From Jack Rickard, former Tesla critic:http://evtv.me/2019/08/the-tesla-conspiracy-or-am-i-a-dead-whistleblower/
Good article. Well worth the read. Thanks for sharing.
I remember when it was quietly announced that Telsa was selling hundreds of million of dollars in carbon credits to other car companies. That's when I knew Tesla was going to be okay and it was the other car companies that were in trouble. These other car companies were actually paying Telsa so they could fall farther behind the curve rather than invest the money in R&D.
What does this have to do with dead babies, I am lost here?
@BH - Good find and well written. I've also always thought the oil industry is behind the shorters, and Jack's analysis that massive shorting losses on Tesla are in the noise compared with the profits the oil industry make. Continued EV FUD and shorters help to slow EV adoption which is well worth it to oil interests. Sad we allow it and the SEC completely ignores this kind of stock manipulation.
Excellent link. Thanks.
Fantastic article. Thanks for sharing.
I hope that the larriies, curlies, and moes on this forum actually read this carefully to truly understand what is happening so that they can realize the reality of what Tesla has been up against all this time.
"hyperbole" - extravagant exaggeration
A very entertaining read. Thanks for sharing.
It appears the shorters even short at the low point to exaggerate a drop in an attempt to get some longs to sell and it seems to work. On one website they discuss Whack the Mole shorting anytime the stock rises too far and usually some BS article comes out in the media(coordinated with shorting and even FUD on the forums) to discourage buyers . Jack makes some very good points and has experience in the market so his take is right on. Too bad RICO laws don't apply or maybe they do but the SEC seems blind to long abuse by the shorters esp. attempting to limit Elon on tweets
@Mike83: I agree with your comment. Especially with regards to the triumvirate around here: F***, r***, and h***; they do appear to coordinate with the stock market movements and FUD.
Might be why there's reports of Tesla involvement in these Fora.
And, M8B: are you OK? Last couple of posts I've seen from you today seem rather disconnected, unusual for you.
@Tronguy I am fine in my own mind : ). The article, indeed, is a great read and I had to look up a few words (always fun to learn new words). The article illustrates beautifully how much effort there is to try and turn people away from Tesla and the fear generated by large interests. I have always maintained Tesla never had a money problem and am happy to see someone articulate the details. Excellent perspective by someone who has essentially given trying to "compete" and step aside encourage the success of Tesla. Very refreshing indeed.
&M8B: No problem, it was the incongruity of the "Dead babies" that threw me.
There were some interesting, perhaps valid points made, but all credence is thrown out when it just gets so stupidly exaggerated:
And they appear to my biased eye to already own ALL of it. 2.3 Trillion dollar market.
Tesla building 78,000,000 annually.
GM, VW, Daimler gone in the very near future.
In the future ALL automobiles will be Teslas.
So much the same comic relief as reading here.
@M8B: Good enough, went right over my head :). And, right on schedule, here's Howard: Good call.
Funny thing is the article does its own discrediting. All I did was read it and post a few of the more outlandish comments. Don't worry I understand why you guys walk right off the plank each and every time then start yelling when someone throws the rope out.
talk about mixed metaphors.
The article takes comments so you are free to post any intelligent debate counterpoints to the article.
However I can guarantee that you wont because all you have is not air and naiveté with zero support to stand on for any points you have.
Well done yet again showing your lack of understanding. I'll happily wait to be proven wrong.
calvin940, the comments are so ridiculous there is no common sense defense/debate and you all know it. Let's take one:
Tesla will never own ALL of the 2.3 Trillion dollar market. This is just so stupid. Period
Why don't you defend this statement? Please provide facts!!
When the biggies are reacting out of fear the term "owned" is spot on.
That's what I thought. Deflecting is all you know.
@howard | August 11, 2019
calvin940, the comments are so ridiculous there is no common sense defense/debate
Gotcha. As I suspected you will not and cannot post to that article an intelligent debate rebuttal.
So much for one of the 3 stooges being able to actually debate someones perspective with data.
Tesla is so far ahead and competitors are still trying to determine if they will even proceed with an EV future.
calvin940, If you actually believe that Tesla will own ALL of it. 2.3 Trillion dollar market what could I say that would make any difference. I only ask because it so absurd a statement that it defies any logic at all. Of course, Tesla is never going to be the sole vehicle supplier to a worldwide market of 2.3 Trillion dollars. Do you not see how absurd that is? Really?
This is the biggest problem with this forum. The blind ardent Tesla fanatics can't even acknowledge when a statement is so far removed from even the remotest possibility of reality. It will never ever happen.
