TSLA Investor Discussions

[FredTMC]

I am guessing it is not firm or at least not announced since I can not find the info anywhere .... but does anyone know when they will release q4 data? From looking at past releases it looks like maybe a couple weeks into January? any knowledge on this would be appreciated

Next quarterly call is on Feb 11th
TSLA: Summary for Tesla Motors, Inc.- Yahoo! Finance

 

[Zzzz...]

TESLA the nex DELOREAN? NO WAY JOSE!

...

Nice first post. You should try write for SeekingAlpha or Fool (.com)

I'm attaching file for those who prefer to listen instead of reading big chunks of text. firstinflite.mp3

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

It's bad luck to spike the ball in the middle of a trading day. But I'm pretty sure that there's nothing wrong with planning which elements to include in the end of day happy dance..

 

[ckessel]

Heh, put in an order before the market at $34 for about 1/7th of my position since I need the cash for some house repairs and the stock goes wild this morning.

 

[efxjim]

I bet it's investors re-buying what they sold last year for tax reasons

 

[dmckinstry]

I had a nightmare last night that the short squeeze hit, and Tesla hit 400 dollars a share. However, for some reason I went to sell and all my TSLA shares were gone. They were in Microsoft for some reason.

Anyways, just a heads up in case I am dreaming of the future!

Hopefully you are, but not in terms of your stock put into Microsoft.

However, there is another potential problem (at least with my IRA brokerage account). Good til cancelled doesn't mean what it says. There's a time limit. I have to check every month or two just to see that it hasn't been cancelled.

 

[DriverOne]

One possible hiccup that the bears may point at after this quarter's results is that of cancellations. I'm hoping for someone to step in and offer a counter.

Back in the July/August timeframe the estimate for my delivery (based on my reservation number) was May/June. Now it's Feb/Mar - which is great, but what explanation can there be for the much earlier delivery? It could be that the factory is working faster than predicted - yet the ramp up was delayed, so it would have to be working really faster to make up. Or it's due to a larger number of cancellations than anticipated. Delivery moved up by about 3 months, or 12 weeks; at 400 cars we week that's 12x400= 4800 places I've moved up in line; about 5000 cancellations. Given my reservation number in the low 11,000s that's over a third, nearly a half, of those orders ahead of me that cancelled.

I'm thrilled with the recent reservation rate, but can someone point out a flaw in my estimation of the cancellation rate?

I believe cancellations will decline over time, as the window between reservation and delivery shortens; less time to change minds or circumstances. This potential bear argument will weaken with that. This quarter could show particularly high cancellation numbers.

 

[firstinflite]

Originally Posted by firstinflite

TESLA the nex DELOREAN? NO WAY JOSE!

...
Nice first post. You should try write for SeekingAlpha or Fool (.com)

I'm attaching file for those who prefer to listen instead of reading big chunks of text. firstinflite.mp3

Thanks bud, the Delorean issue has been on my mind for awhile, so I decided to compare the two companies and made pretty good findings, enjoy.

 

[Citizen-T]

One possible hiccup that the bears may point at after this quarter's results is that of cancellations. I'm hoping for someone to step in and offer a counter.

Back in the July/August timeframe the estimate for my delivery (based on my reservation number) was May/June. Now it's Feb/Mar - which is great, but what explanation can there be for the much earlier delivery? It could be that the factory is working faster than predicted - yet the ramp up was delayed, so it would have to be working really faster to make up. Or it's due to a larger number of cancellations than anticipated. Delivery moved up by about 3 months, or 12 weeks; at 400 cars we week that's 12x400= 4800 places I've moved up in line; about 5000 cancellations. Given my reservation number in the low 11,000s that's over a third, nearly a half, of those orders ahead of me that cancelled.

I'm thrilled with the recent reservation rate, but can someone point out a flaw in my estimation of the cancellation rate?

I believe cancellations will decline over time, as the window between reservation and delivery shortens; less time to change minds or circumstances. This potential bear argument will weaken with that. This quarter could show particularly high cancellation numbers.

You assume that they are capping the ramp at 400 cars per week. Elon has hinted in previous conference calls that he sees 20k a year as the minimum for 2013. With the current reservation trends, I'm sure they have the confidence to actually plan on a number well in excess of that. I would not be surprised to hear that they are already above 400 cars/week and intend to go to 600 cars/week by end of year.

Also, you over-estimate the effect of the production delay. The delay happened very early on when they were building very few cars. As they move up the exponential curve, those lost weeks early on become insignificant.

 

[firstinflite]

Originally Posted by DriverOneOne possible hiccup that the bears may point at after this quarter's results is that of cancellations. I'm hoping for someone to step in and offer a counter.

Back in the July/August timeframe the estimate for my delivery (based on my reservation number) was May/June. Now it's Feb/Mar - which is great, but what explanation can there be for the much earlier delivery? It could be that the factory is working faster than predicted - yet the ramp up was delayed, so it would have to be working really faster to make up. Or it's due to a larger number of cancellations than anticipated. Delivery moved up by about 3 months, or 12 weeks; at 400 cars we week that's 12x400= 4800 places I've moved up in line; about 5000 cancellations. Given my reservation number in the low 11,000s that's over a third, nearly a half, of those orders ahead of me that cancelled.

I'm thrilled with the recent reservation rate, but can someone point out a flaw in my estimation of the cancellation rate?

I believe cancellations will decline over time, as the window between reservation and delivery shortens; less time to change minds or circumstances. This potential bear argument will weaken with that. This quarter could show particularly high cancellation numbers.

You jumped ahead in line because you finalized your orders/configuration regarding color, interior choice, tech. packages, rim size, etc. before the others ahead of you which equated to you receiving your car ahead of those who are slower in choosing their configurations.

 

[bluefuego]

One possible hiccup that the bears may point at after this quarter's results is that of cancellations. I'm hoping for someone to step in and offer a counter.

Back in the July/August timeframe the estimate for my delivery (based on my reservation number) was May/June. Now it's Feb/Mar - which is great, but what explanation can there be for the much earlier delivery? It could be that the factory is working faster than predicted - yet the ramp up was delayed, so it would have to be working really faster to make up. Or it's due to a larger number of cancellations than anticipated. Delivery moved up by about 3 months, or 12 weeks; at 400 cars we week that's 12x400= 4800 places I've moved up in line; about 5000 cancellations. Given my reservation number in the low 11,000s that's over a third, nearly a half, of those orders ahead of me that cancelled.

I'm thrilled with the recent reservation rate, but can someone point out a flaw in my estimation of the cancellation rate?

I believe cancellations will decline over time, as the window between reservation and delivery shortens; less time to change minds or circumstances. This potential bear argument will weaken with that. This quarter could show particularly high cancellation numbers.

My only thought regarding your accelerated delivery timeframe: I don't know your config, but have you factored in the possibility that there are a good number of those 5,xxx reservations that are configs which include either the 40 or 60 kwh batteries as well as the new multi-coat red which will not begin production until this year? I prefer to be more optimistic regarding cancellations and hope that many of that number are just different configs with expected later production start dates.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

I bet it's investors re-buying what they sold last year for tax reasons

No, my guess is that it's related to the fiscal cliff resolution being passed. Off hand I can't think of a tax basis to wait till the 2nd to buy. AFAIK the cost basis is established when you buy the stock, but the tax rate is locked in based on when you sell.

I sold in early December because I expected tax rates to rise and because I was worried about the fiscal cliff affecting the market. If I had only been concerned about taxes I could have repurchased immediately and locked in a new cost basis.

Instead, I waited till this last weekend when it became clear how the cliff was being resolved and bought my shares back Monday morning. The rally was waiting on the bill being passed IMHO, though I must say I had some tense moments when Cantor publically started whipping against the bill. I was worried that there had been a double cross and the Republicans weren't going to allow a straight vote on the Senate bill.

 

[Zzzz...]

You assume that they are capping the ramp at 400 cars per week. Elon has hinted in previous conference calls that he sees 20k a year as the minimum for 2013.

In investor Q&A conference call Mask said that if demand would be there TM could produce 30 000 cars in 2013.

In separate interviews Musk said that TM is aiming at getting production rate as high as 500 cars a week by end of 2012, and in another one he said he would expect production rate to be higher then 400 by the end of 2012. Statements were made more then half a year ago, before TM slashed down production forecasts for 2012 and before TM ran into problems with suppliers etc. Now that problems seems to be behind them they might feel more confident about higher rates of production and thus adjusted estimated delivery dates to customers.

