Automotive Industry

445 readers

59 users here now

News and discussion about the automotive industry.

Maybe also interesting:

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de

Tesla’s 2024 financial results are out—and they’re terrible (arstechnica.com)

submitted 10 hours ago by copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de to c/automotive@discuss.tchncs.de

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 12 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] RangerJosey@lemmy.ml 12 points 9 hours ago

Wouldn't expect the sales of Swasticars to improve any time soon.

[–] GalacticGrapefruit@lemmy.world 10 points 10 hours ago

Good! Tesla deserves far worse!

[–] glimmer_twin@hexbear.net 2 points 9 hours ago

Selling regulatory credits is by and large how they’ve made money over the years

[+] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml -7 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

checks stock

It's up

Yep, this article is obviously pushing an agenda. People who are willing to put their money on their opinion think otherwise.

[–] MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Are you under the impression that the stock market is rational?

[–] salmoura@lemmy.eco.br 3 points 8 hours ago

Specially in the short term.

[–] icerunner_origin@startrek.website 6 points 8 hours ago

I'm expecting the federal government to find an urgent need for a large number of Tesla vehicles in the near future. Bypass the consumer and send their money directly to nazi man.

[–] copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

That means the numbers were not worse than expected. It was always priced in.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

"Priced in" is the proven false idea that markets are rational. Warren Buffet couldn't have become a billionaire if "priced in" was true. Because otherwise there would never be undervalued companies to purchase.

[–] copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

The efficient market hypothesis does not claim anything about “rational”.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I'll amend my statement. If markets were actually efficient then Warren Buffet couldn't have become a billionaire because everything would have already been "priced in".

[–] copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 4 hours ago

This paper concludes that Buffett did essentially do factor-investing.

I don't really understand why the efficient market hypothesis (EMH) and factor investing don't contradict each other but smarter people think they don't (e.g. Fama who co-invented both). The general consensus seems to be that the weak form of EMH is correct but the semi-strong and the strong EMH probably not. However, while markets may not be perfectly efficient they can still be very close. This is why I believe that "priced in" often works in practice and is a useful concept.