stock market

I am not real big on subsidies, even though America is full of them.
But if you wanna, it should be any EV, not just Tesla...
For persons earning up to $70K (or whatever) and only made in America cars.
Thing about subsidies for made in USA only is they would violate the trade agreement we have with other countries (Japan, Mexico, Canada, Euro), and they would have the legal retaliation right to our farm products. It won't work politically.

No Fault insurance do suck on expensive to replace cars but Tesla is a league on its own due to their body design, most body repair I heard is going to be double of a normal car. That's Tesla's fault not EV in general though.

I would love to see more Chevy Volt style plug in design. It is amazing and it is too bad they abandon it rather than popularize it to larger SUV and cross over. At least licensing it to other companies would be great.
 
I have heard from a reliable source that Tesla has a secret lab that is working on cloning Elon.
Just kidding.
But what makes anyone think that Elon is not fully aware that he is the "SPOF" and is not grooming someone to replace him should the need arise ?
He's a pretty smart guy ya know.....
 
Single Point of Failure

Although I'd argue that in the case of Tesla one could call him Significant Personality out Front.

Based on that theory one could state the case that Apple should have whithered after Steve Jobs passed? In fact the opposite happened as Tim Cook has led Apple in brilliant fashion.

Maybe that’s where Apple and Tesla diverge? Does Tesla have a solid management lineup in case the unforeseen should happen? That is actually part of the CEO’s job.
 
I have heard from a reliable source that Tesla has a secret lab that is working on cloning Elon.
Just kidding.
But what makes anyone think that Elon is not fully aware that he is the "SPOF" and is not grooming someone to replace him should the need arise ?
He's a pretty smart guy ya know.....
I have had the incredible experience of seeing high tech companies morph, change and change dramatically when Silicon Valley CEOs go and others take over.
Because of the rapid, constant change in growth, the skillset needs change.
I was involved in "the best run $500M company in the world". But does that skillset scale to $1B? $10B? No it does not.
 
Based on that theory one could state the case that Apple should have whithered after Steve Jobs passed? In fact the opposite happened as Tim Cook has led Apple in brilliant fashion.

Maybe that’s where Apple and Tesla diverge? Does Tesla have a solid management lineup in case the unforeseen should happen? That is actually part of the CEO’s job.
Apple did whither when Sculley fired Jobs.
The company is in a completely different place now. Plus, there are no absolutes. You are right; Jobs mentored Cook.
You might say the same thing about Microsoft.

Tesla is known as a sweatshop here in the Valley. And in the Valley sweatshops are the norm.
Turnaround has been Tesla's norm since day 1.
 
Based on that theory one could state the case that Apple should have whithered after Steve Jobs passed? In fact the opposite happened as Tim Cook has led Apple in brilliant fashion.

Maybe that’s where Apple and Tesla diverge? Does Tesla have a solid management lineup in case the unforeseen should happen? That is actually part of the CEO’s job.

If you use the term significant... then the future success depends on the quality of the follow-on leader.

If someone truly is a Single Point of Failure, future failure is more likely.

Wasn't Jobs ousted the first time? If that was the case (and I don't really recall) he wouldn't have had time to groom/prepare his successor.

I believe when he knew his time on Earth was coming to an end, he had the opportunity to choose someone who he would groom/prepare to continue his vision.


I believe Cook was Jobs' pick, and was more likely to succeed compared to his first involuntary departure.

Has Elon Musk set up people for a succession plan should anything happen to him? Seems like much of what surrounds him is a cult of personality. So are Tesla and other ventures set up for success should he leave or be forced out? Seems Apple wasn't the first time they ousted Jobs, but the second time around, Jobs had Cook around since the late 1990s and recommended him to the board.

One might argue that the reason Jobs/Apple was so much better the second time under his leadership was in fact Tim Cook's doing.
 
If you use the term significant... then the future success depends on the quality of the follow-on leader.

If someone truly is a Single Point of Failure, future failure is more likely.

Wasn't Jobs ousted the first time? If that was the case (and I don't really recall) he wouldn't have had time to groom/prepare his successor.

I believe when he knew his time on Earth was coming to an end, he had the opportunity to choose someone who he would groom/prepare to continue his vision.


I believe Cook was Jobs' pick, and was more likely to succeed compared to his first involuntary departure.

Has Elon Musk set up people for a succession plan should anything happen to him? Seems like much of what surrounds him is a cult of personality. So are Tesla and other ventures set up for success should he leave or be forced out? Seems Apple wasn't the first time they ousted Jobs, but the second time around, Jobs had Cook around since the late 1990s and recommended him to the board.

One might argue that the reason Jobs/Apple was so much better the second time under his leadership was in fact Tim Cook's doing.

Yes Jobs was fired the first time around but we didn’t have the full force of the Interwebs at that point. Apple was in cruise control pretty much with a loyal but smaller customer base. They were at the edge of the abyss ( Wall Street reference) when Jobs came back and the rest is history.

