Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

[Krugerrand]

do you believe everything that everyone says... or only CEOs of publicly traded companies?

For starters I don't believe a word you say/type and I wouldn't even if you were a CEO of a publicly traded company because you didn't even know he was an engineer doing engineering at Tesla. You thought he was just the CEO and then when you were corrected and considered for a moment that you were wrong, he became a lousy CEO. Now you're back to he's just a CEO and I'm a puppy dog for believing that he's an engineer doing engineering at Tesla because he said so (ignoring all the other evidence that you haven't bothered to research that clearly points to him being a hands on engineer).

In future if you're going to try and give me personal advice, at least know I'd NEVER be a puppy dog. I'd be a kitten.

 

[Intl Professor]

In future if you're going to try and give me personal advice, at least know I'd NEVER be a puppy dog. I'd be a kitten.

You're too modest. A kitten, maybe, but with a big brain.

 

[brian45011]

Tesla would have no reason to sell the credits unless it made a meaningful contribution to the bottom line and working out a lower bound price. So the conservative guess is indeed argued based on the total revenue from the sale. I see no reason why this would not be the valid.

IIRC, unused credits have a long, if not perpetual, shelf life.

 

[NOLA_Mike]

I guess Elon being Elon, when he says Wednesday he means sometime before 1159PM Pacific Time. And then he will miss it by a few hours anyway. So...

Yes, when he originally said Monday he meant "sometime this week".

 

[austinEV]

Can't base an investment or trade in Tesla based on Zev credits and nobody here is I hope. Whatever the number is, it will be Irrelevant very quickly in my view. I predict the half life of a zev rally is about that of a fruit
Fly.
Elon seems to intensely dislikes subsidies , and to base his enormous accomplishments
On them would drive him crazy.

Well, that will be the Bear cry when the stock shoots up in the aftermarket next week. But it's crap. ZEV credits are an ongoing source of revenue even if you are ideologically apposed to them, or like Elon doesn't like to count on them. I think the story will be they are marginally profitable without ZEV's and very profitable with them. That is a fine story and cash is king.

 

[Krugerrand]

Tesla said they wouldn't announce further changes to the number. This is easy to understand the logic behind. 373k is a big number (its approximately an entire year's sales of the entire segment that Model 3 will be a part of). Why keep telegraphing to your competitors exactly how screwed they are, and exactly how much they need to do right now to try to remain competitive. Better to keep them in the dark until you're actually shipping the product they can't compete with, or else they might decide to find a way to compete.

That doesn't fit though with Elon's mission. He's always wanted to encourage other OEMs to get on board with EVs. Showing the number shows them that there is a big market for an affordable EV.

Other possible reasons:

To avoid the BS that would ensue if there was cancellations - we've actually seen some of that fodder already
To not discourage people from ordering - we've already seen some of that via the forum and comments like, 'no sense in reserving one now, I won't get it for 2 years anyway
To not encourage people to order - they've already got way more orders than they anticipated, reacted to that by pulling production ahead a full year, if they get significantly more they can't fill those orders in a timely fashion and we've already heard Elon's opinion on having a too large backorder to fill

 

[Zaxxon]

The base range of the Model 3 is at least 215 miles. The ranges are basically equal, but the Model 3 has supercharging and it's a Tesla, not a Chevy.

This is an important point that virtually every article misses when comparing the ranges. Let's assume that the M3 launches at 215 (personally I think it'll be bumped a bit). M3 is 215, Bolt is 238. For commuting, that difference is completely unimportant for something like 99.9% of owners. It matters only when traveling long distances. And in that case, the M3's supercharging capabilities more than nullify the Bolt's advantage, as while the Bolt may go 20 additional miles before needing to charge, it will take significantly longer to charge than the M3. Before the first charge session is complete, the M3 will be miles ahead of the Bolt. That gain is only compounded as the distance increases.

 

[Krugerrand]

If they truly believe that Tesla will fail, there should be no need for stunts like today's CNBC "story" and other FUD.

Devil's advocate anyone?

Are we giving any little bit of a percentage point that it was a straight up mistake? That the person read the website wrong/misinterpreted? CNBC corrected the story pretty quickly.

 

[Tslynk67]

I'd prefer that Elon didn't make announcement announcements? I think we'd see a much more positive market reaction if these things came out of the blue.

 

[JRP3]

And in that case, the M3's supercharging capabilities more than nullify the Bolt's advantage, as while the Bolt may go 20 additional miles before needing to charge,

Except I doubt it will even if the EPA range of the 3 remains at 215. At highway speeds, when range actually matters, the more aerodynamic 3 will certainly get more range than the boxy Bolt.

 

[Lessmog]

In future if you're going to try and give me personal advice, at least know I'd NEVER be a puppy dog. I'd be a kitten.

You're too modest. A kitten, maybe, but with a big brain.

