Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

[StealthP3D]

Maybe our Norwegian posters can add other explanations to this list.

I'm not Norwegian but my understanding is a lot of Norwegians are waiting on the new electric Mustang.
Why? Because Norwegians prefer fjords.

 

[Artful Dodger]

I'm sorry this seems too conspiratorial - almost paranoid. These Index Funds are passive investors all they care about is minimizing their S&P 500 "tracking error". How do 3rd party whale investors benefit from orchestrating a "big push down" to "help" the Index Funds have to buy less TSLA? If an S&P indexer buys all their TSLA on the first day it is actually in the index and helps shoot TSLA's price into orbit, that will also spike the S&P index a bit. As long as the indexer's allocation is correct on the first day, they will track that spike and be okay. If TSLA goes down post-add, they are still tracking S&P 500 just fine thank you. I think for index funds it is more of a challenge not to lose too much on the stocks they have to dump that were tossed out of the S&P 500. They need that money plus funds from reduced allocations of continuing names to buy their TSLA and whatever else the secret committee decides to add.

The stock price was like a Falcon 9 rocket and launched to $500 per share so there was a lot of smart "profit-taking". Unfortunately, I wasn't one of the "smart" ones. I've never been good at trying to time the market. Therefore, I am a buy-and-hold-forever-my-son-will-inherit-at-a-stepped-up-cost-basis investor. That said, my "gut" instinct told me that $500 a "new cheap" share was a good price to cash in our tax-free accounts and buy more shares than before later on. I just didn't act on it because of S&P 500, Battery Day, P&D, and Q3. I guess it was a case of "pigs get slaughtered"! (*)

(*) "Bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered" is an old Wall Street saying that warns investors against excessive greed.

Lol, not sure I saw a question in there. Let me offer an analogy instead: in olden times, when a stage coach driver hitched up his team, he knew where he was headed, and how to drive the horse as he wanted. The horse mostly stick to the road in front of them, but get guided throught the turns, and *encouraged* with the prod of a whip if they stray too far off course. But if a cargo is lost, the owner of the stage coach line doesn't blame the horses; the driver gets the blame.

Large hedge funds are the 'drivers'. Passive investment funds are the 'horses' (we don't ever know who owns the team). But somebody wants to keep TSLA out as long as they can, because it benefits them. Sure, the Owners have to feed the horses either way, but nothing extra is given if they have a good run.

And I bet this analogy made no sense, right?

#RIPUNCLEJACK

 

[SPadival]

I sure would love them to do a tour with a MY, this was a big criticism with the M3 which inspired that guy to come over (damn, forget his name), which ended up with him crashing in Italy. In any case, he did a great service for us in giving an early look at the car.

In my case, wife wants a MY, but reality is that it might be too big for her, so if we could see it in person, a decision could be made and if necessary buy a M3 instead.

yoyo Xi or something. That guy was bad news. He removed the hubcap off without permission from someone else’s Model 3 to make a video. Then he took his car to Europe, crashed in Greece or somewhere and blamed it on autopilot, trying to publicly shame Tesla into shipping the wreck from Europe and fixing it. Last seen, he was running for city mayoral election and lost.

 

[UncaNed]

These types typically just disappear while their theses is not working out for them or move the goal posts. He will just come up with new reasons why Tesla is doomed like one particular factory is not at it's target production rate and you can't count the other factories or how we have to consider the whole story and the solar side is slow. I typically never listen to these types because of how they move the goal post around even during the interview.

He is upset because Tesla is charging for FSD and that's not part of cars? What? What else does one use FSD for? His yogurt maker? Then is cuts his own throat later and starts talking about GMs vaporware like the 21 BEVs in 2021. One exists. The other doesn't. Teslas are actually driving around parking lots with no drivers. FSD in my book altho limited. Where are GM's other BEVs? "They are coming!"