 

[DriverOne]

bluefuego and firstinflite, good points. I ordered a 60kWh pack and waited until 1 week left on my "finalize before then" date (I finalized just a couple of days ago). Even so, you're entirely right, those 4,800 or whatever I jumped over might not be cancellations at all, some portion of them will simply be delays in finalization, colors, or battery pack.

Citizen-T, it will be wonderful if they report they are building 5-600 cars a week!

 

[Norbert]

Citizen-T, it will be wonderful if they report they are building 5-600 cars a week!

That's a "when", not an "if"...

 

[raymond]

TSLA perhaps not sooo short?

I had a nightmare last night that the short squeeze hit

A stock broker friend of mine suggested that the huge number of reported shorts could also include shares by long-term stake holders that have been lent out. He told me that this is not something private share holders can do, but institutional (or very large private stack holders such as Elon) share holders might lend out there stock for a premium of, say, 6% per year.

The reason to borrow stock (and pay this premium) is to be eligible for stock at new emissions; the reason for lending stock is to earn that premium at the risk of not being able to sell the stock when it tanks.

I have never heard of this before. Does it make sense to any of you?

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

A stock broker friend of mine suggested that the huge number of reported shorts could also include shares by long-term stake holders that have been lent out. He told me that this is not something private share holders can do, but institutional (or very large private stack holders such as Elon) share holders might lend out there stock for a premium of, say, 6% per year.

The reason to borrow stock (and pay this premium) is to be eligible for stock at new emissions; the reason for lending stock is to earn that premium at the risk of not being able to sell the stock when it tanks.

I have never heard of this before. Does it make sense to any of you?

I've never heard of that, and I'm not sure I see how it makes any sense. 6% is a LOT of money to pay for an investment, and I don't see where the returns are. But then again, I don't work on Wall Street.

 

[Citizen-T]

Sounds a lot like plain old shorting. Perhaps the "premium" you are referring to is the fact that if you are shorting a stock that pays a 6% dividend then you will need to pay that dividend to your donor out of your own pocket.

This is one reason that high yield stocks tend to have fewer short sellers than those without this sort of "dividend protection".

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[smorgasbord]

For you options gurus out there, I have a question on Bull Call Spreads vs Bull Put Spreads:

Does the pricing on TSLA Puts and Calls being non-aligned (Puts more expensive than Calls) make a Bull Put Spread potentially more profitable than a Bull Call Spread, for those looking for a low-risk short-term bullish play on TSLA?

TIA

 

[kenliles]

Not an answer to your direct question, but I tried a bull call spread with poor results. The problem with TSLA options is the bid-ask spread controlled by the market maker is huge. This makes trading in and out of them difficult (a buy of a call and an immediate sell for example results in a large loss). This makes a spread less valuable as a tool. I stick with straight calls. Notice when TSLA moves higher into the strike, the ask price barely moves higher, but the market maker raises the bid price to simply squeeze the range.

- - - Updated - - -

Sounds a lot like plain old shorting. Perhaps the "premium" you are referring to is the fact that if you are shorting a stock that pays a 6% dividend then you will need to pay that dividend to your donor out of your own pocket.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

It's not dividend related and private holders can do this as well as institutional. When I held a large stock position (now replaced with call options), my broker organization asked me if I would lend my shares for a 6% annual interest rate. The lending is to allow shorts to short and in fact the only way shorts can short - every short share must be lent as an existing share. Once lent you can still sell your lent shares (forfeiting the interest of course). So the pool against short positions is continually dynamic. When everyone stops selling shares due to an event, the stock price rise causes shorts to cover but in addition the pool of available loaned shares reduces causing acceleration of the short squeeze. This is pronounced if most of the shares held are institutional or insiders as these are not often lent for shorts (some institutions don't allow it as I understand it). raymon's post of what a broker told him I believe is misleading as it suggests short positions are double counted as loaned. I don't think this is correct, the loaned pool is not added to short positions that are officially reported as short positions held. I'm no expert, but this is my experience and understanding. Happily corrected if others know differently