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.
Given how unreliable the competitors chargers are, entering a CC number seems like a minor inconvenience. It's one time to enter CC and if Tesla can make this as reliable as it is now for Tesla users the experience will be good.

Probably the biggest challenge for the non-Tesla users is finding the station and stall number. Hopefully Tesla can use GPS to find the station and maybe even suggest a stall.

Does google have the same tax with in app purchases on Android?
IMO (edit: one of) the best ways to do it would be to integrate into plug share. All the super chargers are there already and most non Tesla ev drivers I know (and us early adopters 5+ years ago) rely on it.
 
It could be that Etrade is the one ripping you off. They don't want you to the see the conversion offer because if you did you'd have the evidence to hold them accountable. Etrade ripped me off back in the days of dial up when I used a market order to sell (to close) an SPX option contract. They delayed the order execution over 4 hours (during which many hundreds of these options contracts traded) and couldn't provide an explanation for that. I made money on the trade but it was several thousand less than if they had executed within a few minutes of receiving the order. Heck, it was more than $1k less than if they executed it within 1 hour. It took them a very long time to provide documentation on the time of order entry and the time of execution but they eventually did, but with no explanation of the gigantic time between them. Needless to say I closed that account and switched brokers. The amount was small enough I didn't consider it worth suing over, but your situation could be different. I'd guess they want to make that harder by leaving it unclear who is the responsible party.

That’s an interesting theory about why the brokerages are not willing to disclose the offers. They definitely do not want the liability, but to be fair, the small commission they receive can’t pay for a lawyer to analyze each of the updates.

It was Ameritrade where I converted a smaller amount of convertibles. Etrade holds the bulk of the convertibles, but I don’t dare convert until I receive some assurances.

However Tesla is converting for less than the rate on the convertible note. As I said before, I’m assuming it’s somehow legal. However, that is no consolation, which is why I posted this warning for others who hold these notes.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
Reactions: StealthP3D
Well there are only so many jobs at the top 10 institutions this summer…….a group that I think is quite representative of the “talented youth cohort”……many are dipping their toes into TSLA, and some could be showing up on TMC already. Anyone here?
The really smart ones would hang out here and impress their bosses with TSLA knowledge.
 
Warning for 2024 Tesla Convertible Bond holders

...

Tesla is offering to convert these bonds to shares now, but at a large loss to bondholders. My broker's corporate actions team has said that Tesla's terms include their discretion to convert to shares or even cash at a rate of $1000 cash per $1000 bonds (ie losing 90% of the value of the market price of the bonds).

Before learning this, I naively thought Tesla would convert the bonds at the convertible note's rate of 16.1 shares per $1000. Instead, Tesla converted at a rate of ~14 shares / $1000, so I lost 15% of the shares I would have received in 2024, or from just selling the bonds.

... I believe they were shortchanged like I was.

Personally, this seems really shady. Converting bonds to shares saves Tesla 2% a year on interest, and they'd have to give up the shares in 2024 anyway. I don't see the justification for converting at a discount and making changes daily. Bond holders believed in Tesla in 2019, providing loans when Tesla needed it the most. Now Tesla is shortchanging them.
...
I disagreed because convertibles always have a large amount of fine print.

It is unprecedented (I think, I don't know all convertible issuances, of course) for the terminal conversion conditions to apply at any other time. Nearly always the issuer has the right to make early termination on terms advantageous to the issuer, not the buyer. If anybody buys convertibles without very careful reading and understanding of fine print they're likely to be surprised usually in a negative way.

Just cursory reading of Investopedia gives unmistakeable clues:

"Convertible bonds are typically issued by companies that have high expectations for growth and less-than-stellar credit ratings. The companies get access to money for expansion at a lower cost than they would have to pay for conventional bonds. Investors, in turn, get the flexibility of turning their convertible bonds into cash or stock shares."

Bluntly stated convertibles are issued when there is little usable collateral for a secured issuance, prospects are questionable and cash flow is weak or negative.

What happens when things work out well for the issuer and cash flow turns positive, cash conversion cycle speeds so the company is cash generating rather than cash using? Surprise! They terminate those convertibles under the best terms they can, after all they're very expensive and very dilutive if they wait for maturity.

