Swampgator
Active Member
The software fix was only for repeated emergency braking. Something not likely to occur on a regular street.
-
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
Anecdotal data point - an old co-worker of mine decided to buy the Model 3 over the iPace and Leaf. One primary reason - charging network. She sees no point in buying a car from any other brand if they don't have a similar network to Tesla.
I understand that all three of my cars do emergency braking just fine in emergencies. If I have three emergencies in a row, I have a different problem than that.
If you have to emergency brake five times in succession, there is a problem and it's not with the car. It's not possible to test for every single edge case.
"A company must disclose the following information upon entry into, or material amendment of, a material definitive agreement:
- The date on which the agreement was entered into or amended, the identity of the parties to the agreement and a brief description of any material relationship between the company or its affiliates and any of the parties, other than in respect of the material definitive agreement or amendment; and
- A brief description of the terms and conditions of the agreement or amendment that are material to the company."
Final Rule: Additional Form 8-K Disclosure Requirements and Acceleration of Filing Date; Rel. No. 33-8400; S7-22-02
The initial ZEV Credit Sale Agreements with Honda were disclosed (albeit with numerous redactions) as an Exhibit to the IPO S-1. In the early years after the IPO, TSLA went to some lengths to comply with the spirit of that 8k rule; see as examples:
https://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/8fb6d9d9-8f98-4d6d-a65e-644097bc7d0d Purchase of $15 MM of NUMMI ancillary equipment
https://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/b8541c63-ad52-4b6d-8aac-299d2e6423ab Salary raises for JB and Deepak
https://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/34e43824-64b9-48b6-8609-5880093590ab Panasonic Cell Supply
https://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/a60223a1-aa2f-4cfe-b5a5-d28d18415669 Toyota RAV-4 EV Agreement
https://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/42979655-200d-468f-a466-69dddc3e7f37 Increase in gliders from Lotus
Once the FUDsters started dissecting such disclosures, apparently a decision was made internally to comply with the literal minimum required by the 8k rule.https://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/b8541c63-ad52-4b6d-8aac-299d2e6423ab Salary raises for JB and Deepak
https://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/34e43824-64b9-48b6-8609-5880093590ab Panasonic Cell Supply
https://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/a60223a1-aa2f-4cfe-b5a5-d28d18415669 Toyota RAV-4 EV Agreement
https://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/42979655-200d-468f-a466-69dddc3e7f37 Increase in gliders from Lotus
So much for:
"Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman." (And all the other profound wisdom in Justice Brandeis' other famous quotations.) Justice Louis D. Brandeis | Brandeis University
It's baffling why the prevailing opinion here is against an 8k providing more details about the potential revenue stream from FCA, particularly since there would be little, if any, expense (COGS) causing the entire amount to be GAAP profits.
I'd be the same when buying today, but I'm still in love with ancient Model S's.
From an investor's stand point, it's odd to see so many vacant stalls and no-one charging at cost + $0.25/kWh.
As an investor, I'd want Tesla to just open the network. Even just when stall coverage allows for it. they are so great with software, right? The ChargeAtTesla app to get CCS access would be an intern's job and instantly bring in revenue. That charging network is a great asset but it could be a revenue generating asset at almost exactly the same cost.
IDK....haha....just wishfully thinking in my head how to infuse some ethics.....
Soooo..., this is the new argument. Instead of "Look out Tesla! The competition is coming for you!", its now:
"well, that wasn't the real competition. But if it was, look out!" and:
"We could have done better, but we don't want to kill our ICE car sales", and:
"The REAL competition IS coming, we just can't tell you when."
Its just interesting the ridiculous excuses people make up just so they can ignore the fact that Tesla is, and will continue to, dominate the EV competition. What a joke.
Also, just an FYI: Audi IS trying to sell the Etron turd. I got a private invitation to a one day event at my local Audi dealer (that is all the longer they were allowed to keep the demo unit). And, I have seen the Audi ad on TV at least twice a day lately for the Etron. This doesn't sound like a car they are trying to avoid selling.
How would the others pay for it? Tesla doesn't use a card, it uses the car to authorize. Now I suppose you could create an adapter with a card reader and an internet connection, but that would add cost to the adaptor and I don't suppose it would be that hard to hack since access to the hardware is usually the easiest way.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Usually such bills would take a couple of months - if there is no big opposition because of ideological reasons or lobbies opposing it.
2. if it does pass, will it be retroactively applied to current sales
Probably. Have to read the language of the bill to be sure.
3. how likely is this bill to pass
Easy through the House where Dems have a majority - and rules make it impossible for minority to block it.
