Very telling that this part of the SAME report wasn't posted:
"The paper said the common reason for the delay was a change in design plans for the plant. An unidentified source told the paper the situation is more of a short-term delay."
I couldn't disagree more about your characterization about Elon, especially when you bring up Gore. He IS what you guys say Elon is. Gore has profited from his actions, Elon has yet to sell stock or take a salary from Tesla and has borrowed money to buy more Tesla stock and bonds and the loans are backed by more than Tesla stock. If Tesla fails, he owes the money. Gore has already cashed out of several ventures. Remember him asking for networks not to accept ads from oil companies then selling a business to one of the Middle East oil countries? What a hypocrite.
BTW I really like Ann Coulter. I don't always agree with her but she's smart and doesn't let the race baiters and others intimidate her. My admiration for her started on when she was on that dbag Bill Maher's Politically Incorrect. She not only didn't back down when the guests on the show, some very liberal race baiters, tried to intimidate her but she fought back. It was awesome and I've been a fan since.
You're a jerk and a bully but your bravado and bluster don't intimidate me.
To answer another post first, I haven't been to a store-yet. Probably not for at least another couple of weeks.
"That said, I'd like you to repost where I said between 2,000-4,000 unsold cars for sale were built? I'll save you the time. I didn't!"
"What was the reason the other 2,500 4drs were built ESPECIALLY with Tesla being production constrained and all that. Wow! Let's see? Hmmmm? I bet those other 4drs were nothing more than for-sale inventory which blows a damn hole so large in the Musk excuse and zealot rationalization it's comical."
This ought to be interesting. Will you say you were mistaken? Will you do the car salesman thing? Some other possibility?
By q2 results, we'll have a good idea who's right and who's wrong. Anything north of 17,000 deliveries at that time means you are wrong-again. Just hitting that number will disappoint me and be bad for tsla the stock so it's possible we are both wrong and disappointed.
Google it. Yahoo keeps deleting my post with excerpts. And yes, they said Nebraska instead of Nevada for the location of the GF.
Seeing the launch must've been a cool sight, no? Unless it appeared as just a blip, I guess I'm surprised that any aircraft were even remotely in the area in case something went wrong.
My opinion of the Cochrans, Cutlers, Yagmans and their ilk is more negatively extreme than anything posted here. I'll leave it at that.
"...they are supposted to come out with this car on the 17 March 20015."
"When exactly the Ibis will hit the market and for how much is yet unknown."
"Aoxin is expected to announce details on price and availability on the upcoming International New Energy Vehicle Show in Jinan City, starting on March 17"
"Why don't you tell us if and when you think a capital raise is coming."
Short answer: I don't.
Longer answer: maybe if the stock is in the upper $200's unless you consider selling hedges associated with any notes that get converted.
Tesla has said repeatedly that they might raise funds if market conditions are favorable. Their last raises occurred after the stock had been on a good run; the current price would break that practice. Moreover, unless there's some secret, capital intensive project going on that no one has even hinted at, why would Tesla raise cash now when they didn't do it 5 months ago at far, far higher prices AND Elon said he thought the stock was a bit high at the time?
You've uncovered the tell huh? So rather than doing this 5 months ago when the stock was 40% higher, you've read the tea leaves and deduced that anything that might indicate prospective sales is being used to manipulate the stock higher. Interesting. You'd think Tesla would have tweaked Q1 and 2015 guidance higher if that was the case.
Neither one of us knows for sure when or if Tesla will seek to raise cash but you seem like Johnny Cochran trying to convince jurors of the caliber that OJ's jury consultant targeted and was able to get on the jury, excluding the race and gender criteria.
BTW wrt the 2013 convertibles and Tesla having to come up with cash, part of that cash could come from selling the hedges purchased for these notes.
This jc guy is hilarious! He can't get basic figures right, twists things around and now I guess he wants to tell those who have been here for 2 years or longer what our cost basis is-according to him:
"JTF appears to think that the cost base of longs is always $30. How refreshing?"
Of course, I never said that but what's funny is how many of the shorts talk about how they shorted and it always seems to be close to the day's or week's top.
He kind of reminds me of ballcoach and some of the trolls who have come and gone. I wouldn't be surprised if this is just an alias for a current or former troll. He is slightly different in one way: his posts aren't full of LOL's. Wasn't it iamagod who kept doing that even when he was continually wrong?
This post of yours is another classic and a candidate for ballcoach's greatest "hits".
Re inventory: I've never said Tesla has zero inventory. I've posted about the loaner cars available for sale as well as a small number of immediate sale aka inventory cars at galleries. The difference is I'm putting that figure at 600 units give or take a few hundred and you're at something like 2000-4000. So far you have only speculation to back your view. We'll see. And I do intend to visit a store myself.
