Sun, Nov 23, 2014, 7:32 PM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

VelocityShares Daily Inverse VI (XIV) Message Board

jmcvicker 975 posts  |  Last Activity: 6 hours ago Member since: Nov 18, 1999
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 10:04 AM Flag

    In summary - Tesla has done what it said it would do as a company. "Kickstart interest in sustainable transportation." I believe Musk also said "we are in the business of sustainable transportation, not making profits". Something like that so it may be a slight misquote. Look it up with the google.

    If Tesla lit the fire of all automakers to make EVs - good for them. But will they actually make it as a leader ongoing or as a mark in history where they got things going but couldn't make it on their own. If that is the case - fine - the company could be snapped up by someone else at a fair price. Fair is not $240. It is in the sub $50 range. But if they can actually make a running profit some day, while diluting shares and paying down bonds and growing slowly with the EV industry - then they may settle in to a valuation more appropriate for a large manufacturer of similar equipment. That is not above $200/share. So in the mean time - "trade-em up!".

  • jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 10:00 AM Flag

    Keef pointed out that some changes in the software "appear" to limit the initial thrust of the acceleration (I guess if you don't factor in the new "insane mode" of P85D). This could help with P85 and P85+ drivetrain wear. If MS60 and MS85 pedantic drivers do not slam the accelerator impressing their friends - maybe they will not have as much drivetrain problems. But didn't Edmunds or someone have four drivetrain replacements - and wrote about it? Edmunds is not in Norway and probably drove the car hard as it is their business to do so.

    I have to think that the drivetrain/differential gear cut will need attention and also perhaps adjustability of the differential shimming. They can replace a drivetrain with a recently shop-adjusted pack. But if they have to do that thousands of times - and multiple times (as some have said) - then it will eat away at operating and warranty costs.

  • jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 9:56 AM Flag

    Someone could compute book value. But Tesla is pretty much priced "alive". if it is the sum of its parts, the amount of plant and equipment wouldn't even pay off the bonds. Which are ahead of the stockholders. Does Musk even have bonds in his trust?

  • jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 8:29 AM Flag

    Who wants to shaft the shorts is his financial handlers on wall street. I don't think Musk is as evil as they are. But he may say or do things they ask him to if it makes sense to. It is like watching an actor on a junket or an author on a book tour.

  • jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 8:25 AM Flag

    Tesla has nothing GM needs. GM makes their own electric motors for some EVs. They partner with nearby LG Chem for batteries. They have thousands of oEM sources. They already are nearing their 200 mile EV debut. And people who don't need the range anxiety and issues that come with the BEV can get a Volt and drive anywhere anytime. The next gen Volt is better in every way to the prior one. The only problem GM has is poor dealership support of the Volt, very low service needs, not enough warranty work.

  • Reply to

    Did Ewon tell a porky to Bacon?

    by keefwotgetsaround Nov 22, 2014 7:16 AM
    jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 8:18 AM Flag

    Another general fallacy we all have to consider. Charging nightly is not always happening. When you drive, you do not always drive down your entire gas tank. Or electric charge, I drove 30 miles yesterday. I will drive 700 miles next Monday and Tuesday. I will drive 30 miles on Sunday. I may not drive at all next Friday.

    A tesla owner may only charge once every three days of commuting. But on a road trip they may charge twice fully per day. It is intermittant.

    There have been mass scale studies about US national,driving averages. On average, a car in service drives about 40 miles per day on average. There are about 200 million cars in service, give or take. That is over two billion kWh needed per day if all cars were electric, on average. 2 million mWh. 2 thousand gWh. The hoover dam is a 2.8 GW plant. 50gWh per day. It would take 20 Hoover Dams to charge a nation of electric cars. Something like that. To get there, we need to do a few things. Cut normal energy usage and drop our daily driving miles so that the impact is less.

    I did not factor in charging and line losses and things like people preheating their cars for half an hour off the grid in the cold climates, as some Tesla owners say they do.

    Obviously we need more clean and safe nuclear to do much of this. And places like CA are afraid of nuclear.

  • Reply to

    Did Ewon tell a porky to Bacon?

    by keefwotgetsaround Nov 22, 2014 7:16 AM
    jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 7:55 AM Flag

    I would call that one debatable. Many people plug in and use delayed charging. I charge my Volt from 4am to 8am. We do not have cheaper rates here. But I do it so the draw on the grid is during the lull of demand. Most EV owners do this. However, many Tesla owners may feel that if it is their only car and they need to charge in case of emergency, then plugging in and charging when they arrive home, from their jobs at World Juggernaut, that they need to plug in and charge immediately, no, that isn't true. Most Tesla owners have other vehicles in the stable, perhaps the wife's SUV ICE.

