look at all the articles since 2010 or so about Amazon and Tesla being bubbles. Or before that, articles in 2007-2010 about Facebook being Myspace. Or about Uber dying due to debt (this was in 2014-2016). These are the companies pundits write the most about ,and have been wrong. Yeah, many unicorns do fail or get acquired for sub-billion, but pundits seldom if ever write about them, except when they fail. The media wrote way more articles about Uber being a bubble than Fab, even though Fab died and Uber is doing well and worth >$40 billion .
The obvious difference is that none of those examples had the US government as an adversary. In such cases it's hard to evaluate any product or service based on its merits but rather based on which side of the political games they fall on. It is in the US's general best interest for Uber or Tesla to succeed, no so for TikTok, quite the opposite actually.
There's an often-shared image of the excitement of a technology looking like a V shape, with a valley of disappointment following a big media hype. I wonder if that's why the Bill Gates quote rings so true: "Most people overestimate what they can do in one year and underestimate what they can do in ten years"
Tesla will carry on for the next few years,until all the major manufacturers will get to the point,where making electric becomes a new norm. At that point Tesla may become no more than Dachia or Kia.
The narrative from Tesla bears continues to shift into the future as it outperforms their predictions. Wasn’t the company supposed to have been sidelined many times by now?
And when that doesn't happen, you'll come up with your next theory. The goal posts will keep moving until one day you'll run out of things to say and the company is a behemoth capturing a percentage of all car sales (not just electric).
That's been the dynamic with Tesla since the company was started.
Personally I couldn't care less whether they succeed or not. I'm not blind either and I'm fully aware how big a flame they put under the industry's ass and how everyone started working on similar projects. All that aside, I still think that they will be facing huge competition from other manufacturers once they are fully on board with electric models. Who knows, maybe Tesla will drive fast enough and will be no.1 manufacturer in 10 years time,I don't have crystal ball for that. It is, however, dangerous to ride on positive news only, disregarding any other opinion if it doesn't match yours.
I don't disagree with anything you said there! In fact I agree with your measured take. I only wanted to push back against this part from your original comment:
> At that point Tesla may become no more than Dachia or Kia.
The future is already here, and it requires these old car companies (Ford, GM, etc) to not only become electric car companies, but also become computer hardware and software companies. Many many manufacturers will fold in the coming years or be absorbed by larger conglomerates because they simply won't be able to compete on these vectors.
The advantages/efficiencies these old car companies have spent decades building are being rendered irrelevant. And that's the real problem for them. The risk isn't that they can't compete, the risk is that whatever they put out is irrelevant. Think iPhone v. Blackberry.
It's not just about making a new type of car. It's about building a new kind of company entirely.
The worst case scenario is Tesla gets acquired for a godly sum of money - not that it goes under or becomes the next Kia. Tesla's battery production capacity very well makes the company one of national strategic interest.
For every pundit-bashed unicorn, there are tens of thousands of times the pundits got it right.