Thanks!
If Gordon Johnson conflated that with Supercharging and used it as a comeback on TV twice in the same interview, I can’t put any value on the rest of his TSLA analysis.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
If Gordon Johnson conflated that with Supercharging and used it as a comeback on TV twice in the same interview, I can’t put any value on the rest of his TSLA analysis.
He was downright terrible. That wasn't even his only major mistake. Tesla said last year's plan was to increase S/X production by 66%? Give me a break.
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
I wish Chip was ready enough to question Johnson's history and how he transitioned from Solar(SCTY) analyst to Tesla analyst? It's almost as if someone (gasp) pays him to 'weight-in' on SCTY/TSLA, i.e. shorts' targets.
But no, there is probably nothing to it, right!? Right!?!?
*more context in the "Elon Musk vs. short sellers" thread. Just one piece of info: his first (very negative) report on SCTY apparently coincided with first serious short attack on SCTY
Last edited:
RobStark
Well-Known Member
According to the Chicago Sun Times Yes.
A suburb in Chicago cancelled a plan in the middle of an approval process for multiple Tesla/Clipper Creek chargers in their downtown shopping district.
According to CST entities now only get Tesla destination chargers without Clipper Creek or free installation.
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
Oh, yeah, and almost all solar analysts have now moved to be auto analysts too, so nothing weird going on...
The car industry is not monolithic. The car enthusiasts and sports car fans are up on what Porsche is doing, but the rest of the public doesn't pay attention. Porsche had an SUV out for a few years before I noticed. Porsche's customer base is mostly made up of sports car enthusiasts who do want the best sports car they can find and people who want to flash the Porsche nameplate around.
Jaguar is another company known more for performance cars, in their case more performance touring cars, than family cars. I do think the general public would probably find the iPace more interesting than the Mission E, but both companies are niche players and the bulk of the public would never buy either.
The Mission E is aimed at the Model S P100D, which is probably the lowest volume seller in the Model S line up. It's the halo car in Tesla's line up, the best performer, but if Tesla lost that niche of the market it would hurt their bragging rights, but not their bottom line all that much.
Tesla's future is transitioning from a high end car company to the middle of the market. The iPace and Mission E are going after where Tesla was 2 or 3 years ago and neither car will be available at even Model S volumes for a few years, which puts them competing with the 2014/2015 Model S instead of the 2019 Model S.
Porsche especially has more resources than Tesla and maybe they will be making an equivalent number of Mission Es in 3-4 years. Jaguar might do the same with the iPace (though they don't have the resources of the VW Group, they still have decent resources). But they are behind the curve and most of the public is much more interested in what Tesla is doing than what the legacy auto makers are doing.
It's kind of like Apple and Android. Google was able to scramble and get another smart phone OS out in fairly short order to iOS's release. Android has more overall market share, but Apple is still able to charge a premium and makes more money than any of the competitors with Android.
Android isn't bad and has a few advantages over Apple products (superior interoperability with Windows being one of them). But Apple is one of the richest companies in the world. Most of the public thinks of Apple first when asked to name companies that make cell phones. Even Android users would probably be able to name their brand and maybe one other Android brand, but they would name Apple as a cell phone maker too.
I shy away from comparisons between Apple and Tesla because their industries are very different, however in this regard I think the parallels are apt.
Most of TE's business is different from the car business in the sales and delivery end, but the production side is similar. Stationary storage uses different chemistry from the cars, but the tech is pretty much the same. The Powerwall has a lot of automotive tech in it.
They would find it very difficult to sell off TE because they produce so much of TE's current products at the GigaFactory with the car parts. They could let the solar panel part of the business go, but that's about the only part they could sell off.
It’s hard for us to have our cake and eat it too, we can’t expect Tesla to be valued on non-automotive industry metrics but then complain when non-automotive industry analysts review the company.
Maybe a better description is Elon thrives on going after seemingly unattainable goals. Elon has missed on timing, but he otherwise tends to hit his goals. There are very few goals he has abandoned and quite a few he achieved.
The Europeans are banking on high speed CCS being as common as supercharging by the time they start producing cars in large numbers. That might be achievable in Europe where governments are helping and the car companies are concentrating their resources, but it's going to be patchy in the United States.
It is possible the European automakers will be able to compete in the area of charging network with Tesla in Europe, but not as well in the US. Some areas where state governments have encouraged it like California it might be possible to own a CCS EV and get around on road trips, but competing with Tesla will be tough.
Tesla has built in advantages in its charging network. A 5 year head start, streamlined convenience, reasonable rates for those who don't have free supercharging for life, small connector cables (easier for smaller people to handle), and for those who do pay a very simplified payment system. CCS has some challenges to overcome to even compete on par with Tesla.
