-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Social Chat - Short Term TSLA Movements
- Thread starter Jonathan Hewitt
- Start date
-
- Tags
- TSLA
Mario Kadastik
Active Member
You declare that account XXX is an investment account. Afterwards you only have to declare the deposits and withdrawals that aren't related to trading. When withdrawals exceed deposits you pay taxes on the excess. So very basic and easy. They absolutely don't care what you trade, when you trade or how much profit/loss you make off of your trades. As long as you've put in more money than you've taken out you're good. Take out too much, pay taxes the following year. The things I've needed to declare are actual deposits and withdrawals when I move cash in and out, the monthly account maintenance fees that are unrelated to actual trading and that's it. Even commission on trades is considered financial transaction cost and therefore doesn't have to be declared. Moving money between investment accounts is tax free and what counts is the total sum across all investment accounts.
Speaking about state taxes, I was expecting substantial tax bill for PA as well, but to my surprise, needed to pay only $150 on top of the witholding (PA has flat tax of approx 3%). It turns out that a lot of my losses were disalowed for the purpose of Federal Taxes because of the wash sale rules, which came into play because I sold a lot of calls on the morning of seconf US fire at a loss, and then kept buying March and April, 2014 calls when TSLA was tumbling down to lower hundreds. All this happend with less than 30 days between the transactions, so a lot of losses were disalowed.
It turns out that for the purposes of PA taxes, losses are treated differently, and while my Federal Tax Return shows substantial gains, the PA Return shows losses! Go figure... I am so glad that Fidelity allows for direct transfer of information to the TurboTax, so all of this was handled automatically.
I have a view, but first ...
I posted a comment over the weekend suggesting there was too much group think here on the investment threads of TMC and several people got a bit defensive. Sorry if I was upsetting to some of you. I thought I was simply pointing out the obvious. This being the "social" stock thread, I hope my comments below will be read with a different light.
(I somewhat regret my post over the weekend because why bother pointing out something that upsets people? After all this place is named Tesla Motors Club. If you don't agree there is whole lot of group think here about this stock, just review the responses to post #2624 above)
Don't read me wrong below you guys. I am very much a fan of Elon Musk, his unbelievable achievements, and the start of the whole EV revolution. Our world clearly needs to move away from fossil fuels ASAP. Jesus, just look at the pollution levels in China, corals dying in our vast oceans due to CO2 absorption, everywhere ice caps melting, etc, etc. Tesla Gen 3 cannot arrive soon enough. The Model S and SpaceX are fantastic achievements, Elon Musk is the most incredible tech CEO of the past 80+ years.
Now. TSLA stock. That's a whole different issue.
Many here drives the $100k Model S. To answer the question clmason posted above, I would suggest TSLA longs and shorts pay attention to the Nissan LEAF. Carlos Ghosen currently operates three battery factories supplying the LEAF. He too is working hard on cell chemistry, form factors, and cost reduction.
Tesla's Gen 3 is still many many years away. At least 3, perhaps 4+ years away. (Why? Partial answer: Panasonic)
By then if the Nissan LEAF achieves a range of 130-150 miles (it's 80+ today) it will definitely be a threat to the Model E. Nissan has dropped LEAF's price aggressively in the past 12 months (partly because it was able to reduce the cost of its batteries). Today you can put $3000 down and lease the LEAF for $89, $129, or $179 per month before sales tax (choose from models S, SV, or SL).
I saw the ad with my own eyes. When the promotion is on it's $89 per month!
The talk of disruption is very fashionable today. The LEAF starting from the low-end at $89/month could very well disrupt the Model E before the first Model E is even produced.
Carlos Ghosen definitely sees what's happening. In the near future the LEAF will improve in range, styling, and price.
I have driven the Model S several times. It is a fantastic $100k EV. I have leased the LEAF almost two years. The LEAF too is a fantastic EV. (I agree its exterior styling totally sucks. But the rest of the car is pretty fantastic for the price. The LEAF too is a joy to drive vs. an ICE car of similar size and weight)
Elon Musk would much rather not have to build the Gigafactory. He would much rather just go to the market place, specify the chemistry, order those 18650 cells from multiple suppliers. Wasn't 18650 supposed to be a commodity form factor various vendors can crank out? But that's not the reality today because the truth is more complex than that when the chemistry has to be changed to adapt to EVs.
Carlos Ghosen understood this many years ago. That's why he has three battery factories operational today supplying the LEAF.
On the one hand Elon Musk desperately wants to drive down battery cost to save the planet. On the other hand when battery cost is finally driven down, the EV market will be intensely competitive (translation: low margins).
