Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Video' started by Norbert, May 24, 2011.
Tesla's Musk Interview About Model S, SpaceX - Video - Bloomberg
can somebody explain me what he says from minute 6.01-6.23?
I understood the words like this(whithout grasping the sense):
"If you look at all the companies that keep auto-creating, every single round in every single company everytime we sold stock in one of this companies every single round has been an upround. Thats about 32 rounds over five companies since 1995 without exeption. So if you are a short-seller, yoo know, consider these odds."
I heard it as him talking about the companies he has run for the past five years. Every time they had a round, it has been an upround (ie; valuation higher than previous). He was talking about his track record, when compared to the high levels of short-sold Tesla stock.
This is what I understood: "I would point out that if you look at all the companies that I have been [keep...or] creating, every single round in every single company, every time we sold stock in all those companies, every single round has been an up round. That's about 32 rounds over 5 companies since 1995, without exception. So if you are a short seller, you know, consider those odds."
As far as I can tell, this might mean that even when stock was diluted, it increased its value, which might refer to events such as raising capital for Model X (just guessing, might be wrong).
yapp, you're right, he probably meant his own track record.
In the setup to the interview (@ 0:40) the guy says "Tesla ... losing money on the sale of every single of its Roadster sports cars." That's not right, is it? Fairly sure Tesla makes some profit on each Roadster, though clearly the company is losing money overall for the near term.
Yeah all the superficial analysts talk about how Tesla has always been losing money. But that's just plain stupid. The only reason Tesla raised the money was so they could invest it in the Model S, and they expected to "lose" money as they did that. Everyone who invested was aware that was their plan.
Here comes the up round: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/25/tesla-idUSN2513639020110525?feedType=RSS&feedName=financialsSector&rpc=43
Apparently as a result: "Tesla shares rose 5.8 percent to $28.27 in midday trading on Nasdaq."
[More info in the article, Elon and Daimler getting more shares.]
I was really surprised to see that nearly half the stock available is being shorted. That's good for those that think the company has a bright future but I really not sure where they're getting this negative sentiment from.
Nearly all the analysts that have had the chance to review the company have given it an "over weight" or "buy" rating. Im just wondering what their negative attitudes are based on.
Yeah, they're not losing money on each roadster they build. They're losing money overall but if they werent pumping so much money into the development of the Model S they'd be a profitable company. The Roadster and powertrain business are profitable but it costs about 500 million to bring a car to market so thats why they say "they losing money on each car" when its not really true.
It's easy to talk the stock down with a superficial analysis. That's why all the shorting, IMHO. Sounds like big bucks are going to be made and lost on this one, either way.
What I found really interesting is that Elon Musk is putting more money in:
At the stated price that is $39 million worth. Now THAT is a big vote of confidence in the company from the CEO.
How many of his shares went into the IPO. I see this as him buying some of those shares back. Still is certainly a vote of confidence.
To me it seemed that especially in the last few months, those knowledgable about EVs have established a firm confidence that EVs are the future (or at least part of the future). However if one analyzes Tesla from a purely financial perspective (and ignores Elon's track record), it apparently doesn't necessarily have those ingredients that spell success for an investor who doesn't know much about the specific business the company is involved in.
Three questions seem often discussed:
Are EVs the future, or how much are they part of it?
Will Tesla be able to compete with established auto manufacturers?
Will Tesla be able to deliver the Model S in time and with a margin that allows Tesla to grow?
I'd think these are actually quite difficult questions, even though many of us here are confident that the answer is "yes" in each case. Still, I'm surprised that the short-sell percentage is that high, and I guess it has to do with quite a few writers and bloggers having been on a mission to bash anything that has to do with EVs and clean energy as being a much larger part of our future. These short sellers will soon be pretty annoyed, I expect.
Correct me if I'm wrong. When doing a stock offering, normally a company simply issues more shares. This results in a dilution of percentage ownership of the existing shares, unless the owner buys more to maintain his percentage (as Daimler did at IPO). It does not require the existing shareholders to sell their shares.
Well Elon did sell some shares to shore up his personal finances at the IPO.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk To Sell Nearly One Million Personal Shares At IPO
In general, you're probably right though. Then perhaps Elon is simply buying more to maintain his current percentage.
I could be wrong, but for some reason I remember the Daimler agreement stating that Elon had to continue as CEO until Model S is launched and maintain a certain percentage of the company while Daimler has the option of buying shares to maintain their percentage stake.
I think Elon has great confidence in the company, but I see him & Daimler buying stocks as a part of the Daimler agreement.
Elon Musk Says Tesla Wont Be Sold, But Elon Musk Is Wrong | VentureBeat
This is the original on greencarreports.com: Elon Musk Says Tesla Won't Be Sold, But Elon Musk Is Wrong
The author wrote a similar article a year ago: IPO Or Not, Tesla Won't Survive As Independent, Analysts Say
Maybe he will write another one next year.
I have a hard time finding anything substantial other than an analyst pointing out how difficult it is for a new small company to compete with old big companies. Did I miss something?
I love the comments!