Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

[Value Ev]

We are facing a huge global challenge: global warming. To simplify the argument let's assume there are two possible futures:

There is another future. Remember, we live in a world where "Before the Flood" was badly beaten in the ratings by "Bubble Guppies" and "PowerNation Truck Tech"

Dismal ratings for DiCaprio’s Global Warming Epic ‘Before the Flood’ – beaten by ‘Bubble Guppies’

 

[MitchJi]

Wow, terrible call. Seemed like both sides were speaking over each other's heads.

Tesla has chosen to give generalized numbers, but they aren't detailed enough to be credible for analysts. Analysts don't care much about how great an integrated solar/storage product will be. They'd rather have a 100-page detailed document deconstructing every portion of SCTY debt positions in an objective manner. But it doesn't look like they're going to get that.

I'm not sure about that. None of the questions asked by analysts sounded like they had done the level of homework consistent with your statement. They sounded like the type of questions that would be asked by automobile analysts who are responsible for covering 12-15 companies. And they all get 15 minute private callbacks (quite a bit, the conference call was about 35 minutes). Many of them will be with Jason or Jeff.

 

[larmor]

There is another future. Remember, we live in a world where "Before the Flood" was badly beaten in the ratings by "Bubble Guppies" and "PowerNation Truck Tech"

Dismal ratings for DiCaprio’s Global Warming Epic ‘Before the Flood’ – beaten by ‘Bubble Guppies’

Yeah I tried to get my 4yo to watch it but she preferred bubble guppies...

 

[techmaven]

However, Musk announced that these panels will be less efficient than solar panels by 2%

Less efficient that normal Silevo panels by 2%. I took it as 2% as in 21% - 2% = 19%. Of course, it is possible that it is 2% of 21%, which would be a very low number.

Take a high quality LG Neon 2 Black panel for instance. It is 18.3% efficient at STC, which is 25 degrees C. It loses efficiency at -0.38% per degree C which is pretty good. A cheap panel, like a Topoint JTM 195-72M starts at 15.30% efficiency and has a temperature coefficient of -0.439% / per degree C.

The Silevo tech is -0.22 % per degree C, starting at 21%.

So, on the roof, the cell can hit 65 degrees C. With some racking that allows for some airflow, that would be about 5 degrees C less. So the comparison would be 65 degrees C for the flat on roof mount, 60 degrees C for rack on roof mount.

SunPower SPR-E20-327-COM, roof mounted with airflow, 20.3% efficient -> 17.6% efficiency at 60 degrees C
LG Neon 2 Black, roof mounted with airflow: 18.3% efficient -> 15.9% efficiency at 60 degrees C
Topoint JTM 195-72M, roof mounted with airflow: 15.3% efficient -> 13% efficiency at 60 degrees C
Silevo tech, roof mounted with airflow: 21% efficient -> 19.4% efficient at 60 degrees C
Silevo tech, solar roof w/o airflow: 21% efficient -> 2% micro-louver loss -> 17.3% efficient at 65 degrees C

That's assuming the 2% is 21-2=19, not 2% of 21%, which would be 20.6%, resulting in 18.8%.

Edit: added a SunPower panel for comparison.

 

[N5329K]

Have you seen Tesla's cell packs? Elon doesn't mind lots of connections.

I have seen them and they are beautiful things. Like the roof tiles. However, nature and Elon are not yet one and the same, and, as the saying goes, nature always bats last.
Robin

 

[racer26]

The more I look at it, the more I'm realizing just how ridiculously good a deal TSLA is getting for SCTY, and SCTY's valuation makes no sense.

As we learned on the call, SCTY's solar assets are worth a net of somewhere around $2B today. ie. If SCTY just closed up shop today and stopped selling their product, the existing products already in customer hands will yield ~$2B in profit over the next 20 years.

SCTY's current market cap is around 1.8B. This makes no sense for a company that already holds $2B in future value and is continuing to grow..

 

[Krugerrand]

So the minority short opinions can make a big difference...

Last time I checked the 'short opinions' weren't actually a minority. They may be a 'minority' on this, the Tesla enthusiasts forum called TMC, but out there in the big, wide world called the Internet - not so much. And they certainly more than make up for any lacking numbers by shouting from the rooftops whenever they can.

But yes, as funny as you seem to think it is (though, I don't actually think you find it funny at all), it's called confirmation bias.

 

[3Victoria]

Merger is a "no brainer'. Roof tiles were like EVs of the past: not efficient, short-range and ugly, ie golf carts. Just as the S showed you could have a compelling car: efficient, fast, long-range and good looking, the Tesla roof-tiles show you can have high-efficiency in a good looking package.

If connections are a problem, I would suggest making panels of the tiles pre-connected, and then fill in the gaps with the individual tiles.

