larmor
Active Member
And some of the compliance stuff we put in allows our cars to comply with emissions at the time of testing...
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
A carbon tax could help here, to punish those auto makers dragging their feet hoping to exact more profit from their obsolete ICE production.
You're incorrect. The credit phaseout is specifically based on sales, not on production, and it's completely 100% legit to hold back produced cars, and not sell them, in order to affect when the credit phaseout happens.
By all accounts BMW has a really bad cost structure (why is the i3 so expensive?) so they'd better think about this!
RobStark
Well-Known Member
BMW thought that they could drive down the cost of carbon fiber significantly by mass producing parts using carbon fiber reinforced plastic CFRP.
The plan was to supplement the structure of CFRP with an aluminum frame for the first generation then slowly remove much of the aluminum structure as they gain confidence in the durability and robustness of CFRP.
In effect they bet they could drive down the cost of carbon fiber faster than the battery industry could drive down the cost of batteries. Instead of spending money on more batteries BMW would spend the money on weight reduction.
BMW has admitted defeat recently by announcing they are dropping CFRP.
Also cost reduction in automotive grade aluminum alloys and high strength steels have moved so far it is more cost effective to reduce weight using the metals than carbon fiber. With few exceptions saving a little more weight using carbon fiber isn't worth the cost. Next gen GM trucks will offer carbon fiber boxes on their premium trims.
Along with good Q3 numbers and SEC resolved, TDAmeritrade removed the additional equity requirements for TSLA margin accounts....
That was close
Thanks a lot SEC
That was close
Thanks a lot SEC
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Monthly Plug-In Sales Scorecard
Volt passes Bolt
Clarity PHEV passes LEAF
Wonder where all the BEV buyers are going?
Chrysler Pacifica PHEV is doing well.
Yuri_G
Member
I'm watching this chart for last month's overall brand sales.
U.S. Auto Sales Brand Rankings – September 2018 YTD | GCBC
Tesla was 500 cars from taking down VW...
U.S. Auto Sales Brand Rankings – September 2018 YTD | GCBC
Tesla was 500 cars from taking down VW...
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Volkswagen terminates Audi CEO's contract amid emissions probe | Reuters
Some TMCers love pointing out Audi's CEO is in custody in Germany.
Now it is former Audi CEO is in custody.
Some TMCers love pointing out Audi's CEO is in custody in Germany.
Now it is former Audi CEO is in custody.
You should make an article on SA about it to counter this one:
November Sales Are In: GM's Bolt Outsold Tesla Model 3 By 9:1 - Tesla, Inc. (NASDAQ:TSLA) | Seeking Alpha
RobStark
Well-Known Member
I made no mention of production or sales, I said "held back." I know it's not based on production.
I was only quoting what another person on this forum suggested, which led me to believe this is a potential problem and that we should perhaps NOT state that Tesla did this intentionally as fact (which is what I was responding to here). People seem quick to kill the messenger, ~15 dislikes on this alone. I raised a concern, based on someone else's concern. What gives people?
Since someone else then stated there's no "avoidance of taxes", I maintain that Tesla and the owners would both benefit from any such delayed tactic. Do I need to explain how that would work and why Tesla wouldn't want to produce the 200th unit in the first week of any quarter, and how that would result in financial gains?
So I just read through IRC 30D. There is no mention anywhere on holding back sales in order to obtain maximum benefit in any quarter of the program. But I'm also not an attorney nor do I work for the IRS. I assume everyone here can legally tell me that the IRS can't and will not pursue argument regarding Tesla attempting to benefit in sales through owner tax credits that is not specifically spelled out in IRC 30D. I agree, it looks unlikely but people here seem to be advising way too broadly.
(Not Advice)
The IRS approves each quarter's supplied by the OEMs. That is why there was no announcement by Tesla about the phase out trigger until a while after Q2 ended. If the IRS had a problem with Tesla's approach, we would know by now.
There is no issue.
