Social WTF Elon ????????????????

[MikeMcMann]

...
Jeff Bezos is a toolbag loser running a company built on capital advantage, loss leading, and margin, not simply technological innovation. It's apples to oranges.

How that TSLA stock this morning? Ouch.
I'm a sensationalist? Dude. elon fucking musk went on 60 minutes and tried to tell the public his company was a few weeks from insolvency. Also that without his tech our earth will die. How the fuck am I the one being sensationalist in this scenario? What's more ridiculous? Calling out a billionaire grift or running a billionaire grift? hmmmm

It's hilarious to watch you spout off about China when Tesla's expansion there is actually one of its biggest stumbling points. Their sales there are down. Nio is a nationalist brand plus a few others with cars/battery networks.

lol. another strawman from you. Proves you know that without arguing against ghosts you know your arguments have no merits.

I have never praised nor said anything positive about Amazon or Bezo's or his business. I just pointed out a FACT, that the TRAJECTORY of WEALTH building is often predictable and something you seem completely ignorant of.

BEcause you're ignorant you think it is mockable that an entrepreneur be leveraged up on their own stock when IN FACT it is normal.

If you want to have a debate on Crony Capitalism, and other problems with companies like Amazon we can do that too. We actually might not disagree that much. But that is not what we are discussing here. You making a stupid point about entrepreneurs being leveraged to their own stocks then when shown wrong trying to pretend the argument is about the ethics of the corporation is you admitting a loss. You are all over the place as you do not have an argument otherwise.

I don't have TSLA stock dude so there is no insult in that to me. I also am not aa believer (I'm agnostic) as to whether or not it will ever justify if its value and succeed as I have said many times. But you are so wrapped in hate that if someone says Elon bought a homeless guy a meal yesterday you would have to find a way to hate on that. That is painfully obvious. I am guessing you lost a lot of money you cannot afford betting against him and are mad that emotionally driven investors keep propping up the stock when the merits should see it drop.

And I was not promoting Tesla in my China comments. I was just relaying facts. You cannot dispute a single thing I said there because I said nothing that is controversial.

 

[brackis1]

^ That Teslarati website is the ultimate mark of a cult. Basically pumps out random Tesla stories all day written by 1 guy.

 

[JonesBones]

What kind of reductive apologism is this? Better to start somewhere than nowhere? We're hailing this dude as a leader on climate change, when really we should be getting public grids onto renewables. It's cart before horse, or car before grid. Why? Because Musk can't own a straight up energy company and it's a lot easier to take on car companies than oil titans (though that might change given oil prices lately)
The point is that Musk centers the story around him and his cars being especially crucial, when he is entirely replaceable.

Jeff Bezos is a toolbag loser running a company built on capital advantage, loss leading, and margin, not simply technological innovation. It's apples to oranges.

How that TSLA stock this morning? Ouch.
I'm a sensationalist? Dude. elon fucking musk went on 60 minutes and tried to tell the public his company was a few weeks from insolvency. Also that without his tech our earth will die. How the fuck am I the one being sensationalist in this scenario? What's more ridiculous? Calling out a billionaire grift or running a billionaire grift? hmmmm

It's hilarious to watch you spout off about China when Tesla's expansion there is actually one of its biggest stumbling points. Their sales there are down. Nio is a nationalist brand plus a few others with cars/battery networks.

I agree the Musk worship is pathetic but Bezos is so much better than Musk. Everything he does is smarter. In space too.

 

[PEB]

Ben is usually a cheerleader of all things Elon but he seems to be sort of questioning the direction they want to take this too and I can see why. It seems like they are changing things around to make it easier for Tesla cars and Tesla business that is kinda of a deal breaker for me.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Start somewhere? How is that starting somewhere? Electric cars are not the answer. lol at placing coal plants outside the cities as if the shit doesnt travel or contribute to global warming. lol. you are pathetic.

Google has a car that can literally drive itself.

BySimon Alvarez
Posted on January 18, 2018


According to a recently published study by Navigant research group, Tesla is currently dead last in the self-driving race, placing beside second-to-last Apple on the list of 19 companies. At the top of Navigant’s study were GM and Google’s Waymo, companies whose initiatives to develop and release autonomous vehicles to the public are ranked as being close to perfect.

