Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Totally dodged the question of how they manage to come up with a 2/5 overall rating when all the components of the rating are 4/5 or 5/5. I mean, you'd think they'd at least explain their math.

Honestly, this is my one problem with how the questions were posted. Posting so many at once gave him cover to answer a few of the easier ones before throwing up his hands and saying there were too many. This is the one I’d like to see answered.
 
KarenRei:
"Are you claiming that paint and trim are "reliability" issues? If so, I can sympathize, as my paint rebooted while I was driving the other day... ;)"​

CR: "Crickets"

This was a great line of question. They said they have a value weighting, but it did not seem to have anything to do with the functionality of getting from point A to point B. In IT, you usually rate the chance of failure and the risk of failure to assign resources and estimate your overall risk level.
Example:
CPU failure and car fails completely. Odds of happening 1/100,000 (I have no idea what the number is). You would have a very low probability of happening, but a high impact, so the odds are .000001, but the impact is high.
Paint chip: Odds of happening 1/10 last June, 1/100 in November, 1/1000 today. Risk now 0.001, but impact is low.

I will grant that return trips for service are a pain in the neck and the improvements in process made this year, would not have shown up in their results. That ding may happen in the background and could have weighed heavily.
 
Side note: confirmation that Vicki Salvador was let go for violating NDA by sharing production numbers:
vickis.PNG
 
I don't think auto safety glass shatters that easily. It's made to not splatter everywhere. Also I thought the cops had arrived late - car engulfed and that only bystanders had been trying to break the windows.
That could very well be. It wasn't how I understood it, but I wasn't there.

My wife thinks it is difficult to shatter: she had to try multiple times (I assure everyone it was for a good cause). In my misspent youth I may have had direct knowledge of breaking auto glass. Let's just say I was surprised by how easily it went. "How hard" you hit the glass is less important than "how sharply". It doesn't take that much force, and it helps to have it concentrated in a small area.
 
Tesla had already set similar guidance on their call -- Elon specifically said "Maybe on the order of 350,000 to 500,000 Model 3s, something like that this year." All the tweet did was restate something the company had already made public. what on earth do you or the SEC see here that is in any way interesting? it's absurd and a total witch hunt.

You probably shouldn't use the phrase "total witch hunt" if what you want is to convince someone an investigation is without merit.
 
That could very well be. It wasn't how I understood it, but I wasn't there.

My wife thinks it is difficult to shatter: she had to try multiple times (I assure everyone it was for a good cause). In my misspent youth I may have had direct knowledge of breaking auto glass. Let's just say I was surprised by how easily it went. "How hard" you hit the glass is less important than "how sharply". It doesn't take that much force, and it helps to have it concentrated in a small area.
Why was this person banned?

hitting the glass in the middle of its surface area going to take a lot more effort than hitting it near the frame. tempered glass is surprisingly strong. you can stand on a pinball machine without breaking the glass, for example (note: this is not investment advice).

on a side note: not generally relevant to breaking into a car, but you can easily shatter tempered glass by tapping it fairly lightly on it's *edge* with a blunt object. this is a lesson many people like me who restore pinball machines know all too well. :)
 
Last edited:
He could have done it before but did not, citing that reason so why should he now?
The short answer is because the first attempt was announced too early and caused all sorts of issues. He could do it now by lining up investors ahead of time.

It also depends on how hard the SEC turns the screws. At some point the risk of going private will be outweighed by the risk of staying public.