He kept going on and on about the US sales peaking and insinuating how GLOBAL was not important. Then in the next breath he would talk about the EU sales then China.... are global sales important or not. If they are not important then he needs to pick which country is and stick to it. Global sales are increasing. That means Tesla is taking more market share from ICE vehicles particularly since there are 40% less vehicles sold so far this year. Period. Who cares if others also start taking market share from ICE vehicles. Tesla doesn't not sell ICE vehicles. When I guy buys an Ipace what car did he trade in? A Tesla or an ICE. Most are trading in an ICE. Meanwhile Tesla will sell around 500K cars this year. More than last year. Last year 367,500. This year even at 367,501 (it will be more), that equals increased market share. This should have been clearly explained but then the subject is changed too quickly. Rob should have held things on one subject at a time.

If no one can use his guestimates for total production at the end of the year which shows a growth story then ALL of his stuff must be treated the exact same way. A total waste of time. Like toilet boy I will consider him the paper that gets flushed and not listen anymore. He can not stay on target or a talking point. If he sticks to one he gets trampled so he switches around real fast. I mean come on. As soon as he lost the argument about (34 min mark) people trading in ICE for BEVs so the comparison is apples to apples, he totally changed the subject to credits. Typical moron losing a debate.

Any chance we can move the discussions about the ill-conceived mistake this blogger made - to give this jerk undeserved publicity and credibility - to another thread?

Mods?

 

[mad474]

+15 @ ~380

See you then after my diet (living on bread and water for the next 6 months).

 

[Thekiwi]

Besides the obvious facts that Fremont was closed during the ‘European build month’ in Q2 and that for Q3 there are still a lot of Model 3 on ships to be delivered in September, there are also some unique circumstances in Norway that could explain this low position of Tesla:

- Norway has one of the highest incomes per capita in the world, so more people can afford the Audi E-Tron and Mercedes EQC.
- There are already a lot of Teslas on the road in Norway, so some buyers may want to opt for something more ‘unique’ and not buy what the neighbours are driving.
- Tesla service was highly strained in Norway for several years, due to the large number of cars being sold and the inability of Tesla in those days to keep up with service center expansion. Those problems got a lot of media attention. It will have dented Tesla’s image with a lot of people.

Maybe our Norwegian posters can add other explanations to this list.

It was purely from lack of supply - Tesla has already delivered 211 model 3s in just the first 3 days of September - so is on track to surpass the August total in a few days, with the rest of September to deliver a no doubt market leading amount of EVs in Norway.

 

[CyberDutchie]

This has been a very rough first week post-split for the stock so far, from premarket high of $546 on Monday to $381 premarket now, and bracing for what Friday will bring. Already 30% down, this could be the worst one-week drop in history.

Covid-19 plunch percentage drop during the last week of February was 28%. I got out that week and into all cash, and was able to get back in much lower a month later when the stock recovered (in the IRA account).

However, this time is different. I do not want to be out of the stock so close to likely S&P500 inclusion, and possible battery day surprise news.

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

If you read the quoted part in my post, it explains that this is not how the S&P 500 balances the index.

The S&P does not weigh the index in a way that tells index funds to keep a certain dollar value of TSLA, nor in a way that tells them to keep a certain percentage of their fund in TSLA. The S&P weighs the index in a way that tells index funds to buy a certain number of TSLA shares (relative to the # of shares of other companies in the index).

Again, the quoted part in the message you quoted explains in detail how it works with examples.

This video from Rob Maurer also explains it:

Another way to think of it is like this: If TSLA makes up 1% of the index when it is included, and 12 months later the stock price has doubled and it makes up 2% of the index, this doesn't mean index funds will own twice as many TSLA shares. And if TSLA makes up 5% of the index in 2030, this doesn't mean index funds will own 5 times as many TSLA shares. Similarly, if TSLA stock price is cut in half to $200 after being included at $400, that doesn't mind index funds will own half as many TSLA shares.

I think you're missing the minor detail that makes the nuance. In your post, you setup the term "weight-adjusted market cap" and use that to say "the SP at X date doesn't matter". But you have to have a SP in order to calculate market cap! But that isn't to say your point is wrong, only that it's right for a rebalancing (the SP of each stock doesn't affect their relative weights).

