It's a piece of evidence that investors might be wrong.
It's an easy double. Buy Ford, sell of the assets, pay off the debt and pocket $110B for a cost of $42B. Since that's not happening, nor anything like it, investors don't think Ford assets are worth $250B.
An apples to apples comparison between Ford and Tesla to compare valuation means teasing out the part of Ford that actually makes cars. Lumping in the financial services arm makes no sense if intellectual honesty is the goal.
And in any case, EV isn't at all the final word you're making it out to be. If Ford takes on $100bn of debt to finance $100bn of cars with zero margin in order to move metal, now Ford has a $241bn EV. Is Tesla now suddenly even-more-undervalued compared to Ford? Nope.
You're right that Ford probably can't be broken up and liquidated at book value, but my argument doesn't hinge on that.
Who said Tesla was undervalued?
I take it you're not interested in addressing my actual argument given you've deflected twice.
So saying that Tesla is overvalued compared to Ford is like saying "water is wet". By that measure all 499 of the other companies on the S&P 500 are also overvalued.
I haven't addressed most of your arguments because they're both not wrong and irrelevant.
The original point I was refuting was the belief that the stock market values Ford less than it values Tesla. I'm saying that the stock market values Ford at about 3X what it values Tesla. If you disagree with that statement you need to give an actual number, and why.
But the EV of Ford including FFS also offers no insight in to whether Tesla is overvalued. Not even a tiny bit.
If we can agree on that, then we're arguing here for no reason.
Ford's debt and assets are largely from its financing arm. It doesn't make the car making part of Ford worth more.