Knightshade
Well-Known Member
...what?
Tesla is posting >50% CAGR.
And has for years, and will continue to for years.
Past-12-month P/E is an hilariously terrible way to evaluate a growth stock like that.
Amazons P/E 5 years ago was over 700.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
After what time has passed would you consider an FSD class action lawsuit?
- Thread starter Nuclear Fusion
- Start date
...what?
Tesla is posting >50% CAGR.
And has for years, and will continue to for years.
Past-12-month P/E is an hilariously terrible way to evaluate a growth stock like that.
Amazons P/E 5 years ago was over 700.
@Knightshade lets acknowledge that your suggestions for recognization practices are purely speculative. We just do not know unless Tesla is forced to someday disclose them.
(Hard time sitting on my hands and not pointing out some obvious errors, but I do not believe that would lead to a productive discussion)
(Hard time sitting on my hands and not pointing out some obvious errors, but I do not believe that would lead to a productive discussion)
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Why would we do that when it's not true?
We know the GAAP rules for recognizing revenue, and how deferred revenue accounting is done.
We know Teslas books are audited by a 3rd party to confirm they follow GAAP.
We know Tesla has never recognized revenue for a feature not widely delivered.
We know Tesla has never NOT recognized something just because it has "beta" on the label.
We know when, and how, the FSD package changed around March 2019.
We know (roughly) how many owners there are from before and after that change.
None of this is speculative at all.
If you have taken money for a thing, and not yet delivered the thing, then it's not recognized on the books as revenue. It's a liability.
Did I hear this correctly??
#LongLiveFSD
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
If you have taken money for a thing, and not yet delivered the thing, then it's not recognized on the books as revenue. It's a liability.
Did I hear this correctly??
Yes, that's literally how accounting works. Deferred revenue for things you have not delivered yet are liabilities.
For every company.
I even posted their balance sheet showing over a billion dollars of this under liabilities
What specifically are you confused about?
Go have a chat with someone sufficiently experienced with public B2C company audit practices from KPMG. They will explain why it is impossible to know without having CFO statement on their reasonable expectation for COGS and delivery schedule for the undelivered features. Even with that statement there are likely several options on how to do it while staying within the GAAP guardrails.
(I have some first hand experience on the subject and can testify that it is complex even when you plan and audit for your own business. Guessing specifics for a complex business with communication practices of Tesla. That is next level.)
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Teslas auditor is not KPMG, it's PWC.
And literally every item I listed out in previous post are known things that don't require mind-reading the CFO to know them- they're all knowable from publicly available info and financial disclosures.
Pretty much the only outstanding "question" we do NOT know is this:
When city streets goes to wide release- how much (if any) of the Pre-3/19 buyers deferred revenue will be recognized.
That's it.
All the post 3/19 money could be since that's the only remaining item promised to those buyers but not yet delivered.
At least SOME of the pre 3/19 money could NOT be, because there remains undelivered functionality for those folks.
Of course this is massively far afield of the original reason it even came up.... another users mistaken idea that taking money for undelivered features was net revenue at all which it's not and that getting this revenue Tesla didn't actually get was 'part of the scam'
So I guess you understand what happens to these liabilities when you can’t deliver what you promised! That’s money you owe to someone and if you can’t payback you liquidate your assets.
… and that’s a point we are making. Good to see that you agree that they have unfulfilled liability aka didn’t deliver what they promised!
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
So I guess you understand what happens to these liabilities when you can’t deliver what you promised! That’s money you owe to someone and if you can’t payback you liquidate your assets.
… and that’s a point we are making. Good to see that you agree that they have unfulfilled liability aka didn’t deliver what they promised!
...what?
you were the one who kept insisting the opposite of that
Lemme remind you, I know you've made so many untrue claims you probably lost track-
Tesla knowing exaggerated capabilities of the system to generate more revenue
I then corrected you....again pointing out that this is NOT revenue, it's a liability.
Now you're pretending that agrees with you somehow despite directly contradicting you.
It's increasingly hard to buy the idea you're debating honestly.
Feel free to go and check history- Bottomline remains the same: Tesla made false claims about their system’s capabilities and lured buyers into buying a product (or service) they can’t deliver!!
Anyhow— I have no idea why I’m debating this with you because at this point for anyone with rational thinking it is not a surprise!!
I’m sure there are people out there who like to donate 3K to god Elon and visit his Twitter temple every day but not me!
Have a great day!
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I did.
In the very last post where I quoted you saying the exact opposite of what you're trying to change your story to.
it's on the increasingly long list of factually untrue claims you've been cited making the last several pages.
Hence why questioning if you're actually trying to engage in honest debate or just trolling.
Second seems increasingly the case.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
No - you show me. The entire thread only talks about "future" features. Not existing features.
ps : There was such a mistake on the website at one time. I'll let you find it.
Agreeing on all counts.
Really? Looks like it was below 190 at that time, and have come down to still aggressive 57 today. Part of the story is that Amazon has always believed driving growth with close to 0 Free Cash Flow, disregarding net earnings. Which is brilliant. Now that they have grown up to one of the largest companies globally, they have started behaving more conservatively.
Tesla had a mind-blowing rally in 2020 (market cap growing 9X or so). And then they stopped. 2021 YTD has been just +17% (below S&P 19% during the period).
Tesla market cap is around $0.8T. It increasingly puts on pressure to behave more conservatively. When Amazon reached 0.8T around mid-2018, their P/E was around 100.
More important than the Amazon comparison, is question on how growth oriented TSLA investors are? I would expect that they are more risk-taking than average and want to find another 2020 TSLA 9x holabaloo. Now that 2021 YTD market cap growth has been disappointing, either TSLA investors need to change to expect less (be content with 17% growth) or TSLA need to attract more conservative investors. The latter group won't be convinced on (arguably silly metric of) P/E > 400.
With this background, I would expect Tesla revenues and net earnings to grow fast. It it one of the most amazing companies in the world, including financials and leadership. Problem is that TSLA is so overpriced that will take years for earnings to catch up. During that time market cap growth should be modest at best.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Not sure we are talking about that in this thread - but I'm sure by then Amazon had become the largest retailer & public cloud by revenue ?
Tesla is still one of the smaller auto OEMs - thats why the growth potential for Tesla is more than that for Amazon 5 years back.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Ah, my bad.
6 years ago not 5.
720.66 P/E on 9/30/2015.
Apologies for the error and appreciate the correction.
As you note it had dropped quite a bit a year later.
Teslas BTW was 1102.61 12/31/2020.
3 months later it had dropped to 661.32.
Now it's down around 400.
At current earnings growth it's going to be well under 100 within a year... (forward P/E is already close to this, and those estimates keep improving)
Certainly the stock isn't going to 9x quickly again- but I think 17% YoY is... overly pessemistic
Here's a guy who does this for a living-he has P/E down to 140 by end of THIS year, at 80 next year.
But yeah, there's other places for further investor discussions if you want em.
Terminator857
Active Member
It is good to build up consensus on a public forum for a class action lawsuit and you and your cohorts are trying to block.
rxlawdude
Active Member
Class action with very few eligible members? Unless you opted out of arbitration, you are not an eligible class member.
Case law is clear: mandatory arbitration, which I would estimate applies to at least 75% of owners, precludes class actions. There's no case and besides, class actions never make plaintiffs whole. But they do get successful class attorneys lots and lots of cash. Enjoy your voucher for a meager discount on your next FSD purchase.
Similar threads
