Tesla stock dipped a little today it seems but it's still up 8 percent over the month. I really don't understand those investors and how they price a struggling company so highly.
Struggling, not so much: '24/'25 revenue of just under $100B, with Q3'25 record profitability and deliveries yielding $1.5B net income. Strong liquidity and a current ratio of about 2, boosting short-term financial stability. Solid cash reserves and relatively low debt ratio.
High stock price: far exceeds that of traditional auto makers even though Tesla's revenue is significantly lower. High valuation reflects investor expectations of growth and future tech upside. Exuberant? Probably. OTOH, Tesla has delivered better ROI for investors than the other automakers.
It sounds like you're arguing that high valuation compared to fundamentals means buyers expect gains from future buyers paying more sounds like a Ponzi, but it isn't, it is speculation.
The comparison doesn't make sense. Some surface features of speculative markets can look Ponzi-like, but the underlying mechanics are very different.
A Ponzi-scheme returns to earlier participants directly from money contributed by later participants, with no real underlying business generating value. In a Ponzi-scheme, there is no real product (or it is irrelevant), the operator controls payouts, and investors are promised steady or guaranteed returns. None of that applies to Tesla stock.
Ponzi-schemes hide losses, smooth returns, collapse suddenly. Tesla stock is volatile, has had large drawdowns, and public reflects bad news, margin compression, demand shifts. Volatility is a sign of a market, not a Ponzi.
This part is the smell.
"It's not a car company, it's a AI/Robot/whatever company." The valuation is supposedly justified by a future product that perpetually fails to materialize.
It's obviously not a classical Ponzi scheme in the mechanical sense where payouts are controlled by a central party. It has major Ponzi vibes though, with new money continuing to reward old money even though the fundamentals and products haven't done anything to justify that continued influx - only the hype has.
The actual underlying product, the cars, don’t match the crazy valuation.
Generating revenue and profit at the expense of the participants is literally the ponzi scheme.
If BYD was in the US I think we could check this box reeeeaaally quickly. It would make Tesla irrelevant.
Why? What's your logic?
There's a huge market opportunity here that all our manufacturers are missing, seemingly on purpose. BYD, and others, would absolutely sweep the competition.
They have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to never make low-margin (read "cheap") cars. If someone is looking for a competitive automotive market, they won't find it in the US. The financial engineering is world-class though.
And sure some American cars are plastic and flimsy (particularly the low end models), but these are premium Chinese brands.
I disagree, again, pretty much all EVs handle like shit because they're very heavy and have a ton of torque. It doesn't help that most American cars are very large and particularly tall, which makes handling even worse. The reality is that a sedan will basically always handle better than an SUV, no matter what, even if it's a piece of shit sedan and a 100K Cadillac SUV. At least, on pavement.
> And sure some American cars are plastic and flimsy
No, like, all of them. You can't buy a Tesla with an interior that isn't mostly plastic. GM is still doing that bullshit where most of their components are binned from 20K shitboxes. There's SOME exceptions, but they're rare. And you'll find that what Xiaomi and some other's are doing is not plastic. They have leather interiors and stuff, this is all very easy to verify online. I'm not telling you anything that isn't trivial to find out.
What does a 2025 US car have over a BYD vehicle? Questionable parts availability?
You would have to be crazy to crash 3% of your economy.
On a related note, health insurance companies make up ~18%(this includes care, can't find that broken out).
Good luck getting nationalized health insurance, where are all those people going to work?
I personally prefer a BYD, Musk has damaged his brand by being so political, but the BYD product is (IMO) superior.
Having said that BYD isnt without its issues (eg. over reporting of range)
Yeah, sure.
The big dog is BYD though. Twice as many as 2nd place Tesla.
But it is stunning that legacy automakers are sticking to fossil fuels.
They also know that this means that the EU will push the target date for the end of fossi fuel cars.
"But it's high margin", sure it is, but so is Ferrari, and their P/E is 30-40.
