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

Are you also investing in Tesla?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
With a government loan comes a lot of media scrutiny and public dislike.

Media scrutiny can be a good thing, and as a part of the public, I disagree with the "dislike" part. In the absence of a CO2 tax, and the presence of extensive subsidies for oil companies, government loans are an effective way to support a clean technology for the future, and there should be more. Perhaps after the election, when the public has voted, again. And once Model S is shown to be the technology it promised to be.

The government must express our common interest regarding a better future of generating and using energy, and I see it as up to each administration to decide which is the best possible way to do so.
 
I don't disagree. I think this is exactly the type of problem that government should get involved in solving, but that doesn't mean that the public likes it. Just look at GM and the Chevy Volt, or the beating that Tesla has taken for the last loan.

You can argue whether or not it is worth doing despite the public's opinion, but you can't argue that the public doesn't hate it. Recent history has already demonstrated that for us.
 
When there's a secondary stock offering (speaking now of the market in general, not just TSLA) does it normally result in a drop in the price of the stock? Or does the additional capital offset the dilution of ownership, leaving the price about the same? I guess the advantage for supporters of the company (all or most of us) as opposed to stock speculators who only see the company as an opportunity for stock speculation, is that today if I buy shares the money just goes to whoever sells them to me, whereas if I buy a secondary offering the money actually goes to Tesla and helps the company directly.
 
People say the DOE loan to Tesla was a "bad loan."

Why don't people say the $5.9Billion DOE loan to Ford in 2009 to produce more fuel efficient vehicles was similarly bad?

What about the $250M loan guarantee Ford got from the Export-Import bank of the US last year?

Are people confusing loans with bailouts?
 
You can argue whether or not it is worth doing despite the public's opinion, but you can't argue that the public doesn't hate it. Recent history has already demonstrated that for us.
People say the DOE loan to Tesla was a "bad loan."

Which people? I see that coming from Fox news, Rush Limbaugh etc, and expressed in anti-EV articles and a specific kind of commenters on EV articles. Plus it is a partisan thing in opposing Obama, while voting in favor of oil subsidies. The problem with that is that there doesn't seem to be a bipartisan accepted way of supporting the EV future, and that is probably what they want. But that doesn't mean we should give up on actively supporting EV technology and EVs. If there was a bipartisan accepted alternative to loans, great, but as long as there isn't, I'm in favor of loans. Because they do help and accelerate a common interest, including one of future generations.
 
Leaving aside people who oppose it because they just hate EVs, and people who oppose it because they'll oppose anything the present administration does, I suppose the objection to government loans is that if the company defaults, the taxpayer eats the loss, and if the company was solid, they could get a loan from banks and investors, rather than from the government.

I'd reply that government loans are a way for the government to support projects it considers to be in the public interest. I'm in favor of anything that puts more EVs on the road. And it's not as though the government stayed out of business. Governments at all levels, from federal down to local, are constantly giving grants, tax breaks, loans, etc., to businesses. Here's a 5-year tax hiatus if you open a business in my city. Here's a free logging road so you can cut down trees on public land. Here's a liability exemption so you don't have to pay for insurance on a new nuclear power plant. Here's a tax break just for taking oil out of the ground. And on and on and on. There's nothing wrong with loaning a few bucks to Tesla, which has demonstrated the ability to manufacture a quality car (the Roadster) and now is going to employ a bunch of people in America making pollution-free cars. Yes, there's always default risk. But all those other subsidies and give-aways have risk, and this is something that will make America and the world a better place.
 
When there's a secondary stock offering (speaking now of the market in general, not just TSLA) does it normally result in a drop in the price of the stock? Or does the additional capital offset the dilution of ownership, leaving the price about the same?

It all depends on why you are doing the offering. If you are a bank that is required to raise your capital levels because of new legislation, and nobody is willing to lend you the money so you have to ask the public markets for it, price is probably going to drop like a rock. If you are a pipeline company that is raising money to buy another pipeline so that you can collect more fees and raise your dividend, you might break even. If you are a hot new auto manufacturer going after a market that is potentially worth billions but didn't have the cash, you might rocket higher now that you have the funds to do it.

The above aren't guaranteed though. There are a billion factors that could affect the outcome, which is why it is so hard to accurately predict how the market will value your shares after you make this kind of change.

Are people confusing loans with bailouts?

People are confused for all kinds of reasons---the why doesn't matter. When the board evaluates its options for raising more money, none of the options are going to read "convince American public that their distaste for government loans to fledgling 'green' companies and auto manufacturers is irrational".

They can only play the hand they are dealt. This hand says that taking government money comes with a black mark on your brand in the eyes of a large portion of your potential customers. I think when you weigh that against a secondary offering, the offering is going to be 'cheaper' means of getting the funds.

Which people? I see that coming from Fox news, Rush Limbaugh etc, and expressed in anti-EV articles and a specific kind of commenters on EV articles. Plus it is a partisan thing in opposing Obama...

Which people? You just named them. How many viewers does Fox News have? How many listeners to Rush Limbaugh have? How many purist capitalists are there out there in the investment community that don't like the government interfering in the market place? How many republicans are there?

I mean, you probably just named about half the country, if not more. I think you answered your own question.

Again, I'm totally on your side here. I think that since it is politically impossible to get taxes on oil, subsides (and loans) are the next best option. But just because you and I think that's a fine use of our taxpayer dollars, doesn't mean that the rest of America does. And, whether they are right or wrong, ideological or just plain stupid---that is the reality of the situation, and that's what the board needs to consider when weighing its options.
 