I am beyond amazed at your position but not surprised. Keep making all the fun you want of me because I am not the laughable one.
no one, including jack rickard, thinks tesla will manufacture every automobile on earth.
@howard What part of "appear to my biased eye...." did you not understand? A statement like that is intentionally hyperbolic, self defaming (the author calls himself a liar at least twice), and meant to invoke a laugh but also give the reader pause to reflect what Tesla has actually accomplished. Not surprising you would look for flaws in optimistic forward thinking commentary. Such a sour outlook pessimistic outlook you have on everything Tesla.
I'm a big fan of Jack Rickard. Love his videos (only watchable at X2 speed).
I tend to agree overall with his blog article. Tesla is in much better shape than some would have you believe.
But I also had to pause at some of his hyperbole. The problem with reading vs watching him is you can't tell if he's really serious, or going overboard to make a point. In the end, it's all opinion. I can agree with most of what he wrote without blindly accepting all of it.
Howard, you’re reading that piece much too literally and as a result, missing the forest for the trees. But why am I wasting my time trying to have a ration conversation with someone on here that has ulterior motives? Look who’s the fool now...
Lol talk about deflecting. I knew that you just can't put your money where your mouth is. We all knew that anyhow really but it really shows.
casun | August 11, 2019
He either didn't understand what the author was getting at or he simply is deflecting as I stated above. Either way, he has no actual debate worthy position with the author.
Look folks - the points Howard argues about are NOT the MAIN POINTS of the Article. Getting back to the main point - that there is a very plausible case to be made the oil companies are manipulating the stock price and that the SEC is probably not doing it's job. This is worth further investigation because if stock manipulation can be proved or it can be proved the SEC is corrupt, then corrective action can be taken, and this would help Tesla's mission to hasten the adoption of clean transport. So, i have sent the article to my member of Congress asking his staff to look into this and see what they can do. And, that as a concerned citizen i will do what i can to help them sort things out. If anyone lives in Mass, i would request they email it to Sen Warren.
It only gets better. It is acknowledged that my statements above were correct, casun, Magic 8 Ball, cascadiadesign, 82bert and yet I am still being asked to debate the validity of them calvin940.
calvin940 "actual debate worthy position with the author" what debate is required?
Never ceases to amaze and entertain me.
@howard No one has acknowledged your interpretation of the article is correct. You simply do not comprehend the obvious.
M8B, I know all too well.
Cherry picking from an article that has much self deprecating humor to create an agenda of who knows what your actual agenda is makes it clear you are unable to comprehend language and meaning.
Just being fair with the article. Sorry, it offends.
No you are cherry picking for you agenda of dourness. The article had much self deprecating humor including the author pointing out his bias. You are cherry picking statements to fit your narrative a narrative that no one else has except for you.
I don't understand. It seems to me Jacks bold prediction has at least the potential to come true. If the other car companies don't build a competitive product.
Legacy car makers have had ample time to compete yet for whatever reason they refuse.
Texaco &/or GM cannot buy up the patents & shelve them. Nobody can. The cat is out of the bag. Why would you give $50k-$100k to BMW, Mercedes, VW or any other car maker? When you can receive better value on your dollar from purchasing a Tesla!?!
Jack has a bold prediction, sure, but I don't think it's 100% impossible for it to come true, as Howard believes.
As I said before, Howard cannot debate the article with any data of his own so chooses to pick the only fantastical possible outcome point in the article to attempt to negate his need to debate the issue.
When push comes to shove, Howard runs away. This isn't a surprise to anyone here.
Thankyou @Bighorn for the link. Good read, sobering conclusion.
Please don’t take a balloon from the clown.
Meanwhile, the closest competitor to Tesla will be the Taycan, which is priced like a P100D but can’t even compete with a P3D on price.
If they sell 500/month I’ll be surprised.
So I guess Tesla won’t sell 100% for now.
That said, I don’t think VW will survive.
But there will definitely be Chinese EV companies even when the OG OEMs are bankrupt.
GM - bk
Ford - bk
VW - see above
It might be easier to just list an ICE company that you think might survive.
Anyone want to stand behind a single OEM that they think is likely to survive?
Great article. Thanks again bighorn.
Thanks Bighorn! I love reading Jack's articles. They are very well written and make me realize how little I really know! :-) I'd love to send this to a coworker of mine who adamantly told me back in March that Tesla was going to close its doors in April due to bankruptcy! But doing that may further damage the working relationship! haha Anyway, thanks again for sharing.
Jack Rickard is... The MAN.
