Stock market 2021

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
But you have to give him credit that he did disrupt and accelerate transformation of the auto industry. Remember this and how it went nowhere?

View attachment 347497

The EV1 and the MOOC​



Lessons for higher education from the demise of GM’s 1990s electric car.

By​

Joshua Kim

October 3, 2018

EV1 electric car
What to do with the MOOC?
That is a question that many schools that began programs to build and run open online courses in those heady MOOC bubble days of 2012 are asking themselves six years later.
In answering the question about what to do with our MOOC programs, we might want to look to the story of the General Motors EV1.
Remember the EV1?
Maybe you saw the 2006 documentary film Who Killed the Electric Car? Our collective memory is that GM killed the EV1 to protect the company’s insanely profitable business of selling gas-guzzling SUVs. Remember the Hummer?
We remember how GM refused to renew the leases on the EV1, and how they sentenced the returned electric vehicles to the crusher. GM didn’t just stop selling the EV1 -- it destroyed them.
The real reason that GM killed the EV1 was not some diabolical plot to protect a business built around gas guzzlers. Instead, the reasons were far more prosaic and depressing. GM killed the EV1 because it was too expensive -- the car had a fully loaded development cost of nearly $1 million per vehicle. In the face of little demand for a two-seat car that could only go 50 miles on a charge, GM could not justify continuing the program.
Why did GM refuse to allow EV1 owners to keep their vehicles? The reason is that the company was afraid of liability. It didn’t know if the lead-acid batteries would be safe.
Why did GM crush those cars that they repossessed? Chalk that one up to the dysfunction of GM’s management circa 1999.
The fascinating question is where would have GM been if it had maintained its investment in the EV1 experiment?
A convincing analysis of the mistake that GM made in killing the EV1 appears in the new book Autonomy: The Quest to Build the Driverless Car -- and How It Will Reshape Our World, co-written by Lawrence Burns. Burns was GM's vice president of research and development for 30 years and today is an adviser to Google’s (Waymo) self-driving car initiative. He writes that:

Even from the vantage point of the late 1990s, it was clear to many that the auto industry would have to change eventually. And that the environmental, economic and security implications of relying on foreign oil to make gasoline to run our automobiles would exact an increasingly high price.
Today, Tesla is valued higher than General Motors ($52.5 billion vs. $47.5 billion). Every car company is scrambling to bring out hybrid and electric models. GM could have been way ahead of the game.
We should think of today’s MOOCs as yesterday’s EV1.
When compared to traditional online courses, today’s MOOCs are not very good. Open online courses do many wonderful things. They are a marvelous way to bring lifelong learners together around educational content. The ability of MOOCs to reinforce learning through simulations and formative assessment is improving rapidly.
Today’s MOOCs, however, have not succeeded in the goal of providing quality learning at scale. MOOCs have done very little so far to bring down the costs of postsecondary credentialing. There are some interesting experiments with low-cost online degrees from highly regarded institutions, such as the $22,000 iMBA from the University of Illinois and Georgia Tech's $10,000 online master of science in cybersecurity program. These programs, however, do not seem to be driving the overall cost of education downward.
But we are early in the open online learning game.
The online courses that we have today that can scale at low marginal costs are in their infancy. The goal of personalization at scale has not yet been reached.
We should think of today’s MOOCs as opportunities for educational experimentation. To try new things out to reach the goal of delivering a high-quality education at lower costs.
The global demand for postsecondary education will follow a similar trajectory to the worldwide demand for automobiles. Our current system of small-scale education and fossil fuel-based cars will not be sustainable.
Today’s open online courses may be as ungainly as the EV1. But imagine what might happen if we resist the temptation to crush them.

Read more by​

Joshua Kim


Funny how Tesla had a market cap of $52B when that article was written in late 2018 and is now $1.1T.

Members don't see this ad.
 
What is a good price point to get into LCID. The chart looks terrible. Does it have fundamentals and is it a Wall Street darling?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
Woops I read your post wrong. Pretty true. I see a lot of audi s class but yeah other ones are harder to see. I am against tesla as musk is a dbag who got so much help and government handouts for his company but now acts like he built it all himself.
Musk is a weird guy and he sounds like a nightmare boss to work for but I forgive all of that and more because he brought us the Falcon 9.