 

[sdtslafan]

wasn't too happy with the call.

Elon should try not to be antagonistic or condescending or show frustration. The goal of the call should have been to give analysts all the information possible so that they start to believe this can work. Colin Rusch has always been a supporter of Tesla. Elon and team should have tried to answer his questions in a much detail as possible - otherwise no chance of upgrade. Ego should not get in the way here. Give analysts something they can analyze and come to a conclusion that can help our cause.

 

[Roger t]

Here is my prediction: Five years from now people will take it for granted to purchase solar panel, storage and Tesla EV together. They will also get used to solar panels to charge EVs in the supercharger. Tesla customers double their electricity usage after they purchase the car, it makes so much sense for Tesla to get into solar energy generation business. Interesting thing is, if you are buying EVs from other car makers, you will start to feel it is such a pain to buy solar and storage somewhere else.

Musk should make it clear that Solarcity is a skew up. They were too optimistic about their leasing business in 2014. So they decide to make their own solar cell and panels. Now apparently they won't be able to do it themselves. But Solarcity worth more to Tesla than on the stock market. Their assets still worth a lot, and they have the expertise that Musk needs. With Tesla, the solar Gigafactory will be built and Panasonic de-risks the Silevo cells.

It seems to me Musk is doing all the right moves. BTW, it is hard to do the right things most of the time. It is a waste of his time to have those conference calls. There seems to be an impedance mismatch. Just let Jason handle it. I think TSLA would do better if he talked less to those analysts.

 

[AudubonB]

I'd like to say that Nature bats a bog-standard asphalt shingle a lot harder than she can a well-constructed glass tile.
Along those lines, when I was atop my roof today I was looking at our standard-sized (approx. 1m X 2m) PV panels and thinking "I sure would sooner have to replace two dozen hail-damaged PV tiles than one thus whacked PV panel" - and our solar energy output would be diminished far less in the former case, too.

I do understand the concerns of electrical connections on a roof and, while I think the retort about # of connections in a battery pack is apposite, I'll remind all of a different environment FAR harsher than even an Arctic or southern Arizona roof: within the engine compartment of an ICE. Yet hundreds of millions of today's vehicles have myriad of electrical connections and highly sensitive computing units able to endure such an environment.

Lastly, a niggling issue. I do wish presenters (like Mr Musk) and forum members as well would be more sensitive and sensible when using terms like "%", in the context argued above. It's easy enough, and absolutely clear for all, to say, for example, "2%...and I don't mean percentage points"; or alternatively "...with a two percentage point diminution..." (There. I feel better now)

 

[MitchJi]

Dow pulls plug on its Powerhouse solar shingles

<snip>
These were an interesting product; instead of putting solar panels on your roof, they actually were your roof. There are a lot of reasons being thrown around; Dow is merging with DuPont and shedding jobs. They weren’t as efficient as conventional solar panels, and they cost more money per watt delivered. Scott Gibson of Green Building Advisor notes:
The shingles have a low profile, but the thin-film CIGS [copper indium gallium selenide] cells aren't as efficient at generating electricity as standard solar modules, and they're difficult to manufacture. In the end, investing in building-integrated solar "amounts to paying a premium for less of a return," as Greentech Media's Julian Spector put it.

I thought they were a bad idea for another reason altogether: Why would you tie an expensive solar panel system into a cheap disposable roof system? I wrote:
95% of roofs in America are asphalt shingles that are cheap, fossil fuel based, heat absorbing and don't last very long; then they are hard to get rid of. They have been called "a disposable roofing system that is difficult to dispose of.”… is it a good thing to integrate an expensive solar system into such a cheap roof? Or should it be independent, so that the roof can be replaced without affecting the solar collectors?
<snip>

By the same author:
Tesla introduces gorgeous new solar shingles and some serious storage

<snip>
He has just introduced a new Powerwall with enough juice in it to run a two bedroom house (14 kWh) for a day, and hooked up to rooftop solar, can run indefinitely. (Although it will not charge the car, which needs 85 kWh or more) It is surprisingly affordable at US$ 5,500. This is a real game-changer, that erases so many of the problems I have had with rooftop solar and its dependence on the grid, the whole duck curve thing, just gone.

But what is getting all the pixels is that Musk has introduced a new solar roof shingle, in four different styles. They are made of tempered glass so that they are stronger and more durable than clay or slate or just about any other roof. they have a “micro-louvre” layer so that when you look at it from the street, you just see roof, but when you look at it from above, you see the solar cell.

The slate roof tile is made so that every one is different, with randomly generated patterns that make it look very real. They really are so beautiful that you can imagine, as Musk does, calling over your neighbors and saying “hey, check out my sweet roof.”

