Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2015

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
#17,441
chickensevil said:
Which is why they will be putting X's in stores sooner rather than later. But that has nothing to do with them sticking a pure marketing/show car at Detroit. People will get nothing of value on clearing up the X for them that they couldn't get already by watching the reveal event posted on their website.

The Detroit show is free marketing generation and nothing more. They don't need it so they aren't going.
Click to expand...


It's also not 'free'. Exhibiting at those shows isn't cheap.

And you're right; they don't need to conduct marketing in that traditional sense yet. Word of mouth and YouTube videos from new owners taking delivery; test drive events and cars on display in Tesla stores, will be more than enough marketing for them to sell out the 2nd half of 2016 production. They already are paying for assets in place in the form of stores and galleries. I'd rather Tesla utilize those assets while they're still production constrained (and will be for the foreseeable future), rather than incur additional costs to generate demand that they can't yet meet.
 
#17,442
chickensevil said:
Which is why they will be putting X's in stores sooner rather than later. But that has nothing to do with them sticking a pure marketing/show car at Detroit. People will get nothing of value on clearing up the X for them that they couldn't get already by watching the reveal event posted on their website.

The Detroit show is free marketing generation and nothing more. They don't need it so they aren't going.
Click to expand...

Correct. I was discussing this with another TMC friend who is not a big time TSLA bull: His reaction was essentially that NAIAS is an expensive dog and pony show and TM gets more 'free' attention from an EM tweet.
 
#17,444
AlMc said:
Not sure we can read too much into ^^ this^^. I see TM delivery outside NA markets in November and pushing only to NA in December.

As to skipping the NAIAS: I can read positive and negatives into this one....effect: neutral on TSLA.
Click to expand...

The Europe numbers out for Nov so far are not very remarkable yet either (see EU thread/wiki), but one could argue the cars are still on the way to get here (and individual countries not yet reported - think Denmark - could get an especially big batch one month). Or they are really trying to screw the shorts, producing and collecting cars and shipping them last minute when noone is expecting it any more... But that would be a logistical challenge I guess.
 
#17,445
If I were short TSLA I would close my short in case:
- Model S global deliveries signal a Q4 and 2015 beat (cause of implications on financials)
- Model X delivered in dozens or hundreds per month (cause that signals good execution and bodes well for the next quarter)
While we get no positive confirmation on these topics, I fell like shorts will bounce on TSLA and have a big party.
Personally I would not start a short position here in the $230s, the opportunity to do so was some weeks ago in the $280s.
Thoughts?!
 
Last edited:
#17,451
Chevy Bolt comments:
IMO the people on this thread were incorrect to dismiss the Bolt. It obviously won't be comparable to the M3. But that doesn't mean that it won't be a very successful car. The Prius doesn't look great or have great performance and it sells very well. If GM wants it to be fast and powerful that's pretty simple to do with an EV. What's killing the Leaf and the i3 are lack of range. Also remember the EV1 was an excellent EV in it's day.
 
#17,452
MitchJi said:
Chevy Bolt comments:
IMO the people on this thread were incorrect to dismiss the Bolt. It obviously won't be comparable to the M3. But that doesn't mean that it won't be a very successful car. The Prius doesn't look great or have great performance and it sells very well. If GM wants it to be fast and powerful that's pretty simple to do with an EV. What's killing the Leaf and the i3 are lack of range. Also remember the EV1 was an excellent EV in it's day.
Click to expand...

I agree with this and personally do not believe it negatively impacts Tesla or any offerings to the marketplace. If anything, it better introduces mainstream folks with the EV concept. I fully support GM's efforts even though I won't likely ever own one.
 
#17,454
Announcement today at the global climate talks in Paris: Germany joined International Zero-Emission Vehicle Alliance.
German Deputy Environment Minister Jochen Flasbarth said in a statement:
If we are to achieve our climate targets, the transport sector must make a greater contribution than it has to date. We see electric mobility as the key to making passenger transport climate friendly.
Click to expand...
(link)
 
#17,455
MitchJi said:
Chevy Bolt comments:
IMO the people on this thread were incorrect to dismiss the Bolt. It obviously won't be comparable to the M3. But that doesn't mean that it won't be a very successful car. The Prius doesn't look great or have great performance and it sells very well. If GM wants it to be fast and powerful that's pretty simple to do with an EV. What's killing the Leaf and the i3 are lack of range. Also remember the EV1 was an excellent EV in it's day.
Click to expand...

I come from the perspective that the Chevy Bolt was promoted as a Tesla killer, amongst other BEV projects by a number of prominent Tesla bears. Drawing the distinction between the Bolt and what Tesla is doing does not diminish the Bolt, but does help provide some clarity on the Bolt's impact on Tesla. Further, I think a successful Bolt helps Tesla far more than it hurts Tesla. We need, above all else, to provide positive pressure to build out our L2 destination charging infrastructure in the U.S. and other parts of the world. The Bolt helps that, as does higher sales of the Leaf, i3, and so forth. The big difference is that the charging demands for a 150+ mile BEV is different than one that is 70-80 miles. The sooner that the products look like products that we will have in the 2020-2025 timeframe, hopefully we will make better strategic choices in charging infrastructure. In many place thus far, only the Model S carries the torch in terms of pushing charging infrastructure since it is the only BEV to make it to certain places. Similarly, PHEVs exert a different influence on charging infrastructure that is not necessarily good for BEVs.
 
