The state of being great is exactly the definition I came up with when thinking about the meaning of greatness. 🙂
OT: Electric vehicles
- Thread starter BellyFullOfWhiteDogCrap
- Start date
So I post details on the same loan with the same numbers….complete with how it was paid back early. You might want to read previous posts before replying to them.
Also: Loans with interest aren’t bail outs or credits.
I understand, and lexically, that makes perfect sense. My take on the word is more philosophical, I guess, than lexical.
Rivian cuts 2021 production estimates.
www.cnbc.com
Rivian shares slide after company cuts 2021 EV production expectations
The company said it faced supply chain issues as well as challenges ramping up production of the complex batteries that power the vehicles.
How many times did Tesla come up a few hundred vehicles short? Probably more quarters than we can count.Rivian cuts 2021 production estimates.
Rivian shares slide after company cuts 2021 EV production expectations
The company said it faced supply chain issues as well as challenges ramping up production of the complex batteries that power the vehicles.
A government loan at well below market rate to an almost insolvent company that can't raise the capital via private markets is the very definition of a bailout!! Without the $475 Million we taxpayers ponied up, Tesla doesn't even make it into 2010.
Legit point on private capital. Gov’t should have taken an equity stake!
Seems like right now all of the pickup trucks will not meet targets for 2022.
Sounds like you have a beef with the DOE for running the program that was available to any maker willing to put the genuine, authentic effort into making EVs they set standards for (which only Tesla did).
I’m sure you can Google up their contact info to go off on them, too. There are many other federal loan programs that use below market rates. Get those bastards too.
Your anger at “below market rates” has motivated me to post this again here…
List of US Fossil Fuel subsidies from recent G20 report:
- Expensing of Intangible Drilling Costs
- Percentage Depletion for Oil and Natural-Gas Wells
- Domestic Manufacturing Deduction for Fossil Fuels
- Two Year Amortization Period for Geological & Geophysical Expenditures
- Percentage Depletion for Hard Mineral Fossil Fuels
- Expensing of Exploration and Development Costs for Hard Mineral Fuels
- Capital Gains Treatment for Royalties of Coal
- Deduction for Tertiary Injectants
- Exception to Passive-Loss Limitation for Working Interests in Oil and Natural-Gas Properties
- Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit (EOR) Credit
- Marginal Wells Credit
- Corporate Tax Income Exemption for Fossil-Fuel Publicly Traded Partnerships
- Excise Tax Exemption for Crude Oil Derived from Tar Sands
- Royalty-Exempt Beneficial Use of Fuels
- Royalty-Free Flaring and Venting of Natural Gas
- Liability Cap on Natural Resource Damage
- Subsidies for fossil fuels used in the residential sector
...and here's a BIG one: The US leases federal land to fossil fuel extraction at FAR below market rates, for way less than private landowners or state governments charge. The submarket lease rates are the single largest fossil fuel subsidy. They should all be rebid at modern royalty rates in open auctions.
Lo, you said it wasn't a bailout: I simply corrected a risibly false statement. I think the bailout was a good thing, which the market agrees with, given that Tesla is now valued at roughly 2000 X $475 million. Thanks, Obama! But then I don't have some mythical fawning fanboi fantasy to defend. And let's now remember what your Grand Potentate recently said about capital allocation:
"It does not make sense to take the job of capital allocation away from people with a demonstrated great skill in capital allocation and give it to an entity [the government] that has demonstrated very poor skill in capital allocation."
Well, Elon, dear, the market looked at Tesla in 2009 and decided you were utterly unworthy of the capital allocation you needed to survive. So you went sobbing to the Obama administration, who saved your company's ass, and took real political heat for it from Republicans. But now you're desperate to pretend all that never happened. MmmKay...
You fanbois wonder why people dislike Musk: one reason is because he's one of the world's biggest ****ing hypocrites. He's a welfare queen who loudly proclaims to be against subsidies. And Tesla's a company that would have gone bankrupt multiple times were it not the the support of the US Government at the state of California. But acknowledging others causes deep psychic wounds to narcissists like Musk, so we have to have this fantasy...
