For me it was Musk. I had a finger on the trigger for an M3, which is an amazing car for the price, but then he just didn't know when to stop talking and I've sort of lost a lot of that enthusiasm. So now I'm waiting for the legacy brands to step up, which they unfortunately aren't really doing.
In 2022 I bought my first EV, a BMW i4. It was an impressive am car and still is: second only to Tesla Model 3 when it comes to efficiency and superior to Tesla in terms of features and driving assistant systems.
BMW and Tesla both refreshed their i4 and Model 3 models las year. And the improvement in the Model 3 has been noticeable: better efficiency and range, also better driving dynamics and added features. BMW has barely changed anything, same motors and batteries, just a slightly newer infotainment system and new aesthetic. Not only that, some features are actually gone like the laser lights.
The FSD in the Tesla has improved also lots since 2022, while BMW Driving Assistant is still the same we had in 2022. Robust, but no new features.
I think Tesla is really doing a great job of improving their vehicles compared to legacy OEMs. I guess the i4 will only get real improvements with their next model in 2027.
I had a model Y before, and after it became clear that I'm not extending my lease (thanks Mr. Musk), I test-drove a few alternatives, Mustang EV, IONIQ 5 & 6, etc. Ended up getting BMW I4, and man, this beats Tesla in every way. Yes, software might be not as perfect, but as a car to drive, it's so much better.
I don't see any way for Tesla to survive as a company unless they can completely disconnect from Musk. In urban/leftist/yuppie circles- the only people that actually buy high end EVs new- it is socially taboo now to buy a Tesla, and the people already owning them are embarrassed, and hoping to get rid of them soon. The cybertruck is especially taboo and called names like the "incElCamino."
I think there is a big potential to capture the rural more right leaning market with EVs that have more range, offroad ability, and torque than ICE vehicles- but this will be done by brands like Jeep, Ford, and Scout through EVs with ICE range extenders that can operate outside of a charging network.
> I don't see any way for Tesla to survive as a company unless they can completely disconnect from Musk. In urban/leftist/yuppie circles- the only people that actually buy high end EVs new- it is socially taboo now to buy a Tesla, and the people already owning them are embarrassed, and hoping to get rid of them soon. The cybertruck is especially taboo and called names like the "incElCamino."
If you come to the richer southern cities the picture is very different than what you describe. I'm living in Nashville TN right now and there are Teslas everywhere. Many Republicans proudly have big lifted pickup trucks and Teslas (and a LOT of cybertrucks).
So while becoming an outspoken culture warrior may have cost Musk's brand some support in blue states, it has dramatically increased its appeal in "real America" where people love showing off their masculinity through their vehicles.
I suspect the Cybertruck will dominate the legacy auto makers in the EV pickup segment.
You're wildly exaggerating. There are only ~33k EV registrations in the entire state of TN [1], or just over 1% of all registrations in the state [2].
I don't doubt that most of them are Teslas, but they're hardly everywhere. Also as of October, they'd only delivered about 27k Cybertrucks globally, so even if you assume 5% went to TN (which seems ridiculously unlikely), that's ~1500 vehicles out of the literally hundreds of thousands of non-EV trucks in the state.
I certainly wouldn't say that - I would say that here in "real America" they (meaning rich or "middle class" people with disposable income who engage in the culture war stuff) want to buy vehicles that are good at owning the libs.
It used to be that owning the libs was pretty simple, use more gasoline in a big lifted pickup truck. But now there are other ways to own the libs... you can also buy your electric cars from a rich guy who owns the libs.
I'm being reductive, but there's a strong cultural element to vehicle ownership. To be less glib about it, vehicle ownership is very much tied to identity in sprawly rural America.
In the south today, the big lifted trucks are both status symbols and cultural signifiers. They immediately and visibly identify people as part of the southern / "rural" group (in quotes because many people in this group engage in performative rurality, while in reality they live in sprawly suburbs).
Members of this tribe are also naturally are more inclined to identify as Republican.
So things like the Cybertruck appeal in multiple ways; as Musk is such a vocal Republican, his cool factor goes up with the subset of this group that is extremely into politics. This is one pathway to adoption.
Outside of that, the Cybertruck is a massive pickup truck, and it is very expensive. Vehicle size and expense are both ways to signal status to people in this culture. This is another pathway to adoption.
Hence, I believe that it will become very popular in these areas.
I think the Tesla cars initially succeeded because they proved to suburbanites looking to display their status via a vehicle that electric cars could be "cool" and not "lame." Now, "culturally rural" people have their own equivalent.
It is beyond out of touch to not see how one of the most profitable and successful car companies of all time is going to survive. Tesla is doing amazing and isn’t slowing down.
Are they doing well? For example Toyota sells 5x as many cars, but has 1/5th the market cap. Low sales but high market cap is normally a dangerous situation to be in unless you're sure you have some massive tech advantage that will keep you growing fast. Tesla sales leveled off a few years ago, and now show no indication of ever catching up with the other car companies.
