my truck randomly got power homeshare backup

[sjesser]

i didnt have this before, didnt pay for it. it just randomly came in, now theres a switch for it to turn on

Where did you notice it? On the app or vehicle display?

Sponsored

 

[sjesser]

really gotta sell this thing, its a one trick pony. really the novelty wears off

Funny how people see their vehicles differently. I've had my non-Foundation CT for about 4 months and thoroughly enjoy it. First and foremost it's a truck with a full sized truck bed, which I use frequently. That aside, it is one of the single most comfortable vehicles I've ever driven complete with all the creature features including a stellar sound system. I'm adding PowerShare within the next few months so that will save me 15k or so on a backup system.

 

[cyberguy123]

Funny how people see their vehicles differently. I've had my non-Foundation CT for about 4 months and thoroughly enjoy it. First and foremost it's a truck with a full sized truck bed, which I use frequently. That aside, it is one of the single most comfortable vehicles I've ever driven complete with all the creature features including a stellar sound system. I'm adding PowerShare within the next few months so that will save me 15k or so on a backup system.

yeah people got preferences so you like it! thats great. my experience can be labeled nothing other than utter garbage

 

[not_elon_]

plus i get filped off multiple times a day

This is how we know he’s really a cybertruck owner.

 

[Crissa]

This is how we know he’s really a cybertruck owner.

I'm a motorcyclist; if I can go forty miles in traffic without someone trying to kill me or yell at me, it's a good day.

(Vast majority of Californians know how to be polite to motorcycles; but there's always that one guy, and usually it's a truck guy, mad you slipped past him.)

-Crissa

 

[Balthezor]

Sorry to hear that man. But if you sell your Cybertruck, who will be the leader of the NY Cybertruck group?

 

[sjesser]

but 18k in the first year? thats not normal

Actually it is quite normal given the average depreciation for a car after a year is 20%. I paid around 100K for my CT so I should expect it to lose approximately 20K after 1 year of ownership.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

You're not "eating" any depreciation unless you want to liquidate. I'm a long-time stock investor and it works the same way. You don't take a loss unless you sell.

But anyone who buys a brand new vehicle and doesn't expect massive depreciation in the first year needs to re-appraise how they look at money and new car purchases. Gas trucks purchased a year ago have just as much depreciation. I buy new vehicles to get many years of useage and enjoyment from them (and so I don't have to waste time dinking around with the used market). I mentally write off their entire purchase cost as soon as I buy them.

I am a longtime financial analyst, financial advisor and CPA, have taught graduate level finance at Johns Hopkins for over 30 years. This is one of the most repeated and most incorrect myths in investing and asset purchases.

Public company shares are completely fungible. What you paid for them is completely irrelevant in today's buy/hold/sell decision. They ONLY thing that matters is whether you would buy them today at the market price today. If so, hold. If not, sell. They are easily sold in a matter of minutes, so are the exact same thing as having cash. If you purchased at a higher price, because public shares are so liquid, you have ALREADY sustained the loss or accreted the gain. You simply haven't recognized it yet, but it is fully sustained, in your current valuation at that level.

This approach is repeated often by FA's talking their business, but it is 100% false. We never "recover" market declines in share values - shares may move back up to or above what we originally paid for them, but it isn't a recovery - it is simply a gain from the last time we decided not to sell. This isn't semantics - it should be core to how folks think about investing. Anything else is a basis trap - a psychological trick we play on ourselves using irrelevant data (our original cost - that money is already gone).

Put simply: Every time we decide not to sell a stock, we are making an affirmative decision to buy it today at that price. That's the beauty of market investing - liquidity. The calculus is slightly different for illiquid assets with transaction costs and actual utility (eg transportation in the interim) like automobiles, but the principle is the same.

 

[sjesser]

I am a longtime financial analyst, financial advisor and CPA, have taught graduate level finance at Johns Hopkins for over 30 years. This is one of the most repeated and most incorrect myths in investing and asset purchases. Public company shares are completely fungible. Hat you paid for them is completely irrelevant today. They ONLY thing that matters is whether you would buy them today at the market price today. If so, hold. If not, sell. They are easily sold in a matter of minutes, so are the exact same thing as having cash. If you purchased at a higher price, because public shares are so liquid, you have ALREADY sustained the loss or accreted the gain. Your approach is repeated often by FA's talking their business, but it is 100% false.

I think you are missing HaulingAss's point. Buying a car is generally a purchase; not an investment. An investment is made with the expectation of future returns. If the OP bought his CT as an investment, he needs to go back to Investing 101 considering that with rare exceptions, vehicle purchases are poor investments. Furthermore, if the OP was looking for an investment, he should of purchased Tesla stock instead of a Tesla vehicle.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

Actually it is quite normal given the average depreciation for a car after a year is 20%. I paid around 100K for my CT so I should expect it to lose approximately 20K after 1 year of ownership.

Any yet it is worth only $60K today. Because you can buy a better-made new '25 for $74k, and the 20% drive-off-the-lot valuation loss puts a new CT bought today at about $59k. Discount further for whatever your year of use/ownership implies.

 

[sjesser]

Any yet it is worth only $60K today. Because you can buy a better-made new '25 for $74k, and the 20% drive-off-the-lot valuation loss puts a new CT bought today at about $59k. Discount further for whatever your year of use/ownership implies.

I paid a base price of $79,900 for a non-foundation CT late last year. To the best of my knowledge, they are still priced at $79,900. I'm not in the market for another one so I haven't checked prices lately. Maybe Tesla has dropped the price a bit to move vehicles but that happens quite frequently in the automotive market. Feel free wracking your brain with coulda/shoulda/woulda's but that's not my cup of tea. I make a purchase and then I move on *especially if it involves vehicles or electronics as there is always something newer and brighter and possibly less expensive in the future.

 

[scottyah]

I am a longtime financial analyst, financial advisor and CPA, have taught graduate level finance at Johns Hopkins for over 30 years. This is one of the most repeated and most incorrect myths in investing and asset purchases.

Public company shares are completely fungible. What you paid for them is completely irrelevant in today's buy/hold/sell decision. They ONLY thing that matters is whether you would buy them today at the market price today. If so, hold. If not, sell. They are easily sold in a matter of minutes, so are the exact same thing as having cash. If you purchased at a higher price, because public shares are so liquid, you have ALREADY sustained the loss or accreted the gain. You simply haven't recognized it yet, but it is fully sustained, in your current valuation at that level.

This approach is repeated often by FA's talking their business, but it is 100% false. We never "recover" market declines in share values - shares may move back up to or above what we originally paid for them, but it isn't a recovery - it is simply a gain from the last time we decided not to sell. This isn't semantics - it should be core to how folks think about investing. Anything else is a basis trap - a psychological trick we play on ourselves using irrelevant data (our original cost - that money is already gone).

Put simply: Every time we decide not to sell a stock, we are making an affirmative decision to buy it today at that price. That's the beauty of market investing - liquidity. The calculus is slightly different for illiquid assets with transaction costs and actual utility (eg transportation in the interim) like automobiles, but the principle is the same.

It's not full liquidity because of the transaction cost and taxes (or writeoffs). If it was simply a gain from last time I decided not to sell I'd be "making" ~30% daily haha!
Definitely is a perspective shift though, I'll have to consider it for awhile. Thank you for sharing.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

I think you are missing HaulingAss's point. Buying a car is generally a purchase; not an investment. An investment is made with the expectation of future returns. If the OP bought his CT as an investment, he needs to go back to Investing 101 considering that with rare exceptions, vehicle purchases are poor investments. Furthermore, if the OP was looking for an investment, he should of purchased Tesla stock instead of a Tesla vehicle.

This question was about value and loss thereof. He literally said in the post "I'm a long-time stock investor and it works the same way. You don't take a loss unless you sell." That is incorrect. The loss is already there based on today's market price, whether a hard asset or shares. I didn't make the segue to the stock market.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

I paid a base price of $79,900 for a non-foundation CT late last year. To the best of my knowledge, they are still priced at $79,900. I'm not in the market for another one so I haven't checked prices lately. Maybe Tesla has dropped the price a bit to move vehicles but that happens quite frequently in the automotive market. Feel free wracking your brain with coulda/shoulda/woulda's but that's not my cup of tea. I make a purchase and then I move on *especially if it involves vehicles or electronics as there is always something newer and brighter and possibly less expensive in the future.

the '25 qualifies for the $7,500 tax credit at point of sale, so the delivered price to me last week was $72.4, plus delivery fees, or about $74k - that's the current net price for valuing new vs used.

 

[sjesser]

the '25 qualifies for the $7,500 tax credit at point of sale, so the delivered price to me last week was $72.4, plus delivery fees, or about $74k - that's the current net price for valuing new vs used.

I got a $7,500 credit on my federal taxes as well.

Sponsored