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

[shrspeedblade]

A Minnesota Republican rep also recently introduced a proposal for a $250 annual EV surcharge and a $125 fee on Hybrids. It's almost as if someone else is writing these bills in a coordinated attack on EVs at the state level.

The justification is that EVs and even (shockingly) hybrids are not paying their fair share in road taxes. Minnesota already has an $75 surcharge per EV. In addition to the fact that we basically pay property tax on our vehicles each year. My bill this year for my Model S and Model 3 came to about $2000 (Per year). It's shocking to me that they are even doing this to owners of hybrids, because they are too fuel efficient. Not to mention the fact that everyone who fuels up an EV already pays taxes on the fuel (the electricity is taxed).

This just seems like horrible policy, at a time everyone is buying SUVs by the boatloads and gas in the US is at historic low prices, we are attacking EVs and Hybrids. For shame.

Minnesota Republican-backed tax on hybrid and electric cars would be highest in U.S. – Twin Cities

It's the not-enough-carbon tax. Not too hard to figure out who is writing this legislation and handing it to the pols.

 

[RobStark]

Video is a rehash of the weeks Tesla news but thumbnail is funny.

 

[Fobble]

Totally agree with you. Word of mouth can affect one person at a time. A website can serve 10 million people a day. Tesla needs a good website, maybe created and maintained by fans, to set the records straight. Then when we talk to someone new to EV, we can give them the website.

This website can group info under several tabs:

1. Total ownership cost comparison between (Tesla's) EVs and ICE vehicles

2. Safety

3. Why EVs are good for environment and health

4. Quality and how long can the vehicles/batteries last

5. Autopilot and full self-driving

6. Tesla's mission, master plans and open patents

7. Charging, daily drive and long distance travel.

8. Daily news
...

With latest deaths on MS and M3, FUD will pound on #2 to death.

 

[gringotuanis]

THIS.
People on TMC forget the sheer amount of FUD that is out there.
I mean, basically every media and outlet is biased against Tesla, and this is has been damaging the reputation of Tesla for years.
If every and each media (even the "most respectable", as NYT or WP) portraits Tesla as failing and Elon as a lunatic, you end up believing it. It's not your fault.
I personally don't discuss Tesla much with friends, especially after the pedo tweets and articles on working safety and union suppression. I can't always reply that the only source of verifiable information is a forum on the internet...
I sound like a conspiracy theorist.
And this exactly why the FUD campaigns are working: if nobody "important" tells the truth, FUD reigns, and good and reliable information is just lost in the noise.

I think this will solve itself when people see the truth with their eyes:
a flood of M3s on the streets, multiple profitable quarters on 10Ks.

I wish Tesla were better with social media, but probably in this case Elon wants complete freedom and control: so we are stuck with the occasional pedo/funding/SEC tweet and the much more common (but less newsworthy) good ceo/helpdesk/problem solver.

Or a little thing called advertising? This is why Tesla needs to advertise. I bet most ppl don't even know the range available and how fast they can charge now.

 

[kyzhk]

Totally agree with you. Word of mouth can affect one person at a time. A website can serve 10 million people a day. Tesla needs a good website, maybe created and maintained by fans, to set the records straight. Then when we talk to someone new to EV, we can give them the website.

This website can group info under several tabs:

1. Total ownership cost comparison between (Tesla's) EVs and ICE vehicles

2. Safety

3. Why EVs are good for environment and health

4. Quality and how long can the vehicles/batteries last

5. Autopilot and full self-driving

6. Tesla's mission, master plans and open patents

7. Charging, daily drive and long distance travel.

8. Daily news
...

Just want to add that

3.5 Referring to @Fact Checking analysis on monetary damage to health and environment from the use of fossil fuel vehicle that there is ~$17-$21 damage done per gallon of gasoline/diesel consumed (those directly due to tailpipe emission):
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the 2019 Investors' Roundtable

I will for sure remember this figure and bring it up in lunch with my friends, family and colleague.