At first they were way ahead technology wise with the first really practical EVs on the market, but seem to be falling behind fast. For example Porsche/VW/Audi released 800v production cars 4 years before Tesla did- and those cars still beat all of the S models on a real track with way lower paper specs. Waymo/Google has self driving tech that works demonstrably way better than Teslas. The offroad vehicle/traction systems on the Cybertruck don't work as well as any of the established 4x4 companies products- or for that matter even any of the 20 year old high end SUVs like a Porsche Cayenne or a Land Cruiser.
What is their advantage that justifies the insanely high evaluation with low sales?
> Are they doing well? For example Toyota sells 5x as many cars, but has 1/5th the market cap. Low sales but high market cap is normally a dangerous situation to be in unless you're sure you have some massive tech advantage that will keep you growing fast.
I think 15 billion profit on 97 billion revenue is doing pretty well.
Ford is 4b profit on 176b revenue. VW is 16bn on 322.
> Tesla sales leveled off a few years ago
2024 is the first year since 2011 with a decline (a 1.1% decline), each year prior saw a considerable increase.
Show me any non-Tesla that drives itself 100% of the way to my destination, any destination, from my garage without intervention. My Tesla does this literally daily and I can’t accept that they’re behind in tech when this is the case
Hyundai seems to be the top of the EV game currently. We went with an Ioniq 5. Unfortunately not a ton of EV sedan options out there, yet, but they're starting to come online, with stuff like the Ioniq 6.
The Ioniq 5 has a low reliability according to Consumer Reports. Lower than their gas models. I suppose it is all the ICCU and 12V battery failures. Same story with the KIA EV6. I guess those ended up with better reliability than Rivian, for what it is worth.
I rented seven EVs this last summer (h/t Turo) and we ended up with a Kia EV6. Not a perfect car, but one my family loved more than the others. If we wanted something larger, the EV9 is also fantastic.
I'd recommend trying ones out and picking one. We're not at China-levels of EV options but many do exist at most price/luxury levels. Our other car is a Ford Focus EV which I wish they still sold (I got mine new for $20k about 7 years ago).
I looked at those as well, but the ICCU issues were enough to deter me. I do a fair amount of highway driving and the thought of suddenly dropping from highway speeds to 12 MPH was somewhat chilling.
As an owner of a used EV6, I can tell you this issue has caused some concern and I do think it's a real but rare issue.
However, my calculation is this: It's a 1% impacted issue. Replacing with an AGM battery drastically reduces the issues. Recalls somewhat mitigate this issue further. Apparently reducing your L2 charging rate to < 7kW also reduces this. At the end if you are still unlucky, the ICCU is almost always covered by warranty but replacement is annoying and can take months.
To mitigate I plan to replace my stock 12V with AGM, and buy a portable battery starter.
I think that's solved by a recall, so if the car you're looking at is either new or has already had the 12V battery serviced, it should not be an issue.
When I looked into it, people who had the recall performed had it happen again. This made me suspect that they were trying to correct a hardware problem with software, or that the software was somehow able to damage the hardware if it wasn't updated in time.
That was on the EV6, though, but they share the same eGMP platform.
Mine's in today, Reddit has reports of people being told as late as March. Hyundai Finance is working with customers who cannot get the fix in the near term
2025 Ioniq 5s have the NACS port (only in NA markets, obviously). I don't think the 2025 Ioniq 6s do, though they probably will for the next model year. Like you said, CCS-equipped cars can use the Tesla network with a NACS-to-CCS adapter.
This is a sentiment I’ve had echoed across most of my techie friends. We probably relate more to what Musk says (and US politics towards the tech sector) than the average car buyer, and it is just a major turnoff.
Same, and now I'm actually leaning towards a Plug-in hybrid because the legacy brands are so bad (bad range, bad charging network).
What a monumental dissolution in brand. I can only hope its felt quickly enough by Tesla's bottomline so it can a) either be reversed, or b) be an example to future entrepreneurs.
P.S: a) could be accelerated with some demonstrated excellence in Tesla Autopilot, it's possible, that would bring me back.
I was all set on a model-3, but found the quality lacking at the price. Bought a BMW 3-series hybrid at a comparable price, and is so happy about my choice. Their fully electric cars are fine too.
With the dystopian turn of Musk, I will never consider a Tesla again.
My friends with Teslas seems to have more than their fair share of issues too. I haven’t yet had any problems with my car so far, at 90000km total, with 40000km on the electric motor.
I went with an Equinox EV. It's not outstanding in any particular area, but it's good in all of them. It drives like a car with a battery and not a battery with wheels.
I doubt you did. You just don’t like Musk, and now you are larping as a Tesla buyer to make people think there is some big group that are going to punish Elon for not matching their views.
