TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[NicoV]

Al Gore would be excellent. Nobody would doubt his motivation to be chairman, and he is certainly independent. (Note: I read somewhere that Al Gore was mentioned as possbile chairman).

Replying to my own post: as a european citizen, I’m too far away from American politics to realize that Al Gore may be a controversial personality. I was surprised to see a lot of disagrees on that post, Al Gore seems to have a good reputation in Europe.
I witnessed Al Gore giving the closing keynote at the 2017 WebSummit in Lisbon, and found it to be one of the best speeches on climate change I have ever seen, and the tens of thousands of people next to me in the arena (I guess mostly Europeans) definitely seemed to agree.
That being said, it’s probably not a good idea to have a poltician as chairman, as it will inevitably draw negative comments from supporters of the opposite party, and that doesn’t help the case.

 

[ThereAre4Cars]

The biggest mystery for me and block is the fact that margins in q4 for model 3 are guided to 20% on a mix of 60k$ vehicles. That's 48k$ cost per vehicle. Yet Elon said 'definitely' on Twitter when someone asked if the base model could be made for 28k$. I have no idea how to explain this giant gulfing gap. If the latter margins are correct even if it takes 18 more months to get to that, this game is dramatically over, because you would be looking at like 35+% margins on the models they are selling now. But we have toyed with explanations and none of them explains a gap that large. At the same time 28k$ is likely the cogs for a decked out Camry, and it doesn't seem like a base 3 should cost much more than that to build.

Ultimately I think I give up on understanding it and am just gonna make the leap of faith. Investing is really always educated gambling. First I need Netflix to score on Tuesday and then God help me I am going in deep.

 

[SpaceCash]

#DearMoon

This is why T Rowe Price bought more.
Feels like the deal of the cehtury at these levels at this time

 

[ThereAre4Cars]

FWIW I would vastly prefer Mulally. Tesla's green credentials are solid. What they need to give is the impression of corporate maturity particularly for large scale capital manufacturing business. Hell I'd take Rex Tillerson even. Those are yin for elons yang. And I dont think being old auto or oil is relevant to how they would treat Tesla conceptually. They are professional managers.

 

[ThereAre4Cars]

If Tesla was tapped out until.end of year I dont think rwd would be under 4 weeks at this point, they would have found a way to disgorge any excess inventory by now and that would also be 8+ weeks.

 

[heltok]

If Tesla was tapped out until.end of year I dont think rwd would be under 4 weeks at this point, they would have found a way to disgorge any excess inventory by now and that would also be 8+ weeks.

Maybe Tesla intend to start shipping some 3s to Norway and switch to a more D heavy mix.

 

[CorneliusXX]

The biggest mystery for me and block is the fact that margins in q4 for model 3 are guided to 20% on a mix of 60k$ vehicles. That's 48k$ cost per vehicle. Yet Elon said 'definitely' on Twitter when someone asked if the base model could be made for 28k$. I have no idea how to explain this giant gulfing gap. If the latter margins are correct even if it takes 18 more months to get to that, this game is dramatically over, because you would be looking at like 35+% margins on the models they are selling now. But we have toyed with explanations and none of them explains a gap that large. At the same time 28k$ is likely the cogs for a decked out Camry, and it doesn't seem like a base 3 should cost much more than that to build.

Ultimately I think I give up on understanding it and am just gonna make the leap of faith. Investing is really always educated gambling. First I need Netflix to score on Tuesday and then God help me I am going in deep.

Do you know what the Germans included in their costs? There may well be fixed amortisation costs and variable labour costs to be added on to the 28k price. Even still, an additional 20k doesn't make sense for these items.

 

[mrdoubleb]

What do you guys think of the "bankcruptcy risk" that all the short sellers are saying to be pretty big with TSLA?

Are there any calculations on how much money TSLA will need to manage their debt? How high is the probability of TSLA indeed going bankrupt within the next 24 months considering the fact of ramping up Model 3 production continously and demand being stronger than supply?

