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.
My initial discussions with non-EV folk usually include a mention of portable electric drills.

I ask the person if they have one (they usually say "yes"). I mention that they likely use it and plug it in to recharge when finished. Pretty simple. I ask what routine maintenance is involved (they say "none").

Then I ask if they would consider buying a less expensive drill if it included a small gasoline engine & automatic transmission. I usually see an "are you crazy" look.
This method actually back fired on me when talking to a friend. I asked them if they had a battery drill. They said yes and they hated it because the battery was always dead. See they are a neat freak and keep everything put away in the proper box "like it's supposed to be" so the battery is never charged. "It's bad for the battery to be charging all the time." At some point you just have to roll your eyes and let them live their way. LOL

What will be real fun is when the cars become autonomous and when they need a charge they go plug themselves in.
 
What are your thoughts on shipping hundreds of thousands of cars using Nvidia hardware and then scraping them just a few months later? They needed people for their neuro net or is Nvidia giving them a kickback? Seems to be millions spent on wasted hardware not to mention all that time for retrofiting.

Revenues accorded to FSD have not yet been booked as such, so there isn't a P&L loss associated with an upgrade. However there would be additional costs to replace old boards.
 
Yes, that kind of agrees with my method working back from Norway data.




Don't believe the hype. There are no plans in place and those that are will be discarded, changed and mutilated as new circumstances present themselves. This company will never enter a steady state without a change of leadership. Look no further for evidence of this than the number of ships currently on the water. None. Zero. Zilch. Come June it's once more going to be all hands on deck for a mad dash and there will again be some kind of excuse ('we just launched SR for Europe' seems a convenient one), some kind of pat-on-the-back-sorry-you-are-incredible leaked email from Elon and then the next quarter will roll on again.

For those trigger happy to disagree : I am making not a single value statement in this post. It's just factual observation.

I agree in the short term that there will be an end of quarter rush for the next maybe 3 quarters, I think once volume is at a larger runrate AND Shanghai is operating, the quarter end rush will be a thing of the past.

Reminder that there are at least 2 one-off events occurring at end of quarter in USA for Q2 & Q4 - the elimination of the next level of US tax credits. (It would be almost criminal for Tesla NOT to prioritize almost the entirety of June Production for Deliveries for the USA before the $3250 tax credit disappears on June 30th.)
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Lessmog and neroden
:confused:? Only one side was wrong.
This is a very interesting thing to me. The parties agreed to language but have vastly different interpretations of what that language requires. Since a CD is a contract and there must be a "meeting of the minds" for a valid contract, it creates not only a likelihood that the court will have to state what the contract actually requires but also potentially allows the court to vacate the CD. This would put the case back to the 420 tweet complaint.
As you all know FC is much more optimistic and I admire his enthusiasm but I would be pleased with only a clarification from the judge. Not trying to challenge anyone else's speculation on this.
 
:confused:? Only one side was wrong.

I’ve been thinking about this: there is one problem with Elon’s tweet: it put out numbers that weren’t *clearly* spelled out in previous guidance. Given the delivery numbers(400,000 in 2019), production of 500,000 doesn’t make sense. The analysts on the call even seemed confused about his Model 3 numbers at the time. I still think he was right that it wasn’t material, but I think it would make sense for the judge to just suggest that he should probably be a bit more careful going forward.
 
My buy order limit price was not hit last week (although it came close). As it stands now, I have further lowered my limit price. There are too many storm clouds on the horizon. I will re-assess pre-market tomorrow morning. I am hoping my buy order doesn't execute this week but If I have to buy more TSLA I will...
 
  • Funny
  • Helpful
Reactions: neroden and madodel
This is a very interesting thing to me. The parties agreed to language but have vastly different interpretations of what that language requires. Since a CD is a contract and there must be a "meeting of the minds" for a valid contract, it creates not only a likelihood that the court will have to state what the contract actually requires but also potentially allows the court to vacate the CD. This would put the case back to the 420 tweet complaint.
As you all know FC is much more optimistic and I admire his enthusiasm but I would be pleased with only a clarification from the judge. Not trying to challenge anyone else's speculation on this.

That the SEC either forgot or is too incompetent to know what it agreed to should not vacate the CD.

I know I exaggerate but the language is quite plain. A meeting of the minds occurred, and then the SEC forgot what it had agreed to. The tweets they cite in their second response practically prove this, as most of them are laughably immaterial.
 