Outside far leftists, people are still buying and enjoying Teslas. The difficulties in Europe aren’t related to Elon’s politics, you just wish they were.
An M3 is a BMW. If you are talking about Teslas the car is called a Model 3. You can’t shorten it to M3 because that’s already a car. This is why a Musk didn’t get to call it Model E like he wanted to. It sounds too much like a Ford.
Among EV enthusiasts, M3 is absolutely a Tesla Model 3. I know what a BMW M3 is (there was a time when I really wanted one), and I understand how much of a petrolhead icon the car is, I just don't care anymore.
I think the commenter was sarcastically referencing their historical roots as a Nazi project (Volkswagen) and Nazi-supporting, Hilter-inspiring, anti-semite (Henry Ford)
You can always get a used Tesla. I'm in a similar boat - FSD 13 looks really good and if it actually gets to 'personal driver' territory, it'd be hard not buy a Tesla.
I spent a month in Germany a few years ago. The German government had put up some strong incentives to prompt the move to EV's. Germany has a large car manufacturing base, and those incentives meant every one of them had EV's.
Every German EV I saw was an ICE chassis retrofitted with batteries and an electric motor. For example they all had the hump intruding into the cabin space for the non-existent exhaust. Almost none had a frunk - it was needed for batteries or something. As a consequence the purpose built Tesla's were miles ahead. I had no idea why anybody bought these German EV's at time time, but it seemed like most Germans did.
If that's changed and Europeans making great EV's is what is driving down the sales of Tesla's then that is great news. But I live in Australia, and Tesla sales are having their edge taken off them here too. We don't make cars. There is one, and only country making a material dent in Tesla's EV sales. That is EV's from China. (Tesla's EV's sold here are also made in China, of course.) It's mostly because of price.
Despite the noise in the comments, I haven't met a single person who based their decision on Musk's personality. The things that tilt them towards other brands are price and a more conventional design (things like indicator stalks, displays in front of the driver, rain sensors that work). But these other brands are new, and meanwhile Tesla has very impressive service (BYD has suffered from widely publicised failures), an impressive charger network, and a track record. For now Tesla still dominates.
But the real story is China is made just about every EV sold here. The ICE's we import are made in a variety of places Japan, USA, Europe, and recently a few from China. But if this trend continues there will only be one country making the cars we import in 10 years time.
While this is an oversimplification, my understanding is that it roughly goes like this;
BMWs are decent. Other European brands' EVs are a bit of a joke. Korean ones are solid. US big manufacturers are somewhere inbetween. The Hyundai Ioniq series is probably the best value for money on average for those who don't want a Tesla or Chinese EV.
Tesla cars are really cheaply built. Putting every control on a touchscreen is a cost-saving measure. At the same time, Teslas are actually quite expensive to buy.
I think the target audience for this combo are people who love their iPads. I don't love my iPad - I want actual stalks and dials and knobs and buttons in my car so Tesla is not the car for me. In addition to the political intrigues others have mentioned I suspect that Tesla may be reaching the limit of "people who love their iPads" here.
I'm in a similar boat. Touchscreens might look sleek, but it is dangerous in some ways as you can't adjust things without taking your eyes off the road. I do like the big backup camera though. I won't support Elon though, so Tesla is permanently a non-option for me now. The huge failure of the cybertruck also makes me wary of going that route as the number of videos showing the shoddy craftsmanship seems far too high.
I came to comments to make this point. Many of the EU manufacturers finally acknowledged the safety and usability of physical controls through research (aside from the customer clamor as customers realized touch screens weren't actually what they wanted), and EU pivoted. The physical controls EVs are now available.
USA didn't get the memo, or doesn't want to, thanks to differing corporate priorities and differing user persona preferences. USA manufacturers are (eventually) able to be influenced by customer outcry driving enough media to hit the independent dealer networks, but Tesla feels unlikely to do anything with the memo except file it in the circular bin.
Not sure about your "for people who love iPads" comment. I love my iPad Pro w/ Magic Keyboard + Magic Touch case and LTE modem, but get that crap out of my "control without looking" car experience. OTOH, I learned to drive in Europe.
> Putting every control on a touchscreen is a cost-saving measure
That is the meme. But at the same time, they put a (barely usable) rear passenger touchscreen in the back seat mid console on the Model 3 refresh, and now they're putting powered back seats in the Model Y refresh. There's no way that's cheaper than a few buttons/stalks here and there.
Is that something they're purely doing to try to catch the hearts and minds of the Chinese market? As I have been led to believe, for a lot of Chinese, the back seat is very important.
To be fair the model S wasn't like that the last time I drove one (hired 2022 model S). It's less of an iPad than the model 3 is. What is however terrible is none of the trim fits, the constant distractions and attention it requires and after driving a European car, it feels like I'm driving a Temu android tablet.