How will they pay back their debt in early 2019?

Thanks for an accurate and honest answer.

So you got the weekend shift? Tough luck...

 

[BenPrice]

The biggest mystery for me and block is the fact that margins in q4 for model 3 are guided to 20% on a mix of 60k$ vehicles. That's 48k$ cost per vehicle. Yet Elon said 'definitely' on Twitter when someone asked if the base model could be made for 28k$. I have no idea how to explain this giant gulfing gap. If the latter margins are correct even if it takes 18 more months to get to that, this game is dramatically over, because you would be looking at like 35+% margins on the models they are selling now. But we have toyed with explanations and none of them explains a gap that large. At the same time 28k$ is likely the cogs for a decked out Camry, and it doesn't seem like a base 3 should cost much more than that to build.

Ultimately I think I give up on understanding it and am just gonna make the leap of faith. Investing is really always educated gambling. First I need Netflix to score on Tuesday and then God help me I am going in deep.

The cost of a Model 3 changes as the same equipment and people are used to make 30,000, 40,000 per month versus the 20,000 per month they make now. All of the fixed costs get spread over a larger number of units. Additionally, raw materials may decrease in cost in some areas because buying 30,000, 40,000 a month of something is more efficient for the supplier than 20,000.

At 4,000 units per week (Q3) Tesla appears to be profitable and they’ve guided minimal capex needed as they work to 10,000 per week. That will take awhile, but every bit of progress increases margin along the way.

 

[JRP3]

I don't want to get drawn into the vegan ideology wars again, but meat eating is not bad, but some farming practices are. Pasturing ruminants is net beneficial to carbon sequestration and should be encouraged. Much of the planet's surface is not suitable for crop growth either, and the harm that mono-culture farming does to the environment is enormous.

And don't forget the epidemic of metabolic syndrome currently sweeping the planet, especially those following a standard America diet model - this is a recent phenomenon and a direct result of sugar, flour and industrial seed-oil consumption, not from meat.

Don't be drawn-in to FUD headlines, like Tesla, research the facts.

Indeed, and we have a dedicated thread with information which contradicts what you just posted
Veganism/Leather etc. out of Market Action

 

[Yggdrasill]

What do you guys think of the "bankcruptcy risk" that all the short sellers are saying to be pretty big with TSLA?

It's utter BS.

Are there any calculations on how much money TSLA will need to manage their debt?

There are many calculations, but the debts are something like 1.4 billion until the end of Q1, IIRC.

How high is the probability of TSLA indeed going bankrupt within the next 24 months considering the fact of ramping up Model 3 production continously and demand being stronger than supply?

I'd say about 0.01%. Even if everything went to hell and Tesla needed cash, Tesla would simply do a cap raise. As the go-private attempt showed, there was plenty of capital available.

How will they pay back their debt in early 2019?

With profits and other cash generated by the improving Model 3 ramp. Tesla will likely have around $500 million in profits in Q4 and Q1 combined, and generate another $3-4 billion in cash when you adjust for depreciation, stock-based compensation and increasing accounts payable.

With 2.2 billion in cash, and around 4 billion in cash generation until the end of Q1, that's more than enough to pay for around 1.4 billion in debt repayments and around 1.8 billion in capex, and still have 3 billion in cash.

 

[Drax7]

I don't want to get drawn into the vegan ideology wars again, but meat eating is not bad, but some farming practices are. Pasturing ruminants is net beneficial to carbon sequestration and should be encouraged. Much of the planet's surface is not suitable for crop growth either, and the harm that mono-culture farming does to the environment is enormous.

And don't forget the epidemic of metabolic syndrome currently sweeping the planet, especially those following a standard America diet model - this is a recent phenomenon and a direct result of sugar, flour and industrial seed-oil consumption, not from meat.

Don't be drawn-in to FUD headlines, like Tesla, research the facts.

for science based nutrition check out Michael Greger, you are substantially
Misinformed concerning meat, chicken fish etc..

 

[Unpilot]

What do you guys think of the "bankcruptcy risk" that all the short sellers are saying to be pretty big with TSLA?

Are there any calculations on how much money TSLA will need to manage their debt? How high is the probability of TSLA indeed going bankrupt within the next 24 months considering the fact of ramping up Model 3 production continously and demand being stronger than supply?

How will they pay back their debt in early 2019?

Thanks for an accurate and honest answer.

Sigh...well...sigh....oh the hell with it..DO SOME RESEARCH..you found this forum so you can find the answer's you seek.

 

[Mike117]

Sigh...well...sigh....oh the hell with it..DO SOME RESEARCH..you found this forum so you can find the answer's you seek.

There are a lot of different opinions and calculations on it. I want a true and fair hie by Fact Checking.

 

[KarenRei]

I don't want to get drawn into the vegan ideology wars again, but meat eating is not bad, but some farming practices are. Pasturing ruminants is net beneficial to carbon sequestration and should be encouraged. Much of the planet's surface is not suitable for crop growth either, and the harm that mono-culture farming does to the environment is enormous.

No, it is not. And this has nothing to do with "ideology". I recommend reading the IPCC reports and spending some time on scholar.google.com. Certain types of management can lead to temporary net sequestration (such as reducing grazing of overgrazed fields) or displacing other inputs (such as grazing cover crops on fallow fields), but even ignoring that low-carbon management techniques also tend to be lower density, in the long term all forms of grazing are significant GHG sources. Ignoring the issues of how overgrazing (which is extensive worldwide) depletes carbon from soils, and the (extensive) amount of forest land that has been lost for cattle pasture, cattle are at a fundamental level ruminants. They're extensive sources of methane, which has a GWP of 86 over 20 years and 34 over 100 years. By grazing cattle on grassland, you increase the amount of carbon that ends up as methane rather than CO2.

 

[KarenRei]

There are a lot of different opinions and calculations on it. I want a true and fair hie by Fact Checking.

Ah, our favourite ASTROTURFING TROLL is back. For those just joining us, Mike117 is famous for showing up whenever there's a downturn in the stock and pretending to be a "distraught long", who posts about a dozen times trying to get everyone to sell, then disappears, only to come back whenever there's another downturn, where he's suddenly a "distraught long" again.... a mask he often fails to keep up because he often can't help himself and slips in random remarks about how longs are just a bunch of stupid Musk cultists.

Mods... do your job.

ED: Did "Mike" also just basically admit to sockpuppeting with "Priigoat"? Hey, "Mike", you were logged into the wrong account when you responded to the response to your post.

 

[Fact Checking]

Okay, new topic then: obviously the world is flat, as we experience it; no matter how high you get, the horizon continues to look flat.

I'm wondering how you Flat Earthers explain why the rightmost ship just 10 miles out:

... is half hidden by the ocean?

And it's not stealth government tech in the camera, I've seen this happen countless times on the beach, with my own eyes!

Can you tell your Flat Earther friends to visit the beach and verify for themselves?

 

[Unpilot]

Petition to STOP all flat earth/Vegan discussion.

 

[KarenRei]

I'm wondering how you Flat Earthers explain why the rightmost ship just 10 miles out

Just a mere optical illusion!

Sinking Ship Effect

As the ship gets further away and its apparent size decreases, the hull blends in with the waters - an effect amplified by waves which are closer to the observer and thus having a larger apparent size than the distant ship.

(Surely you realize that nobody in this thread actually thinks the world is flat!)

 

[Fact Checking]

As the ship gets further away and its apparent size decreases, the hull blends in with the waters - an effect amplified by waves which are closer to the observer and thus having a larger apparent size than the distant ship.

But the weather was calm, waves were lower than 5 feet and I was standing on the beach on a small dune higher than any wave could be even in the fiercest storm.

So I was looking down on all waves, even distant ones, no increase in apparent size. Yet the ships went under the horizon!! Please explain!!!