Nov 28, 2015
EarlyAdopter Good things come to those who wait.�
Nov 28, 2015
engle Viral Value of Falcon Wing Doors for TSLA / 8 Year Warranty Desired
As an individual TSLA investor since early 2012, this is how I see the value of the Model X falcon wing doors:
- When falcon wing doors are opened in any parking lot, they will attract the attention of everyone within eyesight because they will be visible above all the other parked vehicles.
- Several interested people will approach the Model X to see what it is.
- Tesla Time!! http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/12029-The-Tesla-Time-Question. Owners like myself will carry a flyer or business card to handout to interested parties. A flyer might just look like the one below with an added QR code that links to http://teslamotors.com/modelx I'm emailing Tesla to suggest that our vehicles be delivered with flyers or a box of business cards that we can handout. I'm sure they will pay for themselves. The main purpose is to minimize Tesla Time and be able to go on your way without having to answer a bunch of questions.
- Some of the interested parties will check out the website.
- Some of those people who can afford an X will go to a Tesla Store for a test drive.
- Some of those people will order an X!
- TSLA sales and cashflow to put towards Model 3 and Model Y, factory expansion and GigaFactory construction will continue to increase.
- TSLA price will increase over time...
- Goto step 1 and repeat.
The only concern I have about the falcon wing doors is long-term reliability of a new, unproven, technology. For that reason, I am going to email Tesla to request that the Model X falcon wing doors be added to the 8-year, unlimited miles warranty for the battery and drive train. I suggest that other people who have either ordered or reserved a Model X do the same.
�
Nov 28, 2015
johnnyduval I am very sorry Bonnie I would not suppose for one moment to know your thoughts on any matter and apologise for using your name or in any way implying that I know your situation.
It is only that you have order #2 which of course for most of us represents the START of Model X deliveries. I don't personally consider the ones delivered on September the 29th to have been the start of deliveries (again just my humble opinion).
I shall rephrase as follows:
Poor old "Customer #3" is looking at January 2016 and even that isn't confirmed.�
Nov 28, 2015
engle Model 3 Sales: Predicted High "Tesla" Brand Loyalty of Est. 500K Owners by End 2018
JD:
1. Toyota and others can copy all they want, but they can't copy the "Tesla" brand. For example, a "Lexus" will never be a "Mercedes" (which is what they originally copied). Also, "Lexus" is just Toyota's luxury brand, which always turned me away from it, although they do have excellent reliability.
2. Apple has a chance if they can figure out how to manufacture vehicles - or - more likely - buy a last century ICE automaker with some of that cash hoard they have, or partner with a Chinese manufacturer since they're used to dealing with the Chinese to make their tiny "i" products in what are essentially sweatshops with substandard pay compared to what people earn in the first world.
3. Google could also make a market impact when they get the manufacturing cost of their self-driving vehicle technology down to be competitive.
4. Right now, there are about 90,000 Model S on the road, since all were recalled on 11/20/2015 as a precaution to check their front seatbelt assemblies. Through 9 months, 33,117 were delivered, with 50-55K guidance for the year. 55% of the quarter had elapsed when the recall was annouced. This leaves ~8,000 more vehicles to be producted (if linear) to get to 50K+ minimum guidance for the year. Tesla has guided for 85-90K vehicles next year, an 70-80% increase. If production increases 50% in 2017, that adds another 130K S&X on the roads. A 40% S&X increase in 2018 -- assuming the Model 3 is late -- adds 180K more. My WAG projection for total Model S & X on the road at the end of 2018, when I predict the Model 3 founders and a few signatures will be delivered, is: 90 + 8 + 85 + 130 + 180 = ~500K Tesla Model S & X's on the road.
5. Brand Loyalty: Assuming 500K Teslas worldwide at the end of 2018, how many Model 3 sales do you think will directly result from these vehicles just because of loyalty to the brand? Tesla owners will buy a relatively inexpensive Model 3 as a commuter car, a second car, for their adult children or grandchildren, or just to add to their "Tesla collection", etc. I predict we'll see 300K-400K Model 3's sold just to past or present Tesla owners. I know I'll be one of these buyers. My son should be graduating from his university around when Model 3 is expected. To help motivate him (it's a really tough school), I've already told him I'll gift him a 3 as a graduation present. (For high school, I gave him an old family ICE SUV with 125K+ miles to drive.)
IMHO, the falcon wing doors operation has nothing to do with "gold chains", unless one has their X or just the doors painted gold like a show off. The doors are Tesla's most practical solution to the design challenges for 2nd and 3rd row ingress and egress, and the use of car seats. I think they are brilliant, especially the way their hidden proximity sensors allow them to open in tight spaces and lower ceilings.
�
Nov 28, 2015
johnnyduval Yup. That Audi Q6 e-tron is sure looking good.
I assume you have seen the rumours swirling around the internet that the Billionaire Chinese backer of Future Faraday is just a front for Apple? I have not the slightest idea if true or not - but if you google there is lots of stuff flying around. Apple has as close to a bottomless pit of money that I can imagine.
