racer26
Active Member
Seems to me that Tesla accounts for a whopping 60% of the YoY gain 2015-2016 cited in that article... Hardly missing out, but rather, driving the bulk of it.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Seems to me that Tesla accounts for a whopping 60% of the YoY gain 2015-2016 cited in that article... Hardly missing out, but rather, driving the bulk of it.
dennis
Model S Plaid
Yeah, I was going to post that too. Some lowlights:
- Tesla has missed out on the growth of the U.S. auto segment
- The Model 3 could have been brought to market sooner if Tesla subcontracted production to Magna
- The pending slowdown in the U.S. market puts Model 3 deposits at risk
Brain dead.
I think the smart shorts, mislead the retail short investors in the last cycle. Got out early, made their money. And now they have accumulated their short positions again. So its Rinse and Repeat cycle to once more slaughter the Pigs. The number of hit pieces seems to once again be on the higher side
Dos Aquis -- Stay Long My Friends
The fallacy of this article is the implication that Tesla's ability to sell cars is predicated upon demand for cars in general. Since Tesla takes up a small portion of total vehicle sales, and since Tesla's vehicles are clearly differentiated from competing vehicles, a smart analyst would realize that Tesla is production constrained, not demand constrained, and that as Tesla's production capabilities grow, Tesla will have the ability to find customers, simply by stealing them from other car makers. The author's suggestion that Tesla contract to have someone else build the Model 3 is absurd when you realize that:
1) Too few suitable batteries for a big ramp of Model 3 are produced on this planet until Tesla's own gigafactory has cranked up, as scheduled
2) Tesla making a suitable profit on Model 3 requires Tesla having the ability to produce Model 3 efficiently at volume, and contracting out the building of Model 3 would work against Tesla's achieving those efficiencies in its own factory. Please show me a contract manufacturer that offers "alien dreadnought 1.0" as a manufacturing option.
Last edited:
Driver Dave
Member
I've wrote this before but I'll mention again: I'm pleasantly surprised to see SO many Tesla's in Toronto now. Seeing a lot more Model X's here too.
For ppl who doubt MX, I see a jump in X sales as people start seeing them driving around on the streets.
Tesla does not do traditional marketing, so having more visibility of the SUV will be a key driver for it. Just like the Model S bought by the early adopters resulted in more and more people getting exposed to it, the X should follow a similar trajectory but at a faster rate since Tesla has an established brand now.
Tl;DR: MX should see an increase in demand as more of them hit the road and the market gets exposed to this SUV
For ppl who doubt MX, I see a jump in X sales as people start seeing them driving around on the streets.
Tesla does not do traditional marketing, so having more visibility of the SUV will be a key driver for it. Just like the Model S bought by the early adopters resulted in more and more people getting exposed to it, the X should follow a similar trajectory but at a faster rate since Tesla has an established brand now.
Tl;DR: MX should see an increase in demand as more of them hit the road and the market gets exposed to this SUV
180W of good-directed Solar PV makes at most 1KW of power per day, which is roughly 2.8 miles due to various charging losses. Are you saying that the roof on a car is what will give them appreciable recharging?
a tiny nitpick: stealing is the wrong word. for instance, i won't buy a toyota ever until they disavow "hydrogen fuel cells" OR any other maufacturer that pushes them for cars. won't buy a GM as their PHEV's and EV's are "range and charge rate crippled" (nice city cars), etc.
its not stealing a buyer when it's just a better deal/TCO/etc.
it's just a better deal and match for the buyer
ValueAnalyst
Closed
I'm right here don't you worry. Still very long Tesla, and I cannot wait for this stock to get to $1,000 so I can rub it in the shorts' fossil faces.
I forgot to add that the solar roof will produce less power per day than the vampire drain uses. So, i cannot see the roof being a net range positive, only a help against system drain over time.
ValueAnalyst
Closed
Solar panels currently convert less than 20% of energy into electricity. That's a lot of room for technological improvement. I do think that solar roofs will play a role in extending range, although I do not expect them to replace the need for a battery.
Thank you for your explanations. Reaction to my original comment has been discussed more extensively in the fact-or-fiction thread: Articles re Tesla—Fact or Fiction?
I get it. I was encouraged by the Electrek article and apparently should not have been. I won't configure my Model 3 with a solar roof.
Should we just go ahead and preempt all the stupid stories and posts that will now claim that this is proof that demand is cratering and Tesla is in huge trouble?
I'll bet you can do it in 30seconds or less
Here Is Everything That Can Go Wrong With Tesla, And It Is Signed By Elon Musk
Please discuss how all investment decisions should be based upon the assumption that risks and uncertainties stated in financial statements are already a foregone conclusion.
Please discuss how all investment decisions should be based upon the assumption that risks and uncertainties stated in financial statements are already a foregone conclusion.
Seeing as these journalists have no shame maybe someone should scour through the Forbes 10-K for similar effect.
I remember a TMC poster did this last year when one of these media companies did the same kind of hit piece on a previous TSLA 10-K....
I remember a TMC poster did this last year when one of these media companies did the same kind of hit piece on a previous TSLA 10-K....
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Locked
