jhm
Well-Known Member
This is awesome stuff. I'd like to discuss this in the Shorting Oil thread.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Referring to the article on German automakers who used to laugh, now worrying:
Abundant denial indeed, and an arrogant blindness that deepens their plight in the soup. This piece, quoting German analysts & industry insiders, adds further credence to the sense that these (and likely all encumbent legacy) OEMs misguidedly conclude that the challenge in front of them is simply an exercise in product engineering - failing to recognize how much more effectively Tesla's approach, with its Silicon Valley dna, fulfills today's & tomorrow's needs - the very basis of Tesla's brand appeal.
We graciously appreciate all the added opportunities that this steadfast blindness & attitude of denial present.
Buddyroe
Active Member
Did you guys REALLY think the media was going to ignore all the issues with the X forever? I mean, just glance daily at the X forum and you will see problem after problem, after problem with those doors. And it's only going to get worse. There are inherent problems with the design that manufacturing will not cure. Eventually, they will have to stop building the X long enough to change it over to some other, traditional doors, or simply spend EVERY dime of profit on repairing those doors (including the lemons they'll soon start having to buy back).
Investing is more than reading a chart every day. You have to have a pulse on EXACTLY what's going on with the company. It will tell you a lot about the short term and the long term. Just like the slow down of the supercharger network this year (1/3 as many stations opened this year compared to the same time last year), another consequence of the exorbitant costs of designing and implementing those doors.
VERY bad decision on Elon's part. He's done a lot of great things and made a lot of good decisions. This is simply not one of them. In fact, this one will be hard to overcome.
Investing is more than reading a chart every day. You have to have a pulse on EXACTLY what's going on with the company. It will tell you a lot about the short term and the long term. Just like the slow down of the supercharger network this year (1/3 as many stations opened this year compared to the same time last year), another consequence of the exorbitant costs of designing and implementing those doors.
VERY bad decision on Elon's part. He's done a lot of great things and made a lot of good decisions. This is simply not one of them. In fact, this one will be hard to overcome.
I'm one of many waiting for my Model X. For some reason, even though it went into production a couple of weeks ago (after the change in the 3rd row), it is still taking a long time and I'm now being told it could be mid-May. Others are being told April/Early May is now June. I definitely don't think they are making 750/week anymore. I don't know if it is the 3rd row, or something else, but production and deliveries seem to have really slowed down again. At this rate, I've become skeptical of Q2 and the 80,000+ annual targets. Be careful...
No, it would be more rational to expect the competitors to wish it would go away and when Tesla finally perfected it to panic and dump a shed load of SUV advertising and negative PR budget at the media in the hope of distracting their customers that the X knocks the living daylights out of anything they can make at any price. After all Tesla does not bribe the media with advertising and PR money - it just makes better cars.
Honestly anyone that wastes $200K+ on one of these relatively low occupant safety low performance and ridiculisly low tech SUVs with a dirty noisy old fashioned engine thing in the front luggage space has not attended a school that offers a basic education in arithmetic let alone some of then finer facts of life - which is a hard ask when customers in that price bracket are more than likely 50%+ Ivy League. Not everyone gets into those schools on a football scholarship - the whole SAT score and wealthy parent thing still happens which I think rules out stupidity on the scale the ICE makers are dependent upon.
Media credibility among the educated ain't what it used to be.
Interesting observation about Chris Porritt. Almost all articles about him allegedly being recruited by Apple cite the website Electrek.co, which is basically a 9to5mac side project/blog. Most of the websites highlight the word allegedly.
Chris Porritt's LinkedIn page doesn't mention Apple. Also, none of the articles appear to include a statement from any credible person at Apple.
The only quote from the original article citing a "person familiar with the matter" doesn't sound credible. It also isn't clear how much of the content in the article the "person familiar with the matter" confirmed.
In most other instances where Apple hired someone significant, Apple at least acknowledges that the person is now working for Apple. I can't find any website with a comment of any sort from Apple.