Don't get me wrong. I have no doubt that EV cars are the future. I also have no doubt that sales in the next 5-10 years will increase massively in the sector as a % - which is easy 'cos it's tiny. In the USA for 2015 new car sales for all electric were 0.4% of registrations. If you include hybrids it races up to 0.62%.
Indeed I have little doubt that if Tesla present a functioning Model 3 on time, on budget and with the ability to physically manufacture them they can sell 500,000 a year worldwide.
My concerns are their ability to hit the timings, budgets and production issues without any pitfalls. They may well do it, but I would not sink my kids inheritance into the company right now. It also remains to be seen if Tesla has entered the market too early or exactly on time for mass market profitability. But at the right price and availability I don't see sales as the issue.
Again as far as the operation of the doors on the car go I am pretty much indifferent. I would prefer normal doors myself, but it's really no big deal for me either way as long as they open and close. I can handle a little embarrassment as long as they work. My issue is that I think they added time and complexity that was just not needed, and in my humble opinion many people would have been happy to get the product 12 months earlier but with boring doors. As long as they work I don't actually care anymore - the door drama is history.�
Nov 28, 2015
EVger I wholeheartedly agree. Email to Tesla sent!�
Nov 28, 2015
CarlK 10. Owners of the Cayenne and the Range Rover parked on either sides of the X would just wait until the X drove away to open rear doors so to avoid people to notice their $100K cars only have the old style low tech swing open doors like Kia has. They made up their minds at that very moment what their next SUV will be.�
Nov 29, 2015
Gzrgmr I have been reading this thread primarily because the other threads are not very active and to see what kind of outrageous comments johnnyduval will make next. I am not sure if he is actively trying to be a troll or if he is not even conscious of what he is doing. Most trolls are looking for self validation or a sense of superiority by engaging others in baited conversation that they control and manipulate. Johnnyduval certainly does this. He also reveals himself by his many personal attacks and condescending remarks showing his need for superiority. Whether conscious of unconscious, his ego needs to be feed so go on and feed the troll. At least it is entertainment and I do learn things from the other commenters.�
Nov 29, 2015
bonnie subtle.�
Nov 29, 2015
SebastianR You keep talking about Audi - who proved time and time again that the only thing they are really good at is announcing electric cars that will never be delivered. Ah, and of course they are good in committing emission standard fraud. In fact, they are sooo good at that, that until today they will not confirm verbally or in writing to me that my current Audi has an "honest" engine system. I guess they either don't know themselves which cars have a cheat device built-in - or - even worse, they know full well that they committed even more fraud than is publicly known to date.�
Nov 29, 2015
luca
nope all german car manufacturers will be next Nokia, all will be dead in 5-10 years
we all know it�
Nov 30, 2015
SBenson Did you hear/read January 2016 somewhere? or is this more of a guess?�
Nov 30, 2015
Discoducky Consolidation is a good bet, I don't see BMW going away anytime soon as they are really trying to transform (I'm not terribly impressed with the i3 or i8, but they are the best to hit the road yet IMO) with the Moses Lake carbon fiber plant being a big investment to get away from heavier materials.
VW it would seem is destined for some restructuring and possible sell offs to regain some consumer trust under 'different management'�
Nov 30, 2015
johnnyduval Somebody let me know......I assume this is a comedy post. I'm not sure on this forum these days?
Somebody said this earlier and it sounds like people here think the ICE manufacturers are terrified of EV......but I don't quite follow why that should be a logical conclusion? The ICE boys do not have profits dependant on future petrol sales. I know for example Epson printers need you to buy Epson inks to make their business model work. But Toyota don't much care about petrol sales - so why do they car what powers their cars? Electricity, Petrol, Hydrogen or whatever - they will make what the market wants if they can turn a profit.
And a car for them is much more than the profit only on the engine.........there is a ton of other stuff that makes up a car. If they can swap engines for batteries and make a profit then why would they actually care if they never sell another ICE ever again. It's just business.
Nissan makes the Leaf but also makes ICE cars. I am sure they would be happy as Larry to only be selling EV if it makes money.
As it happens having been kicking around the forum for a week and reading more - I have just sold my shares in Tesla I have owned since late April 2015 (bought soon after I ordered my Model X). I am out flat at $230 which is fine. Just mentioning so we can come back in 12 months time and see whether I was a donkey or not
I forced myself to read some more and talk to some people in the business.....and got cold feet.�
Nov 30, 2015
Fallenone I assume you know that Billionaire Chinese, Mr. Yueting Jia, is the maker of Xiaomi, which is sort of kicking Apple's ass in China's smartphone market right now (volume wise). I don't think this rumor of yours is the case. More likely, is Jia is mimicking Apple's move once again. He is well known in China to be a copy cat of Steve Jobs.
Yes we all know AAPL has a bunch of money. But the pathway for a designer of small consumer electronics (they don't even make the phones themselves) going into manufacturing cars would definitely be different from a manufacturer of spacecrafts building cars. I don't think AAPL has any advantage in EV for now, even compared with traditional automobile manufacturers.�
Nov 30, 2015
johnnyduval Was that not disclaimer enough? I'll say again (maybe bold will help) - I have not the slightest idea if true or not
But the rumours are swirling around google and news reels and I didn't make 'em. So "this rumour of yours" - is not MY rumour.