An added complexity is Elon's long-term interest is not always 100% aligned with long-term TSLA stock holders. Elon's goal is to get all ICE makers to convert to EV ASAP. That may not be exactly good for TSLA stock holders when he achieves his goal.
When it comes to stocks, any stock, my hummingbirdass timid whisper to clmason is to do your own homework, think logically for yourself, seek out and understand naysayers point of views, and be nimble. Be ready to change your mind when the facts change. After all this is tech land and this stock currently does have a high P/S ratio.
I am way late to this wild orgy party you old timers are having since the stock was under $40 a share a year ago. I only know one thing certain: I am a total idiot for missing the 5x run up.
Might I suggest you watch our recent Google Hangout with guest speaker Capitalist Oppressor before you put your investment dollars behind Nissan's battery tech being a credible threat to Tesla and the 18650 platform. Welcome to the forums.
TSLA investment hangout w/CapitalOppressor - YouTube
Mario Kadastik
Active Member
I think the point of Leaf as a competitor is so-so. Those three battery factories don't crank out nearly enough batteries to make a decent dent in global car sales. The gigafactory will produce more than the whole 2013 production combined globally including the Leaf factories. Therefore the amount of cars it can produce will be higher, it is going to be a decent sedan (20% reduction of Model S) and will have a decent range (150+ miles) with a supercharger network built out. The leaf has to date sold ~96k cars. That's 22k in 2011, 27k in 2012 and 47k in 2013. They can in theory build 250k cars a year @ 80 mile range. Going to 160 mile range that's reduced to 125k. Tesla plans to sell 500k cars from the Gen-III single factory. And even if they both were combined that's still less than 1% of global car sales per annum.
No, I'm not worried about Nissan Leaf.
No, I'm not worried about Nissan Leaf.
I think that all this discussion is moot, because the automobile market is HUGE, and even with several compelling electric cars offered in each category it will take decades before the production will meet the demand, given Lifetime parity in cost with ICE. The market place is big enough to accommodate more than one entrant.
The attrition will be killing companies who are unwilling or incapable to let ICE go.
The attrition will be killing companies who are unwilling or incapable to let ICE go.
The Leaf is a good car and Carlos Ghosn is the second-best auto CEO out there. I have nothing but respect for what he's doing - except showing the Infiniti LE concept, saying it will have the same drivetrain as a Leaf but be way more expensive, and then deciding it wasn't ready for prime time and delaying the project several years.
I don't think the Leaf will quite be a competitor for the Model E, the Model E will be a "premium" brand whereas the Leaf will be a consumer brand. Assuming EV prices go down over the next few years, the Model E will be in the price range of the i3, and the Leaf will be several thousand dollars cheaper than either. The Model E will be a better car than the Leaf. And there's no reason to think that EV sales in general can't increase enough to cover both models. In fact, the existence of the Leaf *helps* EV sales to increase enough to cover both models. The Leaf may well be helping Tesla, by giving people an entry into the EV market at a lower price point, or earlier, so they can see what it's all about (this also is true with the Volt, there are innumerable Volt owners who move on to buy a Tesla, or who plan to buy one as their next car, etc. - I call the Volt "training wheels" for an EV).
So I do not see the Leaf as competition, and I don't think Ghosn sees Tesla as competition currently. Both companies are benefitting each others' plans on this front.
It is most certainly in every long-term TSLA stockholder's interest to get all ICE makers to convert to EV ASAP. TSLA stockholders breathe air. If it costs me some of my investment account in order to stop 1/8th of the overall deaths worldwide (according to a recent WHO report which attributes 1/8 of world deaths to poor air quality due to dirty air), then I'm certainly willing to spend that money. And once EVs are dominant and I've made my money on Tesla then I can move on to the next cool investment idea.
Not to mention, the gigafactory also works as a hedge against this. If all other automakers start making EVs, and if Tesla turns out to be the lead EV battery maker, then they can still make money off of other companies' cars by supplying their batteries. It's pretty win-win.
I don't think the Leaf will quite be a competitor for the Model E, the Model E will be a "premium" brand whereas the Leaf will be a consumer brand. Assuming EV prices go down over the next few years, the Model E will be in the price range of the i3, and the Leaf will be several thousand dollars cheaper than either. The Model E will be a better car than the Leaf. And there's no reason to think that EV sales in general can't increase enough to cover both models. In fact, the existence of the Leaf *helps* EV sales to increase enough to cover both models. The Leaf may well be helping Tesla, by giving people an entry into the EV market at a lower price point, or earlier, so they can see what it's all about (this also is true with the Volt, there are innumerable Volt owners who move on to buy a Tesla, or who plan to buy one as their next car, etc. - I call the Volt "training wheels" for an EV).