Great news from Europe, too: Model X most sold car of all at 1234 units in Norway, Model S 2nd in the Netherlands at 1052! In Norway, S+X captured 19% of the whole market (That is including ICE vehicles, too, and those are official numbers, no estimates) Can only imagine what happens when Model 3 arrives next year!
And in the process:
Tesla Outsells Volkswagen In The Netherlands In September
(this and included link to Norway is also the source for the numbers above)
(That is including ICE vehicles, too, and those are official numbers, no estimates) Can only imagine what happens when Model 3 arrives next year!And in the process:
Tesla Outsells Volkswagen In The Netherlands In September
(this and included link to Norway is also the source for the numbers above)
Last edited:
Aside from Chrysler Pacifica, seemes all EVs sales continue to rise! Good news for the planet.
So you think maybe Chrysler stopped pushing them because of the Waymo ICE version?
ev-enthusiast
Active Member
I like basic comparisons to keep sanity at times when things move quickly or big changes are happening (like SEC issue, Model 3 sales).
E.g. knowing the market cap of Tesla during the 2013 squeeze helped me a lot.
Despite a rapidly increasing stock price at that time, Tesla market cap was still way smaller compared to other car companies.
That was one aspect that helped me keeping sanity and holding onto all my shares during the 2013 squeeze.
This overly simplifying comparison told me that for the stock there was still some room to grow.
Right now I am thinking about an estimated share price to get an idea about the trajectory TSLA is currently moving.
An approximation of the quarterly revenue can be done with the help of the annual delivery rate (calculated from the end of quarter delivery figures), estimated ASP and gross margin.
Number of shares is currently 17050600.
But, what might be a realistic multiple to apply for Tesla right now and during the next quarters (0.5 or 5.0)?
@luvb2b is still making great financial models (thanks!) q2-q4 2018 financial projections.
I borrowed his estimates for total revenue and derived an overly simplistic share price estimate (multiple = 3):
Quarter: Mar-2018 | Jun-2018 | luv q3-2018e | luv q4-2018e
Tot. revenue: 3,408,751 | 4,002,231 | 6,942,683 | 7,299,027
SP estimate: 239,889,582 | 281,655,516 | 488,588,730 | 513,666,306
E.g. knowing the market cap of Tesla during the 2013 squeeze helped me a lot.
Despite a rapidly increasing stock price at that time, Tesla market cap was still way smaller compared to other car companies.
That was one aspect that helped me keeping sanity and holding onto all my shares during the 2013 squeeze.
This overly simplifying comparison told me that for the stock there was still some room to grow.
Right now I am thinking about an estimated share price to get an idea about the trajectory TSLA is currently moving.
An approximation of the quarterly revenue can be done with the help of the annual delivery rate (calculated from the end of quarter delivery figures), estimated ASP and gross margin.
Number of shares is currently 17050600.
But, what might be a realistic multiple to apply for Tesla right now and during the next quarters (0.5 or 5.0)?
@luvb2b is still making great financial models (thanks!) q2-q4 2018 financial projections.
I borrowed his estimates for total revenue and derived an overly simplistic share price estimate (multiple = 3):
Quarter: Mar-2018 | Jun-2018 | luv q3-2018e | luv q4-2018e
Tot. revenue: 3,408,751 | 4,002,231 | 6,942,683 | 7,299,027
SP estimate: 239,889,582 | 281,655,516 | 488,588,730 | 513,666,306
Last edited:
Ulmo
Active Member
Tesla's Board of Directors is growing out of control.
It needs to be swept clean, and have members of the Board that only have the interests of the company in mind. All of the new board members have massive conflicts of interest by being party to other companies and boards, and from many failing industries around the world, and that is toxic to Tesla (or any company).
It needs to be swept clean, and have members of the Board that only have the interests of the company in mind. All of the new board members have massive conflicts of interest by being party to other companies and boards, and from many failing industries around the world, and that is toxic to Tesla (or any company).
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Article