But as it happens I would also think this is NOT Apple in disguise from the sound of things. But they do wanna make electric cars,
so I guess just another competitor that will 100% fail for the true believers.
There is for me slight dichotomy at work in this whole game. Elon Musk has made the Tesla patents available for free, and actively and constantly promotes that he wants to see more competition in EV for the good of the planet (and let's be honest I don't think he really needs to make more money for himself). But clearly there is a point when if the competition gets too good it can theoretically actually shaft the whole Tesla model. Logically for Elon Musk it doesn't much matter if the company fails or succeeds aside from personal pride......financially he has more money than you can spend in 100 lifetimes.
Massive Disclaimer: No, I am not saying that is what is gonna happen. I am just pointing out that is what could happen.�
Nov 30, 2015
Fallenone I don't think all competitors will fail in EV in the long run. That would be the worst case scenario for Tesla. What I (and I think most other people here) think is, these competitors won't be a serious threat before 2020. By serious threat I mean being able to mass produce a better and cheaper car than what Model 3 can offer.
�
Nov 30, 2015
johnnyduval Yeh I do think it all hinges on the Model 3. I have not studied the maths but I assume the Gigafactory and everything else is geared around mass sales of the Model 3.......in other words if TESLA's future depended 100% ONLY on the S and X it would go pop overnight.
So as I am new and ignorant. We get the reveal in March 2016, they then get 100,000 reservations.......BUT........what are the current predictions for when you can actually walk into a showroom, pay your money, and drive one away like an ICE car?
It's like for normal people you cannot actually BUY a Model X until 2017. 2016 is sold out.
I am sure the Model 3 will get 100,000 reservations without trying very hard based on a $35,000 price......I think it sells. It's more about time to market.....'cos I really don't think the rest of the world are twiddling their fingers.
Or put it this way as well. TESLA spent a lot of time on the S and the X and even NOW spending a lot of time and resources trying to get the X manufactured. There is an argument that says it would be EASIER to start with a clean sheet and just be making a Model 3 - which scarily might just be what one of the competition are doing RIGHT NOW with no S or X baggage to worry about.
To some degree the TESLA popularity will also be a problem in the Model 3 if they cannot produce in volume for 12 months after release......it leaves room for the competitors 'cos an electric car you can actually BUY is better than an electric car that you can only reserve. Basically the exact reverse of the current situation. At the moment you buy a TESLA as it is the only decent EV you can get.
If there was a slightly crapper Model X available tomorrow I would buy that rather than wait another 15 months for a P90D here in Europe.�
Nov 30, 2015
Fallenone In making the Model 3, past experience in S and X is definitely not "baggage to worry about", it's more of an assets. Put it this way. One chef already has a Michelin restaurant and is building his second Michelin restaurant and is planning to open up some Red Lobster type joints in a few years. Another to-be-chef is learning how not to cut his fingers when preparing food. Who do you think have a better chance to have some restaurant joints first?
That being said, I fully acknowledge that the Model 3 won't be that easy because mass producing a cheaper version of anything, would be much more difficult in the cost-control and supply chain departments. My own expectations for the Model 3 is sigs will get their cars in 2018 and the ASP would be closer to 55-60k.
�
Nov 30, 2015
johnnyduval So we think "free stocks" for the great unwashed is maybe 2019? I think lots of good and bad stuff can happen in 36-40 months.
How about 20 chefs that don't have a Michelin star........but 50 years general experience each in the restaurant trade? I bet one or two of 'em could succeed at Red Lobsters even if the other 18 screw it up.�
Nov 30, 2015
Discoducky Do you mean a car you drive off the lot? Yeah, 2019 might be a good guess as I'm sure Model 3 will sell out for 2018 within a week of two after reservations open�
Nov 30, 2015
Fallenone Building ICE cars for decades does not make a traditional automobile manufacturer having decades of experience in the restaurant trade in this analogy. It does provide them with money and experience is supply chain that are far greater than Tesla of course. But they still lack many many crucial ingredients in the EV arena. If we go back to the restaurant analogy, it's more like starbucks trying to start red lobster. I mean, they are already very successful in ICE cars, what prevents the mass majority of ICE staff not collaborating fully with their tiny EV staff? How much money would they leave on the table to fuel EV development after all costs for their ICE be subtracted and reserved for next year? And most importantly, why would their upper management bother if their EV succeed or not because they are going to retire with a huge pile of money anyway in a few years? How well the company does in 10 years has nothing to do with the compensation of upper management in traditional ICE companies. Decades of experience in ICE could in fact be the "baggage to carry" for these companies. Of course all the above is assuming EV will prevail over ICE in the future, which is open to discussion.
I think Faraday would be among the first to succeed. Apple may follow up. BMW could be the first among traditional automobile manufacturers.
�
Nov 30, 2015
johnnyduval Yes Discoducky - that is exactly what I am asking. I think based on Model S and X reservations that 100,000 pre-orders of a $35,000 EV car with 200 mile range will be easy peasy. Just I don't think they can manufacture them quick enough to make stocks FREE in the market before 2019.
