Maybe it wasn’t meant that way, but it can certainly be read if one considers the “95%” as an exaggeration. That’s why I was trying to clarify if it was meant to be out of line with “cyclical manufacturing” or with “tech”
The idea that Tesla should have a “tech” multiple, which generally means 80% margins and high growth rates, is kinda scary, since they don’t have either. 80-95% drop would be reasonable if and when it loses its “story”.
But it can use its valuation to bring in capital to try and make the business into something else.
