-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
MartinAustin
Active Member
Is this going to get twisted by the bears? There is a lot of bear fodder in there.
Also, Fred's pre-market full article about TSLA tumbling was dreadful, dreadful reporting and a dreadful choice of headline. The stock is acting is it could have done on a million other days... nothing exceptional is going on. But he had to compose and publish a full article before the market opened, based on pre-market activity. Taking an awful risk (since TSLA is not significantly down as I write this, and who knows? It might be in the green by the end of the day)
Electrek seems to deal with two subjects these days. The world's journey to electrification, and oh, one other thing - TSLA stock price.
Why are they reporting so much on TSLA stock? They are good at reporting electrification efforts. I would stay away from financial reporting.
Furthermore, they are becoming increasingly adept at generating click-bait headlines and bear fodder. SAD!
Last edited:
X Fan
Active Member
Disappointed that volume is not reaching targets (if story is accurate ) but with costs down 30% that increases the odds for a positive FCF. In particular, if they don't have to fly/move folks all over the place unit production costs will decrease significantly.
Analysts know whether the company has a stake; it's published. They actually usually know whether the company is *planning* to buy more, which they really aren't supposed to. There is a well-documented conflict of interest and the "Chinese Wall" is a fiction.
"The company hasn’t been able to go back to a production of 5,000 units in a single week.
During the current quarter, Model 3 production is still very volatile and it has been limited to about 3,500 to ~4,900 per week. It could still achieve its production goal if it starts trending higher next month"
An "incredible" production record?
YUP. Someone needs their press pass revoked.....
Any more of this crap and Electrek will be off my read list and click list.
--
"Some good and some bad in those numbers Electrek has obtained.
It confirms that Tesla will achieve another record quarter in terms of production, but it also shows that Tesla isn’t able to maintain the previously achieved rate of 5,000 Model 3 vehicles per week."
--
True or not, that's not a good thing to be taking confidential data and leaking it.
Tesla needs to give this guy the mushroom treatment from here on out.
bdy0627
Active Member
Yes, it's disappointing. Fred indicates he has a very reliable source and has seen the model 3 weekly production over the last quarter. It is highly volatile, ranging from 3,500 to 4,900 per week. It will need to increase to meet the production goal of 50-55k model 3 for the quarter. He also notes that the Bloomberg tracker is completely off most of the time.
Now on the other hand, why would we not expect production to increase over the final month of the quarter, hopefully enough to at least produce 50k model 3 for the quarter? It seems that the production rate is likely to follow the trend of ending the quarter sustaining the rate achieved in the last week of the prior quarter. I am still optimistic they will meet guidance for the quarter, but it seems very unlikely they will produce much more than that. My own expectation was for about 55k model 3 for the quarter. It sounds like that might be a little optimistic at this point.
X Fan
Active Member
true, unless it was purposely leaked.......
He could be Lance Armstrong and have nothing to lose here. Just like those no position bear cowards on Stocktwits.
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
I feel this is expectation reset.
Done nicely, gently, positive title while news is negative, probably work of the PR shop hired recently. Opposite of what we've been observing last few months. Good work.
Menifeer
Member
It's interesting how much I agree with you about the general crookedness of the stock market, but I have a longer historical view. For entertainment I read about 19th century stock manipulation. The story I grew up with from my grandmother was about a crooked stockbroker who lost all of her parents' money through fraud (he literally had not bought the stocks he said he had -- like Madoff).
In other words, this ain't new.
But this has nothing to do with long-term investing in Tesla, apart from being very careful to make sure you own your stock (I am thinking of getting it all certificated). Tesla's at the point where it's not dependent on Wall Street for funding, so it's irrelevant. As Buffett says, in the short term the market is a voting machine, but in the long term it's a weighing machine.
I see a recent history of articles like this from Electrek with clickbaity headlines. They often arrive at difficult moments too.
I complained to Fred about this and he said that he was only reporting what was "out there" anyway. I'm not sure I fully agree with this any more.
At the very least, make the headline better, it's the main thing that bots pick up on.
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
I'm quite sure this is Tesla using Fred to control the narrative.
On current TSLA market action:
I am happy that TSLA will stay a public company. I also fully understand why Elon would give the strongest consideration to the potential benefits of making Tesla a private company, if it could reduce the malicious misinformation and market manipulations that have beset Tesla by highly sophisticated, highly funded, highly determined enemies (in league with the "shorts").
Just watched Ben Kallo interview on Bloomberg.
First of all, the vivid condescension and vitriol of the woman conducting the interview while asking how he could possibly still be bullish after the SEC investigations and all the civil suits that are coming. Later she asks how he could possibly have any faith in Elon's leadership after all this instability, strongly insinuating that he should be removed as CEO, or at least replaced by one or several COO types, asking if Kallo really thinks Musk could make Tesla profitable. It's as if Tesla would be a great company if only they could get rid of Elon!
Then Ben Kallo, still bullish on the company, and while "not calling for Elon's head," says Elon is close to his "ninth life," and may be facing fines of up to $50 million dollars, but that it would be personal to Elon and not a fine on the company.
The current stock action according to Ben is reflecting the disruption of the going private movement from Elon, but mostly the weight of the SEC investigations.
It seemed to me that Ben felt obligated to tip his hat to all the anti-Elon vitriol of his colleagues, so as not to seem "naive." Even says he hopes he is not being naive. WTF? This actually helps to give the vitriolic narrative some legs.
