Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

[mrdoubleb]

Oh how I wish Tesla-Bjorn was here -- he would have a comprehensive comment, I'm sure of it.

lol took me a while but i got it... understanding this joke should be the acceptance exam to posting on this thread. We would have much less trolls.

 

[Drax7]

I have deliberately avoided solarcity like the plague for years, and now its dumped on me.

Eventually it might just be a total write-off.

.

 

[FANGO]

Don't we all benefit with catching, exposing and discouraging trolls?

Yes, and that's precisely what I'm trying to do. Stop with the ad hominems. Stick to facts. You literally just said that this isn't about ego fights, so stop having one. You don't "expose the truth" by calling someone "low IQ."

 

[SBenson]

I have deliberately avoided solarcity like the plague for years, and now its dumped on me.

Eventually it might just be a total write-off.

.

Write off and then some. It costs money to systematically unwind something.

There are other intangibles. Distraction from model3 both in terms of focus and cash is inestimable.

 

[CatB]

Everyone jumps all over a bear-troll here. But the etiquette seems to dictate that if you see a bull-troll, just move on as if nothing happened. It's no ones business to catch or counter. In fact it's a bad thing to do so.

IMO, it is ALWAYS acceptable and encouraged to ask for evidence or to provide contrarian evidence to any position bull or bear.
But let your logic and analysis prove that a given argument is valid or invalid. When you call someone one thing or another, or you draw conclusions on their character or motivations, it gets personal and it can get ugly. I know it's semantically picky and touch-feely subtle(and isn't it funny that autocorrect want's to turn feely into feebly?), but I think it's okay to air out ideas and theories and I don't think we want to discourage that by disagreeing with the position in a way that attacks the person. I think of it this way: smart people don't always have perfectly smart ideas, it's still fun to talk to them and explore them - that won't happen if we beat them up for disagreeing with us.

 

[Foghat]

IMO, it is ALWAYS acceptable and encouraged to ask for evidence or to provide contrarian evidence to any position bull or bear.
But let your logic and analysis prove that a given argument is valid or invalid. When you call someone one thing or another, or you draw conclusions on their character or motivations, it gets personal and it can get ugly. I know it's semantically picky and touch-feely subtle(and isn't it funny that autocorrect want's to turn feely into feebly?), but I think it's okay to air out ideas and theories and I don't think we want to discourage that by disagreeing with the position in a way that attacks the person. I think of it this way: smart people don't always have perfectly smart ideas, it's still fun to talk to them and explore them - that won't happen if we beat them up for disagreeing with us.

I bet we all could get in great name calling cat fights on the internet, but nothing ever gets resolved nor do we actually gain any helpful knowledge in what we are here trying to do... Understand how this deal affects our investments in either Solarcity or tesla, short term and long term.

This deal was dropped in our laps unexpectedly and a confluence of various tmc members flocked to the short term thread to discuss and understand where things might go from here.

This may cause personal frustration with ideas, but we have a solution that frustration: the wonderful ignore list. I have mine.

P.s. Thanks to whomever made it so you don't have to see a single reminant of the ignored poster comments in the thread anymore... It has been a very welcome upgrade to say the least...

 

[30seconds]

Let's remember the true competition

Volkswagen's Checks Aren't the End of Dieselgate

"Two big lessons of dieselgate are that the car companies will do anything they can to beat tests, and that lax rules play into their hands. Regulators need to clamp down or risk losing major battles against air pollution and global warming."

From Bloomberg's Editorial Board

 

[TMSE]

Anybody want to take a stab at Q2 estimates and Q3/2016 guidance revisions, if any?

My estimates based on 2k+ production run rate achieved 6 weeks ago and the robust wait times for both model S and X:

For Q2:
14500 MS + 4000 MX = 18,500 total deliveries.

Q3 guidance:
18200 MS at 1400/week
10400 MX at 800/week
Total 28,200 deliveries for Q3.

2016 guidance:
Given that Tesla would have delivered almost 61K cars by Q3, it is very easy for Tesla to meet or beat high end of 80-90k guidance. They will mostly like keep it the same instead of revising upwards.

Europe sales could be the black swan event catching us all in a nasty surprise. Anybody has any insight into it? Thanks.

 

[Foghat]

Anybody want to take a stab at Q2 estimates and Q3/2016 guidance revisions, if any?

My estimates based on 2k+ production run rate achieved 6 weeks ago and the robust wait times for both model S and X:

For Q2:
14500 MS + 4000 MX = 18,500 total deliveries.

Q3 guidance:
18200 MS at 1400/week
10400 MX at 800/week
Total 28,200 deliveries for Q3.

2016 guidance:
Given that Tesla would have delivered almost 61K cars by Q3, it is very easy for Tesla to meet or beat high end of 80-90k guidance. They will mostly like keep it the same instead of revising upwards.

Europe sales could be the black swan event catching us all in a nasty surprise. Anybody has any insight into it? Thanks.

