The End of Uber! Elon Musk Revealed ALL NEW Cybercab

Stocks A to Z
42

I wonder why Nikola was not as successful with class 8 semis. Nikola is Tesla’s first name but that didn’t seem to help.

GoogleAI:

It’s one of the great corporate irony plays in the EV world—naming your heavy-duty electric truck company “Nikola” to ride the coattails of the more famous “Tesla,” only to face a dramatically different fate. [1]

Ultimately, Nikola’s failure didn’t stem from its namesake, but from severe executive, operational, and financial pitfalls. [1, 2, 3, 4]

1. Fraud and Staged Demonstrations

The most fatal blow came in 2020 when short-seller Hindenburg Research exposed that Nikola was faking its technology. Most notoriously, the company released a promotional video of a semi-truck appearing to drive at highway speeds, when it was actually just towed to the top of a hill and rolled down. Founder Trevor Milton was later convicted of wire and securities fraud and sentenced to prison. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

2. “Smoke and Mirrors” Product Development

While Tesla built massive vertical integration (battery factories, proprietary motors, autonomous software stacks), Nikola was largely a marketing shell. They claimed to have proprietary battery and hydrogen tech, but prosecutors revealed they were buying or outsourcing parts from other companies and putting tape over the original brand names. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

3. Premature Hydrogen Bets

Nikola bet heavily on hydrogen fuel cells for Class 8 semis before the necessary refueling infrastructure (the “Hyla” highway) was built out. Building both an unproven heavy truck and a nationwide hydrogen network proved to be too capital-intensive. Meanwhile, competitors (including Tesla) focused on dense regional battery-electric routes first, where charging infrastructure could be more easily scaled. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

4. Bankruptcy and Liquidation

The company’s valuation cratered after the scandal, burning massive partnerships (like a collapsed deal with General Motors). Despite trying to pivot, raise capital, and pivot to actual production, the cash burn proved insurmountable. Nikola officially filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and moved to liquidate its assets.

Thanks Googie!

But then Edison’s DC lost to Tesla’s AC but DC seems to be making a comeback with high temperature superconductors. Foxconn never got to make the Apple car either.

The Captain

43

Perhaps because the Tesla is the #1 seller in that market segment. And bringing up the name Tesla attracts eyes to the article. People seem to either love or hate Musk.

2 Likes
44

Exactly but investors should look at the business model. The EV industry is too large for one company to dominate it. Musk realized from early on that for EVs to succeed the world needed an EV support infrastructure

When did tesla build the first supercharger?

GoogleAI:

Tesla officially unveiled and launched its Supercharger network on September 24, 2012. The first six V1 stations were constructed in secret and went live across California, allowing early Model S owners to make long-distance trips. [1, 2]

The First Locations

The initial rollout featured six specific sites designed to connect key West Coast corridors: [1, 2, 3]

  • Hawthorne, California (located at SpaceX headquarters, though subsequently restricted/closed to the public in 2021 due to security/design studio proximity)
  • Gilroy, California
  • Harris Ranch (Coalinga), California
  • Tejon Ranch, California
  • Folsom, California
  • Lake Tahoe, California

Musk didn’t wait for the government to build the Interstate Charging Network, he started building it himself and is still at it even encouraging others to get into the business under their own private labels. The goal is to replace the polluting internal combustion engine.

The Tech Revolution uTube channel is a new and good source of real (not bull nor bear) Tesla news.

The Captain

45

Of course not, because it would never get built. There was no demand, no public push to have it. (Same with hydrogen fueling stations now.)

For the record that was also true with “roads”, which many thought should be paid for by Henry Ford. (See: Good Roads Movement) It took sustained citizen pressure in the early part of the 2th century to convince the government that it was a government job to pave the trails between cities (some urban areas had been paved, either with cobblestone or whatever).

Musk made the only choice available, nobody else was going to do it. Not heroic, just logical.

46

If logical, which other automaker is in the charging and storage business?

The Captain

47

Now that it’s become possible to have an EV and charge it other than at home, why would any auto maker want to or have to be in that b business? Did Ford or GM get into the gasoline business? (Technically yes, there were filling stations at some early dealerships, which went away quickly once independents took over the fuel business.)

Tesla did it because they couldn’t sell electric cars without some way to charge them while traveling. Now that phase is over, the charging infrastructure is better handled by those who know the electrical grid business better, and the car maker better served by paying attention to building cars.

1 Like
48

You’re the one who brought up total market share as being an important metric, I’m just the messenger. But since you asked, profits are down about 75% over the same period. Margins are way down too, going from tech company like margins to more like car company margins. Although still pretty good for a car company.

Musk said free cash flow is expected to be negative this year due to capex spending.

2 Likes
49

The phase might be over but Tesla keeps getting the cashflow that other car makers disdain.

Yes, I was, and your post showed that it is also a useless statistic. I thank you for that.

What good is cash if you don’t use it? The secret is using the cash wisely!

The Captain