We've been watching Tesla retire expensive debt as quickly as they can. After all Tesla is generating large quantities of cash, exceeding all growth needs and capital expenses. So, they retire even Shanghai factory financing and much else.

I'm sorry you feel disappointed. Still, when you bought you should ahem known that if Tesla performed very, very well they'd rid themselves of that issuance and others. You're still a shareholder in the company and you did not 'lose' anything, unless you paid more for the convertibles than the share value and income you've received while you owned them.

You just bet they'd barely survive until after conversion at termination, then become a large success. Sadly for you, I suppose, Tesla has exceeded nearly all expectations.
 
How does Amazon do it? Almost all my Amazon purchases are from my iPhone. Surely Amazon isn’t giving up 30% of those purchases to AAPL.

You initially set up your Amazon account on a web page, not in the iOS app. Your cc is charged by Amazon, not by Apple through iTunes when you make an Amazon purchase, even if you’re using the iOS app. That’s the difference, sending a user outside the app to a web page to set up an account, as opposed to “in-app purchase” like if you were buying coins as an in-game currency.

For example, you can’t use an iTunes gift card to pay for your Amazon purchases.

Google Play is the same, but you can sideload on Android to circumvent that (not use their App Store).

Yes, the inconvenience of the initial setup isn’t substantial, but in the vein of no process is the best process, it would be nice not to have to do it at all.
 
I wrote previously on UK accident rates in UK being much lower for Tesla (classic car levels, not commuter levels) - around 10% of Mercedes/BMW accident rates. (from memory), it was suggested on comments to those posts that Tesla mileages might be lower. I happened on an electrek article from last year (28th April 2020) which I won't link to. This suggests the opposite - HIGHEST mileages of ANY brand in 2020.

How good is it that Tesla is 10 times safer even with higher mileages?

One aspect is that this info came from MOT tests (emission, brakes, safety tests) that are annual but don't start until the car is 3 years old, so presumably these are pre-2017 Model S/X cars. Still interesting and I suspect it will play out as safest/mile over the years. I hope this would lower insurance costs as many/most Teslas are in group 50 of 50

1627740239465.png
 
Last edited:
I wrote previously on UK accident rates in UK being much lower for Tesla (classic car levels, not commuter levels) - around 10% of Mercedes/BMW accident rates. (from memory), it was suggested on comments to those posts that Tesla mileages might be lower. I happened on an electrek article from last year (28th April 2020) which I won't link to. This suggests the opposite - HIGHEST mileages of ANY brand in 2020.

How good is it that Tesla is 10 times safer even with higher mileages?

One aspect is that this info came from MOT tests (emission, brakes, safety tests) that are annual but don't start until the car is 3 years old, so presumably these are pre-2017 Model S/X cars. Still interesting and I suspect it will play out as safest/mile over the years. I hope this would lower insurance costs as many/most Teslas are in group 50 of 50

View attachment 690230
It's the total cumulative miles. I'm sure all other brands having way more cumulative miles than Tesla since their brand have been around for decades. Even if people drive more miles PER Tesla, there are still not enough Teslas on the road compared to other brands and not enough years to accumulate that many cars.
 
IMO (edit: one of) the best ways to do it would be to integrate into plug share. All the super chargers are there already and most non Tesla ev drivers I know (and us early adopters 5+ years ago) rely on it.
I doubt that's going to happen since the parent company of EVgo purchased the developer of Plugshare (Recargo) earlier this month. I don't see Tesla teaming up with a direct competitor to deliver payment for superchargers. The Tesla app already has a location page, so I don't see an issue integrating the supercharger location and stall into the Tesla app.

Plugshare owner bought out by US charging network EVgo
 
I wrote previously on UK accident rates in UK being much lower for Tesla (classic car levels, not commuter levels) - around 10% of Mercedes/BMW accident rates. (from memory), it was suggested on comments to those posts that Tesla mileages might be lower. I happened on an electrek article from last year (28th April 2020) which I won't link to. This suggests the opposite - HIGHEST mileages of ANY brand in 2020.

