Tesla's $56K India Gamble: Will the Model Y Sell in a Price-Sensitive Market?
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) is finally hitting the accelerator in India. After years of back-and-forth, the EV giant is opening its first showroom in Mumbai this July, followed by another in New Delhi. It's starting with the Model Yshipped straight from its Shanghai plantmarking the company's first official sales push into the world's third-largest car market. Internal documents and people familiar with the matter confirm that Tesla has also brought in Supercharger hardware, car accessories, and parts from the US, China, and the Netherlandslaying the groundwork for a broader rollout.
This move follows Elon Musk's February meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and could signal the start of a long-term India strategy. But it won't be an easy ride. Each Model Y imported was declared at just under $32,000, but racked up over $25,000 in import duties due to India's 70% tariff on fully-built EVs. Final sticker price? North of $56,000 before tax and insurancenearly 50% more than the U.S. price post-incentives. For a market where EVs still make up just 5% of new car sales and luxury vehicles are under 2%, Tesla will need more than brand power to spark volume.
Still, the company is quietly building momentum. It's securing warehouse space in Karnataka and Gurugram, boosting hiring across charging, retail, and policy teams, and sending execs from abroad to oversee showroom setup in luxury districts. The early signs point to a premium positioning play aimed at affluent Indian buyers. Whether that strategy holdsor pivotswill depend on how fast Tesla can shift from imports to local production. For now, it's a high-stakes, high-margin experiment in one of the world's fastest-growing auto markets.
This article first appeared on GuruFocus.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
38 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Elon Musk says xAI will retrain Grok: 'Far too much garbage'
When you're Elon Musk, you don't have to rely on centuries of prevailing human understanding — you can create your own. "We will use Grok 3.5 (maybe we should call it 4), which has advanced reasoning, to rewrite the entire corpus of human knowledge, adding missing information and deleting errors," Musk wrote on X on Friday night. Then, he said he would retrain Grok's latest model on that new base of knowledge to be free of proverbial waste. "Far too much garbage in any foundation model trained on uncorrected data," he added. Musk has for years endeavored to create products, like the rebranded Twitter and Grok, that are free from what he views as harmful mainstream constraints. Business Insider previously reported that Grok's army of "AI tutors" was training the bot on a host of dicey topics to compete with OpenAI's more "woke" ChatGPT. Musk on Saturday asked X users to respond to his post with examples of "divisive facts" that can be used in Grok's retraining. Gary Marcus, an AI hype critic and professor emeritus at New York University, compared Musk's effort to an Orwellian dystopia, which isn't the first time he's made the comparison. "Straight out of 1984. You couldn't get Grok to align with your own personal beliefs, so you are going to rewrite history to make it conform to your views," he wrote on X in response to Musk. A revamped Grok could have real-world impacts. In May, just as Musk was stepping back from his work in Washington, DC to refocus on his various companies, Reuters reported that DOGE was planning to expand its use of Grok to analyze government data. "They ask questions, get it to prepare reports, give data analysis," a source told Reuters, referring to how the bot was being used. Two other sources told the outlet that officials in the Department of Homeland Security had been encouraged to use it despite the fact that it hadn't been approved. A representative for the department told the New Republic that "DOGE hasn't pushed any employees to use any particular tools or products." Grok has also had security issues. In May, after what the company said was an "unauthorized modification" to its backend, the bot started to frequently refer to "white genocide" in South Africa. The company quickly resolved the issue and said it had conducted a "thorough investigation" and was "implementing measures to enhance Grok's transparency and reliability."
Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
Elon Musk's DOGE Wouldn't Have Worked Even If It Had Worked
WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 13: Elon Musk listens as U.S. President-elect Donald Trump addresses a ... More House Republicans Conference meeting at the Hyatt Regency on Capitol Hill on November 13, 2024 in Washington, DC. As is tradition with incoming presidents, Trump is traveling to Washington, DC to meet with U.S. President Joe Biden at the White House as well as meet with Republican congressmen on Capitol Hill. (Photo by) It's easy to forget that individual saving in no way shrinks consumption. Short of placing money saved into a coffee can, to save is to shift consumptive ability to someone else. What's true about individual saving is true about government savings. No act of parsimony shrinks the size of government either. That's why Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) wouldn't have worked even if it had worked. Short of the savings being placed in a much bigger coffee can, government spending cuts born of efficiency, headcount reduction, mandate reduction, or all three would have just freed up money for Congress to spend in new ways. In government as with individual, what's not spent is shifted to other existing priorities, or much worse, all new ones. It's the new spending initiatives that are the most perilous. Most start out small, and this includes Medicare. It's so easy to forget that it began as a $3 billion program in the 1960s, but is expected to pass $1 trillion in the coming years. Which speaks to the danger of spending cuts. Talk about "regime uncertainty." Unfortunate and economy-sapping as much government spending is today, the good news is that it's a known. In other words, the myriad ways that Congress politicizes the allocation of precious resources is already priced or factored into our day-to-day existence. That's not so with new initiatives. Who knows what Congress will dream up, and who knows how what Congress will dream up will end up? To see the peril of this, ask yourself if Congress would have had the votes to pass Medicare if it was known that sixty years later it would yet again be a nearly $1 trillion annual program today. That's why without excusing most federal outlays for even a second, when it comes to government the devil you know is better than the unknown. Which is why it's better to let Congress fight over what's known and priced, as opposed to freeing it to design all new programs and initiatives from the proverbial studs. They could end up much bigger than they presently are. Logically so. To which some will reply that what's been written doesn't, or wouldn't have applied to DOGE since any savings wouldn't free up money as much as the savings would reduce government borrowing. More realistically, it would just free up Treasury to borrow $2 trillion more in the future. With our federal government, no act of not borrowing subtracts from borrowing. It's all worth keeping in mind as conservatives in particular lament the failure of the latest gallant, but surely quixotic attempt to shrink the size and cost of government. These initiatives never work simply because in government as with individuals, money saved is never money that's not spent.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
What if Elon Musk Is Right About U.S. National Debt? 3 Stocks to Buy if He Is.
