Yeah they def didn't sell imhoSaudi's fund bought "almost 5%" a while back. It's very unlikely for them to sell.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah they def didn't sell imhoSaudi's fund bought "almost 5%" a while back. It's very unlikely for them to sell.
Still off topic a bit... I read this wrong first time, and thought you meant a charging shuttle... concept? Electricity delivery truck? Charge at work? Hmmm. EU might like this.maybe a small electric shuttle if parking is way out in the boondocks like a GEM or similar
Sorry, can't read link.. FT is the worst with their paywall.
But, I saw all the posts back in August when this was first reported, but we also heard that Funding was Secured. I'm just wondering, was there an official statement or filing from the company that showed the PIF as having actually taken that direct investment? At this point with Elon's comments, it seems they are hedging a bit - again.
So what I meant is that the minimal capex 7,000/week target looks conservative, and they might be able to reach 7,500 or 8,000/week.
But IMO the actual level doesn't even matter much: Tesla made over a billion dollars in Q3 alone, they could afford even "significant" capex. Their Model S/X/3 lines are almost literally printing money.
The level of capex mostly matters in terms of timing of future growth:
- "minimal capex": low cost improvements with little lead time, with a time frame of "months". 4,000/week to 7,000/week is probably this.
- "incremental capex": equipment probably already specced and ordered, buildings under construction. Time frame of "quarters". Shanghai might be an example of this.
- "capex": long lead time of at least a year. I'd expect the Model Y to be this.
Indeed, I can read that. And all the other news reports of this investment simply say "according to the Financial Times". My question is still about is there some other corroboration about this investment?The headline is: Saudi Arabia’s sovereign fund builds $2bn Tesla stake. Search for it from Google and follow the link (it should give you access for a couple of articles).
In particular, the SEC has issued subpoenas to Tesla in connection with (a) Mr. Musk’s prior statement that he was considering taking Tesla private and (b) certain projections that we made for Model 3 production rates during 2017 and other public statements relating to Model 3 production. The DOJ has also asked us to voluntarily provide it with information about each of these matters and is investigating.
Exactly the thought. Stockpile them next to a port and you can have them wired into the grid anywhere in the world a few weeks later.
A 40-foot ISO container has 43,9 times the internal volume as a 100kWh powerpack. Now, with powerpacks, you also have to have power modules, not just energy modules, which argues for multiplying by less than 43,9 - but you'll also be able to use space more efficiently, and energy density will be growing. Let's just say 45x. So 4,5 MWh per container. A single cargo ship could carry tens of GWh. Equivalent to hundreds of the Australian battery farm.
Not bad at all.
Indeed, I can read that. And all the other news reports of this investment simply say "according to the Financial Times". My question is still about is there some other corroboration about this investment?
And Elon's comment about "they may have already sold it", well why on earth would they sell it at a loss? Maybe it was prior to the PIF fund report and prior to "funding secured" pop, so they may have sold it after that, or at loss after THAT but I don't see a large sovereign fund like this TRADING. So, if Elon says "i don't know" they may have sold it, why?
Just as a math exercise, 2B$ in shares at lets just say an average 325$ per share (I would hope the Saudis had entered at a better price than this) that's over 6 million shares. I have looked at lists of "major fund, investors" holders that go all the way down to 2.7 million in shares held. And yet, I can't find ONE list that shows the PIF or other Saudi Fund or investor on any of these lists?
Tesla Says SEC Issued Subpoena To Automaker Over Model 3 Production
Code:In particular, the SEC has issued subpoenas to Tesla in connection with (a) Mr. Musk’s prior statement that he was considering taking Tesla private and (b) certain projections that we made for Model 3 production rates during 2017 and other public statements relating to Model 3 production. The DOJ has also asked us to voluntarily provide it with information about each of these matters and is investigating.
WTF? SEC issued a subpoena about (a) Mr. Musk’s prior statement that he was considering taking Tesla private when they have already settled?
On the other hand, the market didn't really move much from this news.
This is Market manipulators and collusionists trying to gauge reactivity of Tesla as a security to news articles. Since there was relatively little reaction General institutions are realizing and presumably algorithms as well that Tesla is indeed a company that makes, produces, sells and delivers high end cars at a large margin. With a simple calculator that will only add up to more profits.Tesla Says SEC Issued Subpoena To Automaker Over Model 3 Production
Code:In particular, the SEC has issued subpoenas to Tesla in connection with (a) Mr. Musk’s prior statement that he was considering taking Tesla private and (b) certain projections that we made for Model 3 production rates during 2017 and other public statements relating to Model 3 production. The DOJ has also asked us to voluntarily provide it with information about each of these matters and is investigating.
WTF? SEC issued a subpoena about (a) Mr. Musk’s prior statement that he was considering taking Tesla private when they have already settled?
On the other hand, the market didn't really move much from this news.
My God. He sounds like Trump. Like all the hype.
Inexorable is of course dependent on time frame. For me and my crystal ball it is the next 2-3 years.Hmm. What part of the SP looks "inexorable" to you?
View attachment 349143
Don't get me wrong - I do think we're probably now re-basedlined to a higher level. I think a sub-$250 SP would require a pretty significant force majeure event. And I think the peeling off of some of the shorts should decrease the volatility.
But it should neither eliminate volatility nor resistance. Tesla still needs to prove to the general investment community that it can do what it did in Q3 sustainably. What upcoming news is going to do that?
We should recycle old news that Tesla is now profitable, every single day of the week to remind shorters quarter 4 will be another blowout.If you have no new news...
This is from todays' 10Q and part about SEC asking Tesla about production numbers IS a new information, so I don't get that anyone thinks this wouldn't be reported? Now, market doesn't care, so that's fine...This is Market manipulators and collusionists trying to gauge reactivity of Tesla as a security to news articles. Since there was relatively little reaction General institutions are realizing and presumably algorithms as well that Tesla is indeed a company that makes, produces, sells and delivers high end cars at a large margin. With a simple calculator that will only add up to more profits.
Stockpile them next to a port and you can have them wired into the grid anywhere in the world a few weeks later.
My God. He sounds like Trump. Like all the hype.