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

[mrmage]

Why? Serious question.

When in this current 10+ year journey was their opinion helpful to ‘investors’?

Their opinions certainly didn’t help me get a 10-bagger nor to help me continue to accumulate even more over time. Indeed, I held like an addict with their last fix in hand despite their roof top shouts of vaporware, fraud, bankruptcy et al.

I welcome intelligent and informed thoughts and opinions. Anything else is junk regardless which side of the fence you’re standing on.

Constructive bearish opinion can reveal potential issues. Besides, any stock can drop if it’s overpriced. It also not good to live in an echo chamber.

In fact, the FUD and permabears may have inadvertently contributed the most to Tesla’s long term success. I believe the intense scrutiny and malice directed at Tesla drove EMs superhuman effort to relentlessly improve production, costs, and product.

The hardship that Tesla endured has produced a leaner and more focused company. Being dragged though hell has turned Tesla into a sword that will cut through “competition” for decades.

Moral: Forcing the world’s foremost engineer-entrepreneur to spend every living second to make a company succeed is not a good way to make the company fail.

 

[EVNow]

I didn't realize global warming altered the planet's axial tilt.

It doesn't - but there is more to solar than just that.

That make zero sense. Unfortunately like a lot of the "global warming" hype.

I wish it was just a "hype".

In Maritime Climate areas, cloud and rain make a big difference. For eg., cities on the other side of Cascade mountain in WA get little rain/cloud and are better for solar. Infact some colder places with less rain may be better than sunny and hot places because solar is more efficient when it is colder. Seattle gets 43% Sun compared to Spokane that gets 55%, for eg.

ps : BTW, it would be wrong to assume climate change with uniformly change local climate. Some areas the rainfall will increase and in some decrease. IIRC, in NW the rainfall would indeed go down helping Solar.

 

[ZsoZso]

This was a great Twitter reply:

Twitter reply by Ben Hallert (@chairboy)

"It's weird for someone who's lost a ton of money by following the emotion-based $TSLAQ mob... praising the group that sherpa'd him to losing most of his net worth."

"This is some serious Stockholm stuff here."​

Of course as a thank-you for that valuable financial advice Ben Hallert was immediately put on the TSLAQ censorship list:

View attachment 470114​

What these TSLAQ geniuses still don't seem to be realizing is that their Twitter blacklist created a self-reinforcing feedback cycle isolating them from the very investment information that could have saved their investments...

I.e. the TSLAQ Twitter blacklist by Shorty Air Force @Paul91701736 is magnifying the short squeeze.

This TSLAQ supporter's effective personal bankruptcy and the wipeout of his life savings should be a cautionary tale to Tesla bulls too: we should embrace bearish Tesla opinion as well, as long as they are not abusive.

While I have a flaw of erring on the side of Tesla hyper-bullishness, my TMC, Reddit and Twitter block lists are empty.

IMHO, twitter by the very nature of the platform (people getting notifications based on who they follow as opposed to a forum discussion format where you see all opinions) tends to fragment into many little echo chambers -- you get to see the posts of people you follow, who tend to have the same point of view (unless you deliberately follow people with opposing views, which is not the natural human tendency).

This effect is further exacerbated by the TSLAQ block list.

 

[EVNow]

This effect is further exacerbated by the TSLAQ block list.

TSLAQ block list is indeed very weird. I don't know of any such blocklist on the TSLA side - but they do get banned from TMC.

Definitely a lot of us got blindsided in Q1 and lost a ton of money. But my guess is most held on to long term stock.

 

[sparcs]

Yeah, they don't need the new building to make bty packs with locally sourced LG cells. Tesla already sent the v.1 Grohmann bty line retired montha ago at GF1 to Shanghai. It's likely setup already inside the main bldg.

Local sources in Shanghai are saying the new bty workshop will be complete by end of Q1 2020. That sync's well with Tesla bty pack needs at Fremont just in time for start of Model Y production.

GF1/Sparks is on notice to be capable of 10K bty packs / wk by the end of 2019, according to Carsonight.

Perhaps the Grohmann module line won't be set up until the new battery/module building finishes construction at GF3?

Maybe Tesla is using that 10k packs/wk at GF1 to supply GF3 until that module building is online at GF3?

 

[Hock1]

Lots of ways. Financially, water for agriculture can never compete against water for municipal use, as it takes a lot of water to produce a proportionally small amount of money via farming. Agriculture in the US measures water by the "acre foot" - literally enough water to flood one acre to a depth of one foot. Tesla could offer a farmer as much money for their water rights as they'd earn in decades of farming; even buying up a proportionally small amount of water rights on the Truckee would be sufficient. There's also a wide range of other options, including funding water efficiency/recycling measures in Reno, desalination of Pyramid Lake (only 1/6th the salinity of seawater), water catchment and storage from GF1's roof, etc etc.