Indeed. Global 2024 data shows Tesla selling about 1.8M. EV's only by that group of automakers comes to around 1.5M. Toyota and Ford are hybrid-first, not EV. VW is the only legacy automaker that comes near Tesla's EV scale. Mercedes prioritizes margin over volume. Rivian is capacity-limited.
This fully explains the market valuation, of course! Never mind a swarm of retail investors driven by a news media that covered Musk as if he were Tony Stark for years, this market cap is fully based on solid fundamental analysis of expected future revenue.
The people voting Afd et al. are NOT people buying EVs. The venn diagram of those groups is two circles.
Its not like this differs from the US. Neither white supremacists (the "alt right") nor mainstream republicans were buying his cars.
You should be open to the possibility that he isn't clueless, he might actually just be a racist authoritarian.
https://www.acea.auto/files/Press_release_car_registrations_...
The two most popular EVs in China are the Wuling Mini and the Geely Xingyuan. The first one costs $4500 for the base model, and the second one is $9800. And you can get a very decent EV for $15k with plenty of options.
In 2-3 years, these $5k and $10k cars will only get better, and they'll just slaughter all the competition in markets outside the US and Europe. Especially once used cars start appearing at a fraction of the cost.
Traditional auto manufacturers are dead. Full stop. They just haven't realized it yet. Tesla had a chance to compete in this market with Model 2 but Musk decided to blow their lead on a completely stillborn and gimmick-filled robotaxi.
Not sure whether you know, but Geely entered the automotive business in 1997 (founded in 1986).
The company has subsidiaries / joint ventures with automakers like Volvo, Polestar, Proton, Smart, Lotus, Renault, etc.
Lin Shufu, Geely’s founder and chairman bought just shy of 10% of Mercedes Benz in 2018, making him the second biggest individual shareholder in the German carmaker. The #1 spot is occupied by The Beijing Automotive Industry Holding Co. (BAIC), via its state-owned parent.
Even Toyota is slowly waking up, with a reasonable bZ3X SUV for $15k (China only).
How does that justify Tesla's valuation?
Is it based on the idea that the margin can be improved?
You got it reversed.
For Q3'2025, GM net income $1.3B on $48B revenue (down 0.3% YoY). Tesla, in contrast, generated $1.5B income on $28B revenue (up 12% YoY).
GM's income was down 56.6% while Tesla's was down 37%.
GM had higher operating income than Tesla, however. Explained by Tesla's more aggressive investment in R&D and AI.
You're misreading. $100B annual revenue. 1.5B quarterly new income.
Q3 2025 was record revenue of $27B (up 12% YoY). Operating margin was 5.8% (down from 10.8 Q3 2024).
Why the lower profitability? Higher expenses for AI and R&D costs, lower EV prices (very strong competition), etc.
They lost the massive US subsidy making EV’s appealing and are getting outcomes in China. Model E and Cybertruck have anemic and shrinking sales numbers etc.
I sometimes forget that’s not the real name, which gets confusing.
Not quite failure in Sweden. Something about how the car is not quite bad enough to break the lease.
Thus explaining the joke in such excruciating detail as to kill any humor.
Sales have been flat for 3 years and the delivery numbers in Europe are catastrophic
on a fully diluted basis, the market cap is above $1.6tn, so at a PE of 20, they'd have to generate something like $80bn in profit per year - hard to do in an industry that is as brutally competitive and low margin as passenger cars.
It'd like me saying that Barry Bonds only won the home run records because he used steroids. It wasn't entirely the steroids but I'm sure they certainly didn't hurt.
Contemporary western capitalism would disagree. You can never subsidize technology cleanly, only an organization of people working with that technology. We would usually denounce that as "picking winners" in our system.
Of course, the salaries and working conditions are going up in China while west is eroding worker rights as fast as we can. One the factories will come back here simply because we'll end up cheaper. Don't buy solar made by Xinjiang forced labor, by solar panels made by illegal immigrant prison labor!