Shorts on Twitter thought Johnson’s interview was excellent. No wonder they’re about to get burned alive. Good luck! 
The Tesla Supercharging network is also easy for people to understand - which is a huge benefit for mass adoption. “There is a Tesla supercharger, I drive a Tesla, easy”
With other electric cars it’s too confusing, Electranet, CCS, Type 2, Type 2 DC, FastCharge, Chademo etc etc. all these terms are thrown around for all these different networks with different payment methods. No one wants to buy a car that is this confusing.
Tesla has a huge advantage, not just the breadth of the network but it’s ease of use.
With other electric cars it’s too confusing, Electranet, CCS, Type 2, Type 2 DC, FastCharge, Chademo etc etc. all these terms are thrown around for all these different networks with different payment methods. No one wants to buy a car that is this confusing.
Tesla has a huge advantage, not just the breadth of the network but it’s ease of use.
He was reciting talking points like a politician. A paid shill.
Tesla has made charging on the road a no-brainer. Back in the day I was the kid called on to program the VCR, but I have never bothered to figure out how other charging networks work. I've seen videos and read about them and it looks a little more complicated than a gas station, but Tesla's way of doing things is easier than a gas station.
My mother, who was such a technophobe she refused to use any tech invented after the 1950s could probably charge a Tesla. She would be so intimidated as to shut down with most of the other charging networks.
Tesla Energy is the wild card for analysts. They can’t really get their hands around it since Tesla is the cutting end in the “energy generation and storage” segment and not much (or any) precedent to go off. The closest would be the utility business which PG&E might be a viable comparison.
When looking through the accounting, energy generation and storage is lump into one number as far as I can find. It doesn’t break out the details on the energy storage and solar revenue streams and margins. This is interesting for when the both the solar and storage begin to really start adding to the total revenue generation per quarter... will they begin to get more details out on the reports? Will analysts have the opportunity “to look under the hood” here and where it is going and how this real world growth could become significant in relation to the auto side numbers?
Year over year, energy gen&storage revenues have grown 92% compared to 26% for auto side. With the transition of Solarcity assets and personnel, they have transitioned the business from lease to loans/cash sales which 66% cash sales as compared to only 9% in 2016. Now that they have moved many of the solar sales elements to galleries (and still doing so). The solar roof is still in the initial roll out phase and could prove to be another significant revenue stream since there are over 400,000 new home construction projects each year in the USA alone. This revenue doesn’t include new roofs on already built houses.
In addition as the virtual power plant concept demos in Australia and California and the various islands Tesla is operating networks on, will show how grid services revenue and customer sided revenue streams will create significant long term revenue generation streams in the decades.
The home, commercial, utility solar installs. The solar roof product. The energy storage for home, commercial, and utility customers. The aggrigation/grid services suite of offerings. All deal with receiving revenue from energy generation calculated on $/kWh just like a traditional utility breaks down cost and revenues.
This should be an interesting second half of the year, for Elon and crew have stated repeatedly this is going to be a significant growth area and continuing so into 2019. Instead of the traditional car analysts calling Tesla’s valuation “ludicrous,” they will begin to reconsider after running the energy producer-utility sided numbers.
When looking through the accounting, energy generation and storage is lump into one number as far as I can find. It doesn’t break out the details on the energy storage and solar revenue streams and margins. This is interesting for when the both the solar and storage begin to really start adding to the total revenue generation per quarter... will they begin to get more details out on the reports? Will analysts have the opportunity “to look under the hood” here and where it is going and how this real world growth could become significant in relation to the auto side numbers?
Year over year, energy gen&storage revenues have grown 92% compared to 26% for auto side. With the transition of Solarcity assets and personnel, they have transitioned the business from lease to loans/cash sales which 66% cash sales as compared to only 9% in 2016. Now that they have moved many of the solar sales elements to galleries (and still doing so). The solar roof is still in the initial roll out phase and could prove to be another significant revenue stream since there are over 400,000 new home construction projects each year in the USA alone. This revenue doesn’t include new roofs on already built houses.
In addition as the virtual power plant concept demos in Australia and California and the various islands Tesla is operating networks on, will show how grid services revenue and customer sided revenue streams will create significant long term revenue generation streams in the decades.
The home, commercial, utility solar installs. The solar roof product. The energy storage for home, commercial, and utility customers. The aggrigation/grid services suite of offerings. All deal with receiving revenue from energy generation calculated on $/kWh just like a traditional utility breaks down cost and revenues.
This should be an interesting second half of the year, for Elon and crew have stated repeatedly this is going to be a significant growth area and continuing so into 2019. Instead of the traditional car analysts calling Tesla’s valuation “ludicrous,” they will begin to reconsider after running the energy producer-utility sided numbers.
colettimj
Member
Sorry that job requires cutting edge knowledge and a 2 hour work week.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Article