How good is it that Tesla is 10 times safer even with higher mileages?

One aspect is that this info came from MOT tests (emission, brakes, safety tests) that are annual but don't start until the car is 3 years old, so presumably these are pre-2017 Model S/X cars. Still interesting and I suspect it will play out as safest/mile over the years. I hope this would lower insurance costs as many/most Teslas are in group 50 of 50

View attachment 690230
IIRC your accident stats were "accidents per-vehicle for the trailing 5 years". Tesla's sales are extremely skewed to the end of that time period so the average Tesla on the road in the UK is probably only about 1 year old. That is why the statistic is misleading, not because of the average miles a new Tesla is driven.

The statistic that would be meaningful is accidents per mile, not accidents per vehicle.
 
I disagreed because convertibles always have a large amount of fine print.

It is unprecedented (I think, I don't know all convertible issuances, of course) for the terminal conversion conditions to apply at any other time. Nearly always the issuer has the right to make early termination on terms advantageous to the issuer, not the buyer. If anybody buys convertibles without very careful reading and understanding of fine print they're likely to be surprised usually in a negative way.

Just cursory reading of Investopedia gives unmistakeable clues:

"Convertible bonds are typically issued by companies that have high expectations for growth and less-than-stellar credit ratings. The companies get access to money for expansion at a lower cost than they would have to pay for conventional bonds. Investors, in turn, get the flexibility of turning their convertible bonds into cash or stock shares."

Bluntly stated convertibles are issued when there is little usable collateral for a secured issuance, prospects are questionable and cash flow is weak or negative.

What happens when things work out well for the issuer and cash flow turns positive, cash conversion cycle speeds so the company is cash generating rather than cash using? Surprise! They terminate those convertibles under the best terms they can, after all they're very expensive and very dilutive if they wait for maturity.

We've been watching Tesla retire expensive debt as quickly as they can. After all Tesla is generating large quantities of cash, exceeding all growth needs and capital expenses. So, they retire even Shanghai factory financing and much else.

I'm sorry you feel disappointed. Still, when you bought you should ahem known that if Tesla performed very, very well they'd rid themselves of that issuance and others. You're still a shareholder in the company and you did not 'lose' anything, unless you paid more for the convertibles than the share value and income you've received while you owned them.

You just bet they'd barely survive until after conversion at termination, then become a large success. Sadly for you, I suppose, Tesla has exceeded nearly all expectations.

I appreciate your explanation on the disagree. It’s always helpful to know why and the caveat was helpful.

I stand by my warning to those who purchased these though. With Etrade and Ameritrade so far, retail investors like myself cannot even review the terms of the offer to convert, so it’s not unreasonable to assume the conversion is as stated on the note. Plus, the note says conversion can occur earlier.

However, your last paragraph about my wanting TSLA to barely survive implies you misunderstand how these convertibles work. The number of shares that can be received in 2024 is the same regardless of whether TSLA is at $500 or $5000. They’re essentially OTM call options added to the note so Tesla pays a low 2% interest rate for the loan.

Convertible bondholders want TSLA shares to be worth as much as possible prior to expiration. The bonds can be sold anytime at a price proportional to TSLA share price. If the SP is low at expiration, bond holders won’t get shares and all they get is 2% a year and their money back.

Anyone who purchased these notes supported Tesla as much as someone buying stock for a capital raise, possibly more because Tesla needed the money the most. Why should they be grateful to receive 15% less than the conversion rate on the note?
 
Last edited:
Rumors, but Ray seems to be a straight shooter. If this is true I want no part of selling CCs for a while.

View attachment 690011
Tesla said there would be a China designed new model. The design center was announced in January 2020:
I have copy of the concept on my office wall.
Whatever 'trial production' might be, the logical conclusions, I think, is that the entire 'underbody' including suspension components may well be made on a single Gigapress. Bizarrely this may not fit the historical notion of 'unibody' but it will make introducing multiple form factors on the same line a relatively easy process, and the China vehicle is being designed to do that from the outset.There are been numerous hints of inclusions of suspension and even a hint or two that wheels might be included somehow. We have no specifics but plenty of hints. There is also the CATL plant being built next door and they're already building battery packs for Tesla plus doing large amounts of battery R&D.