Hired Polestars since. Those just work, are put together properly and shut the fuck up when you're driving.
I love my iPad, but I’d still rather have knobs and buttons in my car, if I need to adjust it while driving I need to be able to find it without looking.
Given that Musk is actively working to undermine UE (L'Union européenne, EU in English, sorry for confusion), you'd have to be some kind of idiot to support him by buying a Tesla if you live in Europe.
Europe has since many years suffered with high bureaucracy, strict regulations and in general low innovation levels.
Musk has been very vocal about those issues in Europe. He might be right or wrong, but questioning European levels of bureaucracy and regulations is not undermining EU, it’s going to help it.
He is wrong on many things simply from not sharing the fundamental values that makes Europeans and Americans different.
Yet, even on the things he’s right on, it is not his responsibility as a foreign agent, to change. He can fix his adopted home country instead.
Musk is actively supporting the neo-nazi Afd in Germany. Whatever his reasons are, he is now the same type of oligarch as Henry Ford was when he supported Nazi Germany.
In a recent interview with the party chair of the Afd, it was clear that he is just entirely clueless about the Germany and history in particular.
There are a lot of issues in Europe, but it is far from clear if neocon deregulation is really helping anything at all.
It's in English. I found it worthwhile to watch, for a while. Musk really wasn't too bad but the amount of nonsense coming from Alice Weidel was a bit too much for me in the end. To Musk's credit, he even corrected her a couple of times.
You might find it worthwhile to watch after all, because they didn't agree on that.
Note that I don't agree with the AFD at all, however what the media writes about Musk is often so far from the truth that I tend to watch or read the sources when I have a chance.
What we're really talking about is the richest man in the world, who owns one of the largest social media platforms in the world, using his financial and social media power to directly influence politics and/or elections according to his whim, and (it seems) currently to the benefit of causes or candidates who are often right-wing, and/or extreme or anti-establishment in some way.
There's a lot to unpack there, beyond "free speech".
Why? Many people dislike the European Union(myself included). Some of us believe it's an anti-democratic organization that should be dismantled. It hardly makes us idiots.
Additionally, not every European country is a member of the EU. I would argue Europe would be a lot better without such centralized power in the hands of a few.
To do this with a generation of peace who cannot comprehend how you can end up with a conflict in western europe in the next couple of decades does come with some level of risk. You have to have a detailed gameplan right out of the gate having gameplayed how economically and politically antagonistic your neighbors are going to be to your early moves. And if in the early days the perception is that things are getting worse than they were before (see Brexit) the risk of future unrest and conflict increases I would think.
Fundamentally, I believe in a direct, decentralised democracy with Switzerland as a good example. I believe this system of governance gives prosperity and opportunity for as many as possible, while a centralised system like the EU(or USA) gives advantage to the already powerful and well connected, with the masses only an afterthought if beneficial to the ruling elite.
I think this is obvious to any thinking, rational individual.
I'm not a fan of Musk but you're getting his intentions wrong. He's not actively trying to undermine the EU. His recent support for AFD was actually meant, misguided or not, to support Germany.
And his support for Tommy Robinson in the UK was because he apparently believes freedom of speech in the UK is in danger.
Musk is a bit odd re the UK. He goes on about the Starmer and the grooming scandal but it's all a bit distorted like he's getting his info from American MAGA enthusiasts on X and doesn't seem to have spoken to many Brits. A recent poll has 71% of Brits having a negative opinion of him https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/71-of-britons-hold-negative-...
The one drawback of civil discourse is feeling the need to use diplomatic language, even when it's not deserved. "Polarizing" is a term too good for Musk.
I'm in Europe, and I've seen Teslas with "bought it before he went crazy" stickers. I think the Venn diagram of people who want to buy electric cars, and people who dislike Musk's recent behavior, has a pretty big intersection.
And yeah, the competition is getting much better. I'm seeing a lot of Polestar cars recently, and even a lowly Fiat 500e now advertises 460km range.
I'm not really a car person but finding Teslas looking quite dated compared to other options, especially Polestar, in the roads these days. At one point you saw a Tesla and it had some kind of 'cool' factor by both reputation and aesthetics, but Musk has ruined the reputation and time + competition has ruined the aesthetics.
I'd buy a Polestar 2 if I had somewhere to charge it. I hired a few over the last couple of years. Basically an electric Volvo. Everything just worked and they aren't particularly expensive.
"Registrations of battery-electric cars declined by 9.5% to 130,757 units in November 2024. This drop was primarily driven by a significant decrease in registrations in Germany (-21.8%) and France (-24.4%)."
For comparison electric cars declined by 9.5% but Tesla declined by 40.9% at that same time. This is more than Tesla just following the general market trend.
This is about the market share of Tesla, a company with a PE of 112. Not about overall EV trends...
