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.
A lot of people here are with unwarranted hope because they are afraid that it actually matters. Both aspects are misjudgements.

If the market believed Tesla could pull off 500k in 2018, it wouldn't be sitting at 208. The market this year after a happy model 3 announce was like 'yeah whatever Elon, and about that SolarCity thing...'

Tesla nailing their target of 500k cars in 2018 would be such an unbelievable dream if true. They would have expanded their revenue in 2 years from the 7B$ this year to ~30B$ in 2018, software company like growth out of a manufacturer. The stock would probably quadruple if that happened, and it is certainly *possible* but my intuition and interpretation of the evidence is that this won't happen. There are entirely too many bottlenecks, not least of which might be that Tesla doesn't *want* to expand that fast because it might mean unacceptable performance or risk in certain categories like maintenance, margins, quality, etc or they might want to divert batteries to TE or slow fulfillment to capitalize on new high margin product ideas or shift the mix up the chain to the S/X. And exactly like you say, it doesn't matter.
 
If the market believed Tesla could pull off 500k in 2018, it wouldn't be sitting at 208. The market this year after a happy model 3 announce was like 'yeah whatever Elon, and about that SolarCity thing...'

Tesla nailing their target of 500k cars in 2018 would be such an unbelievable dream if true. They would have expanded their revenue in 2 years from the 7B$ this year to ~30B$ in 2018, software company like growth out of a manufacturer. The stock would probably quadruple if that happened, and it is certainly *possible* but my intuition and interpretation of the evidence is that this won't happen. There are entirely too many bottlenecks, not least of which might be that Tesla doesn't *want* to expand that fast because it might mean unacceptable performance or risk in certain categories like maintenance, margins, quality, etc or they might want to divert batteries to TE or slow fulfillment to capitalize on new high margin product ideas or shift the mix up the chain to the S/X. And exactly like you say, it doesn't matter.

IMHO it doesnt even have to clear 500,000 by end of 2018, as cool as that would be. If they they get the first 300,000 reservations converted by then that is already showing that it works.
 
Somewhat undercut when you drive away in your model S.:rolleyes:

This inspired me to troll my local Chevy dealership. I just called, they said they won't have any in until next year. I responded by saying I thought it was available this year to which they replied "yeah, maybe if you're in California." I guess Tesla hasn't lost the entire 35k electric market just yet. :rolleyes:
 
IMHO it doesnt even have to clear 500,000 by end of 2018, as cool as that would be. If they they get the first 300,000 reservations converted by then that is already showing that it works.

Frankly I think the margin story is of far more interest (to me and the market). There's a huge leap in cost between the S/X and the 3, and it's not entirely obvious how that's bridged. I mean yes, lower battery cost, 20% smaller, simpler interior, more automation, better parts supplier contracts, but this is all hand-waving and unquantified. I mean if you sell 500k at 5% margin that's the same as 100k at 25%. Plus the demand is known by the reservations and S/X success, whereas the margin is only Musk's rather non-binding commentary and the unprecedented nature of a profitable 35k$ EV that's not a toaster.
 
Good news for SpaceX (WSJ paywall):

Thiel Pushes to Add Commercial-Space Backers to Trump NASA Team

Venture capitalist Peter Thiel successfully pushed to give commercial space companies a stronger voice within President-elect Donald Trump’s NASA transition team, the result of an internal tug of war over policy directions and future decision makers at the agency.

... All the new appointees favor the type of private-public partnerships exemplified by Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies Corp.

... Mr. Musk had a separate chat with the president-elect to stress the importance of maintaining and growing private-public partnerships to blast humans beyond the atmosphere.
The meeting went well and Mr. Trump appeared to be “very receptive to the concepts” laid out by the SpaceX chief, according to a veteran space expert who was briefed about the session.
 
Last edited:
On the completely useless info and reflect badly on myself front...

I was just perusing my retirement account and realized that 22 of the shares of TSLA that I have in there have a cost basis of $511.68.

:(

Ah, the dreaded Solar City conversion blues. It's going to take the better part of a year or two to make those green again.
 
Last edited:
Frankly I think the margin story is of far more interest (to me and the market). There's a huge leap in cost between the S/X and the 3, and it's not entirely obvious how that's bridged. I mean yes, lower battery cost, 20% smaller, simpler interior, more automation, better parts supplier contracts, but this is all hand-waving and unquantified. I mean if you sell 500k at 5% margin that's the same as 100k at 25%. Plus the demand is known by the reservations and S/X success, whereas the margin is only Musk's rather non-binding commentary and the unprecedented nature of a profitable 35k$ EV that's not a toaster.
$35K price for M3 is base price. The average selling price could be in the range of $42K to $45K on 500K units. Autopilot and FSD options alone could add anywhere from $6K to $8K to the base price and I expect most people opt-in.

In the last earnings call, Goldman Sachs analyst asked about cost for M3, and Elon replied that it about or less than half the cost of MS. My guess on average cost of MS is around $60K, or even lower.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RobStark
My theory is that Ron Baron was behind the invitation of Mark Spiegel to speak at the Robin Hood conference. He wanted to expose the absurdity of the bear case and establish a 'Spiegel bottom'.
The evidence for this includes Baron not responding to Spiegel's presentation or subsequently defending Tesla. He wanted full capitulation. It also explains how Spiegel was selected at all, given his minuscule stature in the investing world and the fact that he had publicly insulted one of the top presenters (I'm sure whoever was in charge of booking would have immediately found the comment by Spiegel that Ron Baron doesn't do his homework). If true this is absolutely legendary stuff from Ron Baron.
 
That's surprising, because Elon and JB have said, several times that it's not on the crucial path. Which means that either your source is wrong, or that there's a potential problem with the GF.

From an Engadget article today:

"Part of that ramp-up requires that the company build batteries. A lot of batteries. This is where the Gigafactory comes into play. Earlier this year the company finally let the press and public into the not-quite-finished-but-already-producing factory in the desert outside Reno, Nevada. The company is now in a race to deliver not only cars but also the power needed to keep them on the road. 'We need to get roughly a third the size of the original building to support half a million cars a year,' Musk said during a tour of the facility."

That suggests to me that EM and Tesla's executive team understand that GF1 IS the crucial path to Model 3 production in 2017 and beyond. It is one of, if not the biggest, potential choke point in the manufacturing chain. But, it would be speculation to suggest there's currently a "problem" with GF1. That remains to be seen and I'm optimistic that the January event at the GF1 will be a pleasant surprise (That's just my opinion. I didn't get any intel from my friend's source to reach that conclusion).
 
$35K price for M3 is base price. The average selling price could be in the range of $42K to $45K on 500K units. Autopilot and FSD options alone could add anywhere from $6K to $8K to the base price and I expect most people opt-in.
I bet that Tesla will charge a maximum of about half of those numbers.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: TMSE
That suggests to me that EM and Tesla's executive team understand that GF1 IS the crucial path to Model 3 production in 2017 and beyond. It is one of, if not the biggest, potential choke point in the manufacturing chain. But, it would be speculation to suggest there's currently a "problem" with GF1. That remains to be seen and I'm optimistic that the January event at the GF1 will be a pleasant surprise (That's just my opinion. I didn't get any intel from my friend's source to reach that conclusion).
I think you need to look up the meaning of "critical path".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.