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

[sparcs]

reddit mentioning that the Tesla Semi page has been updated:

0-60 in 20 seconds with 80k load, <2kWh a mile, .36 drag coefficient, 4 motors, 300 or 500 mile range

Tesla Semi

Reddit: Tesla has updated Semi Page

lower down in the comments, someone said that there weren't any significant changes in the page and that it's been there since 2017.

i guess it's worth a revisit on the info since it's been two years. lol

 

[JustMe]

I think the prop up will be massive government funding of battery factories, and massive loans to keep them going through the fall of the ICE business until the EV business is ramped up enough to put the company on its own feet again.

I see this very likely to play out in Japan and Germany (not necessarily for all players, but, the heavy hitters), and then, by pointing to Germany and Japan to counter public frustration, be used in the US to do the same for GM and Ford.

It's looked like this to me for months now. fwiw, it has been clear to me for years that not only would the ICE incumbents basically not put out vehicles competitive to Tesla, they basically would not even try (see link below).

The likelihood of the German and Japanese governments putting up a huge part of the funding for 11th hour battery factories, and backstopping domestic ICE mfgs balance sheets is the moral hazard that is the last huge incentive to the behavior we've seen play out,

The Fractured Tipping Point Moat

Well put that way, government funding of battery plants does seem rather distasteful, but it’s a darn sight better than propping up coal-fired power plants!

 

[willow_hiller]

lower down in the comments, someone said that there weren't any significant changes in the page and that it's been there since 2017.

i guess it's worth a revisit on the info since it's been two years. lol

Easy to confirm with internet archive: Semi | Tesla seems like the info had indeed been there since around December 2017.

 

[SteveG3]

I listen to him on 2X speed so it got it down to 1 hour. No, his change in strategy had nothing to do with Tesla financials or anything about the company. He said it was all about the strange situation going on with the shorts.

I've made it half-way through so far. Here's the funny thing: He's still very bullish on Tesla over 5 years, he just wanted to go into casino gambling mode. And he flat out admitted it. He also admitted he will probably lose on this move but he couldn't resist it because it's just "too much fun". I tend to agree he's going to lose overall on this hairbrained scheme to profit from a short-squeeze that may or may not happen. And he really cheaped out - all his calls and puts expire on Feb. 21, yes, next month! And the calls are $600 and the puts $300. I'll be really impressed if he does better than holding his shares. I fully expect him to have to admit what a stupid move it was. This is the oddest turn-about I think I've ever seen.

What I was most shocked about was that he only held 1100 shares previously, the way he spoke about his "large" position I thought he had $2-$5 million worth. And that was before it appreciated! I think he said he sold his shares at $404 to go into gambling mode. Just plain stupid. Maybe he needs to check into Gamblers Anonymous? He also admitted that he has lost more money doing stuff like this than almost anyone. But it apparently doesn't matter much because he's also made a sugar-ton of money. Which begs the question: Why did he only have 1100 shares? Too much gambling?

for a guy well on to the likelihood that the bulk of the short position is about massively deep pockets trying to influence Tesla's growth trajectory and image, his betting on a short squeeze is extra puzzling.

 

[Skryll]

IF their stated range holds up.... that's a huge IF.

Too many times we've been fooled to believe competitor EVs would have acceptable range and end up being significantly less than what was initially stated.

and if they don’t just sell a measured quantity for zev credits to Europe and California

 

[StealthP3D]

for a guy well on to the likelihood that the bulk of the short position is about massively deep pockets trying to influence Tesla's growth trajectory and image, his betting on a short squeeze is extra puzzling.

In the video, he does state his belief that even the deep pockets of the oil companies have a limit as to the losses they willing to take on shorting Tesla and he believes they have decided it is at the point that it is no longer worth it or effective in the face of Tesla's obvious successes. As evidence for this, he cited the drop in Tesla hit pieces on Seeking Alpha. He believes the writers are paid by oil interests to write the negative articles and the fact the articles have slowed to a trickle is evidence they are pulling back (and presumably will cover their short positions).

The big hole in this theory is you would expect oil interests to continue the negative articles until after they have covered all their short positions.

Personally, I think a short squeeze is about equally likely to happen after better than anticipated Q1 results as it is in the very near future (after Q4 results). I also think we could get one immediately, going into Q4 earnings. The likelihood of a short squeeze and it's timing is extremely difficult to predict in advance due to limited visibility as to who actually holds the majority of the short positions.

 

[Robertj]

007 thinking on future movements

My summary :Setup looks strong for more pressure on shorts , but be careful

007 on Twitter

007 on Twitter

 

[Bet TSLA]

007 thinking on future movements

My summary :Setup looks strong for more pressure on shorts , but be careful

007 on Twitter

007 on Twitter

This idiot has predicted 100 of the last 5 strong rises in the stock price. He used to post here all the time, and TSLA was always about to go to the moon. Sometimes, of course, he was right. But it was no better than random, and I think much worse. It's like he thinks the stock price can be moved by body english.