In the Senate, a minority can block - but usually happens only if there are strong lobbies opposing it but mostly due to ideological / political grand standing reasons. Also, the leadership in the senate will have to prioritize and bring it first through the committee (looks like the committee chairman earlier tried to kill the entire tax credit as it is now) and then through the full Senate. Usually in this Senate, the Republican leadership will not bring anything that Trump doesn't approve to vote at all. So, if it goes through the Senate, it will probably get signed.
In other words - if the bill can get through the Senate, it will easily get through the House and get signed.
The bill is bipartisan - but supported only by Alexander who is retiring and Collins who frequently breaks with other Republicans (because her state is competitive and she faces a re-election in 2020). I don't see them saying anything about how they will get it through Senate. So, it could just be one of those bills that will just languish and will never get taken up or it has real legs if the auto industry lobbies hard to get it passed. At this moment I don't have a sense of where it is ... will need more reporting on this (esp. comments from other Senators or auto industry lobbyists).
I think that is more than a little premature thinking on your part. Tesla just started delivering the Model 3 in Europe less than 2 months ago, so they are no where near market penetration. Especially when not all SC stations have been converted to CCS. Its bad enough that Model S and X owners are taking the CCS stalls that the Model 3 owners need. Think how much worse it would be if you would add a bunch of Audi, BMW, or other EV cars to the load.
I'm disappointed you felt the need to write in that tone.Soooo..., this is the new argument. Instead of "Look out Tesla! The competition is coming for you!", its now:
"well, that wasn't the real competition. But if it was, look out!" and:
"We could have done better, but we don't want to kill our ICE car sales", and:
"The REAL competition IS coming, we just can't tell you when."
Its just interesting the ridiculous excuses people make up just so they can ignore the fact that Tesla is, and will continue to, dominate the EV competition. What a joke.
Also, just an FYI: Audi IS trying to sell the Etron turd. I got a private invitation to a one day event at my local Audi dealer (that is all the longer they were allowed to keep the demo unit). And, I have seen the Audi ad on TV at least twice a day lately for the Etron. This doesn't sound like a car they are trying to avoid selling.
Just because I can think about other brand without throwing up a bit in mouth doesn't mean I am on Team Dino Juice.
This is my personal opinion and I've not come across many who share the exact same point of view. Heck, I'm usually the best part of a decade ahead with tech stuff that tickles me the right way. I feel silly for getting into BEVs only around 2013-2014. I blame women and my own weakness for them as the distraction of my 30s.
There is a whole rainbow between white and black. Did you notice how Model 3's built in 2017 will get doubled the charging speed once V3 chargers are deployed? It was part of the "anti-selling" that was very real. Audi do have a future planned for themselves selling loads of BEVs. They have not forfeited post-2025 Chinese exports and can't be caught being toooo compliance-minded in the eye off the quickly smartening public.
Please take a moment to realize that there is a difference between digging in your heels and modulating your speed to try and hit the light rolling just as it goes green.
Personally I would have preferred seeing this in an 8k, for the simple reason we would have more clarity on the deal.
As to the requirement they file an 8k, there could be some wiggle room. From your link “requires the disclosure of material definitive agreements entered into by a company that are not made in the ordinary course of business.”
One could argue that selling regulatory credits generally and using their zero emission vehicles to offset other manufactures emissions specifically has become an ordinary course of Tesla’s business.
Last edited:
How hard would it be for Tesla to flash a message "Charging NOT initiated, please keep the dual cable chargers free for our friends in Model 3s"?
The CCS conversion decision was made as the best one for new cars. And it was decided to not even give Model 3 the old charge connector anymore. Adding CCS cables an/or adapters could have been decided upon for commercial reasons. Would it be viable? Companies are building brand new CCS charging stations, Tesla did most of the investment already!
When en route, an Audi driver could see that a SC would be favorable, less of a detour. The Tesla app would show whether a stall could be made available within the set time frame. If the Audi gets the OK, at worst it will be queuing along with the Teslas if suddenly the station gets congested anyway. Other cars would not get the OK and not get any charge there.
They're doing it all wrong anyway, you need to leave the EV's as they are and slap a suitable pollution tax on the ICE - as they do in Norway and to a certain degree in other Europe countries.
The cash flow penalty is not that severe given the un-used commitments under the Warehouse Credit line. Direct leases means Tesla assumes both the lessees' credit risks and the residual value risks, but as long as Tesla can continue with TALTs as the leases season, It's not a bad financial plan. However, outright sales are preferable to direct leases from a GAAP profitability perspective.
Trade-offs abound.
This hardly belongs here. Perhaps you should start a thread about this. Or find one of the other many threads designed for suggestions to Tesla. Or as an investor, maybe submit it to IR. Or tweet Elon.
We're dealing with trolls here, not bacteria. They use the sunlight with smoke and mirrors to transform pets into imaginary monsters.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
