Electric cars

silverwhistle

Car_54 wrote: »

Who said “Two nations divided by a common language”?

Well, I don't think even US English is his first language..
Possibly somebody building up their post count...

Martyn1981

AdrianC wrote: »

I don't think he's taking the hint - he refused the SEC's settlement offer...


https://gizmodo.com/report-elon-musk-rejected-sec-settlement-at-last-minut-1829387515

And now accepted the same offer. Silly Billy. Still, losing the job of Chairman for 3yrs might (just a little bit) rein in some of his more extreme tweets.

Martyn1981

Article on Nissan Leaf batts and their woes. Interesting jump in battery capacity when the Nissan update is applied to correct a bug though, so batts displaying say a 70% state of health jump to about 87% as an example. Bit of a muck up on that front then, but some good news for owners in shock at the rapid performance drop reported by their cars.

Nissan’s Long Strange Trip With LEAF Batteries

To say that the Nissan response has been lackluster is way too friendly. It has taken three years for Nissan to acknowledge that the problem existed and come with an explanation and solution. The explanation is that the software computing the charge of the battery contained a bug, reporting less capacity than there really was (resulting in less range) and reporting a depleted battery before it was empty.

Nissan does not have over-the-air updates like Tesla. That means you have to visit a Nissan dealer to get the patch applied. After the software upgrade, the 30kWh battery is as good as its 24kWh sister, as good as you can expect of a battery without a TMS.

The battery capacity is automagically restored to the level it really has and the range calculation is better than it was.

Martyn1981

Looks like the TM3 has risen to 4th place in the US car sales charts. Partly helped by falling car sales and the rise in popularity of SUV's.

Tesla Model 3 = 4th Best Selling Car In USA* (Maybe)


And looking at Inside EV's slightly lower estimate, the TM3 accounted for 2/3rds of BEV sales, and Tesla nearly 9/10ths.

MONTHLY PLUG-IN SALES SCORECARD

Martyn1981

MEPs vote for 40% cut in car emissions by 2030

MEPs have voted for a 40% cut in car emissions by 2030, in a rebuke to more cautious proposals by the European commission that signals tough negotiations with national governments ahead.

Germany has strongly opposed any increase to the 30% cut in CO2 output proposed by the European commission, although countries such as France have yet to reveal their position.

AdrianC

Oh, Elon, Elon, Elon... Can you really not help yourself by just shutting up?


https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1047943670350020608

Elon_Musk wrote:

Just want to that the Shortseller Enrichment Commission is doing incredible work. And the name change is so on point!

It's almost as if he's channelling Donald Trump...

Martyn1981

AdrianC wrote: »

It's almost as if he's channelling Donald Trump...

My irony meter just exploded!

Anyways, this'll cheer you up, a long list of Tesla failures:

This Is Failure

zeupater

AdrianC wrote: »

Oh, Elon, Elon, Elon... Can you really not help yourself by just shutting up?

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1047943670350020608


It's almost as if he's channelling Donald Trump...

Hi

You must admit that he's got a point though ... not many people or groups are allowed to sell something that they don't own or have supply contract in place for without attracting the attention of relevant authorities!

Considering the issues with banking & investment markets that have been exposed as creating financial system mayhem over the past decade, there's a very strong case for market regulator intervention to prevent the selling of investment assets without prior proof of ownership to prevent market manipulation through short selling, thereby both protecting investors & removing the short-term gambling element, which would offer more stability which is good for business ...

The SEC really need to consider which battles are winnable, and which should be avoided if they want to continue to be taken seriously outside a very confined financial bubble! ...

Musk was probably right to raise the concerns he has about short-selling having a serious impact on his business, and from an investor value position, it's also appropriate for a chairman to do so as the position represents shareholder & other public positions within the organisation .... his methodology may have been a little tangential to the norm, but it certainly hit the mark with a pretty hard punch as opposed to the usual ineffective gesture .... Obviously the SEC disliked the approach therefore a slap on the wrist was taken, but now he's not posting views as chairman or in a way that would directly influence the market for any particular company, therefore it's essentially a 'free speech' story that would likely garner plenty of support from many quarters ....

For anyone else it's be a non-story, for rabid anti-Musk/Tesla/ ... brigade (now joined by short-term market gamblers) it's just something else to whinge and sink their teeth into for a while ...

HTH
Z

AdrianC

No, for any other chair and CEO of a major listed corporation to so blatantly try to manipulate the market would NOT be a "non-issue". And then to extract the urine out of the market regulator...? Within days of (evidently reluctantly) agreeing a settlement with that regulator, but before it's actually implemented...? He is still chair. He will continue to be CEO. And are you really saying that Musk's public comments don't or won't "directly influence the market" for Tesla Inc...

Short-selling might or might not be a practice that he thinks harms the market. That's kinda beside the point. It goes back to the very start of equity markets, and is a globally established practice.

B'sides, in the US, it is illegal to short-sell without a broker instruction ("supply contract") in place, and has been since before the crash.

zeupater

AdrianC wrote: »

No, for any other chair and CEO of a major listed corporation to so blatantly try to manipulate the market would NOT be a "non-issue". And then to extract the urine out of the market regulator...? Within days of (evidently reluctantly) agreeing a settlement with that regulator, but before it's actually implemented...? He is still chair. He will continue to be CEO. And are you really saying that Musk's public comments don't or won't "directly influence the market" for Tesla Inc...

Short-selling might or might not be a practice that he thinks harms the market. That's kinda beside the point. It goes back to the very start of equity markets, and is a globally established practice.

B'sides, in the US, it is illegal to short-sell without a broker instruction ("supply contract") in place, and has been since before the crash.

Hi

As mentioned, it's a freedom of speech issue - short selling in itself may be a long established practice which is vehemently defended by the markets, but that doesn't make the practice immune to criticism - my view, mirroring that of plenty of others, is that it's a short-termism profit related practice and nothing to do with asset investment in an investment market & should therefore be banned ... selling something that you don't own in the basis that if the bet is wrong the asset can be borrowed & later replaced is a form of market manipulation, yet both the short-sellers & SEC don't seem to bother too much about the effects on the businesses that the shares represent as long as there's a profit to be made ...

The issue these days is that trading is electronic & the volumes of such trades are far beyond what was possible in the past, therefore the reason that it 'goes back to the very start of equity markets' becomes irrelevant ... trading isn't conducted on a personal handshake basis & documents are no longer subject to physical international courier-ship between brokers, traders & owners, leaving the need to maintain the practice as being highly questionable ...

I'm pretty sure that any chair of a listed company looking towards raising funds for expansion would have the same views as Musk and be just as miffed with the same people ... the difference is that they would likely be more inclined to 'bite their lip' than someone who is the largest shareholder ... (Reportedly: 33.7million shares with performance related options on 20million more) ...

Long term investors in the company are probably sitting back and enjoying the thought of position traders who are used to manipulating the market for marginal gain having their fingers burned by unforeseen events such as simple tweets ... maybe they'll decide to pick on someone else for a while, in which case Musk would be seen as the 'winner' ...

Anyway, loved the humorous 'This Is Failure' link in the post by Martyn ... it even made me wonder whether the source of much of the humour was to be found within anti-EV, anti-Tesla & anti-Musk posts made by certain individuals in this very thread ... :D:p

HTH
Z