Thứ Hai, 31 tháng 10, 2016

Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA) part 5

  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Thanks
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    My excitement about Q3 announcements has gone up as it would seem TM is poised to drastically raise guidance due to insatiable global demand.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Below is an article published today about a firm considering a lawsuit against Tesla Motors regarding claims of safety before the car fires. Following that is my response to the law firm. Other shareholders here may want to consider sending a similar email to [email�protected] .
    ____________________________

    SHAREHOLDER ALERT: Pomerantz Law Firm Investigates Claims on Behalf of Investors of Tesla Motors, Inc. -- TSLA
    11:32a ET October 30, 2013 (GlobeNewswire)
    Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP is investigating claims on behalf of investors of Tesla Motors, Inc. ("Tesla"). Such investors are advised to contact Robert S. Willoughby at [email�protected] or 888-476-6529, ext. 237.
    The investigation concerns whether Tesla and certain of its officers and/or directors have violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In an August 19, 2013 press release, Tesla touted its Model S as having achieved the "best safety rating of any car ever tested" by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA"). On October 2, 2013, an analyst downgraded Tesla due to "execution risk." On October 17, 2013 in Merida, Mexico, a Model S sped into a roundabout, crashed through a concrete wall and hit a tree. The driver fled the scene before the car went up in flames. The U.S. automotive Web site Jalopnik reported the story Monday, citing the Mexican newspaper Progreso Hoy.
    It was the second time this month that a Model S - (Tesla's only vehicle on the market) was in a fiery crash. On October 2, 2013, a Model S burned after hitting road debris in Kent, Washington.
    On this news, shares of Tesla fell 4 percent to close at $162.86 on October 28, 2013. The shares have fallen 16 percent since the October 2 crash.
    Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP, with offices in New York, Chicago, San Diego and Florida, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 70 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See Pomerantz Law | Front.
    [?IMG]
    		CONTACT: Robert S. Willoughby
    Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP
    [email�protected]

    _________________________________
    Dear PGHDG:

    I�m a Tesla Motors shareholder. You�ve got to be kidding regarding your investigation of the company. Stop now. Any potential gains from a lawsuit would be miniscule compared to share price drops due to publication of your intentions. You actually would be helping the short sellers and hurting the shareholders. If your ulterior motive is actually to aid the former, then we shareholders should be suing you.

    There are hundreds of car fires in the US every day. Many involve death or severe injury. The Tesla fires were contained to the front of the batteries due to a safety design that compartmentalized the batteries. There were no injuries. Both drivers still love the Model S and are anxious to get replacements.

    The Tesla fires were the result of unusual accidents, not spontaneous as in the case of a Fisker car. The first one involved running over a truck fender that jackknifed forcing puncture with a force of 25 tons. The NHTSA says it�s not worth further investigation since there was no safety defect. The second involved a drunk who ran the car at high speed into a wall.

    The fact that the fires were freakish accidents, contained and the drivers were unhurt screams that the Model S is well designed for safety and is indeed the world�s safest car. If any party needs to be investigated and considered for a lawsuit, it is your firm.

    Regards,
    Curt Renz
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Wait, didn�t Elon say the car could reach hyper speed and pass through solid objects? Could have sworn he tweeted that after the NHTSA press release.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    ... And this is Tesla's fault because...???
    Does this kind of stuff really fly in the USA? It kind of confirms the prejudice us Europeans have about the US legal system.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Yes, it's embarrassing.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Seriously? Agree with you about the US legal system being seriously flawed.
    But I cannot see it being limited to the USA any more. Can you?
    Scum bags know no boundaries. Based on dealings I have had with UK solicitors, I would hardly find them exempt.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Curt,

    I'd be more than happy to join you in any lawsuit against PGHDG, with respect to their action.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I think we should get members of this forum to start an anti-FUD movement in support of Tesla with accurate information out to the media and public. People have already alluded to it in various threads. We can start by gathering at major metropolis public areas or wherever you can have a few Model S owners gather (malls, shopping centers, games, events, etc) with member Model S's with signage containing pro-electric facts. But publishing good articles in media is an easier way. I still have not heard from the LA times columnist. I will follow up later this week again. Anyone have other/better ideas?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I've not checked in on this thread in a while but woke up this morning concerned about something I went to bed chewing on. Specifically, what could heavily vested shorts do with MS' floor battery?

    I'm not talking fires here. All cars catch on fire and, if you are going to have your car catch on fire, it looks like MS is the car to be in. I am concerned about one example on TM where a guy ran over a trailer hitch in the middle of the road and the subsequent $40K battery replacement. Sure, you can rip a hole in the bottom of an oil pan and generate a $25K bill for an engine replacement. The key for me is frequency of occurrence for battery replacement versus engine replacement. It will not take many (five carefully staged events around the country???) battery replacements before the news picks up on this. At $40K a pop, its news worthy. Throw in a fire or two and the Shorts are off and running.

    I think it is fair to say that a floor mounted battery defines MS and the car's design. It is also a weakness. What should Tesla do to manage or mitigate the cost of repair to prevent this from becoming a real problem. It will not take too many claims before the insurance companies will wise up and significantly drive up the cost of ownership for the car. I guess the only thing that slows that process is that rates are typically influenced more by liability than comprehensive elements.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    This might be an extreme event. The battery pack is protected by the ballistic shield (Tesla patent linked below). This .25 inch metal plate and compressible material sandwiched between the plate and battery lower cover could be penetrated only by fairly large and heavy objects. I believe that there will be very few claims for complete battery replacement due to the collision with road debris.

    Vehicle Battery Pack Ballistic Shield - Patent application
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Normally I would agree but we have two documented (via posts and pictures) cases of road debris causing significant damage. The idea of 4600 lbs traversing a solid metal object at 70 mph lends itself to undercarriage damage. Apparently deformity without puncture is sufficient to necessitate battery replacement. All this combines for a reason to go through the above thought exercise. How does Tesla proactively address the POSSIBILITY of the above coming true?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Maybe the S just needs a lower front lip that would hit objects and not allow them to go under the car.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Like the old steam-engine cow plow as in Western movies? Could be used for mounting the flux capacitor. ;-)
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    vgrishpin,
    Regarding the patent and battery armor protection.
    The patent says:
    "The ballistic shield may be fabricated from aluminum, an aluminum alloy, steel, fiberglass, a carbon fiber/epoxy composite, and/or plastic. "

    So, the patent is generic enough not to say what the current Model-S uses. I believe some have tested it with a magnet and found it to be aluminum. Properties of metals vary as well as their brittleness. There are various types of industrial aluminum that can be sourced in sheets.

