Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
2018 production numbers are as follows at the end of Q3:
  • 76,392 Model S+X
  • 91,583 Model 3
In Q4, I estimate
  • 24,909 Model S+X
  • 60,359 Model 3
Therefore 2018 total would be:
  • 101,301 Model S+X
  • 151,942 Model 3
  • Total: 253,243
Pretty exciting. Seems like 375,000 minimum for 2019 and 425,000 combined model S3X and hopefully at least a few hundred semis. With leasing and SR model 3 USA sales should be over 100,000 long term, but focus in first half is likely higher ASP in Europe and China. Sounds like the plan is 3000 a week to Belgium, and possibly more direct to Oslo. I assume at least 2000 a week to China, so USA may move to waitlisting until Q2 at least.
With battery cell production doubling soon, it will be interesting to see how many cars Fremont can produce. I think the teslike numbers are probably fairly accurate and due to Sparks. With Panasonic doubling cell production with the three new lines, Fremont is the limit. This also likely means Tesla Energy can finally start to accelerate. With the big California projects coming up TE should at least double in 2019 and hopefully closer to 3-4 times 2018 sales. Add in what the shorts call pump, with pickup and Y unveil later in the year and addition to the S&P 2019 should be a good year. The downward pressure will likely be macro. Political issues and the earnings churn for the rest of the auto industry.
 
Only a small a minority of traders, retail investors and institutions are buying or selling a what is a small portion of the float of a particular stock each day. Most shareholders or potential shareholders take absolutely no action on a particular day. It is those who are trading that day who can influence a stock's price far more than their numbers would seem to justify. They are the ones who react either rationally or irrationally to either the news or what other investors appear to be doing. Hence volatility. As you suggest, buy and holders are usually wise to ignore the nonsense.

I've watched stocks gap down by $5 between Tuesday and Wednesday and gap back up between Wednesday and Thursday. The more bullish traders were clearly doing something other than trading on Wednesday. This is just to reinforce what Curt is saying -- short term movements are generally noise.
 
With today's Close, Microsoft (MFST) becomes the new largest Company by equity listed on the NASDAQ-100, with $826B market cap.

APPL and AMZN are 2nd-3rd, with $805B vs $802B respectively.

MSFT has better weathered the Fall selloff, down only 9% since Sep 4, vs -20% for AMZN, and --26% for APPL.

However all three big cap tech stocks were up sharply today. So is Santa Clause finally starting his run? And will they take TSLA along for a sleigh ride to a new ATH?

Cheers!


The top 5 companies listed on the NASDAQ-100 now account for over 45% of the index:

Company Weight
1 MSFT 10.724
2 AAPL 10.648
3 AMZN 10.404
4 GOOG 4.728*
5 FB 4.447
6 GOOGL 4.092*

*Note: Alphabet has 2 classes of stock listed in the NASDAQ-100: (GOOG, GOOGL)
 
“The chief financial officer of Chinese tech giant Huawei has been released on a $10 million bail, a judge in Canada ruled Tuesday.”
I think this is positive to the market.

Yeah. It looks like the US will have to prove the plausibility of its case in *Canadian* court before anything further happens, which is good. We'll see if the US actually has documentation that she committed commercial fraud, which appears to be the claim. They're claiming that Huawei operated & managed a company called "Skycom" (which they have to prove, though it looks likely), and that Meng told US banks it was an independent company (which they have to prove, though it looks likely), and that Meng knew that it wasn't really independent (which they also have to prove, and is the hardest, well-nigh-impossible-to-prove part of the case).

I think to get extradition they also have to prove Meng's personal relationship with the US or that the supposed fraudulent actions took place in the US, which apparently they didn't. There are so many grounds to refuse extradition here that it's not funny -- I don't know what the US thinks it's playing at.
 
Last edited:
OT
You bitch about that a lot and New York is underserved. But my experience has been great. I currently use the Decatur Georgia service center and I just got my 6 year / 75,000 mile service done. Same people have been helping me since they opened that location and all very professional. Starting the service call through the website was awesome too.

Isn't it nice for you that you have a service center in the same town you live in. But irrelevant. Like I say, people in that position are served pretty well.

People who aren't, should not buy Teslas and I've been telling them not to (they're buying them anyway, and then getting angry at Tesla)
 
OT

OT


Isn't it nice for you that you have a service center in the same town you live in. But irrelevant. Like I say, people in that position are served pretty well.

People who aren't, should not buy Teslas and I've been telling them not to (they're buying them anyway, and then getting angry at Tesla)
We live 7+ hours from a service center and 2 hours from a mobile technician. We currently have two Tesla’s (have bought 3 to date) and I disagree with your assertion that we should not own Teslas.
 
Given Mr. Tripp's situation if the judgment goes against him I expect Tesla never sees 167 million from him.

Criminal liability doesn't necessarily stop with Mr. Tripp though: if he was aided and abetted by members of the media, for example by a certain Linette Lopez at "Business Insider" who appears to have used Tripp as a primary source frequently, then the liability - and Tesla's ability to collect damages - might extend to much more wealthy entities as well.

If such evidence emerges Tesla could also amend their complaint with RICO claims and ask for triple damages - i.e. 500 million dollars (!). It would also give Tesla the right to discovery from Ms. Lopez and Business Insider in general, request identifying transaction details of short sellers, and generally pierce the corporate veil of underlying monetary interests that conspired against Tesla in a potentially criminal fashion.

So if Business Insider, or short sellers, or Tesla competitors did something shady and criminal, and it can be proven by Tesla, or Tripp flips on Lopez and others and delivers evidence of a criminal conspiracy, this could be the "Terry Gene Bollea (a.k.a. Hulk Hogan) vs. Gawker Media" moment of Tesla FUD spreading media outlets - and/or of short sellers and other entities criminally connected to Mr. Tripp.

Beyond being able to collect damages, Tesla would also set a precedent of aggressively going after those who are trying to harm them.
 
Last edited:
Yeah. It looks like the US will have to prove the plausibility of its case in *Canadian* court before anything further happens, which is good. We'll see if the US actually has documentation that she committed commercial fraud, which appears to be the claim. They're claiming that Huawei operated & managed a company called "Skycom" (which they have to prove, though it looks likely), and that Meng told US banks it was an independent company (which they have to prove, though it looks likely), and that Meng knew that it wasn't really independent (which they also have to prove, and is the hardest, well-nigh-impossible-to-prove part of the case).

I think to get extradition they also have to prove Meng's personal relationship with the US or that the supposed fraudulent actions took place in the US, which apparently they didn't. There are so many grounds to refuse extradition here that it's not funny -- I don't know what the US thinks it's playing at.

Terms of release explained in this report from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation:
(CBC News on Youtube)

 
  • Informative
Reactions: shlokavica22
OT

Isn't it nice for you that you have a service center in the same town you live in. But irrelevant. Like I say, people in that position are served pretty well.

People who aren't, should not buy Teslas and I've been telling them not to (they're buying them anyway, and then getting angry at Tesla)

But note that for every angry, loud Tesla customer there's probably 10 more who know that they took on the inconvenience and risk of not having a service center nearby knowingly and are staying silent. I hope Tesla is also looking at customer density maps and is allocating new service centers accordingly. They should perhaps also look at some of the 'worst case' trip lengths of urban and sub-urban Tesla customers and allocate new service centers to shorten those distances, because this would probably create quite a bit of incremental demand.

One of the few advantages of the dense dealership networks of ICE carmakers is the short trip it takes to bring the car in to service - and although Teslas require less service in principle, first-time Tesla customers don't know that and shouldn't have to rely on that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.