Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Do we expect today to go like the 35k car launch? Solid SP increase up to the announcement and then a wave of FUD to drive it lower?
I do not expect a drop after since we have not seen much of a climb leading into the event like we did with the 35k car launch. Of course, the market is still open so we'll see how the day progresses. I expect short covering to increase this afternoon. I'm not sure why longs would sell going into the event since we have not climbed much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nocturnal
Anyone have a link to the latest filings in Tesla's $167M suit against Tripp? I'm wondering when the next news on that will be.

I found this page, but it apparently requires a PACER login: CM/ECF - nvd - District Version 6.1-Confirm Request

I'm mainly curious as to how long Tripp can delay before there's a summary judgement against him, and whether Tesla would be able to launch discovery or not. The high dollar figure is clearly in order to be able to crush any entities who were working with Tripp (for example, if Lopez was paying him, then to take down Business Insider), so discovery would be important.
 
How does one file a complaint with office of professional ethics requesting the SEC lawyers be sanctioned for their frivolous move against Tesla that caused many of us material damages at the gain of those with malevolent intent against Tesla?
Anyone?
Ie potentially communicates with the judge prior to her ruling

I suppose you start with the OIG. The Inspector General for a government department is the internal "auditor" for that department, and waste, fraud, and abuse by the department is supposed to be investigated by the OIG.

SEC.gov | Office of Inspector General

Next step is Congress.
 
Market manipulation.

Remember, we saw bearish analysts inject high delivery numbers into the average to create a fake "miss" two quarters in a row. It's illegal market manipulation.

I lean towards analysts trying to manufacture a miss, but is it possible that since Elon announced Q1 likely not being profitable two weeks ago that they just haven't updated estimates? 2 weeks should be plenty of time to update, though...
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Subhuman
I suppose you start with the OIG. The Inspector General for a government department is the internal "auditor" for that department, and waste, fraud, and abuse by the department is supposed to be investigated by the OIG.

SEC.gov | Office of Inspector General

Next step is Congress.

All of the points raised in that editorial the other day (sorry, I don't have a link or remember the author's name) would be key bullet points. Might also mention how this heavy-handed overenforcement on the comes on a part of the settlement (the social media policy) that 2 out of 5 commissioners didn't think appropriate to include to begin with. Another potential bullet point would be to mention the constant short-seller campaign to tag SEC_Enforcement and formally register complaints, e.g. effectively weaponizing the agency against Tesla in order to profit off of it.
 
I lean towards analysts trying to manufacture a miss, but is it possible that since Elon announced Q1 likely not being profitable two weeks ago that they just haven't updated estimates? 2 weeks should be plenty of time to update, though...
That's the theory I saw on twitter about it. Evidently many analysts only update twice per quarter, so the consensus is still positive simply because many analysts have not yet updated their estimates after Elon changed his.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Johnny Ma
This was a huge cliff in demand...

I also find Musk's decision to fight the SEC quite interesting...

It achieves nothing...

Tesla promised...

will try to promise...

If nothing else, props to you, sir, for appearing--after a several-week absence again--right on schedule and on message. I mean, every point you tried to make is incorrect, but kudos for the effort, so well-timed to coincide with tonight's event.

All your points have been discussed and debunked here so many times that I won't put in the effort to do so again since I understand based on past interactions that you're not truly here to engage in open discussion. I would suggest you do something more productive with your pi day--perhaps consume some delicious pie?
 
Pretty positive article on CCN front page about the model Y.

cnn.PNG
 
1,800 Teslas are due to be delivered by ship directly to central Oslo today. In context, that is equivalent to 1.2% of Norway annual car sales, in one day, from one brand.

"The 1,800 Teslas arriving in Oslo on Thursday will be offloaded starting early Friday morning, before being transported to the nearby town of Lillestrom. The cars will then be readied for delivery to customers, a process that includes fitting them with winter tires."

The cars are on Glovis Courage which arrived at Pier 80 in San Francisco on February 8th, departed on February 12th and offloaded cars in Zeebrugge on March 6th.

Have any other ships offloaded cars in Europe outside of Zeebrugge?

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
Does anyone know if this unloaded cars in Zeebrudge already? Would be great news if they’ve already dropped off 2000 cars and have another 1800 to send to Oslo. This should put March deliveries over 3000 for Norway.

