-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
sundaymorning
Active Member
The day after Tesla released the 5k number the stock opened at $360 and went up to $364 in short order. Within 30 minutes of trading CNBC invited some very questionable low performing analysts to bash the stock. I would be complaining about it as well if I were Elon.
The Blue Owl
Endangerous Herbivore
I can’t sleep and it’s the weekend, so I’ll go offtopic for a bit. Sue me.
The real reason is that the Earth-Moon system is not made of point masses, but of one big pile of rocks and water, and a second, smaller pile of rocks. Both piles spin around their own axes and orbit each other. The spin of the Earth around its own axis is slightly impeded by the presence of the Moon, whose gravity acts as a brake slowing the Earth’s rotation down. (The Earth acts the same way on the Moon, and because the Earth is much more massive, this stopped the Moon’s spin completely relatively to the Earth — which is why the Moon always presents the same side to us. This is called tidal locking.)
However, the action of the Moon acting as a brake on the Earth rotation can be seen, symmetrically, as the Earth trying, and succeeding, to accelerate the Moon going around the Earth. This tidal transfer of rotational energy from the Earth to the Moon leads to the orbit of the Moon getting higher over time. As I said above, it also contributes to the slowing down of the Earth’s rotation, which translates to the day lengthening every year by about 2ms. However, only a small part of that 2ms slowdown corresponds to the energy lost to accelerating the Moon; most of the slowdown is due to the energy lost as heat during the bulging of the oceans (what we call the tides) and the same action on the rocky part of the Earth (we don’t see the rocky tides, but you can think of it as ‘rock-crushing’, which dissipates heat).
Bottom line, the Moon gets higher and our day gets longer due to the tidal interaction between the Earth and the Moon.
(Summarized from Wikipedia. A detailed and intuitive explanation can be found here.)
That would just put it in a higher stationary orbit.
The real reason is that the Earth-Moon system is not made of point masses, but of one big pile of rocks and water, and a second, smaller pile of rocks. Both piles spin around their own axes and orbit each other. The spin of the Earth around its own axis is slightly impeded by the presence of the Moon, whose gravity acts as a brake slowing the Earth’s rotation down. (The Earth acts the same way on the Moon, and because the Earth is much more massive, this stopped the Moon’s spin completely relatively to the Earth — which is why the Moon always presents the same side to us. This is called tidal locking.)
However, the action of the Moon acting as a brake on the Earth rotation can be seen, symmetrically, as the Earth trying, and succeeding, to accelerate the Moon going around the Earth. This tidal transfer of rotational energy from the Earth to the Moon leads to the orbit of the Moon getting higher over time. As I said above, it also contributes to the slowing down of the Earth’s rotation, which translates to the day lengthening every year by about 2ms. However, only a small part of that 2ms slowdown corresponds to the energy lost to accelerating the Moon; most of the slowdown is due to the energy lost as heat during the bulging of the oceans (what we call the tides) and the same action on the rocky part of the Earth (we don’t see the rocky tides, but you can think of it as ‘rock-crushing’, which dissipates heat).
Bottom line, the Moon gets higher and our day gets longer due to the tidal interaction between the Earth and the Moon.
(Summarized from Wikipedia. A detailed and intuitive explanation can be found here.)
Last edited:
sundaymorning
Active Member
I think most investors at this point are just waiting for Q2 reports to be done with before jumping back in.
This is really off topic! ;=) It's because the rotational energy of the earth (1 rpd (rotation per day) is gradually speeding up the angular momentum of the moon. But more energy actually boosts the moon to a higher orbit, which takes longer to make a full orbit. One of the many counter-intuitive things about orbital mechanics.
It is so refreshing being around people smarter than one is. Like graduate school when I could drink two 64oz pitchers arguing books with historians, a philosopher, a religion candidate, some future teachers of political theory, and some economists, over a two or three hour period and be the designated driver because we had a VW van. Later a lot of books I taught in class but hadn't read. Sometimes students would challenge what I said so I read the books and my buddies were always right. Must have been the beer.
vinvin218
Member
The latest study about China Auto market indicate that ICE sales already peak out in 2017. China EV market will enter development period from 2021. By year 2030, EV vs ICE ratio will be 50/50. Best timing for @Tesla Shanghai Gigafactory investment.
here is my tweet with link : vincent on Twitter
here is my tweet with link : vincent on Twitter
Interesting question. Tesla could make an announcement, which would be the earliest we would know for sure. Or, it's possible we'll get no information until the IRS updates its instructions for 2018 tax returns, which could happen as late as next *March*. I think that would confuse a lot of people so I hope that isn't what will happen.