BUT! This is an inclusion, not a rebalancing. TSLA's "weight" prior to the rebalancing was zero, so it's market cap (at the time of inclusion) very much does affect it's weight in the index. That's why I feel Artful Dodger's explanation is a better hypothesis.

 

[MC3OZ]

Once China is producing Model 3+Y and Berlin is producing 3+Y we will get a more consistent comparison of deliveries Quarter-on-Quarter.
The wave will be reduced, logistics should be simplified and the overall result should be less lumpy numbers...
Any trend is probably more meaningful....

One consistent argument from Bears is that the EV market is different to the ICE market and they can cherry-pick EV sales numbers in particular markets to show lower Tesla deliveries relative to "competition".

If we instead assume (as seems logical) that EV market share is growing from a small base, there is plenty of market share for all EVs.
As more EVs become available customers have more choice, and sometimes a new model is more "fashionable", or is a better fit for a particular market...

I've always said I don't expect robust price competition until EVs are a much higher percentage of the market. probably 90%.
if car makers can sell more of their EVs, they need to pay Tesla less regulatory credits, so that income stream is not guaranteed.

But long term other car makers can't afford to lose money on EVs , that is a bad habit to get into.
They will be looking to be profitable and scale and volume will give Tesla a considerable advantage...mostly likely for a roughly equivalent car they can match or better most competitors pricing... for the next few years...

This "demand problem" myth is the next domino to fall after "battery fires",

All other issues, FSD, service, QA are areas where Tesla must deliver to address the concerns, so not myths more of a "work in progress".

 

[heltok]

 

[NooB_cat]

Nice to see SP rise upon pre-market opening for a change this week!

 

[Chocochip]

UK new car registrations for August just got released. Looks like Tesla delivered around 900 cars (the numbers are not broken out, they’re included in the “Other imports” line), so it seems the focus for European deliveries for Tesla in August was indeed Germany.

However, the wider UK BEV market has grown significantly, most likely encouraged by the Benefit-in-Kind tax that was cut to zero sice April. Here’s the cognitively-dissonant statement from the SMMT:

Zero emission-capable vehicles enjoyed a bumper August as a result of new models coming to market, with sales of plug-in hybrids increasing by 221.1%, although they still only accounted for 1 in 30 sales. Registrations of battery electric cars increased by 77.6% in the month, accounting for 6.4%. However, they make up just 4.9% of registrations year to date, up from 1.1% in the same period last year – clearly illustrating the scale of the challenge ahead to reach the government target for EVs to comprise 70% of new car sales by 2030.

So, YTD BEV registrations are 4.9%, up from 1.1% the year before for the same period. That’s a growth rate of about 445%. If that growth rate is maintained, BEVs reach 100% in 2 years. Even taking the arguably more relevant Y-o-Y increase of 77% from the current 6.4% market share in August, it takes less than 5 years to reach 100%. Obviously that growth rate can’t be maintained towards the top end, but somehow the SMMT uses those numbers to argue it’s difficult to reach 70% market share by 2030. That’s 10 years away. Elon Musk was right to argue that most humans suck at perceiving exponential growth. Also, I’m getting some strong Gordon Johnson vibes…

 

[NooB_cat]

UK new car registrations for August just got released. Looks like Tesla delivered around 900 cars (the numbers are not broken out, they’re included in the “Other imports” line), so it seems the focus for European deliveries for Tesla in August was indeed Germany.

However, the wider UK BEV market has grown significantly, most likely encouraged by the Benefit-in-Kind tax that was cut to zero sice April. Here’s the cognitively-dissonant statement from the SMMT:

Zero emission-capable vehicles enjoyed a bumper August as a result of new models coming to market, with sales of plug-in hybrids increasing by 221.1%, although they still only accounted for 1 in 30 sales. Registrations of battery electric cars increased by 77.6% in the month, accounting for 6.4%. However, they make up just 4.9% of registrations year to date, up from 1.1% in the same period last year – clearly illustrating the scale of the challenge ahead to reach the government target for EVs to comprise 70% of new car sales by 2030.

