Tag Archives: Tesla

Pulling Your Plug, by Eric Peters

Do you really want a car that can be disabled remotely by the car company? From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

Electric cars don’t just plug in. They can also be unplugged – so to speak – and not necessarily by their owners.

Lost in the Oceania-is-at-war-with Eastasia mass formation psychosis now forming over Keeeeeeeev! was a telling Tweet that appeared – and disappeared – urging Elon Musk to remotely disable every Tesla in Russia, so as to teach the Russians a lesson.

One lost on Americans.

Electric cars will tether Americans not merely to electrical outlets but to a leash – the other end of it held by those who have the ability to yank it, at their pleasure. Like Elon Musk, who is considered by some to be a kind of libertarian techno-hero a la Tony Stark, the fictitious Iron Man. But if so, why would he design electric cars that are connected cars?

Cars that can be disconnected – for any reason – at any time?

Many such reasons can be imagined – among them that Elon is the scion of a family of managerial technocrats who have been working on ways to manage us for the past 100 years.

Continue reading→

A Tale of Two Geniuses, by Eric Peters

Henry Ford goes down in history as the man who mass-produced cars. Elon Musk will go down in history as the man who mass-produced government subsidies. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

Elon Musk is hailed as a “genius” by some.

And he is – but not in the way they mean it.

Like Henry Ford, Musk took something he didn’t invent that was essentially a curiosity and recast it in a different way. The difference being that when Henry Ford simplified the car by standardizing parts and mass producing them on an assembly line – as opposed to hand-building them, one at a time, as had been prior practice – the result was a much less expensive and far more practical car that almost anyone could afford to buy.

Musk did the opposite.

The early electric cars were simpler as well as more practical than non-electric cars; this was a big part of their initial appeal, 100 years ago, when they were (briefly) competitive with early non-electric cars. You didn’t have to hand-crank the engine and risk breaking your wrist – because of course there was no engine. Instead, an electric motor connected to the drive wheels and an array of lead-acid batteries. The car turned off – and on – and off you went.

Continue reading→

Electrocuting Themselves, by Eric Peters

“Me too” is generally a terrible idea in business, especially when the government thinks it’s a swell idea. From Eric Peters at ericpeters.com:

The key to selling something is to not sell the same thing everyone else is selling. Elon Musk grasps this concept.

His electric emulators do not.   

Perhaps the latest sales figures will help them to grasp it. It appears that Tesla is about to become the best-selling luxury car brand in the United States, toppling BMW – which held the title for many years.

Arguably, because what BMW was selling during those years was something different than what Elon is selling.

Some will recall the old BMW slogan about  Ultimate Driving Machines. It wasn’t just a slogan. BMW invented the luxury-sport sedan with iconic models like the 2002 of the ‘70s. The numbers signified two-door sedan, two liter engine – connected to a manual transmission. It was a car you drove.

Other luxury cars drove you places.

The distinction isn’t about better or worse but rather about the differences. If you wanted the sounds and sensations of a high-performance sports car Matryoshka-doll’d within the body of a luxury car, the compass needle pointed toward a BMW store.

There was nothing else quite like a BMW.

Mercedes, meanwhile, specialized in overbuilt, under-stressed road-bound tanks that would last 300,000 miles. They were plush and even a little stodgy in contrast to the BMW’s taut and youthful.

These was nothing quite like them either.

Continue reading→

“Outages”, by Eric Peters

One of the really cool things about Teslas is that through software, Tesla has absolute control over your movement. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

An interesting item in the news the other day got almost no attention.

The thing that got attention in the news was the news that a “ . . .problem with Tesla servers on Friday once again left hundreds of drivers unable to enter and operate their electric cars.”

No analysis of the italicized implications was offered.

Ergo, it’s well to considering them.

For the past 120 years or so – since the first cars began rolling under their own power – it was taken as a given that the people who owned them controlled them. The keys were a physical symbol of ownership because he who held the keys controlled the car. Parents would threaten to withhold the keys from their teenaged drivers, if their grades slipped, for instance.

But once you were no longer a kid, if you held the keys then the car was yours. You used to see dangling-suggestively keys in car ad copy; the implication being – this could be yours (and by implication, no one else’s).

Not anymore.

Not if it’s one of Elon’s electric cars. Because Elon holds the keys – and you never will, no matter that you’re not a teenager, you paid for the car and Elon isn’t your father. But he is your overlord. He and his fellow managers intend to lord it over all of us – and electric cars are the perfect vehicle for that.

They have two plugs – one physical, the other virtual.

You use the physical plug to charge the thing up.

They use the virtual plug to determine how much and how fast you’re allowed to charge up – and (cue Emperor Palpatine voice) many other things, besides. Including whether they allow the car to move, at all – regardless of its state of charge. A signal is sent over the airwaves and the car bricks – perhaps because you’re not Jabbed. Perhaps because of some wrongthinkful thing you Tweeted. Perhaps just because.

