jhm
Well-Known Member
That's not the issue. Sales went up 160% in Jan y/y. Boudette is switching Jan 2019 with Jan 2018.
-
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
pz1975
Active Member
You know what reassures me about my TSLA investment? The only arguments that shorts use now that would make me consider selling my holdings are based on lies. Not different opinions or judgements based on facts, but 100% fabricated lies.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
The bigger problem isn't just that 91% of 93% isn't 84% but 84.6% (rounded to 85% if a decimal point is too difficult to print), but that in 2018 Tesla's workforce also grew by +30%, so the real growth number is 84.6% of 130%, which is 110%.
TL;DR: Tesla's workforce grew by +10% last year.
Slightly more complicated than that, since The 91% was likely a smaller number, but yes, caught that too.
Looks like you didn't read the table either!
Look closely at the table that boudette referenced in his tweet that jhm was referring to. Even if he were dyslexic, why didn't he notice the percentage was black (indicating a gain) and not red (indicating a loss)?
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
You would think they would quote actual research analysts who covered Tesla if they are going to base the headline of the story on his quote. That way they wouldn't be publishing stories saying Tesla is going to shift production to China to supply U.S. demand.
Oh, wait, he was a research analyst who covered Tesla.
Obviously, this was an attempt to hit the share price. I think most investors are finally seeing through all the biased, misleading and just plain factually incorrect coverage of Tesla.
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
It's probably quite a bit more complicated than that: when was the +30% reached? The end result is different whether it was before or after the -9% layoffs in June: if the order was +30%, -9%, -7% then we get around +10% total, if the order on the other hand was -9%, +43 [here the +30% top is reached], -7%, then the combination is around +21%. (Exactly how much will probably become apparent from the 10-K, to be filed in a few weeks.)
But in any case, not -16% and not -15% either.
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
Elon Musk on Twitter
Meme review in next few days.. Little bit scared - little bit excited.
How do I buy me one of those collars...? Perhaps a cat collar would suit me best.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
I'm also glad to see a spin-free Electrek's take:
"Electrek’s Take
I can believe it.
There are not that many vehicles out there that are just so fun to drive, don’t burn gas, come with always improving software, and also look stunning in my opinion.
At this point, I have referred over 100 Model 3 sales and I know even more people who own one, and I can’t recall one person who doesn’t love the car.
That sounds almost impossible, yet the Model 3 did it.
It’s not to say that all those people had a perfect experience with the vehicle to date, but they are overall all happy with it and in most cases, it convinced them to never go back to gas."
I can believe it.
There are not that many vehicles out there that are just so fun to drive, don’t burn gas, come with always improving software, and also look stunning in my opinion.
At this point, I have referred over 100 Model 3 sales and I know even more people who own one, and I can’t recall one person who doesn’t love the car.
That sounds almost impossible, yet the Model 3 did it.
It’s not to say that all those people had a perfect experience with the vehicle to date, but they are overall all happy with it and in most cases, it convinced them to never go back to gas."
RobStark
Well-Known Member
jhm
Well-Known Member
What worries me is that Boudette may be gaslightling. Not sure that is it intentional, he simply saw what he wanted to see. So grabbing 6,582 fit the narrative he wanted to project. So he didn't check to see if he got his facts right (really bad journalism). Then by Twitting the 6,582 number as "recent" January, he sets up readers to see that as they look at the table, if they look at all. When expectations are "confirmed" by seeing that number, it reinforces the false narrative that was set up. People doubt their own correct reading of it when they see the labels are switched around.
So all in all it is a very strong example of gaslighting. We are all prone to get tricked by this. I had to look at it several times and read other people's reactions before I felt confident that I was reading it correctly. My own sense of self-doubt in what my own eyes were showing me is exactly the effect of gaslighting.
I expected way less sales than 6500 for the US last month.
Certain part of China have different average height and some are taller. So I agree.
The suggestion by some here for the long wheelbase is the elderly are needing the longer leg room. I’m saying this is completely false as that generation is pretty short on average. Larger car equals luxury in their eyes so they want to pay less. And lastly which Chinese can resist a bargain?
That’s surprising. Given that marketwatch reporters like Francine McKenna & Jeremy Owen are professional FUDsters.
I prefer Faberge Egg.
If you must say something not nice, “exercise in hubris” will do.
I’ve decided to know the bear. To know the bear, I must become the bear.
And the TSLA bear is pretty dumb.
Let’s ignore the YoY growth. Or PEG growth. Or let’s move the EPS target to be a miss when bankruptcy was the original goal post.
SpudLime
Active Member
I know the feeling.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
