Based on what I've read, I'm pretty sure the SEC does not want a ruling from the judge, and Elon just wants something reasonable that will keep the SEC from continuing nuisance suits. So I think they will come to an agreement. (IANAL)
-
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
Yet, Nissan someone weaseled some people into buying a small battery car. Most seem to love it and drive the heck out of it.
A very good point. Buy a 50 kWh Tesla and get to borrow a 100 kWh for a certain number of days per year. These drivers would be on < 55 kWh exposure and never skip a SC fewer than absolutely necessary. We are suppose to move away from the car ownership paradigm, per Tesla, right?
The defunct battery swap service would have come in handy here, seasonality or range desire the greatest downside perhaps. I wonder where Nio might go with their swap service.
Durable low cost batteries and 5-minute swaps, what's not to like? Tesla's SC network takes a lot of real estate and capital investment as well. Not sure which cells get more coverage, those in Powerpacks or those in batteries about to be put back into cars of travelers.
what a grade-A db
i don’t get how there’s nothing else in life for these miserable bastards then to wallow in their own group hatred of, basically themselves, once you get to the core of it.
You are conveniently forgetting that charge and power rates are lower with smaller packs. Also you are increasing cycle rate so overall battery life gets shorter.
The only advantage to smaller battery is weight that you have to carry around, that is it.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Lol, you have an oddly selective view. Yesterday Elon said the stock market is manic depressive. I think this proves he reads this forum.
Firstly, he deliberately focused on US deliveries in 2018H2 in order to maximize US residents access to incentives. I believe his words last year were "We will do the right thing". That was a choice, and was motivated by good will. Same as Tesla sending powerwalls on priority delivery to Puerto Rico. The man is altruistic beyond doubt.
2019Q1 was a good plan, with a reasonable chance of success. Biggest hiccup was Panasonic under-delivering bty cells. To remedy that, Tesla will buy Maxwell becoming the sole source of the world's most advanced lithium battery cells. But it'll take time. Elon's will take that time. Will you? He says 'Maxwell bty day' will be later this year or next. That's how long it'll take. For reals.
Second biggest hiccup was delayed deliveries. 1-time teething pains can be expected, but not planned for in advance. But now those extra Euros and Yuan are safely in the bank, and production, shipments, and deliveries will go forward in a steadier stream.
Tesla doesn't need a capital raise urgently, they started Q2 with $2.2 B in cash and guided for positive FCF in Q2. With GF3/Shanghai already funded from local ABS bonds, there's no financial pressure there either, just tremendous latent demand for the best EV in the world. Let's wait and see what capital requirements are for Model Y production. Should be decided in a few weeks. Then the capital requirements can be assessed.
As far as "seriously raised uncertainty about the sustainable demand levels", Tesla was working on a major S/X production refit throughout Q1. So the problem is just they didn't tell everyone in advance? Osbourne here often? Or is it supposed to happened overnight?
Look I understand you feel disappointed in Q1 but both Elon and Tesla are working in good faith as fast as possible. NOT ONE SINGLE other company on earth made even remotely similar progress in even the past 10 years as Tesla did in the last 2 quarters.
Tesla and Elon should be congratulated for their achievement, not micro-managed by Thursday-morning Quarterbacks. Elon also this has long-standing guidance for investors: "If you don't like volatility, sell our stock".
Cheers!
The reference may have been to:
We adopted the new leasing standard, ASC 842 on January 1, 2019, which resulted in (i) recognition of right-of-use assets of $1.29 billion (as “Operating lease right-of-use assets”) and lease liabilities of $1.24 billion for operating leases on the consolidated balance sheet, and (ii) de-recognition of build-to-suit lease assets (from “Property, plant & equipment”) and liabilities of $1.62 billion and $1.74 billion, respectively, with the net impact of $96.7 million recorded to accumulated deficit.
The institutions may wait until the 10Q, with more "granularity," is filed before re-assessing their positions.
If you count the other way around, without the shipping f-up, they'have $600M in stead of $700M loss. So where did the rest come from if they guided profits, maybe forever?
In hindsight, the impact of delaying deliveries from 2Q18 to 3Q18 in order to surpass the 200,000 limit at the very beginning of a quarter may not have been fully appreciated.
Is it fair to compare the 2012 market for $60K, 40 kWh luxury sedans with today's?
