Tesla: From EV Messiah to Overvalued Bubble

Tesla: From Electric Messiah to the Bursting Bubble Many Await

A company that manufactures cars, sells software, and promises full self-driving has traded for years as if it had already won all those bets simultaneously. This is the paradox running through analyses of Tesla: a real business with physical products and customers, whose market value rests largely on promises that never quite materialize. The discussion begins with a bold thesis—that the company is an inflated scheme destined to collapse—and branches into several directions: product quality, the viability of electric vehicles as substitutes for combustion engines, autonomous driving, and Elon Musk’s role as both asset and liability.

Electric Vehicles Are Not Substitutes for Combustion Engines

The most repeated argument does not attack Tesla based on its numbers, but on physics. Electricity must first be generated, and replacing the current vehicle fleet would require immense resources, including oil. Under this logic, battery-powered cars are pretty toys that cannot replace internal combustion engines; if there is no return possible on the billion-dollar investment, the company's future remains uncertain. This is a fundamental objection that no quarterly balance sheet resolves.

To this is added the political reading: electric vehicles depend on public policies against climate change, driven by the Democratic Party, which increasingly clashes with Musk. When the executive's popularity falls, owning a Tesla can shift from a symbol of Californian virtue to a shameful label. In this scenario, brand value ceases to be an asset.

Autonomous Driving: Who Is Really Ahead?

Here the analysis splits into two incompatible currents. One maintains that Tesla leads in computer vision, the correct bet, while rivals rely on LiDAR, which fails in fog or rain. The other responds that the manufacturer's hardware is lamentable compared to competitors, lacking LiDAR, and that its system remains at Level II assistance. A combination of multiple sensors, not just cameras, would be the path forward.

The data cited to temper the hype: the only certified Level 3 systems belong to Mercedes and Honda, operating with a 60 km/h limit on designated highway sections. For enthusiasts, this shows technological superiority; for skeptics, it proves true autonomous driving is still far off and that promising Level V is selling smoke. Legal liability in case of accident is the line separating marketing from engineering.

The Valuation Problem: Illogical Capitalization

The most uncomfortable criticism targets the price, not the product. Tesla trades with a capitalization that defies logic and does not correspond to the company's true worth. The parallel with Bitcoin is explicit: an asset with zero intrinsic value sustained by people agreeing to assign it value. And when the operation relies on printed fiat money, the castle crumbles when the paper runs out.

Some nuance this: as long as the state supports it, the party continues. No one knows when the moment arrives, so opening a short position is an act of inverse faith. You can be right and lose money for years due to market irrationality. Intellectual honesty requires admitting Tesla could be the future, not a bubble.

Musk: The Asset Shooting Himself in the Foot

The founder's figure works in both directions. For some, he is a privileged child playing genius, a seller of ideas who promises what never arrives. For others, his political drift—increasingly leaning Republican—alienates his natural buyers. Comedians from both sides have targeted him, and when many join in lynching someone, something is wrong. The brand is tied to the person, and the person has become a fruta burden.

---

The question remains unanswered with numbers: if electric vehicles do not replace combustion engines, if full autonomy remains uncertified, and if market value admits no comparison with traditional manufacturers, what sustains the stock price? Perhaps only the habit of rising.