 

[brian45011]

I agree with everything you said, but...
Tesla policy, or agreement with SEC (or both) calls for pre-approval of material information, or what could be material information (I've seen it somewhere in documents I read). Production progress and numbers are categories specifically called in Tesla's policy as potentially material. That this tweet didn't turn out to be material is a fact proven by market reaction, but it could have been material. Yet part of it the reason it didn't become material is certainly built-in suspicion in stuff Elon says, which isn't helping his case much.
I think we will need to rely on the fact that those numbers were mentioned in a conference call, more than anything else.
I think Elon gets off with the warning, and more likely than not, SEC gets warning too.

Some credit should go to the Securities Counsel (aka twitter sitter). Any significant market reaction to the first twitter message was curtailed by the prompt reaction (still in the thinly-traded after-hours market) with a follow-up clarification. If the clarification had been delayed until sometime in the following trading day during normal market hours, particularly since there would have been sufficient time for MSM to spin the original tweet, Dr. Noe's analysis and conclusion could have been much more complicated.

 

[Lucky_Man]

After Hours Humor:

I've read here that Elon Musk will not advertise Tesla. As a TSLA-long investor, I'm ok with that.

I must note that, IMO, Product Placement is vastly superior, at least in the sense of emotive response. When we watch a movie that has a Tesla immediately recognizable, my wife and I smirk at each other and do a fist-bump. So, product placement may not sell more cars, but it offers an honest feel-good moment for us personally.

I mean, c'mon! Who among us wouldn't love to see Jason Statham (The Transporter trilogy) tearing off in a Model S P100DL to rescue his next damsel in distress?!?

True, there might be some gear heads who'd miss seeing him slamming the stick while power-shifting his Audi. On the other hand, I think we'd all enjoy watching him speed-typing his next destination into Tesla's Navigate-by-Autopilot screen, then quietly speeding off while charming the aforementioned rescued damsel!

 

[Tifighter]

BTW, there's rumours that the upcoming Tesla service centre is going to be in a building just a couple hundred meters away from me

Yeah, I’m sure that is a coincidence...

 

[1101011]

A Minnesota Republican rep also recently introduced a proposal for a $250 annual EV surcharge and a $125 fee on Hybrids. It's almost as if someone else is writing these bills in a coordinated attack on EVs at the state level.

Ever heard of ALEC?

 

[gringotuanis]

These ships can typically take 6-6.5k cars. However, the original reporting said the Belgian port was prepped by ICO for receiving up to 3k cars. Not sure about the Chinese port(s)

Most of the estimates on Twitter seem to be in the 2k to 3k range by the non experts that track the ships

 

[Artful Dodger]

It's almost as if someone else is writing these bills in a coordinated attack on EVs at the state level.

WAY OT (maybe)

You're kidding, right? That is EXACTLY what the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) does with its model legislation. Copy'n'Paste Law served up hot'ready from the Koch Bros. kitchen for consumption at GOP-controlled State tables.

This is hardly new. It's been going on for over two years:

Flurry of State Bills Introduced, Likely Backed by Oil Industry, to Penalize Electric Car Drivers

ALEC are such flaming hypocrites that, on one hand, they oppose the $7,500 Fed Tax Credit for EVs with this model legislation (whining about 'fair tax treament' for all vehicles):

***WARNING - LINK TO ALEC SITE ***
Resolution Supporting Equal Tax Treatment for All Vehicles​

...then, on the other hand, the same gang of fossil fools push for extra taxes on Hybrids, and DOUBLE those extra taxes for BEVs to discourage their adoption.

But you knew all this and you were just kidding, right?

/rant

 

[K_Dizzle]

After Hours Humor:

I've read here that Elon Musk will not advertise Tesla. As a TSLA-long investor, I'm ok with that.

I must note that, IMO, Product Placement is vastly superior, at least in the sense of emotive response. When we watch a movie that has a Tesla immediately recognizable, my wife and I smirk at each other and do a fist-bump. So, product placement may not sell more cars, but it offers an honest feel-good moment for us personally.

I mean, c'mon! Who among us wouldn't love to see Jason Statham (The Transporter trilogy) tearing off in a Model S P100DL to rescue his next damsel in distress?!?

True, there might be some gear heads who'd miss seeing him slamming the stick while power-shifting his Audi. On the other hand, I think we'd all enjoy watching him speed-typing his next destination into Tesla's Navigate-by-Autopilot screen, then quietly speeding off while charming the aforementioned rescued damsel!