Nice problem to have etc, but if you are not one of the lucky 100,000 with a ticket to the draw then you simply cannot get one. So you have 100,000 delighted happy punters......but the rest of the population will have only two choices:
1. ICE
2. An *inferior* EV from someone else.
Tesla will sell all their stocks if they hit the price and quality......its the timing and production speeds that concern me. Can they make 'em quick enough and cheap enough?
And actually 100,000 out the door before Jan 2019 I assume is maybe tricky?�
Nov 30, 2015
Fallenone Why are you so concerned with only 1 year of sale? It's not like there's no customer left in the market after 2018. Every year there's a new batch of people thinking about buying a new car.
�
Nov 30, 2015
Discoducky I guess it is not going to help if I get 4 reservations then?
�
Nov 30, 2015
Ugliest1 Keep reading other threads on TMC some more, others have addressed this with far more eloquence than I can. The main problem for ICE manufacturers (as I see it) is a) they have invested most of their expertise in ICE engine design, and would need to invest heavily to procure EV motor design expertise and develop competitive EV drivetrains while reducing the priority of their current cash cow (making investors a little irate); b) any popular EV that an ICE manufacturer makes would cannibalize their existing ICE line(s), reducing profits; c) in the US, the dealers have a stranglehold on manufacturers' ability to actually sell what they want to the end consumer. Dealers worldwide like the profits from ICE maintenance, the equivalent of Epson print cartridges except you also have to take the printer in to get a cleaning and have the cartridges installed, thus also giving the opportunity for the dealer to mention the print-head cooler needs to be changed out, and the typewriter ribbon should be replaced.�
Nov 30, 2015
stopcrazypp This would be an incorrect assumption. Tesla started the Tesla Energy line (basically the Powerwalls and Power packs) which will also be a major component of the Gigafactory. That will hedge against any fluctuations on the Model 3 timeline. Tesla also hedged against Gigafactory delays by having the initial cell production for the Model 3 available from Panasonic outside the Gigafactory.
If Tesla's plans were never to make a Model 3, the company would be making quarterly profits already. A lot of their R&D and capital expenditure is going toward preparing for Model 3. Model 3 is not mission critical for the survival of the company, just that it was the long term goal of Elon (and thus investors).�
Nov 30, 2015
Fallenone On the other hand, if there's no Model 3 in the picture, TSLA should be trading below 100.
�
Nov 30, 2015
stopcrazypp Correct, but the company won't be bankrupt as some are suggesting.�
Nov 30, 2015
johnnyduval I am not a stock market investing kinda guy.......in the past I tend to lose more than I win.
Looking back over the last nearly 2 years back in Feb 2014 Tesla was $280 and it has then basically gently rollercoasted between $185 and $285.
This is maybe gonna sound like a really dumb/ignorant question. Surely if TESLA has done loads of great things over the last 20 months, proving their worth, hitting promises, and generally making great exciting things happen the share price should be above $245.
Or put another way........am I correct in saying the stock market considers TESLA to be worth the same as 18 months ago? It has NOT increased in value in the eyes of the marketplace?
Or was there a sharesplit or summat and I am being really dim?�
Nov 30, 2015
Fallenone Two years ago there was a mass short squeeze that sent the stock rocketed above 200. People who didn't believe Model S would be a hit as it turned out to be were running towards a narrow exit and propelled the stock. At that time TSLA was grossly overvalued because these shorts. It has spend the rest of these 20 some months consolidating. So what really happened was in 2013, TSLA valued around 80 or something, but was traded all the way to 200. During the past two years, TSLA's value gradually creeped up to the 200s and now being traded at approximately fair value in my opinion.
�
Nov 30, 2015
Discoducky IMO the market believes that Tesla has spent more cash than thought, and time for that matter, on Model X on a slower ramp.
Once Model X is really in the public eye (sigs dissecting every aspect on social media) and we get a solid month of ramp VIN's we'll see a stock move.
If Tesla can ship 50K, like predicted, and get win over journalists and car sites, then we'll see it go back to ATH territory.
Oh, and Tesla Energy, Gigafactory and Model 3 news is all up in this as well. Nothing is easy...�
Nov 30, 2015
ggr Why would you think this? Just because they are secretive but appear well funded? We have no idea what they are planning except that at the moment they look like a 10-years-later Tesla clone.�
Nov 30, 2015
30seconds
A valuation overshoot followed by a correction and consolidation is fairly normal in the world of high growth stocks. What you saw at $280 was a price that didn't have enough support to sustain / grow 18 months ago. The question now becomes what has changed since then and where is it going from $230?�
Nov 30, 2015
johnnyduval OK, but I am basically kinda correct......the market value of Tesla is the same as 18 months ago. Whether you personally think it was overvalued 18 months ago, and now correctly valued, or even overvalued - the nuts and bolts are THE MARKET thinks it is the same as 18 months ago. If I had bought shares in February 2014 they have bounced around but have the same value now in December 2015. TESLA in the eyes of the market has NOT added value in 18 months.
