Tesla’s factories absorb 100% of all pollution that ever has been and ever will be emitted by their cars every second.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
Tesla’s factories absorb 100% of all pollution that ever has been and ever will be emitted by their cars every second.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
You raised this before, and I pointed out that in Q1 Tesla can avoid having too many vehicles in transit by making EU/China market Model 3's in January and February, and switching back to U.S. production in March:
This gives ships sent late February enough time to still arrive and deliver the cars - and there would be no ships with Model 3's on them at the end of the quarter (March 31).
The latest VIN registrations from this week support this: Tesla has already switched back to registering U.S. VINs again.
Highly unlikely: these are third party car shipping firms with a lot of capital invested in large ships, where every day has been planned in advance for months. They pick up the Model 3's and ship them to the EU and China - together with thousands of other cars.
These ships are busy 100% of time, with no intent to leave cars "in transit" anywhere.
Last edited:
To be fair ..they ARE in transit..like a slow boat to china kinda transit.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
As an additional cost saving measure I'd suggest a single double size crate with two stickers: "Roadster 2020 final assembly training kit" and "contents in no particular order".
We'll be eagerly awaiting "Electrek's take" on the speed of assembly and the resulting panel gaps.
Elon adding Ellison to the board all because he’s personal friends with him is so lame
Emily Chang on Twitter
Emily Chang on Twitter
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
Apparently ship transit times are in the 20-25 days range, so if Tesla switches to U.S.-only production in early March all ships will arrive in time and no new ships are underway at the end of the quarter (March 32).
Tesla can again switch to EU and China production in April-May, and do U.S. production in June. (Maybe a bit earlier, for the next phase of the tax credit.)
This should certainly work for both Q1 and Q2.
If they are doing this then custom European Model 3 new orders should jump from "March" to "May" estimated delivery date, sometime during March.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
Indeed, just have a look at Mark BS's track record:
It's bad faith to the core - IIRC there was even a tweet from him where he admitted that he is spreading lies about Tesla to scare away future customers and hurt demand - cannot find it now, does anyone have a link to that?
Sean Wagner
Member
I wish there was a way to single out the important news and high-factual-content posts such as yours here.
Since we have the "informative" label, all that's missing is an additional field in the advanced search function [which I just checked].
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
Sorry, but this is flat out wrong: when you buy 1 contract of at-the-money $TSLA PUT option with a short expiry from a market maker then the MM will immediately delta-hedge it by short selling about 50 $TSLA shares. If you buy one at-the-money CALL option contract then they'll buy 50 $TSLA shares on NASDAQ.
(In fact if you do a larger transaction, a couple of thousand options contracts or more, then market makers will often first buy their hedge position on the stock market and then only release the options to you once they have built their delta-neutral hedge position.)
As the stock price goes up and down, market makers are constantly re-balancing their delta hedging (and gamma-hedging, etc.) inventory of $TSLA shares (via algorithms) and they'll accumulate a sizeable $TSLA short or $TSLA long position - which has a real effect on the $TSLA stock price.
The exact automatic risk hedging mechanism options market makers are using is very complex, but fact is that derivatives have an effect on the underlying and the underlying has an effect on derivatives pricing. Most of the literature agrees that all other things equal derivatives with a large enough open interest tend to lead the underlying price, because options/futures contracts allow traders to express future price expectations.
Which is leading which depends on exact open interest and circumstances - and of course changes to the fundamentals or to sentiment will have an overriding effect on both. But one thing is certain: options prices are very closely correlated with the underlying and trading in one which moves the price has an immediate effect on the other.
See:
First 3s in Vienna.
@Fact Checking can you confirm
nextmove @nextmove_de
Die Vorhut ist gelandet. Drei rote @Tesla #Model3 Performance in #Wien gesichtet. ...ausatmen nicht vergessen! ;-) #heartbeat @Tesla #teslamodel3
3:48 AM - 22 Jan 2019
Europe is moving forward. A more important market for the 3 than the US - with likely more sales than in the US. With an established and expanding SC network in EU the 3 has best chances to win and dominate that market quickly.
Totoro @terra_mm
Test drive of Tesla Model 3 in Sweden (Stockholm, Malmö, Gothenburg) from 25 January!