"...Year-to-date, Tesla registrations in the EU, EFTA and UK went down 13.7% from 327,635 units in 2023 to 282,692 units this year, while the market share shrunk from 2.8% to 2.4%. In the EU alone, which has 27 member states, Tesla’s market share went down from 2.6% in the first 11 months of last year to 2.2% this year..."
The automaker’s losses can be attributed to a number of factors, including the increasingly controversial attitude of its CEO, Elon Musk, and the decrease in government incentives. Some European states have reduced the amount of money offered toward the purchase of a new EV, while others have eliminated the incentives altogether.
That said, Tesla’s significant drop in European registrations has largely left the EV industry unaffected. Considering the sheer volume of electric cars sold by Tesla, EV registrations as a whole only went down by 1.4% in the EU, EFTA and UK from January to November and they actually went up 0.9% in November compared to last year. In the EU alone, EV registrations went down 5.4% year-to-date and 9.5% in November.
If you fiddle with the pie chart graphic to show all Europe (EU + EFTA + UK), and January to November, the share of EVs has reduced very slightly, from 15.4% to 15.1%.
Hybrids have increased from 26.5 to 31.2%, petrol and diesel are down.
(It seems daft to concentrate on one month, or to count the number of cars rather than the share of cars sold.)
IIRC that was over a year ago. But even in the EV market Tesla has been losing market share, mainly to Volkswagen, but not as much as in the overall car market.
Different markets have different needs. I get that it may not matter for you but the removal of indicator stalks is a deal breaker in countries where you’re required to indicate both on and off roundabouts. Especially when those roundabouts are small. You have to first flick the stalk turn the wheel and flick the stalk while turning. Tricky even with a stalk but legally required and you will be ticketed in places for this.
I found it impossible to do with the tiny buttons on the steering wheel.
Everytime I mention this people argue the indicator buttons on the wheel are fine for them but it’s absolutely the reason I personally did not buy a Tesla. Different markets have different needs and the latest models don’t work in Europe.
I actually think they are dangerous and should be marked as unsafe given my own experience. You do risk a crash trying to find buttons on a tiny wheel.
I didn't know this but agree. Cars should have some control standards so its easy to switch driving between them. Sounds really dangerous to have someone unfamiliar with Tesla unique controls, to be driving.
Agreed that removing indicator stalks is asinine and should never have been permitted, but what on earth is the reason for signaling in a roundabout unless you are actively changing lanes in one?
Similar to the reason you signal at a 4 way when turning across traffic (in that case it prevents a deadlock of two non indicating idiots waiting for each other when if they both indicated they could both go simultaneously).
In the roundabout case it lets drivers know you’re exiting the roundabout and they can enter it. It makes traffic much more efficient but it does need to be enforced since it’s for the benefit of other drivers not yourself.
You haven't been driving long (or at all) if you think trusting other drivers' turn signals is a good idea. Theories that look good through a bus window often don't work as well when viewed through a windshield.
You're indeed signaling that you are about to change lane or exit. People waiting to get in know that they can do so if you're in the outside lane, or that to the contrary they should not take the outside lane if you're inside.
Entering: No, that's pointless. Of course I'm going to turn as I enter the roundabout. What's my alternative? Entering the wrong way? Driving straight across the island?
Exiting: No, that's pointless. Signal all you want, I am going to wait 2 more seconds to enter the roundabout until I see if you are actually going to take the exit.
If you are on the inside lane of the roundabout and prepare to exit, you signal to warn people already on the roundabout, and tell people waiting to get in that they shouldn't get on the outside lane even if it's free.
If you are on the outside lane and prepare to exit, you signal when the road you'll take is next. Whether you'd personally wait is irrelevant; changing lanes and direction always warrants a signal, roundabout or not.
Model Y and 3 are still the most selling EVs here in Norway, but VAG cars have been catching up...fast. In 2023 Tesla vs VAG cars were roughly 25k vs 18k cars sold. Last year, it was 24k vs 21k. If the trend keeps up, VAG will outsell Tesla this year.
In Spain Tesla has actually had a record year, with a huge lead in EV market share (26.5%, the second being BMW with 6.3%). But I think this is circumstancial and next year may be very different.
The purchasing power in Spain is considerably lower than in e.g. Germany or France, so very few people are buying VAG or Stellantis EVs as they are perceived as overpriced (and the brands themselves often don't seem to want to sell them, but I won't bore you with that). During most of 2024, the Model 3 made sense for a lot of people in Spain, since it was the only EV that wasn't perceived as a toy car (Dacia Spring) or too expensive (most Volkswagen, etc.). Basically for less money than what the likes of Volkswagen or Peugeot were offering, you got a car with vastly superior specifications (especially range). Hence, it was the best selling EV by far, in spite of widespread negative perception about Musk and about the lack of physical controls.