Well for sure if any of us really knew the answer to that we would bet the farm on it!!
I was a shareholder for about 8 months but just bailed out (small beer however). I personally just see too many *possible* hazards. The plan may all go great of course but the stock price for me already reflects about 90% of stuff going right.
I have a weird attitude in business. I pretty much always assume the worse case scenario will happen and operate around that. When I do a spreadsheet I never calculate to make a profit.......I calculate worst possible scenarios of costs and crap sales and am pleasantly surprised when things go better. My prediction spreadsheets calculate only potential net losses - never a win - not something you would ever show a bank.�
Nov 30, 2015
stopcrazypp You can pick arbitrary points in the stock price, but doesn't really say much about how the company is actually doing. For example if I pick May 9, 2014, the price almost hit $180, but can I say there was huge growth in the months in between?�
Nov 30, 2015
johnnyduval I hear ya - if you had bought in January 2014 at $150 it would still be dandy.
But I am looking at the rollercoaster and therefore what it says to me is that the price is being based on SENTIMENT and not on FACTS. That's my point.
Everyone here is being bullish about the future price of the stock based on clever numbers and fundamentals such as Model 3, and Gigafactories etc........but it looks to me like the #1 driver is sentiment over the past 2 years rather than any TRUE numbers.
Is the price dictated by fundamentals or sentiment? If the former then why is the price not higher, and if the latter......I don't wanna play in the market.�
Nov 30, 2015
stopcrazypp You have presented a false dilemma. That answer is that the stock price is determined by both fundamentals and sentiment, and the game everyone in the market is playing is trying to determine how close the current price is to each and what direction it will go in the future.�
Nov 30, 2015
johnnyduval I am a good example. I still know diddly squat about the company but I bought some shares 'cos I thought.......yeah.......EV cars are cool and the future after I ordered a TESLA. I was a 100% sentiment buyer and now I guess (in my mind) a fundamental seller having read some stuff.
I still think EV cars are cool and the future and ICE is dead in 20 years. That hasn't changed for me......but it regretfully isn't enough to make me think Tesla will be the winner in the game.
But it's all talk. Only when we come back in 12 months and view this thread will it maybe be clearer (or maybe not!!).�
Nov 30, 2015
anticitizen13.7 Over the past 20 years, it is my observation that companies with stocks that hit big (Intel and Apple are 2 examples) have very long periods of what appears to be stagnation, followed by explosive growth.
For example, AAPL was about $1/share in 1998 (accounting for split), and hovered between the $1 and $2 mark until the mid-2000's. This was roughly 5-6 years with the stock doing nothing. When iPod became dominant in the DAP market, Apple's value skyrocketed to close to $30/share. The iPod's successor, iPhone, pushed the stock to even more astronomical heights.
A better analog to TSLA may be INTC. Intel, like Tesla, required massive capital expenditures. A single Intel fab is a multi-billion dollar factory. At the beginning of the PC era (the 1980's), Intel fluctuated in the $0-1 range, never seeming to make any solid gains for about a decade. It wasn't even clear that the tangled Intel x86 architecture would have any future, but the 80486, which happened to roughly coincide with Windows 3, changed everything. From around 1990 onwards, PCs became a lot more useful, fueling an insane decade in revenue growth, resulting in huge stock price gains.
Every company is different, but the general trend I see over and over again is that the way to profit in the stock market is to buy promising companies and be willing to hold them for a very long time.
This is admittedly difficult in an age where Internet companies become "unicorn" wonders overnight. People expect big money in the time it takes to post a status update on Facebook (I exaggerate, but that's what it seems like), but solid territorial gains take time and effort from a company.
TSLA going from the $30-$40 range (where it stayed for about 2.5 years) into the $180-$280 range was a reflection of the company's transition from a struggling startup whose future was constantly in peril, to a boutique mass manufacturer with proven product and ecosystem. The next level up will be Model 3 and Tesla Energy, which represents an order of magnitude more cars delivered, and at least an order of magnitude more batteries produced. No one should expect anything but price stagnation in TSLA while the outcome is uncertain. However, if the company succeeds, the share price will quickly rise to reflect revenues and/or profits.
Nobody ever got rich by investing in companies that couldn't crater. This is both encouragement :biggrin:... and warning :scared:!�
Nov 30, 2015
Auzie It could be said that most stocks have periods of hibernation.
Lets look at the comparative performance % increase of few good performers 2014 to present, last 2 years that you referred to:
AMZN up 67%
AMZN was asleep in 2014 and then took off after reporting good q numbers.
The same story with Alphabet below.
GOOGL up 35%
TSLA was a bit choppy for the last 2 year, but still with a decent growth. If 2015 q4 numbers are good, TSLA will likely go up, providing no other disasters (taxes on ev, wars, earthquakes, etc)
TSLA up 53%
AMZN and GOOGL are more mature than TSLA (in a different stage of business development), hence comparison might be not quite right, but it does demonstrate that most stocks have lengthy periods of hibernation.
TSLA does not seem to hibernate, it swings a bit more both ways. That may make it more attractive for some investors, less for others. There is never a dull moment for TSLA investors.