Are there really actual SEC investigations going on? Is this truly such a big risk?
A 50 million dollar fine for Elon would seem very unjust to me, but at the same time doesn't seem to represent a mortal blow either to Elon or to TSLA.....
Elon said openly to all concerned that he was considering going private and had secured funding to do so, dependent on shareholder vote. He put together the best proposals he could find to do that, considered all the angles, listened carefully to stakeholders as well as shareholders, and decided on the basis of all that he could gather, that the better path would be to remain public.
Where is the violation of the law, the public trust, or any short term manipulation of stock?
What is would be the basis for investigation(s)?
Is this really weighing heavily on the stock?
Seems to me what is weighing most on the stock is the usual vitriol and the "churning" activity of powerful players who know how to "weaponize" short selling activities against the company. Is this not a major factor? Ben can't see or acknowledge that?
Should a CEO NOT give valid consideration to the various legal paths available for a company going forward, and make an informed decision? This process would have to be public, at least for the most part because it is, yes, a public company!
I honestly don't see any bad faith, instability, incompetence, or dishonestly in any of the actions taken by Elon or the board of Directors of Tesla. Everyone will have their own opinion about the best way to go about such a thing, but only one person was actually navigating this, and did so to the best of his abilities, on behalf of the interests of all stakeholders, which includes future generations of the planet, who cannot vote!
I do however see a lot of bad faith in the financial industry, in the financial media, in the short-selling, misinformation-spreading individuals and organizations we see on a daily basis attacking everything the company and its CEO do, regardless of truth or rational judgement.
Will the SEC investigate any of this? Will the SEC investigate UBS for fraud and manipulation? Seems like enough evidence has been shown to warrant at least an inquiry, probably an investigation. Or is corruption the absolute rule now for US regulatory institutions?
I am happy that TSLA will stay a public company. I also fully understand why Elon would give the strongest consideration to the potential benefits of making Tesla a private company, if it could reduce the malicious misinformation and market manipulations that have beset Tesla by highly sophisticated, highly funded, highly determined enemies (in league with the "shorts").
Just watched Ben Kallo interview on Bloomberg.
First of all, the vivid condescension and vitriol of the woman conducting the interview while asking how he could possibly still be bullish after the SEC investigations and all the civil suits that are coming. Later she asks how he could possibly have any faith in Elon's leadership after all this instability, strongly insinuating that he should be removed as CEO, or at least replaced by one or several COO types, asking if Kallo really thinks Musk could make Tesla profitable. It's as if Tesla would be a great company if only they could get rid of Elon!
Then Ben Kallo, still bullish on the company, and while "not calling for Elon's head," says Elon is close to his "ninth life," and may be facing fines of up to $50 million dollars, but that it would be personal to Elon and not a fine on the company.
The current stock action according to Ben is reflecting the disruption of the going private movement from Elon, but mostly the weight of the SEC investigations.
It seemed to me that Ben felt obligated to tip his hat to all the anti-Elon vitriol of his colleagues, so as not to seem "naive." Even says he hopes he is not being naive. WTF? This actually helps to give the vitriolic narrative some legs.
Are there really actual SEC investigations going on? Is this truly such a big risk?
A 50 million dollar fine for Elon would seem very unjust to me, but at the same time doesn't seem to represent a mortal blow either to Elon or to TSLA.....
Elon said openly to all concerned that he was considering going private and had secured funding to do so, dependent on shareholder vote. He put together the best proposals he could find to do that, considered all the angles, listened carefully to stakeholders as well as shareholders, and decided on the basis of all that he could gather, that the better path would be to remain public.
Where is the violation of the law, the public trust, or any short term manipulation of stock?
What is would be the basis for investigation(s)?
Is this really weighing heavily on the stock?
Seems to me what is weighing most on the stock is the usual vitriol and the "churning" activity of powerful players who know how to "weaponize" short selling activities against the company. Is this not a major factor? Ben can't see or acknowledge that?
Should a CEO NOT give valid consideration to the various legal paths available for a company going forward, and make an informed decision? This process would have to be public, at least for the most part because it is, yes, a public company!
I honestly don't see any bad faith, instability, incompetence, or dishonestly in any of the actions taken by Elon or the board of Directors of Tesla. Everyone will have their own opinion about the best way to go about such a thing, but only one person was actually navigating this, and did so to the best of his abilities, on behalf of the interests of all stakeholders, which includes future generations of the planet, who cannot vote!
I do however see a lot of bad faith in the financial industry, in the financial media, in the short-selling, misinformation-spreading individuals and organizations we see on a daily basis attacking everything the company and its CEO do, regardless of truth or rational judgement.
Will the SEC investigate any of this? Will the SEC investigate UBS for fraud and manipulation? Seems like enough evidence has been shown to warrant at least an inquiry, probably an investigation. Or is corruption the absolute rule now for US regulatory institutions?
This is not accurate. We have surveys. About 2/3 of those ordering want LR, and about 2/3 of those who want LR want AWD. As far as we can tell, the only inventory which has accumulated is LR RWD.
I am not worried about the rework cars which seem to primarily date from specific weeks; it'll be an annoying hit to the warranty reserve and/or to COGS, but it just doesn't amount to much financially since the issues seem to be getting fixed.
OK, this is completely hilarious. You do know the entire California H2 fuelling network -- which is tiny -- ran out of fuel a couple of weeks ago, stranding Mirai owners? It was big news in the H2 world!
lunitiks
Cool James & Black Teacher
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Poll