12:43 AM - 23 Jan 2019
Totoro on Twitter
@Fact Checking can you confirm
nextmove @nextmove_de
Die Vorhut ist gelandet. Drei rote @Tesla #Model3 Performance in #Wien gesichtet. ...ausatmen nicht vergessen! ;-) #heartbeat @Tesla #teslamodel3
3:48 AM - 22 Jan 2019
Europe is moving forward. A more important market for the 3 than the US - with likely more sales than in the US. With an established and expanding SC network in EU the 3 has best chances to win and dominate that market quickly.
Totoro @terra_mmTest drive of Tesla Model 3 in Sweden (Stockholm, Malmö, Gothenburg) from 25 January!
12:43 AM - 23 Jan 2019
Totoro on Twitter
Last edited:
... and consider what is basically a police escort for the likes of Speigel through most of corporate media.
Have a look at that powerful article FC just linked, remember the fabricated venom-filled shots at Musk & Tesla Speigel has pumped out in enormous volume on Twitter for years, and then read these two paragraphs from the NYT a few months ago (paragraphs are in order, and complete, just as they were published), setting up the insertion of some of Mark's feigned analysis of Tesla,
“There’s no doubt Tesla and Mr. Musk, the company’s high-profile chief executive, have plenty of detractors, especially on Twitter, where some critics trumpet vitriol and unsubstantiated information about the company and its business. But many of those who believe that Tesla is destined for a major restructuring — or even collapse — are buttoned-up investors. They base their view not on antipathy for Tesla or Mr. Musk, but on cold financial calculations, including its heavy debt load and voracious cash burn.
“This isn’t only about Musk,” said Mark B. Spiegel, a managing partner at Stanphyl Capital, which has a large position shorting Tesla. “It’s about a terrible capital structure, because of the debt, and a stock price that is out of whack with the demand for the product and the competition that’s coming in.””
Betting Against Tesla: Short-Sellers Make Their Case
Not only do I read this introduction of Mark into the article as setting him up as a "buttoned-up investor" making decisions after working through "cold financial calculations" in contrast to ~critics on twitter trumpeting vitriol and unsubstantiated information based on their antipathy for Musk & Tesla~ essentially a portrait of what Mark's twitter history is basically the poster child of...
Not only is the NYT gas-lighting the public with that Orwellian intro of Mark, they claim he "has a large position shorting Tesla." Mark's entire "hedge fund" has about $10 million of assets under management he cannot have a large position re Tesla given the market cap is $50-60 billion, and there's a roughly $10 billion short position. If all of us his fund was short Tesla, it would be 0.1% of the short position... there are long positions of greater than 10% of Tesla.
Massive concentrated wealth influencing for profit media does not strike me as a conspiracy theory. It strikes me as far more of a conspiracy theory to think massive concentrated wealth is not influencing for profit media. All the more so if you realize that over 90% of the media in the US is owned by 6 massive corporations. And it's not strictly monetary. For the people who own large portions of these 6 massive media corporations, and the top management of them, people with massive wealth, and people running massive established corporations are their peer group and basic to their social circles.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Lincoln Aviator priced from $52,195; plug-in hybrid model starts at $69,895 - TechCyberNews
Aviator is a CUV a bit bigger than a Model X.
Aviator is a CUV a bit bigger than a Model X.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
As a background, the New York Times has a long history of hit pieces against Tesla, the first one dating back to 2013:
A Most Peculiar Test Drive
'The above helps explain a unique peculiarity at the end of the second leg of Broder’s trip. When he first reached our Milford, Connecticut Supercharger, having driven the car hard and after taking an unplanned detour through downtown Manhattan to give his brother a ride, the display said "0 miles remaining." Instead of plugging in the car, he drove in circles for over half a mile in a tiny, 100-space parking lot. When the Model S valiantly refused to die, he eventually plugged it in. On the later legs, it is clear Broder was determined not to be foiled again.'
