Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

2017 Investor Roundtable: TSLA Market Action

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
“When you play the game of thrones you win or you die. There is no middle ground.” Cersei Lannister, The Game of Thrones
$TSLA price is soon going 2 be divorced from reality underlying fundamentals will be great but stock price appreciation will be exponential
George Soros' theory of reflexivity is about to come into play big time
$TSLA linear thinking is inaccurate in this case; exponential S curve is what is more likely to happen
i have a price probability scenario that is informing my stock market moves in this particular stock
i don't see a downside to sharing it since I'm already super long and unlikely to buy any appreciable amounts anymore
suffice it to say that the stockmarket fools most of the investors most of the time and this time is no exception
$TSLA there is a huge under appreciated risk to linear thinking in this case both to longs as well as shorts
 
Last edited:
I was just at the end of nowhere gravel road in SE Utah. I left my Tesla for three days backpacking and drove home even more convinced that it is the best vehicle ever. Tesla is going to gobble up all sorts of market share with the pickup. A small solar panel to deal with vampire loss might be nice though.

You even have pictures to back up your claim, unlike @Sudre who proposes some wild@ss hypothetical camping scenario where contact with poison ivy and aliens convinced him that the S60 isn't the right choice.
 
Ok. I appreciate the frank response.

With which part of my forecast do you not agree? The following are the logical pieces in order:

1. Precedent. By the end of 2017, Model S and X will have achieved more than 30% US market share in their respective niche segments. Model S already achieved this in 4 years and Model X is on track to achieve it in less than 2 years, and that's including the six-month long ramp-up issues, which an optimist may reasonably assume out for Model 3 timeline. This acceleration from 4 years for Model S to 2 years for Model X should be noted, because it screams growing brand value of Tesla, but my argument does not rely on this assumption. In fact, I assume the opposite: a slowdown from less than 2 years for Model X to 3 years for Model 3. This is part of my "margin of safety."

2. Demand. Arguably Model 3 should achieve a larger market share for three primary reasons: (i) With Model S and X, Tesla and Elon Musk have already proven themselves as reliable innovators building consumer goodwill, which translates to higher brand value, which Model 3 will leverage in 2017/18; but more importantly, (ii) the lower ticket price of Model 3 vs. Model S/X will translate to higher relative global adoption due to the differences in purchasing power between the US and ex-US countries. In other words, if Tesla achieved more than 30% US market share with Models S/X, but the global market share achieved was say 5%, a reasonable assumption would be if Model 3 achieves the same 30% US market share, that should translate to ~10% global market share; and most importantly (iii) I expect Model 3 to be marketed as fully autonomous from the get-go, which would make the phrase "game-changer" a significant underestimation. I don't think even the bulls truly comprehend what this really means, but my perspective is that a fully autonomous car approximates about $15,000 lower effective price ($20/hr avg earnings x 5hr/w saved not driving x 50 working weeks x 3y avg holding period, which are all conservative assumptions individually, which makes the compound calculation stupidly conservative), all else equal, excluding the cool factor. Having said all this, I projected only 5% US market share 3% global market share for Model 3 in three years. For reference, take a deep breath and make sure you're seated, a base-case projection that incorporates everything I discussed in this paragraph would add up to at least 30% US market share and 10% global market share in two years, or ~6 million Model 3's in 2019. An optimistic case, could assume 35-40% US market share and 15% global market share in one year, and a halo effect to Model S and X, or 9+ million Model 3's in 2018 with incremental demand on Model S and Model X. TLDR: demand for 4m all-electric fully autonomous Model S/X/3/Semi/others in 2020 is there.

3. Supply. When Tesla first announced the Gigafactory in 3Q14, it projected 500,000 cars in 2020. Shorts said impossible. Two years later in 2016, Elon pulled the 500,000 projection to 2018. Shorts said impossible. Elon last year doubled his original Giga1 2020 capacity to 1.0m, then increased it further to 1.5m but said they would use the third half million for Tesla Energy. Nobody cares what shorts say at this point. Then Tesla bought Grohmann solely for the purpose of creating "alien dreadnoughts." As far as I can tell from this timeline, 1.5m capacity forecast for Giga 1 does not include any improvements that can be reasonably expected from Grohmann acquisition. Arguably, the 1.5m capacity projection incorporates limitations that would reasonably come with designing something three years ago in 2014 and being constrained to make only incremental changes as you move through time, as opposed to designing Giga's 3/4/5 with the accumulated knowledge, innovation from Grohmann, easier access to capital, and a more reliable demand forecast. Keep in mind that Elon has repeatedly noted that he expects significantly more improvement in manufacturing of the product than the improvement Tesla has achieved with the product, which has been at least an order of magnitude as can be concluded just by looking at the fast and vast consumer adoption of a completely new product in a slow-moving automative industry with slow replacement rates. Having said all this, let alone further improvement, my projection of 4m cars in 2020 with four Gigafactories assumes a deprovement to 1m per Gigafactory. This is part of my margin of safety.