Thank you Norway.
 
Anyone have a link to the latest filings in Tesla's $167M suit against Tripp? I'm wondering when the next news on that will be.

I found this page, but it apparently requires a PACER login: CM/ECF - nvd - District Version 6.1-Confirm Request

I'm mainly curious as to how long Tripp can delay before there's a summary judgement against him, and whether Tesla would be able to launch discovery or not. The high dollar figure is clearly in order to be able to crush any entities who were working with Tripp (for example, if Lopez was paying him, then to take down Business Insider), so discovery would be important.

Nope but keep us updated. It'd be great to add to my arsenal of: "how to destroy your enemies."
 
New Anyone have a link to the latest filings in Tesla's $167M suit against Tripp? I'm wondering when the next news on that will be.

You can use the RECAP Archive:


You can do a free-text search, the keywords are 'Musk Unsworth', which results in:


I haven't fully read the motions, just some (non-lawyer) impressions from quickly skimming them:
  • As a procedural background, early phase motions to dismiss usually have a low chance of success, they are often used tactically to fish for facts, arguments and unforced errors, and to increase pressure on the other side.
  • By making this motion first Elon's team outlines to the judge a much more balanced recounting of the events, including the fact that Unsworth started the verbal hostilities by insulting Elon and suggesting that he "can stick his submarine where it hurts".
  • I have no idea whether a crude Twitter response to such a provocation, later deleted and apologized for, can raise to the level of libel - I guess we'll find out.
  • Even if it is libel that is decided by a jury, the fact that Unsworth started the hostilities should also obviously lower any damages he would expect to receive.
  • BTW., the factual record in Elon's motion is a fascinating read: Elon and ALL his companies put in a LOT more effort and expense into the Thai rescue attempts than was known publicly so far:
    • "Within hours of being in communication with Thai officials, Musk directed Tesla, SpaceX, and the Boring Company (which specializes in tunneling and construction) engineers to develop potential solutions to provide assistance to the rescue. And soon after, Musk sent the first of what would be several engineers to Chiang Rai. Dozens of engineers, and Musk himself, doubled down on their work, sacrificing their familial obligations and cancelling vacations, so that they could help the cave rescue efforts. The team worked countless hours each day for days on end, deploying the knowledge they had gained through years of developing unprecedented transportation systems. Aware of the time constraints, the team developed a groundbreaking miniature submarine that could carry the children to safety. The development efforts included not just developing rescue equipment but also providing resources for pumping water in order to provide additional capacity to keep up with oncoming rains (including delivering ground sump pumps, Tesla Powerwalls, and securing extremely high capacity pumps in Europe), and surveying in order to increase air flow into the cave and drain water out (including delivering underwater surveying equipment and arranging for sonar scanners and a 3D laser tracker)."
  • I think it will be hard for the jury to not feel sympathy towards Elon's efforts, if they are allowed to see that information that is.
Anyway, I expect the usual suspects to make a big deal out of an expected non-conclusive dismissal of Elon's motion.
 
Last edited:
You can use the RECAP Archive:


You can do a free-text search, the keywords are 'Musk Unsworth', which results in:


I haven't fully read the motions, just some (non-lawyer) impressions from skimming them:
  • As a procedural background, early phase motions to dismiss usually have a low chance of success, they are often used tactically to fish for facts, arguments and unforced errors, and to increase pressure on the other side.
  • By making this motion first Elon's team outlines to the judge a much more balanced recounting of the events, including the fact that Unsworth started the verbal hostilities by insulting Elon and suggesting that he "can stick his submarine where it hurts".
  • I have no idea whether a crude Twitter response to such a provocation, later deleted and apologized for, can raise to the level of libel - I guess we'll find out.
  • Even if it is libel that is decided by a jury, the fact that Unsworth started the hostilities should also obviously lower any damages he would expect to receive.
I also expect the usual suspects to make a big deal out of an expected dismissal of the motion by Elon's team.

Not Unsworth. Tripp.

ED: I think this is the newest: Docket for Tesla, Inc. v. Tripp, 3:18-cv-00296 - CourtListener.com
 
I agree with these points.

One thing I'm unsure on is if we will be given a timeline for targeted start of production and targeted volume production. Also I wonder if we'll be told a final location for manufacturing.

