Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

[Jayjs20]

If history tells you anything it's don't bet against Musk or Tesla.

You mean besides the last month, right. The problem is the price is 209 right now, and it's hit 209 nine times already in the last 3 years.

 

[maoing]

Do you have the link to the actual video?

The link was valid two years back. Now it's gone. But the transcript is accurate as other members checked video at that time. I guess you didn't follow TSLA long enough, at the 1st half of 2014, not only wall street but also TM/EM all have very high expectation for the growth trajectory. It's not exaggerated to say 100% YoY at that time, so that's the reason we saw two ATHs in 2014. But in 2015 and 2016, 50% YoY is certainly a good number, but fall short of sky high expectation back to 2014.

 

[Crowded Mind]

The link was valid two years back. Now it's gone. But the transcript is accurate as other members checked video at that time. I guess you didn't follow TSLA long enough, at the 1st half of 2014, not only wall street but also TM/EM all have very high expectation for the growth trajectory. It's not exaggerated to say 100% YoY at that time, so that's the reason we saw two ATHs in 2014. But in 2015 and 2016, 50% YoY is certainly a good number, but fall short of sky high expectation back to 2014.

Please use qualifiers such as "in my opinion". Without them, you run the risk of offending. My bolding on things that are your opinion. I followed Tesla closely in 2014 and their guidance was 35k, unless you can provide another source to show otherwise. I hardly consider what you posted to be a transcript.

 

[maoing]

I won't disagree that model X has production issue. Certainly I disagree that's the case for model S. If enough demand is there, it's TM's best of best interest to deliver as many model S as possible to generate much needed cash flow and pump stock price. The only drawback is the capital consumption. This was the similar story with M3 right now but much smaller scale. TM can make bold plan for M3 why not for model S? If TM claimed production constrained for just 6-12 months, that might make sense. But how long did it claim that? There was essentially very minor progress for entire 2015 (1000/week --> 1200/week). I don't want to dig any further for this topic. Unless TM shows the proof of model S delivery growth on consistent QoQ base, I remain skeptical about model S demand.

Here are a few select metrics over the past 6 quarters:
View attachment 176197


First, deliveries are high in Q4, 2015, but remember that's a lot of hangover from Q3. If you smooth Q3 and Q4 out, looking at total deliveries by moving 2k into Q3, then the deliveries looks like it stair steps up pretty handily. During all this time, the customer deposits number hold pretty strong, even going up for Q4 2014 while deliveries was quite strong. If demand was flat, we should have seen a $14 million dollar drop - instead, we got a $14 million dollar increase. If you look at Q1 2016, Tesla claims that there was a $100 million dollar increase on Model S and X alone. No mention of Model 3 in the customer deposits number, I suspect because the credit cards need to be processed first.

Now back to production. Note how the raw material and work in progress numbers jump up massively for the last two quarters. We had been at under $400 million for some time in raw materials. The work in progress is expected to increase as the factory increases in production rate - so we go from roughly $60-90 million to $163 million in Q4 and almost $200 million in Q1, 2016! All the time, deliveries have not kept pace. Finished goods inventory normally also increases as production rate increase, but it actually dropped from Q3 to Q4 as a big backlog of Model S finally got delivered. Again, look at production in Q1 and Q2 of 2015... 11k to 13k. We get all the way to Q1, 2016 and it's 15.5k, a 40% increase. But the work in progress skyrockets at more than double as customer deposits also go up.

This doesn't look like Tesla is holding back production. The answer Tesla has been giving us and the Model X's sitting at Service Centers awaiting final parts tells us the straight forward answer. Since the parts commonality between the Model S and X is not altogether that high, Tesla has to choose the production allocation between the two models well in advance. Obviously, they ordered up a lot of raw materials. And they have a lot in work in progress. If the Model X production stalls, they can only move so much production over to the S between the shared production lines and the parts ordered. Obviously, they did some hedging since they did order a lot of S parts, otherwise the last two quarters would have been disastrous. But not enough to fully cover the Model X shortfall. Obviously, Tesla still felt that the Model X production problems would have been solved already. Simply, the numbers don't tell us that they're holding back production due to demand issues, it's clearly production problems with the X.

There's basically an extra $150 million dollars or so of raw materials and work in progress due to Model X production problems.

 

[AlMc]

I will avoid the demand debate. Spend my time watching the deliver threads for S and X. Just saw this posted over on the TM X forum:

This is the email I got from my DS this evening. I was told just 2 days ago that my production would be the week of May 23rd:
"I wanted to let you know that we have experienced a shift in production of all Model X. We will be producing the car in the second week of June. Delivery is predicted for the end of June."