Musk says that “If you have a great solar roof, a big battery pack and an electric car, you can solve the whole energy equation.” He does not say what it costs, but notes that it will have a “lower cost than a traditional roof when combined with projected utility bill savings.”
They are nice to look at, which has never been something one has been able to say about rooftop solar.

He has done for solar panels what he did for electric cars: turned what were ugly and utilitarian into true objects of desire. Musk asks a valid question when he says they are “beautiful, affordable, integrated; if all these were true why would you go any other direction?”
<snip>

 

[3Victoria]

.... They were too optimistic about their leasing business in 2014. So they decide to make their own solar cell and panels. Now apparently they won't be able to do it themselves. ...

I do not think you are right here. Tesla sees that they need investment in the cell factory. They are already partners with Panasonic at the GF, and Panasonic is good at manufacturing. They know Panasonic has some of the best technology for solar cells. Solar City also has excellent technology for solar cells. They see partnering with Panasonic a win-win: combined technology is a leap forwards, Panasonic puts in capital and know-how into the solar-cell factory. Panasonic gets bigger market. As I said, win-win.

 

[DaveT]

I'm not sure about that. None of the questions asked by analysts sounded like they had done the level of homework consistent with your statement. They sounded like the type of questions that would be asked by automobile analysts who are responsible for covering 12-15 companies. And they all get 15 minute private callbacks (quite a bit, the conference call was about 35 minutes). Many of them will be with Jason or Jeff.

I'm not saying that analysts have done their homework. Just saying they're not looking for Elon's vision and his reasoning. Rather they're looking for more concrete financial detail regarding how things pertain to risks/challenges ahead for TSLA. This is especially the case since SCTY's finances are difficult to understand, even for SCTY analysts.

 

[sundaymorning]

disappointed by the the letter. Besides the outlook of Q4 and beyond, which remains to be seen, does this letter provide anything we don't know? Unfortunately, NO.

I see TSLA goes to 180 in the next several days.

Heh I hope it goes to $100. Using logic from bears on this forum, it's quite possible. In fact, anything is possible. Although Tesla provides the market with all the evidence of a company growing on steroids, few analyst on Wall Street possess the intellect to process this information. So one can only dream of $180, $170, $150s.. if you're bullish. A blessing in disguise if you have dough to drop folks.

 

[Value Ev]

Last time I checked the 'short opinions' weren't actually a minority. They may be a 'minority' on this, the Tesla enthusiasts forum called TMC, but out there in the big, wide world called the Internet - not so much. .

Where exactly did you check to get this information from?

I quickly checked and saw that:
Tesla is ranked number 1 in terms of the most innovative companies (Forbes)
Ranked as #135 in terms of best employer
Ranked #100 in terms of best global brand (Interbrand)

Does this demonstrate to you that the majority view of Tesla is a "short opinion"? LOL


Again, where did you check to see that the majority view of Tesla is "short opinions"?

 

[anon]

For the impact on efficiency, I read somewhere (probably Electrek, but possibly TechCrunch) following the press Q&A after the Friday announcement that 98% of the light passes through the glass. This would mean that the correct measure is 0.98*0.21, not 0.21-0.02.

 

[sundaymorning]

Elon is so convinced that SCTY merger deal will pass, that's very good news for the investors waiting on the sidelines. It would be interesting to see how TSLA continue the downwards trend before the final vote date 11/17, which is still 13 trading days ahead. In between the SCTY ER and US president election could introduce enough volatility to bring the SP into attractive level. Keep your dry powder and be prepared. I still see TSLA has good chance to climb back to 250 with M3 ramp up in 2017.

350-400 by model 3 ramp. But according to your earlier posts, Elon is a lying. Scumbag so Tesla will be at 0 by M3.. So which one is it?

 

[3mp_kwh]

I still don't understand why Tesla gets distracted, trying to fix a roof-top company, when commercial volumes in ESS or even residential ESS would develop without PV. Moody's and Fitch are both out with utility studies in the last 48 hours, with one astute observation, that unlike collapsing policy making solar more sensible where the sun/land is, batteries are making the most sense where it sort of isn't. Like, where the rates are high, and roofs are few. There's a lot of battery market, without pumping the chest of roof-top.

 

[viKtor slamet]

Heh I hope it goes to $100. Using logic from bears on this forum, it's quite possible. In fact, anything is possible. Although Tesla provides the market with all the evidence of a company growing on steroids, few analyst on Wall Street possess the intellect to process this information. So one can only dream of $180, $170, $150s.. if you're bullish. A blessing in disguise if you have dough to drop folks.

Would love $100. Selling my house and cars asap (going rental and taking bus/uberPool) if it reaches $100 in the next 2-3 month.