    What we don't know is the aluminum materials and the ballistics tests done on such a part. Does anyone on the board know? Could it be improved?

    I watched a science tv show last night about metals and saw that with the inclusion of manganese into soldier's steel helmets in WW 1 - the manganese allowed more pliability of the steel and offered less shrapnal injury due to the original brittle nature of the helmets historically.

    Armor is only as good as its pliability during an impact. Just as a banana frozen in liquid nitrogen will shatter like glass when dropped, materials engineering of an armor plate must take into account the brittleness of that material during high psi puncture-type events. I think aluminum is not a good armor material but manganese-enriched steel would be far too heavy to choose as a better armor plate.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I think it is important to separate the ability to absorb energy (classic armor) and the need to prevent deformation sufficient to impact battery functionality.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Totally agree on impact of pliability in protecting the battery. This issue is addressed in patent which includes layer of compressible material sandwiched between the lower battery cover and the ballistic shield, which by the way was confirmed by Elon to be metal during one of his interviews in Germany.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Just wanted to post some quick math to figure out stock price based on the battery expansion with panasonic.

    Assume of the 2bn supplied in the next four years, it's evenly distributed across 4 years. Based on 7000 cells a pack (the highest per pack I believe, so let's assume this is "worst" case scenario and each car delivered has this number of cells), that's ~70k cars produced a year.

    Take 70k cars, assume the pricing of each car averages to about $96k (includes both Model X/S, again probably low balling this figure), that nets to ~$6.8bn revenue.

    Assume $6.8bn revenue, and 15% of revenue is EBITDA (I believe this is the figure GS used for their $90 evaluation). At a P/E of 20, the stock is worth 167.83.

    Just wanted to put the current share price in perspective. With the potential of Model E, cars and battery packs as energy storage, drive train supply, etc., I would be inclined to think the market would award TSLA a much higher multiple (think 40 or 50). If this is the case, the stock at least doubles.

    Anyway, thought I would bring this to the table for discussion.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Tesla can attack the problem from both sides: 1) Make the battery more damage resistant. 2) Make batteries more inexpensive.

    The latter will happen as economies of scale ramp up from 10s of Ks/year packs to 100s of Ks/year packs.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    For once a not FUD SA article on Tesla valuation:

    Tesla Motors Inc (TSLA): Dear Tesla Bulls: That's Not How You Calculate Tesla's Value - Seeking Alpha

    Yes, there are risks and the current valuation already assumes near perfect execution that people should be aware of. Yet the author still misses on some items. The Model S GM of 25% is not only for the highest cost models. It's the net average of the sold cars and is in fact targeted above 30% (EM's goal options). Yes it's true we shouldn't assume 25% for Gen-III, that's more likely to be 10-15% GM product, but who knows. Even with the very conservative GM assumptions the author isn't too far off from current value so changing those assumptions to more realistic ones should give us current fair value around the current stock price.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'll bet they handle it the same way they handled the "what's my battery warranty and where is my exposure" question. I believe they should go out of their way to help owners that have an issue by lowering the cost associated with this particular damage mode.

    I'm not advocating Tesla jump in with lower bumper prices for someone that has a fender bender. Those happen to ICE in exactly the same way they happen to MS. The battery floor, however, is a completely different story. If we start seeing more and more $40-$50K repairs for dents in the bottom of MS from road debris, you will be handing ammunition to those that would slow MS' progress as this is clearly a weakness when compared to ICE. Tesla was aggressive in dealing with this type of ammunition when it came to battery warranty. There is no reason to believe they will not respond similarly here.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Novice investor here
    I got in with a small amount in the $30 range last year. Since then, I had basically been waiting for a time to add more shares (not a large portion of my dough, because that's just not how I roll, but a little more to kind of "double down" on my pet stock). Of course my cheap ass decided the $50 and $60 bump was going to be temporary, so I waited for it to come back down. By the time we got to $190, it maybe started to sink in that there was no more getting in for cheap.
    Even though I am pissed that FUD based information is driving this most recent dip, I have taken it as a sign that it is time for me to put more into it. after adding maye 50% more shares in the last few days my cost basis is up to $60. I don't want to overthink this, as I am not planning to buy and sell frequently, but rather just buy and leave it there. What are people's thoughts on a reasonable buy in price? I arbitrarily chose 155, which seemed to work pretty well for the last few days. I am debating getting a bit more, though I am not sure it will dip much lower. Any guesses? calculations?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Earnings is Tuesday afternoon. You could put in half an order before then, and then the second half of your order after earnings. Would be a good way to average in.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    There has been a lot of good news this week that has been overshadowed by the fire and Elon's out of context remarks about the stock price. I think the weekend will give time for all the good news to sink in. Percentage wise, there isn't a big difference between 155 and 162. If you are getting in as a long, just buy now and hold. It could take off Monday and never get back to <165 again. Only another fire, or an Earthquake at the factory can bring it back down, IMHO. If you are serious, I wouldn't wait for one of those bad things to happen before buying more stock.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Larken posted in the chat thread this Vid: Tesla-Chef Elon Musk im Interview - Frontal 21 - ZDFmediathek - ZDF Mediathek

    the interesting to me part from so far what I've seen is Elon claiming, that Tesla is producing at an annual rate of 25-30k and they hope to double that by next year. So the original 800/week end of 2014 number (40k annualized rate) seems to be upgraded to 50-60k or ca 1000 cars / week rate by end of 2014. This is what EM also claimed battery availability to be going forward and is confirmed by the battery deal. So I think we'll see at the ER an upgrade on the 2014 guidance on total cars as well as the year end rate.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    This is a must watch video. It's the Motley Fools founder talking about his 100 bagger with Amazon. Motley Fool Co-Founder David Gardner on His First 100-Bagger


    I'm posting it here b/c in his talking about how to look for the next 100 bagger everything he said made me think of Tesla. Some of the points
    1. Look for a big trend - auto industry and in particular EV's
    2. Visionary leader - We know who that is :)
    3. High sales growth rate - Tesla is on track to essentially double each year
    4. Have connection to it as a consumer - Model S/X driving experience
    5. Smaller company - not too long ago Tesla was considered small.

