullish attitude that brought that forward a few years so a few months here and thee are nothing.
Yipper said:
liner33 said:
Wow the power of the "Cult of Elon" is strong in this thread
Even the great one thinks the stock is overvalued
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/17/elon-musk-teslas-s...
Others explain why they are think Tesla and the stock value is vulnerable
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/7-big-worries-th...
There is defo some cultism around, blended with a whiff of hysteria.Even the great one thinks the stock is overvalued
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/17/elon-musk-teslas-s...
Others explain why they are think Tesla and the stock value is vulnerable
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/7-big-worries-th...
Structurally bankrupt, major quality issues, free subsidies starting to fade, old models have peaked, delay after delay after delay to new models, and classic diversionary tactics with flashy rocket launches... and, still, some people continue to stick their head in the sand and oppress the non-believers.
Signs of cultish mania and group hysteria.
I reckon people like you are just low achievers with no life and see people like Musk and need to knock him down just so you feel better about living in your moms basement.
Yipper said:
liner33 said:
Wow the power of the "Cult of Elon" is strong in this thread
Even the great one thinks the stock is overvalued
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/17/elon-musk-teslas-s...
Others explain why they are think Tesla and the stock value is vulnerable
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/7-big-worries-th...
There is defo some cultism around, blended with a whiff of hysteria.Even the great one thinks the stock is overvalued
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/17/elon-musk-teslas-s...
Others explain why they are think Tesla and the stock value is vulnerable
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/7-big-worries-th...
Structurally bankrupt, major quality issues, free subsidies starting to fade, old models have peaked, delay after delay after delay to new models, and classic diversionary tactics with flashy rocket launches... and, still, some people continue to stick their head in the sand and oppress the non-believers.
Signs of cultish mania and group hysteria.
RobDickinson said:
Subsidies... spacex has had $5bn in contracts not subsidies.
Tesla had government loans which they have been replayed and incentives which every company gets.
Big auto were bailed out for tens of billions recently..
The falcon heavy is a major achievement, worlds most powerful rocket, entirely developed by a private company, cost them 1/2bn and its reusable for the most part. First private company to put a liquid fuelled rocket into orbit, first to land an orbital booster. Undercutting every other launch company.
The model 3 was original slated for 2020, its only their bullish attitude that brought that forward a few years so a few months here and thee are nothing.
Apart from the “privately funded” read “funded by tax payer subsidies for Tesla” nature of Falcon Heavy, what exactly was so unique about the Rocket? Most powerful? Surely NASA wouldn’t build a rocket that was more powerful than it needed to be.Tesla had government loans which they have been replayed and incentives which every company gets.
Big auto were bailed out for tens of billions recently..
The falcon heavy is a major achievement, worlds most powerful rocket, entirely developed by a private company, cost them 1/2bn and its reusable for the most part. First private company to put a liquid fuelled rocket into orbit, first to land an orbital booster. Undercutting every other launch company.
The model 3 was original slated for 2020, its only their bullish attitude that brought that forward a few years so a few months here and thee are nothing.
Edited by Too Drunk to Funk on Saturday 10th February 20:31
Too Drunk to Funk said:
REALIST123 said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
its almost as thou it costs billions to set up a car manufacturing plant to supply global demand
just as well the main auto manufacturers don't spend this much on their plants, oh wait ...
and its a bargain compared to how much he just spent firing his car at mars lol
They’re hardly supplying global demand. The opposite in fact. just as well the main auto manufacturers don't spend this much on their plants, oh wait ...
and its a bargain compared to how much he just spent firing his car at mars lol
Has any motor manufacturer ever been in so much debt, so early in its life?
You last sentence is probably true.
It's currently the world's most powerful rocket. By a factor of 2.
Next is the delta 4 heavy which costs about 5 times as much to launch.
Falcon Heavy was entirely funded by spacex. NASA didn't put in a penny. NASA won't probably use it. US military might but not until at least next year. It's been developed for commercial launches.
