Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Autonomous driving is going to require a significant amount of bandwidth for connected cars, telemetry and mapping.

Intuitively Tesla's approach (wireless) seems better than Google's (wired) for connected cars. ;)

Silliness aside, to me the question as time passes without any partnering announcements becomes: is Tesla going at this whole autonomous transport as a service alone?! It would fit with their "go big or go home" history.
 
Intuitively Tesla's approach (wireless) seems better than Google's (wired) for connected cars. ;)

Silliness aside, to me the question as time passes without any partnering announcements becomes: is Tesla going at this whole autonomous transport as a service alone?! It would fit with their "go big or go home" history.
Yes, but please don't tell Adam Jonas.
 
l
I think me might get a good dose of help from Macro, at the right time. The guy who is usually all about gloom and doom, Gartman, says 'Run for cover’ if you’re short on markets:

"Anybody who's short — and there are a lot of smart people who are in fact heavily short — they have to run for cover, and I think it could get ugly."

The reference to smart people who are heavily short, particularly TSLA, reminds me of an old joke about the difference between smart and wise people: smart people always find a way out of difficult situations; wise people do not get into difficult situations.

This in turn, brings up the latest Elon's twitter post in response to a question about what would he say to somebody shorting TSLA? Elon: "probably unwise."

My apologies - a lot of things going through my head...:)
 
Last edited:
What is wh/km before refresh? Doing a quick Google search appears to say it is 160wh/km, which would mean refresh made things worse.

I get 215 ish in my P85D 2015 model on that route.
She said they had a 70D older model driving next to the Model S refresh getting those 210ish numbers as well. Also said "lowest I have ever seen", referring to the Model S refresh 178wh/km.

160wh/km must be a theoretical number.
 
Owners on danish tesla forum have some kind of competition going on who can achieve lowest wh/km numbers.
Good ressource for finding real world numbers:

Avg. Wh/km Challenge 2016!
Google translate should make it readable.

"
1. quarter 2016
winner, under 5000 km. = Lannister (229 wh/km)
winner, 5-10.000 km. = Gronhund (196 wh/km)

winner, over 10.000 km. = Kristian70K (236 wh/km)
"
 
Owners on danish tesla forum have some kind of competition going on who can achieve lowest wh/km numbers.
Good ressource for finding real world numbers:

Avg. Wh/km Challenge 2016!
Google translate should make it readable.

"
1. quarter 2016
winner, under 5000 km. = Lannister (229 wh/km)
winner, 5-10.000 km. = Gronhund (196 wh/km)

winner, over 10.000 km. = Kristian70K (236 wh/km)
"

That's hilarious. I bought the car for its performance.....196 wh/km? I couldn't get that if I tried. It's too much fun not getting that kind of economy.
 
Owners on danish tesla forum have some kind of competition going on who can achieve lowest wh/km numbers.
Good ressource for finding real world numbers:

Avg. Wh/km Challenge 2016!
Google translate should make it readable.

"
1. quarter 2016
winner, under 5000 km. = Lannister (229 wh/km)
winner, 5-10.000 km. = Gronhund (196 wh/km)

winner, over 10.000 km. = Kristian70K (236 wh/km)
"

This is good info. I'm still puzzled in terms of tying it to capacity/range.

The wh/km seems to have improved by about 20%.

IIRC Tesla in the past used to say 85D has a range of 276miles. With 20% improvement the range should shoot up to 350miles for 90D!!

Per Tesla though it barely inched up to 294 miles.

So what gives?

Is the new 294 miles much more reliable than the old 276mile claim or something?
 
GM gives $500 Million to Lyft....Apple $1Billion to Didi....Toyota...$?...to Uber. Might be worthwhile not to be first to market. In NYC, it seems like most UBERs are black, hybrid Toyota Camrys.

The two biggest kids left on the autonomous driving stage are Google and Tesla. Google is using both its vast resources and a very systematic liDar mapping effort and Tesla is master of telemetry. Another thing to think about is connectivity and backbone. Google is currently about the business of wiring cities - Tesla and SpaceX are putting together a space-based satellite system for global coverage.

Autonomous driving is going to require a significant amount of bandwidth for connected cars, telemetry and mapping.

There are quite a few different concepts to juggle here and they don't necessarily fit together in obvious ways or in neat competition with one another:

Electrification
Ride Sharing
Google Type (cumulative exception based vehicle autonomy)
Tesla Type (cumulative familiarity based fleet autonomy)
Cumulative Fleet Learning
Network hosted services
Networking itself - traditional terrestrial carrier dependent, terrestrial carrier independent floating / flying / space-based.

Tesla and SpaceX (and Solar City) have a path through this maze that is capable of providing penny per mile transportation anywhere on the face of the Earth (or Mars). It represents a two order of magnitude cost reduction for the entire basis of energy, transport and communications (economic mainstays of the entire global economy besides food, water housing and medicine - with cost reduction benefits to all of these and the distinct potential to go beyond transport to excavators etc in housing construction and irrigation also).

Owing to the sheer scale of the issue, nothing is going to happen all at once. The trick here is to look at two distinct economies. Firstly the contraction of the traditional non-autonomous ICE market into measures to deliver relative savings and to escape margin pressure from new technology vehicles. Uber and ride sharing in general is one of these.