Things are changing fast, though. On the one hand, the traditional brands are catching up with attractive models with decent ranges at attainable prices like the Citroën ë-C3 or the Kia EV3. On the other hand, the Chinese have entered the market, and even with the EU tariffs, they have attractive options at various price points like the Leapmotor T03 or the BYD Dolphin. So now if you don't actually like Tesla's offering that much, there is no reason to buy it anymore.
Scarce data, of course, but in the first 12 days of 2025, the Dolphin is the best-selling EV followed by the EV3. The Model 3 is far behind so far.
Battery cells are just a commodity EV makers can purchase- they don't need to be able to engineer them in house. There are a lot more parts on an ICE car that pretty much need to be engineered by the vehicle manufacturer.
They don't need to engineer them, but for example BYD's vertical integration with batteries has been their superpower. Tesla once upon a time (~circa 2013) talked about building battery manufacturing "gigafactories" all over America but I don't know what the status of that is.
That is likely increasingly less relevant as battery technology matures. Back in 2013 the situation was entirely different, and off the shelf cells were all designed for things like laptop computers.
Panasonic (JP) designed the cells Tesla uses and produces half of them. (The rest are made by CATL, as far as I'm aware.) The "gigafactories" are mostly just Tesla providing facilities for Panasonic to use stateside to make cells, and then they do screwdriver assembly to make packs. Panasonic is also building more of their own factories in the US to serve other car companies.
Tesla doesn't have any competitive advantage in batteries.
Even after losing 16% in a month, falling from a high of $480+ to $405, the PE ratio is still about 111X. Even in a period of near record-high overall market valuations of 26X [1] not seen in at least decades, even before the Dotcom boom/bust, this is an outrageous valuation. Tesla would need to either fall to about $100/share or more than quadruple earnings just to get down to this historically aberrant high of PE~26X.
Considering their now-established history of failure to deliver, the failure of the Cybertruck to catch on, and Musk's authoritarian behavior alienating most customers for his EVs, the prospects for a massive sustainable earnings increase are poor at best. Add onto that an economy that has been excellent for four years and will be difficult to sustain, especially with the new administration likely to undermine it with ill-advised scattershot tariffs and deportations, strong growth seems unlikely. I'd consider yourself very lucky if you had a position that you managed to sell in early December. I certainly wouldn't be buying any soon, but shorting meme stocks is dangerous (even if your thesis is correct, short-term motions can get you stopped out with a big loss before realizing profits).
Not a finance guy, but mu understanding is that shorting can have unlimited losses — you are borrowing an amount of stock at Price $X and selling it at the market price, say 100 shares of TSLA at $400 this week. You are betting that the stock price will go down, and you'll be able to buy it back and repay the 100 shares of stock at perhaps $200/share, pocketing the difference.
BUT, and this is a big BUT, if the price goes up in the meantime, your position goes negative, e.g., if it goes to $800, you are looking at a $40,000 loss. If it goes sufficiently negative that it approaches the point where the other assets at your broker cannot cover such a loss, you will be automatically sold out of your position at a loss. This means the broker will use the other assets in your account to automatically purchase TSLA shares and return them to the loaning party, all at market price.
When there is a large short interest in a stock, this can happen simultaneously all over the market, driving the price to insane levels, as every short must cover their position. This is called a "Short Squeeze". Even if the shorts were right in the end, they all lost. This happened with Porsche a decade ago, driving it's price well over $1000, when it had been $80, and more recently with Gamestop.
There are a LOT more better explanations than mine out there, or maybe some actual finance market guys/gals can weigh in. Here's one [0]. In any case, I hope this helps.
You short 10 shares at $400 and you have $4500 in your account.
The stock is wildly swinging around and temporarily goes up to $440/share.
Your position would cost $4400 and you only have $4500 in your account, so your broker says "oh no! If TSLA goes up a little more we might never get our money back from this customer" so they liquidate your position while they still can.
IMO it's pretty obvious it's being built up for short sellers to have a banner day. I'm guessing the hype bubble will burst sometime after Jan 20 when EV credits are slashed and FSD and the stupid 2-seater with no charging port mysteriously fail to materialize.
This crying wolf has been going on for 10 years. It may happen one day but your comment sounds like a broken record. I can find your same commend posted an ungodly amount of times on /r/realtesla archives.
Part of the Tesla share price are the high hopes about their self-driving taxi plan. With Musk in the Trump government, the expectation is that regulations will be easier on Tesla to get those self-driving cars on the road.
Regulations aren't the obstacle. The whole point of robotaxis is to not have to hire a driver. Waymo has the technology to do that, but Tesla does not and doesn't seem especially close to it.
For me it's Musk too. The refreshed Model Y is the cheapest and most efficient car that fits all my requirements. I didn't like Musk before but I admired him. But supporting AfD in Germany, asking the king of England to kick the government and all other recent acts crossed a few red lines for me.
