MitchJi
Trying to learn kindness, patience & forgiveness
I just read the entire email and it is not definitive.
I completely disagree that that statement has anything to do with the SP, either positive or negative! Where's the Ludicrous button?!
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
I completely disagree that that statement has anything to do with the SP, either positive or negative! Where's the Ludicrous button?!
Can anyone comment on the wording of the 8-k released yesterday that says Wheeler notified Tesla on the 21st he is leaving? I highly doubt they could have Deepak lined up that quickly so I guess it may have been in the works but he didn't hand in official notice until the 21st. I just have no way of knowing if that is strange or not.
Mike Smith
Active Member
When he says equity grants I assume he is talking about shares. Is there something else this could be referring to?
MitchJi
Trying to learn kindness, patience & forgiveness
Percentage gains or dollar gains.
I thought it was ludicrous to suggest that if Elon makes a comment about the the SP growing by any amount that will effect the SP. He already said he thinks it'll be a trillion dollar company. Did that statement cause the SP to reverse a slide?
Last edited:
Krugerrand
Meow
Does it matter in the scheme of things? Wheeler out. Deepak in. That's the bottom line.
DragonWatch
Small FootPrint
Right ON. Prop 13 is one of the key corner stones for willingly moving away (1977) and never looking back.
To be totally honest I allowed a four year visit so my wife could get her degree and the kids could live close to their relatives. That was the nail in the coffin for the relatives and California. My wife, well she graduated Phi Beta Cappa ~ not bad since she told me she was too smart for college when we met; earned AS and BS and two pre teens running wild; and I was frequently absent playing captain. I say allowed because I was offered and turned down a job at the Pentagon to get us back near relatives.
California is almost not on our radar, exceptions are Hawthorne (SpaceX/my high school) & Fremont (Tesla). Okay, Monroe High, my wife's high school in Sepulveda.
So now you know the rest of the story.
Bottom line ~ this tax law probably will not be repealed unless the real people stand up against the elitist religions, elitist politicians and the village idiots. Having said that, I believe that there has not been a better time for the people to stand up against hate and put us on a path of becoming proud of who and what we are. Can California stand back upright and do what is right for "we the people" or continue down the path of "we the money?" Your choice your decision.
Mike Smith
Active Member
He's talking specifically about the gain on equity as a form of compensation, not the change in the nominal value of the shares. Assuming the size of the equity grants are the same now as they were then, Musk is predicting TSLA will rise over 5X again in the next four years.
erthquake
Active Member
California spends over $10k per year per student for public schools.
My niece is getting a first class education at a Catholic High School for $10.4k per year.
I don't think the 6th largest economy in the world should be in the bottom 1/3 of per student spending.
Education Spending Per Student by State
Moreover, Catholic school tuitions are highly subsidized by the Church. I work a non-religious private school, and I can tell $11k per student is not adequate for an education that prepares students for the 21st century.
Mike Smith
Active Member
Edit: And he's clearly suggesting the grants are about the same now otherwise it would be extremely misleading to be using the dollar figures he uses.
Every Start up (with Stock options) Promises the same. Promises cannot be taken literally. However, if Tesla becomes like Microsoft, Apple, Amazon ... it will surely mint some millionaires
-Personal vent: Spent morning going to BMW dealership for issue with car just 3 weeks after I paid like 900$ for Services. First thing these guys say is you need to run diagnostics(computer based) and it will cost you 149$. Every since the Servicing, the issue has come up wasn't there. They don't have leeway to give like a complimentary just because this is needed 3 weeks from the time they touched the car.
So first thing that came to mind is "Tesla provides software updates for free, minimizes Servicing costs and these Old School Dealership models are there to make money on Services like these". Surely this old model needs to be and will be disrupted.
-Personal vent: Spent morning going to BMW dealership for issue with car just 3 weeks after I paid like 900$ for Services. First thing these guys say is you need to run diagnostics(computer based) and it will cost you 149$. Every since the Servicing, the issue has come up wasn't there. They don't have leeway to give like a complimentary just because this is needed 3 weeks from the time they touched the car.
So first thing that came to mind is "Tesla provides software updates for free, minimizes Servicing costs and these Old School Dealership models are there to make money on Services like these". Surely this old model needs to be and will be disrupted.
Mike Smith
Active Member
Here we have Montana Skeptic predicting Tesla will be bankrupt within four months unless they raise money. Hilariously, he for some reason thinks the entire accounts payable of $1.86B needs to be paid down to zero in that time. Nobody in the comments section picked up on this glaring error. Seeking Alpha is an absolute loony bin.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4049370-tesla-capital-raise-now-bankruptcy-4-months
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4049370-tesla-capital-raise-now-bankruptcy-4-months
I was quite surprised about the level of the consternation expressed by many about perceived weak MS/MX guidance, as it seems that some important details were overlooked. I did not have much time to post over last few days, so here is my belated take on the guidance.
I am probably getting a lot of people bored preaching about how many cars Tesla have to have in transit pipeline under steady state operation. This concept is very important to consider, particularly as they are closing in on the mass production of M3. So far, with the few exceptions, Tesla deliveries were hugely lopsided, with 50 to 70% of deliveries made during the final month of a given quarter. Needless to say that this is less than ideal situation as it puts unnecessary strain on logistics and stores. It is quite obvious, that with the deliveries of M3 blending into the mix in second half of the year, and Tesla probably scrambling with opening additional stores and scaling up deliveries in the existing stores, this situation grows from less than ideal to simply unsustainable. So Tesla must even out monthly deliveries by the second half of the year, which means that they need fully filled transit pipeline.