I think Tesla are most likely internally aiming for pilot line in January 2020 and 3k per week production at GF1 by March/April 2020. This is so powertrain production exported to GF3 in China for Model 3s can immediately switch to Y production for GF1 when powertrain lines are ramped up at GF3 in March. Whether it is wise to disclose this ambitious timeline to the market given risks of delays I'm not sure.

In the Business Insider leak we were told:
  • GF1 pilot line - 1 June 2020
  • GF1 production - 1 August 2020
  • GF1 2k per week - 1 September 2020
  • GF1 7k per week - 1 December 2020
  • GF3 Model Y pilot line - 1 October 2020
  • GF3 2k per week - November/December 2020
  • GF 5k per week - February 2021
These plans were reportedly sent to Tesla staff in September 2018, but at the time of the article at the start of December, Tesla said these were out of date. "The timelines and information shared here are outdated. When we have details to announce, we will certainly share them. In the meantime, we remain focused on Model 3, which we are excited to bring to Europe and China early next year," the company representative said."

One thing we know happened in this time period was a significant acceleration of the timeline for Model 3 production at GF3. This new timeline required ramping up GF1 powertrain production to supply GF3, potentially leaving excess production at GF1 once GF3 brings these components in-house. Therefore it seems logical for Tesla to accelerate Model Y plans to make use of this capacity. So i think it most likely the Business Insider timeline was accelerated rather than delayed.

As to where it will be produced, I don't think Tesla necessarily has to make a firm decision until October/November. They can still order all the necessary equipment, but don't need to immediately specify the delivery address. I think it makes sense for paint, body line & assembly to take place at GF1, however, some equipment for components at Fremont/Lathrop/Seat factory may be capable of ramping beyond 7/8k Model 3s per week, and with minor capex may be able to also produce for Model Y. This will be a capex efficient option, and the marginal cost of delivery from Fremont to GF1 will be relatively low given Tesla already have empty trucks heading back to GF1 to pick up more battery packs.

Elon's comments on Y production on the Q4 call also said first production in early 2020:
  • "And we're most likely going to put Model Y production right next to - in fact, it's part of our main Gigafactory in Nevada. So it will just be right there. Batteries and powertrains will come out and go straight into the vehicle. So that also reduces our risk of execution and reduces the cost of having to transfer parts from California to Nevada. It's not a for sure thing, but it's quite likely, and it's our default plan."
  • "As I mentioned earlier, the Model Y, we think, most likely will be produced at Gigafactory, but that's - unless we encounter some obstacle - that's the default plan that we're proceeding towards. And it's fast, low risk and also low CapEx. In terms of the - I mean, probably there's like initial production of Model Y, very low volume, early next year. But then it always takes time to ramp up any production system, and that's difficult to predict the shape of that S-curve. So we feel confident in saying there will be volume production of Model Y by the end of next year, but in between the beginning of next year with low volume, it always starts with very low and it grows exponentially - from beginning of next year to end of next year, it's difficult to break that ramp. So that's our expectation for Y."
For context, Model 3 first production was July 7th 2017, it took around 9 months to get to around 1k per week, then another 3 months or so to get to 4/5k per week (which I'd really call volume production). So Tesla took about 12 months to go from first production to volume production on Model 3 despite encountering huge difficulties, despite it being the first time they had ever mass produced a car and despite the vast majority of its components being unique and also having to ramp up for the first time.

In contrast, Model Y shares 76% of components with Model 3 - so 76% of the car is already in volume production. Tesla also now has experience of ramping to volume production and has learnt a lot from its mistakes. So I think it very unlikely it will take anywhere near 12 months to get to volume production from first Model Y production "early next year".

Further to this. We know Elon aims to start model Y production "early next year" or at "the beginning of next year" - I think this could well mean January, but it means at least targeting Q1 in my view. We also know form the BI leak Tesla initially planned to ramp from pilot line to 7k per week over 6 months.
So I think tonight Elon could say something along the lines of: "We plan for first production in January (or Q1) 2020 and we aim to produce at 7k per week by July 2020 (or Q3), but it is very difficult to predict the S-Curve of a product ramp. We at least feel confident in saying we will be in volume production by the end of 2020."