NASA do want a large rocket, current working on the SLS, 20 billion dollars. Out of that they funded a maximum of 5 launched. So average of 4bn a launch.
Sad thing is its only 10 percent more weight to orbit than fh.
Next is the delta 4 heavy which costs about 5 times as much to launch.
Falcon Heavy was entirely funded by spacex. NASA didn't put in a penny. NASA won't probably use it. US military might but not until at least next year. It's been developed for commercial launches.
NASA do want a large rocket, current working on the SLS, 20 billion dollars. Out of that they funded a maximum of 5 launched. So average of 4bn a launch.
Sad thing is its only 10 percent more weight to orbit than fh.
RobDickinson said:
It's currently the world's most powerful rocket. By a factor of 2.
Next is the delta 4 heavy which costs about 5 times as much to launch.
Falcon Heavy was entirely funded by spacex. NASA didn't put in a penny. NASA won't probably use it. US military might but not until at least next year. It's been developed for commercial launches.
NASA do want a large rocket, current working on the SLS, 20 billion dollars. Out of that they funded a maximum of 5 launched. So average of 4bn a launch.
Sad thing is its only 10 percent more weight to orbit than fh.
Current being the key word, Isn’t it about half, maybe only 1/3 the Saturn V capability from nearly 50 years ago? Next is the delta 4 heavy which costs about 5 times as much to launch.
Falcon Heavy was entirely funded by spacex. NASA didn't put in a penny. NASA won't probably use it. US military might but not until at least next year. It's been developed for commercial launches.
NASA do want a large rocket, current working on the SLS, 20 billion dollars. Out of that they funded a maximum of 5 launched. So average of 4bn a launch.
Sad thing is its only 10 percent more weight to orbit than fh.
http://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-falcon-heavy...
RobDickinson said:
Falcon Heavy was entirely funded by spacex. NASA didn't put in a penny. NASA won't probably use it. US military might but not until at least next year. It's been developed for commercial launches.
Suggesting it was privately funded us actually quite funny.. there’s also n9 real commercial need for heavy, India put 100+ satellites into orbit on one launch, technology is such you don’t need big unless it’s manned or to other planets.Heres Johnny said:
Current being the key word, Isn’t it about half, maybe only 1/3 the Saturn V capability from nearly 50 years ago?
http://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-falcon-heavy...
It's roughly half saturn v launch capability. For 90 million dollars. Try making a saturn v for that... http://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-falcon-heavy...
It's for heavy satellites, already has several customers. The main point of heavy is to put 8 tons into gto and still be reusable.
Bfr will launch 150 tons to orbit , more than saturn v and be fully reusable.
Too Drunk to Funk said:
Too Drunk to Funk said:
REALIST123 said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
its almost as thou it costs billions to set up a car manufacturing plant to supply global demand
just as well the main auto manufacturers don't spend this much on their plants, oh wait ...
and its a bargain compared to how much he just spent firing his car at mars lol
They’re hardly supplying global demand. The opposite in fact. just as well the main auto manufacturers don't spend this much on their plants, oh wait ...
and its a bargain compared to how much he just spent firing his car at mars lol
Has any motor manufacturer ever been in so much debt, so early in its life?
You last sentence is probably true.
Heres Johnny said:
RobDickinson said:
Falcon Heavy was entirely funded by spacex. NASA didn't put in a penny. NASA won't probably use it. US military might but not until at least next year. It's been developed for commercial launches.
Suggesting it was privately funded us actually quite funny.. there’s also n9 real commercial need for heavy, India put 100+ satellites into orbit on one launch, technology is such you don’t need big unless it’s manned or to other planets.rscott said:
So only half the amount lost by GM in 2017 then?
To be fair, you have no need to misquote GM’s results to make the point.
I’m sure you know what the true figures and circumstances of GM are and that the ‘loss’ you’ve quoted is due to tax law change?