#17,456
techmaven said:
I come from the perspective that the Chevy Bolt was promoted as a Tesla killer, amongst other BEV projects by a number of prominent Tesla bears. Drawing the distinction between the Bolt and what Tesla is doing does not diminish the Bolt, but does help provide some clarity on the Bolt's impact on Tesla. Further, I think a successful Bolt helps Tesla far more than it hurts Tesla. We need, above all else, to provide positive pressure to build out our L2 destination charging infrastructure in the U.S. and other parts of the world. The Bolt helps that, as does higher sales of the Leaf, i3, and so forth. The big difference is that the charging demands for a 150+ mile BEV is different than one that is 70-80 miles. The sooner that the products look like products that we will have in the 2020-2025 timeframe, hopefully we will make better strategic choices in charging infrastructure. In many place thus far, only the Model S carries the torch in terms of pushing charging infrastructure since it is the only BEV to make it to certain places. Similarly, PHEVs exert a different influence on charging infrastructure that is not necessarily good for BEVs.
Click to expand...

I remember we had this conversation back in 2014 regarding the terrible nature of L2 charging rollout and how companies are just not installing these where they make sense. e.g. installing a charger outside of a Wallgreens or CVS... who in their right mind is spending more than just a few minutes in these places? This was done with the thought of PHEVs, and their need to charge everywhere they go. BEVs, even shorter range ones like the i3 and Leaf, just plain don't care about a 5 minute charge stop as that is too short for meaningful charging on L2.

So yes, Anything with 200 miles, even if it isn't the best thing in the world, should help change people's frame of mind as it relates to BEVs. Because the dynamic doesn't just become this need to charge *everywhere* you go, but instead thinking more about infrastructure to charge once a day outside of a roadtrip. So this means L2 charging only makes sense where you would expect to spend 4+ hours, anywhere else should be L3 or nothing at all. This is the net-positive benefit of getting more long range EV's on the market as it puts things into this frame of mind.

Even if we hit this hypothetical day where everyone has 500 miles of range, you would still likely look at L2 charging being a 4+ hour event, and all else being L3. You would still only be looking at L3 from a "road-trip" perspective, which overall limits the amount of real infrastructure needed.

Anyway, I'm still not convinced that GM is doing this for more than compliance reasons (even federal regulations require a certain fleet average MPG rating), but am glad to see a 200+ mile car come from someone other than Tesla!
 
#17,460
MitchJi said:
Chevy Bolt comments:
IMO the people on this thread were incorrect to dismiss the Bolt. It obviously won't be comparable to the M3. But that doesn't mean that it won't be a very successful car. The Prius doesn't look great or have great performance and it sells very well. If GM wants it to be fast and powerful that's pretty simple to do with an EV. What's killing the Leaf and the i3 are lack of range. Also remember the EV1 was an excellent EV in it's day.
Click to expand...

Here's the problem: we don't need another golf-cart (crappy, slow, unsafe, low-range experience) "compliance car" EV built as a distraction by a company that actively spends millions lobbying, subverting and attacking the promotion of BEVs. Everything about GM's corporate culture and their actions to date suggests that even if they had the engineering, software and design talent to build a decent EV, they fully do not intend to build more than a handful of cars to comply with minimum green regulations and appear "green" while their dealers actively push people away from EV's toward gas-burners. Remember, this is the company that took away the EV1 from everyone of their customers and DESTROYED THEM despite customers begging them to let them keep them.

I would love it if GM suddenly announced a GigaFactory-level battery commitment that had a guaranteed million-car pipeline of Tesla-caliber batteries, and started hiring thousands of in-house Silicon Valley software engineering talent to build a truly competitive long-range, high power EV. But the Bolt is a mirage so far from a company that simply does not deserve an ounce of trust until it proves it has changed its culture from one of denying liability for killing its customers and deliberate, sustained hostility towards retiring the combustion engine. Until then, the Bolt is smoke, mirrors and to use a term from the software industry: vaporware.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

TSLY
First impression of FSD and how TSLA should promote it
Replies
23
Views
768
AI, Autopilot, & Autonomous/FSD
legendsk
legendsk
dl003
TSLA Technical Analysis & Roadmap
Replies
21
Views
6K
TSLA Investor Discussions
adiggs
adiggs
adiggs
Short the rest of the auto industry?
Replies
0
Views
216
TSLA Investor Discussions
adiggs
adiggs
AudubonB
  • Locked
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
Replies
0
Views
3K
TSLA Investor Discussions
AudubonB
AudubonB
D
2015 P90D sells for $42.5k on cars & bids, time to sell my P85D?
Replies
19
Views
2K
Model S
easyev
E
Top
Back
Blog
New
Forum list
Marketplace
Menu