Last edited:
Bailouts are for companies or industries whose bankruptcies may have a severe adverse impact on the economy.
Belly, with all due respect because I know you are passionate about Tesla, how would you characterize the Gov’t loan to Tesla as opposed to Tesla raising private capital? My guess is that Musk didn’t want to give up any equity because it was against his own financial interests and therefore would rather pass the risk of a default to taxpayers. No? I’d be shocked if no VC firms would give Tesla money in 2009. Musk just didn’t want to give up a piece of the pie and went the Gov’t route instead.
Thanks for the details on the point you had already made. I get it. I can only guess the government understands that it would never be able to collect taxes from or see jobs created by a company that ceases to exist. So, they decided it was important enough to keep it afloat with a low interest loan, the least offensive type of assistance to pure capitalists. But I understand your point.
What I'm waiting for is a response to my subsidy listing that oil benefits from (or owes its existence to) greatly, which also includes leases of public lands at super low interest rates for the use of and extraction of oil on those lands. That list makes $3.30/gallon right now possible instead of the $8-$10/gallon being paid in other nations where subsidies don't happen. Why are you so angry about a loan but you are OK with all those blatant gifts to another transportation related industry that wouldn't be able to exist or be remotely competitive without them?
Why would the crown-jewel and future of EVs need a Gov’t loan? Because BlackRock, Sequoia, etc. wouldn’t throw a few bucks at a Musk-led company? Like I said, and folks can feel free to set the record straight if I’m wrong, but Musk leaned on the Gov’t and shunned VCs so he could make sure his equity wasn’t impacted and pass risk to the taxpayers. Yet another brilliant Musk-maneuver just like his Twitter poll on whether to sell Tesla shares.
Here are a few snippets:
“lobbying government officials to use their censorship powers to restrain online criticism.”
“personalities who’ve posted complaints about the company cars on Weibo and Douyin, have received messages from verified accounts under the name “Tesla Legal.”
This is a good question. I'm against oil subsidies, and trying to move the f**k beyond oil is why I'm doing my microscopic bit and buying a Tesla. I think the government should be subsidizing EVs so they have an even somewhat level playing field on which to compete against all the oil industry subsidies. As I said, I am happy Tesla was bailed out in 2009. I support the EV tax credit, whether or not it arrives in time to be of use to me. However, it's not me that's loudly railing against government subsidies. it's Elon Musk. Simply: if you've been helped/saved by government funds, you are a hypocrite to then fulminate against government subsidies that help your industry as a whole. Still more, if you've had nearly $1 billion in support from the taxpayers of the State of California (including $35K per Model S for several years), then you're a hypocrite to say "f**k you" to California and move to Texas, an leading oil-subsidizing state that won't even allow you to sell your products within its borders. I want a good EV. I don't want a subscription to the extended teenage pity party that the world's wealthiest man holds for himself on social media.
What you're suggesting could be true, but there's no way to verify. You're also assuming he could raise money through venture capital firms.
I don't know for sure, but it seems logical that we have most of those oil subsidies. For now and the short term, at least.
Because (a) we're not powering a lot of our national security machinery with batteries alone anytime soon and (b) EV adoption isn't yet at a place where potential impacts of NOT subsidizing oil won't produce a substantial negative impact to the vast numbers of ICE vehicles in the US, and (c) EV infrastructure isn't yet at a place where forcing people to purchase EVs is a reasonable thing to do, especially for lower income folks.
Again, I'm no expert on all this. But it seems like an ongoing logical defense for oil subsidies. While (b) and (c) will likely self-correct in the short-term, I think (a) will be with us for a long time, so continued incentives for oil producers will still make sense.
But maybe I'm the wrong person to comment. I happily burn up a (currently $60+) tank of gas just engaging in pleasure driving most weeks. So I'm not terribly civic-minded w/carbon production at the moment.
Which was Musk being smart.
But yes, would also mean he's being disingenuous and/or hypocritical with some of his public commentary.
