TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[jelloslug]

OK why the initial dip and now up 3? Did the shorts give up early today? Is there news or just the usual "it's how TSLA rolls"?

MMD fo' life!

Mod: I initially moved the post to snippiness, I thought MMD was a reference to another user. I have been informed it means "Mid Morning Dip". My apologies.. --ggr

 

[WarpedOne]

One can never never expect the TSLA liftoff

 

[aznt1217]

My TSLA Share positions started to get loaned out again. New wave of shorts.

 

[EinSV]

My TSLA Share positions started to get loaned out again. New wave of shorts.

Ditto here this morning (at Fidelity). I had assumed covering was contributing to the SP increase but this may suggest strong buying interest overcoming increased shorting. Would be nice to get an update from Ihor D but from his Twitter account it looks like he may be in the hospital.

 

[CyberDutchie]

Only about 10% away from ATH territory

 

[Starno]

We almost at 3 months high

 

[Tslynk67]

351 seems tricky to cross convincingly

 

[winfield100]

A rising tide floats all boats, except those anchored too shallow, those will sink.

what an intriguing/definition representation of shorts trapped "underwater", air running out

 

[pz1975]

what an intriguing/definition representation of shorts trapped "underwater", air running out

SCUA

SCUBA without the B

 

[Skryll]

Good assessment why analysts are missing basic factors that determine success or failure in the EV business ...

I find the air filtration aspect most interesting. I hated the smell of diesel cars in front of my 2015 VW eGolf, would enter the cabin pretty quickly. And when the model 3 came out I was really disappointed not to see the biodefense filter mode being part of the PUP. But now after owning the Model 3 for a week, I never smelt anything bad entering the cabin, so looks like the air filters are actually quite good as they are standard

 

[RobStark]

No they don’t. As one example off the top of my head, they could simply discontinue it all together and keep on moving forward with future models. The point of Tesla is not to be the next Ford, GM, or BMW, it is to transition the world. After all this time of watching Tesla be outside the box and people still want to put them back in the OEM box. Repeating myself: there are more important tasks for Tesla than refreshing S and X.

Tesla needs profits from S and X to be profitable, at least in the short to medium term.

And becoming profitable is necessary for Tesla to help transition the world. There is not an Angel Investor out there with an infinite pot of cash to subsidize Tesla forever.

 

[Todd Burch]

And here's the mid-afternoon drop, soon to be followed by the end of the day pop.

 

[Krugerrand]

Tesla needs profits from S and X to be profitable, at least in the short to medium term.

And becoming profitable is necessary for Tesla to help transition the world. There is not an Angel Investor out there with an infinite pot of cash to subsidize Tesla forever.

Never said otherwise. The context of the original post stipulated large volume of Model 3. At that stage Tesla won’t need S or X profits, therefore no need to refresh them. Indeed, better to use the money for refreshing to bring forward volume for Y, Semi and pickup.

You’re argument is not convincing for refresh.

 

[RobStark]

Never said otherwise. The context of the original post stipulated large volume of Model 3. At that stage Tesla won’t need S or X profits, therefore no need to refresh them. Indeed, better to use the money for refreshing to bring forward volume for Y, Semi and pickup.

You’re argument is not convincing for refresh.

Model S needs refresh soon not after Model 3 is at 1M per year.

Tesla needs refresh to keep Model S at 50k plus units per year over the next two years.

The amount of money needed for refresh brings excellent bang for the buck but is a drop in the bucket for bringing the Semi or pickup to mass production.

You're argument against refresh is unconvincing.

Dropping Model S is just plain laughable.

 

[Waiting4M3]

Never said otherwise. The context of the original post stipulated large volume of Model 3. At that stage Tesla won’t need S or X profits, therefore no need to refresh them. Indeed, better to use the money for refreshing to bring forward volume for Y, Semi and pickup.

You’re argument is not convincing for refresh.

I don't think any arguments here on TMC would be convincing to the point where people can quantitatively prove one way gets better ROI than the other. Only Tesla would know that, and only Tesla knows when they will build the next GGF and Semi/MY production lines, what the CapEx will look like when that happens.

I can see a couple arguments for refresh:

1) refresh will likely cost much less CapEx than building new line, so if demand of S/X start to drop, especially S, because of people going to M3 (if M3 availability improves), then refresh could be a cheaper way to get more revenue coming in, also much quicker than building new production lines for MY/semi.

2) some refresh could improve economy of scale with M3, such as 2170 cell format and pack/module design, maybe even switching the motor from AC induction to PM

 

[Bobfitz1]

Always skewed by what is included and what isn’t.

True enough. But chart strongly suggests the CPI is skewed toward ensuring those depending on Social Security fall a bit further behind each year. Might not be a bad idea if there was a Necessities CPI as well as current one that factors in price increases in luxury goods.

 

[Esme Es Mejor]

A refresh makes a ton of sense— not just for the interior, battery, screen, and AC, but for ease of manufacturing. Tesla should want a far more automated line that can crank out as many or more S/X with far less space & labor. I wouldn’t want them to do this until the Model 3 is at a steady state of 5K+, but they would be wise to do it soon after.

 

[Starno]

A refresh also makes a ton of sense to increase the moat between competitors and Tesla. Even if competition is actually non existent. Just keep pushing forward.
They must be unattainable.

 

[Richgoogol]

Not liking the reversal here...I wonder if this is it before ER...

 

[Krugerrand]

I don't think any arguments here on TMC would be convincing to the point where people can quantitatively prove one way gets better ROI than the other. Only Tesla would know that, and only Tesla knows when they will build the next GGF and Semi/MY production lines, what the CapEx will look like when that happens.

I can see a couple arguments for refresh:

1) refresh will likely cost much less CapEx than building new line, so if demand of S/X start to drop, especially S, because of people going to M3 (if M3 availability improves), then refresh could be a cheaper way to get more revenue coming in, also much quicker than building new production lines for MY/semi.

2) some refresh could improve economy of scale with M3, such as 2170 cell format and pack/module design, maybe even switching the motor from AC induction to PM

1) Wasted money. Only if Model 3 doesn’t ramp to profitability (5000/wk) in a reasonable length of time, in which case a refresh isn’t going to bail Tesla out. There’s no need to keep demand up for S or C if Tesla is pumping out the 3 followed closely by the Y.

2) Don’t see it.

I’m not sure why people are so stuck on S and X. They were merely stepping stones to the granddaddy of them all - the affordable EV. Add the Y and a pickup and there’s no need for either.