GRA said:
SageBrush said:
Forward looking production guesses have squat to do with a statement of costs TODAY; and profit as some sort of metric of statement veracity is more than casually stupid. Are you a Trumper?
If you can seriously ask that question despite my posting here for the past six years, you really haven't been paying attention.
Have we had any independent verification of Tesla's battery cost claims? No? And do Tesla's alleged battery costs allow them to price their products to make a profit after 14 years in business? No, although some of the cars may be profitable.
Tesla remains a faith-based enterprise, which is fine as long as the economy stays robust, but will almost certainly lead to swift failure or a buy-out if that changes. While I'd love to take Tesla's claims at face value, nothing about their history leads me to do so. At least they're now forced to use GAAP accounting methods, instead of using whichever set of numbers they choose that make things look best.
GRA, 95% of your posts, typically, are excellent.
But then you go off the rails and into wild conspiracy land.
For example, your last statement. Your statement implies that they didn't use GAAP accounting methods. Tesla has been reporting GAAP numbers for years, quite possibly since they went public in 2010 or so.
Likewise, they have never used "whichever set of numbers they choose...". They have listed both GAAP and non-GAAP numbers and detailed why they believe non-GAAP to be a truer representation of the financials.
Now, you are welcome to completely disregard anything Tesla reports, but that doesn't leave much of any way to converse with you if Tesla come up.