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

[elasalle]

Aziz Saba on Twitter

I had no clue that @businessinsider is basically a German propaganda and in bed with diesel car manufacturers

 

[KarenRei]

Yes, if they would have ended the quarter with 0 cars in transit then the net loss would have been 555mUSD.

The discussion was on additional cars in transit vs. Q4, not total.

 

[Pras]

I think it's worth listening again to exactly what Elon said.

.

With respect to raising capital, he said the following or very close to it:

"I think it is healthy to be on a spartan diet for a while..."
"There is some merit to raising capital".

But I think the bit that's getting misinterpreted, potentially, is:

"...But this is probably about the right timing."

Did he mean that this is probably about the right time to raise capital, or did he mean the timing needs to be right to raise capital? If you look at what he said before that I'm thinking the latter.

Edit: I see somebody else was saying the same with a written transcript that might be more useful. Meh. Never mind, I'll leave this here anyway.

I heard the same way that yes it makes sense but only when the time is right. I assume he thinks maybe waiting a few quarters. If we see the debt repayment, next one is in Q4, maybe best to raise right before that or try to roll forward the debt. Also instead of equity, why can’t they issue convertibles? That should be less dilutive than the current stock levels.

 

[schonelucht]

I was skeptical too. But it's on their website. I notice the OP neglected to mention that these rental operator shut down all its rental operations including all its non-Tesla EVs. But including that information wouldn't help make his point, would it?

For real? Company can't get service on Tesla's. Company faces liquidity crunch. Creditors (probably a bank or leasing partner) takes all assets of said company, including non-Tesla cars. Flabbergasted I have to explain these kind of standard operating procedures. Or maybe not because after all I am talking to someone who's confusing balance sheet lines with profit/loss items.

 

[Mike Smith]

Tesla: 41.3B
Ford: 40.5B

That didn't last long..

 

[Artful Dodger]

Yes, if they would have ended the quarter with 0 cars in transit then the net loss would have been 555mUSD.

In transit numbers are NOT net change in inventory, which is responsible for about $145M in missing profit given ~20% profit margin.

Why are you conflating my explanation on the effect of increased inventory (-$145M) with in-transit numbers? You have again flip flopped on the very subject.

Or are you just here to troll with a Day One account and intentionally misleading analysis? You are quacking like a duck. Are you a duck?

 

[Pras]

Tesla: 41.3B
Ford: 40.5B

That didn't last long..

Ford never was the real competition. GM is and for that the SP needs to be near $330. A man can dream!

 

[Chunky Jr.]

If the Tesla Network can lose as much money as quickly as Uber, it alone will be worth $90B

 

[Silent Ludicrosy]

Shorts better start covering

 

[Cloxxki]

Pretty much at this point, the 500k in 2019(or technically 500k run rate) is all based on if you think Giga 3 is going to be operational to the tune of 2-3k/week by the end of 2019. The latest news is encouraging on that front.....

Yeah, Elon has already walked back on his first statement a couple of times now. He first clarified it was just a run rate at the end of 2019 not actual 2019 production amount. In later tweets, he has been saying 500k over the next 12 months. In the Q1 CC, when asked about Shanghai coming online, he said "it looks like we’ll reach volume production at the end of this year with, let’s say, more than 1,000 cars a week, maybe 2,000 from Shanghai Giga at the end of this year. That’s what it looks like to be the case right now. If it’s not at the end, it will be shortly thereafter."

A run rate of 500k per year averages out to a weekly production rate of a little over 9,600. Based upon Elon's statement on the CC that they think Shanghai will be at 1k-2k at the end of the year or shortly thereafter, it seems unlikely they will hit 9,600 per week by the end of 2019. They have guided for Fremont hitting 7k per week by the end of the year. If they achieve that and Shanghai hits the upper end of Elon's guess at 2,000 then total production will be at 9,000/week at the end of 2019. That's close but still less than the 500k run rate Elon tweeted about, plus that's the top range of guidance, which Tesla has failed to hit thus far during the model 3 ramp. It would be far more reasonable to anticipate them hitting the low end of guidance, which would be more like 8,000k per week at the end of 2019, which is an annual rate of just over 400k. Within just a few months into 2020, they should be able to get to 9,000+, and the slight delay is not a big deal at all in the scheme of things, but it still means Elon is not making accurate statements. That's hubris and likely not going away.