Water will in no way, shape or form stop expansion at GF1. But it is one entry on a long list of things that Tesla needs to take care of if it wants to build up its own "neighborhoods" there.

Thanks for the reply. It just seems that with the imminent need for copious more packs and GA space, for the introduction of Y, Semi and truck, Tesla would have continued the build-out of GF1 by now.

 

[Causalien]

It doesn't - but there is more to solar than just that.

I wish it was just a "hype".

In Maritime Climate areas, cloud and rain make a big difference. For eg., cities on the other side of Cascade mountain in WA get little rain/cloud and are better for solar. Infact some colder places with less rain may be better than sunny and hot places because solar is more efficient when it is colder. Seattle gets 43% Sun compared to Spokane that gets 55%, for eg.

ps : BTW, it would be wrong to assume climate change with uniformly change local climate. Some areas the rainfall will increase and in some decrease. IIRC, in NW the rainfall would indeed go down helping Solar.

I have to say that this exchange is veryenlightening and a reason why we should not block arguments to the other side.

For me, it was obvious that global warming = more sun. For them it was obvious that global warming = more rain and doesn't change the axial tilt.Both side are right in their own respective geographic location, without comparing notes, it's not possible to see why ppl think a certain way.

Even though I have lived in the east coast and understand the effect somewhat, it didn't occur to me that that is the logical world that they are staring at.

However, the east coast of Canada have different climate vs east coast of usa. So far it is a wash for east coast Canada as we get more extreme snow storms in the winter as well as flooding and extreme humidity in the summer. So these cloudy days reduces sunshine. The difference is that the extreme climates occurs every other year (if you look at the annual weather report, it flip flops) , so we get at least one year of mild weather and this is where global warming really shows through. On these mild years it is very nice with lots of sunshine. Anyway, just anecdotal evidence from 1 city in the east (I can't be everywhere at once)

 

[Unpilot]

Whew.....caught back up.
It is fun to read all the "victory lap" post's.

Let me add mine. Since I am sorta new here I was not around for the 2013 run up. But for those that were....is this not different in several major way's?

1. China and GF3.........wow that will be some growth!
2. Solar and battery's...wow that will be some growth!
3. ModelY......................wow that will be some growth!
4. Semi and pick up...while a way's off...wow that will be some growth!
5. Full self driving if possible.....OMG!...will that be some growth!

This stock by almost any measure is a freaking steal....I pinch myself that I was able to get in when I did.

Have a good weekend!

p.s. the service center in Bloomington Ill is having a open house today from noon to 6 pm ....I'm going...anyone else?

 

[KarenRei]

Thanks for the reply. It just seems that with the imminent need for copious more packs and GA space, for the introduction of Y, Semi and truck, Tesla would have continued the build-out of GF1 by now.

They were considering it with Y, but went with Fremont instead. That said, as mentioned, I'd put pretty good odds on GF1 expansion starting up again with the next six months. One complicating factor may be, I'm not sure whether building in the winter is realistic in Nevada. Around here the construction industry is very seasonal.

 

[T@oo]

I believe water supply is the ultimate constraining factor in Reno. Not sure how that can be solved.

DRY electrodes?

 

[Artful Dodger]

They were considering it with Y, but went with Fremont instead. That said, as mentioned, I'd put pretty good odds on GF1 expansion starting up again with the next six months. One complicating factor may be, I'm not sure whether building in the winter is realistic in Nevada. Around here the construction industry is very seasonal.

I don't think Tesla will expand GF1 during 2020. They are all about 'Capital Efficiency' now, and they have announced clearly that the next big project will be GF4/EU.

Instead, I expect Tesla will ramp up to 10K Models 3/Y at Fremont during the course of 2020 while fully utilizing the existing capacity at GF1. By the time they are battery constrained again at Fremont, Telsa can increase production density at GF1 by replacing the drying ovens with the MaxTech DBE process. No new building required.

Elon clearly wants to keep Tesla GAAP profiitable going forward, so growth will have to come with capital efficiency foremost in mind. S&P 500 inclusion is a real possibility in 2020 with this course of action. If that coincides with a successful GF3 ramp, Model Y entering voulume production at Fremont, and construction being on GF4/EU well the SP goes through the roof.

Cheers!

 

[bhtooefr]

DRY electrodes?

As I understand, the water supply issue isn't a manufacturing issue, it's a residential issue.

As in, they can't get enough water to build new housing for workers.

 

[shrspeedblade]

They were considering it with Y, but went with Fremont instead. That said, as mentioned, I'd put pretty good odds on GF1 expansion starting up again with the next six months. One complicating factor may be, I'm not sure whether building in the winter is realistic in Nevada. Around here the construction industry is very seasonal.

