I thought 210 was the bottom of the day. No telling at this point, it's only been stable for the last few minutes. I hope you got out the other day at 215.
edit: Nevermind. Further down we go.
Last edited:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
I thought 210 was the bottom of the day. No telling at this point, it's only been stable for the last few minutes. I hope you got out the other day at 215.
edit: Nevermind. Further down we go.
Maybe I missed it. What is the "fair value" at this point? I guess to re-iterate Ben Kallo on the call. At what point, and price do you think those who are shorting and push the bear thesis of Tesla Motors does that change?
IMO, EM mishandled it badly this time. Share value is not built on top of always asking shareholders for money to finance future growth without making the business itself generating cash flows. Also, if you have decided to raise capital, do it at the time announcing it. Even worse, when an analyst asked how much capital they need for M3, Jason answered that they don't have it, unbelievable!
Could you educate me what's the "first principles"? "blind faith" is the exact investment philosophy for TSLA fanboys.
Btw, I bottom fishing order just executed @ 207.9. Will add more shares if go south of 200.
Btw, I bottom fishing order just executed @ 207.9. Will add more shares if go south of 200.
I have this feeling that a capital raise will not come in the form of a conventional offering. I have a feeling it'll be a capital injection via another entity (namely Alphabet) or SpaceX.
FredTMC
Model S VIN #4925
Could be... Google would be huge positive. Their getting a great entry point.
He didn't say that. If the original plans were kept, they absolutely could finance everything themselves. The fact that you are pulling something two years forward of that scale will require more capital with hopes that internally generated cash flows can finance the entire expansion. It's a question of cushion and de-risking the business. Listen to the call more carefully.
As an investor I'd much rather have revenue pulled forward. A lot of analysts are now erring on the side of caution due to the rather ambitious goal and they haven't updated their price input to stay conservative. But let's say even a 300K production is achieved in 2018, all the latter years in the DCF used in their equity research will need to be revalued to a spectacularly high number.
A capital raise is fine so long as the cash is being used efficiency to generate more returns and faster. So it becomes a question of magnitude and velocity. It's not like Tesla is pissing away cash.
That's good wish from TSLA investors though. It's not always the case. How do you think the cash efficiency spent on endless model X delay and ramp up?
Last edited:
To rephrase, I believe evidence of Model X ramp gaining strength and further out GF phase-1 completion and successful cell production will be far better catalysts than a capital raise in my opinion.
Rightly or wrongly people tie Tesla's production capabilities with X ramp.
As far as I can tell, X ramp is still very much stuck. Follow this thread for related discussion and please add any findings.
Highest VIN delivered
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
I agree up to this sentence. This is where I think you make a mistake (I disagree with $183M). Another 5600 Model X units would have added over $500M ($547M if your pricing holds) of revenue, and this would have cost Tesla only material, as labor was already paid.
How much steel and aluminum for Model X costs? I'd bet less than 50%, maybe as low as 25%-30%, in which case there is a missed opportunity to contribute $350M to the bottom line right there.
That is indeed possible. $205.195 would mark a 50% retracement of the rise from the intraday low of $141.05 on February 9th to the high of $269.34 on April 7th. Such a retracement is often a setup for strong a return to the upside. It need not be exact. Today’s low of $206.80 could well have been sufficient.
It's EM's credit score that failed to win analysts' support here. He keeps telling people fantasy numbers, while in the end those won't materialize. Model X production/deliveries are the latest example, no one seems believing him nowadays, even the bulls like Morgan Stanley Morgan Stanley Estimates Tesla (TSLA) 2018 Units to be 1/5th of Guidance.
I have been a share holder for a long time (3yrs), but get really frustrated by Musk's no accountability and do-no-matter-how-much-it-costs style.
People shouldn't really keep calling Jonas a bull if he's only expecting 20% of what the company is guiding for.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
This is simply non-factual. Tesla has achieved very much on a very limited budget. Musk's style is anything else than what you're describing. Get it done no matter if others think it possible, yes. No matter how much it costs, no. He's doing this basically with other people's money, so thankfully it doesn't matter that many people loudly scream: it can't be done, so long as enough people see that of course it can be done. Only those people don't scream, they simply put their money where their mouth is. And watch the money grow like weeds.
Last edited:
Jonas has a price target of $333. That is more than 50% higher than current stock price. How could he not be a bull??
FredTMC
Model S VIN #4925
That short article is completely inaccurate! Says their MS projection is 70K cars in 2018. Wrong.... That's the Morgan Stanley est for THIS year.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
First, you mean energy density, not power density, and 6-10 times better than what they are using now would mean 1560-2600Wh/kg which isn't remotely likely since the S/X90 is probably 260Wh/kg or so at the cell level. Second, faster charging has nothing to do with gigafactory production capacity or costs. Third, any improvement in regen is going to be minimal and have minimal impact, and again, has nothing to do with GF production. Fourth, no, it's not likely that Tesla currently has or will have by next year double the energy density of what they are using now.
He does, it's the constantly improving cell chemistry they have today. They don't need a miracle jump in battery chemistry to meet their goals, they never did.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