So, YTD BEV registrations are 4.9%, up from 1.1% the year before for the same period. That’s a growth rate of about 445%. If that growth rate is maintained, BEVs reach 100% in 2 years. Obviously that growth rate can’t be maintained towards the top end, but somehow the SMMT uses those numbers to argue it’s difficult to reach 70% market share by 2030. Elon Musk was right to argue that most humans suck at perceiving exponential growth. Also, I’m getting some strong Gordon Johnson vibes…

I think we'll look back and see 2020 as the year that BEV started to properly take off in the UK

 

[mrdoubleb]

UK new car registrations for August just got released. Looks like Tesla delivered around 900 cars (the numbers are not broken out, they’re included in the “Other imports” line), so it seems the focus for European deliveries for Tesla in August was indeed Germany.

However, the wider UK BEV market has grown significantly, most likely encouraged by the Benefit-in-Kind tax that was cut to zero sice April. Here’s the cognitively-dissonant statement from the SMMT:

Zero emission-capable vehicles enjoyed a bumper August as a result of new models coming to market, with sales of plug-in hybrids increasing by 221.1%, although they still only accounted for 1 in 30 sales. Registrations of battery electric cars increased by 77.6% in the month, accounting for 6.4%. However, they make up just 4.9% of registrations year to date, up from 1.1% in the same period last year – clearly illustrating the scale of the challenge ahead to reach the government target for EVs to comprise 70% of new car sales by 2030.

So, YTD BEV registrations are 4.9%, up from 1.1% the year before for the same period. That’s a growth rate of about 445%. If that growth rate is maintained, BEVs reach 100% in 2 years. Even taking the arguably more relevant Y-o-Y increase of 77% from the current 6.4% market share in August, it takes less than 5 years to reach 100%. Obviously that growth rate can’t be maintained towards the top end, but somehow the SMMT uses those numbers to argue it’s difficult to reach 70% market share by 2030. That’s 10 years away. Elon Musk was right to argue that most humans suck at perceiving exponential growth. Also, I’m getting some strong Gordon Johnson vibes…

Thanks for the post, I was checking yesterday and this morning but it wasn't there yet. I've now added the figure to Troy's spreadsheet and the formula calculated 807 Tesla deliveries. Hopefully September will pick-up. Still, with only Denmark and a few smaller markets missing (should be ~200-300 cars) we should be just shy of 8000 deliveries in Europe so far in the quarter which is a 44% improvement over last quarter. (BTW it is also 33% lower than same time last year, but to be fair that was before Covid).

 

[NooB_cat]

So what do we reckon today when the day market opens... SP jump up or jump down?!

 

[EVMeister]

So what do we reckon today when the day market opens... SP jump up or jump down?!

Yup.

 

[engle]

I think you're missing the minor detail that makes the nuance. In your post, you setup the term "weight-adjusted market cap" and use that to say "the SP at X date doesn't matter". But you have to have a SP in order to calculate market cap! But that isn't to say your point is wrong, only that it's right for a rebalancing (the SP of each stock doesn't affect their relative weights).

BUT! This is an inclusion, not a rebalancing. TSLA's "weight" prior to the rebalancing was zero, so it's market cap (at the time of inclusion) very much does affect it's weight in the index. That's why I feel Artful Dodger's explanation is a better hypothesis.

To be specific, S&P uses a "float-adjusted market cap". I studied several S&P 500 documents - see my complete July 6, 2020 post: Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the 2019-2020 Investors' Roundtable

"My rough calculation is that if/when TSLA reaches $1,627 its market cap will exceed PG which is currently ranked #10 in the S&P 500 by market cap. When TSLA is added to S&P 500 it will also get added to the "S&P 500 Top 50" at the next annual reconstitution after the close of the third Friday in June 2021, using a reference date of the last business day of May 2021.

However, S&P 500 rules state that "Weighting. Each index is weighted by float-adjusted market capitalization."