 

[SteveG3]

In the video, he does state his belief that even the deep pockets of the oil companies have a limit as to the losses they willing to take on shorting Tesla and he believes they have decided it is at the point that it is no longer worth it or effective in the face of Tesla's obvious successes. As evidence for this, he cited the drop in Tesla hit pieces on Seeking Alpha. He believes the writers are paid by oil interests to write the negative articles and the fact the articles have slowed to a trickle is evidence they are pulling back (and presumably will cover their short positions).

The big hole in this theory is you would expect oil interests to continue the negative articles until after they have covered all their short positions.

Personally, I think a short squeeze is about equally likely to happen after better than anticipated Q1 results as it is in the very near future (after Q4 results). I also think we could get one immediately, going into Q4 earnings. The likelihood of a short squeeze and it's timing is extremely difficult to predict in advance due to limited visibility as to who actually holds the majority of the short positions.

yikes. has he not noticed that those pumping outright smears tend to become a little scarcer with any massive run and are super outgoing when the stock is down? very good point re logical flaw of ending smear campaign before you’ve covered your short position.

I do appreciate that (from what’s been summarized here, he’s basically letting the YouTube audience know ~what I’m doing is most likely foolish but I’m not resisting.~

 

[Quesder]

Looks like I should buy some NIO as hedge
Watch this video and the comments from Chinese customers— they prefer NIO more because of quality and customer service ( if you know Chinese language)

 

[kengchang]

Looks like I should buy some NIO as hedge
Watch this video and the comments from Chinese customers— they prefer NIO more because of quality and customer service ( if you know Chinese language)

FYI : NIO doesn't even build its own car and has negative margin on the car

 

[Artful Dodger]

007 thinking on future movements

My summary :Setup looks strong for more pressure on shorts , but be careful

007 on Twitter

From his Twitter feed:

@s17_scott 4 hrs ago
Replying to TrendTrader007

Any concerns with this war crap? I don’t believe it will escalate but if it does it might dampen things for a bit!

TrendTrader007 4 hrs ago

i just follow charts and my charts look extremely strong- so i am not paying any attention to news​

No RED flags here. Nope.

 

[KarenRei]

I am sample size of one, but I am waiting for plaid myself. I am hoping for much longer range option like 500 miles. I think I am not alone and if they deliver something that exciting no one is modeling how big the sales would be.

Note: Plaid, being track optimized, is pretty much guaranteed to consume more power than existing Ludicrous models. That doesn't mean that that you can't brute force more range by adding even more battery capacity than you're increasing energy consumption. But it's a headwind.

The same pack in a non-Plaid car would produce an even longer range.

You have test driven the Mach-e?

I wasn't aware it was even available yet.

Well, it sure screams quality...

So I got a direct mail add from Audi on Thursday, offering me a $100 Amazon gift card to test drive an e-tron. Can't imagine I'd ever buy a turd, but I am curious to see/drive it in person.

Do it. Monitor the energy consumption on a given route. Then drive the same route in your Tesla and compare.

Yes, and I'm looking for nearly the same range as the Roadster (ie: 620 mi or 1,000 km)

Why on Earth would Tesla do that? "Spend $250k for a Roadster, or get the same range at half the price, with a lot more space"? No logic to that.

I think people are getting way ahead of themselves. They always do this with Tesla. :Þ Tesla could offer buyers the moon, and they'd want two moons. I'll reiterate that there's no guarantee that the pack will even be larger at all. But that sure doesn't stop TMC from assuming that it's going to be literally double the size...

Here's a bonus Charge Rate prediction: 300 miles range added in 15 min via Supercharger v3. Yes, I AM calling for 387 KW avg charge rate to 55% SOC (beginning of taper), perhaps via dual charge port connectors on the Plaid.

Wait, you think Tesla is planning on having the car take up two stalls? Um, no, that's not going to happen.

250kW max. At best they'll wire it to be capable of more for whenever they make "V4" Superchargers. But having just introduced V3, even that's dubious.

Thanks for posting that one-off uncorroborated anecdote in the TSLA investor section of this forum. I just sold all my shares.

Me too! Whew, really dodged a bullet there!!!

Lol, well TBH I want one too the way Boris wants Natasha...

Dual-headed V3 Supercharger at the 'Ring? Just a conincidence...

Cheers!

That's a stock portable Supercharger. They come on pallets and can be dropped anywhere. The fact that there's two pedestals has nothing to do with anything; that's just the way they come (since the V2 cabinets serve two pedestals each). We have the exact same thing here at the Tesla store / service centre in Iceland - they just buried the base into the ground a little bit to make it look more permanent.

 

[FrankSG]

That's a lot of M3s parked in the new parking lot area.

But I thought that area was going to be the new phase for Model Y production? Can anybody point out where the next phase with Model Y is supposed to be built?

 

[FrankSG]

Third Row Podcast on Twitter

Not sure if this has been posted before, but looks like Hardware 3 upgrades are on the way. FSD soon?

 

[Artful Dodger]

Why on Earth would Tesla do that? "Spend $250k for a Roadster, or

Because Tesla can sell 50-100K S/X's per year @100K each, and Roadster will only sell about 5-10K per year @ $200K each. I'll let you do the math.