Now, I admit I don't know the 'why'. Could be concentrating on S production or X overseas production.....Just a data point

 

[maoing]

Please use qualifiers such as "in my opinion". Without them, you run the risk of offending. My bolding on things that are your opinion. I followed Tesla closely in 2014 and their guidance was 35k, unless you can provide another source to show otherwise. I hardly consider what you posted to be a transcript.

Here you go for the video link. 《对话》 20140504 当联想遭遇特斯拉_经济频道_央视网(cctv.com)

 

[EinSV]

I will avoid the demand debate. Spend my time watching the deliver threads for S and X. Just saw this posted over on the TM X forum:

This is the email I got from my DS this evening. I was told just 2 days ago that my production would be the week of May 23rd:
"I wanted to let you know that we have experienced a shift in production of all Model X. We will be producing the car in the second week of June. Delivery is predicted for the end of June."

Now, I admit I don't know the 'why'. Could be concentrating on S production or X overseas production.....Just a data point

Not sure of the "why" but one possibility is they are slotting in some production of Model Xs for shipment outside the US so they can be delivered before the end of the quarter:

From a member on the Canadian deliveries forum:

News Flash. Canadian Model X production scheduled to begin May 23rd.

From the European deliveries forum VINs are being assigned with some DSs apparently saying delivery planned for late June:

I have contacted my DS as well, and he told me that it might be possible that my car might be in Switzerland by end of June, at least he knew that the car will arrive with the first wave (of Model X) ...

 

[ludicrousspeed]

You mean besides the last month, right. The problem is the price is 209 right now, and it's hit 209 nine times already in the last 3 years.

Sure, TSLA has traded in the same relative range for about 2.5 years now with some decent volatility. I'm just saying it would be "probably unwise" to short it, especially while it's near the bottom of that trading range. Shorts may make money in the short-term, but that is doubtful in the long-term. Remember, the stock hit $290 before the company had even delivered it's 50,000th vehicle, released the X, unveiled the M3 (with 325K first week reservations), moved up volume production goals, etc. Shorting almost 2 years later and $80 lower is playing with fire.

 

[madodel]

Most of us are really, really tired of a topic that is irrelevant for the upcoming year and a half and has been beaten to death. I have no wish to be someone who facilitates discussion of this topic any longer.

+1 Yes please stop feeding the trolls. ;-)

 

[FredTMC]

Not sure of the "why" but one possibility is they are slotting in some production of Model Xs for shipment outside the US so they can be delivered before the end of the quarter:

From a member on the Canadian deliveries forum:

News Flash. Canadian Model X production scheduled to begin May 23rd.

From the European deliveries forum VINs are being assigned with some DSs apparently saying delivery planned for late June:

I have contacted my DS as well, and he told me that it might be possible that my car might be in Switzerland by end of June, at least he knew that the car will arrive with the first wave (of Model X) ...

Yep. 100%. You nailed it. They ran out of time to get his MX slotted before EU production starts.
They must start producing EU cars and get them on the boat for end of Qtr delivery.

It's that simple... Sucks for the owner in TX. But this is definitely the reason.

 

[JRP3]

+1 Yes please stop feeding the trolls. ;-)

I think we need a new thread titled Production vs Demand, and maybe a script or something that automatically moves any post containing the words Demand and Production.

 

[Crowded Mind]

Here you go for the video link. 《对话》 20140504 当联想遭遇特斯拉_经济频道_央视网(cctv.com)

Thanks for the link. It is clear in the first instance that he is referring to production rate, but that doesn't mean the same thing as saying they will deliver 44k vehicles. He could be easily be referring to the exit rate at 2014 being roughly double to what it was in 2013. Again, I have not ever seen 2014 guidance of anything higher than 35k and would be shocked if you can find anything that says that specifically. There is no need to look for deception.

It is clear they have missed their estimates on MX production, yet you assume every other shortfall, and then some, are due to demand.

Edit: Sorry all, last post on the subject. Tough to leave something unsettled.

 

[Irishjugg]

X delay is only part of the reason. If demand is as strong as TM claimed (they can stimulate demand at will), TM should had achieved 2k/week run rate as promised. They just doing more S to fill the X gap. But the reality is they can't because S demand is limited and TM can't generate demand at will.



If TM can execute or even beat EM's prediction while keep increasing GM to 30% or higher, that's the way of true growth company should do. I think the stock price would be at least doubled from today's close. Also it'll provide much more favorable environment for M3 capital raise.

I guess I've just never seen them speak about the 2k run rate for model S, I've only ever seen it for S and X combined. They would need to completely stop making X to build 2k S, I don't see how that would ever be the correct decision.

True on beating expectations though I wonder about magnitude? Let's say they came in 5% above high end projections last two years. Do you see over 325/350/400?

