-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
Sigh... having grown up in Quebec, the picture of the rusted suspension looks like business as usual. You get something that rusted, your whole car is no longer safe and... no car manufacturer will cover it.
It's up to the car owners to rust proof their own cars as you will be driving through slushy snow mixed with potent salt everyday. It's common sense. Then again, not everyone experiences wear from corrosion like we do. That kind of rust, looks like salt water was poured on it everyday for 3 years. Like my first car's suspension after 3 years of driving without rust proofing (yes an expensive lesson). I am guessing the other Northerners on this forums must have the same WTF expression I had when reading this.
The part I find weird about the TMC member's reaction is when he isn't happy with the NDA, he didn't go back to TSLA and ask the part that he didn't like to be changed. Mainly, the potential to prevent reporting to NHTSA. Instead, it got sent directly to a blogger. This, in itself, does not prove any planned action, but it sounds like the ban on reporting to NHTSA is something conjured out by Noodlemate as the TMC member himself does not think it applies to NHTSA because he went ahead and reported to NHTSA.
All in all, making this a dip buying opportunity. As a blogger's impact should be technically less than that of an analyst in the pecking order and we have already fallen more than what a usual bearish analyst call can cause. I will be moving in for a short term position.
Also to all you bears. Can't you guys wait till after July when my money isn't stuck somewhere else? There's plenty of time before traders come back in September.
No rush
Last edited:
I can handle lawyer jokes, but I'm failing to see how this is a case of lawyers being cute, or really doing anything wrong at all here.
Again, NDA agreements/clauses in other agreements are very very common. Basically, any time someone is getting special treatment it's perfectly acceptable to ask that person to keep the terms confidential as a condition of receiving the special treatment.
Consider the employment context. Severance agreements, special retention bonus agreements etc. almost always include a confidentiality clause. Employers don't want to create expectations or a general entitlement to certain treatment. The Tesla situation is the exact same - they fixed something out of warranty in a gesture of goodwill and didn't want this to be used against them. This is an accepted practice across so many different applications it's not even worth mentioning as a potential issue in the legal world.
The only failure at Tesla was not recognizing legal trends. Lately, some governmental agencies have expressed general concerns that broad NDAs could implicitly suppress whistleblower type claims. Those who could see the writing on the wall (like me!) redrafted agreements/policies proactively to expressly carve out such disclosures, even though the intent (explicitly or implicitly) never was to suppress disclosure to governmental agencies. So, you add a sentence about "nothing in this agreement is intended to diminish or in any way affect your right to provide information to governmental agencies, including but not limited to [AGENCY]" and the potential issue goes away entirely. NDAs remain totally fine and acceptable.
Anything under $300 is a deal. Under $250 is a sale of a decade. That's my conviction and I'm 180% in, through combination of shares, calls and short puts. I can add few more percents should price fall further.
Having said that, I realize that market doesn't share my conviction and safest bet is to invest in shares with money you don't need for a long while
How do you model for risk? I think this is the biggest factor that would determine valuation -- we can all build hypothetical scenarios of how much Tesla would be worth 5 or 10 years out "if all goes mostly well" and land within maybe 30-50% (or just use Blind Faith numbers). But we're talking about a company with one plant in one specific location, one irreplaceable man leading the effort, operating on a fairly thin margin of error. Add lots of very well funded and connected interests that would love to see the whole thing just disappear. The further out in time you go the bigger the valuation number, but also the longer the timespan is for an extraordinary negative event to show up.
Personally the way I see it is I don't think I am any better than the market in assigning value to TSLA and I don't think of it as an arbitrage opportunity. There's a probability of making a lot of money and a probability of not even getting the principal back. The question is not about the arbitrage but about if I want to take that risk or not. For me I say hell yea but that's not with a smug "I know better than the market" face, it's just taking a fair deal on a risky investment.
blog was great. I didn't anticipate the extent the media would misrepresent it (most frequently headlining ~Tesla defiantly fires back at NHTSA). apparently Tesla didn't anticipate this either.
Tesla likely has decent visibility on how long it will be before NHTSA either announces the matter is closed or is progressing to another level of inquiry. depending on how long that will be, and how much follow on of bad press and/or stock selling there is on Monday, Elon might call into the likes of CNBC & Bloomberg next week. He is extremely protective of Tesla's good name with consumers.
Tesla likely has decent visibility on how long it will be before NHTSA either announces the matter is closed or is progressing to another level of inquiry. depending on how long that will be, and how much follow on of bad press and/or stock selling there is on Monday, Elon might call into the likes of CNBC & Bloomberg next week. He is extremely protective of Tesla's good name with consumers.
On the S60.. I think there might be goal re-evaluation going on. When they set 30% gross margin target they might have been thinking that it'll be too expensive and inefficient to increase production beyond a certain point. If that is the premise then going for a high GM is logical since yes they'd be "production constrained" in the sense of operating well into the top left of the demand curve.