    He also mentioned the importance of looking at the business and not the stock price. I think this is really important for Tesla b/c we often debate the stock price and if it's overvalued or not. But what's more important is the business, the stock price will take care of itself. Also, it took him 16 years to get that 100 bagger... so patience is key.

    This was really motivating for me to watch and I'm glad I was able to get in on Tesla early and I plan on holding for a long time :)
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Yep, right at the beginning of the interview he says TM is right now producing "a little over 500 a week" and expects to double that in 2014. WOW!
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'll have to watch the video later, but I'm a big believer in how Warren Buffet operates and 2 is on the same lines. Look for companies with great management and hold for the long term. That's what we've found with Tesla and why I'm long.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Not quite sure which thread to put it to as it has short and long term impact, but it looks like a huge amount of orders went from sourcing parts to In Production and it doesn't seem to have any geographic preference or when people were originally in queue. I see in the delivery sequencing thread and November delivery thread that people who had delivery targets in end of November and in December got to In Production yesterday. People in EU with January delivery dates got to in Production and so did my order. Yet two weeks ago Tesla told me that they expect my car to enter production end of December.

    I have no clue what this means, the most obvious explanation is a software glitch that changed everyones status to In Production (that'd be a bummer) or that Tesla decided to favor TMC members and pulled a lot of people forward. Then again the other MS order in Estonia (an S60) also went into production as I found out last night over e-mail and he's not frequenting the forum. If this is really true, then it might indicate a serious rampup in November in production that might be gearing for a great end of year production rush. If indeed my car enters production now, then I will get it this year still and this would affect Q4 numbers a lot. As Q4 guidance is part of the Q3 ER, then this tidbit might be of interest. I guess we'll have to wait until one of us lucky upgrades gets through to Tesla to confirm that the car is INDEED in production until we all start celebrating, but if this really happened, then it may well mean that Tesla has solved supply issues to large part and can ramp up the production fast enough that they are pulling Dec-Jan deliveries forward.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    It is a software glitch. Other REMOTELY possible explanation - they might have changed an algorithm, so "in production" now mean not when vehicle enters assembly line(IIRC assembly takes 5 days), but when they start stamping parts... But not likely, glitch is much more plausible. Anyhow factory and supply chain could not ramp up overnight. Tesla was targeting 625 weekly production rate by September, but only achieved 570 by the end of October. No way they could dramatically increase production rate suddenly, overnight.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I have a very limited understanding about patent laws and such but to me this patent seem to prevent any other manufacturer to use floor mounted battery packs as they will not be able to protect it using any kind of armor, as this is patented by tesla? If so this is really limiting any other company to create a really compelling car as, IMO they must use a floor mounted battery to truly take advantage off being an electric car? What do you guys think about this? This might be a truly long term advantage for tesla?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Other EV's are already using floor mounted packs, the LEAF and the i3 for example, and protection for the bottom of a vehicle does not seem patentable.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    It's still just an application, and they may have to limit claim 1 (the important one) to get it approved. Furthermore, all the characteristics in the first claim must be present. So for instance, as presently formulated, there would have to be a spacing of at least 5 mm between the ballistic shield and the pack, and there would have to be "compressible material interposed between the ballistic shield and the pack. Otherwise you steer clear of the patent.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I am not sure what you're saying here. Is it that you think that the patent application will not be approved? If yes, on what basis are you saying that?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I don't know enough about patents to say one way or another, but I don't think this specific patent can preclude others from putting a sheet of some sort on the bottom of a vehicle, since a belly pan is not a new concept. Frankly the floor of any vehicle is a sheet of metal on the bottom of a vehicle.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    The specific arrangement is to leave a space between the pack and a ballistic shield, and fill it with a compressible material. This is the essence of the patent. If it is granted, others will not be precluded from putting a sheet on the bottom, as long as they don't use that arrangement.

    The US Patent Office will be evaluating whether this arrangement is new and whether it is sufficiently innovative (the two criteria for granting a patent). If they grant it, anyone can still sue Tesla to contest the decision by the UPO. Until those processes have played out, I think it is premature for us bystanders to have opinions on the probability of the patent being granted. Obviously, Tesla thought their chances were enough to spend the cash and the effort to go through the application process.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest

    what if there was one supplier left that was the bottleneck for the whole factory. Elon has stated that if not for the bottlenecks they could be at a 40k run rate now. What if the last supplier got their production capacity up from 570 to 675 (insert other large number here).

    It sounds like a software change is most likely but hard to rule out a sudden ramp up.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Could you please provide a link to that statement? shuffle.gif
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    In one of the interviews that Elon gave in the past two weeks he mentioned that he thinks Tesla's stock is higher than is deserved today (is pricing in more than what Tesla is able to do today) and he is going to work very hard to exceed the current expectations. He also said that he thinks the stock will be significantly higher in the future. Anyone else catch this? I'll try to find a link to the interview.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest

    Yes most of us caught that. One of the Europe interviews. The guy is basically giving away money to investors. What a (awesome) dude.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    On Aug 21 he was saying that market gives Tesla much higher valuation than Tesla currently deserves... Tesla Motors Inc (TSLA): Even Elon Musk Thinks Tesla Stock Is Overpriced - Seeking Alpha

    The TSLA price was essentially same as today, ~$161.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    In one of the European interviews Elon gave in the past two weeks, he expanded on that comment, and said he thinks Tesla will be deserving of a much higher price in the future.

