TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[Waiting4M3]

Unfortunately since 300 didn't hold, I'd be very surprised if we didn't touch 280 now. I thought we'd have stronger support at 300.

Without news, I wouldn't be surprised to see TSLA keeping bouncing within the bolinger bands, currently around $279 - $309.

 

[Waiting4M3]

....Probably i'm just stupid again and missing something ...

No need to call anyone names, including yourself , we can just agree to disagree and move on, if you can't understand other side's logic.

P.S. the 4x is important IMO because Tesla is trying to convince everyone to drive their cars and use AP, not just those who has a < 3yr old luxury cars. For me my M3 will replace my 2004 Prius, so the safety stats is really relevant to me.

 

[Curt Renz]

Lora Kolodny is pitching hard during her Tesla FUD field day. Nothing she writes today is original. As usual, don't expect her to have included any good Tesla news.

CNBC - a few minutes ago: Tesla is losing top talent and facing a cash crunch at a critical juncture

I'm still blocked at her twitter account. What is she tweeting there today? @lorakolodny

 

[dc_h]

Once Tesla is making cars in China, Chinese customers will qualify to receive 66,000 RMB = $10,500 USD New energy subsidies + No import tax. Model 3 (also S X Y) demand will be skyrocket.

Wow, from 25% tariff, to huge subsidy.

 

[YasB]

For me my M3 will replace my 2004 Prius, so the safety stats is really relevant to me.

Of course good safety stats are very important. Most accidents are not deadly and can still end tragic.

 

[Navin]

Lora Kolodny is pitching hard this afternoon during her Tesla FUD field day. As usual, don't expect her to have included any good Tesla news.

CNBC - a few minutes ago: Tesla is losing top talent and facing a cash crunch at a critical juncture

I'm still blocked at her twitter account @lorakolodny . What is she tweeting there today?

She’s smart enough not to tweet this specific article since she knows she will get destroyed with twitter responses. Better to just put on CNBC with inability to post comments. She knows what’s she doing. Professional hit man.

 

[Lessmog]

Lora Kolodny is pitching hard this afternoon during her Tesla FUD field day. She seems to have entirely missed any good Tesla news today.

CNBC - a few minutes ago: Tesla is losing top talent and facing a cash crunch at a critical juncture

I'm still blocked at her twitter account @lorakolodny . What is she tweeting there today?

Maybe this?

Lora Kolodny‏Verifierat konto @lorakolodny 4 timför 4 timmar sedan



Lora Kolodny Retweetade Phil LeBeau

Remember when Musk promised this "restructuring" was coming on the Q1 earnings call? Here are some more details via @Lebeaucarnews and @RobertoFerris at @CNBCtech

I'm not on Twitter, but one can access some tweets via twitter dot com slash HANDLE directly on the web. It won't give full access though.
EDIT:
Oh, and of course it's possible to read her articles. I just don't want to donate clicks.

 

[Lessmog]

Elon is communicating well with a little help from friends, addressing WaPo on the stationary truck rear-ending:

ValueAnalyst Retweetade
Elon Musk‏Verifierat konto @elonmusk 9 minför 9 minuter sedan


It’s super messed up that a Tesla crash resulting in a broken ankle is front page news and the ~40,000 people who died in US auto accidents alone in past year get almost no coverage

 

[schonelucht]

Did Panasonic inform shareholders that the Earth revolves around the Sun?

I am used to a little more intellectually honest conversation from you. A possible tripling of investments in the gigafactory is material for Panasonic’s shareholders.

Again, are you passive aggressively suggesting Elon and Tesla are bold face liars and GF is fully built as is?

I am suggesting that the possible expansion of the GF to 105GWh is a lot less certain than some seem to assume here.

 

[schonelucht]

Do you have a link for this?

Robstark gave a link earlier. Google Panasonic IR annual report. It’s one of the first pages ‘special case report’ Sorry on an unfamiliar device right now. If you can’t find the link, dm me and I’ll send it tomorrow.

 

[EinSV]

Robstark gave a link earlier. Google Panasonic IR annual report. It’s one of the first pages ‘special case report’ Sorry on an unfamiliar device right now. If you can’t find the link, dm me and I’ll send it tomorrow.

That's the FY 2017 Annual Report -- from a year ago. Panasonic has already posted FY 2018 results but has not posted an FY 2018 Annual Report yet.

Do you have anything recent to support the statement below that Panasonic is "sticking with" 35 GWh for the gigafactory? (If so, I understand you may not be able to post until tomorrow).

No. Last week Panasonic reported growing inventory due to slower than expected take up of its product at the gigafactory.

Btw someone should tell Panasonic that the gigafactory will be a 105GWh facility because they are still sticking to 35GWh in their investor’s communications.

 

[RobStark]

I am used to a little more intellectually honest conversation from you. A possible tripling of investments in the gigafactory is material for Panasonic’s shareholders.



I am suggesting that the possible expansion of the GF to 105GWh is a lot less certain than some seem to assume here.

There is a lot of material information not confirmed by Panasonic. Cost per kWh, energy density, power density etc

A tripling of capacity does not necessarily mean a tripling of investment.

This is the level of intellectual honesty I have come to expect from you. Are you suggesting 40 GWh or 100 GWh? Or what exactly?

Mod: Cool it, both of you. --ggr.

 

[schonelucht]

That's the FY 2017 Annual Report -- from a year ago. Panasonic has already posted FY 2018 results but has not posted an FY 2018 Annual Report yet.

Do you have anything recent to support the statement below that Panasonic is "sticking with" 35 GWh for the gigafactory? (If so, I understand you may not be able to post until tomorrow).

Look into the 2018 one at the location I indicated. Its verbatim there too. In fact they copied the graphics (and wording) between two editions.

 

[schonelucht]

There is a lot of material information not confirmed by Panasonic. Cost per kWh, energy density, power density etc

For which there is a well established precedent they don’t. Contrary to major investments.

Are you suggesting 40 GWh or 100 GWh? Or what exactly?.

As I said, 100GWh is a lot less certain than it is generally assumed to be here.

 

[vigleik]

I honestly never understood how being 4 times safer than the average car in use is supposed to be especially good. I'd assume the current car fleet includes a huge amount of older, cheaper and smaller cars which usually also means they have less safety features. No, that doesn't mean i say or want to imply that Teslas are especially unsafe. But i can't wrap my head around the figures and bring myself to believe it's the safest car around. At least when it comes to deadly accidents this simply doesn't seem to be true. I mean it's completely understandable that more accidents happen, given Teslas are damn quick and fun to drive. The following link contains a list of cars that seem to be relativly safe in that regard, if you scroll down to the part about "Lowest rates of driver deaths".

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/sr/statusreport/article/52/3/1

It shows several cars having 0 deaths per "million registered vehicle years". I believe Tesla has sold something around 300.000 cars over the last years. More in the last 2 or 3 years than before, so altogether registered vehicle years should be in the range of 1 million years. There have not been 0 deaths.

So how does building the safest cars on the road (citing crash test data) translate into being 4 times safer, when it comes to deadly crashes and another dataset shows others cars are safer in that regard? Either a piece of the puzzle is missing or one of the datasets is flawed, but that doesn't really make sense. Probably i'm just stupid again and missing something ...

This is a subtle statistics thing. Did you know that if you list US cities by, say, cancer rates then all the cities with the lowest rates are small? I don’t have to look at the data to predict that there are going to be several car models with low sales and 0 deaths. Perhaps RobStark can confirm that all the particular car models with 0 deaths had low sales.

Unless you can show me statistics by a competent statistician that say otherwise I will continue to consider it a fact that Teslas are safer than the average car, even after adjusting for age and price class.

 

[EinSV]

Look into the 2018 one at the location I indicated. Its verbatim there too. In fact they copied the graphics (and wording) between two editions.

If you could post or dm it to me I'd appreciate it. As mentioned, the only Annual Report I see on the Panasonic IR site (or anywhere else) is for FY 2017. I also don't see the graphics/wording in any of the FY 2018 materials, although it is possible I overlooked something.

Annual Report - IR Library - IR Information - About Us - Panasonic
Financial Announcements - IR Information - About Us - Panasonic

 

[Esme Es Mejor]

This is a subtle statistics thing. Did you know that if you list US cities by, say, cancer rates then all the cities with the lowest rates are small? I don’t have to look at the data to predict that there are going to be several car models with low sales and 0 deaths. Perhaps RobStark can confirm that all the particular car models with 0 deaths had low sales.

Unless you can show me statistics by a competent statistician that say otherwise I will continue to consider it a fact that Teslas are safer than the average car, even after adjusting for age and price class.

Looking through the IIHS stats YasB linked to, it looks like Tesla’s are 4x safer than the average large 4-door car, 5x safer than the average large sports car, and 2x safer than the average large luxury car. IIHS is using vehicles years rather than vehicles miles, so it isn’t certain that the comparison holds, but until someone provides better evidence, I’ll assume it does.

While demographic profiles matter (Tesla owners are older & wealthier than the average car owner), psychological profiles matter, too. Between the “early adapter” phenomenon and the fast 0-60 times, I’d be shocked if Tesla owners aren’t—on average— bigger risk-takers.

 

[Mike Smith]

Tesla's Autopilot engaged during Utah crash

Autopilot was on, but Utah driver was using phone and is likely to be charged.

 

[bdy0627]

Maybe this?

I'm not on Twitter, but one can access some tweets via twitter dot com slash HANDLE directly on the web. It won't give full access though.
EDIT:
Oh, and of course it's possible to read her articles. I just don't want to donate clicks.

Yeah, I made the mistake of reading her latest "article." There is obviously an agenda there. Garbage journalism. No more reads for me. That includes twitter.

 

[Curt Renz]

Zacks - today: Shrug Off Negative News, Tesla's Still a Buy