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

[Krugerrand]

Regarding climate change, I have little doubt about who is more efficient. But 2B are a lot of money, so I think that a crucial factor is the amount of the Tesla fee. If FCA got a 10x discount that's too much.

I also wonder if VW and Peugeot are gonna pay the fine, that would be awesome.

I don’t think they should get any discount frankly and everyone involved in this criminal fiasco should have to pay through the nose (and preferably from my point of view, until it breaks their backs and puts them out of business for good). But I digress. It still boils down to Tesla will use every penny wisest, so be content with that knowledge.

 

[Intl Professor]

This kind of group think request (and how things seem to be many times) is what poisons the forum and ones own personal growth. One should have ones own opinions on matters and be wary if a member of a group collective. Perhaps fading the action of the group is a legit trading endeavor?

Someone is on the other side of every trade. What are their motivations to buy or sell?

Group think is not always wrong. In the long term it is almost always right depending, of course, what you mean in terms of timing and correctness. In the short term it is a matter of intensity of hope and breadth of interest. TMCers have intense interest in positive news and with considerable expertise are still apt to see the good news first and maybe act on it. They will be upset by the lag in market reaction. Tesla bears are just as keen and maybe full time involved in stressing the negative. Better organized and financed, they will be pleased in the immediate effect but disappointed in the long run with TSLA. As suggested above the scales are tipped by social media and organization. Our side needs more leverage at this point and, of course, a tipping point may have been reached, but certainly will be eventually as news spreads.

There is a great quotation from Prigogine I can't put my hands on at the moment. It goes like this. We have modeled a town and learned timing is everything. At some times an input can encourage growth if it is open to a changing environment. At other times it can falter and eventually fail. The lesson? Linear short term extrapolation is dangerous. That the future is like the past can be true but not in changing times.

As usual, Elon's explanation is easier when he suggested to Kathy Woods (name?) of ARK, when you are close to or into that disruptive curve a near time move can be way off in either direction because of expectations.

 

[JBRR]

CIRCABC - Welcome

source for pool document and FAQ's on the pools.

 

[winfield100]

Awesome!!!

@SPadival Another suggestion if I may, (re)tweet also to:

Cathie Wood (@CathieDWood) | Twitter
Ross Gerber (@GerberKawasaki) | Twitter
Loup Ventures (@LoupVentures) | Twitter

....and any other of the big Tesla investors. They would likely support it, as they all whole-heartedly support the idea of Tesla raising more money.

@Antares Nebula
teensy tiny factoid = competition a bit behind

 

[NicoV]

Given Trump is relaxing emission expectations in the US (and he is likely going to be reelected as per 70% of the wall-street execs), FCA can continue to stay on the current path of staying just positive in EU and create sufficient sales so that the production remains at the scale, and keep cost per unit down. They then will generate all the profit from the US or other 'friendly' countries.

I doubt that will work since Fiat sells 5 times more cars in Europe than Chrysler in the USA.
And it was Fiat that bought Chrysler to save it from bancrupty, so I wouldn’t expect much profits from the USA operations.

 

[lklundin]

Those ribs are formed sheet metal channels, not that difficult to reconfigure the layout.

Right. Isn't that what JB has been doing through all his waking hours for the past 20 years?

 

[elasalle]

This gets to my wonderings. Is there a way to amplify the FCA dollars into more deliveries.

Rather than just recognize the revenue, use it to create an incentive to move more product/vehicles thereby building an increasing longer term revenue stream that exceeds the simple "recognize the revenue". If done well, the SP "might" offer a reward.

I'm thinking FCA should also buy a stake in TSLA (5% of TSLA shares) ....

 

[lklundin]

Here’s a link bypassing the FT paywall

Fiat Chrysler pools fleet with Tesla to avoid EU emissions fines - Phoneweek

Thanks!

- I found myself verifying that the date of publication was not April 1st...

 

[NicoV]

Could that be for US-made vehicles sold in the EU? Are there any?

150 per year: Chrysler European sales figures

 

[Tslynk67]

I’ve never seen a road where honking was required, but maybe that’s because I’m in Europe.
Where I live, blind corners are solved by strategically placed mirrors. I’d be very surprised if FSD would look in those mirrors and analyse that.

In Brussels it's the drivers that need honking, usually with a choice expletive...

 

[lklundin]

Why not go with "Awesome Self Driving", then. That is also an arbitrary product name but doesn't suggest anything specific about being level 5.

Then I propose FSD:

Fabulous Self Driving

 

[hacer]

For those looking to read the rules from the source:

REGULATION (EC) No 443/2009 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 443/2009

Specifically https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:145:0001:0018:EN:PDF (article 7) details how pools work.

 

[TNEVol]

I think your missing point of take private tweet/SEC issue. The whole fight over tweeting before judge points out that SEC has issue with him tweeting at all the infamous tweet was just used to justify reigning him in. I believe the SEC in court pointed out 15 other tweets they didn’t like. I am sure expressing negative thoughts about the SEC is something they are not used to and they want to suppress. They can’t state that in court but suppressing all tweets would achieve their goal.

I see it differently. I believe the SEC was convinced by media and the institutional short sellers that the original tweet (take private) was done without being g fully accurate and with the intention of manipulating the market. In their point of view to harm investors (shorts). I never considered shorts to be investors in need of protection. However, If you combine that hypothesis with EM's public animus toward shorts, you can construct a claim that he intended to harm shorts by his false or reckless tweet.

Before you ban me from TMC, please recognize I am stating the SEC's possible thinking as pushed upon them by their cohorts in the big investment banks. I do not agree with this thesis.