    I don't think Elon has said much in the way of "new information," aside from the information about the Supercharge Network, and European Demand. I do think he has provided numerous hints in the form of "subtle reminders" to those who have listened to his comments from the past year.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Saw on FB where TeslaMotors posted a picture of a Model S in front of Chioin temple in Kyoto with this text:

    "This week, residents of Kyoto can experience the power and performance of the thoroughly 21st century Model S in the shadow of 12th century Chioin temple. With it's nearly silent powertrain and zero emissions, Model S is one of only a handful of vehicles allowed into Japan's delicate World Heritage sites."

    This means test drive events in Japan are ongoing, hadn't seen this reported before so thought to share.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I still think that comment is more likely to be humility and hedging his own credibility against future stock price dips than a comment on valuation. If he believes the next sentence - that the stock price will rise in the future - he is basically saying that today's stock price is more than justified.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    It's not actually what he said (even though it is what certain media, and mischievous shorts, have reported.) What he said was. "higher than we have any right to deserve." That's crucially different. If people think you're going to achieve miracles and they tell you that, that is certainly more than you have any right to deserve. But it may not be more than you actually do deserve. It all depends on whether you go ahead and achieve those miracles.

    The reason many of us are long TSLA is that we believe Elon and team have already offered clear evidence that they are miracle workers. And that the best is yet to come.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Most of the guys at the local Tesla Branch in Bergen also got their car in production this weekend. One of them got it just now. If it was a software bug I bet they would have fixed it on friday?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Well I got through to Tesla today to the regular guy who has been keeping tabs on my order. The In Production change is for real, it means that my cars components have now all been sourced and reserved and it's waiting in the production sequencing queue to enter actual production. What this seems to mean is that some supplier issue was resolved and a lot of cars got their parts sourced and assigned and now it's just the batching and queueing on the factory floor that determines when the car is finished. He still gave me a January 2014 delivery estimate, but considering the car is waiting to enter assembly and that takes 3-5 days add to it shipping for 45 days (that's what he said) and a week at Tilburg we're looking at two months and in two months it's January. So any EU order that changed to production now is likely to be delivered in January.

    So we might see a ramp up in production indeed if the supplier issue got solved (which would explain why such a huge number of orders went into production meaning pre-production when all parts are available and reserved for that particular car).
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    It's very likely, as others have said, that what actually has happened is that some last supply bottleneck has been resolved. Which is very good news :) All evidence thus far (including yours) points to this.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Well the street is taking this TeslaMotors tweet as an indication of production ramp-up. Should we?

    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    ...or demand shortfall? ;-)

    I vote for ramp-up.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    How about prioritizing P85/ P85+ orders? I assumed that this actually didn't signify anything
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Exactly, this was pointed out by someone on SA. I didn't verify, but they pointed out the website says you can get a P85 in 4 weeks, nothing new. If they said you can get any model S in 4 weeks, that is different. Demand is a non issue, moving on.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Well that's all still only if you live in the US ;) Ordering in EU DOES have 6 month wait time even for a fully loaded P85+ :)
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    My bad, didn't mean to pour salt in the wound. :)
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Well if I get lucky and get January delivery then I at least will get it in 4 months, but right now the website does say 5-6 months... Anyway I have to agree that this probably isn't anything but simple marketing and no implications on production increases, which are more likely indicated by the huge In Production move starting of November.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Not sure I would sign a new long term battery deal for a bazillion batteries if orders were going down. Now, assuming Elon is smarter than I am (stretching here), I doubt he would do it either. :)
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    On his recent trip to Germany Elon stated that Germany is the most important market for Tesla after the US. Yet he also says that Germany needs to ramp up EV incentives in Order for demand to lift up.

    I'd like to give my thouhts on that since I live in Germany and love to here back from you Investors and Fans.
    1. Ther will be no incetives for EVs unless Mr. Winterkorn (CEO of Volkswagen) calls Angela Merkel and asks for it. As you all know Germany completely missed the transition in technologie from ICE to EV that clearly will take place in the future and therefore has no competetive EV Models out there. Therfore I think we have to wait quite a while before Mr. Winterkorn makes the call i mentioned above.
    2. What is Teslas / Elons plan to tackle the missing incentives. Is he going to sacrifice margins in order to make prices more competitive?
    3. You may think that prices are copetitive when you take the EU Prices from websites in Germany of an Audi A8/A7/A5, BMW 7/6/5 oder Mercedes S/E-Class. But I can assure you these prices are unlike the prices from Teslas website pure fantasy. Most new cars in that category are bougt as busniess cars. I'm getting an new A5 for example fully loaded with a Diesel as a financial consultant for as much as 30% of the price thats on Audis websites. The first 20% I didn't even have to bargin for the other 10% I made by competing dealers. With Mercedes and BMW I would easily get around 20% aswell. To be clear that is typical in Germany.

    Just to make sure you get me right. I'm 100% sure about the future of EVs I'm just not so sure If demand in Germany can ramp up as fast as Tesla hopes it will. Love to hear you're thougts on it.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I think Tesla targets 10k sale rate by end of 2014. And I think the free supercharger access in combination with the car being really excellent will convince enough germans to go for the car. Remember, they only need to sell ~200 per week, which is a drop in the sea in general sales including in the luxury sector. I think Porsche should be worried for the Panamera because even with 30% off it's still more expensive than the P85+ yet can't really decently compete on performance or capacity aspects of it. And I think Tesla being still somewhat a rare car will bring enough people to it from that point in the start as well.

    Also, Germans managed to install shitloads of solar panels, I think a number of those people would love to have an EV that they charge from their own solar panels. So overall I don't think demand is a real issue, at least not in the short term and for long term Tesla is investing hard to make long term more lucrative :)
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    High Matthias,

    i think Mrs. Merkel wouldn't give taxpayers money as cash back to the people that can afford to buy a Model S, but let's see whether the BMW donation to her reigning party works out (BMW i3).
    The state is losing a lot of money from the "mineral�lsteuer" (tax on gasoline). The employee gets the car fueled up by his company.
    In Germany the leasing company as the owner of an ev business car is taking profit on not having to pay the "KFZ-Steuer" for ten years.
    The employee as the driver of the business car has to pay additional income taxes of 1 percent/per month on the price of the car (800/80000 euros) for the benefit of driving a business car.
    As a incentive for ev-cars 500 Euros per kwh/ max 20 kwh can be deducted from 80000 gives 70000, so the employee has to pay add income taxes on 700 euros/per month.