Tesla, schmesla. Never wanted one, don't want one. Some day I'm sure I'll buy an electric car but I doubt it'll be a Tesla, unless their build quality approaches BMW et al levels. Maybe it will. My daily driver now is a 2006 M3 and while I'm a little jealous of all that electric vehicle torque at 0 RPM there is literally nothing else about those cars that appeals to me. I suppose $17/gallon gas might force my hand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Musk is a weird guy and he sounds like a nightmare boss to work for but I forgive all of that and more because he brought us the Falcon 9.

Tesla, schmesla. Never wanted one, don't want one. Some day I'm sure I'll buy an electric car but I doubt it'll be a Tesla, unless their build quality approaches BMW et al levels. Maybe it will. My daily driver now is a 2006 M3 and while I'm a little jealous of all that electric vehicle torque at 0 RPM there is literally nothing else about those cars that appeals to me. I suppose $17/gallon gas might force my hand.
Keeping my E46 M3 until the government forcibly removes it from my ownership haha. Excellent daily driver!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Musk is a weird guy and he sounds like a nightmare boss to work for but I forgive all of that and more because he brought us the Falcon 9.

Tesla, schmesla. Never wanted one, don't want one. Some day I'm sure I'll buy an electric car but I doubt it'll be a Tesla, unless their build quality approaches BMW et al levels. Maybe it will. My daily driver now is a 2006 M3 and while I'm a little jealous of all that electric vehicle torque at 0 RPM there is literally nothing else about those cars that appeals to me. I suppose $17/gallon gas might force my hand.

Ever think about getting a newer car?
 
I doubt it'll be a Tesla, unless their build quality approaches BMW et al levels.
The built quality is a motto repeated over and over. My wife had an Audi (said to have the best "build quality") and it was not good at all.
On vacation i rented a van got a Mercedes (also high quality) and surprise the parts were the same as my Tesla.
Teslas have a big screen and that's about it no nobs and buttons. You could argue for better seats but you can probably install a Recaro if you wish to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ever think about getting a newer car?
I don't know what I'd get.

I bought my first E46 M3 in 2002. Drove it every day until I crashed it in 2015.

For the next 6 or 7 months while I looked at new/used cars I slummed around in a Honda Civic we had as a 3rd car / beater / learner car for the kids. Eventually found... a 2006 E46 M3 the original owner had tracked for a few thousand miles, and the next owner left in a garage without driving it. So I bought it.

I don't really know that I could improve on it for less than $100K.

I know a lot of people don't really care about cars and they'd be happy with anything so long as it rolls on 4 wheels and starts reliably, but talk to anyone who's owned an E46 M3 and they'll tell you they're a once-in-a-generation car where the maker got everything right.

I looked at a newer M6 a while ago, and they're nice but (again) you can't get into a new one for under $100K.

When I bought the second M3 my wife told me I was in a rut. I said, "it's a groove baby" and naturally she had no counterargument.

When I need a little more cargo space or something that isn't afraid of snow/ice I have a 2017 X3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The built quality is a motto repeated over and over. My wife had an Audi (said to have the best "build quality") and it was not good at all.
On vacation i rented a van got a Mercedes (also high quality) and surprise the parts were the same as my Tesla.
Teslas have a big screen and that's about it no nobs and buttons. You could argue for better seats but you can probably install a Recaro if you wish to.
I don't know anyone who says that Audis aka rebadged VWs have the "build quality" :) but there's no accounting for taste.

There's more to build quality than the fit of the vinyl and plastic in the interior, or the adjustable lumbar support in the seats, even though that's the sort of thing most people mention. As for Teslas - for a while just making them so that the doors closed and clicked and the panels lined up was a major challenge. The touchscreen cockpit is a little cheesy (tech for tech's sake to the detriment of usability) but again, no accounting for taste.