Cate Long seems like a reasonable person who is not paying much attention to Tesla operations. She basically uses argument-from-incredulity to justify her claim that Tesla will need to recapitalize. Never a good argument.
If others are thinking this way, it seems that Q3 delivery numbers will surprise the market. Based on known operations, 65K deliveries are a low-end guess; I'd say 69K is a high-end guess.
When asked whether the likely scenario would mean that Tesla didn't need to raise capital, her response was a rather useless "IDK" (I don't know). We of course have people doing this modeling here. The wild card is margins -- we're not really sure what Tesla's current cost structure is -- but a low-end guess would be over $300 million in incremental quarterly profits, and a high-end guess over $600 million.
If Tesla Energy has also successfully gotten some economies of scale, that would also be incremental profits. Service costs might have gone up though.
That's very interesting. Mr. Left is clearly guilty of market manipulation. His tweet was based on nothing: Trump actually didn't go after Express Scripts.
He's right about the "pharmacy benefit managers" kickback business model, but I've known that since the 1990s. But he doesn't distribute well-sourced, accurate information, or even speculation: he distributes misleading claims intended to manipulate the market, and sensationalizes his claims to get attention. From the article:
Later, Left sent out a hit piece attacking Valeant, which was fraudulent, but he *got the fraud wrong*.
There were actually kickbacks going on -- and no channel stuffing.
I think if someone starts a response with IDK, I feel the following conversation should be taken as low basis opionion and not a well grounded heartfelt position on the subject...
So, Mr Left is not Right -- again. Talk about lemons.
hacer
Active Member
It's because the tidal forces cause the oceans to bulge which has the affect of gradually transferring the Earth's angular momentum into the rotational pair angular momentum Orbit of the Moon - Wikipedia (see the tidal section), this accelerates the moons orbital velocity which pushes it further away. This is why the long term average of TSLA stock is upward. (Just to keep this OT
)
The 50/50 ratio in 2030 is with regard to total cars on the road or to new registrations? The latter I guess...
bdy0627
Active Member
I think it's fair to say that most of us were very surprised to see the stock fall so dramatically following the confirmation from Tesla that they were able to indeed hit their guidance of 5,000/week by the end of Q2. I believe the initial market reaction was accurate and appropriate for the production achievement, though it was obviously amplified by some squeezing of shorts. The analysts then shifted the narrative from a positive reaction to the production achievement instead to a bearish focus on the deliveries miss from consensus, predictions of the 5,000 not being sustainable, and gross margins being negatively affected by the extra expense of the intense push for 5,000. Momentum traders sold off, shorts saw weakness and opened new positions, and the momentum swung hard in the downward direction. Once Tesla demonstrates sustained production of 5,000, one of these new bearish arguments will be crossed off, which will almost certainly send the stock back up to $350+. Analysts will then focus on profitability. At this point they are questioning whether Tesla can be profitable. Once Tesla demonstrates profitability in Q3 and Q4, the analysts will shift to the concern that it is not sustainable. IMO, all of this is likely to amplify volatility rather than create a sudden short squeeze.
FirebirdAlpha
Member
Again, I think you're looking at the wrong metric.
Wall St isn't going to care about a single week output. They aren't going to care about "capacity."
Wall St cares about results, and the results weren't great.
- They only delivered 18440 Model 3s, or 1420/week.
- They have a record number of cars in transit and admitted to logistics problems in places like Norway.
- S and X deliveries, which are supposed to be funding Model 3 CapEx, are down yoy.
That's why the "5000/week" goal is kinda weird. What is significant about being able to pump out 5000 in a week?
Question for Q2 call: why were deliveries below 1700/week? (This is what's tanking the stock price)
And when the answer (which any analyst paying attention should know) is: "Duh... we were stockpiling to time our 200K delivery with the beginning of Q3 for customer tax benefit purposes. That means an extra 10K+ cars will get delivered in Q3", what will the brilliant Wall St. geniuses say?
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Anyone paying the least bit of attention already knows the answer...bonehead question.
Wait... there's an astrophysics thread??Mod: can we move this to the astrophysics thread please
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Poll