Any anticipated shutdown of Fremont this summer (maintenance, plant wide employee vacation)? Might be why they could stick with same annual guidance come q2 conf call.

 

[FredTMC]

Anybody want to take a stab at Q2 estimates and Q3/2016 guidance revisions, if any?

My estimates based on 2k+ production run rate achieved 6 weeks ago and the robust wait times for both model S and X:

For Q2:
14500 MS + 4000 MX = 18,500 total deliveries.

Q3 guidance:
18200 MS at 1400/week
10400 MX at 800/week
Total 28,200 deliveries for Q3.

2016 guidance:
Given that Tesla would have delivered almost 61K cars by Q3, it is very easy for Tesla to meet or beat high end of 80-90k guidance. They will mostly like keep it the same instead of revising upwards.

Europe sales could be the black swan event catching us all in a nasty surprise. Anybody has any insight into it? Thanks.

Q2 better be a beat on Deliveries. Anything over guidance of 17k is fine by me. Over 18k is a "blowout". We will know by July 5th at the latest.

We are still a month away from full Q2 numbers and rest of year guidance. Bottom line is that guidance needs to be reaffirmed again for FY 2016

 

[Foghat]

Q2 better be a beat on Deliveries. Anything over guidance of 17k is fine by me. Over 18k is a "blowout". We will know by July 5th at the latest.

We are still a month away from full Q2 numbers and rest of year guidance. Bottom line is that guidance needs to be reaffirmed again for FY 2016

Come q2 conf call, does anyone have an estimate of possible storage sales? At scty q1 conference call, it was noted they now had 100MWhs of storage under management, I'm wondering if this could have a broader tesla balance sheet impact this quarter and in 2016!guidance moving forward...

 

[TMSE]

Any anticipated shutdown of Fremont this summer (maintenance, plant wide employee vacation)? Might be why they could stick with same annual guidance come q2 conf call.

Good point. Infact, I just remembered that they will shutdown for 5 days from July 1st to 5th. So, make it 26K deliveries for Q2.

Anyway you slice it, 85K deliveries in 2016 is easy.

My estimate of numbers of deliveries needed to achieve break even is ~76K. Anything above 19k per quarter result in non GAAP positive EPS. Consensus for Q2 is loss of 32 cents. I am expecting it to be more like 8 cent loss.

 

[esk8mw]

Anybody want to take a stab at Q2 estimates and Q3/2016 guidance revisions, if any?

My estimates based on 2k+ production run rate achieved 6 weeks ago and the robust wait times for both model S and X:

For Q2:
14500 MS + 4000 MX = 18,500 total deliveries.

Q3 guidance:
18200 MS at 1400/week
10400 MX at 800/week
Total 28,200 deliveries for Q3.

2016 guidance:
Given that Tesla would have delivered almost 61K cars by Q3, it is very easy for Tesla to meet or beat high end of 80-90k guidance. They will mostly like keep it the same instead of revising upwards.

Europe sales could be the black swan event catching us all in a nasty surprise. Anybody has any insight into it? Thanks.

I think the Q2 S might be a little high and X is low. The most S they have produced in a quarter is 13,530 and I'm assuming X issues early in the quarter may have affected S production as they did in Q1. I'm expecting S in the 13,500 range, X is the wild card, but I'm definitely expecting over 4,000.

 

[austinEV]

Anybody want to take a stab at Q2 estimates and Q3/2016 guidance revisions, if any?

My estimates based on 2k+ production run rate achieved 6 weeks ago and the robust wait times for both model S and X:

For Q2:
14500 MS + 4000 MX = 18,500 total deliveries.

Q3 guidance:
18200 MS at 1400/week
10400 MX at 800/week
Total 28,200 deliveries for Q3.

2016 guidance:
Given that Tesla would have delivered almost 61K cars by Q3, it is very easy for Tesla to meet or beat high end of 80-90k guidance. They will mostly like keep it the same instead of revising upwards.

Europe sales could be the black swan event catching us all in a nasty surprise. Anybody has any insight into it? Thanks.

If TSLA management took my advice, and they don't, I would beg them to deliver beats and maintain guidance. But knowing Elon as soon as he has data to indicate maybe they can do 95k he will say that is the new guidance. Then when they deliver 94k the stock will tank on missed guidance.

 

[Foghat]

Good point. Infact, I just remembered that they will shutdown for 5 days from July 1st to 5th. So, make it 26K deliveries for Q2.

Anyway you slice it, 85K deliveries in 2016 is easy.

In my area(west LA), I've seen a noticeable infux of Xs over last couple months as well as an uptick in new s's.

Feels like it might be a strong delivery quarter if one also includes the motivation to get ahead of Fremont shutdown and pulling forward some q3 deliveries.

 

[dc_h]

Judge for yourself about what Panasonic is doing with GaN. Maybe tesla involvement as well? I'm sure having massive mass production capabilities in Nevada and in buffalo could really accelerate things significantly?