4. Capital. Tesla is no longer a pre-revenue company led by a guy that sounds nutty. It's now a company with unprecedented historical revenue growth, not only leading but dominating market share in the segments in which it competes, two proven successful products and third one with a long waiting list, led by a guy that sounds nutty. Further, I also expect lenders to soon start shying away from existing manufacturers, due primarily to declining used ICE car value estimates which back lease debt on balance sheets (think subprime crisis where declining home values backed mortgage debt, but on a smaller scale and more focused impact on the economy). This will free up capital to be lent to the only growing company in the industry at a cost of debt that Tesla has never enjoyed before. If the stock rises 50% in 2017, which is possible if the Model 3 ramp-up goes smoothly as so far seems to be, this would bring Tesla's market cap to $75 billion, so $5 billion non-convertible debt, which is not dilutive, at an interest rate of 8% or below, to fund the start of Giga 3/4/5 would keep debt-to-market-value-of-equity ratio to a very reasonable level. I expect the majority of Giga 3/4/5 cost to be financed using Model 3 gross profits, which I expect will grow significantly more than operating expenses due to operating leverage, throughout the next three years. This math excludes any gross profits from Tesla Energy, which is part of my margin of safety.

I know 4m in 2020 sounds crazy on the face of it, but when I break it down to its components like this, considering all the layers of margin of safety that I explained above, it sounds reasonable. This is why 4m in 2020 is my base case.
It all sounds very nice but I'm suspicious of anyone who has the word "value" in their handle ;)
 
Last edited:
It all sounds very nice but I'm suspicious of anyone who has the word "value" in their handle ;)

Trust me; you're not the first one to mock me for my handle, and won't be the last. If I had a nickel for every time someone mocked me for investing in Tesla with a ValueAnalyst handle, especially on SeekingAlpha, I would be able to fund Gigafactories 3, 4, and possibly 5.

People often make the mistake of thinking value investing is all about historical P/E ratios and dividend yields, former of which I don't believe is enough alone and latter of which I don't believe is even relevant. I believe in building reasonable discounted cash flow analyses with a keen eye on margin of safety.
 
I was thinking that too, but I wanted to ease the forum into my 4 million per year by 2020 projection first. Also, the "faster to build" piece may be the reason why next round will be 3 Giga's at once.

Do you have any estimate of how much faster and how much less? I do think that the Tesla Advanced Automation Germany will make significant improvements for subsequent Gigas, but I don't think we have received any color on this yet.
Here I explain some of my thinking about this. I'll add that there are about twenty sets of anode/cathode and sets of pack manufacturing modules per Gigafactory. With 3-4 additional Gigafactories that are about 80. You can bet your life that Tesla and Panasonic are setting up the equipment to produce that equipment efficiently.:
Battery Pack Costs Plus Overlooked or Underappreciated Items from Q4 Call
I don't believe that the Grohmann acquisition makes much difference. IMO using Grohmann is similar as Frank Lloyd Wright hiring a builder. A good builder can make a substantial difference, but the main determining factor for the quality of the building is the architect.
Gobs more money.
Not if they are funding the major expenses another way.
Sounds like a sock eating contest is in order, for predicting the calendar year in which Tesla ships 1 million cars. @ValueAnalyst should go with 2019 or 2018!
I believe that a reasonable way to make an educated estimate is to start with Elon's estimated timeline for alien dreadnaught production quantities. When alien dreadnaught 2.0 is completed (2019?) Tesla should easily be at a million per year. That's without counting the alien dreadnaught improvements to the MS-MX production lines, or additional models of cars.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like a sock eating contest is in order, for predicting the calendar year in which Tesla ships 1 million cars. @ValueAnalyst should go with 2019 or 2018!

The case of 4m cars in 2020 relies on bringing Gigafactories 3, 4, and possibly 5 online, and this would happen in 2020. I expect a 3x to 4x step-up from 2019 to 2020, similar to the upcoming 3x to 4x step-up from 2017 to 2018. So I'll go with run-rate 1m some time in 2019, but significant jump in full year 2020.
 