----
It might be tempting when one has been asleep at the wheel to chalk up the rise of Chinese carmakers led by BYD to unfair subsidies, especially since leaders in Washington and Brussels have done so. No doubt, China is far from a free, fair and open market. The scale and pervasiveness of corporate subsidies at the federal and local level far exceed what other market-based economies offer.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-10-17/byd-s-...
----
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-11-10/china-s-c...
EVs were subsidised in the west, e.g. in California (#4 "country" by GDP), Norway, and US tax incentives - which have gone away after the Trump anti-renewables Bill of 2025. MRSPs for EVs were slashed after September 2025 due to the loss of this subsidy, and 2 months later Ford cancelled it's electric F-150 program.
Their profit growth has slowed (significant drops in profit YoY). Even revenue has dropped in some quarters.
Investors had very high growth expectations given their past rapid expansion, but investors now see only moderate growth.
Intense competition and pricing pressure.
China EV market is slowing. Overcapacity is emerging over the sector and govt subsidies are softening.
Finally, global macro and sentiment towards Chinese stocks is cautious.
We must live in parallel universes.
From 2009 to 2022, China offered national purchase subsidies for EV buyers. Peak subsidies: ¥40,000–60,000 per vehicle (~$6k–9k). Combined with local subsidies, some buyers paid 30–40% less than market cost. These subsidies were phased down and formally ended in 2022, but the industry had already reached massive scale.
This policy alone created the world’s largest EV market.
Even after direct subsidies ended, China continues to provide: EV purchase tax exemptions (10% tax waived), extended through 2027.
China provides EV manufacturers with: Cheap or free land, Low-interest or state-directed loans, Preferential electricity pricing, Grants for factories, R&D, and tooling, State-backed battery supply chains.
China strategically subsidized battery production: CATL, BYD, and others received R&D grants, Guaranteed demand, Export financing.
China now controls ~75% of global lithium refining and ~80% of battery cell manufacturing.
This dramatically lowers EV costs versus foreign competitors.
No value judgement about subsidizing, but to say it is a myth that China has and continues to subsidize their EV industry is false.
They are also way cheaper and at comparable quality to western cars.
But I (clearly) must be wrong, sorry to disagree with the spokesman of America.
On the contrary, Teslas remarkably high stock price means it's less likely to go up and a big correction is more likely.
The way Toyota and Ford deal with this is reducing investments in EVs while at the same time meeting increased EV demand by heavily leaning on other companies to make them some EVs. Ford is working with VW and Renault in Europe. Toyota is working with big Chinese manufacturers in China. So is Ford. BMW has some success with their recent EV models but it is taking big hits with demand for their overall products in markets like the US and China.
The US is clearly lagging the EU and China when it comes to electrification. It's not at all clear that Tesla is doing much better. Their market share has tanked in markets where EVs do well (China, EU). However, it does have its own tech and still plenty of money. Where other manufacturers are leaning on outside suppliers, Tesla is pushing their own technology hard for just about everything. Including self driving cars and batteries. It's a different strategy at least and one that isn't dependent on the ICE market doing well or Chinese manufacturers doing all the technical heavy lifting.
Tesla's stock price is based on investor expectations on some of those bets working out eventually. Even if a lot of that stuff seems like it is struggling right now, it's too early to write all of it off as failed. The 4680 is still expected to be a big part of the semi's Tesla is expected to finally start mass producing in 2026. Self driving tests are still continuing and might eventually add up to something that works well enough. And it's also a relavant format for LFP based chemistries.
The problem for all of them have right now (especially Tesla) is that the Chinese are moving full steam ahead and are doing really well on technology and growth currently. Including things like self driving and of course batteries. The 4680 seems like it is old news when solid state is happening and new chemistries other than NMC are starting to dominate. And FSD while impressive has plenty of competition from other vendors at this point. Rivian has its own version. So do several Chinese vendors. And of course Waymo is actually moving lots of passengers autonomously at this point.