Now they're figuring they can increase production quite efficiently so the best return is a bit towards the middle of the demand curve -- sell more units with lower average price. With a high chance of post-sale profit of unlocking extra capacity it might be that long-term ASP won't suffer much if any.
The bottom line is I think the market might perceive this as bad news but to me there's a possibility it's an indication of confidence in ability to increase production and possibly also confidence in pushing gross margins up via better 3rd party pricing and manufacturing efficiencies.
Now they're figuring they can increase production quite efficiently so the best return is a bit towards the middle of the demand curve -- sell more units with lower average price. With a high chance of post-sale profit of unlocking extra capacity it might be that long-term ASP won't suffer much if any.
The bottom line is I think the market might perceive this as bad news but to me there's a possibility it's an indication of confidence in ability to increase production and possibly also confidence in pushing gross margins up via better 3rd party pricing and manufacturing efficiencies.
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
I look at it through the lens of a bankroll management.
Never lose the principal is one of the rule.
Determine bull case and determine bear case. Using Adam Jona's research is good enough for most people.
Separate out your investment into tranches.
The # of tranches is the most complicated part of calculation and their buy in points.
So in the bull case, how many multiple are you expecting your investments to go. Take for example a double. A double is easy example because you can take the Martingale bankroll management from gambling.
With this, 10 tranches = 0.00055395 in probability (1 = 100%). Now you probably don't want to go to 10, but everyone's tolerance for risk is different and you can use your age to do the calculation. When TSLA first started around $20 and more volatile, I use the 1 year performance to see how often the stock fluctuates by 100% or 50%. A simplified version of black-scholes
With this, you determine the points at which you double down or sell out based on your risk tolerance. Of course, with stock, doubling is pretty hard, so I use options and their probability of exercise is an easy replacement for risk tolerance.
And gentleman, this is a simplified guide on a mathematical way to approach how I evaluate how much money to put into a trade based on risk.
On top of that, you have the rule of 90 for real estate. 90 - your age = maximum amount of net asset in RE
Then you have the 20% rule for debt used to buy stock
The 60/40 rule for stock/bond allocation which I do not abide by at all for numerous personal reasons. Started out this way though.
These are all risk strategies that helps give you a peace of mind because your own emotional state affect the accuracy of your trade. When you are emotional, you tend to be affected by the blog posts from Noodlemaker and such. Have you wondered why there's an article from a famous blogger almost every month? And you've never heard of this famous blogger in your life before? Yeah being emotion means you will actually react to these "famous" bloggers.
In all the crazy of the past 24 hours we did not discuss the 60 much... What is a little hard to comprehend is that they sell 75s as 60s with software limited capacity. While it did make sense as a temporary fix for the 40 and even when going from 70 to 75, I am puzzled about this move. As the battery pack is the most expensive component of the car, I don't fully understand how this makes financial sense. They are practically selling 75s as 60s, installing 25% more cells than the customer paid for. Granted, the customer can't use it until they upgrade, and many may at some point, but that doesn't change the fact Tesla installs cells in cars that it could install for paying customers. Effectively, with every fourth 60 they sell, they have "wasted" a 60 pack.
What am I missing?
Good point. In an optimistic perspective, maybe the cost of battery/manufacturing dropped so much so that even an S60 is healthy profitable (and an S75 is outrageously profitable).
:I think the 60 is to convert customers on the waiting list for the 3. It broadens the model S market and resets range to 200 miles. As a 60 owner, I know the 60 is a very useable car for local travel, meaning virtually 0 local charging necessary. The supercharger network seems to be designed for the 200 miles range. Since the new 60 will supercharge faster than my old 60, I think it represents good value.
I was wondering the same thing and came to an early conclusion that they can't meet 80k guidance so they have to drop price to increase demand. And they can't have a battery pack line to do 60kWh so they have to "give away" 15kWh. So I sold 1/3 of my holdings based on this conclusion yesterday morning when I saw the news while I'm still in bed. Later in the morning, I combed through the things I know and came to a different conclusion. This one is a really bullish case on the assumption that they can cut cost by 20% of the parts side in H2, which is not too out of the realm considering production rate will nearly double, and they have been talking with suppliers for quite some time and have Model 3 demand as a potential leverage (give us a discount now, or we'll switch to someone else for Model 3 parts). Here's my though process. Lucky I made a mistake to sell and bought back today around 220.
Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016
mmd
Active Member
Did not see this posted here. Saw in mercury news.
Tesla: U.S. senator requests investigation of foreign workers on construction project
Tesla: U.S. senator requests investigation of foreign workers on construction project
No, that's just sloppy proof reading but not indicative of underlying issues in the way Tesla handles these cases.
CALGARYARSENAL
Member
CALGARYARSENAL
Member
NEW MUSK TWEET: NHTSA confirmed today that they found no safety concern with the Model S suspension and have no further need for data from us on this matter
hockeythug
Active Member
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