Assuming steady state production of about 2500 cars/week and average global time in transit of 6 weeks means that fully filled transit pipeline requires 2500 x 6 = 15000 cars. Let's be conservative and ignore additional cars that will be required to fill newly opening stores and service centers.
According to the Tesla Q4 deliveries press release at the end of Q4 Tesla had 6450 vehicles in transit to customers. This means that in order to fully fill transit pipeline Tesla will need to add 15000 - 6450 = 8550 cars to it.
So if we assume that Tesla is going to gradually fill the transit pipeline over next two quarters, in order to deliver 47-50K cars they will need to produce 55.5 - 58.5K MX/MS. In order to be sustainable, this production rate will have to be matched by the rate of incoming orders.
So unpacking the MS/MX delivery guidance:
I am probably getting a lot of people bored preaching about how many cars Tesla have to have in transit pipeline under steady state operation. This concept is very important to consider, particularly as they are closing in on the mass production of M3. So far, with the few exceptions, Tesla deliveries were hugely lopsided, with 50 to 70% of deliveries made during the final month of a given quarter. Needless to say that this is less than ideal situation as it puts unnecessary strain on logistics and stores. It is quite obvious, that with the deliveries of M3 blending into the mix in second half of the year, and Tesla probably scrambling with opening additional stores and scaling up deliveries in the existing stores, this situation grows from less than ideal to simply unsustainable. So Tesla must even out monthly deliveries by the second half of the year, which means that they need fully filled transit pipeline.
Assuming steady state production of about 2500 cars/week and average global time in transit of 6 weeks means that fully filled transit pipeline requires 2500 x 6 = 15000 cars. Let's be conservative and ignore additional cars that will be required to fill newly opening stores and service centers.
According to the Tesla Q4 deliveries press release at the end of Q4 Tesla had 6450 vehicles in transit to customers. This means that in order to fully fill transit pipeline Tesla will need to add 15000 - 6450 = 8550 cars to it.
So if we assume that Tesla is going to gradually fill the transit pipeline over next two quarters, in order to deliver 47-50K cars they will need to produce 55.5 - 58.5K MX/MS. In order to be sustainable, this production rate will have to be matched by the rate of incoming orders.
So unpacking the MS/MX delivery guidance:
- The current yearly rate of the incoming orders for MX/MS is about 112-118K
- The projected production rate is about 55.5k-58.5K per 6 month or 2312-2438 cars/week (48 production weeks per year). I would be shocked if Tesla did not sand bag this, at least by very modest amount.
- Assuming that current rate of incoming orders will be maintained going forward, there will likely be 55.5-58.5k MS/MX cars delivered in the second half of the year
- Tesla is or very close to the nominal two shift production capacity of 2500 MS/MX per week
Last edited:
Mike Smith
Active Member
Also, how do analysts expect Tesla to be focused on ramping up MS/MX production at the same time they're trying to get M3 in production (in the same facility no less) by July - a feat they themselves said was impossible even on its own? Yeesh.
racer26
Active Member
The reason Elon used a 4 year holding period is because that is required by the grant. The options take 4 years to vest. The employees didn't have a choice to sell them until just recently.
What I mean with insufficient testing includes production testing. Before rollout typical auto makers spend a good amount of time hashing out production issues during their testing. As you stated it appears Tesla is still ironing out production problems by delivering cars to customers diet and fixing problems second. This can and should be avoided by fixing those problems earlier through more exhaustive testing and test production runs prior to shipping cars. If Tesla would have done that, the MX rollout would have been so much better.
But that said, I do agree that it appears Tesla is taking a different approach with Model 3 as it'll be easier to manufacturer (so hopefully less quality issues) and they'll use their own employees as guinea pigs of sorts. So hopefully when Model 3 gets delivered to non-employee customers the quality will be good.
However, what I mean by "stellar" isn't exclusive to quality. Quality (in terms of reliability) is just part of the equation. The car has got to perform like no other car in its category. That's what the bulls are betting on. And what the bears are betting against.
Just to make it clear, based on my post above Tesla IS planning to gradually increase MS/MX production. In Q3 2015 they produced 25,185 cars over 12 weeks of production for an average 2099 car/week. In Q4 they produced 34,822 cars over 11 weeks of production for an average of 2,257 cars/week. In first half of 2017, as was shown in my post unthread, are likely planning to produce 2312-2438 cars/week. Summary:
Q3 2015 2099 cars/week
Q4 2016 2257 cars/week (+7.5%)
Q1/Q2 2017 2312-2438 cars/week (+2.4 - 8%)
sundaymorning
Active Member
Although we won't be in need of this, but it helps to have shorts pay for the future GF 3&4, in they way they have just paid for the scty acquisition.
Keep it up SA, in a way, you are our frenemy.
sundaymorning
Active Member
It's really a simple question about why you cut his last part of his statement. My question has nothing to do with him. I'm asking what benefits do you get misrepresenting his statement.
Mike Smith
Active Member
I'm guessing Telsa has learned a lot from SpaceX about pre-production testing and validation. Methods unknown to the antiquated big 3 or even venerable auto analyst Paulo Santos.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
