Slightly OT, but I just got a call from upset Lady who wants her microwaved, thoroughly dried cat back.
What should I tell her??
Help!!
What should I tell her??
Help!!
Last edited:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Wow are people stupid. Autopilot is NOT self driving and DOES NOT avoid stationary objects half way in the lane. It is adaptive cruise control with lane keeping. That is it. It is not designed to make a 3D map of structures ahead and then decide how to get around them safely. That accident is 100% the drivers fault.
Krugerrand
Meow
Autopilot 2.0 is going to take care of someone who can't follow simple instructions and pay attention when they drive? Will a mallet pop out of the center of the steering wheel to bonk them on the head?
Who in their right mind doesn't slow right down in that situation, move over and make sure they don't hit the car, hit a person? What about making sure the passenger door doesn't unexpectedly open? Seriously, all this video proved to me is that someone needs to get up off their butt and let their brain have some air.
That is COMPLETELY different than approaching a stationary object on the road.
It's incredibly obvious when Maoing has entered into a short position. His posts instantly flip from strong positive to strong negative.
I posted this earlier, but since it got no response, I post it again. I'm not trying to make a statement, but I want to learn.
About investing in growth and profitability.
If the asset's useful life extends more than a year, then the company must capitalize the expense, using depreciation to spread the cost of the assetover its designated useful life. Capital expenses are most often depreciated over a five- to 10-year period (buildings longer).
So does investments in machinery, buildings (stores, service centers), superchargers etc explain losses, because they are depriciated over several years?
About investing in growth and profitability.
If the asset's useful life extends more than a year, then the company must capitalize the expense, using depreciation to spread the cost of the assetover its designated useful life. Capital expenses are most often depreciated over a five- to 10-year period (buildings longer).
So does investments in machinery, buildings (stores, service centers), superchargers etc explain losses, because they are depriciated over several years?
ev-enthusiast
Active Member
Mario Kadastik
Active Member
Ok, so I did a bit of math. Assuming TSLA entered Q3 with 1950 cars / week (don't forget, they said just under 2000, that means 19XX). And exit Q3 at 2150 / week (same logic) with an exponential growth in the 12 week period, then the total number of cars produced is 24.6k Assuming entry and exit cars in transit as steady state and giving 10% of cars to loaners/demo/etc we get ~22k cars delivered in Q3.
The pessimistic scenario is that they run the whole 11 weeks with 1950 and only the final week at 2150, then we get 23.6k cars i.e. ~21k deliveries.
The pessimistic scenario is that they run the whole 11 weeks with 1950 and only the final week at 2150, then we get 23.6k cars i.e. ~21k deliveries.
@Matias, no I wouldn't say depreciation " explains" the losses. Depreciation is a good way to fairly value a company's finances. The other alternative would be to recognize those expenses in the year they were incurred, and that would lead to a very confusing profit/loss statements as profit would swing wildly from one year to the next as different capital projects started and stopped.
But it is true that there are some very big capital projects that haven't helped profits yet, like the gigafactory, Model 3 tooling, etc. And while only a fraction of those cash outlays are reflected in the P/L, they are still there.
Bottom line, analyzing a company though simple metrics like cash flow is useless for a company of any reasonable size. You have to understand what the company is doing now and in the future and read the financial reports with that understanding.
For instance, if Tesla did not have a competitive advantage, and they weren't expecting to grow revenues 10x, the current financials should look poor indeed.
Look at any tech stock that has grown a lot, like Amazon. It has never had great financials unless you realized how much growth it was going to have.
That's why comparing Tesla financials to other, much more established, and limited growth car companies like Ford is also useless.
But it is true that there are some very big capital projects that haven't helped profits yet, like the gigafactory, Model 3 tooling, etc. And while only a fraction of those cash outlays are reflected in the P/L, they are still there.
Bottom line, analyzing a company though simple metrics like cash flow is useless for a company of any reasonable size. You have to understand what the company is doing now and in the future and read the financial reports with that understanding.
