[awkwarddaturtle]

> I'm not sure why you're so upset.

I'm not. But it's interesting how I just got swarmed by 3 commenters.

> The comment you are quoting is a snippet out of context.

The context makes it even worse.

"None of us can unlearn what Tesla has taught us. There is no way back now. Tesla has already won.'"

I can't believe you think that the "context" makes it any less cultish. The comment is almost messianic.

[tpolischuk]

Is he wrong? Did Tesla not prove to the rest of the auto industry that electric cars are not only viable but also profitable and inevitable? Would we have the Bolt, Spark, Fiat e500, eGolf without Tesla?

[galkk]

If any, I think it was baby steps made by Toyota Prius. Original poster specifically pointed that profitable part of your answer isn't there for Tesla, in reality.

[blang]

Isn't the parent's point that they are not profitable?

[deelowe]

Toyota may have had a part in that... The stage was set before TSLA was a household stock symbol.

[awkwarddaturtle]

> Is he wrong? Did Tesla not prove to the rest of the auto industry that electric cars are not only viable but also profitable and inevitable?

From your "context": "What are the accumulated losses so far? $5-10B?"

$5-10B Losses doesn't translate into "profitable".

> Would we have the Bolt, Spark, Fiat e500, eGolf without Tesla?

Maybe? Electric cars existed before TSLA and electric cars will exist after TSLA.

What is with you? I'm a fan of TSLA. I like electric vehicles. I just don't believe in the cult of it.

Honestly, I don't expect crazy comments like "What are the accumulated losses so far? $5-10B? Even if Tesla were to spend another $50B and go bankrupt, I would still maintain it's great. "

to be upvoted on HN.

Maybe on reddit or some other social media, but I feel there is a higher quality of people here. And when I see something odd, I'll point it out.

[mhermher]

The Bolt, etc. exist because of federal subsidies mostly, not because of some billion-dollar-losing company showing that the idea is viable.

[DannyBee]

"Is he wrong? Did Tesla not prove to the rest of the auto industry that electric cars are not only viable but also profitable and inevitable?" No, they didn't.

Nobody doubted they were viable or profitable, only desired. If TSLA accomplished anything, it was convincing people they are desired. That demand definitely did not exist before TSLA.

Your comment implies all these things were already the case. That electric was "always inveitable", and tesla just proved it. That's, IMHO, quite wrong.

as is this: "Would we have the Bolt, Spark, Fiat e500, eGolf without Tesla?"

You understand, for example, the bolt started design in 2012, right?

IE At the same time the model S did.

Others in your list are similar.

It's like saying success of the iPhone caused Google to release Android.

I'm with the OP, every single one of these threads seems some combination of cultish love for tesla and messianic adoration of elon.

As a complete outside observer, the distinct impression i get is of people who always loved electric cars, etc, who felt like the rest of the world was "wrong" about something, thinking they have now been proved "right" about something.

The only practical difference between TSLA and the other auto makers I see is that the others by and large followed demand (IE they wait for people to want a thing, then build that), and TSLA was able to create some demand.

That's awesome and a testament to great PR/etc. But it's pretty also pretty normal successful startup behavior,and may or may not be related to any of the "moral goodness" people see in electric vehicles.

[mason240]

>But it's interesting how I just got swarmed by 3 commenters.

Losing an argument? Better accuse the other side of being paid shills.