[Note: these were pre-split values back in July, now float-adjusted market cap is approx. 147M * $2,000/share pre-split]

TSLA: Shares Outstanding = 185.48M; Float = 147.62M; % Held by Insiders = 20.51%; % Held by Institutions = 57.93%.
Float-adjusted market capitalization = 147,620,000 x $1,371.58 = $202,472,000,000 ($202B). ("Float-adjusted" removes the shares held by insiders like Elon that are presumably mostly not for sale.)

According to S&P, Mean S&P 500 Float-adjusted Market Cap Weighted today is $53,391.96M x 505 Constituents = $26,962.94B. TSLA would be 0.75% of this, which is its float-adjusted market cap as of 7/6/20 close.

S&P also states there is over USD 4.6 trillion indexed to the S&P 500. $4,600B x 0.75% = $34.5B worth of TSLA stock the indexers will be forced to buy. At today's close, that represents 25,153,472 shares or 17% of the "float". Will that be enough to cause an extreme spike up in the price when TSLA is added? By contrast, today's volume was 20.5M and the average is 14.2M.

Perhaps there will be a huge spike if one can assume that volume will be 14M average plus an extra 25M spread over 5 trading days for ~19M total shares per day. If that drove the price up 10%/day (today it was +13.48%) it would total +61% in a week which is just insane (to $2,208 if TSLA were added today and it happened this week). Of course, I think baring an even worse "Black Swan" event, TSLA will be trading significantly higher when added to the S&P 500. That said, I am always VERY suspicious of a crazy run-up like what we enjoyed today. The market tends to over-react when panic selling AND buying. Remember February 4 followed by the 5th? I think the momentum algorithms all were triggered on the way up today. We shall see what they do tomorrow...

Still, I will go out on a limb and predict that TSLA will exceed $2,000/share within a week of being added to the S&P 500 on 9/28/2020. Remember it will be shortly after "Tesla Battery Day" on Tuesday, 9/15/2020. That scheduling on the part of Elon is pure genius since it will drive up the price the week before the S&P 500 indices will HAVE to buy shares. Do I get to revise my prediction upwards to $2,500? "

[My 7/6/2020 prediction came true a bit early due to the unexpected 5-1 stock split! However, today we are dead-on $2,000 pre-split in the pre-market.]

 

[FrankSG]

I think you're missing the minor detail that makes the nuance. In your post, you setup the term "weight-adjusted market cap" and use that to say "the SP at X date doesn't matter". But you have to have a SP in order to calculate market cap! But that isn't to say your point is wrong, only that it's right for a rebalancing (the SP of each stock doesn't affect their relative weights).

BUT! This is an inclusion, not a rebalancing. TSLA's "weight" prior to the rebalancing was zero, so it's market cap (at the time of inclusion) very much does affect it's weight in the index. That's why I feel Artful Dodger's explanation is a better hypothesis.

I'll try to explain one more time why stock price and weight in the index have effectively no effect on the # of shares an index fund has to buy. There is a very small effect, but it's negligible.

For simplicity's sake, let's say the shares in TSLA's public float are 1B, and let's look at 4 scenarios where TSLA is $10, $100, $1,000, and $10,000. Let's also simplify math and say the S&P 500 is currently exactly $30T. And let's say there is $5T worth of assets indexed to the S&P 500.

Scenario 1:
TSLA: $10
TSLA float-adjusted market cap: $10B

TSLA's weight in the S&P 500 is now $0.01T / $30.01T = ~0.03%.
Index funds will buy $5T * $0.01T / $30.01T = ~$1.67B worth of TSLA.
At a share price of $10, that is ~$1.67B / $10 = ~167M shares

Scenario 2:
TSLA: $100
TSLA float-adjusted market cap: $100B

TSLA's weight in the S&P 500 is now $0.1T / $30.1T = ~0.33%.
Index funds will buy $5T * $0.1T / $30.1T = ~$16.61B worth of TSLA.
At a share price of $100, that is ~$16.61B / $100 = ~166M shares

Scenario 3:
TSLA: $1,000
TSLA float-adjusted market cap: $1T

TSLA's weight in the S&P 500 is now $1T / $31T = ~3.23%.
Index funds will buy $5T * $1T / $31T = ~$161.29B worth of TSLA.
At a share price of $1,000, that is ~$161.29B / $1,000 = ~161M shares