I don’t disagree - Musk is scary smart. Something seemingly simple like his Twitter poll was carefully designed to achieve his desired result. He knew EXACTLY what he was doing and I wouldn’t be surprised if in 6-12 months it’s abundantly clear that Musk got out at the top. Although apparently someone just filed a lawsuit about his recent Twitter activity.
Good post, and I think these are all valid points. Yes, just precipitously ending the subsidies would have bad outcomes as well as - hopefully - salutary ones. One imagines that with investment in charging infrastructure, and competition/tech advances lowering the cost of EVs, the sheer economic advantages of EV ownership would drive large-scale adoption, regardless of subsidies to oil.
And mitigation of climate change is going to come mainly from the development and mass adoption of new technologies. Driving for pleasure, or, in my case, flying back to NZ when there's not a pandemic on are examples of the self-interest that it's difficult to regulate or shape. I buy carbon credits, and I'd happily take longer with, say, a plasma-powered jet, but we build lives within existing infrastructure, and removing/regulating that will just create new problems and unanticipated outcomes.
Looks like Ranger hybrid is on the way.—
www.musclecarsandtrucks.com
Next Generation Ford Ranger Hybrid May Arrive At Dealerships In 2024
The Next-Generation Ford Ranger has only just debuted but engineers have already begun hinting at the inevitable hybrid powertrain
www.musclecarsandtrucks.com
Anyone know if Ford plans to offer a EV Raptor?Looks like Ranger hybrid is on the way.—
Next Generation Ford Ranger Hybrid May Arrive At Dealerships In 2024
The Next-Generation Ford Ranger has only just debuted but engineers have already begun hinting at the inevitable hybrid powertrain
https://www.nio.com/news/nio-day-2021-held-suzhou-smart-electric-sedan-et5-unveiled
This one is beautiful.
Now keep in mind I spent all of 10 seconds finding these and there are more:
Tesla just missed its goal of delivering half a million vehicles last year
The automaker had acknowledged that reaching its goal of 500,000 deliveries would be more difficult because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
www.businessinsider.com
Tesla Stock Is Tanking Because It Delivered Way Fewer Cars Than Expected
Tesla stock was falling sharply after the auto maker announced disappointing March deliveries.
Of course it's a factual argument - the number of stories about people who have had production dates pushed is enormous. All of those production misses represent exactly what he said.
Rivian missing production #s by a few hundred is nothing. It's to be expected with a new production ramp.
One thing that does puzzle me about Rivian is they are attempting to ramp production of 2 new vehicles simultaneously. Getting one vehicle to volume production is difficult enough. 2 simultaneously seems unnecessarily complex; especially for a start-up.
One thing that does puzzle me about Rivian is they are attempting to ramp production of 2 new vehicles simultaneously. Getting one vehicle to volume production is difficult enough. 2 simultaneously seems unnecessarily complex; especially for a start-up.
For the record, I agree it’s no big deal because at this point seems like everyone misses. On the other hand, there were folks indicating that Rivian missing was a big deal so I merely used Tesla history of missing as an example.
Anecdotes have nothing to do with Tesla meeting or missing it's quarterly targets. This is another post that is just spouting off. Provide data.
Now keep in mind I spent all of 10 seconds finding these and there are more:
Tesla just missed its goal of delivering half a million vehicles last year
The automaker had acknowledged that reaching its goal of 500,000 deliveries would be more difficult because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Tesla Stock Is Tanking Because It Delivered Way Fewer Cars Than Expected
Tesla stock was falling sharply after the auto maker announced disappointing March deliveries.www.barrons.com
The 2020 miss was because of the pandemic, not specific to Tesla. The 2019 Baron's article is not relevant. Tesla is killing it and the company has been continuously ramping up its production targets and actual sales.
Yeah, yeah, we know. I should just buy a Tesla now and get it over with because in the future the auto world is going to consist of one giant fleet of Teslas. Ford, GM, BYD, Rivian, VW, [insert auto manufacturer], will all be bankrupt and cease to exist. All hail Musk!Oh, it's true. Plus, two new gigafactories coming on-line Q1 2021.
