Prediction Thread - "You Called It"

[neroden]

We know that the IRS doesn't consider the vehicle "sold" for tax credit purposes until title transfers under state law.

It's possible Tesla screwed this up. It just seems highly unlikely, given the combination of Canadian deliveries -- and not just in Ontario which had its own rebate going away, but in Vancouver too -- and the clear increase in cars in transit at the end of the quarter. Those are obvious attempts to push out the date on which 200000 was crossed. So it would be an actual *screwup*.

I would be unsurprised if Tesla is currently verifying and auditing the numbers and making sure that they didn't screw up. Maybe they did screw up! They probably don't want to make a public announcement until they've audited it all and are absolutely sure.

 

[wdolson]

Tesla knew where they were with respect to the threshold at the beginning of June better than anyone. They also could see the strategic advantage in delaying the 200K mark until after July 1 and Elon had made noises they would try and manage when they crossed the line.

All those things together, I'm about 90% sure Tesla did manage to stay under 200K until July 1, even if it meant slow walking some title transfers.

The law does say the date when the credit of the credit for the owner is the date ot title transfer not the date the paperwork was signed. It appears the IRS has been looking the other way for cars sold on Dec 31. Even if the seller rushed through the title documents, at least some of those cars had title transfer dates in the first week of January. The IRS is understaffed so they may have just been letting it slide even though it was technically the wrong year. The tax payer was owed a tax credit, if a few end up taking one in the wrong tax year, it doesn't usually make much difference in the long run. Few people have wild swings in their taxes from year to year and even fewer of those would happen to buy a qualifying vehicle at the end of the year when their taxes were unusually high. It's probably a non-zero number, but it's also very small.

It won't affect me one way or the other, but I am nervous Tesla screwed this up, though I'm pretty sure they didn't.

 

[MikeC]

Privatization predictions:

-More than 60% of investors commit to go private.
-Buyout raised to 480 due to popularity and to compensate those forced out.
-Saudis, Tencent commit to buying 10-15%, Silver Lake 5-10%, Elon increases position a few percent, smaller investors commit to buying whatever is left of the available less than 40%.
-Price eventually goes to 600-1000+ (the big players buying as much as possible below 480 so they don't have to buy at 480, other people wanting to get in or up their stake before it goes private, helped by shorts covering, and then a general mania bubble as the rapid price appreciation itself, particularly for an asset that will soon no longer be readily available to buy, becomes the story)
-No shares actually trade at 480 when the stock is delisted because the price is significantly higher and anyone who doesn't want to go private has already sold

 

[GeorgeSymonds]

Privatization predictions:

-More than 60% of investors commit to go private.
-Buyout raised to 480 due to popularity and to compensate those forced out.
-Saudis, Tencent commit to buying 10-15%, Silver Lake 5-10%, Elon increases position a few percent, smaller investors commit to buying whatever is left of the available less than 40%.
-Price eventually goes to 600-1000+ (the big players buying as much as possible below 480 so they don't have to buy at 480, other people wanting to get in or up their stake before it goes private, helped by shorts covering, and then a general mania bubble as the rapid price appreciation itself, particularly for an asset that will soon no longer be readily available to buy, becomes the story)
-No shares actually trade at 480 when the stock is delisted because the price is significantly higher and anyone who doesn't want to go private has already sold

While you're entitled to your point of view, we're picking numbers out the air again. When is "eventually"? 600 is only a few years away with even modest compound growth and no better than any other share.

It's just as likely that the Saudis will get their feet in the door, and as soon as they can, put Musk in the corner, at which point they'll sell off the sales and service centres, the supercharging network to the retail arm of a oil company and opened up to other makes for a fee, solar panels to a company wanting it etc and a few other bits and bobs getting back a chunk of their cash and getting shot of the parts of the business that are more of a hindress to management etc etc. They'll then look to launch future models partly built by third parties. I'm not saying I like that scenario - I'm saying its a possibility. Big time investors won't necessarily be 100% aligned to Musks vision.

 

[MrDoor]

Big time investors won't necessarily be 100% aligned to Musks vision

No but the whole point of Musk taking it private was to make progress not necessary money for himself so he will consider this outcome.

 

[MikeC]

While you're entitled to your point of view, we're picking numbers out the air again. When is "eventually"? 600 is only a few years away with even modest compound growth and no better than any other share.

It's just as likely that the Saudis will get their feet in the door, and as soon as they can, put Musk in the corner, at which point they'll sell off the sales and service centres, the supercharging network to the retail arm of a oil company and opened up to other makes for a fee, solar panels to a company wanting it etc and a few other bits and bobs getting back a chunk of their cash and getting shot of the parts of the business that are more of a hindress to management etc etc. They'll then look to launch future models partly built by third parties. I'm not saying I like that scenario - I'm saying its a possibility. Big time investors won't necessarily be 100% aligned to Musks vision.

We’re just making predictions on an Internet forum here. I’m not trying to guess exactly when “eventually” is - that would be picking numbers out of the air.

You are also entitled to your point of view - just not sure why you’re trying to refute mine at the same time. The point of this thread is simply to record the prediction and then wait to see how it turned out. There are other threads to discuss and debate the various future probabilities.