Scenario 4:
TSLA: $10,000
TSLA float-adjusted market cap: $10T

TSLA's weight in the S&P 500 is now $10T / $40T = 25%.
Index funds will buy $5T * 25% = $1.25T worth of TSLA.
At a share price of $10,000, that is $1.25T / $10,000 = 125M shares

As you can see, the math shows that the opposite of what @Artful Dodger suggested is actually the case. The larger the weighting of TSLA in the S&P 500, the less shares funds will have to buy, because TSLA's higher market cap increases the overall market cap of the index upon inclusion. Realistically, the effect is quite negligible though, because TSLA is unlikely to even be worth $1T before inclusion, let alone $10T.

If you don't believe me, you can watch Rob Maurer's video on the topic. He makes the exact same calculation on a smaller scale. Here is a screenshot of the relevant part of the video:

As you can see, according to his calculation index funds would need to buy 26,026,431 (pre-split) shares at a stock price of $800, and only 25,909,157 (pre-split) shares at a stock price of $1,600.

 

[Artful Dodger]

I'll try to explain one more time why stock price and weight in the index have effectively no effect on the # of shares an index fund has to buy.

This is a strawman. Nobody is arguing that. What we're saying this the weight that TSLA will have in the NDX can not be determined in advance, since it depends on their float adjusted Market Cap on the day the S&P makes their determination.

It's pointless doing any other calculation such as number of shares required. Repeating your argument ad nausieum doesn't make it any more appropriate for the circumstances of this inclusion.

You seem to label "short exempt" volume as naked shorts. Why do you believe all "short exempt" orders are naked shorts?

... going by that description I am unsure how there could be "short exempt" volume on days where "the uptick rule" is not in effect, yet there is. Do you have an explanation for this?

Yes. "Short Exempt" doesn't mean what they wrote on that website.

Unresolved question is: "Exempt" from what? As you surmise, it's obviously not an exemption from the "Uptick Rule" or there would be only zeros reported on days when the uptick rule isn't in place.

So what other "Exemptions" are there? Well, SEC Regulation SHO is itself a narrow exemption to the prohibition against short selling granted only to Options Market Makers.

One could argue that doesn't connect the reporting requirements of Regulation SHO to the daily data released on the website REGSHO.FINRA.ORG (linked daily in my "After Action Reports") but then it's pretty crowded dancing on the head of that pin...

 

[Tslynk67]

Something refreshing, real news direct from the man, always entertaining too - earlier today - weird how the best news are reported by amateur supporters (in this case YouTuber Tobias Lindh).

Also note how efficient and organized the Germans are, there was a transcript (in German) of what Elon was saying, nice touch for the locals. Since the audio quality wasn't so great, I looked up the reverse Google translation, and added it here for convenience.

Tobias Lindh YouTube Video:

"Elon visited Giga Berlin today and had a little spontaneous press conference on arrival. Sorry, for the bad audio. I just had my phone. I didn't expect to get an opportunity to get so close to him, and i didn't know that he would talk to us. I'll try to do better next time. If you want to support me: https://www.paypal.me/tobiaslindh https://www.patreon.com/tobiaslindh Follow me on Twitter for the latest updates: https://twitter.com/tobilindh

DEUTSCH-ÜBERSETZUNG:
GERMAN TRANSCRIPT:

It's a great place to work.
Produce cool cars.
We have to employ quite a few people.
We want people to think about working here.
We want to make it as easy as possible.
We even have a train station that is directly connected to Berlin and stops right in front of the entrance.
I think there are even 2 train stations.
That makes it very easy for people who live in Berlin and want to work here.
You can drive or come by train.
We look forward to having a wonderful place here.
The 2 contractors, Bögl and Goldbeck, did a great job.
You see how fast the progress was.
It's an excellent step forward.
Pre-production technology is used.
While we were doing the ground work, we worked with Bögl and Goldbeck to develop the building parts as prefabricated components.
So you can build incredibly quickly and it will still be a high quality building.

