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

[ZachF]

Why are we not in red today?

It can't be SC V3 - that I know. Did some analyst say something?

because reasons

 

[anthonyj]

Why are we not in red today?

It can't be SC V3 - that I know. Did some analyst say something?

Lots of technical traders saw yesterday’s doji candle as a reversal maybe

 

[humbaba]

I value many of your posts, but shouldn't this discussion be in Model 3: Battery & Charging instead?

If you don't want to start a new thread, this one seems to have some MR SCv2 discussion: Model 3 MR charges at 32 amp vs LR at 48 amp

You are right: I was responding here due to the V3 comments and it got away. My apologies.

 

[Nocturnal]

because the stock is trading at a fraction of its actual value and shorts and FUD can only do so much?

What? Seeking Derpa has told me that the stock should be at like 25$ a share!

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

I think that option 1 is critical for the mission. To really accelerate the transition to EVs, we need segment leaders in every segment. If Tesla were to withdraw the Model S, that would provide enable the large luxury sedan market to retreat on developing any EVs for that segment. Tesla would be conceding that segment back to ICE. So even if there is not much upside potential for the Model S in that segment, it is critical to the mission that Tesla continues to apply competitive pressure within that segment.

Now the counterpoint to this is that Tesla also need to apply competitive pressure within other segments especially those which the Model Y, pickup truck or semi would address. Absolutely we must venture into these areas, but I do not believe that is incompatible with continuing to keep the Model S and X fresh and competitive. Quite the opposite, Tesla very much benefits from having the stable cash flow that these models provide. There is enormous risk with any ramp up of a new model and it can throw the company into a "bet the company" proposition as was the case with the Model 3. Betting the company is not a reliable way to advance the mission, because it means that one bad bet can destroy the whole mission. We need the S, X and 3 to be a very stable cash engine to support venturing into new segments. The Model 3 is not yet a strong and stable enough cash engine to safely cut the S or the X. Upgrading batteries for S and X is a much lower risk investment than launching an entirely new model. So I would prefer to see that investment made before any new models come out.

Especially if we are going to grow on internally generated cash flow, we need to be good stewards of stable cash engines that we have.

Completely agree here on all of your points. The S and X revenue is still needed to be stable, especially with the margins they have.

But importantly, the higher end vehicles need to keep pushing the sector forward......as the 3 and upcoming Y are doing for the lower end segment. The offerings that I'm seeing from other auto companies are already disappointing in terms of range and in all cases, can't match a existing S and/or X. The longer the S and X stay in their current form without being upgraded, the more traditional auto makers are going to feel its ok to have a their flagship models have just 220-275 miles of range. To me, that hurts the overall adoption for EVs, especially in the high end segment. I think there will be a lot more adoption in the general public when battery ranges are in the 400-450 area. Not necessarily because the general public can afford the high end versions.....but because it creates a lot of eye grabbing headlines and people naturally start to then inquire about EV options in general

 

[jerry33]

Completely agree here on all of your points. The S and X revenue is still needed to be stable, especially with the margins they have.

But importantly, the higher end vehicles need to keep pushing the sector forward......as the 3 and upcoming Y are doing for the lower end segment. The offerings that I'm seeing from other auto companies are already disappointing in terms of range and in all cases, can't match a existing S and/or X. The longer the S and X stay in their current form without being upgraded, the more traditional auto makers are going to feel its ok to have a their flagship models have just 220-275 miles of range. To me, that hurts the overall adoption for EVs, especially in the high end segment. I think there will be a lot more adoption in the general public when battery ranges are in the 400-450 area. Not necessarily because the general public can afford the high end versions.....but because it creates a lot of eye grabbing headlines and people naturally start to then inquire about EV options in general

Agreed, but if they do them all at once, what will Tesla do the next quarter or two. You always save a couple of bullets just in case.

 

[Remus]

I voted this Informative because it is and I can only vote once.

But what's possibly even more important is how transformative the test drive experience was for Rogan, and probably for most people who drive a Tesla for the first time. I wouldn't know, I don't own the car and never took a test drive - and now I probably won't have the chance until, you know, I actually buy my own. But it's the story that I hear again and again and again... and I guess most people on this thread treat this as common knowledge (yeah, you give someone a test drive, you blow their minds, they're hooked, they start with the questions, blah-blah...), but this is KEY to the company's success!

So I really hope that, long term, Tesla will come up with some way of allowing potential customers to get to drive the car before they are required to make a substantial financial commitment. As an investor, I'd rather have 10 people who got hooked on a test drive and, even if they don't have the money to buy one right now, the experience stays with them and some of them end up overextending financially for a Tesla, rather than one customer who bought the car without a test drive and is left even slightly disappointed by any part of the experience.

Sorry have to disagree. Listen carefully,
He said he drove one years ago but was NOT impressed at first.

Test drive is useless for a significant portion of the population.

 

[jerry33]

Sorry have to disagree. Listen carefully,
He said he drove one years ago but was NOT impressed at first.

