I think the lesson here is not to place financial bets based purely on idealogy. Without huge government subsidies, Musk would be bankrupt. You'd have to be blind not to see the shell game that keeps him afloat.
People keep forgetting that the vast majority of billionnaire founders, including Musk, are good at finance. Not at anything else.
And Musk and Bezos' specialities are in the field of taking government subsidies. NOT making cars. NOT rockets. NOT delivery. NOT ...
So if you believe in them, you can bet money that they'll be able to attract more subsidies in the future. But buying a car from them is a bet that they produce good cars ... and it's just moronic.
Ecommerce itself involved exploiting government regulations around sales taxes. Amazon didn't charge sales tax for over a decade because it had no physical location outside of WA. That alone gave it a massive price advantage over every other retailer. When the laws finally caught up, many competitors had already closed down, the biggest of them being Circuit City and Borders.
Let's think for one second. If Enron Musk has these really profitable cars, wouldn't he keep them for himself instead of selling them away under what they're worth?
Oh right he's not motivated by money he just wants to make the world better, right.
> Oh right he's not motivated by money he just wants to make the world better, right.
No. The reason is the same as why his Optimus robots will take over all menial jobs from us, work hard to earn money for us, eliminate poverty forever and leave us to do whatever we want.
Anyone who believes blindly musk promises is a moron
Those were the good years, when money was free and any idea could get funded.
> For investors and fleet operators, though, the episode is a stark lesson in not equating corporate hype with economic fundamentals.
If further evidence is required that truths need relearning daily!
The Pied Piper's tune leads you to the river to drown. If you want to survive you need to plug your ears and stay close to him.
I think the lesson here is not to place financial bets based purely on idealogy. Without huge government subsidies, Musk would be bankrupt. You'd have to be blind not to see the shell game that keeps him afloat.
People keep forgetting that the vast majority of billionnaire founders, including Musk, are good at finance. Not at anything else.
And Musk and Bezos' specialities are in the field of taking government subsidies. NOT making cars. NOT rockets. NOT delivery. NOT ...
So if you believe in them, you can bet money that they'll be able to attract more subsidies in the future. But buying a car from them is a bet that they produce good cars ... and it's just moronic.
The idea that Bezos' specialty is taking government subsidies and not ecommerce is hogwash..
Ecommerce itself involved exploiting government regulations around sales taxes. Amazon didn't charge sales tax for over a decade because it had no physical location outside of WA. That alone gave it a massive price advantage over every other retailer. When the laws finally caught up, many competitors had already closed down, the biggest of them being Circuit City and Borders.
Apparently 4.7 billion worth. https://www.vice.com/en/article/amazon-has-received-at-least...
It's just hard to believe that any company would be in the business of selling turnkey money printing machines, at scale.
Let's think for one second. If Enron Musk has these really profitable cars, wouldn't he keep them for himself instead of selling them away under what they're worth?
Oh right he's not motivated by money he just wants to make the world better, right.
> Oh right he's not motivated by money he just wants to make the world better, right.
No. The reason is the same as why his Optimus robots will take over all menial jobs from us, work hard to earn money for us, eliminate poverty forever and leave us to do whatever we want.