67% of Americans have said they'll never consider buying a Tesla. 56% cite Musk as either the entire reason or part of the reason. [0]
Tesla IS Elon Musk. Without him they're nothing, with him they can't access 2/3rds of the market. Why would anyone invest in that?
[0] https://www.yahoo.com/news/two-thirds-of-americans-now-say-t...
Musk is a shit human, but to an investor, everything he touches turns to gold. Whether his companies make anything useful doesn't matter, what matters is that the stock price in his companies goes up, so people give him more money. This works until it doesn't.
* don't believe the 67% will follow through with that after experiencing FSD
* don't need 67% of Americans to purchase the car. Robotaxi use is plenty.
* look beyond the American market and its pathetic 5% EV share.
Thanks for explaining the other side of it.
I’ve tried v13 few weeks ago, knowing it works so well. Still got shocked how good it is.
They’ll have to drop the price of it tho, but even then 10M cars * $100 per month is $12b of revenue per year.
I'm fairly certain every auto manufacturer and many non-auto manufacturers are working on it. I doubt they'll be able to patent anything truly important to the process, since others beat them to the market with most of it. Or am I missing something essential?
It's not. Waymo could license a version of its stack using the Android model (specifies a minimum sensor suite OEMs have to qualify models on).
It's a race between how fast Waymo's COGS can decline and how fast Tesla's FSD can achieve actual self-driving. At this moment, given all the evidence available, my inclination is that Waymo is in a better spot.
It’s a bit of a bet. It feels like Tesla is real close, and if they get there, Waymo has no way to compete with Tesla’s manufacturing prowess and vertical integration.
I feel like people will be willing to wait until next year for the Alphabet or Mercedes version, but maybe I'm overestimating the average person's attention span or underestimating how far behind the competition is.
[0] https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-new-yorker-documentary...
I can say though that when my brother bought his first Tesla he paid thousands of dollars for FSD, which was supposed to be released "any day now." It's been many years and as far as I can tell it's still not REALLY here (in the sense that most people would mean it).
I know that the plural of anecdote is not data, but... The Tesla that he bought originally all those years ago is actually gone now. He had one of the earlier versions of FSD enabled and passed out behind the wheel. Tesla, in their infinite wisdom, decided that if you let go of the wheel for too long they should just completely disable the self driving (at least in that version). So naturally when the driver became incapacitated it just disengaged self driving completely and let the vehicle drive straight into a tree as "punishment" for daring to let go of the wheel for too long. Nobody was hurt, but the vehicle was totaled. It could have been much worse though.
It's such an obvious design flaw. "Driverless 2000 pound missile hurtling down the highway at 55 mpg" is the one failure mode you would think they'd avoid at all costs, rather than using it as the safety fallback. When people talk about how great Tesla engineering is I just kind of shrug.
When you say that it makes me wonder, because the tree was way off on the side of the road with narrow but deep ditch between the road and the tree. It drove through/over the ditch to hit the tree.
I wonder if "pulling over" is exactly what it was trying to do. Maybe it just missed that there was no place to pull over TO because it was foggy. So it drove straight into the ditch then bounced out of it into a tree on the other side of the ditch.
Either way, it's a second hand story with a sample size of 1. Doesn't prove anything, but it was enough to make me pretty nervous about FSD because the one sample happened to be close to me. I recognize that it's valueless to you or anyone else.
Then why are Tesla's sales down globally?
You're not in a position to makes those claims. People think that if it works for them, it's great, which is nonsense of course.
So these people are no longer shorting. Sane long-only people, likewise have been out for a long time. You're left with a clique of people who won't sell regardless, and when Elon promises to make ice cream with robotaxies, they'll buy a bit more stock.
When only irrational people trade something, the price and market for it are irrational too.
Musk can move money around SpaceX/Tesla/XAI/whatever the next story to investors is to prop up valuations and share prices, but can he win against China's clean tech export machine? Long term, I think not (China is a third of global manufacturing capacity as of this comment, and the world is their TAM). So he'll do the tech bro thing, giving talks, going to demo days, spending his wealth on pet projects, etc, while innovators innovate and point the firehose of these products at the world. Are you going to talk people out of his religion? Unlikely. The faithful will remain so, because that's how the human brain sometimes operates.