    Sorry for being off-topic.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I found this comment to be very interesting, as it points to a means of extending the range of the Model X that should be good for demand:
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    The "giga factory" is the key long-term take-away from the CC today imho...

    Lots of open questions beyond 2014 (that year TSLA will be busy with other, short-term production issues):

    How much will TSLA need to spend on that factory and supply logisitcs? Timeframe? JV with Panasonic or other battery supplier or go alone?

    I think this and the Gen III will require another secondary offering one day.

    PS: In other news, will Andrea have to stop covering TSLA as an analyst (n�e journalist) in case she moves in with Elon one day ;)?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Take your trolling back to SA where the other trolls appreciate it.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    My remark about Andrea included a smiley, wasn't it obvious enough?

    The rest of my remark and the quote from the CC is very serious however.

    The elephant in the room beyond 2014 and 2015 is the needed "giga factory" imho. Why don't we focus on that? It's the topic of this thread.

    This is also why I raised the question of another secondary offering in earlier comments when the stock was close to $200. Somehow this "giga" factory has to be built and financed for the Gen III car volumes.

    TSLA may soften the financial impact with a JV structure (Panasonic? Samsung? LG? Sony? Not that many options with enough know-how...).
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I agree, the financing of the giga-factory will be interesting. I think there will be some cleverness there. I also think that their cash pile of $0.8bn (and growing) is a cruise missile aimed at that giga-factory.

    They could pay the entire factory from cash on Day 1. Or they could:

    1. Partner with Panasonic or others, e.g. in JV format
    2. Borrow/lease a significant part of the expenditure
    3. Build it in stages, to correspond to growing production

    [Anything I forgot?]

    My 2 cents is that they will do points 2 and 3.

    I am more unsure about 1. The key reason is that this investment is more risky than what Panasonic is doing for them. I am not sure they would get good terms from a partner.

    In the case of Panasonic, they are providing capacity for the current Model S and its sibling X. These models are known successes. Furthermore, I think Panasonic are reinstalling pre-existing capacity, and not building all from scratch.

    In contrast, the giga-factory is for upcoming models, for which demand is not proven in the same way.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    The limited supply of batteries brings some issues up to me
    1. Months ago Panasonic claimed tesla bought 200 million batteries. If 60 kv only 15% of sales that would be enough for about 27,000 cars. Is there an inefficiency in building the packs? How many used in r and d?
    2. This is the first major failure of management. Why wasn't new contract negotiated sooner? Couldnt get more with old contract? Was Panasonic playing hard ball knowing they could take it to the limit? With that kind of leverage over company I suspect they got price increase. They should have been negotiating with samsung more than a year ago not when the battery storage room looked empty. I hope they are already negotiating next contract with other suppliers. Would not want to be negotiating with your single supplier of the major car component
    3. When they discussed issue of suppliers not keeping up in last cc, I never imagined Panasonic one. Was anyone else surprised by this?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Thorium should not be lumped together with Uranium etc based reactors. It's a product that is by far safer to handle and maintain and has reasonable by products. CERN is hosting a conference on Thorium reactors for the future and I think Thorium is one case where you can make small scale reactors that can never go critical because it lacks the necessary mass. The radioactivity part is a small item that I think isn't too bad unless it's spewed around en mass and inhaled. The amount required to operate a car for a long long time is miniscule. But I think that's something more to be discussed in other threads and I think it'll take a long time before it can get to cars. First we need a few decades of reactors etc.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    A little surprised, but also pleased. Because despite the slight hold-up on Q3/Q4, it's easier to fix a problem with one supplier, than with many. Indeed, the new contract has fixed it.

    What's gradually coming in to focus is this:

    - to truly disrupt the automotive industry means building a whole new pipeline for delivering the key component: energy
    - the scale at which this needs to take place to be more than a niche player is mind-boggling
    - but whoever really believes in that vision, invests in the necessary scale, is going to end up with an incredible competitive advantage
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I think you misunderstand the issue. It is not one of willingness of the cell suppliers. It is one of aggregate production capacity in the industry. They are doing this as a three-stage rocket. The first stage was to soak up whatever they could from existing supply. That was the original Panasonic partnership. The second stage is negotiations with suppliers to get them to invest in expanding capacity. That is the second Panasonic deal (and potentially deals with LG/Samsung).

    The third stage is to plan capacity growth beyond what the market will be willing to risk. That is the giga factory.

    - - - Updated - - -

    This +1000. This is the true competitive advantage of a disrupting player. Management at the fossil automakers might even know what they would need to do, but they know that getting such an ambitious and visionary plan through top management, the Board, shareholders etc. is a non-starter. It is simply not a career-friendly move to suggest initiatives such as "go all-in on a new EV model, that coincidentally requires building a billion-dollar giga battery plant". The BMWs of the world are simply incapable of adopting this strategy, for internal/human reasons.

    I've seen this first hand. What happens is that managers instead tell each other (hopefully) how wrong everything will go. "Just wait and see what will happen to their stock when they go to raise money for the giga plant" and "I look forward to the day when the giga plant is up, and they have half the Gen 3 demand they thought they would have". Because the other guy nods and agrees, now the first manager feels safe that the feelings are widespread, and that his career will still be intact even if Tesla eats their lunch. The important thing is that the (current) main competitors are also doing next to nothing.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I think what this all boils down to is that we will most likely lose the MOMO investors who we haven't already lost in the last few weeks crunch. The stock price will likely correct downwards further and move sideways for 1-2 quarters with slow upwards trend (smaller angle than previously) as news about various deals and supply constraint resolves come out. This means that for short term we have a bloodpath and options in 2013 will most likely expire worthless for everyone. However it does show that real long term (i.e. 2016+) the company is positioning itself to be an absolute leader in IP and supply and will dominate the market for sure. This means that the ones winning today are the real long term investors who are sitting on stock with no plans to sell and are buying more on this correction.