  • Reply to

    Did Ewon tell a porky to Bacon?

    by keefwotgetsaround Nov 22, 2014 7:16 AM
    jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 7:50 AM Flag

    A gallon of gas contains the equivalent of about 33 kWh of power, of course electricity demand would go up exponentially, the issue is then cost. Do you upgrade the grid at hundreds of billions and include dozens of new power plants? Or do you charge slowly off peak, drive electric locally and use gas only on long trips thus cutting oil usage by 80% for common drivers without demanding a huge infrastructure change in short time periods? The extended range electric vehicles make total sense. Relying on BEV for long distance travel and also using up a glut of batteries in a few cars is not consumer scalable nor sustainable.

    They are already trying to convince EV buyers they need to install solar and backup batteries at the home. And who owns such a company to provide that?

  • Reply to

    Did Ewon tell a porky to Bacon?

    by keefwotgetsaround Nov 22, 2014 7:16 AM
    jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 7:30 AM Flag

    People will refute me. But a consumer base of people running around recharging at 200KW per vehicle cannot work across the country to replace gas stations. It can only work sporadically for random users on specific charging sites.

    We already know a tesla supercharger of 120KW cuts two users in half, say 90 and 30 KW each. The utopian scenario mentioned by Bacon is currently whiteboard only and a dream. Sure, it can happen, but the electric draw is not sustainable on a wide scale.

  • Reply to

    Did Ewon tell a porky to Bacon?

    by keefwotgetsaround Nov 22, 2014 7:16 AM
    jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 7:26 AM Flag

    Bacon is calling out a 15 minute 200 mile recharge? He is then calling out a 200KW+ charge rate on a 220 mile EV. It is 448 miles from Reno to LV. He is talking about technology that doesn't exist and may never exist. To support gamblers going between one gambling destination and another? Seems he is gambling on science catching up with his governmental lack of scientific knowledge.

  • jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 7:21 AM Flag

    They are all trading it. And watching the news and details for cracks in the foundation. BNP was in and out of 7 million shares over a few quarters. Twice. Nothing is long term to many funds and institutions. Fidelity sold this past quarter, again. Remember when they were long 15 Million shares? 8.x now.

  • jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 7:18 AM Flag

    One thing I have noticed. Many P85D buyers are already Tesla owners. Some as recent as September 2014 and trading in for P85D.

    It is like going to an expensive concert by your favorite band. And at the end of the show, they announce a new tour starting 6 months from now and the tickets go on sale in two weeks. And you just have to see them again.

  • jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 7:14 AM Flag

    Takes high torque starting-stress off the drive unit. You know, so the grease works better.

  • jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 7:13 AM Flag

    In my state, local solar companies are actually telemarketing for business. I am going to give a call to my installer from 2012 to ask how his business is doing. Might talk to him about a generator install for backup power. So much more sense than batteries. Of course, it could be that in 10-15 years, vehicles could utilize V2G technology to provide home backup power to essential circuits. The switching and NEC are not yet established to tie in a solar array into a car for standby storage, home demand yet. That would need to be a type of hybrid off-grid configuration. Not cheap configure. And in a long and drawn out blackout for weeks, it wouldn't matter. MadMax scenarios could get ugly. News blurb out on CNN this morning has latest fear porn of "China could shut off our power grid".

    http://situationroom.blogs.cnn.com/2014/11/21/could-china-cripple-u-s-power-grid/?iref=allsearch

  • jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 22, 2014 7:04 AM Flag

    Ahem... This is what I have posted about for a while. People are just starting to notice. Also, some S85 were built but buyers switched to P85D or S85D and Tesla routes the unsold cancels to larger sales lots where they can discount them. I mentioned the plan for dealership lot cars as being essential for Tesla growth longer term, if not survival. They cannot do Model 3 without generous inventory outlay. This means floating a lot of finished goods inventory into the field.

  • Reply to

    Game over for Musk

    by robskydives Nov 21, 2014 3:55 PM
    jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 21, 2014 7:48 PM Flag

    I said "responsible for founding Tesla". Not for its current situation. People try to make it sound like Musk alone did Tesla and did Paypal alone.

  • Reply to

    Game over for Musk

    by robskydives Nov 21, 2014 3:55 PM
    jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 21, 2014 7:39 PM Flag

    he was installed as board chairman - then displaced the original CEO with someone else before he took over as CEO because he is said to be a control-oriented person and pushes people out of the way if they are not up to his "level".

  • Reply to

    Game over for Musk

    by robskydives Nov 21, 2014 3:55 PM
    jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 21, 2014 7:38 PM Flag

    Paypal was easy - it was a consortium of two debit processing companies, quite simple - and he was more of a money-man to Peter Thiel and others. He is as "responsible" for Paypal as much as he is responsible for founding Tesla.

  • Reply to

    50,000 in 2015

    by temagami67 Nov 19, 2014 5:19 PM
    jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 21, 2014 7:27 PM Flag

    I was off by 20 (high) for Q2 estimate and 20 (low) for Q3 estimate. Trying for a trifecta.

  • Reply to

    50,000 in 2015

    by temagami67 Nov 19, 2014 5:19 PM
    jmcvicker jmcvicker Nov 21, 2014 6:59 PM Flag

    I said 31k was a good guidance early in 2014, still may be very close.

XIV
37.90+0.79(+2.13%)Nov 21 4:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.