主题：苹果已死，脸书当立？ -- 大山猫
去年正好参与了某油商炼化业务的剥离。最近几年，除了上游，中下游业务都不怎么挣钱。
但不巧被及时到来的新技术革命颠覆了优势。
中国、美国都不是fair play。
目前为止，华为数据通信产品和思科还有相当的距离，从ASIC到体系结构到软件功能。。。不服？恕不展开了。
对美不敏感的人、不注重细节的人，也不容易体会到Apple产品的很多好处。
一对一单挑，俄国就不是拿破仑的对手。俄国之所以取胜，是因为英国的总体外交部署和经济支持。英国诱使俄国深入欧洲为英国碎片化欧洲中心的战略目的而服务。这一安排，二战间被美国再次使用了一回。
技术也没有什么壁垒。
给我100万， 我给你一个做出来，8分钟到70%。
单看品质，中国货很少顶尖的，真正有竞争力的是性价比。
just two sides of the same coin.
我们每个人看同一个事务都是从自己熟悉的角度看，瞎子摸象只看一面有时是难免的。互通有无，互相尊重 is good for this forum. Disagreement is inevitable and sometimes it should be cherished since it allows us to see different sides of the same target.
It has been repeated several times in the history and also mentioned in the strategy book: it is about the specific capital investment that's only useful in a new emerging industry.
In a new emerging industry where players are few and technical specifications have not been optimized, usually an innovator must adopt a vertifically integrated strategy: it means that it will have to invest in both key supplier industry as well as downstream distribution business.
In early years of Ford, its car production line was integrated with steel sheet production capacity and the line started with iron ore and ends with a final car.
In Tesla's case, any charging station based on traditional technology is not going to serve its new car well. And more importantly, nobody wants to make this kind of investment because it is so SPECIFIC: very difficult for independent third-party to earn return back.
Tesla thus must invest in charging business in order to support its main business: electric car making.
去谄媚这么没品的消费者群体，没有了起码的尊严和道义，以后不死没天理……
不过Musk已经阐述过很多次了，所以不算很犀利的认识。
显然Tesla将会成功，未来将成为大公司。但利润率可能会很低很低。等日本车杀过来的时候，也将有难熬的时光。但很可能最终会长得很大。
具体的估值不太好估，不过看样子，“披明月”更擅长估值。
你很有眼光，但短期中期的估值，我看好“披明月”的。
我觉得你们两个的看法最终都可能对，Tesla未来长期会最终成长成大公司，即使将来日本车杀过来也阻挡不住Tesla。但眼前的估值确实有过高估了。毕竟未来还很远。