Some car makers just make cars that drive better. BMW has a well deserved reputation for making cars that drive well. Even my X3, which is an otherwise unremarkable iteration of a smallish SUV, handles and drives well. Some people don't care and that's OK, some people don't notice the differences and that's OK too. It's OK if your car is just a tool.

Some people can tolerate driving a Lexus or Mercedes. Some people are just dead inside, I guess. Or maybe they focus on hauling plywood twice a year in their F150s or eleven kids in their Suburbans. To each his own.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Porsche > all

If you’re looking purely at the driving experience, I don’t disagree.

But for a daily driver, the technology and price of Porsche can’t compare to BMW. We recently upgraded our family SUV and I have no regrets picking an X5 over a Cayenne.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The times I've tried to fit myself into a Porsche I had legroom and headroom issues. Sucks being dysmorphic sometimes. But I won't argue that they've got soul.

Oh yeah true, it's very important for the car to have enough room for head
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
If you’re looking purely at the driving experience, I don’t disagree.

But for a daily driver, the technology and price of Porsche can’t compare to BMW. We recently upgraded our family SUV and I have no regrets picking an X5 over a Cayenne.
I'm Cayenne Turbo and M3. I hate BMW after about 2011, frankly. What year is your X5?
 
I'm Cayenne Turbo and M3. I hate BMW after about 2011, frankly. What year is your X5?

2021 X5 M50i. We really stewed on it but couldn’t justify the extra $15-20k for a similarly equipped Cayenne S, especially when we were able to custom build every detail of the X5. The dashboard and HUD were also way better on the BMW in my opinion.

That said, I will be picking up a Panamera for myself in a few years once we’re done paying for the nanny and daycare. It’s really grown on me.
 
The times I've tried to fit myself into a Porsche I had legroom and headroom issues. Sucks being dysmorphic sometimes. But I won't argue that they've got soul.
Ya those are cars I'll likely never buy due to that. I couldn't fit in the new Supras either. Although, when I have the funds, I MAY just trick out a c3 stingray with everything I can. That body just speaks to me somehow.

For this Christmas, I was driving around in my MIL leased Escalade, which aside from how damn bulky the thing is, was actually VERY comfortable to drive in. My back was enjoying the creature comforts that I just don't have with my corolla.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
401k and other retirement funds: should i do something like vanguard 2050 retirement fund (mixed bonds, stocks, foreign and domestic) vs something more like SP500 ETF?
Depends entirely on risk tolerance, self control, financial goals and how many years from them. Obviously some of this info might not want to be shared but it's gonna help a lot to give actionable, non-generic advice.
 
Tesla is on borrowed time. Stock is overpriced. Musk knows this and will sell more in 2022. Tesla isn’t worth more than all the USA plus Toyota car manufacturers combined. Valuation matters eventually and the competitors will close the gap over the next 3 years. look at intel vs AMD.
 
401k and other retirement funds: should i do something like vanguard 2050 retirement fund (mixed bonds, stocks, foreign and domestic) vs something more like SP500 ETF?

Vanguard 2050 retirement fund is about 55% total stock market, 30% total international market, and 6% bonds.

As time progresses, it will shift to become heavier on bonds and less volatile.

I have invested all of my 401k/403b funds in a s&p500 etf. This is riskier because of the lack of bonds to weather market downturn.

I am more tolerant of risk for 3 reasons:
-As a physician, we have started saving later so I want to catch up
-Technically, our jobs are stable (I know the pandemic made this idea less true)
- I plan on working for 20 to 30 years (job is reasonably enjoyable) so I can wait out most downturns

At the end of the day, how much risk are you willing to take and what are your Financial goals?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I MAY just trick out a c3 stingray with everything I can. That body just speaks to me somehow.
C3 is the old Corvette with the really pronounced cirves on the hood I thought?

The new Corvette seems amazing. Nobody ever has any real gripes about a Porsche, but the Vette seems to deliver at about half the price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
401k and other retirement funds: should i do something like vanguard 2050 retirement fund (mixed bonds, stocks, foreign and domestic) vs something more like SP500 ETF?

Vanguard 2050 retirement fund is about 55% total stock market, 30% total international market, and 6% bonds.