This almost sounds like 9to5mac is trying to lure Apple into confirming the existence of an Apple Car Project.
(The author of the article?), using the name md, appears to have admitted the article was not well written and that the "updates" that were supposed to confirm the validity of the articles claims were added without any consideration for if they made sense. (Was the article even edited or fact checked?).
The author makes the awkward assumption that because Porritt left Tesla in September "They (Elektrek) can confirm Porritt didn't make a direct transition from Tesla to Apple.
It's not clear to me what Musk's "Tesla Graveyard" comment could possibly have to do with Porritt needing time to allegedly "transition" from Tesla to to Apple. The author also doesn't say anything about the "person familiar with the matter" saying when Porritt supposedly started working for Apple.
The author then says the following:
Did Elektrek confirm anything or are they assuming that every person who is believed to be working on "Project Titan" is now reporting to Porritt?
Even if the source the author supposedly relied on is correct, the entire article looks to be poorly written speculation based on a lot of assumptions.
Chris Porritt's LinkedIn page doesn't mention Apple. Also, none of the articles appear to include a statement from any credible person at Apple.
The only quote from the original article citing a "person familiar with the matter" doesn't sound credible. It also isn't clear how much of the content in the article the "person familiar with the matter" confirmed.
In most other instances where Apple hired someone significant, Apple at least acknowledges that the person is now working for Apple. I can't find any website with a comment of any sort from Apple.
This almost sounds like 9to5mac is trying to lure Apple into confirming the existence of an Apple Car Project.
(The author of the article?), using the name md, appears to have admitted the article was not well written and that the "updates" that were supposed to confirm the validity of the articles claims were added without any consideration for if they made sense. (Was the article even edited or fact checked?).
The author makes the awkward assumption that because Porritt left Tesla in September "They (Elektrek) can confirm Porritt didn't make a direct transition from Tesla to Apple.
It's not clear to me what Musk's "Tesla Graveyard" comment could possibly have to do with Porritt needing time to allegedly "transition" from Tesla to to Apple. The author also doesn't say anything about the "person familiar with the matter" saying when Porritt supposedly started working for Apple.
The author then says the following:
Did Elektrek confirm anything or are they assuming that every person who is believed to be working on "Project Titan" is now reporting to Porritt?
Even if the source the author supposedly relied on is correct, the entire article looks to be poorly written speculation based on a lot of assumptions.
Last edited:
I disagree. No, speaking for myself, I REALLY didn't think the media was going to ignore all of Tesla's problems. Investing is of course more than looking at a chart -- coming from someone with a solid background in macro economics I'm pretty well aware of that. In fact I think most here are fairly versed with what exactly is going on with this company, but that has little currency when dealing in short term movements. But then again, this thread is not about long term price movements of TSLA, as the title suggests it is about Short Term Price Movements. STSP movements have more to do with TA and Nowcast situations to gauge movements in the SHORT term. This has nothing to do with long term stock price, P/E, or how you feel about the company, or theories about design, charging, yadee yada yada yada . Most everyone that focuses on STSP's are dealing in options, perhaps taking the top and reinvesting in core shares, or looking for an entry / exit. For that you have to know TA signals (i.e. looking at a 'chart') or you will lose your shirt.
90% of what is discussed on this thread has zero to do with Short Term (hourly, daily, weekly) movements. I post here infrequently for this reason -- it seems as if you have to weed through 10 posts for every one that has relevance to the topic.
90% of what is discussed on this thread has zero to do with Short Term (hourly, daily, weekly) movements. I post here infrequently for this reason -- it seems as if you have to weed through 10 posts for every one that has relevance to the topic.
I certainly value your observations.
On the topic of short-term price movements, do you think the afternoon recovery was enough today or perhaps we are in short-term bearish mode now?
Your post has nothing to do with short term price movements. Not even anything to do with sentiment that might drive them.