Navigant’s analysis points the blame to Tesla and its eventual split with Mobileye, which was involved in the development and release of the first generation Autopilot system. Since its separation from the Israeli-based tech company, Tesla has spent significant effort in developing its own in-house self-driving suite – Autopilot 2. So far, however, the Elon Musk-led firm has encountered challenge after challenge, with improvements to EAP and new features trickling down in a rather slow stream.

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-finishes-last-navigant-research-self-driving-tech/

I think the Google Self driving car technology could wipe out Tesla and UBer and Lyft, ZipCar, Car2Go, and many others almost over night once they get a full green light to deploy them in cities enmasse.

The question is will Google buy a mass vehicle manufacturer who can manufacture for them on scale a mass electric fleet? Or will they simply license the technology to a few select market manufacturers who will dominate each sector?

Imagine google just flooding the Arizona market with 10 times the driverless cars that exist on the roads as Taxis, Uber like Taxi's, and Car Share programs like ZipCar.

With no human costs and the fuel costs (electricity) being subsidized by free plugins they could certainly afford the cost to put the iron on the road and completely gut those markets.

It will be interesting to see this progress and I would not want to be long on any of the stocks in this sector because of this.

 

[JonesBones]

I think the Google Self driving car technology could wipe out Tesla and UBer and Lyft, ZipCar, Car2Go, and many others almost over night once they get a full green light to deploy them in cities enmasse.

The question is will Google buy a mass vehicle manufacturer who can manufacture for them on scale a mass electric fleet? Or will they simply license the technology to a few select market manufacturers who will dominate each sector?

Imagine google just flooding the Arizona market with 10 times the driverless cars that exist on the roads as Taxis, Uber like Taxi's, and Car Share programs like ZipCar.

With no human costs and the fuel costs (electricity) being subsidized by free plugins they could certainly afford the cost to put the iron on the road and completely gut those markets.

It will be interesting to see this progress and I would not want to be long on any of the stocks in this sector because of this.

True but a lot of people still like to drive. Let's face, it the electrics before Tesla were not a driver's car. Style matters. That is what Musk understands. He made electric cars cool and have performance. Chevy has a nice electric but I wouldn't be caught dead in it. Driving and freedom were interlinked in America in the past and I think that still lingers. Musk basically created a whole new class of electric car drivers who never would have considered electric before. Kind of like how Steve Jobs saw how people like Joe Rogan and my father would use computer devices everyday and they weren't just for enthusiasts.

Musk has said Edison is better than Tesla because Edison brought it to the public. Just like Musk and Jobs.

 

[Fanu]

Start somewhere? How is that starting somewhere? Electric cars are not the answer.

they certainly are compared to traditional cars with internal combustion engines - engines that have been in use for 100+ years
or would you take away cars from streets and go in a different direction with everyone using only public transport? good luck with that in most countries/cities

also you forget that Tesla debuted electric semis which are expected to make a huge impact on the land shipping market:

https://electrek.co/2018/11/18/tesla-semi-order-electric-trucks-launch/

lol at placing coal plants outside the cities as if the shit doesnt travel or contribute to global warming. lol. you are pathetic.

your lack of foresight is pathetic
take away gasoline cars and you are left with coal plants as sole (in terms of this discussion) pollutants, instead of having both coal plants and gasoline cars everywhere - or you think traffic doesnt pollute all that much ? there are over 2 billion gasoline vehicles on the road worldwide, if you replaced all of them with no CO2 exhaust electric cars that would make a tremendous impact on the environment and city quality of life (no longer will people have to inhale fucking exhaust fumes at every turn)

Google has a car that can literally drive itself.

yeah? where the fuck is it then? where can I buy it? Teslas have been in mass production and on sale on several continents
while competition is all talk and no show - fucking mercedes and audi (two of the biggest car companies in the world) are still behind Tesla, not to mention american car companies..

and I find it especially hilarious mentioning apple considering they've shown fuck all so far regarding their electric cars and their project is veiled in secrecy

btw existing Teslas have been receiving OTA software updates for years now - updates that improve quality of its auto pilot making it one of the best solutions on the market currently, hindered only by government regulations (requirement that drivers have to have both hands at the wheel at nearly all times)

 

[brackis1]

lol. another strawman from you. Proves you know that without arguing against ghosts you know your arguments have no merits.