Q: How do you feel personally when you are in Berlin now?
I love it, awesome! I always have a great time when I'm here.

Q: How is X-AE 12 doing?
Oh, HAHAHAHAHA, you mean my child? That sounds like a password. Yeah, he's fine. I think I'll bring him next time. Maybe we'll be back in a few months and I'll bring him.

Q: Mr. Musk, why are you building the factory so quickly? Why are you so fast?
You know, I believe in speed. I also think, let's be serious for a moment, it's very important for the climate that we are fast. It's important ... [people are talking in between] ... who should I talk to? [Woman: talk to me!] ... HAHAHAHA. It is very important that we accelerate the transition to sustainable energy and make it as soon as possible. That is the reason why speed is so important to us. I've been saying this for a long time. It's nice to see companies like VW now take this very seriously. But still only a very small percentage of the cars made are electric. I think we're going to be making more than cars here, maybe batteries, cells and some other things. That would be good for stationary energy supply, wind and solar. The three elements that are important for a sustainable energy future are energy generation, energy storage and electric cars / transportation. Possibly. electric planes. In fact, anything can go electric except missiles. But only in passing. The reason for the importance is that it depends on whether we take our time or are fast. The faster we move forward with the conversion to sustainable energies, the better for the world. That is the reason.

Q: Do you have a message for the people around here?
Sure, first of all we are very happy to be here in Grünheide and are grateful for the support. When we have the grand opening ceremony, the entire neighborhood is invited. Yes, we start the celebration early and it will last a long time. With, I don't know, a rave at the end. A bit of cool techno, something. It's going to be a family celebration and then go on late into the night. A raver den is damn necessary! HAHAHAHHA, absolutely! That's cool.

Q: What are you doing here today?
I came here to see the progress in person. I actually wanted to come earlier, but of course, as you know, the pandemic is. I actually wanted to be here 3-4 months early. I'll be here a lot from now on. The new airport is finally going to open, as I heard. It's very conveniently located.

Q. Did you know about this [Baumisere BER]?
Maybe we are a good thing I don't know

Q. How long will you be here?
I'll be traveling on late tonight. I've been there from the beginning of the week until now. So about 4 days. But it was great, I love Germany, it was great. I am impressed with the talent and engineering skills. I think this is really the ideal place to build our first factory in Europe. We start with the factory but will then also develop new technical concepts here. I want to mention that the factory's painting line will be the most modern of any car factory in the world. That'll be awesome. To be honest, it'll be better than the one in the US. Well, we'll upgrade those in the US later. It's a really cool multi-layer painting system. We'll have a color lab here. It's going to be really cool. Engineering, concept development and production.

Q: What are the future plans with Germany?
As I said, we're going to build the factory. We're going to be doing a lot of innovative stuff here that I'll talk about in the future. It's not just a copy of the Model Y here. It is a radical redesign of the core technologies of car manufacturing. I will report on some of these things here in Berlin on Battery Day later in September. It is the first time that there has been a transformation in the core concept of how a car is built. That's a pretty big / important thing. As I said, production, engineering and concept development.

[Sign autographs]

Q: Have you heard of the water problems here in Brandenburg?
Yes, I tried to understand the water issue. To be honest, it's pretty complex. A brown coal mine that pumps water. Who previously pumped water. The mine provided water but has now been closed. Does that make sense? Are you familiar with that?

I just know that there isn't enough water.

The mine provided water with their pumps or something. I think, basically, that we are not in a dry area.

We still suffer from droughts. The last few years.

Yes, but these trees would not grow here if there was no water. HAHAHAHA, we are not in a desert. I believe the reality is that the factory is not an excessive water user per square meter. It is not a big consumer per square meter over the year. And we will recycle as much water as possible. I'm pretty sure it will become the world's greenest factory. That is our goal. Anything we can do to make them greener, we will do. Because that is also the company's mission. If anyone has any advice, we are open to criticism and advice on what we can do better. Let us know. Ok cool I have to go and see the factory now.

It was a "lignite mine", Elon said. Astonishing that he knows this, but the ones protesting about the water, don't...