The sec does get to approve the tweet nanny.
EM signed and had notarized the signature page on friday. His lawyers held the page until they worked out the final details and he gave them permission to deliver it on Sat.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
The sec does get to approve the tweet nanny.
EM signed and had notarized the signature page on friday. His lawyers held the page until they worked out the final details and he gave them permission to deliver it on Sat.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
1997 was a year with $178b in revenue.
But it gets worse: the 1997->2018 cumulative inflation is over 55% ...
So 2017's GM revenue of $145 billion is only worth about $93 billion in 1997 dollars.
So GM has already shrunk in half from its peak years, inflation-adjusted.
How convenient for James to be privately embarrassed, he can have his cake and eat it too.
I wonder, what sort of a grown man hides his embarrassment and for what reasons?
Tesla can do much better than having a Murdoch as a chairman.
Last edited:
ZachF
Active Member
...With most of that decline taking place under the helm of the guy who keeps yelling at Elon to get off his lawn.
andrewt3000
Member
Many headlines yesterday stated that Tesla fell short of Wall Street expectations on deliveries:
Tesla Meets Model 3 Production Targets, Misses Delivery Estimates
Tesla Meets Model 3 Production Goal, but Struggles With Deliveries
However, it appears that was all based on wrong data from FactSet...
Tesla has actually exceeded FactSet’s delivery estimates. Look for corrections!
Yeh that is absurd.... by "wrong data from FactSet" do you mean incorrectly reported by the street, or the factset data is inaccurate?
On the daily mail... after sec settlement... the headline on snapchat was "Elon resigns" talk about clickbait and misleading headlines.
Not sure who made the mistake, but apparently a lot of publications repeated it. See here:
Last edited:
bhtooefr
Active Member
TBH, at the last shareholder vote, I voted against Murdoch even being on the board...
My 2 cents: If losing the money you spend on the shares wouldn´t significantly affect the way you live today or your retirement plans and you don´t need to get margin to buy, go for it. Otherwise, scale down. Disclaimer: Just a hobby investor/fan, all I know I have learned here.
According to a technical, Danish news outlet (ing.dk), the above article is based on the Danish prime minister's speech at the opening of parlament (following their summer break), the actual speech is here:
Statsministeriet - Statsministerens tale ved Folketingets åbning, 2. oktober 2018
In this speech, he specified his government's goal of forbidding newly sold, pure ICEs from 2030 and to allow only ZEVs from 2035. Understandingly, this speech does not differentiate hybrids and plugin-hybrids.
The context of this information is important. Danish politicians are not fundamentally different from politicians in other countries, so there is a non-zero risk that (due to wholly unforeseen circumstances) the current government's stated goals will not actually materialize.
Edit PS. Denmark does not have an auto industry, so different lobbying interests.
Last edited:
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
Shortsville Times: Mazda Announces Electrification and Connectivity Strategies for Cars That Invigorate Mind and Body
Actually, I lied, the headline and the quote is from a real press release from Mazda this week:
The mind boggles, in 2-4 years these ICE makers are going to be in a world of hurt...
"By 2030, Mazda expects that internal combustion engines combined with some form of electrification will account for 95 percent of the vehicles it produces and battery electric vehicles will account for 5 percent."
Actually, I lied, the headline and the quote is from a real press release from Mazda this week:
The mind boggles, in 2-4 years these ICE makers are going to be in a world of hurt...
Because Market thinks that Tesla doesn't have enough cash to pay off it's debt.
Further it wants Tesla to raise more capital on its terms, and since it's not doing that, they are trying hard to supress the SP < 360. Start paying off the debts and SP will fly to $420
What does that mean? ( You seem to be saying that there is a chance for a short squeeze given their desperation (running to Tesla because the bull market has been going too long... not likely.)
Shorts are here for 2 reasons. Tesla is on the verge of going under, under too much debt... or, there are deep pockets that want to keep Tesla from succeeding in introducing EV's that are compelling. (too late here under the rock) The short activity seems aggressive and transparent.
I think that Tesla has the momentum now to prove itself as a technology ecosystem that can develop cars, autonomy, and power systems that will dominate or disrupt multiple markets. If they can get out of debt and find a way to fund its growth... Model 3 isn't believed to be enough, the solar business looks to be negative or neutral at best.
There was a chance for a short squeeze, but EM's attempt at causing it has diffused the opportunity. His behavior has soured large investors, attracted the SEC, DOJ and weakened the SP by nearly 100 points. I think that the shorts, the large ones, want the stock to bounce around 310 and 250 so they can suck the life out of longs... so no, there is no longer a chance for a short squeeze in my opinion. This is a long opportunity to buy at 270 and sell at 310, for the next 6 months. That is the rock over my head, mostly caused by EM's frantic attempts at causing a short squeeze (I see it as a result of exhaustion). I am hoping to see momentum coming to the stock after it is clear that growth is sustainable. I am an investor because I genuinely like the products and buy into the mission statement, I wish I had kept my investment smaller, too much enthusiasm after getting out from living under a rock for too long.
Did you get elected the forum bully on the 20th?
Ulmo
Active Member
There's no one who thinks Tesla is a bad deal. There are only stock manipulators like the SEC and Chanos who try to make money by making the stock price of TSLA go down as short sellers.
keep going
#Tesla registered 4,609 new #Model3 VINs. ~85% estimated to be dual motor. Highest VIN is 122517.
Model 3 VINs on Twitter
#Tesla registered 4,609 new #Model3 VINs. ~85% estimated to be dual motor. Highest VIN is 122517.
Model 3 VINs on Twitter
ZachF
Active Member
depends how to look at it. VINs are not used in sequential order. Would not be surprised if we hear about it from Elon once he 100k one is rolling out.
The true VIN number 100.000 though has been already reported somewhere.
Thats an interesting piece of information to counter shorts:
In Q3 Tesla delivered 83.5k vehicles, or 908 per day. So 12.6k of unsold inventory represent less than 14 day worth of the current Tesla sales. For comparison, current inventory level for auto makers in US is 69 days, or about 5 times higher than for Tesla
Twitter. It's what's happening.
In Q3 Tesla delivered 83.5k vehicles, or 908 per day. So 12.6k of unsold inventory represent less than 14 day worth of the current Tesla sales. For comparison, current inventory level for auto makers in US is 69 days, or about 5 times higher than for Tesla
Twitter. It's what's happening.
ZachF
Active Member
I'm not talking about VIN #100,000, there are probably already cars out there with vin#s >100,000, but the 100,000th produced Model 3... should be in the next few days, no?
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
I call bull*sugar* on their explanation;
- Background: this widely syndicated article about TSLA is one of the main reasons for yesterday's drop: this article was the source for the widely reported false claim that Tesla Q3 deliveries "missed expectations". They claimed Tesla's 55,840 Model 3 deliveries "missed" expectations of 56,000, while the real expectations value was 55,600.
- Firstly, rounding to 55,600 to 56,000 and then unfavorably comparing it to Tesla's 55,840 was unlikely to be an honest mistake: had the Tesla numbers been rounded up as well it might be defensible, but they weren't. Also why round up, it's still the same number of characters ...
- Secondly, changing "80,000" expectations to "82,000" expectations out of thin air isn't rounding nor a mistake. I find it hard to see any credible scenario under which the "2000" could be added "by mistake". Cat ran over the keyboard?
Yeah, this week or early next, Through the Q3 report, just under 95k 3 had been built.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Poll