I have never praised nor said anything positive about Amazon or Bezo's or his business. I just pointed out a FACT, that the TRAJECTORY of WEALTH building is often predictable and something you seem completely ignorant of.

BEcause you're ignorant you think it is mockable that an entrepreneur be leveraged up on their own stock when IN FACT it is normal.

If you want to have a debate on Crony Capitalism, and other problems with companies like Amazon we can do that too. We actually might not disagree that much. But that is not what we are discussing here. You making a stupid point about entrepreneurs being leveraged to their own stocks then when shown wrong trying to pretend the argument is about the ethics of the corporation is you admitting a loss. You are all over the place as you do not have an argument otherwise.

I don't have TSLA stock dude so there is no insult in that to me. I also am not aa believer (I'm agnostic) as to whether or not it will ever justify if its value and succeed as I have said many times. But you are so wrapped in hate that if someone says Elon bought a homeless guy a meal yesterday you would have to find a way to hate on that. That is painfully obvious. I am guessing you lost a lot of money you cannot afford betting against him and are mad that emotionally driven investors keep propping up the stock when the merits should see it drop.

And I was not promoting Tesla in my China comments. I was just relaying facts. You cannot dispute a single thing I said there because I said nothing that is controversial.

Dude "trajectory of wealth" what the fuck does that mean?
You want to chart that claim?
The two guys both founded companies and have paper shares in the tens of billions? Groundbreaking stuff.

I've disputed everything you desperately clawed at, showed my money is where my mouth is, posted articles, described competitors and used actual business concepts. You're more of a joke than Musk.

 

[brackis1]

I agree the Musk worship is pathetic but Bezos is so much better than Musk. Everything he does is smarter. In space too.

My comments weren't about smarts, it was about value judgments about them as humans: total maniacs callous to real human needs who won a bunch of money emerging from the dotcom bubble with take-all networth

 

[JonesBones]

My comments weren't about smarts, it was about value judgments about them as humans: total maniacs callous to real human needs who won a bunch of money emerging from the dotcom bubble with take-all networth

Bezos is a true student of the market. Everyone who makes that much money has to be sociopathic to some degree.

 

[MikeMcMann]

True but a lot of people still like to drive. Let's face, it the electrics before Tesla were not a driver's car. Style matters. That is what Musk understands. He made electric cars cool and have performance. Chevy has a nice electric but I wouldn't be caught dead in it. Driving and freedom were interlinked in America in the past and I think that still lingers. Musk basically created a whole new class of electric car drivers who never would have considered electric before. Kind of like how Steve Jobs saw how people like Joe Rogan and my father would use computer devices everyday and they weren't just for enthusiasts.

Musk has said Edison is better than Tesla because Edison brought it to the public. Just like Musk and Jobs.

Lol. First off you are going to have a lot of problems with @brackis1 giving Elon any ounce of credit for anything.

Yes I agree that when it comes to ownership people want a cool looking or status car. Even econo-boxes focus on style now whereas generations ago they did not.

But what the various car share models fro Uber to ZipCar have proven is that when people do not own and they basically just use or rent, that style does not matter near as much.

And those Carshare companies are proving, especially with those under 35, that ownership requirements will diminish greatly as long as you have readily accessible and affordable CarShare options accessible enough.

CarShare services are best utilized in high density large City Centre areas because the DRIVERS can get enough fairs in a short time to make it worth their while. Fully autonomous Ubers (or the like) could be staged all through the city just left plugged in and charging somewhere ready for action when summoned on an App. Based on need the cars in an area cold be very easily balanced or redeployed for instance if you needed more cars in the downtown for weekends (for partiers) but more in the burbs on weekday (for work commuters).

And unless you are using your car as part of your job the economics of carshare for the vast majority of people will be better than ownership when you factor in all ownership costs such as purchase, depreciation, maintenance, fuel, insurance, parking and accident repairs.

