-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
ValueAnalyst
Closed
Wish I had a nickel for every time people thought Elon misspoke.
Like that time when people thought he was joking about "just buying a boring machine and start drilling."
Interesting that both shorts and longs will use this ER to bolster their side of the argument. I don't think this ER will decisively move this up and I expect a lot of short term down pressure. Big shorts will be piling on tomorrow I think.
Oh well I'm holding my measly 200 shares till the cars fly...
Oh well I'm holding my measly 200 shares till the cars fly...
Elon said a production line is optimized for a certain run rate, and that 100k is the optimal run rate of the current S/X production line. Personally, I don't think they want to mess that up at the risk of having a similar to the X ramp up like last year. Also, if they are so comfortable with S/X humming along at the current run rate of ~25k/quarter, this tells me they are all hands on deck for Model 3 ramp up and are optimistic about Model 3 ramp up.
Once the production line is running at this optimal point, cost per vehicle is optimized, which allowed them to play with pricing. Just my $0.02 worth.
there was a conversation on this subject last fall. there were figures provided where longs... not me... stated what a ramp would look like and the minimums for Q1/Q2/Q3/Q4... the number was NOT 60MWh in Q1... from recollection 250MWh was an absolute minimum.... and there are simply no projections stated going forward... just "it looks good".
this misalignment of story vs reality can not continue. the story was... 2017 will be the explosion of TE helping justify the valuation... that is absolutely NOT the reality... this stock is trading as if they are succeeding today and will continue to succeed in the future with ALL of their tangential business lines... not just Auto... which quite frankly... the "we never said 100k in 2017" was a shocker. this is simply preparation for missed targets.
ValueAnalyst
Closed
It is a factual statement that they never said 100k Model 3 deliveries in 2017.
That doesn't mean it won't happen. My guess is that they're playing it safe with 2017 guidance given timing uncertainties along the s-curve ramp-up, but their parts order numbers point to 100k+ Model 3 deliveries.
In any case, the market is STILL pricing Model 3 to be delayed into 1H18, so any deliveries of Model 3 beats what's priced in $300/share stock price.
Will anyone be surprized if the SP gap up tomorrow? I think it is possible.
ValueAnalyst
Closed
As I noted before, the Current stock price is assigning zero value to Tesla Energy.
This is clear to anyone with a DCF in front of them.
Last edited:
then why can I find 30 articles from 1Q16 ER that state otherwise and WHY WAS IT ASKED THAT WAY ON THIS CALL?... and why were there people on this board just prior to the call stating exactly those numbers?
Are we reading the same shareholder letter?
Last edited:
damn... you do realize DCF does not account for risk of any kind?... and you are basing your values on a person that is a repeat offender of exaggerating projections in the 100% range.
And in your DCF... do you have 100k M3 for 2017?
ValueAnalyst
Closed
Tone it down. It's a result of FUD spread by people like you.
Management never guided to 2H17 or 2017 deliveries. The only comment they made is number of parts ordered per week for July, august and September.
ValueAnalyst
Closed
Clearly, you've never worked on a DCF or you're trying to scare people here, as the discount rate in the discounted cash flow analysis does in fact account for risk as well as time value of money.
DragonWatch
Small FootPrint
Nothing new in 1Q17, except facts. Those of us watching this thing too much know that bears like to eat fresh meat. If I am correct, those of us fanboys will limp away act like bulls and charge on.
Because as a fanboy I know the M3 will not be an S or replace the S or X; I am slightly off that it is a concern. I conned my wife into the X because I knew the 3 was not to become the X. I wanted to reduce our carbon footprint and for me the X was the car. My wife after the cheeks in the seats test drive was still wondering about the S, but not backwards to the 3. We were an early M3 reservation. The 100D battery along with uncle Don gutting the EPA, I had to pull the trigger. Pissed slightly that I missed the lifetime of supercharging.
The M3 will be better than the fully loaded Prius in my humble opinion (IMHO). Having purchased a generation II and III Prius coupled with owing and driving an X, I believe I have experience as opposed to market cap.
Range is the biggest issue needing to be addressed having been challenged by competitors. Harmful to Tesla, no. If range is important then the buyer, like me will push the envelope from a M3 to MS or X. Those seats in the X are supercharged by the way
May want them as Tesla continues to grow Rocketmannnnn
Because as a fanboy I know the M3 will not be an S or replace the S or X; I am slightly off that it is a concern. I conned my wife into the X because I knew the 3 was not to become the X. I wanted to reduce our carbon footprint and for me the X was the car. My wife after the cheeks in the seats test drive was still wondering about the S, but not backwards to the 3. We were an early M3 reservation. The 100D battery along with uncle Don gutting the EPA, I had to pull the trigger. Pissed slightly that I missed the lifetime of supercharging.
The M3 will be better than the fully loaded Prius in my humble opinion (IMHO). Having purchased a generation II and III Prius coupled with owing and driving an X, I believe I have experience as opposed to market cap.
Range is the biggest issue needing to be addressed having been challenged by competitors. Harmful to Tesla, no. If range is important then the buyer, like me will push the envelope from a M3 to MS or X. Those seats in the X are supercharged by the way
May want them as Tesla continues to grow Rocketmannnnn
ValueAnalyst
Closed
thank you... and why do you have 100k for 2017?... and are you now going to adjust that down because they corrected an analysts question when he asked if they were on target for exactly that?
ValueAnalyst
Closed
They didn't say they won't do 100k. They said they never guided 100k, and that is a factual statement, and I know that.
My independent analysis points to that Tesla will produce 100k+ Model 3's in 2017. This willl become clear after July.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Article
