zzziii
Member
It's probably not a surprise for anyone that short volume was still very high yesterday.
-
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
Maybe because the shorts are seeing that the P&D numbers will be good and they want to beat the stock down before they come out so it doesn't run up out of control. Or people over-reacting to the law suit information or that NIO looks to be going under... Or some combination of the three...
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
Me either. WTF? Is this the shorts' Alamo or something?
On the bright side, the defenders of the Alamo eventually got slaughtered...so we have that going for us.
April->July TM3 was up 992->1108. There's some preliminary numbers that suggest that May->Aug is way down though - was 1489 TM3 in May, but is said to have been ~650 all Teslas combined in Aug. I'm not sure how to interpret this, so I interpolated September from a combination of July and August rather than just August. This comes up with an estimated 2971 for September (vs. 3766 for June), and a Q3 total of 4664 vs. 6247.
APAC looks to be doing great, mainly due to the new markets. China is reportedly subpar in July, good in August, and took off in September due to the 10% tax discount. My monthly estimates for outside of the US, Canada, Europe, and the new APAC markets (that is to say... overwhelmingly just China) are 1152, 2304, and 4491, respectively for Model 3s, for a quarterly total of 8447, vs. 7679. But there's always a ton of uncertainty with China. But Australia is reportedly delivering as many as 2414 this quarter (I've got 2200 for Australia), plus New Zealand (I'm estimating 400). One of the local Tesla fans stated that there's an estimated 6400 deliveries pending, 800 per ship, but it's unclear exactly how many are supposed to happen this quarter; I've got 1500 down. I had 2000 down as the estimate for Taiwan, but that was based on almost no data except how pro-EV Taiwan generally has been and how well other known new Model 3 markets have been performing (AU, UK, etc). Based on the pessimism above, I've lowered it to 1000.
For the US, I'm using InsideEVs, which show slight US growth QTD (a rise in July, a drop in August - take your pick as to whether the drop was a "demand problem" or just simply how much of their production they've been sending overseas). I decided to play it pessimistic and say that September would be down 3k over June (I IMHO don't really believe this), so 18225. This yields a Q3 US total of 44825, vs Q2 as 45225.
Model 3 total, everything combined: 88726, vs. 77550 in Q2.
That's why iPhone sales suck, only 3 coloursTesla Roadster hits the roads: "Look, we're fine with <blank>, but we're not the average car buyer. When Tesla makes their next car, they're going to be dealing with the mainstream market, and they're not going to accept <blank>."
Models S and X hit the road: "Look, we're fine with <blank>, but we're not the average car buyer. When Tesla makes their next car, they're going to be dealing with the mainstream market, and they're not going to accept <blank>."
Model 3 hits the road: "Look, we're fine with <blank>, but we're not the average car buyer. When Tesla makes their next car, they're going to be dealing with the mainstream market, and they're not going to accept <blank>."
Wash, rinse, repeat.
Ok fair enough. Still - and believe me I am not trying to be difficult, just trying to avoid our usual Q end "high" when we expect too much - when doing that math we should keep in mind that the dataset is very small. If we could observe a pattern within a reasonable range of deviation over several quarters or years, sure, maybe, we could apply it. In fact we have done that with S +X in the past when they were rather steady in Europe in 2017 and 2018. But we are pretty early in the Europe M3 deliveries life cycle.To repeat, since you missed it:
Each country is considered for itself. What's happening in Norway, Netherlands, or Spain has no impact on the estimates for, say, Germany. The countries that lack realtime data are only considered using their monthly data. For example, Germany was 317 in May and 356 in August, was 1336 in June, so extrapolated to 1438 for September. By contrast, France was 321 in May and 304 in August, was 1097 in June, so extrapolated to 861 in September.
Overall, "non-UK other", at an estimated 9519, is down vs. Q2, where it was 10135.
Anyway, next week we should be smarter.
