ZingPowZing v bowlhead challenge

AnotherJoe

Linton wrote: »

Thanks, I cant now find where my figure came from. However the point still remains that Tesla is way over-priced..

Watch this (only 3 minutes) . https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/tesla-tsla-1-trillion-revenue-ron-baron-battery-day?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Linton wrote: »

At the moment hybrids can be seen as the most practical option for many customers, look at the sales figures.

If you mean Toyotas "self charging" hybrid nonsense that is burning fuel and forcing everyone to breathe in carcinogens.

If you mean ones that you can plug in, research shows that in general most people fall back to their old petrol ways and dont plug in despite fuel savings. Maybe this is why the government is looking to ban not just ICE cars but also ICE hybrids.

Linton wrote: »

You dont think anyone else can make batteries were that to make economic sense? Panasonic are moving away from Tesla
not any more https://www.moneyweb.co.za/news/companies-and-deals/tesla-up-20-after-panasonic-posts-1st-quarterly-profit-at-battery-business/

and working with Toyota, see https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-panasonic-results/tesla-up-20-after-panasonic-posts-first-quarterly-profit-at-battery-business-idUKKBN1ZX0MO.


But just like Tesla is about much more than cars, a globally successful and profitable car manufacturer is about much more than clever technology. Technology is the easy part.

That is not working out to be the case with ICE manufacturers making EVs so far.

I think it much more easy for a company with the ability to design, manufacture, sell and provide aftercare for vehicles across the world at a profit to acquire technology than one with technology to acquire the ability to do these far important tasks for the business to make money.

Legacy vendors have a difficult chasm to jump. They have to invest in whole new areas about which they know very little (Toyota being perhaps the only exception) whilst their ICE business evaporates underneath them (its already started) starving them of the capital to design and build new EVs, and each good EV they produce Osbornes their existing products. Building an EV is about far more than ripping out a petrol engine and fuel tank and swapping it for batteries. See what Diess said last week in Davos. He has said this is an existential crisis for legacy car makers.

Of course in 10 years time Tesla could be the largest and most profitable business in its sector, but this is far from certain. My reason for not wanting any significant investment in Tesla is that its shares are priced as if it were practically guaranteed. Look at the history of technology, the early pioneers rarely enjoyed long term success.

So far even at these levels they are a fair way off what is possible.

Well I guess Tesla isnt actually an early pioneer what with GM in the 1990s, and electric cars being invented a hundred years before that !

woolly_wombat

Linton wrote: »

At the moment hybrids can be seen as the most practical option for many customers, look at the sales figures. Stubborn insistence at making a profit is something investors should welcome. I have little doubt that Toyota and many of the other global manufacturers will have full EVs comparable with, or better than, Tesla's by the time they become competitive in the mass market against other options.

Toyota are also ahead of the game in hydrogen car production.

Username999

Toyota are also ahead of the game in hydrogen car production.

"Hydrogen is Silly"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFPnT-DCBVs

Price per KM:
Hyrogen = 17.7 cents
Battery = 2.4 cents

Gadfium

woolly_wombat wrote: »

Toyota are also ahead of the game in hydrogen car production.

Hydrogen is dead-end technology as a power source for cars. There's a raft of reasons why it is unsuitable and only one why it is suitable (fast refuelling).

beamyup

I said what about a simple low cost e.g. LS100....

beamyup wrote: »

can we also track some kind of more "normal" benchmark aligned fund, and if that wins then you both pay £100 to charity?
e.g. LS100

cfw1994 wrote: »

Well, just for reference it looks like that is £224.57.....

An interesting thread, for sure. 1 year is a short time for this kind of thing, of course, no point having is as sticky....but bookmarked!

As of today LS100 is 240.91 which is up 7.3% approx.

[Deleted User]

beamyup wrote: »

.
As of today LS100 is 240.91 which is up 7.3% approx.

Not too bad.

[Deleted User]

This is a particularly meaningless “competition” between an active investment strategy and an outright bet over a short period of time.

AnotherJoe

woolly_wombat wrote: »

Toyota are also ahead of the game in hydrogen car production.

LOL. Thats like being ahead of the game in making buggy whips in 1910.

woolly_wombat

Lokolo wrote: »

It's a fashion stock. There are many fanboys and with the ease of purchasing shares now people will buy them because they are the in thing. Just look at bitcoin. There's no fundamental behind bitcoin yet look at the price and the history.

But "this time is different".

🍿

Ceme3000

Looking forward to the next update given the excitement currently in the markets.