The relationship between Cook and Jobs was well known. Jobs was a bit of a arse as those in the company would tell you. Cook took a different direction in that respect and instilled a team atmosphere at Apple.

I have a acquaintance who works at the Spaceship. She loves her job and while Jobs is well revered at the company her experience tells her that Cook is the better boss to work under.
 
The point is, different leadership skills are required as companies grow. There was a time for Jobs and he changed the world. He might not have the leadership skills for the different, more mature Apple of today.

The same is likely true of Musk. He instantly (in business time) took Tesla to success and changed the world. Of course timing is only everything.
Will his skills, personality, etc be the right fit in 10 years? Probably not. Unless he continues to be Superman.

In Silicon Valley, growth is so rapid due to technology shifts. Growth, by its nature, requires change.
Again, I saw this 1st hand in the history of a company I was part of for more than 25 years.
When you are young and small, you can be agile. Tesla as a company and with its wealth is extremely agile.
That will change. As we say in the Valley, you grow or you go.

By the way, with their software driven cars, agility is Tesla's strength and #1 advantage over everyone else.
Tech baby!
 
Since Feb 1 I have bought Bitcoin on and off to the tune of $1000 and since Mar 3 $2000 in Ethereum. I am up $1431.

Also associated with the crypto..PYPL, ARKF, LEGR, BLOK, BLCN about the same $$$. Up pretty good in these. No it wont get me rich...lol
 
Based on that theory one could state the case that Apple should have whithered after Steve Jobs passed? In fact the opposite happened as Tim Cook has led Apple in brilliant fashion.

Maybe that’s where Apple and Tesla diverge? Does Tesla have a solid management lineup in case the unforeseen should happen? That is actually part of the CEO’s job.
They are different kind of leaders.

Steve Jobs are innovators but he isn't that great at running a business to scale. If he was leading everything without Tim he would run into production and design reliability problem, people would end up "waiting in line" for every product and scalpers would be scalping them. Brilliant designs, cannot scale, then lost the advantage when everyone and Chinese knockoff.

Tim Cook got all the manufacturing problems resolved, make their manufacturing the gold standard in the industry, addressed the hard problems of making things reliable and scale production to enough for everyone who wants one, instead of priced high because they are expensive to make in small boutique way. He also runs the company in a way that it grow into what it is today, without Tim it wouldn't be this big of a company despite Steve having more innovation that you cannot afford to buy.

So, you cannot just complain about either Steve or Tim, you cannot have the Apple today without either of them.
 
When you get an $3.4 billion in local government grants and another $20 billion (last year) in government subsidies/vouchers/property tax exemptions
it’s hard not to make profit
As I said previously, that's a very very small fraction of their own investment. i.e. AWS invest 9B a quarter, and that's not including those retail investment they made. Gov cloud also is not a major portion of their client base, i.e. Snapchat alone were spending 1B a year on AWS service.
 
As I said previously, that's a very very small fraction of their own investment. i.e. AWS invest 9B a quarter, and that's not including those retail investment they made. Gov cloud also is not a major portion of their client base, i.e. Snapchat alone were spending 1B a year on AWS service.
income isn’t profit
Investment/ R&D also isn’t profit


They make $5 billion in actual profit in a quarter

so yeah $20 billion in government cash is a thing when your “profit” tracks government kickbacks
 
income isn’t profit
Investment/ R&D also isn’t profit


They make $5 billion in actual profit in a quarter

so yeah $20 billion in government cash is a thing when your “profit” tracks government kickbacks
LOL you seriously believe they only make $5 in profit? and $20 gov cash is all profit and no cost? I though government buying stuff and services still need to pay instead of robbing vendors blind.
 
I don't think TSLA is making money on selling cars. IIRC, their profit for the last quarter was less than the income from selling mileage credits to other automakers.

From CNBC, "Net profit reached a quarterly record of $438 million on a GAAP basis, and the company recorded $518 million in revenue from sales of regulatory credits during the period. It also recorded a $101 million positive impact from sales of bitcoin during the quarter."

So TSLA is not making money building and selling cars. If you take out the speculation on bitcoin as well as the sales of regulatory credits and TSLA is $181 million in the red.

So while they clever, they are not really making their money on the sales of cars. Their money is made on trading.

Not saying that's bad, just suggesting people understand where any profits are really coming from.

If other automakers have lesser need for such credits, what does that do to TSLA?
I wonder how many additional carmakers will need fewer if not no emissions credits from Tesla.

https://europe.autonews.com/environ...s-target-without-teslas-help-ceo-tavares-says
 
Keeping in mind gone I’ve gone conservative in this one account if that’s what you can call it.
I would like to thank TMobile this morning. Other holdings in this account are Walmart and Wells Fargo. Not that I plan to buy any more of them.

In another account I did purchase Wells Fargo starting at a high of 43 all the way down to roughly 23 and all the way up the entire year of 2020 Into January and February 2021. The remainder of this other account is index funds on the NASDAQ and S&P 500 and I just stopped purchasing Wells Fargo and went into a international index fund.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom