Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

4680 Batteries, Cybertruck, and Contract Write-Down

  • Core fact: Tesla’s 4680 cathode supplier wrote down a $2.9B contract to ~$7,400, implying effectively zero expected volume.
  • Many commenters see this as confirmation that the 4680 program has largely failed and that Cybertruck demand is far below Tesla’s stated capacity (tens of thousands sold vs ~250k/year capacity).
  • Some argue it may simply reflect chemistry/supplier changes or vertical integration (Tesla making cathodes in-house, LFP pivot), not a “collapse,” but this is speculative and not backed by concrete production data in the thread.

Tesla’s Business Health and the EV Market

  • One side: Tesla is “struggling” — declining sales in key markets (EU, China, US), weak margins, flat global EV growth in the US, and heavy competition from Chinese OEMs.
  • Counterpoint: revenues near $100B, positive net income, strong liquidity, still among top global EV sellers; problems are margin compression and competition, not imminent insolvency.
  • Several note that all BEV makers in the US are hurting; policy changes and lost subsidies are big factors. Outside the US, EV demand (especially cheap Chinese models) is strong.

Valuation, Meme Dynamics, and Shorting

  • Many argue Tesla’s valuation is detached from fundamentals, driven by “cult of personality,” memes, and expectations of future miracles rather than cash flows.
  • Frequent comparisons to a Ponzi scheme (in vibe, not legal mechanics): returns depend on ever new buyers; narrative constantly shifts (battery company → FSD/robotaxis → robots).
  • Others push back: that’s speculation, not Ponzi; company has real products, revenue, and profits.
  • Multiple comments stress that shorting is dangerous because markets can stay irrational longer than shorts can stay solvent.

Self-Driving / Robotaxi Thesis

  • Bulls: stock is effectively a bet on Tesla cracking full self-driving; if they succeed, other automakers’ margins collapse and Tesla’s software revenue (e.g., subscriptions) could be huge.
  • Skeptics: autonomy will be a commodity provided by many (Waymo, Mobileye, Chinese stacks, legacy OEM L3+ systems). No clear Tesla moat, especially with camera-only hardware.
  • Past robotaxi/FSD timelines are cited as systematically wrong over nearly a decade; some label the pattern “corporate puffery” or worse.
  • One long anecdote claims FSD v14 is a qualitative leap and extremely impressive in real use; others question survivorship bias and safety, or note that similar claims have been made for years.

Musk’s Credibility and “Cult” Dynamics

  • Extensive discussion of Musk’s long history of missed or wildly delayed promises: $25k car, early Roadster, Cybertruck pricing/features, hyperloop, Mars timelines, robotaxis, Dojo, etc.
  • Critics see a confidence game: hype moves stock, stock funds the next story, while timelines slip indefinitely. Supporters frame it as over-optimistic moonshot culture where some big things did ship (SpaceX, mass-market EVs).
  • Political radicalization, public behavior, and association with far-right figures are widely seen as damaging the brand and sales, especially in Europe and among US moderates.

Competition: China, BYD, and Legacy OEMs

  • Broad agreement that Chinese manufacturers (BYD, Geely and many others) now dominate low- and mid-priced EVs, with aggressive pricing and rapidly improving quality.
  • Some predict traditional US and European automakers are structurally doomed by short-termism and reliance on high-margin ICE; others note they are finally ramping dedicated EV platforms and in-house batteries.
  • Several claim Tesla squandered its lead by chasing Cybertruck/robotaxi instead of a true affordable mass EV, thereby ceding “car for the masses” territory to China.

Media, Electrek, and Bias

  • Multiple comments criticize Electrek as increasingly anti-Tesla, framing everything in the worst light and leaning heavily on speculation.
  • Others argue that what looks like “bias” is simply aligning with reality now that early hype has failed to materialize; their negative tone followed years of over-optimistic coverage.

Macro: Finance, Governance, and Policy

  • Broader complaints that US capitalism rewards hype over fundamentals; index funds and mega-asset managers dampen real competition; and “new economy” giants practice self-dealing across affiliated companies (e.g., related entities buying unsold Cybertrucks).
  • Debate over Chinese industrial subsidies vs Western short-termism: some see China’s long-term strategy and state support as rational industrial policy; others emphasize overcapacity and hidden costs.