I suggest you watch Liam new sons new movie, you and your wife will be goat bumping for 1 hour straight

 

[Artful Dodger]

(I don't know how much spare time the Fremont press lines have available.)

I looked into that a few months back. With some Tesla mods, the current Model 3 presses have about 14K vehicles/week capacity. They'd need new dies for the unique parts of the Model Y. So stop gap, temporary production at best.

 

[kelly]

Ok after hours SEC talk. I have reviewed the pleadings so far and I was about to post that the Judge will permit a Reply Brief by the SEC when someone posted the Order. You guys are incredible. The Local Rules govern the proceeding here. I believe Rule 83 covers civil contempt. Basically there will be wide open briefing and exchange of legal and factual arguments. In Federal Court affidavits are called declarations and they set forth the facts and the briefs argue the application to and of the law. I was surprised by the burden of proof, clear and convincing. This is a much higher obligation on the SEC.
Lets talk procedure first. The Judge has offered both parties the opportunity for an evidentiary hearing. This is a right under the Local Rule. An evidentiary hearing is only necessary if the facts are in dispute. I am interested in whether the SEC points out disputed facts and asks for a hearing. EM may also request a hearing if the SEC alleges facts he believes are incorrect. Lets be clear facts are much different from opinion, interpretation and application of law. If no one requests an evidentiary hearing it is a sign that they all believe the facts are not in dispute significantly. I suspect that the tweets, the public disclosures the effect on the market, Tesla Policy and most other facts are not in dispute but the interpretation of them is as is the law.
I can also see a hearing in which evidence is not taken but each side argues the law. The Court has discretion to hear argument of counsel in order to ask questions and clarify the positions in the briefs.
I found EM's brief exceptional. I appreciated the way that the First Amendment argument was raised even though it can only be applied under a particular interpretation of the SEC's position. With all I have seen thus far I see a difficult hill to climb for the SEC on Tesla policy, prior release of information, materiality and motive. I think I said previously that I would never take a case before a Judge with this level of minimal level of potential contempt. So far I would not expect a dramatic victory for either party even though EM deserves it. Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if the Court said no contempt was shown but cautioned EM and Tesla about the seriousness of the Agreement. I could also see an interpretation that there was no harm but EM is lectured about tweeting. Both of these should be seen as victories for EM but saving face for the SEC. So far I have seen nothing that shows a clear and convincing proof of contempt but hey I am just one person and obviously the SEC disagrees

I am a bit behind on reading the forum, but I am very happy to see you weigh in on the Tesla Response. I was hoping you would and I was hoping you would see things the way you do. I also read the response and was very impressed.

I don't mind the judge giving Elon a lecture if she feels it is necessary, but I would hope she would then turn to the SEC and lecture them on the perils of overreaching. One can hope.

 

[KarenRei]

I looked into that a few months back. With some Tesla mods, the current Model 3 presses have about 14K vehicles/week capacity. They'd need new dies for the unique parts of the Model Y. So stop gap, temporary production at best.

Wow, where did you get those numbers? That's much higher than I expected. That'd be a brilliant stopgap if so - that could support 7k at Fremont + 3k at Shanghai + 4k MY or whatnot.

 

[TradingInvest]

With latest deaths on MS and M3, FUD will pound on #2 to death.

Law of large numbers. That's why we need a reliable source to look at this objectively. Each year 1.25 million people get killed in traffic accidents. According to NHTSA, there was an automotive fatality every 86M miles in 2017 (~40,000 deaths in the US). Tesla was every 320M miles.

 

[TNEVol]

I don't know, this is a government agency we're talking about. The track record for government agencies being held in a negative light isn't real strong. After all, there are a lot more egregious actions the SEC has taken (or not taken as the case may be...aka short manipulation) that has gone unpunished in any way, shapem, or form. It would not surprise me if the court found in the SEC's favor. Not because I think it is right, but because I'm not totally comfortable with the American justice system. (I can say that, I'm an American lol)

Dan

I would be pleasantly surprised if the SEC took a major hit. However I think that is very unlikely. EM will likely prevail but not in a way that calls out the SEC. I think it is a win for EM even if the Court finds a technical issue with the tweet but no damages. The more likely result would be no contempt but a lecture from the Court to both parties on meeting the obligations of the agreement. These are big WINS for me because the government always gets the benefit of interpreting it own authority and gets great deference from the courts. I really hope I am too skeptical but that comes from 45 years of representing and suing the government

 

[capster]

Agreed. I think Musk has already proven his ability to tunnel quickly and cheaply. Yeah, they didn't have a chance to smooth out the first tunnel's pavers before unveiling, but is there anyone who actually thinks that's a legitimate challenge?