'The above helps explain a unique peculiarity at the end of the second leg of Broder’s trip. When he first reached our Milford, Connecticut Supercharger, having driven the car hard and after taking an unplanned detour through downtown Manhattan to give his brother a ride, the display said "0 miles remaining." Instead of plugging in the car, he drove in circles for over half a mile in a tiny, 100-space parking lot. When the Model S valiantly refused to die, he eventually plugged it in. On the later legs, it is clear Broder was determined not to be foiled again.'
The author of this very first hit piece against Tesla, John Broder, is now sitting on the NYT editorial board:
Opinion | The New York Times Editorial Board
"Mr. Broder joined the editorial board at the start of 2018."
"The editorial board is composed of journalists with wide-ranging areas of expertise. Their primary responsibility is to write The Times’s editorials, which represent the voice of the board, its editor and the publisher. The board is part of the Opinion department, which is operated separately from The Times’s newsroom, and includes the Letters to the Editor and Op-Ed sections."
Editorial boards have wide ranging influence:"Mr. Broder joined the editorial board at the start of 2018."
"The editorial board is composed of journalists with wide-ranging areas of expertise. Their primary responsibility is to write The Times’s editorials, which represent the voice of the board, its editor and the publisher. The board is part of the Opinion department, which is operated separately from The Times’s newsroom, and includes the Letters to the Editor and Op-Ed sections."
Elon should never have agreed to give the NYT an interview - and even if he did, he should have recorded the whole interview.
Elon should give his next interview to the NYT maybe in 5-10 years, once John Broder is not on the editorial board anymore, and if the NYT demonstrates an uninterrupted streak of factual, fair Tesla reporting, with squeaky-clean journalistic ethics.
I'll have what you're smokin', dude!
Mars ☰mperor
Member
Interesting information:
- Tesla gives against a small fee a 10 year warranty for the output
- He expects a cost reduction or profit of $1m per anno
- He expects a pay back in 7 years
- Putting this together the cost of that system was about $7m for 4MW
- With an expected live span of 20 years that sums up a profit of $13m
- Main criteria in favor of Tesla has been experience with similar installations
Last edited:
Yes.
What's more, Elon's blog you quoted led to a parade of media articles about how he was thin-skinned and lashing out. This was close to universal, including NPR (National Public Radio), in eschewing the merits of the conflicting claims, and going straight to dismissing Elon as just lashing out at criticism in a child-like way instead of acknowledging what wasn't working with his product. It seemed to me rather like a media variation of the "blue wall of silence" mentality sometimes ascribed to police forces in the face of corruption within. Elon's blog in and of itself did not counter Broder's bogus article, but, it did help get that process going.
In the wake of Elon's blog, and many many Tesla supporters commenting on the NYT website re the first Broder article and Broder's rebuttal of the blog, the NYT's public editor, Margaret Sullivan stepped in. The public editor position is basically an internal watchdog of a newspaper's journalistic quality, "the readers' representative".
Margaret's findings from investigating the incident basically brought things to an end. She found Broder's reporting to have problems with precision and judgement. She noted that she had been inclined to side with a journalist and colleague rather than Musk in this "he said-he said" situation, and call it a day, but, her brother happened to be very enthusiastic about Tesla, and he persuaded her to look more deeply.
As FC just pointed out, John Broder has stayed with the NYT, and, been promoted to it's editorial board.
Sullivan? No longer with the NYT. Far more concerning, the public editor position, the internal watchdog of journalistic integrity at the NYT? That position has been eliminated.
From Wikipedia,
"The job of the public editor is to supervise the implementation of proper journalism ethics at a newspaper, and to identify and examine critical errors or omissions, and to act as a liaison to the public."
Last edited:
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
To be fair to the NYT, the position of "public editor" was pretty unique in U.S. journalism, you won't find it at the Wall Street Journal or the Washington Post - nor at the big international independent newspapers. When the political right radicalized in the U.S. and went on their current anti-science and anti-fact crusade they started using the public editor's findings against the NYT, which made it pretty predictable that they'd eliminate it.
BTW., Margaret Sullivan, NYT's former public editor, is now writing for the Washington Post.
I believe it's generally a hit-and-miss: John Broder and David Gelles are bad, while many other journalists at the NYT have high journalistic integrity.
anthonyj
Stonks
Lol 293 premarket on basically no volume. If this drop holds until open then you can safely say the game is rigged by MM
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