  • Like
Reactions: everman
The case of 4m cars in 2020 relies on bringing Gigafactories 3, 4, and possibly 5 online, and this would happen in 2020. I expect a 3x to 4x step-up from 2019 to 2020, similar to the upcoming 3x to 4x step-up from 2017 to 2018. So I'll go with run-rate 1m some time in 2019, but significant jump in full year 2020.

Besides, did you mean "sell 4 million" as in, pre sales or as in produced and delivered. If there's a 4-500,000 vehicle backlog for tesla now.... I figure they're still a relatively unknown company along with EV's in most people minds.

Flash forward to 2020 when all automakers are starting to make their first real EV (teehee) I wouldn't be surprised if 5x more people were interested in EV's. By then Tesla's will be everywhere. 2,000,000 cars on backorder? I'll have a preorder in for a truck if it suits a home builder.
 
The case of 4m cars in 2020 relies on bringing Gigafactories 3, 4, and possibly 5 online, and this would happen in 2020. I expect a 3x to 4x step-up from 2019 to 2020, similar to the upcoming 3x to 4x step-up from 2017 to 2018. So I'll go with run-rate 1m some time in 2019, but significant jump in full year 2020.
Considering that Elon said that the future Gigafactories would include vehicle manufacturing lines that estimate doesn't seem that outlandish to me. No way that I'd bet our Tesla portfolio against it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ValueAnalyst
Some not so great news from Germnay:

Worker Strike at German Tesla Subsidiary Could Delay Model 3

This combined with N. Korea, wonder how next week pans out

More bad reporting. Article claims model 3 is already late. It is most definitely not.

I'm fairly convinced that a subsidiary of 660 employees acquired less than a year ago for around $150M (and therefore represents around 0.25% of the company) is not going to be allowed to cause problems for model 3. Tesla will cut them loose if necessary.
 
Although I am fully invested in Tesla and anticipate a surge in the stock price in the months ahead, if the US drops anything on North Korea, I will be out in a flash.

I think North Korea would be a relative blip on the radar. China would much rather have a stable North Korea. If we took any action, it would (should) be to remove the regime. Secretly, China would be okay with it. They may publicly denounce it to save face, but privately, they'd breathe a big sigh of relief. It be tricky to install a government satisfactory to both China and South Korea, but almost anyone would be better than the present. China doesn't want our market/economy to tank either.
 
More bad reporting. Article claims model 3 is already late. It is most definitely not.

I'm fairly convinced that a subsidiary of 660 employees acquired less than a year ago for around $150M (and therefore represents around 0.25% of the company) is not going to be allowed to cause problems for model 3. Tesla will cut them loose if necessary.
I'm convinced that Tesla will treat them fairly enough that it won't come down to "cutting them loose".
 
More bad reporting. Article claims model 3 is already late. It is most definitely not.

I'm fairly convinced that a subsidiary of 660 employees acquired less than a year ago for around $150M (and therefore represents around 0.25% of the company) is not going to be allowed to cause problems for model 3. Tesla will cut them loose if necessary.
Gotta love the one liner claiming Model 3 is "delayed further" with abosultely nothing to back up that claim.
 
I think North Korea would be a relative blip on the radar. China would much rather have a stable North Korea. If we took any action, it would (should) be to remove the regime. Secretly, China would be okay with it. They may publicly denounce it to save face, but privately, they'd breathe a big sigh of relief. It be tricky to install a government satisfactory to both China and South Korea, but almost anyone would be better than the present. China doesn't want our market/economy to tank either.

A game of "chicken" is being played. If North Korea explodes a nuclear device, our implied threat is we'll bomb their their nuclear site. Hopefully not! If we do, they may fire their long range artillery on Seoul. Millions could die in hours. They are barbaric enough to do it, which is the reason for my original post.
 
I think North Korea would be a relative blip on the radar. China would much rather have a stable North Korea. If we took any action, it would (should) be to remove the regime. Secretly, China would be okay with it. They may publicly denounce it to save face, but privately, they'd breathe a big sigh of relief. It be tricky to install a government satisfactory to both China and South Korea, but almost anyone would be better than the present. China doesn't want our market/economy to tank either.

I've posted elsewhere (@#5375) about Charlie Rose's latest interview with Mike Morell, formerly deputy director and Acting Director of the CIA regarding North Korea and Pompeo's recent press conference. (Still no available link at the usual places a few minutes ago.)

Your view is mostly consistent except that Morell believes China includes keeping the status quo with Kim out of fear of loose nukes if there is a sudden regime change in the North. Their definition of stability is nuanced.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.