�
Nov 30, 2015
Fallenone First of all, Faraday is not that secretive. I think they were first exposed early 2015 if not late 2014. It's just they got a ton of money put them under spotlight recently.
What makes me think they could come up with something of importance before other non-Tesla companies in EV, by which I mean a Model S type of car, is because their team is made up by people with the most experience in developing pure premium EV related products. And they won't suffer from any distractions from upper management because their sole goal is to get a premium EV out, not maintaining ICE growth or smartphone growth. It is true Faraday looks like a Tesla clone in 2005, but that puts them pretty much ahead of the curve.
�
Dec 1, 2015
johnnyduval I like this attitude. Shows some reality about buying into TESLA stocks. I can of course also envisage a future in which TESLA hits $2,000 a share in 10 years time and when we look at the graph for the last 2 years it will just be a tiny squiggle on an otherwise upwards graph. Clearly if the company succeeds in its stated goals - the share price should and will rise.
Just when people were saying earlier in this thread that the only threat facing TESLA was terrorism attacks or an earthquake it was just a bit too optimistic for me!!�
Dec 1, 2015
johnnyduval Just for amusement value and to cement my status as the only true Anti-Christ having sold my TESLA shares at $230 yesterday......I just stuck the spare cash into VW at �134.50
Reasoning? Not much really, more for fun 'cos everyone hates them at the moment, but I do quite like the sound of the big electric Audi Q6 e-tron and VW are I think big enough as a group to potentially make an entry into the EV market if they fancied.
But more so we can come back here in 12 months time and someone will have a giggle at the expense of the other. I put my mark in the sand!�
Dec 1, 2015
tftf The economy in China as well as the global economy in 2016+ will influence VW Group a lot more than a few EVs for the forseeable future.
As we all know, VW Group sells around 10 million cars per year. Pure EVs will be a fraction of sales (even in a very optimistic scenario for EVs), maybe a little more when counting PHEVs from VW.
China dictates sales and - especially - net profits for VW Group:
1 second analysis: Who is most exposed to the Chinese contagion? - DailyKanban
PS: Also interesting is the difference between Toyota and the two other giants in China - Toyota has a little downside, but lots of potential future upside in Greater China.�
Dec 1, 2015
johnnyduval Public Warning. Do NOT read this Bloomberg opinion if you are of a nervous disposition and easily excitable:
Tesla Should Be Afraid of German Carmakers - Bloomberg View
It actually reflects my opinion very closely - but I did not write the damn thing so please shoot your arrows at the author :wink:�
Dec 1, 2015
Cosmacelf Not very good article IMHO. They talk about the German concept cars as eventually being the Tesla killer. By the time those are selling as production cars, Tesla will have switched to the $35K model 3. If you want to see panic, wait until Tesla starts eating into the mid priced car segment.
The article then says that the car manufacturers are going to rely on pressuring their governments to build out the high speed charging network. No doubt governments, even if pressured, will do that with their usual competence and speed. If relying on government is part of your strategic business plan, well...
They then bring up the hemorrhaging money trope. Amazon has been hemorrhaging money for 12 years, all while cheerfully killing off all entrenched competitors. As long as investors like what Tesla is doing, they can continue losing money indefinitely. I give Tesla about another 10 years of going back to the markets before they need to use their own internally generated cash. As long as Elon has worthwhile things to spend money on (gigafactory, model 3, truck, roadster v2, etc), the financial markets will support him.�
Dec 1, 2015
dalalsid
That article is so funny and obviously written by somebody who doesn't know cars or European standards.
"The German manufacturers have now set a 310-mile goal for the next three years"
In Europe Tesla Model S has a range of 330 miles with the 85D and 350 for the 90D. Beyond what Porsche and Audi plan in 2018-2020. That is if they don't abandon their plans altogether from R&D cuts. The Phaeton EV already bit the dust.
"And its relatively mass-market Model 3, expected to launch in 2017 unless there's a customary delay, will enter an already crowded field. "
Crowded field of dreams and press releases for cars coming 3 years in the future.�
Dec 1, 2015
anticitizen13.7 I have looked at the issues the article raised, but do not find them compelling.
Where Audi and Volkswagen are concerned, VAG has a long history of promising high-end electric cars and ultimately not delivering. What they are targeting is where Tesla is today. By 2018, Tesla will have moved on. Also, I don't believe the full financial implications of the diesel cheating scandal are clear, which will affect VAG's budget for the foreseeable future. BMW's i3 and i8 are not significant competition. The i3 is an odd looking car with mediocre overall driving performance. i8 drives well, but has extremely limited utility. The plug-in hybrids still use gasoline and have low EV range. I've looked at BMW's plug-ins, and I don't find them very interesting as products.
The argument that sales of gasoline cars allows the big manufacturers to finance EV development is incomplete. The flip side is that the big manufacturers have to keep spending $ on dead-end technology, which includes increasingly complicated transmissions and small-displacement turbos. They also have to contend with extreme resistance in some markets (United States in particular) where powerful dealer franchises and their trade associations block EVs at every turn because low maintenance EVs threaten their profitable service/repair departments.