Continue reading→

The Ugly Math: GM, Ford, other Legacy Automakers Throw Hundreds of Billions at EVs, Only Auto Segment that’s Growing. Tesla Made Them Do It, by Wolf Richter

The question remains: if electric utilities right now are having trouble supplying enough juice in places like Europe and China, where does the extra juice come from for millions of EVs? From Wolf Richter at wolfstreet.com:

It’s a zero-sum game that’s eating up a huge amount of cash. But Electric Utilities are loving it.

In the press release for its investor conference today, GM said that it plans to double its annual revenues by the end of the decade as it transitions to EVs. In terms of the math, 8% in price increases a year for nine years would do that without having to jump through the hoops of selling more vehicles. GM’s average transaction price in Q3 in the US jumped by 20% year-over-year. So…  I don’t see this statement as sign of an increase in volume, but an increase in prices.

GM confirmed that logic by pointing out that it expects its margins to increase as it transitions to EVs. It said that half its manufacturing capacity in North America and China will be capable of producing EVs by 2030.

Sales growth in this industry is obtained by selling higher-priced vehicles. But volume growth, in terms of the number of vehicles sold, is hard to come by in the auto industry. There are some developing economies where sales are still growing. But there has been no growth in developed economies in two decades.

In the US, sales peaked in 2000 at 17.4 million vehicles, then fell off, then plunged to 10.4 million vehicles in 2009, and then recovered to hit 17.5 million vehicles in 2016, and that was it. Sales have been falling ever since. Last year, the industry sold 14.6 million vehicles. This year, may be around 15 million vehicles.

But the one segment that is growing in leaps and bounds is EVs. And that’s what GM’s investor conference was about – creating investor excitement about this “transition to EVs,” from a Chevrolet crossover “priced around $30,000,” to the high-end Hummer EV pickup truck with 1,000 hp.

Continue reading→

Are Tesla’s Sudden China Woes A Harbinger Of Things To Come? by Fan Yu

The thing about doing business in a command economy is you’ve got to stay in good with the commanders, who are sometimes known to be capricious. From Fan Yu at The Epoch Times via zerohedge.com:

o see the impact China’s fickle market can do to a company’s value, look no further than Tesla.

On April 20, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s media and regulators began a series of public rebukes against the California-based electric carmaker. The criticisms were broad, ranging from Tesla’s car safety, to data gathering practices, as well as customer service.

In early June, technology website The Information reported that Tesla’s May China orders fell by nearly half compared to April, according to internal data. Orders fell from 18,000 in April to 9,800 in May, a reflection that Chinese consumers were negatively impacted by the uproar.

And all of this has erased $137 billion in market value as Tesla’s stock price declined 19.5 percent since April 21.

A Series of Unfortunate Events

Tesla has encountered issues all year in China. In February and March, the CCP banned Tesla from its military compounds and housing units on concerns that the company could collect information via the cameras attached to Tesla cars to facilitate spying on behalf of the United States.

In early April, Tesla’s communications and governmental affairs director in China announced that any data collected within China would be stored in China and will not be sent to the United States, in an effort to quell CCP security concerns. This came about after founder and CEO Elon Musk publicly declared that Tesla would not engage in spying.

On April 20, CCP mouthpiece Xinhua published an article from the sidelines of the Shanghai Auto Show slamming the electric vehicle maker on the quality of its vehicles, citing consumer complaints.

On the same day, an official post on WeChat from the account of the powerful Commission for Political and Legal Affairs also drew attention to the Auto Show, when a woman climbed onto the roof of a Tesla vehicle to complain about her car’s faulty brakes. The video of the woman went viral on Chinese social media. While it’s unclear why the CCP organ which oversees the country’s police and court system would weigh in on electric cars, it was nonetheless a powerful rebuke of Tesla.

While Tesla China originally pushed back against this narrative, stating that the woman in question has been protesting against Tesla for some time, later during the same week the company issued a public apology and promised to better listen to customer complaints.

Continue reading→

The Cryptoverse – Bastard Son of the Fiat, by David Stockman

Many people who have made a lot of money in cryptocurrencies would vigorously resist the notion that their gains are fueled by the same monetary inflation that’s fueling gains in many other speculative markets. From David Stockman at davidstockmanscontracorner via lewrockwell.com:

Goodness gracious, me! Is this the ultimate case of the pot-calling-the-kettle-black or what?

If there were ever a pure play in the great fraud of fiat, Elon Musk is it. Yet here he is electing to go with crypto instead.

The true battle is between fiat & crypto. On balance, I support the latter.

Actually, there is a seminal picture in these few words and it amounts to this: Crypto currencies are not money, they are the latest boiling hot speculative asset class that, ironically, is just another bastard spawn of the central bank money-printers. They are not an alternative to bad central bank money; they’re are an issue from its own loins.

It’s blatantly evident that neither Bitcoin nor any of the other swarming herd of cryptos are a store of value or a medium of exchange. During the last 48 months, for example, the value of Bitcoin has changed on a monthly basis as follows.

Monthly Value Change:

  • Gain of 40% or more: 7 months;
  • Gain of 20% or more: 17 months;
  • Gain of 10% or more: 21 months;
  • Loss of 20% or more: 5 months;
  • loss of 5% or more: 19 months;
  • Loss of 2% or more: 22 months;

As to a means of exchange for anything less than a $125,000 Tesla (for a time), a good old fiat wire transfer, check or chunk of cash has a lower transaction cost as a percent of purchase price.