 

[YasB]

1. Tesla won't be taken private in 2018 or 2019 at any price above 300$ a share.
2. At one point in time between today and the end of 2019, the share price will be below 250$ again.
3. Tesla won't be able to show a positive net margin for each of the following 6 quarters.
4. By 2022 the VW group will sell more electrified vehicles per year than Tesla (PHEV+BEV)
5. By 2023 the VW group will sell more BEVs per year than Tesla.
6. CAGR of Teslas revenue will be below 30% for the 5 periods from full year 2018 until 2023.
7. Tesla won't be able to sustain a company wide EBIT margin of 5% from 2019 until 2023.
8. Tesla won't achieve SAE Level 3 during 2018, 2019 or 2020, if they stick to their DIY approach and country roads are included.
9. Tesla will never achieve SAE Level 5 autonomy on all road-types in all environments, if they stick to vision, ultra-sonics and forward radar only.

Hm ... that should be enough for now.

 

[navguy12]

Tesla won't achieve SAE Level 3 during 2018, 2019 or 2020, if they stick to their DIY approach and country roads are included.
9. Tesla will never achieve SAE Level 5 autonomy on all road-types in all environments, if they stick to vision, ultra-sonics and forward radar only.

Couldn't agree more.......
The latest update (Model 3, 28.x) has made TACC (hence EAP as well) too twitchy when it comes to shadows to the point I will not use it when I have passengers.

 

[neroden]

1. Tesla won't be taken private in 2018 or 2019 at any price above 300$ a share.
2. At one point in time between today and the end of 2019, the share price will be below 250$ again.
3. Tesla won't be able to show a positive net margin for each of the following 6 quarters.
4. By 2022 the VW group will sell more electrified vehicles per year than Tesla (PHEV+BEV)
5. By 2023 the VW group will sell more BEVs per year than Tesla.
6. CAGR of Teslas revenue will be below 30% for the 5 periods from full year 2018 until 2023.
7. Tesla won't be able to sustain a company wide EBIT margin of 5% from 2019 until 2023.
8. Tesla won't achieve SAE Level 3 during 2018, 2019 or 2020, if they stick to their DIY approach and country roads are included.
9. Tesla will never achieve SAE Level 5 autonomy on all road-types in all environments, if they stick to vision, ultra-sonics and forward radar only.

Hm ... that should be enough for now.

Your prediction #3 means you simply don't know how to read a balance sheet. Pathetic.

I will state flat out that Tesla will turn out profit (and therefore a positive net margin) in 2019. There's my prediction. I'm not sure whether that profit will be published, because the company might be private by then.

You're very optimistic about VW. You might be right, and I even hope you're right, but history says you'll be wrong.

I actually believe that nobody will achieve SAE Level 5 autonomy on all road types in all environments ever, so #9 is kind of a trivial prediction.

 

[JRP3]

I predict YasB won't be here a year from now.

 

[wdolson]

I doubt VW is going to outsell Tesla in electrified vehicles until at least 2025. They might want to before that but they won't have the battery supply.

 

[Off Shore]

I predict YasB won't be here a year from now.

NB For some (many?), your prediction has already come true.

 

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Couldn't agree more.......
The latest update (Model 3, 28.x) has made TACC (hence EAP as well) too twitchy when it comes to shadows to the point I will not use it when I have passengers.

I'm on the fence about EAP. On one hand, Tesla taking an extremely cautious approach to EAP has resulted in it being very finicky around shadows if there aren't any other cars for it to follow, which really highlights it being a Level 2 system. IMO this is good overall because people were treating it like a Level 3-4 system and getting themselves killed, but Tesla still has a ways to go for Level 3 on HW 2.5.

On the other hand, 3.0 will supposedly be an ASIC with an order of magnitude better performance than 2.5 to support FSD, which might help EAP performance as well.

Tesla claims to have ‘world’s most advanced computer for autonomous driving’ with Autopilot 3.0 update coming next year

 

[Troy]

• I estimate that the Model 3 Mid Range battery has 3,744 cells.

I have added this to the predictions sheet here. I will measure the accuracy in percentage when we find out the actual number.

 

[ValueAnalyst]

No automaker other than Tesla will be profitable in 2019.

 

[neroden]

Hey, I gotta complain. I predicted that the base Model 3 would have an equal or higher EPA rated range than the Chevy Bolt. This is marked as "No", but in actual fact, *it hasn't actually been resolved yet*, because the base Model 3 *has not been released* and *does not have an EPA rating*. Please correct!

I think this is because someone put in a deadline for my prediction. I didn't give a deadline. ;-)

I'm probably still going to be wrong but... y'know... no actual EPA range yet.

 

[electracity]

I predicted on June 29th, 2017 that ValueAnalyst was going supernova:

2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

This was the most ambiguous yet still accurate prediction ever made.

 

[ThereAre4Cars]

Your prediction #3 means you simply don't know how to read a balance sheet. Pathetic.

How was this prediction wrong via proper reading of the balance sheet?

 

[Off Shore]

I predict that Tesla will not buy a shuttered car factory for at least 20 years.

 

[Buckminster]

The Tesla AI concierge service will go live in 2019, named KITT and at least 1 board member will change his name to Michael.