People point to larger volume sales of lower range EVs as trouble for Tesla, but I don't believe that lower range/performance EVs will ever displace ICE cars. In order to get people to switch from ICE to EV, EV has to be better than ICE cars. Blackberry was the dominant smart phone for much of the 2000's. People called them "Crackberry" because the device was said to be more addictive than crack cocaine, and Blackberry seemed unstoppable. Then iPhone and Android touch phones came along and offered something better... and people switched in droves. A Nissan LEAF is not clearly better than a Nissan Versa. That is why the lesser EVs will ultimately not succeed against ICE.
Another factor that the mainstream media is behind the curve on reporting, is the gravitational pull that EV startups exert on the best talent in relevant engineering fields. It's not just Tesla that is bringing the best talent to its ranks. Apple's EV program is rapidly growing, and the company has billions in free cash flow and hundreds of billions in reserve. Mystery companies like Faraday have stolen talent from the likes of BMW and others. If the best talent is going to California, that will leave Detroit, Japan, and Germany behind.
Lastly, the mainstream media keeps pointing to Tesla's massive cash expenditures as a problem. I do not think many of these reporters ever took a business class or worked for a startup company, because expenses and early losses are part of the game. Cars take a lot of R&D to develop. Tesla's factory has undergone several production line upgrades since 2012 and added a new paint shop too. Then there is the new facility at Lathrop (components fabrication) and the Gigafactory (batteries). Laying the groundwork to ultimately produce 500k vehicles/year plus an unknown quantity of Stationary Energy Storage solutions, rather than today's 50k vehicles/year, is extraordinarily expensive.
I don't dismiss that Tesla is in a high risk venture, but I think the media in general has a poor understanding of entrepreneurship.�
Dec 1, 2015
tftf Do you still believe in a 2017 date release for the Model3? Good luck with that.
And with "release" I refer to meaningful shipments that move revenue, not a few cars (see botched Model X launch in 2015 - and that was after two years of delays!).
Tesla is sitting in the glass house itself when it comes to delays, it should not be throwing stones at other car companies.�
Dec 1, 2015
dalalsid Do you believe in an Audi/Porsche long range EV anything like the concepts and in any volume? Good luck with that.
I'm thinking we'll see a few founders Model 3s in 2017 priced at 99k, maybe a few sigs at a similar price.�
Dec 1, 2015
stopcrazypp Tesla has delays but ultimately delivered. The large automakers (especially Audi) are very good at press releases and not delivering at all. And many have zero track record to speak of or are at compliance car volumes (for example Hyundai).�
Dec 1, 2015
30seconds Looking forward to hearing from you in 12 months. I actually think that both companies will be higher than their current price, but VW isn't without significant risk
VW U.S. Sales Plunge 25% Amid Emissions-Cheating Crisis - WSJ
VW posting 25% sales decline in the US. Pretty sure VW magnitude of losses in Q4 2015 & Q1 2016 will absolutely dwarf Tesla.�
Dec 2, 2015
tftf First, all major car companies have R&D labs in California now, they can and will poach talent as needed:
Ford, Mercedes Set Up Shop in Silicon Valley - WSJ
Not just car companies are there, also all major suppliers. See map in link.
Second, cars take indeed a lot of cap-ex. Tesla didn't invest in the full Gigafactory. It can only make a fraction of the planned 500k EV batteries per year unless it invests additional billions into the Gigafactory.
And major cap-ex for Model3 hasn't even started yet.�
Dec 2, 2015
anticitizen13.7 I can set up an R&D lab in California :biggrin: That doesn't mean that the best people are going to want to work for me.
From an opportunity perspective and a company like Apple starting with a clean slate is much more appealing than an place like Ford (baggage of old platforms, Detroit bureaucracy, internal resistance). From a status perspective, it's not even close. A hotshot engineer in Silicon Valley is going to want startups and tech giants on their resume, not Ford or Mercedes Benz.�
Dec 2, 2015
tftf If you read Glassdoor reviews there are many unhappy people at Tesla as well. Senior personnel (both car engineers and software/ADAs engineers) is leaving Tesla.
Every senior departure will add to existing delays. And what's with the Tesla CTO dumping shares? A few more months at this rate and Straubel will have no shares left...
But you can believe Elon's mantra that only the incompetent are leaving for opportunities like Google and Apple (yeah right, as if these giants were in need to hire leftovers from Tesla).
The Model X launch delays since 2013 are real (I predicted a "photo op" launch months ago and that's what happened in September) and I predict the same for the Model3.