I have to change my car in May and it will be probably more expensive or worse car than the Model Y. I need 500+ km range, big trunk, efficiency, silence and confort, acceptable fast charging, heat pump and all for around 50k € max.
The Chinese options are cool but much less efficient. Not that cheap but better equipped. Also no service in some countries where I travel often.
KIA/Hyundai are a bit overpriced and okish but the EV5 is the only I would consider and it's not here yet. The VW group are overpriced and need a new platform. However my current first choice is the new Skoda Enyaq. Otherwise maybe a slightly used VW ID7 but it's too long for parking...
From Stellantis I could consider the Renault Scenic and its clones but I think they are a bit short on trunk capacity and they use too many capacitieve buttons
BMW is out of my reach but they make the best EVs from the ones I tried
In the comment section for that article someone was defending Telsa by claiming the one of the signs of the competition being behind is that they do not have nearly the same number of OTA updates as Telsa has. Personally, I would prefer a car that 0 OTA updates, or at the very least they should be extremely rare.
Me, and thousands others, loved Tesla cars. Now you can buy a better, more reliable EV for the same money from a company not owned by a man hell-bent on forcing the rise of the far-right in Europe.
If Rupert Murdoch made cars, I wouldn't buy one of those either.
Musk has been using his money to influence politics (including in the US, accross the board). Buying a Tesla is giving him money and thus supporting that behavior. It seems obvious to me (a European living in the US) that, if you disagree with his politics, you should not buy his cars. This also apply to people living in the US but, having seen a strongly pro choice north Californian friend buy a Tesla recently, I do not know if US citizens think in those terms.
this is a very well known local meme which has been posted around the city. most people here get the reference and it gets called back about half the time i see a cybertruck in company
I used to think Zuckerberg was the worst person in the tech world. Musk has far exceeded him. I wouldn’t spend a cent on a product associated with him.
Appropriate to remember the original use for this phrase was to describe him stealing ideas from engineers with no credit in a psychotic fashion and make scheduling realistic release dates impossible:
> he's really funny about ideas. If you tell him a new idea, he'll usually tell you that he thinks it's stupid. But then, if he actually likes it, exactly one week later, he'll come back to you and propose your idea to you, as if he thought of it."
And
> He can convince anyone of practically anything. It wears off when he's not around, but it makes it hard to have realistic schedules.
This is expected. Elon Musk is being sanctioned for interfering in European elections and in unprecedentedly involved in the administration of an administration that has made annexing, by military force if necessary, the territory on an EU member and fellow NATO ally a centerpiece policy.
This is not a political comment. YouGov is one of the best pollers (rankings are based on past prediction quality, and easily confirmed with any search engine if you don't believe this). If a CEO is widely unpopular for whatever reasons and deeply identified with the brand, it will cause a problem.
I used to be really pro Elon Musk, I love the advancements in space tech but man I'm sad of his behavior. I'm not a "hate rich people" guy, I know they say to think you can become one is a joke or something but yeah. I do believe in trying/possibility too. I'm proof of it in a small way.
I don’t understand people being fans of billionaire business people who profit from being revered. Specifically billionaires because they have so much funds to spin their own narrative.
I’ve seen some counter-propaganda about his engineering endeavors. I don’t know. Should I consume 50/50 pro/anti and make up my own mind? I don’t think that’s worth my time over a cult of personality. There are more important things to investigate.
Same for me, I was a big fan of his engineering mindset, but even though he probably still has that, the negative stuff he says and now does completely overwhelms everything.
So I know he's the CEO at SpaceX, but doesn't that just mean he pays people to do the engineering? In my view this makes someone about as much a genius engineer as hiring a plumber makes me a master plumber.
I suggest you read some books about SpaceX. Musk was deeply involved from the beginning, when the team was only a few people and was the chief engineer. Now you can argue, as 'chief engineer' he just happen to heir 4-5 of the most brilliant team leaders and they did everything themselves. But in the middle there was always Musk who made man decisions, and there was nobody else who can really be considered the chief engineer, as all of the team leaders were quite busy running their teams. You can say a lot about Musk, but that he wasn't involved enough in SpaceX is just not one of them.
They actually want to heir somebody for the chief engineering position, but couldn't really find anybody suitable with the needed experience that wasn't already employed high up at the large defense primes. So really on the top level of the company it was the leadership team of Musk, Mueller, Shotwell, Königsman and Buzza.
And even if you want to claim that, finding the best talent, hiring them, giving them the best possible support while having the best possible business strategy to work towards is also quite impressive.
I guess one could argue that those things aren't 'chief engineer' tasks. I guess that would just be considered 'engineering management'. But again, management is what many chief engineers do a lot of the time.
What you absolutely can't compare him to is just a money man who is largely uninvolved. That is just ahistorical.