If Google or a partner flooded a market with autonomous taxi's such that it was almost always faster, cheaper and easier to use then even grabbing your own car out of a parking space (by the time you get to the office front door the car is pulling up) I do not see how we do not get a new flood of users abandoning their principle vehicle. This first wave of Carshare services has already made massive change amongst the young folk who live in city centres and have access to them as many now do not ever foresee themselves owning a car in their lifetime.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Dude "trajectory of wealth" what the fuck does that mean?
You want to chart that claim?
The two guys both founded companies and have paper shares in the tens of billions? Groundbreaking stuff.

I've disputed everything you desperately clawed at, showed my money is where my mouth is, posted articles, described competitors and used actual business concepts. You're more of a joke than Musk.

I knew you would not understand basic business concepts.

I will explain (but not hold my breath that you will understand).

What is NORMAL, in an entrepreneurs wealth accumulation trajectory, particularly when outside dollars are taken in, is the following

- begin start up, over commit personal assets to its success, often using leverage and indebtedness
- get traction and attract outside investors either at seed or subsequent levels
- companies PERCEIVED value grows, not tied to earnings or traditional metrics but tied to trajectory of sales and multi-year, forward looking projections
- entrepreneurs paper wealth continues to grow but is very tenuous as its tied to perception and not results yet, and any change in perception could wipe out all or substantially all of their paper wealth
- continue to achieve goals and knock down hurdles where the success is perceived as more clear and the risk, diminished
- actually start turning profits as per projections and become a true success and have your corporate value more tied now to more traditional measurable metrics, making that value more 'real'.

You can say a company like Amazon has passed the last bar but it took them almost a decade to declare any meaningful profit. But almost ALL hyper growth, investor fed, companies go through a similar trajectory.

So what are you brackis actually saying when you mock Elon for his wealth being tied to his stock when his stock, when his company is somewhere between my bullet 3-5? You seem to think it strange, mock worthy or something that is not normal when IN FACT it is absolutely not strange, not to be mocked and NORMAL when it comes to the trajectory of how these create and receive wealth for themselves and their investors.

I do not expect you to be able to understand any of this. I suspect it is well above your head and pay grade. So you will continue to mock it as if it is laughable, but that is because you are dumb, not because you are making a point.

 

[JonesBones]

Lol. First off you are going to have a lot of problems with @brackis1 giving Elon any ounce of credit for anything.

Yes I agree that when it comes to ownership people want a cool looking or status car. Even econo-boxes focus on style now whereas generations ago they did not.

But what the various car share models fro Uber to ZipCar have proven is that when people do not own and they basically just use or rent, that style does not matter near as much.

And those Carshare companies are proving, especially with those under 35, that ownership requirements will diminish greatly as long as you have readily accessible and affordable CarShare options accessible enough.

CarShare services are best utilized in high density large City Centre areas because the DRIVERS can get enough fairs in a short time to make it worth their while. Fully autonomous Ubers (or the like) could be staged all through the city just left plugged in and charging somewhere ready for action when summoned on an App. Based on need the cars in an area cold be very easily balanced or redeployed for instance if you needed more cars in the downtown for weekends (for partiers) but more in the burbs on weekday (for work commuters).

And unless you are using your car as part of your job the economics of carshare for the vast majority of people will be better than ownership when you factor in all ownership costs such as purchase, depreciation, maintenance, fuel, insurance, parking and accident repairs.

If Google or a partner flooded a market with autonomous taxi's such that it was almost always faster, cheaper and easier to use then even grabbing your own car out of a parking space (by the time you get to the office front door the car is pulling up) I do not see how we do not get a new flood of users abandoning their principle vehicle. This first wave of Carshare services has already made massive change amongst the young folk who live in city centres and have access to them as many now do not ever foresee themselves owning a car in their lifetime.

I also think all these cars will be used for security which is something Nio has said they plan on doing. Basically all the cars lined up on the street could communicate with each other and monitor the neighborhood like neighborhood watch. They will be parked in strategic places all over the city.