Wait, you plan on having the car take up two stalls? Um, no, that's not going to happen.

Yeah, ur right. There is no technical way to fix that.

Cheers!

 

[KarenRei]

Because Tesla can sell 50-100K S/X's per year @100K each, and Roadster will only sell about 5-10K per year @ $200K each.

I'll let you do the math.

You have to give people incentive to upsell. You don't make your lower-end cars as good or better than your higher-end cars. And furthermore, is S then supposed to just stagnate all the way until Roadster comes out? Or is it supposed to just keep going up in range, making the Roadster look all the more ridiculous?

The wishful thinking over S/X that we always see (but which got really bad in 1H '19) seems to be surging again :Þ Hey, where's all the "imminent huge pack upgrade switch to 2170s" people that had been posting relentlessly and discouraging people from buying S/Xs for the past three years because "they'd soon be obsolete"?

Now that S/X will actually be getting a pack upgrade - at least for the high end (~$125k or so) - people are now convincing themselves that this means that it's going to literally double in energy capacity and charge at rates that require taking up two stalls :Þ

Yeah, ur right. There is no technical way to fix that.

I have no clue what you're trying to say. Only one cable can be used at once. Are you trying to say that they're going to - after just having done a retrofit - go back and retrofit stations again? And then add more cabinets to be able to power these extra cables for the extra power per stall? And the transformers and switchgears for those cabinets? And double up the feeds to the stations?

There's no logic to any of this. Tesla is switching to 250kW per stall. They just started this switchover. They're not going to suddenly jump up to way higher than 250kW per stall.

The wishful thinking is getting crazy again. :Þ

 

[KarenRei]

That's a lot of M3s parked in the new parking lot area.

But I thought that area was going to be the new phase for Model Y production? Can anybody point out where the next phase with Model Y is supposed to be built?

Oh shoot, I forgot to post that video when it came out like I was planning to.

But seriously, how have people not noticed that Tesla keeps doing exactly this, repeatedly - paving a lot, storing things on it, then when they need the space to build buildings, tearing it up for them?

Paving ground and tearing it up (as needed for new foundations) are proportionally fast and cheap. The concrete pour on that whole huge area took what, maybe 3-4 days? The act of building the parking lots involves all of the drainage and grading work that they need to do either way.

I found nothing out of the ordinary with any of that. New lot being used for cars (which I called a while back, in my "Debbie Downer" post for people thinking that was the Y line going up), previous lots being torn up. The main thing that piqued my curiosity was the tent that they're building. I wonder what they plan to use that for?

 

[sundaymorning]

Mercedes said they’re going to delay the EQC a year to 2021 in the US market, now we know why:

Once-deemed ‘Tesla killer’ Mercedes EQC flops with 55 units sold in Germany to date

If Benz can’t sell their $70k cars at home on their own turf, they sure as heck won’t be able to compete with Tesla’s Model Y at $39k

 

[ReflexFunds]

In the video, he does state his belief that even the deep pockets of the oil companies have a limit as to the losses they willing to take on shorting Tesla and he believes they have decided it is at the point that it is no longer worth it or effective in the face of Tesla's obvious successes. As evidence for this, he cited the drop in Tesla hit pieces on Seeking Alpha. He believes the writers are paid by oil interests to write the negative articles and the fact the articles have slowed to a trickle is evidence they are pulling back (and presumably will cover their short positions).

The big hole in this theory is you would expect oil interests to continue the negative articles until after they have covered all their short positions.

Personally, I think a short squeeze is about equally likely to happen after better than anticipated Q1 results as it is in the very near future (after Q4 results). I also think we could get one immediately, going into Q4 earnings. The likelihood of a short squeeze and it's timing is extremely difficult to predict in advance due to limited visibility as to who actually holds the majority of the short positions.

I do agree that fossil fuel interests and ICE auto interests are a very likely a large force behind TSLAQ and Tesla short interest, but I don't think its as blatant and straightforward as oil companies directly shorting Tesla shares.

Propaganda, lobbying and slander of competitors is standard corporate practice, and frankly I think it is absurd to assume that the $3trillion oil industry and $3 trillion ICE Auto industry are not doing anything to protect themselves from renewable energy and EVs.

A huge lobbying and propaganda arm was set up by these interests, particularly by oil/coal billionaires/multi millionaires and oligarchs, to discredit climate science and delay action for 20+ years.
I think it's quite obvious that much of this infrastructure was redirected to targeting Tesla and Elon when it became clear how direct a threat they were. Many of the short narratives are likely crafted and pushed by these groups, but I think many of the journalists and TSLAQ social media accounts are people that have been conned by these narratives and are not directly employed by these fossil fuel PR firms. Many of these people have then taken to joining in and deliberately exaggerating and distorting to profit and aid their cause.
Oil wealth is also a large investor in hedge funds, and I also think it likely there has been a lot of pressure from these investors on the hedge fund PMs to hold their Tesla short positions and push the short narrative.
There are also many employees in the oil and auto industries that have been made to feel threatened by renewable energy and Tesla and so have their own motives for attacking them.