Going by his present jaguar avatar, not only a big brain

 

[racer26]

This is an important point that virtually every article misses when comparing the ranges. Let's assume that the M3 launches at 215 (personally I think it'll be bumped a bit). M3 is 215, Bolt is 238. For commuting, that difference is completely unimportant for something like 99.9% of owners. It matters only when traveling long distances. And in that case, the M3's supercharging capabilities more than nullify the Bolt's advantage, as while the Bolt may go 20 additional miles before needing to charge, it will take significantly longer to charge than the M3. Before the first charge session is complete, the M3 will be miles ahead of the Bolt. That gain is only compounded as the distance increases.

Yep. Independent of this, though, I'm pretty sure Elon won't allow GM to win on range.

Tesla has the cheapest batteries available for Model 3 and its $35k 200mi EV brethren. Winning on range is just a matter of more batteries. Model 3 will be more efficient (in a Wh/mi sense) than Bolt. It has to be, the physics says so. That means Model 3 can easily outrange a Bolt with equal size battery.

I predict that the cheapest possible Model 3 (smallest battery and no options) will have a range of at least 240mi.

 

[brian45011]

Anyone any idea when this new product announcement is due? I also through it would be AP2, but on reflection that doesn't strike me as a "new product".

With the pack-related software for 75s as 60s, etc. how about: "buy the 75 kwh pack in a version downrated to 60 kwh and rent by the week/month additional unused pack capacity as needed, using an over-the-air app"?

 

[racer26]

Except I doubt it will even if the EPA range of the 3 remains at 215. At highway speeds, when range actually matters, the more aerodynamic 3 will certainly get more range than the boxy Bolt.

Also correct. Months ago I predicted (wrongly) the range of the Bolt by estimating its range at 70mph. The very best the physics allowed for was something like 229mi, if you went 70mph non stop, with no powertrain friction losses, no accelerating or braking, just accounting for the rolling resistance and the wind resistance, based on a 60kWh battery.

 

[larmor]

I'd prefer that Elon didn't make announcement announcements? I think we'd see a much more positive market reaction if these things came out of the blue.

Agreed, if this 'product' doesn't take me to Mars and back without any ill effects from solar flares or cosmic radiation, then i would suggest TM is worthless, and liquidate and get GM-- at least that's what a small analyst bird told me....

 

[SBenson]

Yes, when he originally said Monday he meant "sometime this week".

Which sometimes he misses and it spills into next week. So if the announcement comes out any time before Oct 30th 11:59PM pacific time, I will consider it as meeting expectations.

Professionalism be damned. This is our Elon. We love him anyway he does things!!

 

[ggr]

You're too modest. A kitten, maybe, but with a big brain.

A Kzinti kitten... growl and leap. (Larry Niven reference. A compliment.)

 

[tslalala]

I guess Elon being Elon, when he says Wednesday he means sometime before 1159PM Pacific Time. And then he will miss it by a few hours anyway. So...

This is both funny and not funny at the same time. It will be interesting to see if TSLA gets whipsawed around today (or maybe just flat'sh) since there is no immediately clear "buy on the rumour/sell after the announcement" inflection point. Probably better since that doesn't give the bears an opportunity to coordinate a short attack post-announcement regardless of how great Elon's product announcement might be.

 

[racer26]

California ARB boss hints at stricter zero-emission vehicle rules as automakers are stockpiling credits

Looks like CARB might tighten the ZEV belt after all?

 

[dalalsid]

today in Colorado if [hypothetically] a person were to buy a M3 for $35000... they would get a Fed credit of $7500 and a Colorado credit of $6000. that would make 38% of the vehicle price subsidized and the cost of the vehicle for the consumer $21500.

if Tesla leaks up into the 200k and then sells 500k in 2018 as is planned... then with the 50% for 2Q and 25% for 2Q formula you're describing... that would be an additional $3b in Federal subsidies and $2.5b in Colorado subsidies.

regardless of what anything at this point says... this is not going to happen. the laws will quickly change as these kinds of numbers would bankrupt Colorado and on the Federal side... if all manufacturers did this would be in the many 10s of billions.

also... these credits are only useful for Colorado residents that have a tax bill of greater than $13500... I'd guess that a typical salary based income of about $75k to $80k would be required to take full advantage of these credits.

so not only would quickly dumping 500k in 4 quarters after the tax credit went away be not in the nature of the credits... the credits themselves are only available to those that make 50% more than the median income in the US.

and even worse... TODAY... the only people benefiting from these tax credits are again... people making significantly more than the standard US household... and those that can afford a Tesla starting at $70k... which requires even a much higher income.

this is taking from the poor and giving to the rich. this whole setup has been truly disgusting. there should have been a $40k vehicle price cap on eligibility for the credit as well as an income based cap of $100k.

So you are saying that subsidies that actually do what they are intended to do will be removed? Then why bother with them in the first place.