Excellent article, with marvelously insightful observations. And though what he writes may seem 'hyperbolic' from a certain point of view, it is nevertheless correct on all points. So many traditional legacy ICE automobile manufacturers have spent so many decades employing the deny, delay, defer strategy regarding the full implementation of safety, fuel economy, and emissions technology that they invariably began to believe their own [BOLSHEVIK]. It will be sad to see GM, VW, Toyota, Daimler, et al join AMC, Hudson, Kaiser, Studebaker, and Tucker in the annals of automotive history, but at this point it seems inevitable.
I kind of liked Jack's comments that Tesla had the legacy car manufacturers "surrounded"; just like the legacy car companies seem to think that they've got Tesla surrounded.
The obvious public attack points seem to be in Tesla's favor: It's an American company working on American soil, and the most populous state in the union, at that. It's for that reason that $RANDOM_POLITICIANS in congress have a problem trying to kill of Tesla: They've got the congressional delegation from California to contend with. (This works for SpaceX, too, which is the probable reason that SpaceX is based out of LA.) So, the usual method of attempting to legislate Tesla/SpaceX out of existence seems to be denied.
Using the SEC seems to be working, somewhat. And it's sadly typical for the SEC: See Bernie Madoff, about whom the SEC got lots and lots of warnings, but declined to investigate. Regulatory capture, indeed. But even if the SEC clown car is racing around, the circus is still running, and, as Jack noted, funding for Tesla's not really in doubt.
Finally: During the last public meeting, Elon and his management team were asked about, "Why does negative news about Tesla get a police escort to the large news organizations, but positive news shows up late, if it all? And what can be done about this?"
I distinctly remember Elon looking at his other team members, shrugging, and then making a nebulous, "Well, there's not much we can do about it" comment back to the questioner.
I strongly suspect that Elon and company know very well that other major parties are trying to rig things against them. And I'm afraid it's more than that: Elon has stated multiple times that there are clear cases of sabotage going on in the factories.
On the one hand: Unions have repetitively attempted to unionize Tesla and, well, unions have a long history of performing sabotage and making misleading statements. (Note: I am, personally, not anti-union; unions have done done good things in this country. They also have done some bad things by promoting the interests of the union hierarchy over that of the union members.)
But there may also be sabotage by agents from the established car companies or big oil. We don't know: We're on the outside. But the public outcry and legal lawsuits that would follow by a no-kidding revelation of such antics would be something to behold.
Jack Rickard is a bit of a nut quoting from the St. James English translation of the New Testament to justify 19th capitalism in the 21st century, against pollution controls and EV tax subsidy in one ahem...manifesto and then claiming a conspiracy against EVs in the next.
He leads off with his conspiracy theory on stocks with "It is refreshing and encouraging that in a world where all our long trusted television news shows, and institutions such as the Department of Justice, the State Department, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have been exposed as deeply corrupt rotten to the core partisan organizations infested with dishonesty and corruption".
He seems pretty much into the alt right "deep state" wacky stuff from the get go.
Might be a good electrical engineer but clearly in the deep end and over his head in the conspiracy theory pool.
Yes. Denounce Jack for pointing out the actual existence of bought and paid for institutions. /s
Then dismiss the depravity and legality of a paid for disinformation campaign and short-attacks.
To top it off, pretend that his bottom line isnt that Tesla has already won because of the half-baked and lackluster efforts of OEMs.
Who wants to buy a jaguar? Wants to buy a leaf? Who wants to buy the Kona aura Bault?
Hardly anyone. Less than 1%.
But owners are radioactive Tesla radiators. And we give rides and scare granny with silent ninja-like acceleration. We sold cars before a referral program.
We don’t advertise and likely never will. We have Superchargers and you have adapters and range anxiety and 2-stall 50kW “fast chargers”.
Like I always said, buying a few cars and paying people to disparage them is no money at all to the interests involved. Anyone vocally downplaying the effect negative sentiments on this forum can have to peoples attitudes about buying a Tesla is either naïve or actively participating.
I appear to have touched a nerve with a couple individuals over the subject of FUD. Very interesting.
More that Jack Rickard railing against EV tax credits based on his reading of King James English Translation of New Testament makes for an outlandish source. Some of Rickard's conclusions based on his biblical theory of history seem as outlandish as his source.
ha ha ha.. as I have suggested to the other Stooge, by all means comment on the article to the author to provide your intelligent debate rebuttal points. I dare you.
Notice that they come out swinging big. Totally overplaying their role. What is it about the article that makes them so defensive. Were they attacked? did the article call them out by name? They certainly behave like it.