Ember Energy: China Cleantech Exports Data Explorer - https://ember-energy.org/data/china-cleantech-exports-data-e... (updated monthly) ("In 2024, China produced around 80% of the world’s solar PV modules and battery cells, and 70% of electric vehicles.")
US warns China overproducing EVs, batteries, semiconductors for global dominance - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41909869 - October 2024
China's Batteries Are Now Cheap Enough to Power Huge Shifts - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40954508 - July 2024
China Already Makes as Many Batteries as the Entire World Wants - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40933773 - July 2024
(as of this comment, ~50% of light vehicle sales in China are NEVs [battery electric of plug in hybrid] while exporting ~6M units/year, more than total annual US light vehicle sales)
It doesn't mean that Tesla stock won't crash unless it actually delivers a Holy Grail. Which is supremely unlikely
Just because stock is trading on memes, doesn't mean it can't keep doing so well past your solvency to short it...
> "Short it then"
I can smell your personal finance through the screen.
The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent.
Meaning you also need to get the timing just right otherwise you'll lose big, even if Tesla crashes and burns to zero just after.
Imagine an investor's experience with TSLA. From the beginning, they're flooded with news reports about 'fundamentals' this, 'fundamentals' that, about how Tesla would imminently collapse, how it's a scam, yada yada. Said investors _constantly_ see themselves being right and those skeptics wrong. Tesla is in fact disrupting an industry. They really are just continuing to scale. Marginal profitability keeps going up. Their cars keep getting better. FSD keeps getting better. The competition that people kept pointing at kept failing to materialize. None of this seems to change the skeptics' byline.
Tesla is actually in a materially worse position than it was a few years ago, by many metrics, but the stock price isn't set by 'fundamentals', it's set by the people setting demand for the stock. With TSLA, this is disproportionately going to be people who have learned to and gotten rich from ignoring the people loudly telling them why investing in Tesla is a bad idea.
A market will correct eventually, but corrections either require people to change their minds or run out of capital. Neither has happened yet, so the market can't correct.
Our so-called "gdp" is mostly rent and legal ponzi schemes
It's why the entire S&P 500 teeters on the back of 7 companies without any presently viable paths to profitability that would justify the current valuations.
It's why repeatedly lying for a decade+ made Elon so rich even though the business output and fundamentals never really matched the valuation.
Still doesn't - this valuation is mostly vestigial beliefs that AI would eliminate an entire workforce ("history often rhymes") of drivers and replace car ownership with subscription.
The majority of the performance in the market has little to do with actual material value being produced and everything to do with how much rent finance bros think they can extract from the stock.
SpaceX Buys over 1000 Cybertrucks - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46405984 - December 2025
Last week: Elon Musk's SpaceX bought tens of millions worth of Cybertrucks Tesla can't sell - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46317462 - December 2025 (6 comments)
Elon Musk's SpaceX and XAI Are Buying Tesla's Unsold Cybertrucks - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45572152 - October 2025 (8 comments)
Tesla's European Sales Plunge - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46391352 - December 2025 (3 comments)
Tesla US sales drop to nearly 4-year low in November - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46248803 - December 2025 (60 comments)
Tesla looks to reset strategy amid sluggish India sales - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46084554 - November 2025 (2 comments)
Tesla's European sales tumble nearly 50% in October - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46063634 - November 2025 (57 comments)
Tesla sees worst sales performance in China in years - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45881302 - November 2025 (1 comment)
BYD Pulls Ahead of Tesla in UK, Closes Sales Gap in Germany - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45859618 - November 2025 (35 comments)
Tesla's German car sales more than halve in October as wider EV sales jump - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45827314 - November 2025 (135 comments)
[Flagged] Tesla sales in Germany have cratered from last year, data shows - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45826384 - November 2025 (28 comments)
Study: The Musk Partisan Effect on Tesla Sales - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45825382 - November 2025 (2 comments) ("Without the Musk partisan effect, Tesla sales between October 2022 and April 2025 would have been 67-83% higher, equivalent to 1-1.26 million more vehicles. Musk’s partisan activities also increased the sales of other automakers' electric and hybrid vehicles 17-22% because of substitution, and undermined California’s progress in meeting its zero-emissions vehicle target.")