Bottom line: There is nothing of value to note at present about short term price movements. Go ahead and surprise us all if you can say definitively otherwise. My opinion is don't trade short term at the moment unless you just want to do an asynchronous straddle with a Put bias. But I said that ages ago and it's stil true IMO and will be for weeks yet.
jhm
Well-Known Member
FWIW, for those interested in trading, options and technical analysis, we have threads devoted to those topics.
My 2 cents (having not read all the forums) is that TSLA is prioritizing the most expensive orders, so maybe the lower priced models are getting pushed back when higher priced ones come in. Moreover, pretty much anyone buying an X knows that the quality will improve once they get the hang of it, and there are only so many that want one bad enough that they are willing to take those early models with all the problems, so once it's clear things are figured out a lot of sideliners will jump in.
The market for the X isn't that big, 100-200k a year? But within that market eventually Consumer Reports and NHTSA will be talking about how quality control got things together and it's now the best and safest crossover ever etc. And a year after that you're going to hear that BMW X3 and Mercedes GLC? are getting outsold by the X in Germany. In the short-term however, happy trading, the wall of worry might grow a bit right now but it's looking like it might be a speed bump by the end of this year.
Last edited:
I usually think of anything less than a year as "short-term" since that's how it is defined tax-wise. Maybe it would be good to define it better for the purposes of this thread?
Yes, we do -- however, those haven't really been dedicated to anything other than quarterly (or longer forecasts). Specifically, I thought this thread was dedicated to short term price movements, and this had been clarified multiple times. Then within a day or two it becomes polluted for those looking for price movements and evolves in to long-winded thesis' about completely irrelevant topics -- as was demonstrated this morning. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this was already hashed out.
FredLambert
Member
Author of the original report here. You sure about that.
Why talk about all articles as if it adds any weight to the statement. I hope you are not learning anything when I tell you that they are all using words like "reportedly" and "allegedly" because they all working off the same report (from us at Electrek, which is not a "side project" but the most read EV news website on the internet) and therefore their only source is us so they can only report based on what we are saying.
On the other hand, we are stating it as fact because we have the original sources and we can confirm what they are saying is true.
That's how every article you read works. Someone reports some new information and every other publications report "hey those guys are SAYING that" and not "those guys SAID that so it is now true".
When we published this morning, Porritt's LinkedIn page was still stating that he works at Tesla. No one had reported that he left the company until we did (and it was then confirmed by Tesla).
Now our sources were right about him leaving Tesla, but you don't want to believe us when we say he joined Apple? OK sure.
What? How can you say that when we clearly stated:
"He joins Apple a lot more quietly than with a press release. We are told by sources with knowledge of the matter at Apple that he joins the company as “Special Projects Group PD Administrator” – an intentionally vague title."
That's absolute bullshit. Especially when we are talking about a secret (or unofficial) project, like Titan.
For someone quick to scream speculation, you make wild ones yourself.
The author of the article, using the name md, appears to have admitted the article was not well written and that the "updates" that were supposed to confirm the validity of the articles claims were added without any consideration for if they made sense. (Was the article even edited or fact checked?).
The author makes the awkward assumption that because Porritt left Tesla in September "They (Elektrek) can confirm Porritt didn't make a direct transition from Tesla to Apple.
Again, what? MD? Where do you see MD? My name is Fred Lambert and clearly stated in the article.
Also where have I admitted anything?
Also what update was suppose to confirm the validity of anything? The only update is about when exactly Porritt left Tesla. We said "a few month" ago because sources (at Apple) weren't clear and said about 6 months. Then Tesla confirmed it was in September. So ~7 months. We added only a small update for precision but didn't even have to because it technically still matches our original timeline.
And again, I'm not make any "awkward assumption". We know for fact that there was a gap.
I don't know what your problem is here with my report or our publication but you'll have to do a better job in refuting our reports in the future because that was gibberish and/or unsubstantiated.
Last edited:
We may be in for a slight movement down. Very similar to September movements. There is a negative sentiment overshadowing some very positive things. As we saw today, a few articles are shaking out weak hands and desperate shorts are piling it on. We 'should' be testing the 255, but unless it gets there EOW and stays consolidated the ol' macro triggers will kick in and signal otherwise. Today was precipice for the SP. It did make a nice recovery, but the volume was incredibly low.