Test drive is useless for a significant portion of the population.

In my opinion that's correct. Most people don't notice much difference at first. It's after they have driven it for awhile and then go back that the difference is very noticeable. People who are into cars will notice it. There are more of the former than there are of the latter.

 

[lascavarian]

Maxwell and Tesla

Yikes, this formula for the MXWL shares to TSLA shares is a little convoluted. Offer to expire & withdrawal rights expire 11:59pm Eastern Time March 19th unless extended as has been noted.

..... volume weighted average of the daily volume weighted average of the trading price of 1 share of TSLA.... blah blah .... for the 5 consecutive trading days ending on and including the second trading day immediately preceding the expiration of the offer, subject to .... blah, blah unless TSLA less than or equal to 245.90..... blah, blah (in which case) will be exchanged for 0.0193 share of Tesla common stock.

So if I have this correct, for every 100 shrs of MXWL the maximum TSLA shrs possibly received would be 1.93 shrs which reflects the minimum TSLA conversion price of $245.90ish.

If the 5 day volume weighted average .... blah, blah .... turned out to be a TSLA shr price of say for example $300 then the conversion, being above the $245.90 minimum, would be about 1.58 TSLA shrs per 100 MXWL shares.

MXWL shareholders do better (get more TSLA shrs) should the TSLA 5 day volume weighted average .... blah, blah ...... approach $245.90, assuming the exchange goes through.

Seems a TSLA bull owning MXWL benefits from a (temporary) downward drift (in common interest with shorts) in TSLA stock as the 19th approaches. Just something interesting maybe for options traders to be aware of as a possible influence .... if I haven't misunderstood this.

Corrections welcomed ..... blah, blah.

 

[SteveG3]

The difference is that a test drive has zero commitment behind it. Perhaps I am missing something, but even if you turn your car in 7 days, you are probably looking at being locked up for a couple of weeks:
1) Original loan needs to process with the lender once you take delivery
2) Tesla needs to process your return and a) pay off your loan (which means #1 needs to complete first otherwise there is no loan to payoff)
3) It's unclear what happens to your trade-in if you had one. Do they give it back to you? Do they cut you a check for the trade in value? Will they be willing to do that before they have flipped it?
4) All this needs to be reflected with the credit agencies so the loan is cleared off your credit report and you can now apply for a new car loan--unsure what impact, if any, that would all have on your credit score
5) Until all this clears, perhaps you have no car since you traded in the old one and still don't have a new one

What’s more, I imagine the fine print indicates that Tesla will refund any money paid to Tesla, but, any titling/plate fees paid to your state will only be refunded if that is your state’s policy (which I suspect is not the case).

Finally, if the system is being played by a concerning number of people, Tesla can tweak it... $1/mile restocking fee...

 

[myt-e-s-l-a]

new avatar

 

[UncaNed]

.

Once current demand is being met by M3 production, why is the only choice as to Tesla doing some advertising, between Zero and several hundred million?

How totally easy it would be to create a few 30 second commercials highlighting the M3 being the safest car ever tested. That they start at $35K. That you can charge at home for far less than pumping gas? That doing so fights climate change?
How many celebrities, like Steven King for one, would appear in such ads to say their Tesla is the best car they've ever owned?

A few ads of this kind don't have to be aired during the Super Bowl for mega bucks to get beneficial attention that fights the FUD storm and grows interest to learn more about Tesla cars by the mass population that are not yet EV enthusiasts. A few tens of millions spent showing these in movie theaters and on television shows watched by people with the right demographic can surely be worked into Tesla's budget without hurting key research and new product development funding. The time is here or nearly here for Tesla to do a modest amount of high value advertising.

IMHO it already does that. I think it's called "marketing" ie., reveals, tweets and stuff. Very high value, VERY efficient.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Tesla vvroom vrooom app for those adjusting to the EV future.

You could give you car the engine noise of any car you want....

Hell, BMW already fakes their engine noises this way today.

There was one released a while ago using the accelerometer on your phone. Can even choose jet/rocket sounds.

 

[SteveG3]

I'm pretty sure the cold is the reason for the <24kW -- that has been pretty consistent -- but never seeing more than 60kW even warm weather makes me wonder if its me, the car or what. Except in one case I've never shared power with another Tesla -- and that is the one time I got 60kW sustained for any length of time. [edited to add: The closest super charger is the one I've used the most, but I've used four others as well. The nearest one does seem to have a bad stall, but as it has eight stalls and it is seriously underutilized (I've never seen more than three there, including mine) I just avoid it.]

I've been meaning to raise it with Tesla, but apparently I'll need to have exact times for everything and up to now I haven't been tracking it that closely. So on the next trip I'll log things and submit to them.

But I'm still curious if anyone else here has an MR and what they've seen.

I think we’d likely of heard about it if it is an MR issue.

Perhaps search the Model 3 Forum here on TMC and see if anything comes up.

fwiw, does seem like an issue needing help with your car.

