Tesla dropped to No. 3 in Cali

[Arctic_White]

I am worried about my portfolio that's overweight with Tesla stocks?

And it will be dead in the water for the long haul?

As the late, great Charlie Munger once said:
“If you’re not willing to react with equanimity to a market price decline of 50% two or three times a century you’re not fit to be a common shareholder and you deserve the mediocre result you’re going to get compared to the people who do have the temperament, who can be more philosophical about these market fluctuations.”

Are you in it for the long haul or the short run? Are you a true investor or a mere speculator/gambler?

 

[Cougs]

I will not be your megaphone and not cite your kind anymore.

Do not pick and choose what you read Amanda Guru written multiple articles picking on companies like Tesla etc..., CEO Jamie Diamond

Tesla surpasses Toyota as bestselling carmaker in California

https://spectrumnews1.com/ca/la-wes...-toyota-as-bestselling-carmaker-in-california

What You Need To Know

• Between April and June, Tesla sold more vehicles than Toyota for the first time in California
• Tesla sold 69,000 vehicles in the second quarter; Toyota sold 67,000
• The Tesla Model Y and Model 3 were the top two bestsellers, followed by the Toyota Camry and RAV4
• For the first half of 2023, 21% of new vehicles sold in the state were battery electrics

The bestselling vehicle overall was the Tesla Model Y. The Tesla Model 3 took the No. 2 spot, followed by the Toyota Camry and Toyota RAV4.

Through the first six months of 2023, Toyota was the market leader with 14.7% of all new vehicle sales in California, despite being outpaced by Tesla between April and June.

Rounding out the top five were Tesla (13.6%), Honda (9.3%), Ford (8.1%) and Chevrolet (6.9%).

California’s vehicle market differs from the rest of the country. Nationally, Ford was the top-selling brand for the first half of the year (12.2%), followed by Toyota (12%) and Chevrolet (11.1).

For the first half of 2023, the market share of new battery electric vehicle sales in California exceeded 21%.

EV newcomers Rivian and Polestar both saw 22% increases in sales. Nationally, EV sales made up 7.2% of the market, according to Cox Automotive.

 

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

As the late, great Charlie Munger once said:
“If you’re not willing to react with equanimity to a market price decline of 50% two or three times a century you’re not fit to be a common shareholder and you deserve the mediocre result you’re going to get compared to the people who do have the temperament, who can be more philosophical about these market fluctuations.”

Are you in it for the long haul or the short run? Are you a true investor or a mere speculator/gambler?

That's why I am not a fan of Munger.

And he is wrong, I made good money with my short-term outlook. How else I was able to buy my CT in cash?

Some of my buy-and-sell trades happened in the span of less than 30 minutes.

A few times, I am done trading in less than an hour and being in PDT, can go back to bed and continue my pleasantly interrupted sleep.

 

[Cougs]

Electrek

Tesla sold one out of every 8 cars in California in 2023, 21.4% EV share
https://electrek.co/2024/01/30/one-...california-in-2023-was-a-tesla-21-4-ev-share/

 

[Cougs]

I do not have time to rewrite the article but I copied and pasted it so the following is word for word of the aticle not my writing: To the people who are trying very hard to knock down electrification without knowing what are the overall benefits here are some. In addition during COVID when Europeans population stopped driving Venice waters changed from dark ugly dirty waters to nice clean clear water with life in it like fishes etc...

https://electrek.co/2023/02/10/surprise-electric-cars-are-already-making-california-healthier/

"From the “duh” department, California is already becoming more healthy because of electric car penetration, which has resulted in cleaner air in areas where electric cars are more prevalent, according to a new study.


The study was published last week by the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California. It tracked real-world pollution levels, electric car penetration, and emergency room visits across California between 2013 and 2019, and controlled against overall improvements in California air quality during the study period.

Completely unsurprisingly, the study found that clean air vehicles actually resulted in clean air, with the benefits being stronger in areas where there were more of them. Amazing. Who knew.

Each increase of 20 cars per 1,000 people (which is roughly equivalent to 2% of cars – since CA has 840 cars per 1,000 people) was associated with a .41ppb (parts per billion) drop in nitrogen dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere. California law sets average NOx standards at 30ppb, so a drop of .41 is a pretty big chunk, especially when compared to just 2% of EV penetration.

It stands to reason that taking gas cars off the road would reduce NOx, because nitrogen dioxide is a form of pollution particularly associated with vehicle tailpipes, and is the major contributor to the formation of smog, with a variety of negative health effects.

For one example, worldwide, vehicle traffic specifically is responsible for 4 million new cases of childhood asthma per year. And air pollution is responsible for 100,000-200,000 deaths in the US per year, the largest chunk of which is caused by vehicle pollution.

And so the study checked to see if areas with higher EV peneration, and lower NOx, would also have fewer problems with asthma, and whaddayaknow, they did!

Every 20 electric cars per 1,000 Californians in a particular zip code was associated with a 3.2% decline in asthma-related emergency department visits.

And since emergency room visits are extremely expensive in the American healthcare system, it stands to reason that any drop in ER visits would also reduce health costs. This is relevant even for those who do not suffer from asthma, due to pooling of costs through health insurance.

The cost benefits of better public health are not always focused on, but should be relevant here. The study did not focus on these, but other studies have. For example, IMF estimates that fossil fuels are responsible for $5.3 trillion globally in health and environmental costs every year, and any reduction in fossil fuel pollution would stand to reduce this number.

And the best part of these results is that they happened rapidly, only over a few years, and with only low numbers of EV penetration. The study period only tracked 2013 to 2019, where the installed base of EVs across California rose from a tiny 1.4 to a still-modest 14.7 cars per 1,000, and yet the study still found these significant benefits even with a small number of EVs.

And those numbers are still growing. EVs made up 8% of the new car market in California in 2019, but that number is up to 17% now. Surely, if the study were to incorporate new data, the health benefits of clean air vehicles would continue improving. And on the longer term, the benefits of avoiding climate change will be tremendous."

 

[Kahpernicus]

Why are you posting articles about 2023 quarters?

 

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

Why are you posting articles about 2023 quarters?

I'm simply old fashioned? ?

 

[Cougs]

Only one article written by Amanda Gerut is being floated around everywhere possible. Do they have anything else??? show it.

companies go up and down and the macroeconomics changes. The overall objective is totla electrification by

Data pulled from:

https://www.cncda.org/wp-content/uploads/Cal-Covering-1Q-24-FINAL.pdf

I like it when there is concrete proof. One article written by Amanda Gerut is being floated around everywhere possible. Journalist nowadays.

 

[Cougs]

Why are you posting articles about 2023 quarters?

it is a fact 2023 toyota was not number 1.

 

[Kahpernicus]

it is a fact 2023 toyota was not number 1.

No one is saying they were?


What are you disputing?

 

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

No one is saying they were?


What are you disputing?

And who cares really on who is No.1 as long as we have our own trouble-free vehicle.

 

[Crissa]

Data pulled from:

https://www.cncda.org/wp-content/uploads/Cal-Covering-1Q-24-FINAL.pdf

So the Model Y is still the most popular model, selling more than most entire brands; but like I figured, the compact and cheaper models en masse prevailed.

Sure seems like the article misstates the totals.

-Crissa

 

[Snlass]

Also reflects higher gas prices with people shifting their new purchases down the luxury tiers to; more economical higher mpg models cause they can't afford to fuel larger more luxurios models any more due to inflation (Bidenomics) in conjunction with all those CA taxes they have to pay to provide the free benefits for everyone

 

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

Also reflects higher gas prices with people shifting their new purchases down the luxury tiers to; more economical higher mpg models cause they can't afford to fuel larger more luxurios models any more due to inflation (Bidenomics) in conjunction with all those CA taxes they have to pay to provide the free benefits for everyone

I am not here for politics and rightfully this should be a non-partisan zone.

I know economics is hard. Both in my college and 30+ years as practicioner.

So i'll continue to refrain least I hurt some snowflake's feelings.

 

[Crissa]

Also reflects higher gas prices with...

Sure, inflation returned prices to their median for the last decade and a half.



Good reason to buy an EV.

C'mon, let's not with the politics.

-Crissa

(Zerohedge sucks, but fight nonsense with nonsense, I guess.)