How so? Can you provide a link about how you knew the good Q3 results better than market consensus in advance, and also numerical facts about the pull-forward? How many orders were pulled from Q4, and thus, is there already information about Q4 deliveries?
US subsidies will also come in Q4, when in Q3 an order has been placed and a $250 reservation fee paid. On the last day of the quarter, a new model, MY Performance, went on sale in the US, and probably none were delivered, even though orders certainly came in.
An affordable model is coming. Tesla might understand the Osborne effect of sales with its subsidy implications. And perhaps Teslaâs quarterly report comment âbetween growth wavesâ was not zero information or a lie after all. In Q4, weâll see if it was a dead-cat-bounce.
Everyone who follows these things even a little knew about this for a long time, e.g., Troy Teslike. I understand that you donât follow your favorite stock very closely, but perhaps you should try a little.
Similarly, other experts like Gary Black and James Cat clearly predicted a higher delivery volume than market consensus.
I understand very well that this came as a surprise to you, and thatâs why your joy is great.
Or perhaps youâre not really up to date on things - go figure.
Q1/26 is the next ânormalâ quarter by the looks of it; the last 2 years have seen declines in Q1, and now thereâs such a weak comparison period available that weâll probably finally achieve YoY growth.
Do the 98 investors who liked this still believe that half a million Tesla buyers in Q3 support far-right pro-Russian ideology and that the group is growing?
I recommend re-reading my comment carefully. I did not say that Tesla buyers support far-right pro-Russian ideology. Nor do I believe that any of the 98 people who liked my comment thought so.
I merely stated that Elon Musk uses money to advance his own ideology, which in many respects is close to far-right and pro-Russian ideology. This is difficult to deny, as Musk himself has stated it.
I do not believe that half a million people have bought a Tesla because they support far-right pro-Russian ideology. I believe they have bought a Tesla simply because they wanted the best electric car, and they simply do not care what Musk supports or does with his wealth. There are many such people, but there are also many people for whom such things matter a great deal. I still consider Tesla to be by far the best electric car, but the brand is so embarrassing now that I would never buy one. In my opinion, this is reflected in Tesla losing its share of the electric car market. For example, Volkswagen is now Europeâs best-selling electric car brand, even though its models are not yet quite on Teslaâs level. I also talked with the young student trainees at work. The conversation quickly turned to cars, and I was surprised how unanimously they considered Tesla to be a really embarrassing brand.
Agreed, but in fairness, it must also be said in this context that you yourself have repeatedly been guilty of the same towards them previously. Hopefully, thatâs in the past now. Everyone could try to focus on not letting personal arguments fill the thread.
I find it a bit odd coming from a writer who usually bursts into the thread, then calls everyone who considers Tesla overpriced stupid, and finally disappears from the thread for a while again.
Tesla really seems to stir up emotions, and the atmosphere of the thread certainly takes away the desire to write. Here, some writers seem to take it immensely personally if one dares in any way to question Teslaâs suitability as an investment. In most other company threads, a normal exchange of thoughts about companies takes place, and perhaps knowledge is gained from it at the same time.
In this thread, things seem to be exceptionally black and white, and every message is read like the devil reads the Bible.
Perhaps in any case, this thread is not the right thread to discuss this matter and other writers and their writing style or wishes to get them banned. This might be a better thread for meta-discussion:
Indeed, if we now want to discuss flagging and user activity, it must be done in the thread indicated by @Paapaa. Over the years, it has become very clear that it is very difficult for Tesla bears and bulls to discuss in the same thread. Even if one were to go through this matter extensively from the beginning of the thread, explaining why the development has been like this, as someone who has followed the thread for a long time in a moderatorâs role, I can say that the most obvious thing is that many debaters on both sides need to look in the mirror. So, instead of starting to blacken another writerâs name separately, one should first look in the mirror and consider whether there is perhaps something to improve in the quality of oneâs own writings and the expressions/rhetoric used.
Let this message now serve as a final warning: if inappropriate messages continue in the thread, the banhammer will start swinging very easily, regardless of the userâs status/followability/positioning regarding Teslaâs stock or other similar attributes. I am now acutely informing other moderators about this pastoral letter I have sent.
I went through Yleâs Tesla news coverage from this year. Yle has published 30 articles. Tesla Motors | Yle.fi | Uutiset, urheilu, ilmiöt
Of these, only one is positive. It was a short article about Arizonaâs robotaxi permit.
Negative articles have even been made about first registrations in individual countries (not Finland) and stock price drops. In addition, financial statements and quarterly reports have been reported when the result has been negative. They remain silent when first registrations in Finland and other Nordic countries are growing, the quarterly report reached record highs, and the stock price is clearly positive year-to-date.
The headlines of the articles reflect Yleâs objectivity on the matter well, for example, âHelsinki man woke up to Elon Muskâs âmessing aroundâ and canceled his Tesla purchase â and heâs not the only one.â If you bother to read the article, it turns out that most respondents are satisfied with their Tesla. However, this is not evident from the headline at all. On the contrary, the reader is led to believe that many are dissatisfied.
Yle, of course, has the right to do this, because the Council for Mass Media (JSN) does not require journalists to be objective, but rather to report truthfully. All of Yleâs articles about Tesla have probably been true. Itâs just not very objective to report only the negative things. I donât know if Yleâs Tesla-negativity is due to Musk or because negative news is more interesting.
I understand if it annoys a Tesla fan, as one can undeniably see Yleâs biatched trend. On the other hand, when you Google Tesla, a lot of negative stuff comes up from there too.
Does one have to play the victim for each of these, how dare they write about Tesla in a negative tone?