Continue reading→

Tesla – and GM – Finally Admit It, by Eric Peters

Electric cars, including Tesla’s, in the US have yet to meet the market test: can they be sold without subsidies at a price that will their makers to make a decent profit? From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

 
 
 

GM – and Tesla – just publicly admitted that they can’t sell electric cars. Or rather, they need your help – via Uncle.

To pay people $7,500 each to “buy” their electric cars.

To be paid by those who pay the taxes which will make up for the taxes not collected from the people who “buy” electric cars. This is the wealth transfer scheme styled “electric car tax credits.”

They have been around for years – and may be coming back – because electric cars have pull rather than range.

Great sums of money were expended to extract great sums of money – via the tax code, which was adjusted to give preferential treatment to the purchasers of electric cars by making electric cars seem more affordable than they are, in fact.

 

In order to create the fiction of a “market” for electric cars, where none – or very little – actually existed.

If that were not the case, then why the need to pay people to “buy” them? In every other case of such massive discounting – an industry term –  the need to apply such discounts is taken as evidence of the car being discounted being a flop.

Get rid of them by whatever means necessary – as by giving them away –  and then build no more.

The Aztek being a for-instance. Imagine being paid to buy one. Of course, the difference with EVs is that instead of GM paying you to buy an Aztek, the government is making someone else pay for your electric Aztek.

Or rather, your neighbor’s electric Aztek.

No one would abide such a thing, much less laud such a thing. How come almost no one is questioning this thing?

That question is hardly ever raised – much less answered. Probably because of the answer. Electric cars are the Azteks of our time, but worse. And unlike the Aztek, which was merely ugly – electric cars are evil. A kind of cancer that is not only metastasizing but being encouraged to metastasize.

Continue reading→

Elon’s “Earnings”, by Eric Peters

Elon Musk’s subsidy-slurping, tax-credit-trading companies will be the poster children for the Biden administration, like Solyndra was the poster child for the Obama administration. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

It is being “reported” that Tesla’s net “earnings” have “surged” to $438 million. What they do not report is that this includes $518 million “earned” via regulatory credits – which aren’t cars. Rather, they are monies mulcted from other car companies, paid to Tesla to get “credit” for not having made a sufficient number of electric cars themselves.

Enough to achieve compliance with government requirements, as in California, that they build a certain number/percentage of them – else pay Elon to get the “credit.” In other words, it is a racket.

A shakedown.

Only legal – like the income tax. But it does not change the nature of the thing. Only the marketing of the thing.

It is very interesting that no major automotive media reports the context about Tesla’s “earnings.” Instead, it is “reported” that Tesla is making money hand-over-fist.

Which is true.

It is also true of the IRS. And of Al Capone. But the media in those days did not cover for Capone. Everyone knew he was a gangster – and to be fair to Capone, he was only that because the government made his otherwise legitimate business – the selling of alcohol to people who very much wished to buy it –  illegal.

The situation with Tesla – and Elon Musk – is morally and legally the inverse. The government has made it illegal for other car companies to not sell electric cars, which most people do not wish to freely buy.

It makes no more sense for Toyota, say, to build lots of electric cars when there is no real market for electric cars than it does for Starbucks to build coffee kiosks in Death Valley. Luckily for Starbucks, there is no government regulation requiring hot coffee to be sold in Death Valley as the price of being allowed to sell hot coffee in San Francisco – so Starbucks doesn’t have to build coffee kiosks in the desert – nor pay some other coffee company that does build them in the desert, so as to get “credit” for it.

Continue reading→

Tesla, Quadruple-WTF Chart of the Year: It Should Just Sell Shares on Autopilot at Huge Prices and Exit Sordid Business of Making Cars, by Wolf Richter

Tesla’s ticker symbol should be TULIP. From Wolf Richter at wolfstreet.com:

Global market share of 1%. But market cap equals combined total of Toyota, Volkswagen (VW, Audi, Porsche, etc.), Daimler, GM, BMW, Honda, and Ford. Raised $10 billion in three months by selling shares.

Tesla is going to replace Apartment Investment and Management in the S&P 500 Index, S&P Dow Jones Indices announced Friday evening, fleshing out its initial announcement of November 16 that Tesla would be added to the index. The switch will become effective before the start of trading on Monday, December 21. Over $100 billion are estimated to flow in different directions as index funds have to unload Aimco and add Tesla. But they’ll position themselves ahead of time so they don’t have to all go out next Friday and buy or dump those shares in one day. In terms of Tesla shares, the index funds had a month to prepare.

The expectation that Tesla would be included in the S&P 500 index, and all the hype surrounding it, has been powering the last spike in my Quadruple WTF chart of the Year, which blew away and annihilated my Triple-WTF Chart of the Year of August 31, and my Double-WTF Chart of the Year of July 1, and my original WTF-Chart of the Year of February 4, which depicted the puny little 120% jump in one month, as noted in the chart below. Each of the prior three WTF points has been duly followed by a plunge (stock prices via YCharts):

Continue reading→

%d bloggers like this: