Wooloomooloo
Member
Tesla didn't have a choice and so had to - but it would be foolish to think there won't be safety and synergies in numbers for established makers.
-
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
Tesla didn't have a choice and so had to - but it would be foolish to think there won't be safety and synergies in numbers for established makers.
We are talking about why the limit on plates by the government for beijing, has nothing to do with Tesla's or the addressable market.
The plates were obviously going to be for people
who are currently banned from owning a car
but could afford one
I thought it was a brilliant ploy, though unlikely to survive
I don't know why they need to join forces for parts, but for charging stations it makes sense to have a single standard that all cars could use. If you want the widest possible EV adoption, that is. So whenever you come across one you can use it regardless of make.
Doesn't that suggest they still aren't all in? If they really felt electric was the future, why work with rivals?
Don't forget the price point of Tesla. There's probably a large intersection between the set of young people who make their own decisions and the ones who can afford (and would want) a Tesla. Poorer kids aren't getting expensive cars. Richer kids still dependent on their parents for cars aren't getting Teslas but whatever brand their parents view as "prestige" brands - probably Porsche, Mercedes, BMW.
Schwab raised margin requirements to 75 percent for my Tesla position today.
That's a load of crap.
That's a load of crap.
K_Dizzle
Member
It’s usually the opposite unless one of them is accepted as the leader. This move will lead to more wasteful resilience allocation, doubling or in this case tripling of certain roles who will each argue with each other over small details.
Joining with Rivals
They are out of their comfort zone with the tech, need more brains
Haven't got answers yet.
Share CAPEX risks
All fear the Demand Unknown
The great unanswered question
as all of this is new and different
which to them is new and threatening.
But mainly, I suspect the subplot is Batteries.
Already an issue, and a limiter of growth
Wildcard:
A widespread movement to nuclear power
would make the entire premise moot.
They are out of their comfort zone with the tech, need more brains
Haven't got answers yet.
Share CAPEX risks
All fear the Demand Unknown
The great unanswered question
as all of this is new and different
which to them is new and threatening.
But mainly, I suspect the subplot is Batteries.
Already an issue, and a limiter of growth
Wildcard:
A widespread movement to nuclear power
would make the entire premise moot.
Yes but the initial post was about why I think the Chinese government limit plates in Beijing. # of plates had nothing to do with the addressable market.
What is the standard usually? 75% is really freaken high. I thought 25% is the usual? I don't know, never looked into margins.
Varies by stock. A few I checked, Apple Ford GM are all 30 percent. Snap is 60 percent.
Because they lack the ability to do it themselves.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
1) I hope not. Using GF1 expansion for S/X would be quite disappointing
2) Fleet buyers test a few units for 12-18 months before buying in quantity
3) Agree, pickup is after Y
4) Shipping a product they haven't even teased would be a huge departure
They may ship Model 3 packs and drive units to Shanghai during ramp up, then switch that capacity over to Y next year after they qualify a Chinese cell provider.
I don't understand why people like margin so much. Margin is drug. There are two things hurt retail investors the most: Wall Street manipulation and margin. Unfortunately SEC doesn't care.
William O'Neil (a very smart guy) talked about when to use margin, when to avoid it. I suggest everyone read it. Don't argue with O'Neil, just follow his advice.
Interactive Brokers raised theirs from 30% to 40% this week.
I assume this works for both longs and shorts though. Can someone correct me if I am wrong (or confirm if I am right)?
other brokers are doing it too
someone posted IB raised from 30 to 40% over a series of 10 trading days. 1% increase per day until june 7
correct. margin is margin.
even though you’re shorting something, say a put contract, there’s a minimum requirement of collateral you need to absorb an adverse directional move. that tightens with an increase in margin requirement
They could be planning to do this temporarily - it was reported a few weeks ago that Panasonic will upgrade the Japanese plants to 2170 within a year, and that lines up with the S/X upgrade rumours. So Tesla could use gigafactory cells from the US for the initial new S/X packs while waiting for the Japanese plant upgrades to be completed.
Done: Lycanthrope on Twitter
Go give it some love!
F*ck - should've proof-read your text first - now I look like a moron!
Attachments
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