    I have always been options person and I will take the hit now, but I do have some LEAPs and will probably extend the relative portion of LEAPs. Playing the volatility that will ensue now is something that might work well for short term options to run down and up and down and up, but that's just pure speculative day trading. In any case, the happy days of Q to Q nice gains are mostly over now as it's clear that Tesla will not try to game the market to show momentum growth, but is really investing in fundamentals. Oh well, got to rethink short term strategies, but the long term is solid.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I was lucky enough to sell out of most of my calls yesterday 5 mins before close. I just felt like expectations were too high as I read all the "earnings preview" articles that were circulating.

    I feel like the dynamic has changed in TSLA. As the company has become more complex (shipping to EU for instance) it has become much harder to predict earnings. Also, there is no technical trend that I can really rely on. It seems like the stock has ignored most technical signals since breaking out of its channel during the debt ceiling mess.

    As a result, I think that I'm probably done playing options on TSLA for a while. It was fun, and I made a ton of money, but I just don't have an edge anymore. I'm going to wait for the next day or two to play out, then, if the price is attractive, I'll probably go back to building my common share position for the long-haul. The last time I bought common shares was for about $30.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    What are you going to focus on next? Solar?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    For me, yesterday's conference call provided the justification for bringing under the aegis of this thread the topic of a battery plant - it wasn't before, in my opinion.

    I remain opposed to it under normal circumstances and, were I sitting on TMC's board, would play the role of the Loyal Opposition.

    Normal circumstances means that TMC is a majority owner, operator and beneficiary of the output. Co-owner/operators could be Panasonic, Samsung, LG, perhaps I Chinese player I'm not aware of.

    My reasons for opposition are primarily for the difference of business from TM; secondarily for the disruption of capital flows. That latter soaking-up of capital normally would be paramount, but it is very easy to imagine a Panasonic, etc., being the Deep Pockets for such a venture, so it is easy for me to dismiss it out of hand. Thus we need look into the difference of business.

    TM is a manufacturer of a highly complex end product and it is in this field that it excels. A battery is metallic (usually) tube enclosing an extremely simple set of basic chemicals, slightly enhanced by a very modest packet of electronic circuitry. It is never appropriately considered as a final product, rather, is very much a component. Batteries, thus, are a commodity product - the successful manufacturer is the one able best to design and operate its sourcing and production line marginally better than the competition, and the devil take the hindmost. Margins are minuscule; market share is everything. A fine business for some; NOT the business for an end-product corporation. In my experience, the market is littered with companies that attempted to incorporate swaths of differing businesses - the great experiments of the 1960s and 70s all came to bitter ends for ITT, LTF, Sears and even, I can argue, GE. And in this era, the financial markets despise them for its inability properly to price them.

    Now, let's perform a gendankenexperiment and assume that Toyota and Mercedes also come in as partners. How might this change the environment? For me, this creates a spreading of risk and so mollifies my opposition somewhat, but it doesn't change the overall unattractiveness of the business proposition.

    Now, let's assume this plant is set up to produce 18650-style batteries. Mr. Musk and company have been very careful over time to reiterate these are the most appropriate power packages for the moment, but almost certainly to be eclipsed eventually. To me, that says I dig in my heels even further until I can be convinced that, FOR NEGLIGIBLE COST, this giga-factory would be able to alter production to put out The Next Best Thing.

    Now, let's further refine my earlier caveat about "normal circumstances". Here, my opposition begins to melt. Mr. Musk has been unwavering in stating his goal: to bring the world to replacing transport from an individually-powered hydrocarbon-fueled model to an all-electric (except for rockets, of course and wonderfully ironically). Tesla Motors and whatever financial success it enjoys is a player in this very grand scheme, but it is NOT the goal. So, if this gigafactory is structured as to be instrumental in this latter Big Picture, rather than as to be fundamental to the medium- and long-term success of TMC, then I have to backpedal and re-assess - as should the market. It would, I should thereupon hope, most definitely include Toyota, MB and whichever other of today's automobile companies are appropriately forward looking as partners in one way or another.

    Gotta go - the day is on us.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    The open questions are the money needed (even in a JV with an Asian supplier) and the timeframe to complete this factory. Is it really possible to build this factory without another secondary? I doubt it, but I don't have enough information (depends whether TSLA goes alone or with a partner and at what percentage the JV is formed).

    As for "traditional" car companies being "incapable" of vertical integration in EV production: Nissan-Renault already built battery manufacturing plants in Europa, Japan and now the USA (early 2013), they are up and running on three continents:

    Nissans New US Battery Plant Shows Major Dedication To EVs - HybridCars.com

    I wouldn't put all competing car companies into one hat.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    China Cuts New Car Sales by 40 Percent To Stem Air Pollution

    China Cuts New Car Sales by 40 Percent To Stem Air Pollution : Auto News : Auto World News


    The new regulations will favor electric vehicles and other green technologies in the hopes of stemming the country's worsening smog problems.So if they want to buy a premium EV they buy?


    Great news IMO

    I think this sealed the deal on that demand will not be an issue even if Tesla makes 100k model S each year. China wants to get cleaner, we have already seen this in the solar section.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I wish I had sold the calls at the end of the day. I read the articles as well and wrote them off as junk. Didn't think people would be taking it to heart. Do you really think you lost the edge? I think it's just short term and bears are jumping on this opp due to Euphoria on their end.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    If only Tesla can make that many cars! - that's the doubt everyone is having right now. Hopefully this phase will clear out soon.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Well the battery deal is there. If this news would have been followed up by a chinese factory I think our calls might be worth something afterall.
    Anyways, I think this is big news. The chinese needs to get their pollution down, and solar and Tesla is the only answear.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    That was my first thought. But actually I'm thinking I might just get back to focusing on my actual job and personal life. It was worth the extra effort to play TSLA because I knew I could stay a step ahead of the market, not so sure I can do that in solar.