The second is the pace of actual replacement with technologies that have no dependencies in the former economy. This really will be production constrained and in the case of Tesla the under-supply of transportation with a cost basis two orders of magnitude below the preceding technology (regardless of autonomy of ICE vehicles) will result inevitably in bonanza profitability both for internally funded growth and to amply reward long term shareholders on the 2020 - 2025 time line.

Meanwhile for the short term: After forecasting the stock down from $255, down through Q1ER, maintain down through $190/KWh pack level cost disclosure, down through fundraising speculation, white swan warning at the c $210 level and finally calling a bottom on May 19th, stock is now up and forecasting a long up-leg from here through Sharholders Meeting May 31st (positive M3 progress reassurance and difinitive resolution of Model X as a concern as opposed to an asset). Then Gigafactory Unveil (anticipating positive recognition of Tesla Energy as an additional business unit that is not fully priced in). Then through Q2 ER which offers a combination of strong sales and strong cash flows (incorporating current raise) alongside a trough in spending for strong net positive results and guidance.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: dakh
This is good info. I'm still puzzled in terms of tying it to capacity/range.

The wh/km seems to have improved by about 20%.

IIRC Tesla in the past used to say 85D has a range of 276miles. With 20% improvement the range should shoot up to 350miles for 90D!!

Per Tesla though it barely inched up to 294 miles.

So what gives?

Is the new 294 miles much more reliable than the old 276mile claim or something?

They never claimed a 20% improvement. They claimed a (294-276)/276=6,5% improvement, regardless of if measured in total range or Wh/mile.
 
Had a chat with a Tesla sales staff in Denmark. They had the new Model S refresh in store and she told me they where getting 178wh/km while highway driving. According to her mostly because of improved battery chemistry.
Well, that statement makes no sense at all. The chemistry doesn't matter once the electrons leave the battery :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johan
The 20% figure is a deduction based on some sales person claim of wh/km improvement that JBRR reported up thread. So the sales person's claim might be inaccurate.

... As numerous claims by Tesla sales persons in the past regarding a plethora of things.

Point in case:

Well, that statement makes no sense at all. The chemistry doesn't matter once the electrons leave the battery :)
 
This happened over 4 hours ago...

RBC analyst apparently cut his PT from 252 to 242.

So, lemme see here.... Tesla has INCREASED their growth rate by some amount, right? so he should RAISE his model by some amount
Its more then just a price cut most of you guys fixate on.

RBC Capital Markets analyst Joseph Spak and team argue that “execution risk is elevated” for Tesla Motors (TSLA), and cut their earnings estimates accordingly. They explain why:


We are updating our model for 1) the equity raise and share countand 2) a more tempered Model 3 ramp than prior upon further reflection of the challenging target laid out by the company. As a result, our 2017 EPS estimate goes to $1.30 from $2.65, 2018 to $3.05 from $5.50, and 2020 to $12.15 from $13.95. Our price target goes to $242.

We were always below Tesla’s vehicle delivery targets of 500k by 2018 and 1mm by 2020, but after speaking with industry contacts and reconsidering our model, we are tempering our delivery forecast to account for a slower Model 3 ramp. Our new delivery forecast for 2017/18/19/20 is 91k/180k/325k/525k versus 109k/315k/420k/620k prior, respectively. We are all for setting aggressive internal and supplier goals, but as an investor, we believe these targets should be moderated. In reality, installing the new equipment/lines takes time and then even if Tesla has learned from their Model S/X launches, there is a ramp and the scale of Model 3 is significantly larger. In the interim, the Tesla story is about manufacturing, and execution risk is elevated. For the investor with long-term horizons the ramp is less of a concern. For others, expect a choppy ride with sentiment a large driving factor.


Tesla Motors: Execution Risk Rising
 
Its more then just a price cut most of you guys fixate on.

RBC Capital Markets analyst Joseph Spak and team argue that “execution risk is elevated” for Tesla Motors (TSLA), and cut their earnings estimates accordingly. They explain why:


We are updating our model for 1) the equity raise and share countand 2) a more tempered Model 3 ramp than prior upon further reflection of the challenging target laid out by the company. As a result, our 2017 EPS estimate goes to $1.30 from $2.65, 2018 to $3.05 from $5.50, and 2020 to $12.15 from $13.95. Our price target goes to $242.

We were always below Tesla’s vehicle delivery targets of 500k by 2018 and 1mm by 2020, but after speaking with industry contacts and reconsidering our model, we are tempering our delivery forecast to account for a slower Model 3 ramp. Our new delivery forecast for 2017/18/19/20 is 91k/180k/325k/525k versus 109k/315k/420k/620k prior, respectively. We are all for setting aggressive internal and supplier goals, but as an investor, we believe these targets should be moderated. In reality, installing the new equipment/lines takes time and then even if Tesla has learned from their Model S/X launches, there is a ramp and the scale of Model 3 is significantly larger. In the interim, the Tesla story is about manufacturing, and execution risk is elevated. For the investor with long-term horizons the ramp is less of a concern. For others, expect a choppy ride with sentiment a large driving factor.


Tesla Motors: Execution Risk Rising

Yes, I already read it earlier... Blah blah blah

Here's a quiz for us Bulls...

Does raising $1.5B in cash increase or decrease risk? Mic drop...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.