 

[Irishjugg]

Here are a few select metrics over the past 6 quarters:
View attachment 176197


First, deliveries are high in Q4, 2015, but remember that's a lot of hangover from Q3. If you smooth Q3 and Q4 out, looking at total deliveries by moving 2k into Q3, then the deliveries looks like it stair steps up pretty handily. During all this time, the customer deposits number hold pretty strong, even going up for Q4 2014 while deliveries was quite strong. If demand was flat, we should have seen a $14 million dollar drop - instead, we got a $14 million dollar increase. If you look at Q1 2016, Tesla claims that there was a $100 million dollar increase on Model S and X alone. No mention of Model 3 in the customer deposits number, I suspect because the credit cards need to be processed first.

Now back to production. Note how the raw material and work in progress numbers jump up massively for the last two quarters. We had been at under $400 million for some time in raw materials. The work in progress is expected to increase as the factory increases in production rate - so we go from roughly $60-90 million to $163 million in Q4 and almost $200 million in Q1, 2016! All the time, deliveries have not kept pace. Finished goods inventory normally also increases as production rate increase, but it actually dropped from Q3 to Q4 as a big backlog of Model S finally got delivered. Again, look at production in Q1 and Q2 of 2015... 11k to 13k. We get all the way to Q1, 2016 and it's 15.5k, a 40% increase. But the work in progress skyrockets at more than double as customer deposits also go up.

This doesn't look like Tesla is holding back production. The answer Tesla has been giving us and the Model X's sitting at Service Centers awaiting final parts tells us the straight forward answer. Since the parts commonality between the Model S and X is not altogether that high, Tesla has to choose the production allocation between the two models well in advance. Obviously, they ordered up a lot of raw materials. And they have a lot in work in progress. If the Model X production stalls, they can only move so much production over to the S between the shared production lines and the parts ordered. Obviously, they did some hedging since they did order a lot of S parts, otherwise the last two quarters would have been disastrous. But not enough to fully cover the Model X shortfall. Obviously, Tesla still felt that the Model X production problems would have been solved already. Simply, the numbers don't tell us that they're holding back production due to demand issues, it's clearly production problems with the X.

There's basically an extra $150 million dollars or so of raw materials and work in progress due to Model X production problems.

Damn good post, these numbers are very useful. Thanks a ton!

 

[maoing]

True on beating expectations though I wonder about magnitude? Let's say they came in 5% above high end projections last two years. Do you see over 325/350/400?

Yes. Why not? If Tesla consistently beat guidance by 5% in last two years. We might had seen FCF+ in mid-2015, continuous uptrend to propel SP up. Remember last two years are the golden time for tech stocks, FANG are examples.

 

[lango]

Yes. Why not? If Tesla consistently beat guidance by 5% in last two years. We might had seen FCF+ in mid-2015, continuous uptrend to propel SP up. Remember last two years are the golden time for tech stocks, FANG are examples.

Can you explain to me the big difference between guiding for 85k and deliver 80k versus guiding for 75k and deliver 80k? I don't see it, it is just a number to Wall Street, what matters is how the company is growing.

 

[Curt Renz]

Yes. Why not? If Tesla consistently beat guidance by 5% in last two years. We might had seen FCF+ in mid-2015, continuous uptrend to propel SP up. Remember last two years are the golden time for tech stocks, FANG are examples.

Elon’s guidance is always a stretch for those under him to try to meet. Unlike other CEO’s, they’re not numbers designed to show Wall Street after each quarter that he always exceeds them. That’s his style: motivate employees to shoot for lofty goals, and the heck with analysts’ expectations. He’s trying to disrupt long established companies in a capital intensive industry. To do so he is thinking long term. Quarter to quarter number games are not to his liking. Look for Tesla shareholders who stick with Elon to be hugely rewarded by his philosophy.

 

[ludicrousspeed]

Elon Musk on Twitter

Haven't seen Elon with a sarcastic tweet like this.. something tells me he wouldn't do this if he wasn't confident he'd prove everything they're saying wrong and make them look like idiots in retrospect. Or he could just be doing it for a good laugh, which it also was.

 

[30seconds]

He's pushing capital markets like everything else. We know his goals, but none say anything about maximizing share price. If you consider his goal to switch to renewables and electric cars as soon as possible then keeping a high investment rate to support rapid / reckless growth is right on target.

Capital is to be used. There is little difference between 4% dilution or 5% to Musk.

 

[GoTslaGo]

Elon Musk on Twitter

Haven't seen Elon with a sarcastic tweet like this.. something tells me he wouldn't do this if he wasn't confident he'd prove everything they're saying wrong and make them look like idiots in retrospect. Or he could just be doing it for a good laugh, which it also was.

Maybe he's humble.