Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
2baee3661f7d34338d50c0a4f8447cfc.png


updated

I don't think anyone cares about these.

I think what everybody is really waiting for is for guru Gordon Johnson to update his current $87 price target.
 
Barclay's still has a $300 price target. The guy literally said "I don't expect the market to agree with my target anytime soon."

I know I'm not a wall street stuffed suit, but remind me folks. Price targets are an estimate of where the price will be right? Not what my feels say the price should be. Right?
I can't wait visit gigatexas and pick up my cybertruck! I already told my wife to plan on the trip. We'll fly the family to Austin, see the factory, pick up the truck and do the cross country sight seeing trip that I've talked about for years, on the way back.
Yeah I'll probably do the same. It's not a crazy long drive and Austin is fun.

That is refreshing as hell. Love that guy.
He is why I'm comfortable putting a little bit of money in Virgin Galactic.
 
A question about the credit pools.

So let's say Fiat bought the rights to what turns out to be only say 60% of the credits Tesla earns. Maybe Tesla produces more cars than expected. Maybe Fiat only needed parts of what Tesla had anyway. Seems unlikely their need and Teslas availability would line up perfectly. So what happens to the remaining credits. Do they have no value?. Can Tesla sell those remaining credits on some open market? Seems a bit harsh if those are just worthless.

I guess what I'm asking is it possible Tesla will have another billion or two worth of usable credits at the end of 2021?
I’ve come to the conclusion that the Tesla-FCA deal is completely opaque. There is no logical reason that credits should have been higher in Q2 than in Q1. FCA sales were abysmal so the emission penalties should have been relatively less.

Similar to your thinking, it seems that the annual credits are agreed to a priori and Tesla can allocate them to whatever quarter they want, making quarterly estimates rather futile.
 
So starting with car insurance where data gives them an edge, and they can lower repair costs, makes perfect sense...

Sentry mode an a few other car security features probably reduce the risk of car theft...

It is unlikely other insurers can take proper account of the features in a Tesla that reduce risk. Their aggregate data across many car brands will always lag reality. And they may find the Tesla drivers they do insure are not safe drivers...

The insurance industry is quite powerful. I suspect anti-trust objections will be successfully raised which will force Tesla to release their driver data to other insurers. Of course, this won't matter because the entire point of going into insurance was to make the cost of insuring a Tesla competitive with other brands.
 
I’ve come to the conclusion that the Tesla-FCA deal is completely opaque. There is no logical reason that credits should have been higher in Q2 than in Q1. FCA sales were abysmal so the emission penalties should have been relatively less.

Similar to your thinking, it seems that the annual credits are agreed to a priori and Tesla can allocate them to whatever quarter they want, making quarterly estimates rather futile.

I think it's likely they recognized the ~100-200M in deferred credits from their balance sheet. We'll know for sure after looking at the 10-Q.

Curious about @The Accountant 's opinion on this.
 
Funny how one can get such conflicting views of Tesla.

Read this thread and it is euphoria, swop to the Model Y thread and there are people posting that Tesla make rubbish cars full of defects not worthy of a modern car.

JD Power posting Tesla near the bottom for delivery defects followed by information that is is the most appealing car out there according to owners.

Considering the share price, where Tesla is going and the underlying engineering, makes one realise that once the manufacturing QA is sorted (taking a bit long...?!) the momentum will just build and build...The main (now) source of FUD will evaporate.

Haven't read the whole ER but did anyone ask Tesla this question?

Seems that the hard stuff has been done! I'm HODLing my shares till I need then for a Tesla (or some other desperate need...)
 
Funny how one can get such conflicting views of Tesla.

Read this thread and it is euphoria, swop to the Model Y thread and there are people posting that Tesla make rubbish cars full of defects not worthy of a modern car.

JD Power posting Tesla near the bottom for delivery defects followed by information that is is the most appealing car out there according to owners.

Considering the share price, where Tesla is going and the underlying engineering, makes one realise that once the manufacturing QA is sorted (taking a bit long...?!) the momentum will just build and build...The main (now) source of FUD will evaporate.

Haven't read the whole ER but did anyone ask Tesla this question?

Seems that the hard stuff has been done! I'm HODLing my shares till I need then for a Tesla (or some other desperate need...)

This too shall pass. Model 3 had these same threads circa early 2018.
 
I’ve come to the conclusion that the Tesla-FCA deal is completely opaque. There is no logical reason that credits should have been higher in Q2 than in Q1. FCA sales were abysmal so the emission penalties should have been relatively less.

Couldn't that part be explained though by the contract between Tesla and Fiat stating that there is a minimum number of credits allocated to each quarter over the year?

If I was selling something for two billions over two years I would make damn sure I knew, at least roughly, when I would get that profit. Big difference between getting paid on Jan 1, 2020 or Dec 31, 2021. So maybe the two billion is a minimum for say 300 per quarter in 2020 and 200 per quarter in 2021. We don't know that the full 428 this quarter comes from Fiat.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: oldTAVguy
Tesla announced their first profitable quarter in 2013.

On March 28th tsla was at $37 per share. On September 27th tsla was at $190 per share a fivefold increase. But it took six months.

I see enormous parallels between Tesla’s first profitable quarter and their first profitable year. It will be interesting to see how long this takes to develop.
 
CNBC cut that video right after he finished making the case that the distributed energy business is a market measured in trillions of dollars.. Does anyone know how I can see how CNBC responded?

If I had to guess they switched to another company afterwards.

You do not really expect them to be able to add anything of substance to what Chamath said? Doubt they had a clue about it before he put the utility aspects front and center. Asking how large that market is? Um, you are stock market commentators, right?
 
The insurance industry is quite powerful. I suspect anti-trust objections will be successfully raised which will force Tesla to release their driver data to other insurers. Of course, this won't matter because the entire point of going into insurance was to make the cost of insuring a Tesla competitive with other brands.
Plus, Tesla can redesign cars to make repair cheaper. That advantage is of no use to insurers in case data is shared.