The SC network, everyone tells me, has come a long way. And I sure see that with the various 50 kW networks.
If people still buy all the range they can afford, perhaps Tesla should try harder (again) to explain BEVing to newcomers. First the fight was to justify less range than on a tank of fuel. And these forums were very vocal about it. Now, with all those chargers and improved efficiencies, I see the likes of you defending needlessly long range cars. Don't we both care for the environment? A 100 kWh car only makes sense environmentally if it displaces a brand new high annual mileage petrol car. Say, you run a SF-LA transfer service and you don't want to stop any longer than a pee brake, even switch drivers to make that safe as possible. It's then a solid BMW/Audi/Merc petrol cars, or a Tesla, basically. In the case of a minivan, those kind of compete for footprint/person/mile in the same way planes and trains do, but I digress. For such a service, and I know they exist, 100 kWh seems warranted. These operators log crazy miles on Tesla and indicate that they may be halfway to the million mile car already, at least with this type of use.
Definitely sounded like multiple quarters, but also like they were gonna do a lot of it in Q2.
For perspective, suppose they go full-out to 7K/week and unwind completely, and suppose average days in transit is 25 (as Fact Checking surmises). That would be *25,000* cars in transit, versus 10,600 right now. A buildup of 14,400 Model 3. At a 38K production cost, that uses $547 million in cash. I suspect they're going to do maybe half to 2/3 of that in Q2.
But that does not include M3 leasing which was just recently announced? It's just S/X. ..
Well, I don’t know about you but I was expecting a Q1 loss. Especially since Mgmt specifically told us to expect a Q1 loss.
What’s clear to me is that Tesla continues to scale the business (lumpy) while paving the way for future growth. China, Model 3 RHD, Model Y and the Model S upgrades (& I’m sure that the X will be upgraded soon) are all growth drivers within the next 3 - 4 quarters.
The big issue for me is what multiple the above company deserves. It should have higher multiples than the rest of the auto industry but based on recent execution the multiples should be much lower than tech companies. The business above are very hardware dependent solutions to hardware dependent problems (transport) - high Capex investments, lower growth and lower margins vs tech.
Now FSD, Robotaxi & insurance stack is a much broader future vision that layers software solutions with low Capex growth and larger margins on top of the current business. The question with these are 1. Are they even possible and 2. Timing.
Until some of this is resolved I suspect multiples for the automotive business will stay flat and maybe even compress.
And the other big development this quarter was confirmation that Audi’s EV sucks & that Tesla’s lead in the transition to BEV has been expanding. This is pretty important and I think overlooked.
What’s clear to me is that Tesla continues to scale the business (lumpy) while paving the way for future growth. China, Model 3 RHD, Model Y and the Model S upgrades (& I’m sure that the X will be upgraded soon) are all growth drivers within the next 3 - 4 quarters.
The big issue for me is what multiple the above company deserves. It should have higher multiples than the rest of the auto industry but based on recent execution the multiples should be much lower than tech companies. The business above are very hardware dependent solutions to hardware dependent problems (transport) - high Capex investments, lower growth and lower margins vs tech.
Now FSD, Robotaxi & insurance stack is a much broader future vision that layers software solutions with low Capex growth and larger margins on top of the current business. The question with these are 1. Are they even possible and 2. Timing.
Until some of this is resolved I suspect multiples for the automotive business will stay flat and maybe even compress.
And the other big development this quarter was confirmation that Audi’s EV sucks & that Tesla’s lead in the transition to BEV has been expanding. This is pretty important and I think overlooked.
Should be any day now. Doesn't mean we'll hear about it. Court need to be satisfied it's not being sidelines in legal matters anymore as per the last agreement which should never have existed. Amateur hour on the part of SEC, a big FU to the court on the part of Tesla, neither are OK and hightly delicate.
Pras
Member
My wife used to play this game called cake mania. In the game you play as a waitress and the goal is to serve the customers in the restaurant. There are too many things to order, where customers are waiting with different asks, they keep coming at different frequencies, and you have to ensure that the food gets to the right customer in right time. I tried it once but I sucked at it.
Last quarter felt like cake mania for Tesla. They had to deal with 2 new regions of customers, export and label issues, shipping / logistics, tooling for S&X, model 3 SR variants and associated order mix change. I am just impressed that they quickly found stability and are back to their 90-100k forecast.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