I don't know how much kool-aid it takes to think that all these companies are hiring incompetent people and that the only smart ones are at Tesla:
�
Dec 2, 2015
PeterK They may have outposts or labs, but the best people are going to want to be someplace where they are core to the organization, a clear priority with a direct connection to the top. That's clear at Tesla and Faraday Future, pretty clear at Google/Alphabet and perhaps Apple, but becomes less so at the OEMs. And even if they have funding, good people and good projects, they won't succeed without committed leadership in Detroit, Stuttgart, etc. who are ready to make tough decisions for EVs at the expense of their core business.�
Dec 2, 2015
dalalsid The question is - does the talent want their work to be used by real people or not and how soon? If you want to apply your talent to building an EV, do you want to work at Mercedes - with one EV with a Tesla powertrain, Ford with one amateur EV with the battery occupying the trunk that nobody wants to buy or do you want to work at Tesla? Do you want to be part of the company "aggressively" deploying autopilot stuff or building the largest battery factory in the world? Or do you want to work at the company that lets others do the battery stuff? If you really have talent, do you want to work for the company that says they will do the hard stuff that others don't/can't or someone that lets others do the hard stuff?�
Dec 2, 2015
pz1975 95% of people will go where they will make the most money and/or have the most power. IMO - too much reading into these employee movements.�
Dec 2, 2015
bonnie Clearly we all have an opinion on this based on what matters to each of us personally. I've turned down more than one job in my career where I was being offered the most money or the most 'power' (that's a weird one to me, I've never looked for 'the most power'). What has mattered to me, without question, was the ability to make a difference.
I guess I'm just one of the 5% you're talking about. Oh wait. Hmmm. One office was shut down and everyone was being transferred out of beautiful Boulder, CO to another location. 100% of the employees declined the move and went and found another job. Work/life balance thing.�
Dec 2, 2015
pz1975 Power means a higher-level position (probably bad word choice). And I agree with you that fortunately there are the 5% (I obviously made that number up and it's just my opinion but you are one) that do make choices that aren't based on money and position. Your example of people having to move to another city to keep their job is not an example of how most people choose whether to change jobs as that is a very uncommon circumstance - I was referring to people who have a choice to stay at the job they have or move to a "better" one.�
Dec 2, 2015
bonnie I spent a lot of years with Intel (congrats, Intel, for earning a perfect score on Human Rights Campaign Foundation's Corp Equality Index). And with tens of thousands of employees, I can assure you that employee retention efforts centered around recognition, satisfaction, etc. Once you've leveled the playing field on 'fair pay' and people have enough to live, there has to be something else that gets you up in the morning, excited about the day ahead.
One of the things that caused me to invest in Tesla several years ago was that I heard about 'the mission' from employees at all levels of the company - senior execs to shuttle bus driver. I'd always heard CEOs talk about 'shared vision', but it was the first time I'd ever witnessed it. When people believe in what they're doing, they do amazing things. It's not just about money or position. For a lot of people, purpose is a required component.
�
Dec 2, 2015
johnnyduval 
�
Dec 2, 2015
bonnie Hah. I would have put you square in that camp. No judgment.�
Dec 2, 2015
Aljohn End this thread... Ignore Johnny whatever. Let it die its death on page 20 of the forum.�
Dec 2, 2015
dalalsid We are talking about "talent", not 95% of people.�
Dec 2, 2015
johnnyduval I was pointing out the story of the morally bankrupt Jerry Maguire who has an epiphany and only finds true happiness once he mends his ways.
I cannot think of a better modern parable to back up your case.
p.s. I used to be a foreign exchange broker in the City of London in my early 20's.......gave it up and took a 90% paycut.
@aljohn - thank you so much for post #185.....I am confident your wish will come true.�
Dec 2, 2015
anticitizen13.7 (1) You miss the point. There's a huge intermediate zone between "top talent" and incompetent. Most companies will hire competent people, but only a few companies get a lot of top talent.
(2) You miss the point again. Tesla will never get all the most talented people, and I never claimed they would.
What I am saying is that many of the top people who chose to avoid or leave Tesla are going to go to other Silicon Valley startups, not GM and its pals. Apple is paying $250,000+ signing bonuses in some cases for top talent, and their auto group has its own skunk works facility. Faraday is using the latest in VR and digital tech to bypass the traditional design process (clay models, etc.).
The hotshots with killer new ideas aren't going to want to be hamstrung by some bureaucrats in Detroit. Anyone can rent an office in Palo Alto or SF and claim to have a presence in the Valley area, but who is in that office and what are they accomplishing?�
Dec 3, 2015
aesculus Not sure if you can get this in Munich but check out Crazy Ex Girlfriend.
Crazy Ex-Girlfriend (TV Series 2015– ) - IMDb
It's a bit of a struggle to keep up with and you really have to understand Los Angeles to get a lot out of it. But the underlying theme is the abandonment of expected achievements and doing what others expect you to do instead of being yourself. The lead, and most of the other roles, struggle with this in every episode. And its a musical. :smile:�
Dec 4, 2015
PeterK Watch Out Tesla! Porsche Green Lights Mission E - Bloomberg Business�
Dec 4, 2015
EarlyAdopter See, this is what I mean. Tacit admission that none of Porsche's existing ICE cars can compete with the Model S. Otherwise, why aren't any of their existing cars "killing" Tesla?�
Dec 5, 2015
rdalcanto LOL! Porsche's 2020 EV might be able to compete with (what will be in the year 2020) a 12 year old Tesla Roadster, and still loose to a 7 seater, 5 year old (2015) Model S.
That being said, if it looks good, I'll at least check it out. It won't hurt Tesla, but it will put more of a dent in ICE sales as EVs become a larger percentage of new car sales in the future.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét