Wow. I had no idea how poorly ranked JP Morgan was. 4000+ seems kinda shocking for the most powerful bank in America.
They said on average 50%. Some years less some years more. They haven’t suggested that that will stop anytime before 2030.
-
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
They said on average 50%. Some years less some years more. They haven’t suggested that that will stop anytime before 2030.
The test cars seemed to be european spec based on the shape of the rear license plate holder, so I am guessing these are made in China. So what is Tesla's rationale behind making the new model 3 available for review so early in the NA market when the earliest they are likely to launch is Q1 2024 or later? Wouldn't this simply osborne demand for the current model until the new Model is available?
Getting price info out there can be done via a fairly simple process like the one I described.
It is helpful if the customer can view, sit in the car, and book a test drive at the same time.
But IMO they should be able to see the price from some distance away.
Tesla already has some good YouTube videos, just show them on big screens near the cars, for education purposes.
I do agree that it would be nice to produce some slick witty advertisements to counter some of the FUD, but just letting people know the price is the priority..
Since he recently wrote an article with anti-EV talking points, I wonder about hiring Rowan Atkinson for a series of ads.
e.g. Rowan drives home in his new ICE and his neighbour has bought a Model Y for less than Rowan paid. The neighbour on the other side has bought a Model 3. etc
The rest of the ads can be neighbours debunking FUD talking points made by Rowan.
Last edited:
Congo Line
(not the dance)
Easy - just duck below window level.As long as attacker nicely aims at stainless steel parts and avoids the windows
ByeByeJohnny
Active Member
You mean his car is?
In Formula One you are the champion if you are above average in your team (meaning better than the other guy) and you happen to drive for the, at this moment, best team out of the 5-6 teams that are not jr varsity versions of some other team.
Being the best (driver) has very little to do with winning.
I hope this is the end of the whole advertising debate, I'm getting tired of it.
No, I wrote Verstappen. Why?
Because I’m ______’d if I’m going to write “Honda* is the Tesla of…” anything!
*That Red Bull car is a Honda, isn’t it?
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
US full truck sales annually are ballpark 2 million units, nearly 2.5M if we include Canada. I'm not sure someone introducing a new one for 125k with plans to then scale to 250k units puts "massive pressure" on anyone, ~90% of demand will still be met by ICE OEMs because math.... 250k would have Tesla as likely the 6th best selling NA full sized truck (125k would still put it 6th but just barely ahead of then-7 Toyota- though that could vary by 1 slot worth depending who they take those 125-250k sales from).
That's on top of Elons remarks leaving...questionable... that the pricing will be such it puts pressure on anyone at all for a while- until we see pricing we don't have enough context around his struggle to make it affordable remarks.
Record number of US auto payments are late more than 2 days just reported on CNBC. Hummm…
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
For anyone who does not understand 'exceptional'and 'superb' when discussing TSLA I suggest looking at the 10Q for 3rd quarter.
In the category labeled "Automotive Lease Revenue" page 11 look at credit losses then divide by "gross Lease Receivables. The results are astounding when compared with others.
Then go to page 14 to make similar assessment of "Warranty Reserves" and "Warranty Expense"
Apart from the virtually unprecedented Free Cash Flows being generated at @The Accountant and others often discuss,
the amazingly good credit quality and equally amazingly low warranty expense with very conservative reserves is yet another obvious but little noticed indication of how exceptional TSLA really is.
When facing FUD from all sides, friendly fire too, we also have constant carping of what Tesla should do better. Much of that is valuable, for continuous improvement is crucially important, in cost reduction, reliability improvements and feature development.
Still, this 10Q tells a vastly different story than the PR, including that of Elon, is presenting. This 10Q describes excellence in nearly all efficiency metrics, despite gigantic investments continuing with challenges in every area.
If the foregoing is not good enough take a glance at services and energy sales.
After examining that and the rest of the financials then, and only then, tell us why Tesla does not understand marketing, why they desperately need better education of the masses and why they are faltering in several areas at once. I would really like to understand what is wrong. Frankly, I'm almost giddy with admiration for the sequence of nearly impossible successes.
Without doubt I could be wrong. Please tell me how I am, if anybody can find evidence in the 10Q or elsewhere.
In the meantime I'm still HODL, and thrilled that TSLA is preserving such a stellar balance sheet, and not wasting reserves on share buybacks, dividends or inefficient promotional devices. Those practices have allowing Tesla to survive and thrive while others around have had bankruptcy, mergers and/or bailouts. Every quarter, poring over the 10Q new brilliance emerges!
Nerdish life is thrilled!
In the category labeled "Automotive Lease Revenue" page 11 look at credit losses then divide by "gross Lease Receivables. The results are astounding when compared with others.
Then go to page 14 to make similar assessment of "Warranty Reserves" and "Warranty Expense"
Apart from the virtually unprecedented Free Cash Flows being generated at @The Accountant and others often discuss,
the amazingly good credit quality and equally amazingly low warranty expense with very conservative reserves is yet another obvious but little noticed indication of how exceptional TSLA really is.
When facing FUD from all sides, friendly fire too, we also have constant carping of what Tesla should do better. Much of that is valuable, for continuous improvement is crucially important, in cost reduction, reliability improvements and feature development.
Still, this 10Q tells a vastly different story than the PR, including that of Elon, is presenting. This 10Q describes excellence in nearly all efficiency metrics, despite gigantic investments continuing with challenges in every area.
If the foregoing is not good enough take a glance at services and energy sales.
After examining that and the rest of the financials then, and only then, tell us why Tesla does not understand marketing, why they desperately need better education of the masses and why they are faltering in several areas at once. I would really like to understand what is wrong. Frankly, I'm almost giddy with admiration for the sequence of nearly impossible successes.
Without doubt I could be wrong. Please tell me how I am, if anybody can find evidence in the 10Q or elsewhere.
In the meantime I'm still HODL, and thrilled that TSLA is preserving such a stellar balance sheet, and not wasting reserves on share buybacks, dividends or inefficient promotional devices. Those practices have allowing Tesla to survive and thrive while others around have had bankruptcy, mergers and/or bailouts. Every quarter, poring over the 10Q new brilliance emerges!
Nerdish life is thrilled!
As you debate, please refer to the latest 10Q, then think about what that shows in terms of "cost per qualified reach"
Even the subthread needs deep rooting in financial discipline, just like TSLA financials display.
That metric is quite odd, since there are many factors producing that metric apart from consumer lateness.
Those involve slow mail (believe it or not, some people still send snail mail), processing delays etc. Other things remaining equal (they aren't) the most probative metric is 30 days past due or more. That one is high correlated with POD (Probability of Default) and also well correlated, but a little less so, to LGD (Loss Given Default), although the latter measure is most closely correlated with percentage of cost financed and tenor.
FWIW, Tesla paper, leases anyway, absolutely gleams by all those metrics and has an exceedingly low Loss rate, very likely the lowest in the present time.
Last edited:
My general understanding is that the Sparks, Nevada, area had, and has, nowhere near the population needed to support the size of GF1, a major blunder on Tesla's part.
To be frank, as I understand the issue it is that very few people want to live there, and they won't move there either . . . a huge "oops" moment for Tesla.
Optimus Subprime can't come fast enough, especially as they won't need housing, schools, parking, or much of anything
My general understanding is that the Sparks, Nevada, area had, and has, nowhere near the population needed to support the size of GF1, a major blunder on Tesla's part.
To be frank, as I understand the issue it is that very few people want to live there, and they won't move there either . . . a huge "oops" moment for Tesla.
Optimus Subprime can't come fast enough, especially as they won't need housing, schools, parking, or much of anything
If there is a labor shortage affecting Giga Nevada, I wonder why Tesla would decide to expand that plant with Semi and 4680 lines?
I'm wondering if labor is now the limiting factor for Tesla's growth. Elon talked about lack of labor in Austin. We've heard about lack of labor in Berlin. And now discussion of a lack of workers in Nevada.
For a long time, Tesla has been held back by a lack of cells. Now, maybe it's a lack of people?
For a long time, Tesla has been held back by a lack of cells. Now, maybe it's a lack of people?
Reno/Sparks didn't have as much of an issue until after Tesla moved there which accelerated other companies moving in.My general understanding is that the Sparks, Nevada, area had, and has, nowhere near the population needed to support the size of GF1, a major blunder on Tesla's part.
To be frank, as I understand the issue it is that very few people want to live there, and they won't move there either . . . a huge "oops" moment for Tesla.
Optimus Subprime can't come fast enough, especially as they won't need housing, schools, parking, or much of anything
The new 3,000 employee expansion is being planned with housing in mind.
Semi plant is a pilot plant IIRC; volume production will be elsewhere.
4680 may require little human labor to produce, esp. if it has dry electrode tech?
The pilot plant is in Nevada, but not at the Giga factory. (Though there is rumor that a second pilot line is being, or has been, setup in empty space at GigaNevada.)
Tesla has said that the volume production will be in the GigaNevada expansion.
Tesla’s $3.6 Billion Expansion Plans At Giga Nevada - CleanTechnica
Operations at Tesla’s Sparks, Nevada plant are set to grow substantially in the coming years, with the company recently sharing plans
cleantechnica.com
Last edited:
When it was built, the lack of people was due to not enough water. That has apparently be rectified. And recall they got the land really cheap. So, no, not a major blunder.My general understanding is that the Sparks, Nevada, area had, and has, nowhere near the population needed to support the size of GF1, a major blunder on Tesla's part.
To be frank, as I understand the issue it is that very few people want to live there, and they won't move there either . . . a huge "oops" moment for Tesla.
Optimus Subprime can't come fast enough, especially as they won't need housing, schools, parking, or much of anything
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
