Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2013

[uselesslogin]

Talk about a flat line around $121.50. It's been a while since this stock has flatlined like this.

I'm hoping we see some stability here for a while and the option prices start coming down.

 

[brysondad]

My previous average share price was $92 (I bought 15% more this morning), and I started buying at $27.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results

 

[kenliles]

The goal shouldn't be to make it a momentum play again...

I'll second that motion

 

[v12 to 12v]

The general theme of your posts seems to be that you're rooting for the failure of what appears to be the first successful new American automobile manufacturer in ninety years. It is putting Americans to work while leading the world to an electric car revolution. Innovative American free enterprise is being proven again by American determination, effort and know-how. I fought a war for this great country, and am greatly disheartened by the legions of pseudo-Americans who prefer to see entrenched plutocrats keep America stuck in the past and eventually brought down to the level of a second rate country.

I do not believe there will be a recall specifically for Tesla or different criteria and testing standards for undercarriage protection for Tesla cars. All passenger vehicles would end up having the same safety standards and tests for undercarriage protection. All passenger vehicles have vulnerabilities. Other car designs have more vulnerable and delicate systems on the underside than Tesla does. We already know that Tesla has the best passenger protection on the market today.

Testing and rules are standardized. If other passenger vehicles had different standards and testing requirements, their passengers would not be offered the superior protections and that would be an injustice.

Tesla already has superior performance and protections that were put in place voluntarily and that is why the Model S scored the highest safety rating ever. The sensational headlines are just noise to instill FUD and enhance media revenue.

Tesla was cleared in the first incident inquiry by the NHTSA and I think the same will be true for the second incident.

BTW... I used to write compliance rules and regulations for my day job.

 

[FANGO]

Model S risk may not increase over time, however newer ICE car do (arguably) have much lower risk of fire vs. older cars. This is why you must compare apples to apples.. best way it to compare to direct competitions. aka cars Model S is positioned to compete against (as i said earlier S-class and 7 series).
Alternatively, compare to other electrics, aka Volt, which i believe had to be re-called for similar fire situation.

"Arguably" they do? Does arguing have some influence on the statistics? If you'd like to cite some statistics, please do so. If you'd like to fearmonger, please go elsewhere. Until you cite some statistics, then your statistical argument is pretty weak - or nonexistent. The statistics which have been presented thus far show that the fire risk is lower. The made-up nonsense from people like yourself show otherwise. I'd rather stick with statistics than made-up nonsense, unless you have some information you'd like to cite?

Also, do feel free to bring up statistics specific to sportscars, as "arguably" they would have a higher risk of these sorts of incidents than commuter cars which are less high-performance and which are driven less hard. Make sure to get the exact mix of M and AMG models alongside the performance models, correct for geography (as that's the most important factor in car insurance claims, after all), and so on. And then, tell me if your denominator is any bigger than two. Because denominators of two sure do make great statistics.

The Volt had a voluntary recall, but you're right that the situation was "similar," in that it was also a complete non-issue. And you bringing it up, as a new member here, shows some of your colors.

By the way, here's a BMW crash which killed people, happened the same day as the TN event: BMW smashes into tree at 100 mph in fiery crash in Riverside; 2 dead - latimes.com

I wonder if anyone is talking about recalling BMW or selling off all their BMW stock. And yes, it crashed into a tree - without even crashing through two walls and taking out 15 feet of curb first, which are three things a safe car can take in stride while protecting it's occupants. I guess the BMW is a super unsafe car, right? Let's waste a billion words on the internet talking about it, why don't we.

 

[Causalien]

We don't know, however don't think there will be one. Not because I would have experience second-guessing NHTSA (which I don't), but because that would open a can of worms for gasoline car manufacturers. In theory, they might have to recall all their cars and have no replacement. They'd be stuck in recall-timeloop.



The share (and options) price had become a momentum play and attracted related algo bots and all sorts of attention, rather than an investment by those who believe that electric cars are the future. However, over time, the understanding of electric cars will increase in numbers, and confidence, sufficient to genuinely support a growing share price reflecting the significance of this "mission". The goal shouldn't be to make it a momentum play again. (Except it currently probably also is, or was, just in the negative direction.)