We also know that Zeng Yuqun (AKA: Robin Zeng) and Elon Musk talk frequently and share technical insights. It is quite reasonable to imagine that CATL battery technology will power the China designed vehicle.

Perhaps unusual is that Tesla has not made any formal announcements about all this since January 2020. My personal guess is that this vehicle will enter volume production sometime toward the end of 2022.

The production technologies already working for Model Y will expand to other lines. Just as soon as the Cybertruck enters production there will have been major technical advances that will enable cheap, durable and resistant bodies. As 4680's mature that too enters the mix.

I believe that the China designed vehicle will incorporate Gigapress and CATL battery advances plus a few surprises. That will enable much cheaper production at high volumes. All of that will be being disclosed during the next six months.

Following Cybertruck production with 4680's the soon to be developed German car will appear. There are few clues, but I'll be surprised if it will not be an SUV/hatch in roughly the Peugeot 208/2008, VW Golf class, but slightly larger. That will have major commonalities with the China design, but will be slightly larger, have more capable running gear and will be tuned for higher speed operation. In short, it will have all the classic capabilities of a "hot hatch" but also have a larger SUV version launched together with in (again think Peugeot 208/2008, VW Golf/Taos).

Each of these will end out being the same price as equivalent ICE, but all of them will have higher range than most people think they will.

FWIW, everything we seem to know now suggests that 2023 will probably have major updates for Model 3 and Y with 4680 structural packs across the board. I believe that because Panasonic and LG both say they're working on 4680's and CATL. has disclosed nothing other than the 80GWh plant going pop,beside Tesla, so they may or Amy not do 4680's but they're certainly preparing to supply structural packs.

There will also be multiple factories to build Superchargers and other TE products. Further, energy storage done cooperatively with large scale renewable installations as well as commercial and residential products cannot be neglected. They need massive storage supply, new battery capacity and technology advance will enable that within the next two years.

Global car markets have these types of vehicles as the largest volume vehicles in the vast majority of high volume markets. The highest volume exceptions are India, which trends slightly smaller (excluding tuctuc/auto rickshaw) so an adaptation fo the China model will be an India CKD, assuming the Indian government can allow Tesla the terms it needs). Variants of the China and German models will be built (either CKD or manufacture) in other global markets. Further, some of them will also supply raw materials and/or components to other Tesla factories. Much of this will be developing during 2022/2023.

Doing most of this in one form or another will be essential to maintain a 50% vehicle growth rate.
Even a conservative five year forecast requires all of this even if not in this precise form.
Doing this will allow a 5,000,000 annualized vehicle production rate in 2025.
A quick view of the 25 largest vehicle markets in the world will make it clear that BEV adoption in most of the world is necessary to advance the mission.

That is my personal crystal ball. I do not claim prescience.

I freely admit that this ranks as a close analogue to "the Heart of Gold" but I do not think it requires an "infinite improbability Drive".

IT is well to note, however, that the rough 2020 annual unit sales by familiar OEMs went like this:
Toyota. 9.5 million
VAG. 9.3 million
GM. 6.8 million
Stellantis 6.2 million
Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi
4.5 million
Hyundai 4.5 million
Ford. 4.2 million

Can Tesla outsell Renault, Hyundai and Ford? If they do, from whom will they take share?
Will the markets be much higher than the non-very-stellar 2020?
What will the displaced auto dealers do?
What will the oil and gas industry do?
From whence commeth all those charging stations?

If that happens what will be the state of Tesla Energy?
Will Elon Musk still be alive then?

It is easy to forecast, but making it actually happen is another thing entirely.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why no pictures??? Doesn't make sense...
Everyone else there did not come to be in a photo. They came to enjoy seeing the car. Also photographers are obnoxious in so many various ways they ruin the ambience of everything except the red carpet at the Emmys.
Plus, not allowing photos might establish a more intimate experience (help foster information transfer and increase fan base) for those that attend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T@oo