 

[Cherry Wine]

Ihor is highly regarded around here, until it doesn’t line up with the ultra-bullish narrative

I think what people are rightly taking issue with regarding Ihor is that he's saying on one hand that there is no short interest increase, and now he's publishing a chart that shows a 1.1M increase in short interest. Well, which is it? The perfectly justified criticism has nothing to do with his data working counter to the "bullish narrative", at least not on my end.

@MP3Mike already addressed this very well.

• 3/1: "#Tesla Down 7% on Long Selling Not Short Selling. $TSLA short interest is $8.22 billion; 25.69 million shares shorted;"

• 3/5: "$TSLA short interest is $7.31 billion; 25.62 million shares shorted; 20.24% of float; 0.30% stock borrow fee. #Tesla shares shorted are basically flat for the year, up only 47k,"

• 3/6: "What $TSLA short covering ???? #Tesla shares shorted are actually up by 47k year-to-date (virtually flat), the short side is not pushing the stock price up or down in 2019"

• 3/7: "$TSLA short interest is $7.41 bn; 26.81 mm shares shorted; 21.18% of float; 0.30% stock borrow fee. #Tesla short sellers have gotten out of neutral after a quiet Feb. & early March. Shares shorted are up 1.12 million shares this week,"

 

[EVNow]

Lots of technical traders saw yesterday’s doji candle as a reversal maybe

Shorts covering.

 

[bobinfla]

Is there anywhere to move the mathematical analysis of the chargers and batteries and vroom-vroom sounds and gorilla toxic masculinity? This thread has officially become overwhelming and impossible to keep up on, and after many years I have completely given up.

It has become the "Discussion ad nauseum of Anything and Everything Tesla or possibly Tesla related by anyone who also has an interest in the Market or happened to somehow find there way here Thread".

In one week from Feb 28th to midnight last night we went from post # 18,315 to 23,073, so that's 4758 posts in one week. That is 679 posts on average every day. Which comes out to an average of roughly 28 posts per hour, every single every hour around the clock.

Don't know if this is possible, but wouldn't it be great if in addition to the like, dislike, funny buttons, we had an option in the main investment thread of "Off Topic / Wrong Forum". Then when a poster gets hit with a certain number of those within a 24 hour period, the system puts them in time-out and doesn't let them post anymore for a certain period of time.

Hope there was no valuable information in the hundreds of pages I've chosen to skip over in the last week.

 

[larmor]

Tesla vvroom vrooom app for those adjusting to the EV future.

You could give you car the engine noise of any car you want....

Hell, BMW already fakes their engine noises this way today.

And VW fakes their emssions, but i get it, tesla is a (insert latest FUD) here...

 

[Artful Dodger]

Hasn't he been saying that there has been no TSLA shorting all week? How do they add 1.12 million shares to the short position if they haven't been shorting?

• 3/1: "#Tesla Down 7% on Long Selling Not Short Selling. $TSLA short interest is $8.22 billion; 25.69 million shares shorted;"
• 3/5: "$TSLA short interest is $7.31 billion; 25.62 million shares shorted; 20.24% of float; 0.30% stock borrow fee. #Tesla shares shorted are basically flat for the year, up only 47k,"
• 3/6: "What $TSLA short covering ???? #Tesla shares shorted are actually up by 47k year-to-date (virtually flat), the short side is not pushing the stock price up or down in 2019"
• 3/7: "$TSLA short interest is $7.41 bn; 26.81 mm shares shorted; 21.18% of float; 0.30% stock borrow fee. #Tesla short sellers have gotten out of neutral after a quiet Feb. & early March. Shares shorted are up 1.12 million shares this week,"

Sadly I don't think I can trust his data anymore. Either he has been wrong all week, he has been lying, or he is misrepresenting things. If yesterday shorted shares were only up 47k this year, and today they are up 1.12 million shares, that is major shorting yesterday, not this week.

My working theory is that S3 Partners is only able to monitor FINRA data sources, which usually covers about 40% of daily trading volume. I do not know who is doing the other trading. NASDAQ says something mumble 'sattelite exchanges'. So it could be the TSX in Toronto, etc.

I think it could also when market makers trade with other market makers exempt under SEC Regulation SHO. If certain trades by market makers are not reported until the 13 day max undeliverable report is required, then Ihor data is missing an entire massive segment of short selling.

Also, I noticed there was a huge correction to volume on NASDAQ (roughly 1 M shares) a day after the Model 3 SR news broke. NASDAQ updates the trades the following day, then issues final numbers after 2 days. That's a huge correction, and leaves lots of 'splainin to do.

In my opinion, only market makers have the ability to trade in these kinds of volumes and not have it reported. Don't quote me on this yet, still doing my analysis.

I'll post a summary here when I'm done including some stats I'm working on.

 

[Remus]

All the fuss about test drives.

If the customer comes from a gas car, there's a significant chance he or she is not used to the peddle and alarmed by the jerky motion caused by fast release of the peddle. The time in test drive is too short to form an informed decision.