> It has delivered a better ROI in the same way a ponzi scheme can deliver higher ROI.
It sounds like you're arguing that high valuation compared to fundamentals means buyers expect gains from future buyers paying more sounds like a Ponzi, but it isn't, it is speculation.
The comparison doesn't make sense. Some surface features of speculative markets can look Ponzi-like, but the underlying mechanics are very different.
A Ponzi-scheme returns to earlier participants directly from money contributed by later participants, with no real underlying business generating value. In a Ponzi-scheme, there is no real product (or it is irrelevant), the operator controls payouts, and investors are promised steady or guaranteed returns. None of that applies to Tesla stock.
Ponzi-schemes hide losses, smooth returns, collapse suddenly. Tesla stock is volatile, has had large drawdowns, and public reflects bad news, margin compression, demand shifts. Volatility is a sign of a market, not a Ponzi.
Mechanics is exactly the same - it's not Tesla revenues driving returns for investors, it's new investors putting their money into the stock at very high price.
If you believe Tesla is a Ponzi scheme then you also believe that the SEC is either knowingly keeping a Ponzi scheme going (and it is getting included in indexes) OR the SEC doesn’t know OR you are wrong.
The cars are higher quality and, more importantly, cheaper. US manufacturers can't make a cheap car to save their lives. The average age of cars on US roads is now 13 years, nobody can afford new cars.
There's a huge market opportunity here that all our manufacturers are missing, seemingly on purpose. BYD, and others, would absolutely sweep the competition.
> US manufacturers can't make a cheap car to save their lives.
They have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to never make low-margin (read "cheap") cars. If someone is looking for a competitive automotive market, they won't find it in the US. The financial engineering is world-class though.
High quality? I’ve ridden in several. It’s an all plastic deal with a flimsy feel. The ride is horrible and from the reviews I e read the handling is terrible.
Handling on basically all EVs except maybe what porsche is doing is terrible. And American cars are all plastic and flimsy, and this includes Tesla. But they're also much more expensive.
> The Chinese EVs were particularly atrocious in their handling.
I disagree, again, pretty much all EVs handle like shit because they're very heavy and have a ton of torque. It doesn't help that most American cars are very large and particularly tall, which makes handling even worse. The reality is that a sedan will basically always handle better than an SUV, no matter what, even if it's a piece of shit sedan and a 100K Cadillac SUV. At least, on pavement.
> And sure some American cars are plastic and flimsy
No, like, all of them. You can't buy a Tesla with an interior that isn't mostly plastic. GM is still doing that bullshit where most of their components are binned from 20K shitboxes. There's SOME exceptions, but they're rare. And you'll find that what Xiaomi and some other's are doing is not plastic. They have leather interiors and stuff, this is all very easy to verify online. I'm not telling you anything that isn't trivial to find out.
The only logic anyone really needs is the US's refusal to approve BYD cars for sale in the US because they would destroy US auto manufacturers. Past that the much cheaper price for the same or higher quality level of vehicle.
What does a 2025 US car have over a BYD vehicle? Questionable parts availability?
> In a Ponzi-scheme, there is no real product (or it is irrelevant)
This part is the smell.
"It's not a car company, it's a AI/Robot/whatever company." The valuation is supposedly justified by a future product that perpetually fails to materialize.
It's obviously not a classical Ponzi scheme in the mechanical sense where payouts are controlled by a central party. It has major Ponzi vibes though, with new money continuing to reward old money even though the fundamentals and products haven't done anything to justify that continued influx - only the hype has.
Yeah, the target keeps moving. Earlier it was “it’s not a car company, it’s a battery company”. Then it was all about FSD and robotaxis. Now that that is not working out, it’s going to be a robot company.
The actual underlying product, the cars, don’t match the crazy valuation.
It also has the characteristics that most of the dupes are not pleased that the fraud was discovered to be a fraud. People swindled by Madoff swore that it was all legit. It's not easy to give up a belief one has held fervently for years.
It sounds like you're arguing that high valuation compared to fundamentals means buyers expect gains from future buyers paying more sounds like a Ponzi, but it isn't, it is speculation.
The comparison doesn't make sense. Some surface features of speculative markets can look Ponzi-like, but the underlying mechanics are very different.
A Ponzi-scheme returns to earlier participants directly from money contributed by later participants, with no real underlying business generating value. In a Ponzi-scheme, there is no real product (or it is irrelevant), the operator controls payouts, and investors are promised steady or guaranteed returns. None of that applies to Tesla stock.
Ponzi-schemes hide losses, smooth returns, collapse suddenly. Tesla stock is volatile, has had large drawdowns, and public reflects bad news, margin compression, demand shifts. Volatility is a sign of a market, not a Ponzi.