I guess when your CEO has a highly publicised pivot to a position that’s the antithesis of your customers views it doesn’t help. What’s that saying — “Go Fash Lose Cash”?
Politics aside, the fact that now a handful of companies offer competitive cars at similar pricepoints, while there has been a general slump in EV demand doesn't help either.
I mean, also, they haven’t had a new car in about 7 years (unless you count the joke truck thing, but c’mon now), and outside the US the competition has really made them largely irrelevant.
While Musk being a loony is certainly making things worse for them, even without that you’d expect them to be in a bad place.
They are considered radioactive by their primary target audience in the US, have been surpassed in various ways outside the US, seem to be focused on a few boondoggles internally rather than fixing what is broken in their core business, and their CEO has been distracted by other ventures.
I expect this decline to continue indefinitely. I also wonder when the stock price will reflect the company's past and projected results.
I think their cars are more and more hostile to the driver, sort of like windows 11. Each car has fewer displays and controls and it makes it harder to be a good driver.
For example, model s had a dashboard. Model 3 comes alone without one, and crams all the status on the left side of a central screen. It had fewer stalks and cheapened less friendly steering wheel controls.
ok, so model S is more expensive and you get more stuff, right? But then the updated model s goes from 4 stalks to zero and gets a smaller central screen.
1. The products are barely competitive, and the design is dated.
2. The Cybertruck is no F-150.
3. The CEO built the brand on a cult of personality, and then went fascist. It's a free country, be an asshole if you want, and pay the price personally, whatever. But don't link your asshole personality to the brand that you and thousands of your employees depend on to make sales.
Tesla should have had a new car model by now. Something comparable to BYD's midrange cars.
Or a useful delivery van. Or a new roadster. Or something.
For some reason, most of the Cybertrucks seem to have disappeared. A year ago, they were common on Silicon Valley roads. Now I see more driverless Waymos mid-peninsula than Cybertrucks.
It's been raining lately; maybe people don't want to take them out.
As for the value being in self-driving, there's no moat there. Ford and Mercedes have SAE level 3 systems about as good as Tesla's. Several Chinese auto companies have systems. Toyota is partnering with Waymo. Level 3 is just another car option.
It's 2026. Where are the Musk-promised Robotaxis? Do they have anything, anywhere, in revenue service with no driver in it? In this area, there is a moat, and Waymo is behind it.
There are at least eighteen companies with demo humanoid robots good enough to have Youtube videos.
Again, Tesla has no moat. As far as I know, there are zero autonomous humanoid robots generating revenue. Autonomous human robots are going to be a thing, but probably about 5-10 years out.
And the door problem. There was no US regulation prohibiting a car door that can't be opened in an emergency because nobody was ever dumb enough to make one. Regulations are written in blood.
Consumer Reports: "On a newer Tesla Model Y, remove the mat from the bottom of the rear door pocket, press the red tab to remove an access door that reveals a mechanical release cable, and pull the cable."
People who claim Ford and Mercedes have systems as good as Tesla haven't personally taken a currently shipping v14 FSD trip and then personally used Ford and Mercedes systems.
I see Cybertrucks many times a day in San Francisco and on the 101. I took a Robotaxi ride in SF last week. It was cheaper than Uber and Waymo but I am hoping they bring back the 2014 price wars of Uber/Lyft.
I think Musk's pay is $1/yr.
Ive owned a Tesla since 2018 and honestly besides my gripes with body damage repairs (specifically dealing with insurance) from 3 separate instances of people hitting me it's been a great car. I definitely wouldn't consider any future car that isn't an EV but I also wouldn't consider a Tesla at this point. My concern is that other car manufacturers would continue to signal that EVs have lost interest from buyers if Tesla went under and I believe that is far from the truth. EVs are very much a luxury item. The fact I haven't had to inconvenience myself even once in seven years going to gas station has been amazing. Electricity pricing is both stable and cheap where I live and so I don't have to even care about fluctuations in gas pricing. I don't have to waste my time getting oil changes either. Owning a traditional car is just a bunch of wasted time.
I have more than a few complaints of current EVs manufacturers outside of Tesla. Every manufacturer has been very slow to adopt NACS. I wouldn't consider a new car without that it and I will absolutely not accept an adapter solution. I don't trust legacy car manufacturers even manufactures like Mercedes that they will keep the car updated and instead use that as a way to push me to purchase a new car. One of the reasons that pushed me to Tesla back in 2018 was they kept their cars updated and provided new features over time. They also had a track record of not changing the looks of their cars that often which I very much prefer. An EV can last significantly longer than ICE vehicles and so you need the ability to not only support the cars for longer through software but also by doing new computer hardware drop in replacements. I want the ability to extend the life of my car not replace it. I have absolutely zero interest in lease deals which every manufacture and dealer push with EVs because I don't drive very far in the city so I keep cars for a long time with low miles. I fundamentally HATE the push from buyers who desire large batteries for range when they don't even use it which has resulted in many of the smaller cars to not be sold here in the US. This is also preventing desired cars from even being made. If Ford would have made the Maverick an EV instead of wasting their time on the F-150 Lightning it would have significantly cost them less to develop and their issue would have been keeping them in stock.
The EV market is absolutely frustrating. Tesla brought these vehicles mainstream and for the most part outside the Cybertruck they have decent products where they have shown willingness to support longterm. Everything else made them undesirable.
Reminder that Tesla is still worth more than ~every other auto manufacturer in the world combined. It is unbelievable just how irrational the market is when dealing with this particular stock.
Resale values are trash, motion sickness is terrible, electrical rates are going up, and it's a pain in the ass to travel long distance and wait to recharge constantly. I think EVs have hit that saturation point where everyone who wanted one has bought one and now some people are going back to other options. Also Elon hasn't exactly remained neutral so that probably makes it even harder since it seems like there is significant overlap between Tesla's potential customer base and his political opposition.
> I think EVs have hit that saturation point where everyone who wanted one has bought one
I don't think so. In my immediate family we've got a combined six cars and one EVs. If we all had to replace our cars today we'd probably be looking at 4/6 EVs. But cars have long lives, and none of our cars are slated for imminent replacement.
They clearly can't compete against BYD and a company that relies on sanctions to survive doesn't seem like it is long for this world never mind the crazy multiples people are willing to pay for Tesla
I do not understand the P/E at all. It feels to me like a screaming red flag. If I'd been in front of this, holding long, I would be walking to other investment now and only looking to buy when the inevitable corrections come. But I don't hold directly and nobody I know who does feels the way i do about the P/E so.. I just don't understand.
Can you think of any non tech business where a P/E like this was not a signal of corporate diseased thinking?
To zoom in on how toxic the brand has become, look at the European market. Sales were down 71% in Sweden and 66% in France for 2025[1], despite ~35% growth in European EV sales. The only "bright spot" was Norway, but that's partly because EVs increased to 96% of sales there (vs ~25% in Europe.)
38 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 54.3 ms ] threadWhile Musk being a loony is certainly making things worse for them, even without that you’d expect them to be in a bad place.
I expect this decline to continue indefinitely. I also wonder when the stock price will reflect the company's past and projected results.
For example, model s had a dashboard. Model 3 comes alone without one, and crams all the status on the left side of a central screen. It had fewer stalks and cheapened less friendly steering wheel controls.
ok, so model S is more expensive and you get more stuff, right? But then the updated model s goes from 4 stalks to zero and gets a smaller central screen.
2. The Cybertruck is no F-150.
3. The CEO built the brand on a cult of personality, and then went fascist. It's a free country, be an asshole if you want, and pay the price personally, whatever. But don't link your asshole personality to the brand that you and thousands of your employees depend on to make sales.
It's just not difficult to understand at all.
Tesla should have had a new car model by now. Something comparable to BYD's midrange cars. Or a useful delivery van. Or a new roadster. Or something.
For some reason, most of the Cybertrucks seem to have disappeared. A year ago, they were common on Silicon Valley roads. Now I see more driverless Waymos mid-peninsula than Cybertrucks. It's been raining lately; maybe people don't want to take them out.
As for the value being in self-driving, there's no moat there. Ford and Mercedes have SAE level 3 systems about as good as Tesla's. Several Chinese auto companies have systems. Toyota is partnering with Waymo. Level 3 is just another car option.
It's 2026. Where are the Musk-promised Robotaxis? Do they have anything, anywhere, in revenue service with no driver in it? In this area, there is a moat, and Waymo is behind it.
There are at least eighteen companies with demo humanoid robots good enough to have Youtube videos. Again, Tesla has no moat. As far as I know, there are zero autonomous humanoid robots generating revenue. Autonomous human robots are going to be a thing, but probably about 5-10 years out.
And the door problem. There was no US regulation prohibiting a car door that can't be opened in an emergency because nobody was ever dumb enough to make one. Regulations are written in blood.
Consumer Reports: "On a newer Tesla Model Y, remove the mat from the bottom of the rear door pocket, press the red tab to remove an access door that reveals a mechanical release cable, and pull the cable."
Musk is getting paid how much for this?
Edit: yeah he has a big stock multiplier factor, but then consider valuation from actual future innovations. Inflated stock price is just that: vapor.
I have more than a few complaints of current EVs manufacturers outside of Tesla. Every manufacturer has been very slow to adopt NACS. I wouldn't consider a new car without that it and I will absolutely not accept an adapter solution. I don't trust legacy car manufacturers even manufactures like Mercedes that they will keep the car updated and instead use that as a way to push me to purchase a new car. One of the reasons that pushed me to Tesla back in 2018 was they kept their cars updated and provided new features over time. They also had a track record of not changing the looks of their cars that often which I very much prefer. An EV can last significantly longer than ICE vehicles and so you need the ability to not only support the cars for longer through software but also by doing new computer hardware drop in replacements. I want the ability to extend the life of my car not replace it. I have absolutely zero interest in lease deals which every manufacture and dealer push with EVs because I don't drive very far in the city so I keep cars for a long time with low miles. I fundamentally HATE the push from buyers who desire large batteries for range when they don't even use it which has resulted in many of the smaller cars to not be sold here in the US. This is also preventing desired cars from even being made. If Ford would have made the Maverick an EV instead of wasting their time on the F-150 Lightning it would have significantly cost them less to develop and their issue would have been keeping them in stock.
The EV market is absolutely frustrating. Tesla brought these vehicles mainstream and for the most part outside the Cybertruck they have decent products where they have shown willingness to support longterm. Everything else made them undesirable.
I don't think so. In my immediate family we've got a combined six cars and one EVs. If we all had to replace our cars today we'd probably be looking at 4/6 EVs. But cars have long lives, and none of our cars are slated for imminent replacement.
They clearly can't compete against BYD and a company that relies on sanctions to survive doesn't seem like it is long for this world never mind the crazy multiples people are willing to pay for Tesla
Can you think of any non tech business where a P/E like this was not a signal of corporate diseased thinking?
I could be wrong. I hold BE shares.
PE is measuring the past, stock price is measuring the future.
I'm not saying TSLA PE makes sense, but if people expect earnings growth then in theory it could.
I wonder what it’ll be next. Betting on ‘quantum’ something, which has the great benefit of being rather vague.
Here’s an interesting quote from Musk: “The ability to predict the future is the best measure of intelligence.”
Based on Musk’s own standard of intelligence, he is a grade A moron.
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2026/01/02/...