 

[MikeMcMann]

My comments weren't about smarts, it was about value judgments about them as humans: total maniacs callous to real human needs who won a bunch of money emerging from the dotcom bubble with take-all networth

And here again your irrational hate of Elon leads you to dismiss Paypal as if it was just some type of DotCom bubble exploiter who got rich on stock but did not produce anything of value. The fact is that Paypal was one of the earliest and most successful, what is now called FinTech, disruptions of the traditional banking model.

FinTech is one of the most highly valued ares of tech currently and your favorite boy Elon as part of that Paypal team certainly deserves some credit for the venture capital that was spurred to focus on that sector, even if me saying that makes your blood boil.

Here is an info graph showing you how with just Wells Fargo, how many FinTec companies are challenging each and every area of their traditional businesses.

Bezos is a true student of the market. Everyone who makes that much money has to be sociopathic to some degree.

Yes, There is an All or Nothing type mentality to many of these guys where they will literally walk way with nothing instead of compromising and de-risking and walking away with millions or even billions.

There are so many stories of companies like Digg's that reportedly turned down big over priced buyout offers from companies like Google (reported at $200MM) and then later the entire company gets liquidated or sold for $500k.

But if you did not have these guys taking moon shots and all selling to eliminate risk you would not have new emergent giants. You would only have the existing giants getting bigger.

 

[brackis1]

I knew you would not understand basic business concepts.

I will explain (but not hold my breath that you will understand).

What is NORMAL, in an entrepreneurs wealth accumulation trajectory, particularly when outside dollars are taken in, is the following

- begin start up, over commit personal assets to its success, often using leverage and indebtedness
- get traction and attract outside investors either at seed or subsequent levels
- companies PERCEIVED value grows, not tied to earnings or traditional metrics but tied to trajectory of sales and multi-year, forward looking projections
- entrepreneurs paper wealth continues to grow but is very tenuous as its tied to perception and not results yet, and any change in perception could wipe out all or substantially all of their paper wealth
- continue to achieve goals and knock down hurdles where the success is perceived as more clear and the risk, diminished
- actually start turning profits as per projections and become a true success and have your corporate value more tied now to more traditional measurable metrics, making that value more 'real'.

You can say a company like Amazon has passed the last bar but it took them almost a decade to declare any meaningful profit. But almost ALL hyper growth, investor fed, companies go through a similar trajectory.

So what are you brackis actually saying when you mock Elon for his wealth being tied to his stock when his stock, when his company is somewhere between my bullet 3-5? You seem to think it strange, mock worthy or something that is not normal when IN FACT it is absolutely not strange, not to be mocked and NORMAL when it comes to the trajectory of how these create and receive wealth for themselves and their investors.

I do not expect you to be able to understand any of this. I suspect it is well above your head and pay grade. So you will continue to mock it as if it is laughable, but that is because you are dumb, not because you are making a point.

I know what it means dude. I'm saying you can't prove it and it's such a nebulous fucking concept that it has no bearing on whether Tesla/Musk are running a company well (they aren't).
The commonality is 101 level garbage: they both started companies and got stock in it, expanded, were worth tons. The fact you value companies based off these dilettante level analogies is so laughable.
Again. I walk the walk. Here is me taking my entire electronic car nestegg out of the market this morning when my phone blew up with China arrest news. Your argument is as thin as a stock certificate.

 

[MikeMcMann]

I also think all these cars will be used for security which is something Nio has said they plan on doing. Basically all the cars lined up on the street could communicate with each other and monitor the neighborhood like neighborhood watch. They will be parked in strategic places all over the city.

Makes a ton of sense.

you know this could be a good thread to discuss tec, trends, and other emerging topics if that idiot brakis was not set on spewing all sorts of irrational hate through out it. And I have no problem with skeptics (I am one in many areas) nor the fact that someone does not like a CEO or person. But just as we see in the Heavies, when a fight fan hates a fighter, they have to take every aspect of their life and suggest it is negative and hate on everything, that is what he is doing here. it would be like a Jones hater being unable to accept that he has regular bowl movements... nope he must suck at shitting too, because I hate him and that nonsense makes having productive discussions difficult.