I've never believed everything you post is a lie but rather much of it is distorted. Look no further than 2014 units sold. You claimed to be right despite being wrong even after several revisions. You were even off on your country estimates.
"You've been 100% wrong 100% of the time about Tesla, the business."
Now THIS is a classic! I've been expecting strong sales growth for the 2 1/2 years I've been posting here and so far I've been right. And you? Over the same period, you've been saying Tesla is failing, will fail, there's no demand, etc. etc. etc. Tesla is burning cash and raised more? Shocking! Sales chiefs have changed? Who cares? If these "prescient" insights make you feel better, fine. The 45% yoy increase in units which defied your forecast is far more important to me.
YOU are calling ME smug? LOL! Seriously, that's funny!
Care to post anything to support what you've attributed to me? Anything?
I hope so. Still have a bunch of hedges that I'd like to cover/roll.
Sticking with your theory about Tesla planning to sell 7 million cars in the U.S. in 2025?
Santelli is all for free markets and free speech-except when he disagrees. He censored the other guy, pretending they were out of time but he somehow managed to kill another 10-15 seconds after.
What a disgrace.
Sounds like you're referring to your comrades in the legal biz particularly the PI and class action thieves.
"...the privileged elite who feel smug & righteous..."
Yup, sounds like a good description of most lawyers.
"...in a car that only the top 0.1% can afford..."
And you're bad at math.
Maybe you should spend less time on your computer. After all, out there in Montana it's coal powered and you've made it clear how much you hate coal power.
In trying to keep it simple, I left out that under SCE's non-TOU residential rate plans, charges are based on total monthly usage and are tiered so the more you use the more you pay per kwh. A dual meter setup, which is what some EV owners do, might be one way to get the lower rates for home "baseload" usage while the 2nd meter would be under the TOU plan and cover the rest of the monthly usage.
You're probably right about MX's accounted for in inventory but I'm preparing a list of questions for IR and it'll be a good one to ask.
There's no disagreement that there are inventory and loaner cars. I used 4 cars average at each of 150 galleries and Service Centers as a baseless WAG to arrive at 600. You're right that the big question is "how many"?
I know we'll disagree about transparency but I've seen plenty of simple concepts that although repeatedly explained again and again continue to be misrepresented and distorted here and in other venues including the media. For that reason, I'm ok with Tesla buffering some info. Example: look at the huge disparity in monthly sales in Norway. The large increases and severe drops month over month are meaningless as far as the overall trend yet some still can't grasp, or are intentionally ignoring that fact that Tesla doesn't allocate supply to every geography at the some rate every month. Sales are neither rising nor falling at the rate that month over month sales changes imply.
There are many caveats and conditions but let's keep it simple for now. The max price differential you posted is $.20/kwh, the same as what I posted. In my SCE territory, you can sign up for a TOU rate so that all power used at a certain time is at the lowest rate. Again, I'm greatly simplifying but now assume each 1 kwh battery pack saves that differential each day. That's $73 (.20*365) per year. N0m0renancy posted info from an article suggesting a $330/kwh SolarCity battery system cost so payback in 4 1/2 years. Net $ benefits from the system will depend on usable capacity over time.
I again acknowledge that there are numerous caveats that I'm leaving out to simplify including the unlikely 100% utilization of the battery's capacity, degradation, unfeasibility of this system for low usage customers, the risk of rate differentials declining, etc. I just wanted to give a very basic idea of how such a system might possibly work. Had the differential pricing effectively been a few pennies per kwh, we wouldn't even be discussing this nor would SCity or Tesla even be considering it.
Where have I gone wrong?
Thanks for the reference to the CT article. I've been looking for a ballpark cost figure and the $330/kwh is not only in the ballpark but under my $350 estimate which was admittedly based on very scant actual data.
Will continue this on temagami's new thread on this topic but want to note my interest in this has nothing to do with backup power for when there's a power outage other than it being a side benefit.
Your calculations are flawed. You assume the 1400 cars not delivered in Dec and pushed into Jan are the only in transit cars and leave out the cars in transit for overseas delivery that won't be delivered in q1. I'm ballparking it 1700. Now we're at 1400+1700+600 (loaner and "inventory")=3700 in finished good inventory.
Next, while not very significant, q4 only had 2 or maybe 3 weeks of D model deliveries so the q1 mix will have a higher COGS due to a much higher mix of D models so add maybe 6% to COGS.
Beyond tweaking my figures for overseas transit and inventory cars, there is still a discrepancy between my estimates and inventory however there could be plausible explanations no one has considered. How are MS' traded in for D models accounted for? Is it possible there are 500-1000 of these used MS' in inventory and if so are they part of finished goods? It's been suggested that quite a few MX have been made for testing. Could there be a few hundred out there and if so wouldn't they be included in finished goods?
I can't prove there isn't something nefarious going on but those who are casting aspersions need to adjust their presumptions first.