In 10 years when we look back on TSLA's history, this will be seen as the event that put TSLA in every person's mind and locked in history. Whether as the event that created the second Delorean or the event that raised the perception of required average standard in safety which crippled the other auto manufacturer's margins and propelling TSLA to a monopoly.

I just talked to a pretty well off neighbor and he believed in the media's fud because that's the only place where he gets his information from. When I mentioned 265miles range and 45 minutes charge time I can see him raising his eyebrows. So we still have a long road ahead in terms of educating the masses.

 

[sub]

A quick Google search will pull up fires of any vehicle you can probably think of, and that is the entire point. The statistics say that Tesla does not have a problem IMO. I'm a big backer of Tesla and have been a shareholder for a while, sold on news of 3rd (2nd really) fire only because I knew I could buy my shares back cheaper and make a few bucks due to the unjustified panic. That being said, I don't want Tesla to just be (clearly) better than ice vehicles when it comes to safety or fire. I think the design is vulnerable to these types of accidents, but at the same time that doesn't mean it's "unsafe" or an "issue" that has to be fixed. Airplanes do not respond well to crashing into the ground either, but we still fly (and sometimes die) in them. However, I would like Tesla to take it as a challenge to fix this one vulnerability to the car (not the occupants) just because they can and want to, not because it needs to be done.

 

[moshennik]

OK, i accept some criticism. I thought the fact that newer cars are safer was obvious, however if you insist on my proving it here it is:

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v13i11.pdf
from 2008 to 2010, an estimated 194,000 highway

vehicle fires occurred in the United States each year
http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v2i4-508.pdf
From 1996 to 1998,there were an estimated annual average of 377,000 highway vehicle(automobiles,vans,trucks)fires
Calculate it over miles driver in 1997 about 220 billion in 2009 about 300 billion
File:USA annual VMT vs deaths per VMT.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So 2x the number of fires and 30% fewer miles mean in 1997 we had about 2.65 times more fires per mile driven.

Unless you can point out another reason I would say that due to increased vehicle safety an average car in 2.65times less likely to catch fire now vs 12 years ago.
So lets not compare Model S to an average 12 year old car on the road, unless you are willing to make this adjustment.

 

[moshennik]

"Arguably" they do? Does arguing have some influence on the statistics? If you'd like to cite some statistics, please do so. If you'd like to fearmonger, please go elsewhere. Until you cite some statistics, then your statistical argument is pretty weak - or nonexistent. The statistics on the table show that the fire risk is lower. The made-up nonsense from people like yourself show otherwise. I'd rather stick with statistics than made-up nonsense, unless you have some information you'd like to cite?

Also, do feel free to bring up statistics specific to sportscars, as "arguably" they would have a higher risk of these sorts of incidents than commuter cars which are less high-performance and which are driven less hard. Make sure to get the exact mix of M and AMG models alongside the performance models, correct for geography (as that's the most important factor in car insurance claims, after all), and so on. And then, tell me if your denominator is any bigger than two. Because denominators of two sure do make great statistics.

The Volt had a voluntary recall, but you're right that the situation was "similar," in that it was also a complete non-issue. And you bringing it up, as a new member here, shows some of your colors.

By the way, here's a BMW crash which killed people, happened the same day as the TN event: BMW smashes into tree at 100 mph in fiery crash in Riverside; 2 dead - latimes.com

I wonder if anyone is talking about recalling BMW or selling off all their BMW stock. And yes, it crashed into a tree - without even crashing through two walls and taking out 15 feet of curb first, which are three things a safe car can take in stride while protecting it's occupants. I guess the BMW is a super unsafe car, right? Let's waste a billion words on the internet talking about it, why don't we.

crap!! wrote a post and for some reason it did not go thru! i will do a quicker version with a lot of math:
http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v13i11.pdf
From 2008 to 2010, an estimated 194,000 highway

vehicle fires occurred in the United States each year
http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v2i4-508.pdf
from 1996-1998 the number is 377,000 fires per year
File:USA annual VMT vs deaths per VMT.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Miles driven went up 30%.
So average fire risk per mile driven went down 2.65 times over 12 years.