It's very cold and windy there, but still pretty dry. Light occasional snows that probably wouldn't be as troublesome as rain (which they get a bit as well, but still high desert).

I still remember being out in the wind at Reno-Fernley Raceway just over the ridge. Cuts through you no matter how bundled up you are- that might be more of a factor!

 

[jhm]

I really think they have cried "wolf" a few too many times. People might be slow to catch on but they are not completely stupid! I've already noticed the hit pieces don't have much impact (like they did previously).

People are on to the fake news and now they are hungry to profit from it.

I hope so.

Additionally shorts now lack the ability to pull off the news nullification tactic. They lack the firepower to drive down the stock price in the face of this good news.

Musk does seem to be staging the release of good news which makes it hard to sustain news nullifying trading.

Additionally, Musk seems to be deploying surrogates like Chairwoman Denholm to the media. This is smart PR strategy.

 

[CorneliusXX]

TT007 is back in business!

That guy has some serious conviction and patience. Hats off to him.

 

[KarenRei]

I don't think Tesla will expand GF1 during 2020. They are all about 'Capital Efficiency' now, and they have announced clearly that the next big project will be GF4/EU.

Instead, I expect Tesla will ramp up to 10K Models 3/Y at Fremont during the course of 2020 while fully utilizing the existing capacity at GF1. By the time they are battery constrained again at Fremont, Telsa can increase production density at GF1 by replacing the drying ovens with the MaxTech DBE process. No new building required.

Elon clearly wants to keep Tesla GAAP profiitable going forward, so growth will have to come with capital efficiency foremost in mind.

Cheers!

The problem is that they've guided for Semi production in 2020. Where's it supposed to go? I'd consider myself a GF4 timeline optimist, but even I don't expect GF4 to be anywhere close to operational in 2020.

Pickup also may or may not be a problem; it depends on the timing, which at this point we have no idea.

I also suspect that they'll need more space for their new Tesla cell lines in order to meet Model Y battery needs in 2020.

 

[StealthP3D]

Why? Serious question.

When in this current 10+ year journey was their opinion helpful to ‘investors’?

Their opinions certainly didn’t help me get a 10-bagger nor to help me continue to accumulate even more over time. Indeed, I held like an addict with their last fix in hand despite their roof top shouts of vaporware, fraud, bankruptcy et al.

I welcome intelligent and informed thoughts and opinions. Anything else is junk regardless which side of the fence you’re standing on.

That's why I said I'll listen to what the bears have to say, but they have to make sense.

I'm still waiting for them to say something that makes sense and that I wasn't already aware of.

 

[MartinAustin]

Ford EV Mustang SUV launch is Nov 17th.

So should TSLA pickup be before or after? ....

The media will want to cover them together, like Ford and Tesla are "trading blows" or something.

IMO the Cyber Truck will have more of a profile. Ford's entry will not have compelling acceleration or charging speed if it really has an EPA 300 mile range. (which I am skeptical about)

 

[ReflexFunds]

I don't think Tesla will expand GF1 during 2020. They are all about 'Capital Efficiency' now, and they have announced clearly that the next big project will be GF4/EU.

Instead, I expect Tesla will ramp up to 10K Models 3/Y at Fremont during the course of 2020 while fully utilizing the existing capacity at GF1. By the time they are battery constrained again at Fremont, Telsa can increase production density at GF1 by replacing the drying ovens with the MaxTech DBE process. No new building required.

Elon clearly wants to keep Tesla GAAP profiitable going forward, so growth will have to come with capital efficiency foremost in mind.

Cheers!

More vehicle capacity is far more important for profits than more depreciation.
I don’t see Tesla limiting it’s 7-8k per week Fremont Model 3 lines and 7-8k per week Fremont Model Y lines to just a max combined capacity of 10k per week due to battery supply limits coming from GF1. Particularly given Elon said he is working off the assumption Model Y release will not reduce Model 3 demand.

Free cash flow is now so strong it can invest in GF1, GF2, GF3 and Fremont at the same time while remaining cash flow positive.

 

[CorneliusXX]

Constructive bearish opinion can reveal potential issues. Besides, any stock can drop if it’s overpriced. It also not good to live in an echo chamber.

In fact, the FUD and permabears may have inadvertently contributed the most to Tesla’s long term success. I believe the intense scrutiny and malice directed at Tesla drove EMs superhuman effort to relentlessly improve production, costs, and product.

The hardship that Tesla endured has produced a leaner and more focused company. Being dragged though hell has turned Tesla into a sword that will cut through “competition” for decades.

Moral: Forcing the world’s foremost engineer-entrepreneur to spend every living second to make a company succeed is not a good way to make the company fail.

Couldn't agree more. If there was no scrutiny Tesla could well be following the path of some of the other SV unicorns that have had endless access to cheap capital.

The funding problem has been engineered away.