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.
This is another dark cloud hanging over TSLA. Elon potentially needing to sell again

Elon Musk begins trial over Tesla tweet that cost him $20m Elon Musk begins trial over Tesla tweet that cost him $20m
If a San Francisco jury rules in the shareholder's favour, Mr Musk may be ordered to pay billions of dollars in damages.

Legal experts said they believe it will be a difficult case for Mr Musk to win, and that the fine he paid to the SEC will be used against him in the case. However jury trials in cases of fraud are notoriously difficult to predict.
 
I wonder who Interactive Brokers pissed off to 'get caught' - they must have broken some sort of "pirate's code." 😉

I'm glad at least someone is getting charged - that's a positive step. My optimistic side thinks there are some ethical people involved somewhere in the system... Even if many get away with cheating and stealing.

I started watching Madoff on Netflix - as disheartening as that story is (what people get away with...), anything that raises awareness of the kinds of shenanigans Wall Street performs is helpful, and maybe we can very slowly make some progress. Computerization/connectivity has helped make some things a bit more transparent to the public.

(BTW - anyone else here watch Madoff, and is it a relatively accurate picture of reality?)

Edit: not holding my breath waiting for real change, just HODL'ing my TSLA so that it's harder for the pirates to make money off of me...
$5.5M in naked shorting probably resulted in $100M in profits, small price to pay for making almost 20X, damn crooks!!
 
OK, how about "they could raise prices if they did this" instead of "I genuinely feel they'd sell more EV's if they did this".

It would make Ford EVs easier to sell, if they are already sold out it would raise prices (dealer markup, and eventually a change in MSRP).

Most importantly, this would establish Tesla Superchargers as the de facto "premier charging network." The one the "trusted and established" auto makers align with to bolster their customer's experience with their EV products.

This would instantly speak volumes to the masses who are essentially clueless about EVs. Those who are EV-curious would start putting the pieces of the puzzle together and begin playing the "disprove the FUD" game more and more.

Those who had been educating themselves, and who had concerns, would accept Ford's endorsement of the Superchargers as a feather in Tesla's cap.

Everybody wins and the transition is accelerated.
 
Thanks. Still a disagree.

Which chains exactly have cheaper rates than Tesla superchargers?
Also, are you talking about charging Teslas at superchargers or other brands there?
BC hydro is pretty cheap although they are at best 100 kw units. Same with FLO. EAC is somewhat cheaper although not the most reliable.

But there are lots of routes we could not travel without an adaptor up here. Very handy. Definitely a sales driver for tesla. Without an adaptor you could cover a lot more of the province with a leaf than you could with a tesla.

Cheers.
 
The Leaf? Bad example! Far from an example of a EV in a non Tesla world, The Chevy Volt and the Leaf both were responses to the Tesla Roadster. Neither would have existed without it. The leaf in fact, never sold in numbers anywhere near expected, in spite of very large price reductions. It’s been a huge money loser. Far from the ability to kick off an EV shift, it actually would’ve set it back a decade probably.
Nissan was consistently developing EV's before the Roadster. A high priced low volume sports car from a startup EV maker was not what drove Nissan to build the LEAF. After the Prairie Joy they did the Altra from 1997-2001, another lithium ion powered EV. The LEAF has sold more than 500K units world wide.
 
CCS2 of course as used in EU... that does mean all the CCS1 connectors need to be changed in North America though. Oh, perhaps using the smaller NACS might be better in that case....

I think the world will settle on 3 - Chinese, CCS2 for Europe & TBC for North America. Rest of World picks whichever they fancy depending on historical ties/geography & where they import used cars from. You might find that some Chinese OEMs add ports for CCS1 & NAC to the same car for North American-sold cars. Once you're past the the ports, wiring can be the same.
Almost but communication protocols, authorization protocols (both vehicle authentication and payment method and sources), and charging rate limits vary substantially. For AC there is less issue but still some problems, for DC there is much more. It's more than adapters, although the Tesla adapters for CHAdeMO are very bulky because of independent software to manage the differences (I have one, a couple of times with software upgrades). The Tesla CCS adapters (both versions) also receive software upgrades.

Of course if OEMs do choose to build in all the needed software for NACS there should be no problem other than the odd updates. However the present Tesla pilot plans are CCS only.

"...Supercharger post has two cables, non-Tesla cars can only charge with the CCS connector. Tesla is unable to accommodate vehicles that do not fully comply with CCS communication and safety protocols."

It remains to be seen how Tesla will deal with non-Tesla access in China and North America
AFAIK. Maybe somebody better informed than am I will have that information.
 
Thanks. Still a disagree.

Which chains exactly have cheaper rates than Tesla superchargers?
The main one is Electrify America, at least as long as you pay the $4/month membership fee. With that they charge $0.31/kWh or $0.12/$0.24/minute. (I think the per minute rates are way cheaper than what Tesla was charging.)

Tesla charges up to $0.60/kWh in some locations, so yeah EA can save you a bunch of money, even after taking the $4/month into account.
 
Sorry, not sure I'm following the lingo here.

I used a number you gave (80m shares short, the high end of your range actually) and applied it to the Tesla's public float (2.69bn shares) to get to ~3%

Now you're saying only a "fool" would count on that calculation - so which part is suspect...the # of shares short or the public float?

There is no way to "truly" calculate a company's public float if you want to throw out the "HODLers." Probably a good % of shareholders aren't planning on selling AAPL or AMZN either, for instance.

You have to go with facts you can prove, not with what you "feel" or whatever. My only point was that you said "70-80m shares short" as if it's an astronomical number, but 3% is the context that matters and it falls in line with quite a few other companies.
I‘m investing my own money so I don’t "have to go with the facts I can prove." I’m making an assertion that I and others here have made before. Though I don’t suppose it takes much imagination to see how it works: In large stock price drops it will be the weak longs that get flushed out, when it goes back up you will have some proportion more shares held in strong hands, and then rinse and repeat.

Just as we retail longs don’t have visibility into the true amount of short interest in its various forms, there is not a way to measure the high conviction longs accurately enough to back their shares out of the free float.

We also see in short weeks with relatively low volume exaggerated stock price behavior. So it reasonable to extrapolate that the high volatility suggests the true free float is lower than your calculation gives and (and I would assert "and") the true short interest is much different than the delayed reports we get.

If there isn’t a research paper on this somewhere, it would be a great topic to investigate. For myself, I’ll just continue to go with my observations.🤷‍♂️