But then again, one would hope that the unfortunately unpleasant statistics referred to by Yle would also gain visibility on a forum like this. No one seemed to dare link it at all.
Itâs easy to comment âthe success of electric cars doesnât matter to Tesla anymoreâ if something doesnât go well. But a single record quarter is worth celebrating with a P/E 250 valuation.
Quite something.
As a side note, I would also point out that VW doesnât seem to get much love from Yle either, even though there are several VW models among the least rejected in those statistics. And itâs a European model.
Wired had a good new article about car software and OTA. The speed of development and data ownership is a moat for Tesla here. AI development accelerates by collecting data. Other manufacturers perhaps see risks in OTA, and software is scattered among different operators, unlike with Tesla. Fordâs CEO Jim Farley summarizes the matter:
âThe problem is that the software [for them] is written by 150 different companies, and they donât talk to each other. So even though it says Ford on the front, I actually have to go to Bosch to get permission to change their seat control software.â
I could elaborate a bit on those thoughts. Originally, Tesla was justified as an investment specifically because it is the worldâs best electric car company, which would conquer those markets and destroy traditional internal combustion engine car companies. In the same way that Apple makes almost all of the profits in the phone market, Tesla was justified as winning the electric car market quite dominantly against all competitors. In my opinion, this legendary message is a good example of that argumentation:
After Tesla started taking a beating on the electric car side, the arguments changed. Tesla had the only true autonomous driving system, and soon millions of robotaxis would be on the streets. When Tesla then lost the Level 3 race and the robotaxi race regarding FSD, the justifications changed to how the company has billions of miles of data stored on Dojoâs supercomputer, which competitors donât have, and thus a huge competitive advantage that no one can catch up to within any reasonable timeframe. Now Dojo is no more.
When Musk realized that hype could no longer be generated on the automotive side, he invented a new product completely independent of Teslaâs business, without any synergy with electric car sales. Optimus does not serve Teslaâs business in any way, but it must be invested in, because without Optimus, Tesla is just an ordinary electric car company losing market share in the US, and as a result of Muskâs brand-destroying activities, owning it also evokes negative feelings in Europe.
Muskâs status is strongly tied to Teslaâs stock price, and if (when?) Optimus flops, then a new product must be invented to pivot to, in order to shift the goalposts and keep the stock price high. I personally bet on quantum computers as the next Tesla product
I myself have noticed that when car sales figures were declining, the responses were that sales figures donât matter and valuation is not based on that. Now that sales figures were apparently growing, thereâs tremendous hype and messaging like âlook now, Teslaâs mission is progressing - I told you but no one believed meâ
If one looks back in time, Teslaâs stock price 10 years ago, split-adjusted, was just over 14 dollars. Would it have been sensible to invest in the company then, if one had known that in 10 years the EPS would be around 2 dollars and growth had stopped? No, it wouldnât have been. However, the narratives have carried it surprisingly long, and thereâs no sign that they wouldnât continue to do so.
This is of course true, and I donât believe in the disappearance of Teslaâs stock magic either, even if the scams change every few years. If we go by theory, the company would need a full-time and fully-committed CEO who would focus on the core business, i.e., car manufacturing and development, and these Optimus and other adventures should be spun off into their own separate company. Tesla has plenty of world-conquering products that were brought to investors with a lot of hype but never got off the ground.
Where is the Tesla Semi, which was supposed to conquer the entire truck market and autonomously transport cargo from city to city, making truck drivers unemployed? The AI revolution came and went, but the Semi is nowhere to be seen:
Where is the new Roadster with a rocket engine (or without)? People have had $50k tied up since 2017 in a product that doesnât exist, and if they cancel that 50 THOUSAND advance payment now in 2025, Tesla will still keep some of the money. This scam essentially made gullible people pay to lend money to Tesla interest-free:
Is Optimus an easier product for an electric car company to get into production and on the market than, say, the Tesla Semi or Tesla Roadster, which havenât been moved forward despite strong efforts? Isnât the most likely scenario still that the robot games will collapse when technical challenges cannot be solved and big promises fulfilled, and some other pure robot company will get the job done?
Judging by the pre-market price reaction (right now -0.49%), the features are quite as expected. Functionality will become clear during the coming weeks.
Tesla will finally start producing its much-hyped budget Tesla at the German factory. In fact, itâs a budget version of the Tesla Model Y. This means the seat material has been changed to a cheaper one, the sound system has been changed to a cheaper one, suspension parts have been changed to cheaper ones and the suspension has been simplified, the Model Yâs front light bar has been removed, the roof has been changed to all-metal, etc⊠this achieves a 10% cheaper Model Y. Itâs a budget Tesla.
According to German sales figures, Teslaâs sales have dropped by -50% during January-September this year. Although electric car sales grew by +32%. The fastest grower is the Chinese BYD. I also looked at Tesla figures from China and the brand has dropped to seventh place there, and the decline is presumably continuing. Things are going better in the USA. In the USA, sales were boosted by the end of purchase subsidies in September. GM announced a doubling of electric car sales, as did Hyundai, Ford +30% ⊠Still, Teslaâs sales for 2025 will be negative. And the USA is Teslaâs most important sales region, as sales in China collapsed. And next year will be difficult for Tesla as a car manufacturer.
BYD will also be the largest electric car manufacturer in 2025, even if not a single car is sold in the USA.
In addition, Tesla is in trouble with insurance supervisory authorities in the USA. Tesla launched its own insurance product in 2019. The idea was to offer cheaper insurance premiums and faster service. Not everything went smoothly, and now Tesla is responding to 3,000 insurance cases where Tesla has committed insurance law violations.
