bdy0627
Active Member
If true, this is a monumental achievement for option investors. I reckon it is akin to landing rockets for reuse. TSLA would suddenly become a tiny bit predictable!
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
2virgule5
Member
May have been a way to give 'an explanation' for a slower ramp than previously announced (sugar coating).
May actually be one particular item that is now the new bottleneck and accelerating it creates quality issues (even if not visible by the owner, ie inside the pack)
May as well be a cheap and smart way to redress some consumer fears (fueled by FUD); after all, a big part of the M3 consumer base is new and they need a lot of education/reassurance.
^^This^^. His credibility on meeting his self imposed production dates/goals was hurting TSLA, investors and ultimately the ability to obtain future financing at the most favorable rate. Someone (thank you if that someone is reading this) finally stepped to the plate and said 'Enough'.
Yes, there is all that resistance to change you mentioned that applied to Kodak (or Barnes and Noble vs. Amazon, or Blockbuster vs. Netflix, etc.). There is one, as far as I know unique, massive impediment to change for the ICE incumbents. More or less kicking the can down the road as much as another decade, with a couple of notable exceptions does not explode the odds of going out of business amid this disruption (those exceptions- the luxury vehicle makers and the Chinese auto industry. For the Chinese, it's not so much about going out of business as not passing up on a massive opportunity to expand market share and pressure from Chinese government mandates). Don't get me wrong... the incumbents are in for rocky waters and some may go out of business. However, with the exception of the luxury makers, it only marginally increases their risk of being done in by those rocky waters if they wait another decade to respond to the disruption we can all see is extremely likely and really move to EVs.
Some details- if Tesla hits it out of the park, they will sell 5 million vehicles per year in 2025. That's in a global auto market that is likely to increase from ~90 million in 2017 by more than those 5 million units lost to Tesla. I.e, net increase in annual volumes for the likes of Ford, Toyota, Hyundai, etc. So, for another decade, they can very largely ignore Tesla, not turn assets/investments into dead weight and implode their cash machine of selling ICE (actually watch it grow larger), and only slightly increase the level of hazard in switching to BEVs in the late 2020s vs now (possibly make it less risky as they go through an "electrification" phase, i.e. plug-in hybrids etc).
Now, does it sound so absurd or short-sighted that Toyota announces their move to EVs and it's 10% of their production... in 2030!
Of course, this only works if the incumbents look around and see this is what their peers are doing. Well, for the non-luxury makers this is just what seems to be happening.
So, yes, the ICE incumbents are facing very difficult decisions to pull the trigger on as you've mentioned we've seen before with other disurputions... but, there appears to be an unprecedented dynamic that means this disruption is extremely likely to continue in slow motion as I don't believe we've ever seen before.
More on all this, here.
Last edited:
Sell some puts, long-term, (a bet on Tesla going up) to raise the cash to buy your 3. If you're portfolio is in good shape/scale to do this, not kidding : ).
Reciprocity
Active Member
First time I ever disagreed with Curt. This is Elon, cast iron gonads the size of a falcon heavy, Musk. That's like trying to take Trump's Twitter away. Speaking of falcon heavies, You do realize that Elon just put a roadster in rocket that's going to Mars? Anyway. You are probably right because you usually are. But I'll believe when I see it. I honestly don't think it matters much what Elon says and it matters more what happens.
Last edited:
We'll see. However people often mellow with age. Trump excepted of course.
He has already shown some 'backing down' on some things: He admitted people talked him out of the 'Y' will be built on a new platform vs. why not just make it on an existing platform of the 3 and use '3' components in the semi. If the 'Y' comes with traditional doors vs FWDs I feel that he may be finally listening to his staff regularly.
Elon is Elon. He hasn’t started under-promising. Just my two cents.
I hardly ever disagree with you Dave but I think he did at least realistically promise this time. Otherwise, why not stick with 5k by the end of Q1?
Now, I agree that this realistic type of projecting may not be a long term phenomenon
I can only hope it becomes at least used sometimes moving forward.All I can say is if they don’t reach 2,500 per week by end of first quarter, I will be extremely disappointed...
Remember when I accidentally predicted 180,000 Model 3 in 2018 when I really meant 230,000? I probably was much closer to reality at 180,000. At this point I would be very happy with that number...
Remember when I accidentally predicted 180,000 Model 3 in 2018 when I really meant 230,000? I probably was much closer to reality at 180,000. At this point I would be very happy with that number...
I hardly ever disagree with you Dave but I think he did at least realistically promise this time. Otherwise, why not stick with 5k by the end of Q1?
Now, I agree that this realistic type of projecting may not be a long term phenomenon
Expectations do matter. If Tesla hits a rate of 3k/week at the end of Q1 after changing their guidance to 2.5k/week it will be viewed as very positive news.
On the other hand if they kept guidance at 5k/week for Q1 and hit the same 3k weekly rate they will get significant criticism even though the rate and their "job performance" is the same.
I'm just hoping that for once Elon and Tesla decided to bank on under promising and over delivering for a change.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
ValueAnalyst
Closed
ValueAnalyst
Closed
Watch a Tesla Model X all-electric SUV pull a semi truck out of the snow
This is how SP got pulled out of the hole today
This is how SP got pulled out of the hole today
I agree. Elon wants to change the world and having public pressure to meet very difficult goals generates more internal pressure than the method of Google and other companies who set aggressive internal deadlines but do not publicize them.
IMO long-term shareholders can also benefit as intense focus translates into goals being achieved faster than they otherwise would be. In the short-term, it makes some investors and analysts unhappy but so far that has been a price Elon seems willing to pay to meet goals no other company has come close to meeting. One of the reasons he may prefer to have Tesla be a private company is to reduce the blowback from short-term misses by a stock market that too often lives quarter to quarter.
Having said all that hopefully any miss of the 5000/wk by end of Q2 goal is only a month or two, and it would not surprise me at all if they were on time.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
It could have always been said with Tesla, but this time I think he's actually set the bar low enough that it could be reached.
It's not like the 793 cars in the last week were exactly 113 a day.
They were more something like:
1. 90
2. 96
3. 102
4. 110
5. 120
6. 131
7. 144
This is how you get 793 cars, and end up at 1000/wk
That's exactly what Elon said.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Article