For instance, if Tesla did not have a competitive advantage, and they weren't expecting to grow revenues 10x, the current financials should look poor indeed.
Look at any tech stock that has grown a lot, like Amazon. It has never had great financials unless you realized how much growth it was going to have.
That's why comparing Tesla financials to other, much more established, and limited growth car companies like Ford is also useless.
Why specifically 10% for loaners/demo/inventory? Why not 5? Or 15? I think we should have learned after Q2 not to try to deduce deliveries from production guidance except as an upper bound. There is a thread specifically about net order rate opened yesterday by @bonaire and it contains much more pertinent and verifiable information to estimate deliveries in Q3.
I rated you helpful. Helped myself putting you in my ignore list.
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
dmckinstry
Model X 2019
No!! It's the fault of the manufacture of the microwave. They failed to include safety integrated interlock to prevent the microwave from turning when there's nobody present with a fully functioning and reasonably well educated brain.
Electrifying
Member
Pathetic volume.
Longs not selling. Shorts not covering.
Game of Chicken.
Only one side is paying interest every day.
Let's see who can hold out longer.
Waiting for the Tsunami of Hurt 2.0.
Longs not selling. Shorts not covering.
Game of Chicken.
Only one side is paying interest every day.
Let's see who can hold out longer.
Waiting for the Tsunami of Hurt 2.0.
Yeah, but it won't be available soon enough for Elon... (Current range is only 2 meters, with them hoping for 10 meters in another year.) And their currently plans only go to 100 meters, which doesn't seem far enough for automobile uses.
With such a slow day, I'll put in my two cents of pessimism. The bottom line is that over the last few years, we have heard of being cash flow positive and/or profitable, "by the end of next year," or, "by the end of this year," so many times, it's just getting tired. Everyone seems to acknowledge that at this point, the stock price is entirely driven by confidence in Elon's long term vision, with no clear signal of whether or not it will be successful until the M3 is in volume production. Very few believe that will be before 2018. Any normal stock would have been obliterated by such a huge miss, even the much compared to Amazon. No, Amazon wasn't reporting positive EPS, but the losses were generally expected and understood given the focus on rapid growth and reinvestment of cash.
Who will blink first? I don't know. I wouldn't count on it being the shorts. It might be them, but even the big institutions have expectations. If they were just going to hand someone money with a promise of future returns 5 years out, they would have different names. Yes, they are playing the "long game", but that doesn't mean they don't still have to meet quarterly and annual goals. Given the lower volumes recently, I almost think some of the big longs might be getting nervous, knowing that reducing their exposure will both take longer and have a bigger price impact than it would have when the volume was regularly north of 5 million shares a day. I don't know, just trying to make sense of the amazingly tame price action and volume following such a surprising shortcoming from 2Q.
By the way, for the more rabid Tesla fans, I'm not an "enemy of the future", Musk Hater, SA author or even a SA commentor. I just read a lot on this and other boards, and try to educate myself into being able to make informed investment decisions. Sticking with Tesla just seems precarious.
Who will blink first? I don't know. I wouldn't count on it being the shorts. It might be them, but even the big institutions have expectations. If they were just going to hand someone money with a promise of future returns 5 years out, they would have different names. Yes, they are playing the "long game", but that doesn't mean they don't still have to meet quarterly and annual goals. Given the lower volumes recently, I almost think some of the big longs might be getting nervous, knowing that reducing their exposure will both take longer and have a bigger price impact than it would have when the volume was regularly north of 5 million shares a day. I don't know, just trying to make sense of the amazingly tame price action and volume following such a surprising shortcoming from 2Q.
By the way, for the more rabid Tesla fans, I'm not an "enemy of the future", Musk Hater, SA author or even a SA commentor. I just read a lot on this and other boards, and try to educate myself into being able to make informed investment decisions. Sticking with Tesla just seems precarious.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