Well, we could compare positions, trades, and movements if you like. For a long term successful day trade you need to be right 51% of the time. My batting average is about 82%. Then again I have owned a position in TSLA since the upper 20's, and successfully bought almost every dip, and sold on swing highs -- it has allowed me to add to core shares. Those entries and exits have everything to do with short term movements. Typically that cycle is 3-4 weeks.
If people can benefit from that, I am all about sharing. If not, no problem. FWIW, if you are holding out for a bull run in summer doldrums, you might be eating your popcorn alone. Then again, there is an 18% chance I am wrong on that.
I hope not. One of the reasons to get off oil is to make our nation's energy sector stronger. We don't need those same foreign countries buying most of the shares and slowly taking control.
I didn't say md was the author of the article. There is a reason I said (The author of the article?) instead of , "the author of the article".
"The Most Read EV website on the internet"? Really? Your website is good, however, I think that's a bit of a stretch. In the past 1-2 years multiple random websites have been created purely to post rumors about Tesla. I think it's reasonable to be critical of an article, that included a few awkward assumptions, and was written by a (affiliate?) of a website that regurlarly post information from vague sources, that frequently turns out to be false.
Based on the info from the 'about' section of Electrek.co, calling Electrek.co a 9to5mac side project is a fair description.
All I'm saying is you made a number of claims in your article, that don't sound substantiated. Even if they are true, the "new information" could have been better phrased.
I'm not sure why you included this sentence.
I'm really not sure why you included this sentence.
That might be true. I'll need to search around to see if anyone mentioned it before you. Confirming he left Tesla in September does not confirm he was hired by Apple, even if it is true.
Those are two completely different things.
1) It's not clear to me what Musk's "Tesla Graveyard" comment could possibly have to do with Porritt needing time to allegedly "transition" from Tesla to to Apple.
2) You conclude by saying:
"We can confirm that some senior Apple engineers will be reporting directly to Porritt, including Product Development Engineering Director, Albert Golko, who until last year was working for the iPhone group and now on unspecified products. Emery Sanford is also said to report directly to Porritt now. Sanford is a prolific engineer named in dozens of Apple’s patents and who often worked directly with Zadesky, the exec believed to have been in charge of Project Titan until earlier this year."
If you had said your source provided you with this information, it would have made sense. Because you didn't say this, you sound like you're saying you are speaking as the representative for Tesla or Apple.
It's not clear from your article which facts were from your sources.
A list of people believed to be working on "Project Titan" - Apple electric car project - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Apple has confirmed that many of these people are working for Apple.
Regarding MD, I never said that was you. I just said the person who commented on your article, sounded like he might be the author.
I said : "The author makes the awkward assumption that because Porritt left Tesla in September "They (Elektrek) can confirm Porritt didn't make a direct transition from Tesla to Apple." The way you phrased the update is awkward. It isn't clear how the two thoughts connect, or why you included the part about "Giving some weight to Musk’s half-jokingly ‘Tesla Graveyard’ claim."
The update you posted doesn't read right. The way you phrased it sounds like you were looking for a way to include Elon's comment about Apple being "Tesla Graveyard', and added the update without having an editor look it over.
Last edited:
Based on the corporate structure I'm not sure they can buy enough shares to take control of the company in a hostile sort of way. And while it wouldn't be surprising if they invested in TSLA, I read a longer piece about the Prince/King? and it sounded like they were much more interested in building companies and actually changing out their own infrastructure. So who knows maybe in ten years Tesla's biggest competitors will be Saudi? Back to the short-term though, I was surprised that announcement didn't have a greater affect on TSLA and other renewable type stocks, but maybe it is too international or too long-term/broad. It was sort of like if Hershey's announced they were going to quit making chocolate and start farming kale, you'd think that would have a big effect on either chocolate or kale stocks.
Please do post in real time. I definitely want in on 82% chance of winning.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
