Originally Posted by abrown83
You have to remember that Ford and Chevy are still using parts that they have more or less used since the 60s and 70s.
When you truly make a new vehicle from the ground up you have a huge advantage.
They haven't proven whether or not they can do manufacturing at scale yet though, as they are still losing money on every Model 3 they make (even though they sometimes try to claim otherwise).
excellent points, no argument here.
my background (tech) tends to make me focus on IP oriented equity. perfect example; cmoney didnt make most of his money directly off a product he developed. he made most of his money licensing out his patent. ibm pays microsoft $10 per windows license because it costs them less to do so than to develop a competing product in house. same principle. so to me, i factor in the current negative growth factors (per unit losses) and weigh them against the implied equity from holding a commanding r&d lead over the competition, a lead so generous at this point that it would cost competition probably 100x as much to develop their own proprietary solutions as it would to license existing solutions from tesla.
and the thing is, i dont think there is a way out of that gauntlet for them. ev solutions and autonomous navigation solutions are the golden path. top fund managers seem to be divesting themselves of oil, to me thats a huge tell. like regardless of the politics/science, when people who make money for a living say oil is over, thats actionable intelligence to me.
when japanese industrial scientists say 'we are 6 years away from a competing offering', they arent going to make a competing offering. they are going to license solutions from tesla.
thats my thesis.
thank you for attending my ted talk.
Reply With Quote