As time progresses, it will shift to become heavier on bonds and less volatile.

I have invested all of my 401k/403b funds in a s&p500 etf. This is riskier because of the lack of bonds to weather market downturn.

I am more tolerant of risk for 3 reasons:
-As a physician, we have started saving later so I want to catch up
-Technically, our jobs are stable (I know the pandemic made this idea less true)
- I plan on working for 20 to 30 years (job is reasonably enjoyable) so I can wait out most downturns

At the end of the day, how much risk are you willing to take and what are your Financial goals?

I do the targeted fund for my 401k. It’s the “right” amount of diversification, and as mentioned above, it auto-adjusts your asset allocation based on your age to decrease your risk over time which is what you’re supposed to do. The main drawback is the fee which is 0.15% as opposed to 0.04-0.08% with most S&P index funds, and the fees could add up significantly over time. I like the set it and forget it aspect so am willing to pay the price for that.

I take much bigger risks with my other investment accounts. Agreed with the overall risk aspect: we earn a lot of money with a relatively stable job market that is usually sustainable over decades. Most of us can probably afford the risk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Ya those are cars I'll likely never buy due to that. I couldn't fit in the new Supras either. Although, when I have the funds, I MAY just trick out a c3 stingray with everything I can. That body just speaks to me somehow.

For this Christmas, I was driving around in my MIL leased Escalade, which aside from how damn bulky the thing is, was actually VERY comfortable to drive in. My back was enjoying the creature comforts that I just don't have with my corolla.



Lol. Years ago I had a Cayman R with gt2 seats. I went to pick up my buddy to go to vegas. He sat in the passenger seat and immediately said, “I can’t do this.” We took his Escalade instead. I’m 5’ 8” 150 so I fit just fine and found the seats very comfortable. Ironically he got a Supra last year because he felt the dealer markups on the c8 corvettes were too high.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Tesla is on borrowed time. Stock is overpriced. Musk knows this and will sell more in 2022

While Tesla's price has always been too rich for me, Musk selling stock this year had nothing to do with that. He had expiring stock options that he had to exercise and he wanted to get taxed at a lower rate than what the Democrats were threatening in the BBB bill if he would have sold in 2022. The only shares he sold were used to cover the tax bill generated by the exercising of his stock options.

Musk doesn't sell Tesla shares because he thinks they are overvalued, he sells it because he doesn't have billions of dollars laying around to pay taxes with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
While Tesla’s recent execution has been commendable, we remain negative on Tesla stock at its current valuation. With a market cap of about $1 trillion, Tesla trades at a relatively lofty 120x projected 2022 earnings and is essentially valued higher than the ten largest automotive companies combined. We think this is excessive for a couple of reasons. Firstly, it’s likely that the EV market is going to get a lot more competitive. The barriers to entry aren’t too high, the products are not too complex compared to internal combustion engines and mainstream automotive companies are investing in building massive scale. For example, VW alone plans to invest about $100 billion toward its EV transition in the next five years. We don’t think that Tesla is going to corner the auto market in the long run given that car buyers like variety. If mainstream players eventually deliver compelling EVs that are well-received with customers, it could change the narrative around the auto majors, and potentially hurt the valuation of pure-play EV players such as Tesla.




 
The stock market looks a bit overheated at this point with a pullback likely soon. Despite the wasteful govt spending Bill ( 1 trillion too much) I’m still bullish on stocks particularly foreign and emerging equities.

since this original post, S&P up 22%, Vanguard International up about 1%, and Vanguard Emerging Markets down about 10%. Nobody knows nothing about the direction of markets and the stronger their conviction the less likely you should listen to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
While Tesla's price has always been too rich for me, Musk selling stock this year had nothing to do with that. He had expiring stock options that he had to exercise and he wanted to get taxed at a lower rate than what the Democrats were threatening in the BBB bill if he would have sold in 2022. The only shares he sold were used to cover the tax bill generated by the exercising of his stock options.

Musk doesn't sell Tesla shares because he thinks they are overvalued, he sells it because he doesn't have billions of dollars laying around to pay taxes with.


