Nivek

He should have run. Fuck.

What the fuck is a quavo? An auto tune remix of a one hit kravitz?

Choke? Mizzou lost their offense with Cook. He is back. So their offense is back. And now their defense is inspired.

Flagship university has school colors = bad. Marching band stolen valor = good

Difficult to do when your receivers are being mugged, and pulled. IIRC the game ended on a no-call DPI going over the receiver.

So, Cory Redding to right guard?

You see we beat Georgia at the end of the year when they didn’t want to be there. And we beat Alabama at the beginning of the year when they weren’t ready.

The criticism about Texas not facing passing attacks is a mirror to last year, where our worse secondary did face more opponents. And it is not like everyone on the team is suddenly new. But overall they look better and the overall defense has held down opponents to -50% below their average ppg. What Georgia brings is more depth than other opponents have had. But our averages are skewed because of the injuries and games getting out of hand with low enough scores. And if Ewers stinks it up, it is not like Sark doesn’t have another option that can bring in a little more flash of athleticism to mitigate some of the youthful risk.

1/3) I think that the influence and business plan that was put in place with the 2 founders was sound and I do not think Tesla exists without them. I do not think Elon provided a service much greater than a Peter Thiel, Bezos, Buffet, Gates, Jobs, or any other celebrity rich connected guy could have if they were in the same position. So yes, they had the idea for the company, their competencies to bringing products to market were instrumental in getting the plan off the ground and their knowledge and connections gave them credibility to outside investors. Elon jumping in, also helped with the cash raising aspects and it seems like he was content with the founders getting things going. During that time, the first EV to be street legal and mass produced by Tesla was going forward under their watch and with the people they brought to make it happen and to build for the future. I absolutely believe they had a plan to build the first car at a loss to prove it could be done without legacy automakers and then use the money from the sales and additional funding to develop the next model which would be offered to many more customers (though too expensive) for everyone. Then use that capital to grow the business further so they could bring down fixed unit costs across all models and compete with legacy automakers with EVs for mass consumption in westernized nations with the infrastructure. They also needed to develop home charging stations and on site charging stations in order to grow the acceptance of the vehicles as well. Elon has actually stated that was the plan for Tesla. With the NDAs and the lack of insider knowledge, it seems like that strategy which they largely achieved was instrumental to their success. So look at the Elon lead business strategy for Tesla. It is a mess. I said I wasn't going to do this but here it is: Article 1: Master Plan Article 2: Elon takes credit for Master Plan (you can find other examples of this if you do not like the source) (here Elon refers to himself as CEO in 2006 when Eberhard was in that role! https://www.tesla.com/secret-master-plan Article 3: Master Plan 2 (this one links some commentary, but the plan is outlined) Article 4: Master Plan 3 (this one likes the research of the plan but doesn't address the implementation issues) 2) I really do not believe Musk runs the company. How many CEOs do you know and what type of hours do they put in? The few I knew who part-timed it or 40-50 houred it didn't last or the companies went under. How can Musk do the same for Boring, Starlink, Twitter, Tesla, and SpaceX? I think Musk relies on others to actually run the company. (I have run a store before without the title while my supervisor was credited for it. He had virtually involvement and only showed up when I went on vacation.) 4) A plan doesn't have to be ground breaking to be successful. They found an uninhabited market space which was not being served and they served it. Look, buy low, sell high, isn't going to be new to any investor, but damn if that isn't how many of us make money in investments when it comes down to it. If you are into shorting you just invert the order of operations but the fundamentals are still the same. Especially if they estimate their margins are high and much higher than their capital costs. Lastly, I brought up the master plans (strategies) for a secondary reason. If you look at the original one, it was focused and had clear goals which make sense. If you look at Master Plan 2, it is kind of shitty. The idea that they will enter every market segment for vehicular travel is simply not reasonable. They can make passenger vehicles but they cannot just simply scale it up to any size and make something equivalent. It reminds me of the idea of making a giant bug from the movie Relic a monster, in reality a scaled up bug would just hug the ground not able to get enough oxygen because its system is not evolved to be that massive. Shrink rays and Big rays are fun for movies, but the physical limitations of reality get in the way. Sure if new battery technology comes out, then this can be revisited. The other aspects include create stunning solar roofs (subjective and not actionable) and develop the self-driving capability which is 10x safer than manual driving. Well they have had access to billions of miles driven from their products, how much is enough to put it into place? Why is this not working? Can it work given the limitations provided on the cars out there or what would have to be added for future care to be able to achieve this? Enable car to make money for you when you aren't using it. (How?) And now they are moving to master plans 3/4 when they haven't achieved 2? Why are they suddenly not focused and no longer able to meet these goals? I think the answer is that Elon's setting them now. And the first ones were set by the former founder. So yeah, if that is accurate then much of the success is rooted in the culture and strategies they created off of the ideas they had.

But that doesn't sell drama. It doesn't matter if Texas played the 85 Bears defense. Just as a few years ago we all heard about how Texas hadn't played a defense like Georgia's and we skull fucked them.

But those two SEC teams and defending national champions are not SEC teams.

I don't have much time to reply in depth but for this part I want to get something out there. Eberhard was into racing EVs, he was a consultant for AC Propulsion, and this was a hobby of his. This was not someone who bought an unrelated sports car or started collecting cars just because they were bored and had money to burn. I say this as a guy who has rebuilt engines, fixed and modified cars and have scars on my hands left over from that time. There were car guys who were into it and wanted to learn and car guys who just wanted to buy it. Even when it came to racing cars there were people who built and tested modifications, those who had and idea but couldn't do the work (or didn't want to) and there were others who just brought theirs to a shop and let them go at it. And it was pretty easy to discern who was who.

Look, they know they can create more drama by doing this. Just like in 2005 when USC played an easy schedule but hardly anyone questioned them because it was good for business at that time and shitting on Texas was good for business then too. I am old enough to have seen all the narratives and goal post shifting and the parroting. It don’t make a shit and the talking heads will just say something stupid again in the future.

I think you are under some delusion that I was going to write an exhausting evaluation of the Tesla Corp complete with insider information and references. I am not. But what I can do as a layperson outsider, is make observations and use judgement. An electrical engineer and inventor whose hobby was racing electric vehicles founded the company with his former business partner. His focus was not on reinventing the wheel, but to use technology that largely existed and leverage his own skill set to develop a car that could be street legal and sporty and electric. Musk joined on as an early seed investor and helped with the Series funding for sure. He definitely helped make the company what it is through funding it. But is Musk providing some unique value here? Is this the first time a company has been funded before? No. Does he have prior manufacturing experience? Racing? Automotive? The fact that the company is now 250 months on, after it was founded, is irrelevant. He is not the founder nor was it his idea. He just latched on to something someone else did which is a pattern for him in his most successful ventures. The fact that they kicked out the guy the same year they sold their first models doesn't mean there weren't plans for the future. I am not really sure how you operate, but some of us operated in a current sphere while working on the next phase of development. This is not unusual in manufacturing as well as other sectors. In one former role of mine, we were working on developing techniques and software for the next phase of operations while we trained people on something that could be made obsolete - this was a smallish private company. And while this might come as a surprise to you, the investors of that firm were not in the room with us talking about Bequay's method for 3 component geophone calibration in free space or finite difference modeling details to be worked out. You keep harping on the fact they ran off the founder just before the first model was produced seems to make me question your understanding of business and design. Unless you think Musk sat down in 2008, put pen to paper and came up with a car <6 months before selling them (which curiously matches the actual founder's original stated plan) and the other founders were just chasing their tail for the previous ~4 years in spite of their backgrounds for bringing products to market and prior expertise on the subjects. Or maybe you think Drori was the one who designed the car and got the old GM/Toyota plant all going at once. Well then maybe we can claim the first car was on the founders but the second is all Elon. Is it? The first car was proof of concept, it lost money and was expected to lose money. Unless you think one can mass produce ~200 cars and ever break even even though you just bought a factory that was used to produce thousands of cars week? This brings me to my next point, business having net losses is not really something all that unusual as they get going. The fact that you talk about this as evidence is strange. There are kind of fundamental aspects to manufacturing of products that you seem to be overlooking and/or ignoring. Economies of scale, I believe is the terminology for spreading costs amongst more products which can then allow for profits to be generated. So yeah, I do think they had an idea of how much it would cost them to build and mass produce their first serious production vehicles, at scale (which was Ebenhard's goal in the first place) with a profit in mind, and with about $450 million of US government loans helping to fund it. As I have mentioned, Musk did a job, he showed up at the right time, and leveraged his skills/assets/connection to help develop the company from a financial aspect, and he branded himself as a founder, genius, and tried to champion trends of the time. I admit, at first I thought he might be doing something good for humanity and I originally thought he was the founder (I didn't care to look it up). Now I see him for what he really is. He used massive assets that he had to create massive wealth for himself by piggybacking on the works of others but then trying to take credit for it. But his character couldn't be concealed by the PR firms, and he has come across as a bit of a scumbag. His hubris created a stupid truck that cannot do truck things. His management of twitter has made it largely unusable for some people (no, I do not care to see random porn or elevated racism, misinformation, disinformation, and xenophobia that are all but unavoidable). The success of Tesla is from the hardworking engineers, designers, manufacturers, supply chain managers, software writers, and the scientists that helped invent what is put into production there and of course the founders. The money guys allowed it to happen, but they didn't make it happen. I cannot imagine any other company operating with a part-time executive who spends much of his day rallying for fascism, popping pills, and syphoning off resources from one company for another. That leads me to believe that his role as a leader at Tesla is mostly symbolic, and that the real management is handled by others, while he just gets in the way and fucks things up from time to time. Lastly, the public's hesitation to invest during the first 9 years was limited due to the fact that they didn't go public until 7 years after their founding. So this is just a ridiculous statement by you. Plus you are trying to twist what I stated, when I am not an officer of the company, of course I did not have access to their internal documents. So yeah, when I say it is fucking obvious they are successful after having 50% margins, this is entirely after the fact and I have never stated otherwise. But I imagine the folks who did have access to this information sure as shit knew it would work when they had the math available. So tell me how I am wrong or if anything I said was dishonest or a spin.

I find your lack of comma, disturbing.

That brings back memories. I spent a little over a week out in Austin, NV. The old lady with the giant fly swatter, got me for being fresh. Drank a bit at the International nightly until we went to Belmont. A girl I know got some shoes from that tree, and unsurprisingly contracted a foot fungus.

BUT BIDEN IS OLD!!!!!!!

Um, you are just cherry picking information. Musk was an integral investor who helped them get the funding to build the cars and to expand the company. He is also a prick who ran off the guys whose design was that first sports car, as their business plan was sound. Build the sports car first, then build a cheaper car, then build an even cheaper model. He laid the groundwork, and got the boot just as they rolled out the first models to be sold. At that point the company was established, and Musk rushed into take credit. He disparaged the guy and settled a lawsuit. The fact that they achieved profitability as they scaled up is not really a surprise, fuck man, their profit margins are 50% on some models IIRC. Let's not act like he sat down and designed the shit. My guess is that the reason the Cybertruck took so long to produce was that Elon has a Elizabeth Holmes method for design, sets a goal and hopes others can achieve it. The timeline still seems rushed as the bugs and fixes make it pretty much shit. The other vehicles don't have these ridiculous issues. I think this dichotomy in quality is directly related to the pivot from car guys starting the company and building the team. Heck his FSD should have billions of miles driven data. When will there be enough data to analyze?

So do you know the real story of Tesla and the 2 founders? One was an electrical engineer who raced electric cars. He asked a custom electric race car company to make production vehicles and they declined. He did some work for them and then figured he could make a go of it and brought in another guy. Elon sued to have himself listed as a founder of the firm when he was just an investor. Once it got rolling he started branding it as his idea.

Can’t blame him. College was fun.

How much were student tickets?

Judges need to be held accountable.

You never really had to live near the aggy. Imagine the Princess Bride scene, where we have built up an immunity to moronic cultists through our proximity poisoning.