I’ve been thinking about this: there is one problem with Elon’s tweet: it put out numbers that weren’t *clearly* spelled out in previous guidance. Given the delivery numbers(400,000 in 2019), production of 500,000 doesn’t make sense. The analysts on the call even seemed confused about his Model 3 numbers at the time. I still think he was right that it wasn’t material, but I think it would make sense for the judge to just suggest that he should probably be a bit more careful going forward.

400k Model 3s plus 100k S & X = 500k
 
There is a lot of anecdotal evidence of Tesla trying to generate as much revenue as humanly possible this quarter -- even going so far as to have that merchandise bonanza recently. The question is: is this to eke out a small surprise profit, or just make the loss as small as possible? Impossible to know.
I think there will be several one off charges this quarter. That said, there's a slim possibility that Tesla *might* show slightly higher cash balances end of quarter, if it manages to empty out it's inventory, extend payables, fewer receivables at quarter end, etc., After paying off almost a billion dollars.

Would be a real hard smack behind the head of anyone saying Tesla is headed for a cash crunch.
 
Solarcity was essentially a finance company. They installed solar panels on people’s houses and financed the entire install (cost of materials, labor) over 20 years. The homeowner was charged under a power purchase agreement which effectively paid off the installation over 20 years (plus a profit for Solarcity of course). So Solarcity was a prolific borrower on the financial markets. They were growing 100% per year, so they would issue equity and bonds on a routine basis to keep financing the installs.

One of the things they did is that they issued relatively short term debt to cover these 20 year projects. Short term debt at the time was almost free.

This was a perfect company for short sellers to attack. Shorts did a concerted attack questioning the company’s credit (will homeowners continue to pay for power if we hit a recession), and interest rate rise fears (hey, the fed is about to raise rates meaning Solarcity will have to refinance at higher rates). Neither scenario came to pass, by the way.

Anyways, the bear raid worked in that Solarcity’s cost of capital shot up. When Tesla acquired them, Solarcity’s 1.5% coupon 3 years bond was trading at 20% yield (not 100% accurate numbers, this is from memory, but you get the idea). Meaning that if solarcity wanted to borrow more money, they would have had to pay 20% interest for it, which effectively shut them out of the debt market.

But they were growing at 100% per year and had short term debt to refinance, so they were absolutely going to go bankrupt had Tesla not acquired them. As I recall, their cash needs were so large, they couldn’t issue enough equity to cover it.

This was a classic bear raid against a financial company. Normally such raids are against banks. Create enough FUD about the banks and customers start to leave, liquidity dries up and it snowballs. Solarcity had a similar enough financial structure (minus depositors who could withdraw money), that the bears could attack it.

So while Elon gave a giant FU to the bears when he acquired Solarcity (and thus depriving the bears of a bigger payday), they have been making his life miserable since their short positions effectively got moved from Solarcity to Tesla during the acquisition. I don’t know enough about acquisition mechanics to know if the shorts had to close out their positions when Solarcity was acquired, or whether they just decided to raid Tesla out of spite/malice/hatred of Elon for depriving them of their oh so smart, can’t lose, payday. Either way, that’s how Tesla acquired so many shorts betting against it.

And this matters since Tesla is NOT the kind of company that you normally mount a bear raid against. Financial companies are a lot more vulnerable. Having said that, as a growth company, Tesla does need a lot of capital to grow, and the bear raids of the last few years have effectively raised the cost of capital to Tesla. Not to the point of bankruptcy, but certainly to a meaningful, annoying extent. Elon appears to be on the cusp of having the last laugh however. 2019 should put to bed the “Tesla is running out of cash” meme.

So if you see Elon being a little bit touchy against the SEC and financial markets, it’s because he’s been in a multi year death struggle with parts of them.
Thanks a million for the amazing explanation. Much appreciated.
 
:confused:? Only one side was wrong.

I disagree. EM should stop taunting the SEC. Just concentrate on continuing to further the mission statement...make batteries, EVS, back up batteries, solar tiles/panels, AI improvements for AD and launch satellites for mapping/communication between vehicles.
 
@outdoors had his vinyl wrapped. Protects the paint, changes the color, and is fully reversible. Other people get their car dipped, same sort of thing, can peel it off later.

OT

All wraps can be removed; some wraps can not be UNSEEN:

Smartly-Davidson.jpg