PS: it will be interesting to see if there is any language in the ER around international deliveries transitioning from pre-orders to organic demand. Not sure they will share anything there, but I know when it came to US demand they felt it was necessary to share that the majority of deliveries were now for new orders coming in.
anthonyj
Stonks
People are sick of seeing a month of gains being wiped out by a random 8% down day. It is most certainly a trader’s stock. Also $219 is support (watch The Chart Guys on YouTube), $210 is another support line and then it’s just an air pocket to $180 but I really doubt we will see that unless earnings are bad
I’ll jump in if it hits 215 today. If delivery numbers come in strong it’s going to jump quickly.
We can also consider production. TM3 production in Q4 was 61394 = 4772/wk (assuming 13 weeks). Q1 was 62950 = 4842/wk. TM3 production in Q2 was 72531 = 5579/wk.
Since Q4->Q1 was nearly flat, let's treat Q1 as flat, e.g. ending at 4842/wk. Let's assume what should be the only realistic assumption, that Q2 production didn't just instantaneously jump up at the start of the quarter, but ramped across the quarter. So if it started 737/wk down, it ended 737/wk up, or 6316/wk. So if Q3 held steady at that rate, without any production improvements this quarter, that would be 82108 vehicles. Any production improvements increase this.
What about battery capacity? GF1 was stated to be up to 28-29GWh/yr as of the last conference call. Let's say 28,5GWh/yr, and an average pack size of 65kWh. With no cell production improvements, that would be enough cell capacity for 109615 TM3 per quarter - more than enough. So that passes a sanity check.
So deliveries and production estimates both seem to reconcile.
Since Q4->Q1 was nearly flat, let's treat Q1 as flat, e.g. ending at 4842/wk. Let's assume what should be the only realistic assumption, that Q2 production didn't just instantaneously jump up at the start of the quarter, but ramped across the quarter. So if it started 737/wk down, it ended 737/wk up, or 6316/wk. So if Q3 held steady at that rate, without any production improvements this quarter, that would be 82108 vehicles. Any production improvements increase this.
What about battery capacity? GF1 was stated to be up to 28-29GWh/yr as of the last conference call. Let's say 28,5GWh/yr, and an average pack size of 65kWh. With no cell production improvements, that would be enough cell capacity for 109615 TM3 per quarter - more than enough. So that passes a sanity check.
So deliveries and production estimates both seem to reconcile.
Last edited:
You could also sense check your numbers to the number of ships reaching the EU in the quarter. Given supply will be lumpy due to shipping timing it may be a way to increase confidence.To repeat, since you missed it:
Each country is considered for itself. What's happening in Norway, Netherlands, or Spain has no impact on the estimates for, say, Germany. The countries that lack realtime data are only considered using their monthly data. For example, Germany was 317 in May and 356 in August, was 1336 in June, so extrapolated to 1438 for September. By contrast, France was 321 in May and 304 in August, was 1097 in June, so extrapolated to 861 in September.
Overall, "non-UK other", at an estimated 9519, is down vs. Q2, where it was 10135.
Apologies. I was high when typing this, like all Musk fanboys are. I meant to say America`s NIO is seeing demand fall to record lows and is close to bankruptcy. I mean look at Q3 2018 vs Q3 2019 so far in the US! That`s a 20% drop! Surely there is no reasonable explanation for that!
Doggydogworld
Active Member
Debt repayment does not count against FCF, but you're right if they don't replace it with other financing it will reduce the yearend cash balance.
It's a lot more than 2B. The solar leases generate roughly 300m/year. This cash first goes to pay SCTY's maintenance/support infrastructure (maybe 20m/year), then to repay non-recourse debt of 2.2b (by my count), then to repay Tesla's equity partners. Equity partners are on the books at 1.3+ billion (see non-controlling interests). That's almost all solar equity partners, but may not have much to do with the actual cash they'll eventually receive since the entire structure is a tax scheme.
These non-recourse obligations consume essentially all of the incoming cash flow, and will for 10-15 years. After that the cash will start to flow up to Tesla. In theory this upstreamed cash would go to repay 1++ billion of recourse debt SCTY brought in. In reality almost all the recourse debt was due in less than 5 years, not 10-15. It was a classic maturity mismatch, and it doomed SCTY.
Some of that non-recourse debt already came due, e.g. 230m last November. Despite Musk's claims that SCTY would be cash-positive to Tesla almost immediately, in reality Tesla has dipped into their own pocket to repay this debt. First in line be repaid were Spacex, Musk and the Rivebros. Mama Tesla also paid down some of SCTY's non-recourse debt and wrote checks to fund continued operating losses.
The long term future of the solar lease portfolio depends largely on the default rate, which neither SCTY nor TSLA ever disclosed. SCTY forecasts assumed a very low default rate, and I generally agreed until the WalMart fiasco came to light. Now I'm not so sure. The renewal rate at the 20 year mark also matters. SCTY forecast near-100% renewal at ~20 cents/kWh vs. the initial ~13 cent rate. I always thought that was a fantasy.
Barring new developments, the VIEs should run off over the next 20 years. I don't see why they'd continue to use VIEs for vehicle leases beyond this year. The new solar rental program could use VIEs, but tax equity investors are more skittish these days and can't be very excited about the "cancel at any time" clause. Also, the program may not be big enough to bother. It's just an experiment at this point.
I doubt it. It's been three years since reading the Evercore and Lazard justifications for the rescue, but as I recall much of the value/benefit was based on renewals of the PPAs/leases in years 21-30. SCTY/TSLA hasn't announced a utility scale project since KIUC. (I think the scope for Moss Landing is just stationary storage, and that may be suspended during PG&E's reorganization.) Tesla announced in a shareholder letter (in 2017 I think) that it was eschewing the industrial/commercial solar market and would be concentrating on residential solar. IMO, that's a tough game--competing as a centralized, nationwide corporation with small local contractors that are often sole proprietorships who can more easily staff up and down with roofers, installers, electricians and technicians to match their backlog plus they know the ropes in dealing with the permitting authorities and utilities. Not to mention the customer acquisition expense. A month-to-month rental with no cancellation charge is telling
Tesla wrote off last quarter the remainder of the expensive and ill-conceived acquisition of the Silevo solar cell technology. It has turned solar cell manufacturing at GF-2 over to Panasonic (not even a heavily redacted Exhibit of the contract for that arrangement was filed) who is selling part of the solar cells produced to third parties.
Solar tiles remain an inchoate hope—the few installations that have been publicized appear to be on flat pitched, shed type roofs with few if any gables and minimal peaks and valleys. I do not think the interconnection process has been resolved, and will likely continue to require R&D expenditures. Installation of the tiles would seem to be prohibitively labor intensive (how do they field cut tempered glass?)
It's past time to put the SCTY carcass out of its misery—but they can ill afford to do that as long as the Delaware derivative action festers.
HG Wells
Martian Embassy
Don't LOOK.
I told you not to LOOK.
I told you not to LOOK.
By the end of the week, we seriously might be back below 210. Practically all the gains and progress in the quarter.....wiped in 3 consecutive trading days (fri, mon, yesterday). Just unbelievable.
While theres a good chance Tesla might surprise to the upside for P&D number next week, it's not going to go up 15-20%. Wall st will make sure of that. I doubt we get a 5% move. All the planning and trying to make educated buys, looking for clues on production, etc......means diddly with how Tesla stock gets traded.
Sorry guys for the downer post. It was just disheartening to see how easily it was pushed back down.....for such a ridiculous reason(s) and was especially disappointing to see absolutely zero support. Not a chance of me selling my shares
While theres a good chance Tesla might surprise to the upside for P&D number next week, it's not going to go up 15-20%. Wall st will make sure of that. I doubt we get a 5% move. All the planning and trying to make educated buys, looking for clues on production, etc......means diddly with how Tesla stock gets traded.
Sorry guys for the downer post. It was just disheartening to see how easily it was pushed back down.....for such a ridiculous reason(s) and was especially disappointing to see absolutely zero support. Not a chance of me selling my shares
lol exactly my thoughts. Getting paid on Friday too...
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
