zlacker

[return to "Twitter applies 7-day suspension to half a dozen journalists"]
1. afavou+n6[view] [source] 2022-12-16 02:16:28
>>prawn+(OP)
So this is how Twitter goes out: not with a bang but with a seemingly endless stream of stories about the little ways Elon is ruining the service each day.

Just staggers me that Elon could have just… not done any of this. And yet here we are. He’s had to sell billions in Tesla stock to finance this ongoing mayhem, this is surely going to be up there as one of the greatest examples of hubris in modern business.

◧◩
2. abraae+U7[view] [source] 2022-12-16 02:25:14
>>afavou+n6
Elon's slide into max doucheness is a real shame. I used to tell my kids he was one of the most admirable people around for jump starting the EV industry (yes, I know he didn't do it all).

Then came the pedo guy comments. I cut him slack, he must be tired/strung out, he'll apologise. He never did.

Now he's become like a meme of himself, or perhaps just himself as he always was but now right out there, and it's not good to see.

◧◩◪
3. Daniel+Kd[view] [source] 2022-12-16 02:56:48
>>abraae+U7
Tinfoil hat on: the dude is a foreign asset and now has to pay dividends.

Tinfoil hat off: all the admiration and money he received turned him into whatever it is that we are seeing today.

◧◩◪◨
4. mushbi+Hh[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:17:04
>>Daniel+Kd
Nearly all of the value of his companies comes form government grants and loans. He also has large security state contracts with SpaceX and Starlink. He's a US govt asset, which is worse, imo.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. fastba+oj[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:25:23
>>mushbi+Hh
Umm, pretty sure most of the value of Tesla (his main source of wealth) comes from all their cars, tech, and manufacturing capacity.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. scubbo+Um[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:44:50
>>fastba+oj
I don't have a recent article backing this up, but this has been false as recently as last year: https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-cars/a36266393/tesla-mad...

I guess a definition of "value" as "the intangibles that allow it to keep functioning" would make your statement correct, but a definition that relies on "how it generates revenue" would probably not.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. fastba+A11[view] [source] 2022-12-16 08:49:22
>>scubbo+Um
5% of Tesla 2021 Q1 revenue was generated from selling emission credits, 1% from trading Bitcoin, for a total of 6% generated from not selling cars / energy products / etc.

So yes, the vast majority of revenue generators (and therefore value generators) for Tesla (at least in Q1 2021, as per the article you linked) are the things I listed in my first comment.

You were seemingly thinking about what was generating profit, which is generally not how value is calculated, otherwise my (profitable) two-man company would be more valuable than Twitter. But given that you explicitly said "how it generates revenue" at the end of your comment I'm actually a bit confused as to your position.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. scubbo+Ond[view] [source] 2022-12-20 00:22:32
>>fastba+A11
> Emissions credits accounted for $518 million in revenue in a quarter that saw a pretax income of $533 million and a net income of $438 million on a GAAP basis. Needless to say, the credits account for almost the entirety of Tesla's profit for this quarter

518/533 ~= 97%, not 5%. I must be misunderstanding something somewhere. Explicitly, I'm saying that (per my understanding of that article) Tesla derived more income from selling emissions credits than from selling cars in that particular quarter (and, I think it's reasonable to assume, other quarters, given how overwhelmingly that seems to be their business model).

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. fastba+N5o[view] [source] 2022-12-23 00:47:17
>>scubbo+Ond
You are conflating "net income" (profit) with revenue. I do not disagree that the vast majority of profit was generated by selling credits, but revenue is how most people measure value for corps (this is how Amazon could be an amazingly valuable company while not turning a profit for years). Re-read the last para in my other comment for another example of why you don't use profit to benchmark "value".

Even the emission credits being "pure profit" is misleading, given that the only reason Tesla can sell those is because of the cars/batteries/etc they are producing, so realistically the cost of producing those things should be deducted against the revenue generated by selling the credits.

[go to top]