It's just such an Elonism. Lots of zero's, no context. And it's not allowed for a public company CEO to insult investors with such "information".
Fremont has shown 7,000/wk before. Although never consistently, and axing 75D didn't help.
Any delay at Shanghai, and the opportunity for that is plentiful with multiple new cell suppliers and a whole factory to be built, staffed and trained before the first car rolls out.
Thank goodness this nonsense will be spared from now on. Although he seems to already compensate with mocking of his regulators. An army of psycho analysts could feast on that.

 

[Anstandswauwau]

Aziz Saba on Twitter

I had no clue that @businessinsider is basically a German propaganda and in bed with diesel car manufacturers

Search my postings for "AutoBild" to learn about their modus operandi.

 

[Alexander Grea]

Any idea what the alternative funding sources can be from the 10Q? Can it be capital raise or is capital raise traditional source?

Looks like the bounce has some volume and if we stay over 240 then should be a good week. Even TSLAQ's data is showing better than expected deliveries in April in the US. So we should get some support for the bounce from InsideEVs.

 

[neroden]

The problem with big institutional sells is you never know when they're just going to spontaneously stop.

Or, sometimes we do know.

T Rowe Price owned a huge amount of Tesla stock -- what was it, like 10% of the shares outstanding? They sold essentially all of it -- and they stopped when the fund which was selling ran out of shares to sell.

So we know when they're going to stop because they stop when they run out of shares to sell. (As does everyone except short-sellers.)

I honestly think T Rowe Price was the primary cause of the entire TSLA drop over Q1, because 10% is a *lot* of stock, enough to move the market for pure supply & demand reasons. Since they're done selling, further drops past that point are short-sellers -- and this is backed up by data.

 

[farzyness]

I sold a portion of my stake at 235 on Friday. I'm taking this as a sign that the market was waiting for me to set the bottom so that everyone else can prosper.

You're welcome, America.

 

[Anstandswauwau]

Any idea what the alternative funding sources can be from the 10Q? Can it be capital raise or is capital raise traditional source?

GoFundMe, Kickstarter, IndieGoGo, …

 

[mongo]

It's just such an Elonism. Lots of zero's, no context. And it's not allowed for a public company CEO to insult investors with such "information".
Fremont has shown 7,000/wk before. Although never consistently, and axing 75D didn't help.
Any delay at Shanghai, and the opportunity for that is plentiful with multiple new cell suppliers and a whole factory to be built, staffed and trained before the first car rolls out.
Thank goodness this nonsense will be spared from now on. Although he seems to already compensate with mocking of his regulators. An army of psycho analysts could feast on that.

500k all vehicle types
7k 3 at Fremont, 2k S/X at Fremont, 2k 3 at GF3 = 11k.

Any idea what the alternative funding sources can be from the 10Q? Can it be capital raise or is capital raise traditional source?

Looks like the bounce has some volume and if we stay over 240 then should be a good week. Even TSLAQ's data is showing better than expected deliveries in April in the US. So we should get some support for the bounce from InsideEVs.

500 million from Chinese banks for GF3?

 

[Tim S]

Check the website of the company EC - Rent This company is really well known in the Dutch section of this forum (owner was an active member for a while too)

OK that story may be true. Tesla has had service issues in Europe but they are working on it.

I still don't believe the Chinese company Times Square billboard story.

 

[dww12]

For real? Company can't get service on Tesla's. Company faces liquidity crunch. Creditors (probably a bank or leasing partner) takes all assets of said company, including non-Tesla cars. Flabbergasted I have to explain these kind of standard operating procedures. Or maybe not because after all I am talking to someone who's confusing balance sheet lines with profit/loss items.

Seems like if you were having that big an issue with the 3s you would have taken them out of service and sold them for sometimg else (especially if you had other makes of cars too). If you went out of business why are you using your last $$ to buy a billboard adv.? If I was your creditor I would have some issues with that.

 

[neroden]

FWIW, as I said I was going to over the weekend, I bought more shares today. Didn't manage to hit the exact bottom (would have preferred to buy on Friday, but was preoccupied with other obligations all of Friday and couldn't trade).

If I'd bought Friday I would have bought MXWL at 4.19 and played the merger, but MXWL jumped right back up again and the arbitrage looks poor now (if TSLA goes over $260 before the merger closes, I'm worse off with MXWL at these prices) so I just bought TSLA.

 

[Alexander Grea]

We can only hope that alternative funding is a strategic partnership. Something like Rivian + Ford. And something that Adam Jones has been pushing lately with the fundamentally overvalued and strategically undervalued thesis.