As Elon Musk argues, rising national debt and debt servicing costs are curtailing the growth prospects of the U.S. economy. More debt could lead to higher interest rates over the long term. These stocks are beneficiaries of rising interest rates. 10 stocks we like better than Prudential Financial › The highly public spat between Tesla CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump over the One, Big, Beautiful Bill highlights an ongoing, decades-long debate over national debt. The focus of this article is to explore a potential scenario and suggest a way to invest in protection against it. That path is via life and retirement insurance companies like Prudential Financial (NYSE: PRU), MetLife (NYSE: MET), and Corebridge Financial (NYSE: CRBG). Here's why. This chart gets to the heart of the matter. As shown below, the U.S. national debt has increased substantially, and so has the level of debt in relation to the country's gross domestic product (GDP). The shaded areas show recessionary periods, including the financial crisis of 2008-2009 and the pandemic, whereby GDP contracted and spending soared, so naturally, the debt-to-GDP ratio did, too. Still, the response in both cases was the same: more spending and more debt. Musk's view is that the national debt issue needs to be addressed as it's out of control and has the potential to saddle Americans with an unsustainable debt burden, which the bill will exacerbate. To be fair, the Trump administration's aim is not to increase the deficit as officials believe it will lower the deficit, through implementation of mandatory savings and promoting GDP growth. Again, this is not the place to debate that matter. However, what if Musk is right and the U.S. continues down the path of rising debt? Rising debt levels and debt servicing payments imply more debt issuance. Simple economics argues that, unless demand improves, the rising supply of debt will lead to a rise in the price of debt. In other words, long-term interest rates will rise, and could be higher than the market is expecting. The chart below indicates that the market is comfortable with the matter and isn't attaching a significant premium (beyond the usual premium to reflect the increased risk of holding longer-dated debt) to long-term interest rates over medium-term rates. But the market could be wrong. And while Musk's primary concern appears to be the difficulty of cutting rates caused by rising debt, it's only a short step away to argue that rising debt could lead to higher long-term interest rates. The situation might not be catastrophic, but interest rates could be higher than anticipated. It's not an ideal scenario for stocks overall, as it makes them relatively expensive compared to bonds. However, there is one sector that could do well, namely life and retirement insurers such as Prudential Financial, MetLife, and Corebridge. These insurance companies pick up premiums from policyholders. The policies create long-term liabilities for insurers that they need to balance against their assets. As such, they tend to invest in relatively low-risk assets, such as government debt. While rising interest rates will reduce the value of the existing debt holdings, they will also increase the discount rate used to calculate the net present value of their liabilities. Consequently, as rates rise, insurers will be able to buy corporate bonds, mortgage loans, and government debt at higher rates. Here's a breakdown of all three insurers and the assets they hold in their general accounts, which are used to match their liabilities. General Account Assets Highest Share Second Third Notes Prudential Financial 54.9% in publicly available for sale fixed maturities 18.3% in privately available for sale fixed maturities 14.4% commercial mortgage and other loans Mainly corporate and government fixed maturities MetLife 31.6% investment grade corporate debt 18.4% Net mortgage loans 16.1% structured products Only $11.6 billion of its $430.9 billion in general account assets is in non-investment grade corporate and foreign government bonds Corebridge 35% public corporate debt 10% private corporate debt 7% residential mortgage-backed securities 97% in fixed income or short-term investments Data sources: Company presentations. As indicated above, the assets in their general accounts are fixed income and relatively safe investments, giving all three companies good exposure to the theme of higher long-term rates. It's important not to be too alarmist here. The debt problem is undoubtedly an issue, but it's very hard to predict where interest rates, or total interest payable, will be. That said, if you are a young person worried about the public debt burden and the possibility of higher rates over your lifetime, then it makes sense to buy stocks in this sector as a form of (I'm avoiding the obvious word) matching your assets to your potential future liabilities from rising public debt servicing costs. Before you buy stock in Prudential Financial, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Prudential Financial wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $664,089!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $881,731!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 994% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025 Lee Samaha has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. What if Elon Musk Is Right About U.S. National Debt? 3 Stocks to Buy if He Is. was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