So at best one can argue that he is himself not a real engineer but a good manager of engineering teams, both small and very big.
He said himself that probably knows more about manufacturing than anyone else. I don't take that as a true statement, but at the time he slept at the Tesla factory floor, I am sure he learned a lot and solved many manufacturing problems. He is not just a manager that signs paychecks
I may be out of the loop, but how much engineering has he done? Seems like he's surrounded himself with talented engineers, and they've been the source of his various companies' impressive engineering feats.
Musk isn't a good engineer. Lol. He's never really invented anything, just given money/resources to smarter people. Musk is good at sounding smart. He isn't a talented engineer.
A good recent example would be Musk getting caught paying someone to rank up his video game accounts while taking credit. That's very on point for Musk. Pay someone, take credit.
The Tesla naming is funny because musk is more of the "Evil Edison" than he is a Tesla.
I put Edison in quotes because Edison isn't nearly as bad as Tesla fanboys like to think.
The problem with that position is that plenty of people who also had money tried to just pay smart people, and most weren't nearly as successful.
The absolute shitton of failed car and rocket companies, including by people better financed then Musk, indicates this.
I guess you can say 'its just luck', but given that we are talking about two capital intensive industries that were widely considered almost impossible to break into, you would have to argue that he was lucky twice. I guess one can have that position, but I don't really think that's credible.
I guess one can say he isn't a great engineer but good CEO? Because he is the longest running CEO of the space and the car industry, and both companies over the last 20 years have been pretty successful.
Taking Bezos as a comparison, Bezos has been dropping like 1-2 billion per year into Blue Origin for almost 10 years and had a workforce comparable to SpaceX, who were the leader in rockets, sats and space transport of cargo and humans. SpaceX was started with less then 100 million $.
As some point just saying 'he had resources' just doesn't work. At some point you have to evolve your explication.
Similar here in the US yet and probably an unpopular thing to say but him buying Twitter / X was a major push in the US pendulum (zeitgeist) swinging from the left to the right. Himself a pendulum of the left and the right who swings either ways at his whim and or when it behooves him. He doesn't stand for either side just his ideologies and desires and with $444 billion net worth he can change societies as he chooses and has done and is doing openly.
Recently he posted about disliking Mackenzie Bezo's donations to various far left groups which is rich and laughable.
I’m sure Musk is non-trivia part of this, but also there haven’t been any significant remodel, update or new models (for typical consumers, cybertruck is fairly niche) released in quite a while.
At the same time tons of new e-vehicles are coming out from a ton of competitors.
Back in 2000, Cisco had a PE ratio of 196.2
It has now been 25 years and Cisco's stock price is almost back at its 2000 price (current PE ratio is 25.22).
Nowadays, Alphabet (Google) has a PE ratio of 25.72.
The sales of Tesla are not that great given the past 5 years and the investors are paying 117 times the future earnings.
Forward PE multiples can't be lower than trailing multiples unless you believe earnings will decrease next year. Interestingly, going off of Yahoo Finance, EPS did decrease in 2024, but I don't know their methodology. You'd have to scrub these numbers to make sure they are meaningful and I no longer have access to Bloomberg / FactSet / Capital IQ to do that... and I'm too lazy to pull up research reports and scrub manually ;-)
I have the same lack of Bloomberg access ^^
Anyways, forward PE ratios are generally lower right now (Alphabet for example has a forward PE of 22, current is at 25). There may be a lot of explanations regarding this situation, but globally it either implies worse macro economic conditions, or a decrease in revenues and/or profits, some high one-shot costs/loss to take into account (legal or structural), or most generally it can also reveal that current stock price is too high and some correction will happen.
Given the current situation, I bet it says that stock is overpriced/valued.
Audi is a single, premium, brand of one of the biggest automotive groups out there. It seems odd to single them out in particular and position Tesla outselling them, how is it relevant for anything? I bet they're outselling Dacia too, so what?
The A4 is priced on parity with model 3, the Q5 on parity with model Y, so I guess that might be a hint. Why buy a dirty diesel when you can buy a Tesla for tfe same amount?
But clearly people _aren't_ doing that, because Tesla sales are falling. Those lost Audi sales are presumably largely going either to another VW AG brand, or to another manufacturer entirely.
Largely yes, although VW AG has problems of its own with the VW with falling profits. Their cheaper brands and also Cupra are doing okay. Toyota along with the other Japanese brands, BMW and Volvo are last years' winners. I think people in Europe are mostly buying hybrids.
"Volkswagen and Toyota were again the best-selling car brands but BMW moved into third place followed by Skoda. Volvo and Suzuki increased sales sharply while Ford and Tesla struggled."
Just dropping a link like that about a car manufacturer doing even worse without any argument attached just comes across as coping or soviet style whataboutism.
They just edged out Honda - a company with 4% of their market cap. Not really a slam dunk.