What about the $8B + Ford profits? Or the FCA $4B +?
RobDickinson said:
It's roughly half saturn v launch capability. For 90 million dollars. Try making a saturn v for that...
It's for heavy satellites, already has several customers. The main point of heavy is to put 8 tons into gto and still be reusable.
Bfr will launch 150 tons to orbit , more than saturn v and be fully reusable.
My point is only that it’s not new, Saturn v was bigger, Space x have already done reuseable before. It's for heavy satellites, already has several customers. The main point of heavy is to put 8 tons into gto and still be reusable.
Bfr will launch 150 tons to orbit , more than saturn v and be fully reusable.
Moore’s law on all things high tech would indicate things should be cheaper today, material science especially. When Saturn started, and let’s remember it’s cargo included people which is somewhat more precious, they’d only just about invented cling film to wrap their sandwiches and people were watching black and white tv. Trying to compare costs is pointless.
RobDickinson said:
ford lost what $800m last year (2016) though right?
2017 was last year , go see how well Ford turned that around - http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/fo...Criticise the Tesla and you get massive diversion
"But but EV's are the future" - not denied and Tesla are not going to be the saviour or responsible for the demise of EV's
Tesla make really cool stuff - not denied but they cant keep going on losing money like they are
Space X is really cool - yes yes it and so is Paypal but that has nothing to do with Teslas issues
Just drink the kool-aid and be done with it
liner33 said:
Tesla make really cool stuff - not denied but they cant keep going on losing money like they are
Well, yes they can. It depends on investors’ tolerance and their desire to fund the company to some future point where it might be profitable.
One current bullish argument is that Tesla is the Amazon of cars. It’s a land grab. Amazon net made no money for the first 12 years of its life, iirc, but it made the market its own. Cars are different but there maybe some truth in the view - the shift to EV is happening faster and is accelerating.
Whatever one’s own views, there has been no shortage of investors willing to back Musk’s ambition. Up till now. The recent equity market volatility might just halt that. If capital markets close to Tesla before Model 3 cash flows start in earnest, it may be in real trouble. Amazon shares lost 95% of their value in 2000-2003.
If the bull market shrugs this episode off then Tesla will probably thrive.
AstonZagato said:
Well, yes they can.
It depends on investors’ tolerance and their desire to fund the company to some future point where it might be profitable.
One current bullish argument is that Tesla is the Amazon of cars. It’s a land grab. Amazon net made no money for the first 12 years of its life, iirc, but it made the market its own. Cars are different but there maybe some truth in the view - the shift to EV is happening faster and is accelerating.
Whatever one’s own views, there has been no shortage of investors willing to back Musk’s ambition. Up till now. The recent equity market volatility might just halt that. If capital markets close to Tesla before Model 3 cash flows start in earnest, it may be in real trouble. Amazon shares lost 95% of their value in 2000-2003.
If the bull market shrugs this episode off then Tesla will probably thrive.
The shift to EV's is happening faster and accelerating but the big players have joined the game and Tesla are not in a position to exploit this It depends on investors’ tolerance and their desire to fund the company to some future point where it might be profitable.
One current bullish argument is that Tesla is the Amazon of cars. It’s a land grab. Amazon net made no money for the first 12 years of its life, iirc, but it made the market its own. Cars are different but there maybe some truth in the view - the shift to EV is happening faster and is accelerating.
Whatever one’s own views, there has been no shortage of investors willing to back Musk’s ambition. Up till now. The recent equity market volatility might just halt that. If capital markets close to Tesla before Model 3 cash flows start in earnest, it may be in real trouble. Amazon shares lost 95% of their value in 2000-2003.
If the bull market shrugs this episode off then Tesla will probably thrive.
p1stonhead said:
Too Drunk to Funk said:
Too Drunk to Funk said:
Exactly, other makers are supplying a demand. Tesla are throwing money in the fire.
Lost 2 Billion Dollars in 2017 apparently.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff