• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread Musk, SpaceX and future of Tesla

Status
Not open for further replies.
Exactly - the value of a company is decided by handful of investment firms that have no need for fundamentals.

As long as there is nothing more Hip than Tesla in the US, it will keep its evaluation despite mostly being a meme Stock at this point.

Investors are not betting on Tesla, they are betting on the US government to tariff all competitors out of the market.
Q. E. ******* D.
 
The government, instead of the Board, making sure the Company success against its competitors worked so well for Boeing.
 
Exactly - the value of a company is decided by handful of investment firms that have no need for fundamentals.
Nonsense. Of course they know the fundamentals.

As long as there is nothing more Hip than Tesla in the US, it will keep its evaluation despite mostly being a meme Stock at this point.
So you agree Tesla is over priced?
Investors are not betting on Tesla, they are betting on the US government to tariff all competitors out of the market.

Which is fine because it is happening, but Tesla is likely to find other markets difficult as a result. And Tesla is not the only EV maker in the US and it still has fundamental problems with its current line up and demand.

Tesla's share price is being propped up by the hype of its owner and increasingly hollow promises of extreme growth (for a car company).
 
Nonsense. Of course they know the fundamentals.

I didn't say they don't know the fundamentals - they just don't care.
Musk is a junkie who makes irrational decisions all the time - there is no bigger Red Flag. And yet they don't downgrade the company until he's gone.
That's because they can keep the price where they want it.


So you agree Tesla is over priced?

All non-Chinese EV companies are. Chinese companies have such a huge advantage in labor costs, economy of scale and access to Lithium that no European or US company could compete in a Free Market.
the only chance other companies have is Protectionism.



Which is fine because it is happening, but Tesla is likely to find other markets difficult as a result. And Tesla is not the only EV maker in the US and it still has fundamental problems with its current line up and demand.

Tesla's share price is being propped up by the hype of its owner and increasingly hollow promises of extreme growth (for a car company).


Tesla has a very outdated product line.
Its Autopilot is, at best, a dud, at worst a constant source of litigation.
The cybertruck is a bad joke.

At this point, the Supercharger Network might be the best thing about the company, and Musk just fired the entire Team.
And then had to hire them back.

Who would invest in a company this bad?

Answer: people who know that Musk fanboys will literally buy anything with his name attached.
 
In other words, the proper value of a share is whatever price the buyers and sellers of those shares are buying and selling those shares for. There is no higher source of valuation, for shares. The share price at market is by definition the proper value of the share. The market is the proper method for determining a share's value.



Doesn't this assume perfect information?
 
I think of it more as publicly available information which all investors have access to.


Yes.

So, if there were information that the public were not aware of that would affect the valuation of a company, then one could confidently state - possibly only after the event - that the shares in that company were overvalued?
 
Yes.

So, if there were information that the public were not aware of that would affect the valuation of a company, then one could confidently state - possibly only after the event - that the shares in that company were overvalued?

Depends.

Are we talking about fraud, or arbitrage? In general, my view is that investors account for the assumption of incomplete information, and the risks associated with that, when they estimate the value of a stock and decide whether to gamble on it.

---

Some people think that the proper way to value a company is to add up all its assets and liabilities, and whatever dollar value pops out of that sum is the "correct" value of the company. I don't think that's right.
 
Last edited:
Depends.

Are we talking about fraud, or arbitrage? In general, my view is that investors account for the assumption of incomplete information, and the risks associated with that, when they estimate the value of a stock and decide whether to gamble on it.

If it's a gamble, then that implies that the shares may be incorrectly valued.


Some people think that the proper way to value a company is to add up all its assets and liabilities, and whatever dollar value pops out of that sum is the "correct" value of the company. I don't think that's right.

I don't disagree with that. I just think that "shares cannot be under or over valued and the value the market places on them is always correct." is wrong. Or, at the very least, wildly simplistic.
 
If it's a gamble, then that implies that the shares may be incorrectly valued.




I don't disagree with that. I just think that "shares cannot be under or over valued and the value the market places on them is always correct." is wrong. Or, at the very least, wildly simplistic.

I'm saying that there is no other source of truth for the market value of a share, than the value the market puts on the share. It's not like going to the grocery store and thinking the price of an item is different from what it actually is.
 
I'm saying that there is no other source of truth for the market value of a share, than the value the market puts on the share. It's not like going to the grocery store and thinking the price of an item is different from what it actually is.

That is only true IF there actually is a market.

That is, a place with so many buyers and sellers that no single one, or small group, can manipulate the price.

This is demonstrably not the case in Stock Trading.
 
I'm saying that there is no other source of truth for the market value of a share, than the value the market puts on the share. It's not like going to the grocery store and thinking the price of an item is different from what it actually is.

Yeah, but it can still be incorrectly valued. People who are able to accurately work out when shares are incorrectly valued have made a lot of money in the past, I think.
 
I don't disagree with that. I just think that "shares cannot be under or over valued and the value the market places on them is always correct." is wrong. Or, at the very least, wildly simplistic.

I think this really nails it.

Suppose I'm a shareholder in a gold mine that will be opening soon. My capital is funding equipment and employees that will soon net me a nice profit once we get that gold.

But there's a problem. Through some error (either mistake, negligence, or fraud), this mountain has been identified as a gold mine, when in fact, it is full of turds. If I'm paying gold mine prices for a turd mine, that is overvalued. That's just what people mean when they say overvalued. It isn't complicated.
 
I think this really nails it.

Suppose I'm a shareholder in a gold mine that will be opening soon. My capital is funding equipment and employees that will soon net me a nice profit once we get that gold.

But there's a problem. Through some error (either mistake, negligence, or fraud), this mountain has been identified as a gold mine, when in fact, it is full of turds. If I'm paying gold mine prices for a turd mine, that is overvalued. That's just what people mean when they say overvalued. It isn't complicated.

We really should see more headlines in, say, the Economist like…

Tesla: Gold mine or turd mine?
 
****'s getting real

https://www.businessinsider.com/tes...imbo-no-communcation-elon-musk-layoffs-2024-5

Elon Musk's*recent firing of*Tesla's entire Supercharger team*seems to be causing chaos at some of its suppliers.

Aaron Luque, CEO of*Tesla*charger installer Envirospark, told Business Insider that the company still hasn't heard from Tesla after Musk gutted the company's Supercharger division, with dozens of potential charging sites now stuck in limbo.

"There's no one remaining from the team that we worked with," said Luque. "In terms of formal communication from Tesla, we haven't received anything."

Envirospark, which has built EV charging sites for Tesla for over a decade, told BI that it has 26 projects with the company contracted or under construction.

IIRC, the Tesla charger is a good product. The capricious man/child Musk has reverted to is going to kill any serious business opportunities. They need stability and support for the long term if they are going to commit capital to a product.
 
Last edited:
****'s getting real

https://www.businessinsider.com/tes...imbo-no-communcation-elon-musk-layoffs-2024-5



IIRC, the Tesla charger is a good product. The capricious man/child Musk has reverted to is going to kill any serious business opportunities. They need stability and support for the long term if they are going to commit capital to a product.

It's bizarre! My wife and I bought our Tesla primarily because of the supercharger network. It's easy to use, well maintained, and not terribly overpriced. With the other automakers in North America switching to the Tesla connector, you'll need even more.

And Musk fires the team? Is he trying to kill the golden goose?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom