AI Summary:

Tesla’s 2024 financial results were disappointing, with several key points highlighted:

  • Automotive Revenues: Fell by 8% in Q4 2024 compared to Q4 2023, totaling $19.8 billion.
  • Energy and Storage Revenues: More than doubled, growing by 113% to $3 billion in Q4 2024.
  • Services: Grew by 31% in Q4 2024, contributing $2.8 billion.
  • Total Revenue: Increased by 2% in Q4 2024, but income fell by 23%, with an operating margin of 6.2%.
  • Net Profits: Dropped by 71% to $2.3 billion in Q4 2024.
  • Annual Performance: Automotive revenues decreased by 6% to $77 billion in 2024. Energy generation and storage increased by 67% to $10 billion. Services grew by 27%, bringing in $10.5 billion.
  • Gross Profits: Fell by 1%, with net profits dropping by 53% to $7.1 billion for the year.
  • Free Cash Flow: Decreased by 18% to $3.6 billion.
  • Regulatory Credits: $2.8 billion of profit came from selling regulatory credits, not from core business activities.
  • Future Predictions: Tesla expects energy storage revenues to grow by at least 50% year-over-year and aims to grow automotive sales by more than 60% in 2025.

Despite the poor financial results, Tesla’s share price increased by 103% over the same period.

  • Pika@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    it’s ok, the president will make some rediculous executive order like “all federal vehicles must be tesla”, then do no price haggling or something and it’ll pull him right out of that bind.

    Sadly I don’t think I’m joking.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      You know you fucked up when you made it so people hear nazi car and think of your company and not the car company founded by the nazi government

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Ah, but you’ve forgotten the real money maker.

    • Having full control over the regulatory authority that currently prevents him putting his automated deathtrap taxis on the roads

    Turns out it’s much cheaper to buy governments than it is to perfect self driving technology.

    • ansiz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 hours ago

      He probably needs all the H1B visas for his remote taxi drivers. I doubt the latency would be good enough otherwise. And it was clear in the ‘demo’ the pilot was just standing right there controlling it.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        I doubt latency would be an issue.

        More the fact that they’ll be juggling too many at once.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Yeah but then it’s not teslas fault. That employee didn’t do their job and can be fired

  • NoSpiritAnimal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Ah so only the unverifiable services that don’t require an easily trackable commodity did well.

    I wish I could make up income too.

  • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Credits aside, these dont seem like bad numbers when compared to spend/investment. Tesla management got what they wanted.

    • boonhet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I can barely see how they were so popular up to now anyway. I, too, thought they were cool like 10 years ago, when they were the only real electric car (Leaf and I-Miev don’t count and we didn’t get the Bolt or Volt here, only Opel Ampera and Ampera-E, which are ultra rare). Then a couple of years later, I realized some things, in this order: 1) Tesla interiors are THE BLANDEST THING EVER, 2) Elon Musk’s been seeming increasingly weird starting with the cave diving incident, 3) Tesla quality control is absolute shite

      Tesla changed the world by proving you CAN have good range and performance in an EV, but now they’re way past their prime. The Germans, Swedes, Koreans and now I believe EVEN THE CHINESE make better EVs. I have no experience with non-Tesla American EVs to comment on those, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they surpass Tesla in overall quality of vehicle in a few years too.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        As an owner of a recent one, but before Musk’s issues got so hard to ignore, it has good quality, as did everyone I look at. Tesla had some very well publicized quality issues, when they were hand-building the first vehicles, scaling up the model 3, and trying to build the very different technology of the cybertruck, but their normal, recent cars seem fine

        As a gadget freak, teslas have many features that just don’t exist on other vehicles. Has any other manufacturer even gotten over-the-air updates right?

        Several of the other vehicles you mentioned aren’t available in the US. We can expect increased protectionism so they never will be.

        At least at the time, my Tesla was the lowest price EV with capabilities I wanted. The incentives made a huge difference but I don’t think it would qualify anymore plus they appear to be getting cancelled

        We did have a wave of vehicles expected over the next couple years that may give some competition, if those legacy manufacturers don’t retreat to selling ICE trucks and SUVs only. However GM botching the Trailblazer, and Volkswagen screwing up the software on their attempts do not bode well. Hyundai/Kia has some good possibilities. The high end has several good possibilities but for too high a price and too low a volume

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Service being up 30% is a bad thing for the consumer. For a vehicle that doesn’t require much at all in the way of service…

        • boonhet@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          I’m not sure what Services means there though. It could very well include subscriptions rather than the actual servicing of their cars? Or maybe both?

          • rumba@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            re though. It could very well include subscriptions rather than the actual servicing of their cars? Or maybe both?

            true. the report is very very vague

        • boonhet@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          Well yeah, they’re about as Swedish now as Chrysler is American. Maybe a tiny bit more.

          Still, they produce a lot of cars in Sweden, are traded on the Swedish stock market and are headquarered in Göteborg.

          Honestly, I think they’re doing better now than they were under Ford, but obviously they’ll never match the quality of Volvo’s old RWD bricks.

  • vga@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    Net profits $2.3B. “Poor financial results”. How does one reconcile these two things?

    But yeah, I live in a country that has had about 0% growth since 2008 :-| Perhaps this is bad news for you rich yankees.

    Also note that the automotive industry seems to be pretty much flatlining for the last 5 years or so: https://www.vettafi.com/indexing/index/autos – so Tesla is not doing particurarily badly in the large picture.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      All too often neither the size of the profit nor percent profit really matter. The important criteria is “compared to plan”.

      The stock has been priced according to what the company said it planned to do. If it didn’t meet its plan, stock usually decreases. If it keeps not meeting plan, shareholders usually lose trust and stock decreases even more. Tesla is “special” so who knows

    • iii@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      Net profits $2.3B. “Poor financial results”. How does one reconcile these two things?

      That’s 2.3B USD on a 1.29T USD valuation, or 0.17%.

      Valuations should be reflective of expected future profits. Multiples of ×20 yearly profit are possible for risky (tech or biotech usually) companies, with large potential profit. But the ratio is ridiculously off the charts for tesla. If it does not improve, it will have turned out to have been a very wastefull use of capital.

    • bobalot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      The issue is the price to earnings ratio of the Tesla stock which is almost 200:1.

      The level of profit is not bad for a normally price company but Telsa needs to have profits grow exponentially to justify their stock price.

    • tekato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      It used to be double that, so I can see why people see it as a bad thing. But I also don’t think 7.1B profits qualifies as “poor financial results”, even if it used to be higher.

  • thejml@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    23 hours ago

    If any other company dropped net profits by 71% they’d be firing their CEOs (well giving them a golden parachute to gtfo) and having some major shake ups.

    • __Lost__@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 hours ago

      The problem is that it has been a bubble for most of its public trading existence. It was highly overvalued 10 years ago, the stock price has never made sense, so who knows when it will finally correct.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Historically they were technically right. Tesla has always been priced by emotion rather than fundamentals. However it’s not enough to be technically correct when you lose money on that bet. And they almost always lost money.

        It’s always been a bubble but that has lasted much longer than most bubbles and no one can predict when it’s pop

      • c0c0c0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        It’s a memestock now. Aspirational tech-bros are buying it because they want to own the libs, too.

      • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 hours ago

        All it needs is a couple of opportunistic fuckers to take advantage of chaos and that shit will plummet like a fucking rock.

        • ouRKaoS@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          This is the reason they’re legislating against all the Chinese EVs that are 90% as good for 40% of the price.

          A brand new 12-15k electric car from a competitor would evaporate Tesla’s bubble so quick.

  • realitista@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    24 hours ago

    The CEO is too busy playing social media edgelord. I guess when you blow up a company to the point where it will pop, you have to go into politics to change the laws to make it more profitable.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    1 day ago

    https://fortune.com/2025/01/29/tesla-shares-rally-2025-earnings-growth/

    Tesla shares rally on pledge to return to growth in 2025

    Continuing the bullshit from 2022, where Musk promised a typical year would have growth of 50!!

    Tesla plans to launch its autonomous ride-hailing service in Austin in June

    Hows that going Elron?

    “This is not some far off mythical situation,” Musk said on the company’s call with analysts. “It’s literally five months away.”

    So it’s been LITERALLY running for more than a half year now? Or is it still a no show, like the 7 previous years FSD should have been here?

    We can do this TODAY.

    He has said that so many times, on so many things, and it’s always a lie. FSD, Convoys of trucks that are cheaper than trains! Tesla being able to park. which it still can’t do reliably. And this is the very beginning of the claim that a Tesla can drive across the country (USA) to pick you up!

    Did ANYONE believe his bullshit ever, do people believe he will build a manned base on Mars eventually? A base that should have been up and running I think it was 2022!!!

    How is this man not in jail?

    Oh right, probably much the same way Trump is not in jail. USA is an oligarchy moving towards a fascist dictatorship!!

    • foggenbooty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I believed him at first, why wouldn’t I? Self driving was starting to take shape, the demos looked good, I assumed what he was saying was legitimate.

      I remember starting to question things around the time of the Tesla Semi reveal. It didn’t make sense to me that you’d use heavy, short range batteries in an industry that runs by driving as far as possible, for as cheap as possible, hauling as much as possible. There were just too many compromises and he didn’t give any details other than acceleration (who cares in trucking).

      After that I started looking into him more and realized his bullshit spread through everything he touched. I honestly think most people are simply not paying attention to him, they just read headlines and since headlines never call him out and only amp up the crazy ambitious things he says, people believe he’s a genius.

      That seems to be slowly changing as he opens his stupid mouth about politics, but he’s pivoting to a new audience now.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I believed him at first, why wouldn’t I?

        Admittedly so did I. 😋
        I agree the Truck convoy claim to be cheaper than trains were so obviously bullshit, I was beginning to get on to him by that time, but if I wasn’t sure before that, I definitely agree at that time it became obvious that he is a fraud.

        headlines never call him out and only amp up the crazy ambitious things he says, people believe he’s a genius.

        Absolutely, it’s so bad much of the media are essentially complicit.

        That seems to be slowly changing
        Here it’s changing fast, it may be tomato - tomato, but some claim Tesla is still the best option, despite all the bullshit.
        But we recently had a report on how Tesla had record high failure rate on mandatory safety checks after 4 years here in Denmark. So maybe that will detract from the “best option” bullshit.
        Tesla claims to have cheaper servicing, but if the cars aren’t legally road worthy, when adhering to manufacturer service recommendations, that’s just another bullshit claim.

        I’ve seen reviews where they point out cheaper maintenance of Tesla as a HUGE advantage, making them cheapest car to own in their category. This has annoyed me a little, because I’m a little bit in love with the Skoda Enyaq, but it cost about twice in maintenance than a Tesla Y. Well maybe there’s a reason for that, and it doesn’t annoy me anymore. Because if you follow recommendations for the Skoda it’s actually maintained, the Tesla is not. The same for all other VW family cars, they are a bit expensive to maintain, but I’ve NEVER heard about problems like with Tesla on safety on any VW-group car.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      17 hours ago

      tessla plans to launch it’s autonomous ride hailing service

      Autonomous driving, like he’s promised he already had every year for over a decade now.

      Who does anyone believe this scammer? He is a con man, always had been, and I’m just amazed at the enormous amount of idiots believing his shit

  • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    170
    ·
    1 day ago

    Value investing is basically dead, isn’t it? Am I crazy? How can you objectively evaluate a company’s value, notice it is undervalued, and then trade accordingly when price action does not even slightly track the company’s value?

    • iii@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Value investing is basically dead, isn’t it?

      You’re looking at a too short time frame. The famous tulip bubble lasted for a decade, too.

    • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I wondered that a while ago when Tesla was worth more than many other car makers combined while producing far less vehicles than any single one of them. And I remember people telling me about projections and expectations and that it’s only a matter of time until everyone drives a Tesla basically. Sounded like mass hysteria to me back then because the rest of the world won’t just sit there quietly and let Tesla have a monopoly. People bought shares because they rose rapidly in value, causing even more people to buy shares. It’s a pyramid scheme like so many things these days and people have no problem with it apparently. They love gambling and playing lottery. Value investing is too boring for them.

    • cevn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      139
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      The investors are banking on Elon looting the Govt coffers into Tesla. I can’t deny the chances based on the other crap we are seeing.

      • danc4498@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        1 day ago

        Exclusive contracts at 20% mark up. Can’t wait for all police vehicles to switch over to teslas.

        • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’d support that: the new excuses as to why a suspect escaped would be fantastic.

          “Well, I would have caught him but my car died for some reason and I couldn’t get out.”

          “Well, I would have caught him but I hit a bump and half my car fell off.”

          “Well, I would have caught him, but my car caught fire and killed my partner.”

          “Well, I would haved caught him but it was raining so my bumper fell off and punctured my tire.”

      • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        1 day ago

        True enough. A bet on any tech stocks right now is probably safe on that basis - but I expect they really do plan to crash the stock market at some point… It would make sense if you wanted to consolidate ownership cheaply.

      • Viri4thus@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        They’re also banking on Elon staying alive for the next 4y which is a risky bet given how he immediately antagonised the MAGA crowd on H1Bs.

        • samus12345@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 day ago

          The MAGA crowd hates just about everybody. The last time they did anything of note was the 1/6 insurrection, and that was with the help of Dear Leader.

      • Lauchs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        That but also removing green subsidies helps Tesla as it’s further ahead than other electric car rivals. Also, less safety regulations likely brings it closer to fully autonomous driving.

    • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Value investing isn’t dead. There are tons of value investors, and they aren’t the ones buying Tesla.

      • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 day ago

        My point is, if this is how markets react to worsening sales and an actually insane CEO how can you trust a rational bet to pay off?

        • iii@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          50 minutes ago

          How does the first exclude the second? That’s like saying: how can I trust train travel if F1 cars drive 300km/h. They’re different things.

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Value investors don’t invest in Tesla, so you should not expect its share price to reflect fundamentals.

          But they do invest in stocks like Coca Cola and American Express, so you should expect the share prices of those companies to better reflect fundamentals.

          • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 day ago

            That’s just another way of saying buyer sentiment is the only thing that matters, in which case we’re back to square one.

            • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              If you’re a value investor then you believe that the actual value of a company depends on its current and future earnings and the market price will tend towards the actual value in the long run.

              But naturally there are other factors that also influence the market price. In fact, the whole point of value investing is to find stocks that are “underpriced”. For various reasons, they are currently priced at a discount to their actual value. Those are the stocks you should buy, and you should expect their price to increase.

              Conversely, for various reasons some stocks are “overpriced”, like Tesla. You should not buy those, because you expect their price to decrease in the long run.

              A corollary is that value investors expect seemingly irrational price movements like we see with Tesla. If share prices perfectly reflected fundamentals, then it would be impossible to find a “good deal”.

              • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                Right. So anyway, the market does often appear oversensitive to buzz and under-responsive to fundamentals. What’s your take on market reforms? Are there any changes you’d like to see, regulatory or otherwise?

                • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 day ago

                  I don’t care if the market is under responsive to fundamentals. That just means some investors are exercising poor judgment by paying too much attention to irrelevant factors. It also gives an opportunity to investors with better judgment.

            • AA5B@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              Pretty much the definition of bubble stocks. If you don’t want emotion driven stocks, don’t ride the hype train. There are many many more stock opportunities, most of whose value is related to actual facts

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      22 hours ago

      That’s not new to Tesla. Avoid bubble stocks. Avoid penny stocks. Buy “stodgy”

      • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        I’m not into Tesla stock. I’m not just here to whine about a single stock not doing what I want, it’s that I think price action in general is too irrational. I’ve got an axe to grind here and it goes beyond which stocks to pick.

        Huge ETFs and algorithmic trading makes too many tickers move all the same way. This harms price discovery. And don’t get me started on off-exchange trading; This month, off-exchange volume exceeded that of lit markets.

    • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      17 hours ago

      There’s value investing and there’s speculation. If Tesla can make a robot that can mop the floor, even this seemingly ridiculous valuation will look like a bargain. Have to remember, Tesla is not a car company. They are an AI and green tech company. Cars are just their largest activity to date.

      I am concerned about Elon though. I think he’s a visionary, I think he’s valuable, but I also think he’s spread far too thin and he’s losing it as a result. Tesla, SpaceX, Twitter, xAI, Neuralink, and his political efficiency project. All of these are full-time 100hr/week jobs. Even if you assume he literally never sees his gaggle of children, hell even if you assume he never sleeps, there’s literally not enough hours in the day. And I think he is thus blind to the fact that his antics are costing him support for the bigger mission.

  • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    So more than a third of their net profits come from selling credits they received from the government? Am I understanding that correctly?

    • sushibowl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      24 hours ago

      They are emissions credits. Every company receives some amount of “CO2 emission credits” from the government. These allow you to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide. If you don’t emit all the CO2 that your credits allow, you can sell those credits to other companies that need more than the government gives them.

      The idea is to put a total limit on the amount of emissions in the country, while letting the market figure out where it makes most sense economically to invest in emission reduction.

      Tesla makes only EV cars and so it doesn’t need all the credits a typical gasoline car company would receive. So they sell them.

      • FauxPseudo @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        16 hours ago

        “Tesla makes only EV cars and so it doesn’t need all the credits a typical gasoline car company would receive. So they sell them.”

        Which means the system isn’t working. Surplus credits should come from improved efficiencies, not excessive allotment.

        • iii@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          Which means the system isn’t working. Surplus credits should come from improved efficiencies, not excessive allotment.

          Total number of credit goes down over time. That mechanism ensures an adapt, die or emigrate pressure for large polluters, and a financial stimulus for small-polluters.

    • crystalmerchant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yes you are understanding that correctly. For producing EVs, they get credits from the federal government. I don’t know the exchange rate – e.g., how many EVs per credit.

      Then, Tesla turns around and sells these credits to buyers, usually other companies. Companies buy these credits from Tesla to comply with regulations requiring certain environmental outcomes, and credits count towards these outcomes.

      In theory this type of program incentivizes and rewards companies who invest in the technology(is) tied to these credits, in this case EVs. In practice it’s a way for other companies to comply with renewables regulations without actually doing anything to meaningfully reduce their impact and footprint (other than buying credits)

      • Rogue@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        So it’s a government subsidy at no cost to the government, funded instead by other companies? That’s actually quite a neat idea.

        I guess the issues arise if Tesla just pockets the subsidy without passing on the savings to savings to people buying EVs

        • iii@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          I guess the issues arise if Tesla just pockets the subsidy without passing on the savings to savings to people buying EVs

          This report shows that they do just that: without the emissions credit system they would operate at a loss. In other words: they sell cars for cheaper than the cost of manufacturing. Coincidentally the same thing the US and EU claims China is doing, as motivation for mercantillist tarrifs.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          22 hours ago

          Why is this an issue. They have their incentive to keep building and selling. As long as they’re building and selling, it doesn’t matter to the rest of us what their profit is.

          If they’re building make excess profit, that’s just more opportunity for legacy manufacturers to be competitive. Capitalism 101

          • Rogue@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            Why is this an issue. They have their incentive to keep building and selling. As long as they’re building and selling, it doesn’t matter to the rest of us what their profit is.

            “Issue” was probably the wrong word “potential for controversy” would have been more appropriate. It’s potentially controversial because if the profits exceed the subsidies you’re effectively just giving money to shareholders.

            If they’re building make excess profit, that’s just more opportunity for legacy manufacturers to be competitive. Capitalism 101

            No. This is entirely the opposite of capitalism. Under capitalism there are no subsidies. If a business isn’t profitable then it fails. Simple.

            What we have is an abomination of capitalism and corporate socialism. That’s the controversy I referred to above. Where governments funnel money to enrich corporations and the select few rather than helping improve population they are charged with governing.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Right, we want EVs, Tesla gets a little boost from legacy manufacturers, so now we have a market, EVs are available. GM gets a break do it has time to design EVs, but are really annoyed at funding that bastard Elon, so have incentive to get their shit together. EVs are built a little sooner m, no one goes out of business (yet), we all win

    • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      I think it’s from Europe. Car manufacturers in Europe must sell at least n ev every year. Stellantis, that was asleep at the wheel and only has undesirable EVs that don’t sell, is paying billions to Tesla to make a fictitious alliance, so they will meet the sales target and won’t pay the fine