I mean, you probably just named about half the country, if not more. I think you answered your own question.

No, I don't think all republicans are thinking in terms partisan enough to oppose anything Obama does. Also don't forget the loan program is of Bush's making.

A government loan (especially in the current situation) is a huge endorsement, and as Elon recently said, without the Model S loan the Tesla IPO would not have been as good. It is not only an endorsement for Tesla, but also a recommendation for the public to buy electric cars. We need to continue politics, and act, in favor of EVs, even if maybe 20% of the voters don't like it. So both as a voter and as a shareholder, I'm in favor of loans for specific projects such as the Bluestar.
 
Right now I'm happy with my holding. If it goes down to 26 I'll buy another 50. If there's a secondary offering at a price I like, I'll buy that same 50 if I didn't already. Otherwise I'm good. Right now, I really don't care what the stock does. I want the company to succeed and build lots of electric cars, and move into the lower price class and build even more. I don't want to be driving the only Tesla I've seen in my city. (Supposedly there are something like 4 others in the area, and I saw one at a car show a couple of years ago, but never on the street.)

Another question about a secondary offering: Are we likely to learn about it in advance, or is this sort of thing usually not announced until the offering is actually on the market? If I know it's coming up, and I'm considering buying some more shares, I'd rather buy them directly from Tesla (so they get the cash) than from the market.
 
Right now I'm happy with my holding. If it goes down to 26 I'll buy another 50. If there's a secondary offering at a price I like, I'll buy that same 50 if I didn't already. Otherwise I'm good. Right now, I really don't care what the stock does. I want the company to succeed and build lots of electric cars, and move into the lower price class and build even more. I don't want to be driving the only Tesla I've seen in my city. (Supposedly there are something like 4 others in the area, and I saw one at a car show a couple of years ago, but never on the street.)

Another question about a secondary offering: Are we likely to learn about it in advance, or is this sort of thing usually not announced until the offering is actually on the market? If I know it's coming up, and I'm considering buying some more shares, I'd rather buy them directly from Tesla (so they get the cash) than from the market.

I think secondary offerings depend on what they want. But I believe the most common is that existing shareholders are offered to keep their holding as it were, if they pay X. For example, if there are 1 million shares, and they want to sell another million, they will offer shareholders to buy their share, if they don't then their holding will be diluted (as originally they had 5 shares out of a million, but they don't buy so they now have 5 shares out of 2 million). I am not sure what happens if not everyone accepts, I think it then goes to the public.

Of course they could just put a load on the market, but not sure if this is done a lot or not.

Although I have never personally experienced this but I think I've got the theory right.
 
For those who didn't see ...

April 12, 2012

TESLA MOTORS ANNOUNCES DATE FOR FIRST QUARTER 2012 FINANCIAL RESULTS
PALO ALTO, CA -- (Marketwire) -- 04/12/12 -- Tesla Motors, Inc. (NASDAQ: TSLA) announced today that it will post its financial results for the first quarter ended March 31, 2012 after market close on Wednesday, May 9, 2012. At that time, Tesla will issue a brief advisory release via Marketwire containing a link to the first quarter 2012 Shareholder Letter, available on the company website. Tesla management will hold a live Question & Answer (Q&A) session at 2:30pm Pacific Daylight Time (5:30pm Eastern Daylight Time) to discuss the Company's results.

What: Tesla Motors, Inc. First Quarter 2012 Financial Results Q&A Conference Call
When: May 9, 2012
Time: 2:30pm Pacific Daylight Time / 5:30pm Eastern Daylight Time
Shareholder Letter: Tesla - Investors Overview
Webcast: Tesla - Investors Overview (live and replay)
Live Call: (877) 312-5519 / (760) 666-3771 (International)

Approximately two hours after the call, a digital recording of the Q&A session will be available for a period of two weeks following the date of the call. To access the recording, please dial in to one of the following numbers using the conference ID shown.

Replay Dial In #: (855) 859-2056 Conference ID: 70938591
International Replay Dial In #: (404) 537-3406 Conference ID: 70938591

The webcast will also be archived on the Company's website for a period of one year following the date of the call.

About Tesla Motors

Tesla's goal is to accelerate the world's transition to electric mobility with a full range of increasingly affordable electric cars. Palo Alto, California-based Tesla designs and manufactures EVs and EV powertrain components. Tesla has delivered more than 2,150 Roadsters, the world's first electric sports car, to customers world-wide. Model S, the first premium sedan to be built from the ground up as an electric vehicle, goes on the market the middle of this year.

For additional information, please visit ir.teslamotors.com.

Add to Digg Bookmark with del.icio.us Add to Newsvine

Source: Tesla Motors, Inc.
 
I had a friend whose grandmother was talked out of buying 3M. My friend was obsessed with how rich he'd have been. But I had another friend whose grandfather was enormously rich, and it was all frittered away in the next generation and my friend got nothing.

The problem with "My grandmother almost bought X" is that when Coke or 3M or Apple were starting, there were hundreds (or at least tens) of other very similar companies that went bust. You can't know which will succeed. Anybody remember Birelys? (sp?) They made fizzy soft drinks with 10% fruit juice. I used to drink the stuff. It's gone now.

My grandmother, however, lived for her entire life off her investments, and left my mother a small fortune. She was actually pretty good at picking 'em. She regretted not buying Coke (because she felt that she should have spotted the attractiveness of it in advance) but didn't regret buying 3M, Standard Oil of New Jersey, General Electric, etc.... or Union Carbide, though that one didn't actually work out that well. So I was simply describing the psychology of someone who did pretty well: Everyone misses some opportunities.