You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And the red tape of course!There could be a lot of symbolism in these initial cars. That's a lot of black there. Maybe a tribute to the impending death of the long-esteemed marque of BMW.
Yeah, but doesnt the latest permit give Tesla ability to build 2000 that as far as I can tell cant be sold. That replaced a permit that allowed I think 250. Seems like a huge amount for just crash and regulation testing.Those are sellable, but my thoughts are these are most likely built for Euro NCAP testing. I know as I had to do that for Model S in 2014 when we built 12 identical cars and they came and randomly picked one. They then test it and approve production/homologation for customer purchase.
O
Send them to US! I just got back from a service center yesterday. No way, now how, on either a loaner or a test drive. Forget it, demand is so crazy right now, they sold everything that was drivable.So they cant be sold. So can they be sent to stores and act as loaners, test drive cars, etc. then sometime in the future sold as a used demo car? Maybe after going back to factory as retrofit.
I saw it posted somewhere, possible Alex Voigt on twitter, that the cars could be sold, but not before the final permit has been issued. I think it was a german official that said it.Yeah, but doesnt the latest permit give Tesla ability to build 2000 that as far as I can tell cant be sold. That replaced a permit that allowed I think 250. Seems like a huge amount for just crash and regulation testing.
Reuters published more factually incorrect data, supporting your statement.Reuters are notorious FUDmuckers.
Yeah, but doesnt the latest permit give Tesla ability to build 2000 that as far as I can tell cant be sold. That replaced a permit that allowed I think 250. Seems like a huge amount for just crash and regulation testing.
Today, 1/14/22 is officially ONE of the 1-2 “oh s..t” days I expected to come.. next week we’ll probably see the other. Some things are getting very interesting but I’m still going to be waiting till the whites of their eyes are covered in vomit before taking some positions. I’ve spent the day taking OFF the CC‘s I wrote on QQQ and many other NASDAQ holdings for pennies.. There is some good premium for 1/21 and 1/28 for what ppl think is going to be a bounce so I wanted to free up the underlyings to be able to write again. , but as I said I think there is one more day of puking to come. Question is, when.I'll go on the record as saying, TODAY is not the day that Tech stocks are "bottoming" for this current pull back. I think we have 1-2 more 'oh sh..t" days to come.
Many of those weren’t intended to be sold. Tesla asked for the permit because they weren’t happy with the quality of the cars.And an injurious financial penalty to a new factory that was incentivized to locate there. Maybe the permit can be amended whenever they can get around to it, and sales allowed.
I really don't believe anything I read from any reporter. AND I BELIEVE EVEN LESS WHEN PEOPLE INTERPRET IT.So they cant be sold. So can they be sent to stores and act as loaners, test drive cars, etc. then sometime in the future sold as a used demo car? Maybe after going back to factory as retrofit.
Also from the pictures I think they are all performance, so does this go along with the order pages where people in Europe getting March expected delivery dates for performance Ys?
What do you mean ?I kinda agree. We all remember the hullabaloo about GM beating Tesla to the punch with the Bolt... And how did that work out?
Sales are red hot. Booming.What do you mean ?
I thought the Bolt is an explosive success on the market -- or more precisely in garages and parking lots...
I keep beating this drum, but . . . why not just borrow against the assets?I thought I’d ask this question (that I should probably remember the answer to off the top of my head) because others here might like assistance recollecting the answer as well and it is applicable to most all:
Let’s say I need to sell shares to get a certain amount of money, e.g. to cover a given sum of taxes, how do I calculate how many additional shares I need to sell to cover the taxes on the shares I sold to cover the original amount (and so on)? Any rate could apply, but call it 37% for concreteness.
Note that this is not the same question as “How do I calculate my tax on capital gains, income, or whatever?"
Also note there may be further subtleties in a given situation. For example, this can remain hypothetical for a few more months in my case *cough* safe harbor *cough*
Final note, I didn’t realize that in retiring I would lose some of that sense of contributing to society and that paying taxes mitigates the feeling of loss (though there really can be too much of a good thing ).
And an injurious financial penalty to a new factory that was incentivized to locate there. Maybe the permit can be amended whenever they can get around to it, and sales allowed.
Just last month Elon tweeted that he wasn't happy with the design of the wiper - which implies that Tesla are not yet "pens down" on the CT design.I’m calling it now, Cybertruck delayed because of late change to add 4-wheel steer-by-wire. Better yoke usability, deletes steering column, and enables tank turn & crab walk. We’ll see if I’m right in two weeks.
They're barking up the wrong tree anyway given spacex is private, unless they want to poison the well for a company that won't list for years to come.Clearly an agenda here - is CNBC doing this to other companies who also have these issues (which many, many sadly do)?!!! These are serious issues, and should be heard in the proper forum. But, singling out a company on a financial news network with an employee making accusation, at least in my view, is transparently biased.
I think it depends greatly on what percentage of assets we’re talking about an the person’s particular financial situation.I keep beating this drum, but . . . why not just borrow against the assets?