upvote
Operating margin fell from 16% to ~2% over the last 10 years and will probably be negative in 2026 and 2027. They have a big cash pile to burn through but they’re spending it on ummm “a flying car,” humanoid robots, and an AI fab. They’re fucked.
reply
Similar, to the time Tesla was fucked, because they wanted to sell EVs when there was neither demand nor charging infra. Or when SpaceX wanted to build a rocket that could land on legs, whereas every wannabe rocket scientists knew that to be impossible.
reply
Or similar to the time Cybertruck was a giant success, FSD was ready in 2022, and Falcon 1 would launch 600kg for $7 million.
reply
I'd be very surprised if the roadster project was particularly expensive. That operating margin tells you they are spending all the cash they are earning on cars on the other stuff, not that the cars suddenly became more expensive to make.

I'm interested to meet someone online who's short both on-shore US silicon fabs and the market for humanoid robots. Can you say more about your thinking?

reply
I'm short on an allegedly successful automotive company that has a rapidly deteriorating automotive business (due entirely to management's own decision-making) pivoting into the most hyped business ideas in the world. I'm bearish on the type of creative accounting and self-dealing we see between the Musk companies.

Musk is similar to Zuck in that they get some credit for sheer courage to turn the wheel on their massive businesses, but they also have to be right. Aside from his anticompetitive behavior, Zuck continues to miss. Musk's pattern has been that the more Musk is personally involved, the worse the outcomes. Cybertruck was his baby. Optimus is his baby.

If Tesla is doing so well as an automotive business, then why doesn't he just continue making it a great automotive business?

reply
I mean the short answer is that it doesn’t temperamentally suit him to do so.

Maybe a mid length answer is if you agree with his assessment on say humanoid robots in terms of market and you believe they might have a geometric growth factor in production (eg robots can make more robots) then you’d want that business build out done by a team that can scale rapidly.

For fabs spacex and Tesla are significant consumers of the output- vertical integration is preferred by lots of companies.

reply
> I mean the short answer is that it doesn’t temperamentally suit him to do so.

Correct, and I think having a CEO who's totally unaccountable to a board and is temperamentally unable to focus on his core business is not good.

SpaceX and Tesla are nowhere near large enough consumers to justify vertically integrating a fab. The demand is predicated on Optimus producing millions of units per year.

This circularity will probably end up being seen in retrospect as so transparently absurd that it'll beggar belief that anyone accepted it.

reply
I respect the perspective, of course, and cannot argue with the risk assessment.

That said I think these bets will pay off. Let’s check in in five years!

reply
> Let’s check in in five years!

Do you have particular predictions we can evaluate in five years?

reply
1) The fab will have been a highly profitable investment, possibly worth spinning out

2) more than 1mm optimus produced and sold in the US

Happy for any counters :)

reply
You've got to take Musk's forecasts with a massive grain (sack?) of salt. Pre-launch he was estimating making 250,000 Cybertrucks per year by 2025. So far, total sales over 3 years have actually been 60-70K.

I'd bet that in 5 years time Optimus total sales are in the 10's of thousands at best, with few to no large scale industrial users (other than self-use by Musk). Customers will be similar to what AgiBot and Unitree currently have - entertainment, hospitality, academic, small scale trials, plus a few Tesla fanboy sales that don't do anything actually productive.

reply
In five years? It would be an achievement if it's operating in five years. Absolutely zero chance it will be profitable by then.

1MM Optimus sold in the US is hilarious too.

Want to make bets on these?

reply
I'm not a betting man, but I'd comfortably place a bet to agree with you.

My prediction is Musk will become less and less stable, more and more flamboyant and performative, and less and less effective.

He's already saying he suffers from occasional AI psychosis, and there is no chance that's going to get better on its own.

reply
It will be his robot typing the message for him at that point
reply
If anything his companies are doing well despite of him, not because of him. There's level-headed and competent leadership in them resisting his bullshit.
reply
The counterpoint of course is that he has demonstrated a consistent ability to build and run successful businesses, many of which are extremely high risk

The only new western car company in decades to not fail, based on a technology nobody believed in at the time, least of all other car companies

SpaceX being a private space company, which was completely unheard of. No experts though they could succeed

Smaller earlier businesses like Zip2, paypal, etc

These are gigantic high risk companies with high failure probabilities, the chance they they all happened to be successful despite Musk and not at least in part because of him is stretching reasonable doubt for me.

I'm absolutely no fan of his politics or personality, but the man can run a business that nobody else even dares try (at least until he demonstrates viability and the market starts to generate competitors)

reply
> The counterpoint of course is that he has demonstrated a consistent ability to build and run successful businesses, many of which are extremely high risk

Three sucesses.

Not so successful: Solar City, Neuralink, TBC, X.

(X exists, but before it was valued-and-bought by one of Musk's other companies, it appeared to have lost about half its value).

Richard Branson he aint.

reply
> Neurolink

They put out this video of a patient with ALS regaining the ability to communicate.

https://youtu.be/_j806JHhCRo

Hard to see that not being successful, once it passes the FDA, assuming it's real.

reply
If the boring company potentially slowed competition for other Tesla focused options, is that not success?
reply
paypal succeeded _despite_ musk and required a boardroom coup to remove him from leadership because he was about to tank the company. if he had is way nobody would remember paypal besides a couple people with merch for a long defunct company.
reply
I'd still restrict this to an ability to pursue ideas that others find too risky with relentless persistence and a laser focus. He is able to get something off the ground and make others believe in it, but not good at actually running a stable business. And that's fine, mind you, I absolutely respect what has built. But the person who is responsible for turning SpaceX from an incredibly risky bet into a profit machine is Gwynne Shotwell, not Elon Musk.
reply
Rivian, Polestar, Slate etc. Would like a word.

Of course it’s still early days for all these companies and they’re not exactly fiscally solid, but if Tesla had not made all those cars, someone else would have.

reply
Revisionist history at its finest.
reply