They're fortunate to be doing proof-of-concept work in Los Angeles. Los Angeles's geology, particularly the north side of the city, is particularly diverse and complicated. Bedrock depth varies greatly. Sometimes the sediment on top is pure, sometimes it's full of boulders. The water table varies greatly, and seasonally. There's pockets of oil and gas in certain places in town. Etc. Basically, if they can prove that they can tunnel effectively across LA, in all the various conditions and substrates, they can do it anywhere.

When I first heard of the Boring Company, it was a "Huh?" moment for me.

Then I thought about it and did some speculating around cost. I worked from the low end up, ‘cause it’s easy (skeptics might want to work down in, say, halves). What if the cost per mile was zero, then a little bit more, etc., then what are the use cases? Kinda interesting if you think about it, a “Huh, whaddya know!" moment for me.

The question then is, can Musk get a virtuous cycle of innovation going around tunneling? Depends on the business model, but notice they have three tunnel products. They’re not selling boring machines at the Boring Co. either (get it? groan ) so I expect they’ve a line on it.

Now, I’m a fan.

 

[TNEVol]

It is really simple.
First, the market data proves definitively that the tweet in question was not material since it precipitated no market movement. That is a quite definitive standard, one which the SEC must apply if they pursue a civil or criminal action.
Second, if the SEC chose to pursue legal action claiming a violation, they must prove their assertion.
Third, if proof of immateriality is present, but teh SEC chose to proceed anyway, they must prove their own case.
Their own case allegedly relied on TSLA share traders providing evidence, which must be presented to prove their case.
Of course, if they wish to avoid discovery they can drop their case and void the original agreement that precipitated their assertions.

It's a civil action, the plaintiff has no alternative other than present their evidence unless they wish to drop the case. Their standard of proof is less in a civil than a criminal case, and the SEC has rarely pursued such cases, almost never in the absence of clear criminal action in violation of an agreement.

Discovery on a motion for contempt is very unlikely. The parties will use declarations and if there is a factual dispute an evidentiary hearing. This is not going to expand past the issue of whether the tweet violated the consent decree.

 

[Opus BC fan]

After Hours OT

The greatest contributions to most fields are from outsiders. These are the people that can approach things in a novel way. All groups establish norms for themselves. If you try to effect change from within the group, you will be censored in many ways. If you approach from outside the group, you are disruptive. I think we can all agree that Tesla is disruptive to many entrenched group systems.


Functional and dysfunctional systems (industrial, political, and economic) work to maintain themselves. Dysfunctional organizations require scapegoats, an outside enemy, to maintain internal balance. These dysfunctional systems are incapable of learning and adapting. They are only focused on avoiding collapse. They are in survival mode and that can get very ugly.


There is a behavioral phenomenon called "the extinction burst". Before we give up on behavior that has ceased to be rewarding, we do more of that behavior. [example: drop a coin in a pop machine and press your selection. If nothing happens you will press the button a few more times and maybe pound your fist on it. Only after that extinction burst will you begin to explore other behaviors]. So as things get more desperate for the ICE manufacturers, I expect we will see more of what has worked in the past.


IMHO, Tesla's goal of accelerating the adoption of BEVs by other auto manufacturers will only partially be achieved. Most of them will collapse precipitously because they cannot change. But before the fall they will fight with propaganda, advertising, political favors, corruption or any means available. They are fighting for their survival. Tesla is fighting for our survival. I do hope new serious BEV manufacturers fill the upcoming void to join with Tesla in achieving its’ goal.


The extinction burst will not be pretty. This will be repeated in energy (and the economies and political systems built around fossil fuels). Tesla will not only survive this extinction burst - it will thrive.