And his sales had minimal effect on share price revealing there remains high conviction for TSLA.
 
since this original post, S&P up 22%, Vanguard International up about 1%, and Vanguard Emerging Markets down about 10%. Nobody knows nothing about the direction of markets and the stronger their conviction the less likely you should listen to them.
Clearly, the warning signs for 2022 are present. The Fed is beginning to taper more aggressively, higher interest rates, inflation and 2 stellar years of returns. If you are expecting 2022 to match 2021 in terms of returns you are mistaken.

Second, Emerging markets and Europe remain cheap relative to the USA. The Omicron wave delayed any recovery in these markets until 2022. Just like Oil was at $30 per barrel 24 months ago and the energy stocks were all hated the same applies to emerging markets. Stay the course.

My conviction is to stay diversified and realize 2022 could even be a down year for the S and P 500 while other sectors/markets could be up significantly.
 
The rest of the decade will be value stocks. Tech bubble will burst. SP 500 and Nasdaq will dip. The dot com burst will recur though maybe more gradually this time. History will repeat. Switch to value stocks now and maybe even some SQQQ, and when tech crumbles, slowly buy QQQ and even TQQQ to have capital investment. Make a boat load when it is large cap growth again around 2030.
 
The rest of the decade will be value stocks. Tech bubble will burst. SP 500 and Nasdaq will dip. The dot com burst will recur though maybe more gradually this time. History will repeat. Switch to value stocks now and maybe even some SQQQ, and when tech crumbles, slowly buy QQQ and even TQQQ to have capital investment. Make a boat load when it is large cap growth again around 2030.
I have the same feeling in SQQQ. But I am scared to buy it.
 
Why do people even bother to write down their predictions?

so they can link to it 4 years from now when they are correct. They will conveniently ignore the 15 other predictions that were wildly incorrect.
 
Clearly, the warning signs for 2022 are present. The Fed is beginning to taper more aggressively, higher interest rates, inflation and 2 stellar years of returns. If you are expecting 2022 to match 2021 in terms of returns you are mistaken.

Second, Emerging markets and Europe remain cheap relative to the USA. The Omicron wave delayed any recovery in these markets until 2022. Just like Oil was at $30 per barrel 24 months ago and the energy stocks were all hated the same applies to emerging markets. Stay the course.

My conviction is to stay diversified and realize 2022 could even be a down year for the S and P 500 while other sectors/markets could be up significantly.

You just never change. It's like reading from a how to book on being a fortune teller. Make predictions couched in signs and warnings that are just vague enough to not quite ever be completely wrong no matter what happens.


Here's a prediction. Neither you nor I know anything. Always stay diversified. The end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
While Tesla’s recent execution has been commendable, we remain negative on Tesla stock at its current valuation. With a market cap of about $1 trillion, Tesla trades at a relatively lofty 120x projected 2022 earnings and is essentially valued higher than the ten largest automotive companies combined. We think this is excessive for a couple of reasons. Firstly, it’s likely that the EV market is going to get a lot more competitive. The barriers to entry aren’t too high, the products are not too complex compared to internal combustion engines and mainstream automotive companies are investing in building massive scale. For example, VW alone plans to invest about $100 billion toward its EV transition in the next five years. We don’t think that Tesla is going to corner the auto market in the long run given that car buyers like variety. If mainstream players eventually deliver compelling EVs that are well-received with customers, it could change the narrative around the auto majors, and potentially hurt the valuation of pure-play EV players such as Tesla.






Nice pop today after Q4 deliveries reported. Interesting that EM sold before the announcement. He knows the score and I think he’s just playing around.
 
Nice pop today after Q4 deliveries reported. Interesting that EM sold before the announcement. He knows the score and I think he’s just playing around.
He needs to sell before year-end for tax purpose. His first batch was sold at the previous peak around 1200$.

I think Tesla has a potential of 2000$, considering that its market value is only around 1T. With top tech companies go to 2T, 3T, Tesla will be there too.

BTW, Nancy Pelosi's husband has a LEAP position of 500$. He made a bundle. I think it is corruption.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Top