So I do not see the Leaf as competition, and I don't think Ghosn sees Tesla as competition currently. Both companies are benefitting each others' plans on this front.
It is most certainly in every long-term TSLA stockholder's interest to get all ICE makers to convert to EV ASAP. TSLA stockholders breathe air. If it costs me some of my investment account in order to stop 1/8th of the overall deaths worldwide (according to a recent WHO report which attributes 1/8 of world deaths to poor air quality due to dirty air), then I'm certainly willing to spend that money. And once EVs are dominant and I've made my money on Tesla then I can move on to the next cool investment idea.
Not to mention, the gigafactory also works as a hedge against this. If all other automakers start making EVs, and if Tesla turns out to be the lead EV battery maker, then they can still make money off of other companies' cars by supplying their batteries. It's pretty win-win.
Its logic like this that makes me cringe a little... There is no reason to think that other car manufacturers will buy batteries from Tesla, or even use the same chemistry/technology that Tesla uses.
Furthermore, the idea that by owning an EV, or the entire world using EVs, makes the world a greener place is far from reality. Yea maybe one day when all of the world's energy is solar, wind and hydro that may be true. But that is a lonnng time from now (several decades at the very minimum). The recycling process of the metal casings for batteries, the car body etc. are all extremely wasteful, not to mention getting electricity from the US grid...
Finally, the name of the game is to make money, not helping the world. Investing in tesla because you think the company will do well, and you want to make money off it is fine. To think that by doing so you are saving the world is just fuel for the bears to feed on.
When Life Gives You Lemons... | Blog | Tesla Motors
"It's also of interest to note that this particular lawyer filed a lemon law suit against Volvo in February last year – on behalf of the very same client."
http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/blog_attachments/volvo-lemon-law.pdf
Wow!!
"It's also of interest to note that this particular lawyer filed a lemon law suit against Volvo in February last year – on behalf of the very same client."
http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/blog_attachments/volvo-lemon-law.pdf
Wow!!
Mario Kadastik
Active Member
I think this is the new hire by Elon working perfectly. Notice that the last few blog posts have been from Tesla Motors Team and not Elon Musk as previously 
But indeed ... kudos, had he been in place half a year ago we could have avoided a lot of FUD I think
But indeed ... kudos, had he been in place half a year ago we could have avoided a lot of FUD I think 
mitch672
Active Member
I like the part about the fuse blowing 3 times, then they installed tamper tape, and hasn't been an issue with the fuse since
Someone's working with a shady lawyer looking for payday...
Someone's working with a shady lawyer looking for payday...
I did view it FluxCap. In addition it took me about two weeks but I did read through CapOp's two threads on cell costs and pack IP. He worked hard on those two topics as you all know.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think CapOp no longer posts much these days because he is apprehensive of the Gigafactory. It is so capital intensive, and it will be difficult without Panasonic's cooperation. As others have explained, Panasonic has many good reasons not to do such massive joint venture. Panasonic is an old conservative large company. The company has lost a lot of money in the past ten years. Its management cares more about creating jobs and making a profit at low risk than to save the earth from global warming. As its CEO Tusuga explained, they understand what Elon wants, but they can only move one incremental step at a time (i.e. increase production rate one step at a time when needed, as they are doing to accommodate the Model S and X through 2017). Naturally Panasonic is not interested in sharing its cell IP and production know-how with anyone unless it had no other choice.
We don't see any battery experts explaining cell chemistry, cell IP dynamics, and cell manufacturing here on TMC (which is kind of strange actually given how hot this stock has been and that Tesla wants to build a battery factory). From the outside, we have no idea how difficult it will be for Elon to create the Gigafactory without Panasonic/Samsung/LG/Chinese. For sure, just like all of you here, I want Tesla to succeed.
You are making an assumption that Panasonic is not already on board. That is not necessarily true. They are not yet ready to disclose anything yet, so the public answer is essentially... we're thinking about it. What else are they supposed to say? They aren't ready to announce it.
I find it much harder to believe that Tesla announced this giga factory and has not already lined up the partners, or a least almost all the way sorted through it.
All the rest of this is just idle speculation from interested parties but with no information at all.
Also, this document was posted by a Seeking Alpha commentator which I thought was quite interesting: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/documents/420r12021.pdf
It's a peer review of the Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) Draft Report “Modeling the Cost and Performance of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Electric-Drive Vehicles" and most interesting thing I found about it is that one of the peer reviewers is from Tesla Motors. A Mr. Kurt Kelty, whose bio is also included. Here is an interesting excerpt:
So the battery person at Tesla Motors used to work at Panasonic for quite some time, including leading their battery research lab in Silicon Valley among other relevant activities. The implications are very interesting.
Similar threads