    Yeah, I don't want to give the impression that I'm not hurting today. I sidestepped some serious pain because I held calls that expire on Friday, but my long-term position is taking a beating today. I do take some comfort in knowing that it could have been much worse, and that I have a bunch of cash on hand now that I can redeploy.

    I want more than anything to buy TSLA with that cash, but my portfolio is too TSLA heavy right now. I need to find somewhere else to put it to diversify.

    Yes. I don't think I have a good enough edge to play options right now. Two things have changed: the market's expectations for what Tesla will be have gotten really high, and the accuracy of our predictions has declined. That said, I think I've got a huge edge over the rest of the market as far as the multi-year outlook for Tesla. So I think that LEAPs and common stock remain a great investment.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    In the last 12 months I see that the story has changed from "the car can't be as good as a luxury sedan from BMW, M-B, Audi" to "maybe it is a good car, but only a few environmentalists will buy it" to "OK is it a good car, but the demand will be limited, and they won't be able to make more than a few % margin (like other car companies) without emissions credits." Now I see the new story developing as "OK there is a good amount of demand, they can hit their target margins w/o credits, but they may not be able make enough to support substantial growth."

    To me that is a tremendous amount of progress, and more importantly, removes alot of the nonsense and really sets up deliveries and production capacity as the most important metrics for 2014 to support current valuation (maybe with modest growth).

    It may seem rather obvious but higher Q3 deliveries would have shown that TSLA is growing production substantially above plan and would have set the market with more confidence that the eventual Model E scale is reachable. At this point it seems to me that we are more stuck at the "Model S and X scale (60-80k) should be reachable within 3-4 years, but 400k+ Model E scale really won't be (or will be substantially delayed)."

    So basically I think the company valuation will slowly tick upwards over 2014, unit there is more visibility on Model E scale.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Beijing had already limited the number of cars that can be registered in the city to 240,000 each year, but the number will be cut to 150,000 annually.
    As fewer cars are purchased in major cities, automakers will likely move their focus to other parts of the country.

    Ford will shift its emphasis to other regional markets, including in central and western China, said Ford Executive Vice President Joe Hinrichs, until recently the head of the maker's Asia/Pacific operations.

    Volvo, General Motors, Nissan and Volkswagen officials have also said they will focus on emerging cities and areas where the government has been encouraging regional development.

    China hopes to become the world's largest market for electric vehicles, which have undersold partly because of concerns about cost and range. In Beijing, the number of electric vehicles that can be registered will be tripled, increasing from 20,000 in 2014 to 60,000 in 2017. The higher number will amount to 40 percent of total vehicles allowed by the city.

    So Beijing wants to have 40% of EV in 2017!
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest

    It is fantastic that Nissan has 200k battery pack capacity for North America.

    But they really need a temperature controlled battery pack to break into the mainstream of the auto market.

    Not to mention increasing range beyond 83 miles per charge?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    The really interesting thing about the article is the $1.4 billion Dept. of Energy loan to finance the plant. Safe bet that Tesla will apply for one too, I should think.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I think one thing that is spooking people is the potential slow-down in US demand. Elon stated that this was not the case - they were chosing to deliver to Europe. Is there somewhere on these threads that we can track overall new US orders to confirm that there is still ample demand? I want to believe that they are truly only "supply constrained," but on days like today would be good to have a way to back it up. His comment on the call that "he believes they can sustain 20,000 cars in the US" wasn't that exciting. If they are going to get to 500,000 cars, the demand really needs to be there. Thoughts? I really appreciate these forums - I have learned so much from everybody's insights.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I was disappointed by the 20,000 figure because he definitely mention 40,000 before (I think in the shareholder meeting), but perhaps that was for the whole of North America.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Great perspective, well said.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    While I agree with much of your analysis, I think this particular concern is misplaced. Conglomerates didn't fare well, but a battery factory would be a vertical integration play, not an unrelated business. Sears is an interesting example: its tool and white-goods businesses are vertically integrated and the only things I buy from Sears, while its failed attempt at offering financial services was a failed conglomerate play.

    That said, I am concerned about Tesla deploying its scarce capital to build a factory making a low-margin item.

    Query: is it people's sense from the hints on the call that the factory would start with cells and make batteries, or start with raw materials? The former makes a lot of sense, as I gather that there is a lot of handicraft in the current battery production process that must be mechanized in order for Tesla to hit its growth targets.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I doubt Tesla will be committing much capital the the giga factory. More likely Tesla will be signing a contract for a guaranteed quantity of purchase so that the partner (e.g. Panasonic) can build the factory without the risk of not having a buyer. Well, guaranteed barring Tesla going suddenly bankrupt or demand disappearing.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Tesla Motors may not advertise through the traditional media, but today I received an offer through email to test drive a Model S this weekend in Chicagoland. Tesla emailed to me similar ads on July 31 and October 9. I assume I�m on their mailing list as a shareholder without a Tesla car. So as some posters wonder about international expansion in light of supply constraints, I might wonder about this type of domestic advertising. The implication is that either demand is slowing, or that supply constraints are expected to alleviate.

    I really wouldn�t worry about demand, since the company could implement a wider form of advertising. It may be hard for TMC members or Californians to believe, but a great many Americans are still unaware of Tesla Motors and its cars. I was unaware until receiving a tip in January and performing research which resulted in my share purchase. Yesterday I received a photo from a high school 1963 classmate in Delaware seated in a replica 1927 Ford Roadster he had made (see image below.) I mentioned Tesla, and he responded, �I�ve seen some info on them, but not much.�

    During the eighties I lived in Palo Alto and friends tell me there is a Model S on nearly every block. That certainly is not the case in the rest of the country. Not even close. Word of mouth can take a while to traverse a continent. I see much untapped demand. If Tesla is sending email ads to people like me, my suspicion is that supply constraints are expected to alleviate, but that Elon did not have sufficient proof to give analysts during yesterday�s conference call.

