Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Julius Wong who wrote (163040)	9/26/2020 11:27:38 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218505

the clusterf_ fight can only detract from both parties, can give NKLA a big windfall, and TSLA a surprising loss cannot cost NKLA much, because it doesn't have anything to lose cannot give TSLA a win because NKLA has nothing to lose one cannot lose if one is a zero to begin with one cannot win because one is the biggest game on the planet we should cheer for NKLA when convenient, and champion TSLA when necessary right now TSLA best go up so we can short more, or go down so we can close out shorts 20th November is E-Day for expiration can set up new campaign around 5th November 2020 is just super thrilling

To: Julius Wong who wrote (163040)	9/27/2020 2:59:11 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218505

in the meantime it gets sillier by the day makes one wonder what's next on the silly schedule there may be a misunderstanding, and that is believing Team China EV is somehow coordinated and guided, as opposed to a lot of entrepreneurs mobilising a lot of SAVINGs plentiful around to wager on whatever might turn a dollar, or yuan If so, it may be the lack of mobilisable savings that is the strategic disadvantage, and not any of its particular expressions in any specific sector time shall tell ft.com US urged to subsidise electric cars on national security grounds Military and business leaders say country risks becoming dependent on Chinese supply chain September 24 2020 There were 1.2m electric vehicles sold in China last year, compared to 320,000 in the US, according to McKinsey © Bloomberg The US must urgently build up an electric vehicles industry or risk becoming dependent on China for its automotive future, a group of senior military and business leaders have warned. China is in the process of consolidating control of the supply chain for electrified transport — from mineral extraction and battery production to manufacture and sales of the vehicles themselves — according to the group, Securing America’s Future Energy, which campaigns for US energy security. Failure by US authorities to counter Chinese dominance within the next five years risks the “withering of the US automobile industry” and the loss of millions jobs supported by the country’s auto sector today, said Admiral Dennis Blair, a former director of national intelligence, who sits on SAFE’s energy security leadership council. “It would be reduced to a small share of the market, producing electric vehicles that are not as advanced and as attractive as those produced by China and by Chinese subsidiaries, and a loss of jobs, industrial depth and technological skill,” he said. Long-term progress really depends on a bipartisan approach to these things that will survive the swings Admiral Dennis Blair, Securing America’s Future Energy’s energy security leadership council China has come to play a leading role in the development of EVs. The US trails it in the extraction of minerals such as lithium, graphite and rare earths, as well as the production of lithium-ion batteries and finished EVs. There were 1.2m EVs sold in China last year, compared to 320,000 in the US, according to McKinsey. “They not only have more electric vehicles purchased in their market, they have more companies, they build more batteries, they have gone around the world for rare earths and other metals that go into these vehicles and locked up or gained preferred access to many of them,” Admiral Blair said. “So they have a jump on the direction that the electrical vehicle industry is going.” According to Simon Moores of Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, China produced 72 per cent of the world’s lithium-ion batteries in 2019, while the US accounted for just 9 per cent. He warned in May that the US was falling further behind, as China is building one battery factory a week, while the US builds one every four months. China “has not just built an entire suite of supersized battery megafactories for its auto industry, but the supply chain to feed them”, he said. “China produces only 23 per cent of key battery raw materials combined. Yet it produced 80 per cent of the next step in the chain — battery chemicals — and 66 per cent of cathodes, 82 per cent of anodes and 72 per cent of battery cells.” Still, the US may have a considerable edge over other carmakers in the form of Tesla, the world’s largest carmaker by value. But even Tesla head Elon Musk has expressed worry about a shortfall in raw materials needed to realise his ambitions. SAFE — whose leadership council comprises executives from several large US companies, including Royal Caribbean Cruises, FedEx and L-3 Communications — wants the US to revive and expand federal incentives to buy EVs and develop a supply chain for minerals that avoids China, as well as allowing US companies to work together to counter China’s ascendancy. The warning comes weeks ahead of the US presidential election. Joe Biden, the Democratic contender, has thrown his weight behind the expansion of the US electric vehicle market, promising to deploy half a million new public charging outlets by the end of 2030 and restore tax credits. President Donald Trump has cautioned companies against large-scale production of EVs and expressed doubts over the range such cars can travel. On Wednesday, when California said it would to ban the sale of fossil fuel-powered cars from 2035, the Trump administration called the state’s move “alarming”. But SAFE argued the issue should be treated with equal importance by both major US political parties. “Long-term progress really depends on a bipartisan approach to these things that will survive the swings,” Admiral Blair said. He said it should be treated “as a national security issue, which is bipartisan”. Additional reporting by Patrick McGee in San Francisco