Tesla Cybertruck sales are flatlining - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45573985 - October 2025 (17 comments)
Tesla Pivots to Robots as Investors Question Sales and Soaring Valuation - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45228566 - September 2025 (3 comments)
[1] https://www.thebignewsletter.com/
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=thebignewsletter.com
I don’t even know what to call the kind of system we have.
> BYD announced in 2022 its plans to launch a fleet of car carriers to build what it calls a “maritime bridge” to support its global sales growth and supply chain. The company said it would invest about $687 million to develop a fleet of eight car carriers. The first of the vessels, BYD Explorer No. 1 was delivered in January 2024 followed by BYD Changzhou in December 2024, and BYD Hefei, which was the company’s first owned PCTC. Each of the first three vessels has a capacity of 7,000 units. [My note: current BYD vertical integration marine fleet capacity is ~30k units when including the Shenzhen vessel mentioned above, but does not include capacity through third party charters]
[1] China EV Exports Worldwide Rise 87% Year over Year to 199,836 in November [2025] - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-29/china-ev-... | https://archive.today/Q80Zs - December 29, 2025
[2] Chinese EV Manufacturer BYD Takes Delivery of [World's] Largest Capacity Car Carrier - https://maritime-executive.com/article/chinese-ev-manufactur... - April 24th, 2025
(think in systems; US light vehicle TAM is ~18M units/year, global TAM is ~90M units/year; Tesla US sales will finalize at ~600k units for 2025)
https://fortune.com/2025/03/20/howard-lutnick-pumps-tesla-st...
“If you want to learn something on this show tonight, buy Tesla,” Lutnick told Fox News host Jesse Watters.
In this economy we have a billionaire clan selling hot air and backing each other up. The main "achievements" of this administration are in pumping Bitcoin, "AI", cannabis sales and and online gambling.
Two things can happen:
The dream is a bust, and Tesla is worthless.
Or the dream pans out, and almost all other car companies are worth a lot less.
Unless you absolutely want to believe that either self driving is impossible, or Tesla is uniquely unable to achieve it, the valuation is not entirely unwarranted.
Put shortly, Tesla is not a car company, it's a bet on self-driving cars.
They abandoned the hardware most promising to help enable self-driving.
Tesla is not the only company to achieve self-driving, and all companies that achieve it share the market with them.
(Or the fourth option, it will take decades for self-driving to take even a significant market of "driving" as humans continue to want to own and drive cars rather than short-term rentals.)
The real question is if Tesla is uniquely ABLE to achieve it, above others in the market... including new startups or tech/auto-maker partnerships which may yet form.
Tesla has some supply chain innovation, but none of what they do can't be replicated... and Musk's slavish commitment to video as opposed to LIDAR is hobbling them.
So something isn't being priced correctly.
It omits a lot of other scenarios that increase the actual risk of betting on Tesla...
Self-driving becomes a commodity and so there's no unique Tesla win.
Self-driving becomes something only Tesla controls but (in the fleet/rental model) doesn't bring back returns to justify this investment because of extremely high capital, maintenance, regulatory, or other costs.
Self-driving becomes something only Tesla controls but (in the personal-owner model) doesn't bring back returns to justify this investment because it doesn't motivate the entire world to splash out on new vehicles overnight and also doesn't override other existing biases/preferences.
Self-driving is won by someone else (maybe someone with less religious views about Lidar, say) and Tesla no longer can even sell that promise.
Those are just the ones that occur to me in a few minutes!