racer26
Active Member
Rumor discussed on the GD thread, I mistakenly replied in here. Rumor on a podcast over the weekend was that Fremont is on track to run at a rate of 72 cars/hr by the end of July.Did I miss some news or rumor here?
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Rumor discussed on the GD thread, I mistakenly replied in here. Rumor on a podcast over the weekend was that Fremont is on track to run at a rate of 72 cars/hr by the end of July.Did I miss some news or rumor here?
This post.Rumor discussed on the GD thread, I mistakenly replied in here. Rumor on a podcast over the weekend was that Fremont is on track to run at a rate of 72 cars/hr by the end of July.
It is completely ridiculous that financial journalists use a chart like this that does not use percentages. It turns out when looking at the chart analysts currently have price targets about 20% under the price. Similarly on April 30th 2013 the analyst targets were about 20% under the price at that time. Coincidence? I think so, but I still argue absolute numbers should never be used when making a comparison like this.
Rumor discussed on the GD thread, I mistakenly replied in here. Rumor on a podcast over the weekend was that Fremont is on track to run at a rate of 72 cars/hr by the end of July.
The factory does not operate on anything resembling a 5day/8hr = 40hr work week.That's 2880 cars/week assuming a 5 day work week and 8 hours per day.
The rumor from TMC was 2000 cars per week.
It is completely ridiculous that news sites will post an editorial article like this one day prior to an earnings report. So uninformed! Will be very out of date in 36hrs, but I bet they won't update the article after ER.
The factory does not operate on anything resembling a 5day/8hr = 40hr work week.
The factory runs near-24/7.
I was just being conservative and came up with a much higher # than theTMC rumor.
Herding cats, Vetinari.There IS a General Discussion thread, folks...
Also this gem: "Last week Tesla’s RSI topped out above 83, the highest “overbought” reading in almost four years. "So according to this chart, the only other times Wall st and Tesla were this far apart was Jan 2013, April 2013 and August 2013. Were those good times to buy the stock or sell the stock? (hint: analysts suck)
So the question of the day.....what's going to happen after tomorrow? I've been burned plenty of times thinking that the ER was very positive, only to find the SP in free fall the next day. Perhaps some protective puts are in order? Or will the shorts finally throw up their arms and capitulate?
So according to this chart, the only other times Wall st and Tesla were this far apart was Jan 2013, April 2013 and August 2013. Were those good times to buy the stock or sell the stock? (hint: analysts suck)
So what you're saying is that the analyst sentiment is most useful as a contrarian indicator. Shocker.Oh, and analysts were most bullish - their targets almost $120 above share price - in July 2015! You can't make this stuff up.
I think it is more than the bare truth - "Analysts suck" - or that they at least are a lot like people that are trained to only look for one thing. They are falling prey to Maslow's Law - "...if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as a nail." Not only are their DCF models suspect, but they don't have the ability to leap out of the hammer mode and bring in analysts from utilities, energy, oil/gas, technology, AI, solar, mobility/autonomous driving, manufacturing....to properly model Tesla - this is only the beginning of watching them flail about.So according to this chart, the only other times Wall st and Tesla were this far apart was Jan 2013, April 2013 and August 2013. Were those good times to buy the stock or sell the stock? (hint: analysts suck)