Another silly article by a hopeful short. Pure speculation, no data. And totally ignoring the large amount of revenue coming in as cars are shipped. -smh-
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Anti-Tesla Gibberish
- Thread starter bonnie
- Start date
antochat
Pearl White P85
CapitalistOppressor
Active Member
John Shinal is just a new media guy and doesn't have a ton of credibility to begin with, but he is still enough of a somebody that he's interacted with my company. By that, I guess I mean he actually has a real job working for real media companies doing (presumably) real analysis and getting paid to do it, as opposed to the lame, unaccountable fanpost type setup that you see on SeekingAlpha.
Frankly, I think Shinal isn't really shilling for the shorts so much as he just has a political axe to grind. MarketWatch (who he works for) is one of the Wall St. Journal's new media operations, which makes it a part of the Rupert Murdoch/Fox News universe. And if you look at what he wrote, it isn't so much about Tesla, as it is about the Federal Loans that conservatives are trying to discredit. So this whole 2 part story was about bolstering the alternate universe where Romney says Tesla is a loser and Obama's loan programs are a disaster, as opposed to a simple hit job by the shorts.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Strangely there has been a lot of recent reporting on this Shinal article that came out on Dec 20th.
http://articles.marketwatch.com/201...920896_1_ceo-elon-musk-cash-flow-tesla-motors
rolosrevenge
Dr. EVS
meh. All of the talk of losing money up until the third quarter neglects the 2000+ cars sold in the 4th quarter. That's at least $100,000,000 in revenue and with an average of $10,000 profit on each sale, is $10,000,000 in profits from the sales. Add to the fact that the R&D and tooling will be greatly reduced and I'd expect to see them with very little losses this quarter, maybe even positive cash flow.
Adm
Active Member
You do have to take into account that more than average effort is put in getting the cars right. I've read about more than a few windshield and doorhandles having to be replaced and cars damaged in transit. We have to assume this will become less in time, but this will be eating into potential profits for now.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
The bid hit is the up front costs of setting up a functional line followed by the cash gobbling funding of such a sizeable receiveable. Even if you get paid the second it rolls out of the factory your still looking at 8 to 12 inventory turns a year. Use 12 and Tesla has to tie up 20,000 units/year / 12 turns/year or 1666 units at (round number for math) $50K each. There is $84MM in cash right there and that was far from an accurate accounting.
Why the Car of the Future Will Be Powered by … Gasoline
While not specifically anti Tesla gibberish the fact Tesla isn't even mentioned is surprising. Doesn't say much about the author.
Still a very telling survey of what automobile executives think.
http://business.time.com/2013/01/14/why-the-car-of-the-future-will-be-powered-by-gasoline/#comments
While not specifically anti Tesla gibberish the fact Tesla isn't even mentioned is surprising. Doesn't say much about the author.
Still a very telling survey of what automobile executives think.
http://business.time.com/2013/01/14/why-the-car-of-the-future-will-be-powered-by-gasoline/#comments
Here is the problem:
All 200 of these people have a vested interest (unless from Nissan) of EVs not really panning out.
Agree. Maybe Tesla's generally positive press has them more nervous now
"When asked about which electric vehicle technology would attract the most customer attention over the next 5 to 15 years, 16% pointed to battery-powered plug-ins in the 2012 study, compared to 11% this year."
Agree. Maybe Tesla's generally positive press has them more nervous now
"When asked about which electric vehicle technology would attract the most customer attention over the next 5 to 15 years, 16% pointed to battery-powered plug-ins in the 2012 study, compared to 11% this year."
so they got asked which electric vehicle technology would attract the most customer attention, and only 11% are pointing at battery? they must know about technologys that the public doesnt know about.
whats the other option? nuclear powered EVs?
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
strider
Active Member
In other news, 200 horse farm owners surveyed in 1909 see faster horses as the future of personal transportation.
Norbert
TSLA will win
Not mentioning Tesla is contradictory to the article's claims that a larger range is important for the future of the electric car.
Also, a central point of the article is the claim that Leaf sales in 2012 have decreased, based on a September 2012 article. However the actual end-of-year numbers show an (albeit slight) increase in 2012 vs 2011.
Given that those are central points, the article is simple doubly wrong.
Time to Bet Against Obama’s EVs?
The section on Tesla has the standard short flawed reasoning. The car is too expensive. Their last quarter reported only 263 deliveries, and although they made a wild prediction of 2500-3000 cars in the next quarter they haven't confirmed any numbers. According to their most recent earnings report they're still losing tons of money and have no hope of ramping production until they come out with an affordable car.
Of course no mention that although they haven't yet confirmed the number of cars sold last quarter, they did state they are currently producing cars at a rate of 20,000 per year.
The section on Tesla has the standard short flawed reasoning. The car is too expensive. Their last quarter reported only 263 deliveries, and although they made a wild prediction of 2500-3000 cars in the next quarter they haven't confirmed any numbers. According to their most recent earnings report they're still losing tons of money and have no hope of ramping production until they come out with an affordable car.
Of course no mention that although they haven't yet confirmed the number of cars sold last quarter, they did state they are currently producing cars at a rate of 20,000 per year.
Norbert
TSLA will win
I think it was George Blankenship who (already) said the volume for 2012 was above the lower bounds of the (revised) prediction, although he did not want to say the actual number. (The lower bounds might have been 2500 for the whole of 2012, not sure).
The "most recent earnings report" was Q3 2012, at which time Tesla barely started delivering Model S, so of course no surprise they were still losing money. They also raised additional capital since then (more than $200 million, I believe).
Regarding being "too expensive", one of course needs to mention that there is a long list of reservations, with new reservations coming in apparently at a good rate, and that Tesla has said they can become profitable with far less than 20,000 Model S per year. (Although they intend to spend future profits on preparing Model X and Gen III production). Independent reviews frequently say the Model S compares *very* well to other cars in its price category.
- - - Updated - - -
...not to forget that Elon Musk tweeted a few weeks before the end of 2012 that Tesla was already slightly cash flow positive (for a week) at that time, and expected that to further improve.
So there really were several significant points omitted...
It's more an anti-EV article than a specific anti-Tesla article. It covers all the typical anti-EV talking points by being somewhat accurate while generating negative spin.
Considering the content the headline is most blatant bit of misinformation. Someone in the comments correctly points out that the EV tax credit was created by G.W. Bush. Even that person didn't point out that the ATVM program that they are attributing to Obama was also created by G.W.
The other bit of bad misinformation is that the author implies the the $5.9 billion given to Ford was for the FFE. Even after writing that the money was used to update Ford's engines and hybrid platforms he then fixates on the FFE and how it was a waste of all the money.
She, like many others, just doesn't get that G.W. was trying to jumpstart the American auto manufacturing business by assisting them to upgrade their outdated technology. Tesla will likely be the biggest success story of the bunch. They are creating an entirely new car company with a measley $465 million loan.
- - - Updated - - -
On purpose. To support his overall (inaccurate) point.
Last edited:
She might want to know about other car funding;
Its a tax break - seattlepi.com
And that commenter's Carnegie melon Study was debunked:
Dan Fichana's Instablog - Seeking Alpha
Similar threads