    Non-Attend 15.jpg
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    As an owner and investor I also get emails. They do not bother to discriminate. There is no cost to sending emails. They are just publicizing the events. I would not read much more into it as compared to TV ads or print media which does cost
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    My point was that Telsa is doing a form of advertising, and the implication could be that supply constraints are being alleviated.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Curt...I live in Delaware. I will trade your friend a drive in my S for a drive in his hotrod!
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I thought he said from raw materials to recycling, full circle sort of thing. If cell supply is the bottleneck building a battery assembly factory wouldn't help them, they need cells.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'm pretty sure he said raw materials, because part of the plan was recycling as well. I don't think this is Tesla doing everything, it's everything being done on one site in an efficient, integrated way in order to minimize overall cost as much as possible, including by cutting travel. He mentioned it being clean, with solar IIRC.

    Of course it doesn't have to start out that way. They'd need cell manufacturing and battery manufacturing and could add other parts of the procless. As long as up front they design it right it could built in pieces so they don't have to invest all the capital up front.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Is there a fund with good tsla exposure (still)? I would move some long term fund money that cannot be used for stocks.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    When will 2016 options come out?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Monday
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I am a Tesla long, with over $250K in stock purchases. I feel that the single biggest threat to Tesla now is the ease with which the battery pack can be damaged by road debris. I was bullish after the Q3 report showed positive cash flow after capital investments thanks to the 21$ profit margins. But they need to fix the skateboard design issue ASAP, or we are all loosing a ton of cash.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Agree 100%
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest

    Curt, they've been doing these types of emails since (at least) Nov 2010. I know this because that's when I received one to test drive a Roadster and, dammit, I bought one. :) I can think of countless test drive events around California for Model S over the last year or so. I wouldn't take this as a sign of supply contraints being alleviated, but more that the store is reaching out to the community.

    Think of it this way - the more test drives, whether or not a Model S is sold, the more people want a Tesla. Many of them will wait for a Gen3 or a Model X. That's a great outcome. No pressure to buy. Just take a test drive and find out how much fun it is to drive electric.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Road Debris

    Road debris is more common than most people seem to think. This piece from wikipedia is an eye-opener.

    "Road debris is a hazard that can cause fishtailing and damage like a flat tire or even a traffic accident with injury or death. Road debris can cause loss of control crashes, rollover crashes, or penetration of the passenger compartment by the debris.

    Released in early 2013, NHTSA data for 2011 showed over 800 Americans were killed that year in vehicle collisions with road debris. Mississippi, Wyoming, Arkansas, Kentucky and Louisiana were the top five states for these crash deaths to most likely occur. Also in 2011, New York and Massachusetts saw significant increases in road debris-vehicular crash deaths, unlike other big, populated states. In 2004, a AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety study revealed that vehicle-related road debris caused 25,000 accidents�and nearly 100 deaths�each year. At highway speeds, even small debris can be deadly."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_debris

    In this perspective, Model S is a very safe car. It alerts passengers. It gives enough time to exit. Fire is (relatively) small and contained.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Thanks, Bonnie. That's good know. Indeed it could lead to future demand. Let's hope so. And let's hope production can keep up with it. Meanwhile, I hope you've been enjoying your Roadster. :smile:
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    The driver will undoubtedly be providing quite favorable testimony to the NHTSA. Their interest is personal safety and not vehicle damage.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    JESTX
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    pulled my cash out immediately when I heard of the 2nd fire, willing to get back in once that issue has been resolved. I had no concerns after the ER, wasn't happy with the drop but didn't sell until the fire. I'm hoping TM will get something out no later than Tuesday. I do get the feeling that Mid 130's is pretty good support. How many others sitting on the sidelines temporarily? I even bought some puts the morning after the fire and made a few bucks, didn't feel good doing it but the stock was dropping on emotion and thought I might as well take advantage of it.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Increased my holdings of common shares today for the first times since about $30.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Respect! Thanks for sharing.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Great story from Norway, this guy was run into from behind by a Ford Mondeo. While the Mondeo was totaled, this guy is still is still driving around in his model S while he waits for it to get minor repairs :)

    http://www.dagbladet.no/2013/11/12/tema/aaretsbil/bil/tesla/elbil/30196645/

    In the bottom of the article you could also vote for Tesla Models as the car of the year in Norway. If you leave your e-mail you could win 5000 NOK(900$) worth of gasoline :p
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    bought back 1/4 of my shares this morning at a nice discount, waiting to hear from Elon on the fire before doing anything more.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    While that article quotes the "giga battery" factory badly needed to produce the Gen III car...

    ...it falls short discussing the investment costs involved. TSLA "only" has 0.8 billion in cash & equivalents at hand.

    In my guesstimates, TSLA will need 5-10 billion USD of new/additional funding to build this giant factory and ramp up for Gen III. This number is based on batteries for 200+ miles of range and a production of 250-500k Gen III cars/year.

    Needless to add, this can have major implication on either the share count or the debt structure of TSLA going forward - or I could be totally wrong. Please add your estimates (more details in the "giga factory" thread).
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    If Tesla gets the EV movement to the tipping point where a factory makes sense, you can bet they will sell batteries to other customers.

    They should have no problem getting a Department of Energy loan for the factory if they need it. They would also likely pay it off early again. How powerful and valuable would Tesla become then?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Ok, another DoE loan (or a joint-venture with a battery supplier) could soften the upfront financial impact for TSLA.

    My question about "selling batteries to other customers". I assume you mean other EV makers? While I can see supply scenarios for Daimler and Toyota (TSLA investor "frenemies", however Toyota doesn't seem to be that interested in pure EVs beyond compliance cars at the moment) why should TSLA be supplying other competitors?

    ( Also, the 5-10 billion will be needed to just cover their own demand for the Gen III car, there won't be any leftovers at 250-500k cars/year according to my estimates).

    Would TSLA be comfortable supplying its direct competitors - and will they bite or decide that battery production is so important strategically that they start their own production?

    For example, EV pioneer Nissan is already producing its EV batteries in-house in three plants (and has a joint-venture with NEC since 2007, NISSAN AND NEC JOINT VENTURE - AESC ). I assume other car companies will copy this vertical integration model in case EV demand takes off in the mass market in the near future.
    �
    • Người đăng: vào lúc

    Không có nhận xét nào:

    Đăng nhận xét

    Đăng ký: Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)