I was literally asked by a Conor hater, when I said 'I actually do not like Conor', 'why i was then defending him from some of the most absurd claims leveled against him'. he said 'if you don't like him, I don't get why you would defend him'. He was perplexed why I cared about actually fact or honesty in a debate, if i did not like the person and thought I should get on board the hate wagon. Even if I hate someone I am still objective in my criticisms.

 

[brackis1]

Makes a ton of sense.

you know this could be a good thread to discuss tec, trends, and other emerging topics if that idiot brakis was not set on spewing all sorts of irrational hate through out it. And I have no problem with skeptics (I am one in many areas) nor the fact that someone does not like a CEO or person. But just as we see in the Heavies, when a fight fan hates a fighter, they have to take every aspect of their life and suggest it is negative and hate on everything, that is what he is doing here. it would be like a Jones hater being unable to accept that he has regular bowl movements... nope he must suck at shitting too, because I hate him and that nonsense makes having productive discussions difficult.

I was literally asked by a Conor hater, when I said 'I actually do not like Conor', 'why i was then defending him from some of the most absurd claims leveled against him'. he said 'if you don't like him, I don't get why you would defend him'. He was perplexed why I cared about actually fact or honesty in a debate, if i did not like the person and thought I should get on board the hate wagon. Even if I hate someone I am still objective in my criticisms.

Wait so you're a Conor fan too? Oh this is gold.
My biggest regret of the year was not driving from LA to Primm to put money on Khabib.

There is a mountain of stuff about why Musk is a trash human, just like there is with McGregor.

 

[MikeMcMann]

I know what it means dude. I'm saying you can't prove it and it's such a nebulous fucking concept that it has no bearing on whether Tesla/Musk are running a company well (they aren't).
The commonality is 101 level garbage: they both started companies and got stock in it, expanded, were worth tons. The fact you value companies based off these dilettante level analogies is so laughable.
Again. I walk the walk. Here is me taking my entire electronic car nestegg out of the market this morning when my phone blew up with China arrest news. Your argument is as thin as a stock certificate.
View attachment 490893

lol. Not a fucking chance you understood any of that.

One thing here that is clear as day is that you are 100% an emotion based investor and there are lots of them.

I never said 'I value' companies that way, I said 'that is the way THEY ARE valued'.

I don't have to like or agree with it but as a non-emotion based investor I better understand it because not understanding it could lead me to shorting Tesla based on thinking its over valued based on traditional metrics (which it is) while not recognizing that current and still future investors are buying it in stages 3-5 based on 'belief'.

I stay away from 'faith' based investments entirely and focus on metrics driven ones that can be measured and compared. Again something you will claim to understand but won't as you are the definition of an emotion driven investor.

 

[brackis1]

lol. Not a fucking chance you understood any of that.

One thing here that is clear as day is that you are 100% an emotion based investor and there are lots of them.

I never said 'I value' companies that way, I said 'that is the way THEY ARE valued'.

I don't have to like or agree with it but as a non-emotion based investor I better understand it because not understanding it could lead me to shorting Tesla based on thinking its over valued based on traditional metrics (which it is) while not recognizing that current and still future investors are buying it in stages 3-5 based on 'belief'.

I stay away from 'faith' based investments entirely and focus on metrics driven ones that can be measured and compared. Again something you will claim to understand but won't as you are the definition of an emotion driven investor.

I am driven by the emotions of others. I think Nio has a great car; as I've stated multiple times here I'd consider a Tesla too. I knew people would get scared by the news. What am I supposed to do? Take it on the chin and not sell $40,000 of assets when I expect it to drop 3-10%?

Run along child; the metrics on Tesla are trash. Try telling me about their bond offerings.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Wait so you're a Conor fan too? Oh this is gold.
My biggest regret of the year was not driving from LA to Primm to put money on Khabib.

There is a mountain of stuff about why Musk is a trash human, just like there is with McGregor.

As with everything your comprehension is your problem.

Here is my quote you could not comprehend "I said 'I actually do not like Conor'"

You literally have the comprehension skills of a toddler and you are trying to talk corporate strategy and stock.

i honestly suggest, and hope you take the suggestion, that you get someone to read these posts to you and help you with the big words as you are making yourself look like a fool.