You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
... As numerous claims by Tesla sales persons in the past regarding a plethora of things.
Point in case:
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.
... 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.
Which models for essentially 0% growth in 2017 vs 2016 guidance of 80-90k, so either Model S/X demand goes down or it stays the same and there are zero Model III deliveries in 2017. I love strawman analyses that begin with "I will start with an incredibly pessimistic initial data point and then grow reasonably from there, Tesla has a habit of missing deadlines." Tesla also has a habit of growing 50% YOY....but RBC wants us assume that Tesla will take a year off from that metric, rather than accelerating it as they have publically stated.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
Have you all heard about this? Makes having your own source of energy (solar panels + batteries + electric car) all that much more appealing.
French Oil Refinery Strikes Spread as Fuel Shortages Worsen
Wall street UP on the fact someone lent Greece money to pay off next months bills there's them Jed Clampett eccynomics aginTo continue the potential good 'macro' news: Greece and IMF at a 'breakthrough'
Wall Street looks to resume rally after Greek accord
Well, that statement makes no sense at all. The chemistry doesn't matter once the electrons leave the battery
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)
"
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...
Did we really need to touch 200DMA before breaking through that $219.50?
I believe we could talk about decreased execution risk when Elon said, during the last CC that Tesla is hell bent on becoming the best manufacturing company.It's close to neither. Tesla had a lot of money before and spent it on falcon wing doors and non-folding middle row. Hiring Audi exec is a first step, assembling manufacturing team second and lining up suppliers third. Once those steps are done we can talk about decrease in risk.
200 SMA 222.35$220 battle continues... Anyone know the current 200DMA? Curious. Thx
Confused the 200MA on my minute chart at $219.50 with the 200DMA currently at about $222.35, sorry.200 SMA 222.35
It's close to neither. Tesla had a lot of money before and spent it on falcon wing doors and non-folding middle row. Hiring Audi exec is a first step, assembling manufacturing team second and lining up suppliers third. Once those steps are done we can talk about decrease in risk.
Just FYI. While improved aerodynamics of a facelift Model S are most likely responsible for improved Wh/Mille figures it is not senseless to look at the battery for efficiency improvements in the range of 6.5%.
A battery is not a fuel tank. Instead it is a member of the electrical circuit that goes through the motor and inverter.
(It can also be switched to being a member of the charging circuit with the charger and the source.)
The internal resistance of the battery effectively determines how much of the drivetrain energy stored in the battery is expressed as heat in the battery pack as a percentage of the total energy used to drive the car. It is not at all impossible for Tesla to find 6.5% additional drive train (and charging) efficiencies (or figures in this kind of range) by developing a battery pack with a lowered internal resistance. The heat loss in a battery is classically I squared R. I = Amps R = Ohms of resistance. In real life thermostatic controls and cell balancing play a role too and Ohmic resistance does not really tell the whole story which is why IR is typically measured as an Impedence at a certain frequency (typically 1KHz). However the frequency that actually matters is related to the demands of the Inverter. A poorly designed drive inverter will typically use the battery as a smoothing capacitor which is a terrible idea for efficiency and cycle life. The closer the demand is to unmodulated DC the better.
Internal resistance of a battery has two key components. Electrical Conductivity (or conversely Ohmic resistance) of the sum of metal current collectors (Alu and nickel foil plates), internal welds (of foils to cell terminals) and infra-pack connections - which in the case of Tesla double as cell-level fuses and therefore must in this design have an appreciable resistance to function (otherwise they would not melt and disconnect an overloaded cell). The second component is Ionic Conductivity - because if the Ions don't flow freely enough in the chemical part of the circuit neither can the electrons in the electrical circuit. Ionic Conductivity is chiefly what gives rise to capacitance and Impedence effects due to the relatively massive nature of a Lithium Ion when compared with an Electron. Ions can come out of an intercolated graphite matrix and accumulate at the separator "ready to go" - (hence initial spark when shorting a battery - or Tesla Launch acceleration for that matter) and and also effectively express effects similar to inertia and momentum. So indeed improvements at the chemistry (and cell separator) level that deliver improved Ionic Conductivity will increase Wh/mile efficiency of the overall vehicle all other things being equal - and not just drive train efficiency but also end to end efficiency including charge efficiency.
Reduced internal resistance is also a natural feature of larger Amp-Hour capacity battery packs of the same Voltage (note not directly proportional to Wh capacity which can change in the opposite direction with Voltage with cell resistance multiplied in series rather than divided in parallel).