Looking back at the settlement we can now see that the SEC lawyers at least expected that Tesla and EM had agreed among other sanctions to supervise and preapprove all of EM's Tesla tweets. This is a remedy they could only get by agreement and not from the original case. Tesla and EM however did not consider that the agreement acted as a blanket constraint and specifically and artfully negotiated the language to limit the effect to material substance.
Regardless we need to separate the latest filing from the original case. All of the latest argument is about the settlement agreement and not the take private tweet. As FC has surmised if the parties fail to fix the agreement and the judge fi do the agreement too vague and void, the parties are back to whether EM intentionally or recklessly tweeted to harm investors.

Many more folks on here know more about whether shorts are protected as investors but I just can't believe they should be

 

[winfield100]

....treated as a thought crime. ..European demand for FOSSIL FUEL FREE CITIES AND COUNTRIES..... over the coming months AND YEARS....there will also be a pent up demand effect in those markets... will..NOT... fade SOON

@Singer3000
tiny adjustment you kinda missed....

 

[lklundin]

I, for one, am fine with that. Who cares where the money comes from? This is business, not a children’s sport league. We don’t need to play fair, we just need to win.

Wait, in absence of its lobbying or other unfair influence, Tesla helping to implement regulations of democratic countries is _fair_.

I have to wonder why Tesla ended up making this open pool with FCA.

Did Tesla not want to have anything to do with the emissions cheating Germans? - I mean Tesla taking their money would be kind of ironic.

Also, I would like to hear the reactions within FCA when people hear that significant amounts of money is been paid to Tesla.

 

[Tslynk67]

Those of us who worked at MSFT during Ballmer era sadly remember a very different Balmer

ps : One thing I still admire about Balmer is that he tried to bring up his kids like a normal guy would - not a billionaire. I've seen him frequently in local restaurants and shops with his sons shopping like anyone else. Even telling his sons a particular pair of sneakers was too expensive

Maybe he's just tight?

 

[Prunesquallor]

For those looking to read the rules from the source:

REGULATION (EC) No 443/2009 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 443/2009

What I take away from this is:
1) Pools can be multi-year, but not to exceed 5 years
2) Emission pooling for FCA/Alfa/Tesla can begin this year

 

[Fact Checking]

Fiat Chysler paying Tesla to offset CO2 emissions in Europe to the tune of 100s of millions of Euros.

Reported in Financial times...


"Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has agreed to pay Tesla hundreds of millions of euros so the electric carmaker’s vehicles are counted in its fleet in order to avoid large fines for breaking tough new EU emissions rules."

More details in article.

FCA has confirmed the deal and made a couple of statements to Reuters, without new details:

Fiat Chrysler to pay Tesla hundreds of millions of euros to pool fleet: Financial Times - Reuters

'Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Sunday. Fiat Chrysler did not directly address the amount that it would pay but added it would "optimize the options for compliance that the regulations offer.":

'"FCA is committed to reducing the emissions of all our products...The purchase pool provides flexibility to deliver products our customers are willing to buy while managing compliance with the lowest cost approach," FCA added in a statement.'​

 

[lascavarian]

@ 11:30 into this video, Sandy mentions working with Fiat Chrysler on "other parts of Tesla" that he can't really talk about.

EDIT: It is hard to watch this video and not come out of it feeling incredibly good about what Tesla is doing. Everyone feeling unsure about TSLA should do themselves a favor and watch this video. Seriously.

THIS!

This video is nearly and hour and a half so hard to view. But it is really helpful to hear Sandy Munro speak about the nature of Tesla and China in the context of Detroit.

I did not know that EM had some kind of honorary citizenship in China!

Really most of this video is Tesla oriented. Sandy Munro is making money talking about the Tesla technology and he is pumped about it. He confirms that China moves fast and has well educated engineers available. China has the natural resources to make a lot of electric cars. Tesla's timing to enter China was well done.

There is talk of Deming and his relationship with Detroit which which inspired Munro to leave his automotive job. He talks about EM being the only genuine hero in the USA today.

Munro does a great job of showing the motors among GM, BMW and Tesla and how advanced the Tesla PMSRM design is. He is still working on improving his understanding and is giving a second look at the induction motor.

He raves about the quality of the Tesla SW and their engineers and the value of the OTA updates. He talks about the Tesla initiative to reduce wiring from 1.8 KM to 100m by using radio communications. He says they have antennas throughout their PCBs.

Finally, he finds it hard to believe how uninformed Tesla "analysts" are. Really poorly informed and spewing false information he seems to think they get by googling the internet... heh, heh.

 

[Fact Checking]

Looking back at the settlement we can now see that the SEC lawyers at least expected that Tesla and EM had agreed among other sanctions to supervise and preapprove all of EM's Tesla tweets.

I agree with everything else you wrote, except this detail. Here's what happened I think:

• The lead SEC lawyer arguing the contempt motion was not part of the settlement negotiations. I believe this was deliberate, so that she could credibly push a legal theory and interpretation unsupported by the negotiation evidence.
• The SEC did not fully counter Elon's evidence of settlement intent - they just objected to it in generic terms and indicated that they'd submit more evidence if the court examines this question. I.e. they ran away from this topic.

My reading:

• The SEC didn't expect that Elon would comply by "not tweeting material information at all".
• When Tesla replied that none of Elon's tweets were reviewed they genuinely considered this as evidence of reckless non-compliance - while the opposite was true.
• They jumped on Elon, expecting an easy win and them folding under shareholder pressure.
• Instead the fine lawyers from Hueston Hennigan ate Cheryl Crumpton for breakfast, have gained the sympathy of the judge, and have now opened up a wide range of options to clarify or even invalidate the settlement.