Skip ahead, but a big part of Ludicrous mode was increasing speed of energy transfer. Around 3:45 they get into Blue LED and faster energy transfer versus silicon. This could also be important on reducing charging time. Quadruple charge rate is probably more important than improving acceleration from 2.8 to 2.6 seconds to 60mph.

 

[gigglehertz]

Marketplace is not for ego fights. I humbly/repeatedly admitted that I lost money in SCTY big time (happy to show the record if you care). I learnt my lessons as part of it as well. You lost a bundle too. Infact you borrowed money from 401k to buy more and further more committed the last dollar from your girlfriend. Because? you fell for bull-trolls like Foghat. Despite all these loses you fail to recognize why you are losing or show any care to learn anything from it. What's the point of attacking me? what do you earn or learn? Did I cause you loses or is it people like Fogat? Think through it.

Actually she got in at $19 so she's going to be fine. I'll make my money back in either SCTY or TSLA eventually, I have absolutely no doubt. Being down in a stock doesn't mean you have to feel cheated or robbed or lied to, as long as you're playing the long game.

 

[electracity]

Write off and then some. It costs money to systematically unwind something.

There are other intangibles. Distraction from model3 both in terms of focus and cash is inestimable.

The way Tesla will sell solar is to have many fewer face to face sales calls in prospects home. The store is much more efficient, with the homeowner's roof viewable on google earth. Even a customer who calls asking for an estimate can be directed to the store for the reason that they can see the equipment like the powerwall.

Like Solarcity, Tesla will still lose lots of bids due to higher price. But the sales costs should be substantially less.

In this sales model the call center is likely smaller, so tha may need unwinding. But many of those people are personable enough to work face to face in the stores.

Solarcity has gotten an increasingly smarmy reputation offering unclear, deceptive products. Hopefully Tesla can offer straightforward energy products marketed to intelligent adults.

 

[SBenson]

Anybody want to take a stab at Q2 estimates and Q3/2016 guidance revisions, if any?

My estimates based on 2k+ production run rate achieved 6 weeks ago and the robust wait times for both model S and X:

For Q2:
14500 MS + 4000 MX = 18,500 total deliveries.

Q3 guidance:
18200 MS at 1400/week
10400 MX at 800/week
Total 28,200 deliveries for Q3.

2016 guidance:
Given that Tesla would have delivered almost 61K cars by Q3, it is very easy for Tesla to meet or beat high end of 80-90k guidance. They will mostly like keep it the same instead of revising upwards.

Europe sales could be the black swan event catching us all in a nasty surprise. Anybody has any insight into it? Thanks.

Backing into delivery estimates from revenue estimates, consensus analyst estimates are about 18K deliveries for Q2 and 24K deliveries for Q3.

Its hard to tell what Q2 will turn out to be. The big wildcard for me it the S deliveries, with the facelift midway through the quarter.

Q3 delivery guidance comes out at Q2 ER in early Aug. I'm very optimistic about it. With 24K deliveries, Tesla is expected to show a non-GAAP positive EPS which I think is a huge deal and a major blow to short thesis (loss/car bs).

However, we have this SCTY *sugar* now added to the mix. So that throws a curve ball into the math. Additionally, the financial reports will look quite messy and can cause either legitimate confusion or a bear attack on the numbers. Thus discrediting even positive results. Hence I'm really pissed and am having a hard time accepting this SCTY merger.

 

[SBenson]

The way Tesla will sell solar is to have many fewer face to face sales calls in prospects home. The store is much more efficient, with the homeowner's roof viewable on google earth. Even a customer who calls asking for an estimate can be directed to the store for the reason that they can see the equipment like the powerwall.

Like Solarcity, Tesla will still lose lots of bids due to higher price. But the sales costs should be substantially less.

In this sales model the call center is likely smaller, so tha may need unwinding. But many of those people are personable enough to work face to face in the stores.

Solarcity has gotten an increasingly smarmy reputation offering unclear, deceptive products. Hopefully Tesla can offer straightforward energy products marketed to intelligent adults.

I am doubtful of this and here are my reasons:

- SolarCity operates in a very limited geographic region. Only 16 states or something like that because the economics simply don't work else where. To contrast, Tesla sells in three continents. Massive difference.

- With Powerwall added to the cost, it will be prohibitively expensive just about everywhere, except maybe in Hawaii.

- Musk wants to attract sales through other means like aesthetics (which are not part of the equation right now). When will Silevo's buffalo factory be really producing stuff? That's a big unknown with a lot of drama going around the factory.

- Meanwhile, Musk will have to do something to stop the cash bleed at SCTY. I can't see any other immediate option but to strategically unwind in a bunch of markets.

- The ultimate solar product (as Musk envisions) that Tesla will produce/sell will be very different from what SC sells today in terms of the product, how it's sold, financial methods, just about everything

- Effectively much of SC as it stands today will be purged but a new solar product/service will take it's place