So when you compare "modern" care to population of cars with average age of 12 years (currently on the road), you need to make a significant adjustment.
Which PROVES my point, so it's no longer "arguably".

 

[moshennik]

I am confuses to why my posts don't show up. i will try it again.

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v13i11.pdf
From 2008 to 2010, an estimated 194,000 highway

vehicle fires occurred in the United States each year
http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v2i4-508.pdf
from 1996-1998 the number is 377,000 fires per year
File:USA annual VMT vs deaths per VMT.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Miles driven went up 30%.
So average fire risk per mile driven went down 2.65 times over 12 years.

So when you compare "modern" care to population of cars with average age of 12 years (currently on the road), you need to make a significant adjustment.
Which PROVES my point, so it's no longer "arguably".

 

[Raffy.Roma]

However, I would like Tesla to take it as a challenge to fix this one vulnerability to the car (not the occupants) just because they can and want to, not because it needs to be done.

I think that you got the main point. If I can give my contribution to this discussion I would like to say that IMO Tesla will come out from this crisis brilliantly. Because of this crisis Tesla has already set a new standard in the automobile field by giving to Tesla buyers of Model S (and I suppose of all the other future Models) the fire insurance for free. This is a revolutionary element in the automobile field. In fact at least in Italy a new standard of insurance will have to be established. (Somebody in this thread suggested that Tesla itself could start a business in this field). In fact in Italy we have only "fire and theft" insurance, but for the Model S the new standard of "theft" insurance will have to be established which still doesn't exists, with a further economical improvement for people buying an electric car. In fact in Italy there are other economical allowances for EVs buyers.
Then for what is concerning the battery pack issue consisting in the vulnerability with respect to road debris (which doesn't affect the safety of the car as you also mentioned) I think that Tesla will solve this problem brilliantly without any recall. I have an idea of what could happen but I prefer not to mention it because I could be wrong of course.
Just my opinion.

 

[dmunjal]

Talk about a flat line around $121.50. It's been a while since this stock has flatlined like this.

Double bottom today?

 

[aznt1217]

For those who have been around long enough, $120 is the new $28 Pre Q1 ER.

 

[MartinAustin]

Hopefully the "three fires in five weeks" story will die down as the amount of time increases since the Tennessee one. (and by that I mean with no additional fires happening!) That will dampen the negative force on the stock, no pun intended.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

Hopefully the "three fires in five weeks" story will die down as the amount of time increases since the Tennessee one. (and by that I mean with no additional fires happening!) That will dampen the negative force on the stock, no pun intended.

I would like very much that you were right. But IMO the "three fires in five weeks" story will die down only when the NHTSA will give an assessment to such a story. I hope that Tesla will give a possible solution to this story in advance without waiting for the NHTSA assessment so that the NHTSA could simply nod. I don't know how these things work in the USA. Is it possible to work out a possible solution to this problem through an agreement between Tesla and the NHTSA?

 

[Causalien]

For those who have been around long enough, $120 is the new $28 Pre Q1 ER.

Been around since Eberheart. I don't remember the significance of $28. Please enlighten me.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

I just gave a look to this video:

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000219887&__source=yahoo|headline|quote|video|&par=yahoo

and I got the answer to my question. Tesla is working in cooperation with the NHTSA.

 

[hoang51]

It really looks like TSLA will be trading around $120s due to the options expiring this week given that there are not any more downgrades or significant news. From the looks of options, $120-$130 is the range where on either side, they are heavy at each end of the range. I'd say TSLA would probably close around $125. Any updates to the charts after today's trading?

 

[RobotGrease]

Still deep in the downtrend. I think we will see more sideways or downwards movement within the channel at least until the 200d MA. We might hit it by the end of the week or the beginning of next week.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's a little more perspective:

 

[BornToFly]

That new ICE vehicles don't catch fire is false. A simple Google search will show lots of articles like this. http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/03/autos/la-fi-hy-autos-ford-recall-fire-risk-20130603 and this http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/12/03/engine-fires-spark-recall-new-ford-escape-fusion/ Doesn't look like Ford recalled nearly a half million OLD cars for fire risk. Seems like they were pretty new ones....