"I want EVs to win but TSLA has been pumped by wall street and the company is being pimped by large institutions to try to make billions off of it. I think with posting the truth, somehow, the real valuation will come to light."
Yahoo shows the following analyst ratings: 3 Strong Buy, 3 Buy, 7 Hold and 1 Underperform with (I think) a $75 price target. That's being pumped?
"... sell their corporate soul to wall street to float two sets of bonds (well, really three) since May of last year?"
You mean those bonds for paying off government debt, to expand production and to invest in the Gigafactory? Note that debt was sold, debt that has to be repaid potentially in cash as opposed to just issuing shares which have no such requirement.
"I think with posting the truth, somehow, the real valuation will come to light."
As I recall, you were bullish on tsla and Tesla until sometime after it broke $100 then your tone changed. Suddenly, Tesla the company was evil and tsla the stock overvalued. You want EVs to win? Apparently not all EVs. Not Tesla. YOU have taken issue with a car as fast, as large and as expensive as the MS is.
As a friend of mine noted, it's one thing to be dishonest but it's worse to proclaim how honest one is while being dishonest. Dishonest may be a bit strong overall but disingenuous is not.
Article was written by Kohei Kondo for The Asahi Shimbun.
Yahoo kept deleting the post when I included some details. Bottom line per the article: contract is expected to be signed this month.
Article from July 4th.
I'll be disappointed if they are not back up at full production levels by the time of the cc. Whether the line is back up or not is an obvious question that should be asked during the cc so scheduling it before all work is completed is baffling. What's the source of your info?
MX retooling? That may be part of the reason for the shutdown but here's what was said on the cc which makes it sound like the conversion is at least as much to improve MS production efficiency:
"So, it actually will actually be taking the factory – the Fremont factory down for roughly days or so in July to convert inline, which enables a substantial increase in our production capacity on the vehicle side, as well as a labor house reduction. So it’s just fundamentally more efficient process."
"I think a single cost reduction with same Q4 this year would be related to labor and overhead, which I guess as mentioned earlier in the call we have a much more efficient production line that’s going to come online in July, which has more automation and its just set up in a better way and that’s making the car with greater labor efficiency is the biggest single improvement..."
Do you think that the body of the MX would be produced on the same line as the MS? Perhaps most of the "skateboard" could be but the body seems unlikely, no?
I'll be surprised if q2 results miss estimates by much if at all. As recently as early June they said everything was fine and q2 production was sold out. Actually, I think it was early May when they said q2 production was sold out. If there is going to be a miss or warning I'd expect it be for q3 or for 2014, not q2.
Another thought: what are the odds that they've moved the date up because they expect that the new assembly line will be up and running and they want to not only include that with the report but offer some specifics on it. Doesn't it seem less likely that they'd move up the q2 results if the line isn't or wouldn't be done by that time?
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) announces that it will post its financial results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2014, after market close on Thursday, July 31, 2014. At that time, Tesla will issue a brief advisory release containing a link to the Q2 2014 Shareholder Letter, available on the company website. Tesla management will hold a live question & answer webcast at 2:30pm Pacific Daylight Time (5:30pm Eastern Daylight Time) to discuss the Company's financial and business results and outlook.
The usual suspects will be sure the openings are mostly to replace people who have quit because they hated working for Tesla. While none of that is impossible, I believe it's more likely that they're hiring mostly to meet increased demand and also to expand geographically. How many companies hire or replace workers if business isn't good?
We'll find out who's right in about 3 weeks...
Granted while this is only 1 car, it is among the highest mileage MS' on the road if not THE highest. He posted a Tweet showing 90,464 miles on the car and 278 miles of range. He actually posted 2 pics saying that ideal and rated ranges are 278. I'm assuming that was an error and that actual is lower. Far, far better than many of the usual suspects here have proclaimed without anything to back it up.
Here's what Tesla has said on the topic:
"...we currently expect that the Tesla Roadster battery pack will retain approximately 70% of its ability to hold its initial charge after approximately 100,000 miles or seven years, which will result in a decrease to the vehicle’s initial range. In comparison with the Roadster battery pack, we expect that the retention rate of the Model S battery pack is greater, due to improvements at the battery cell and pack level."
What would the results from operations be in q1 if Tesla wasn't expanding stores and service centers and wasn't spending additional R&D on the MX? How about the hit due to the time differential between when a car manufactured for overseas delivery is completed and paid for?
Here is another way to look at Tesla's finances:
"We generated $61 million of cash flow from operations during the quarter. This was after consuming $63 million from increased inventory of in-transit finished vehicles built to specific customer orders".
"Typical attack dog liberal/progressive tactics. Can't argue the facts so you attack people who disagree with your socialist agenda."
These comments as well as much of your post reflect so much ignorance on your part and also validates my characterization of many Tesla/EV haters.
As I've posted numerous times, I'm a Republican, certainly not a liberal or socialist. My interest in EVs and Tesla has nothing to do with the environmental benefits but they are a plus.
Maybe it's your hatred, maybe it's ignorance but who's more anti-American: those who support a domestic car company that gets subsidies which will eventually end (unlike carried interest, it appears), which will be building a battery factory in the U.S., supporting more U.S. jobs and further increasing the proportion of the car that is U.S. sourced or someone like you, who'd prefer that the Tesla buyers instead purchase the MBs, BMWs and Audis that are not made in the U.S. and compete with it?
Can't understand how EVs will hurt Russia? Do some homework.
BTW when it comes to hating Elon, the jokes on you. Guys like you who ridicule the Hyperloop will be paying for something far, far worse if it doesn't succeed as will the rest of us. The true scam known as the California High Speed Rail project, currently projected to cost $69 billion and better characterized by your views on EVs, will be paid for by both state and federal funds ie taxpayers. There is little doubt that it will cost more than budgeted and will operate at a loss, requiring further state and federal funding. Elon has repeatedly and in no uncertain terms come out against this horrible project and came up with the idea of the Hyperloop as an alternative. California's democratic politicians have to date prevented the voters from voting on and ending this scam. Elon may be one of the few people that can get the Dems to back off as well as providing an alternative with huge potential if it works.
How did I make it seem like Tesla won the case? The topic I used was copy and pasted from the article that I quoted. By saying that the lawyer got something implies that he won the suit, not Tesla. For all of his antics and hyperbole, I did expect him to get more if he won but if the doctor's car was a stripped MS60 (as cssaxt pointed out) the lawyer didn't make out too bad.
"Tesla lost, it sold this guy a lemon."
Despite the outcome of the lawsuit, I'm not convinced the car was a lemon. I don't trust the doctor (you know he filed a similar claim on another car, right?) and I certainly don't trust that lawyer. OJ Simpson won his criminal case but...
BTW I have admitted it when I've been wrong and have apologized at least once. I don't recall seeing the long time, hyperactive negative posters doing anything along those lines-even when I've proven them wrong.
My enthusiasm for Tesla isn't just blind patriotism. It's based on my belief that Tesla's (and EV's) success are in the best interests of this country and the world aside from any environmental benefits. Ignoring profiting from the advance or decline of tsla the stock, would you disagree and if so why?
These are a couple of great posts. I'm not being facetious.
"The first adopters already have their cars. The next wave is the toughest. These are people NOT pre-disposed to buying/leasing an EV for any number of reasons. THIS is the market most difficult to overcome."
Good points. That's what advertising is for, no? And you may be right that no one currently at Tesla knows much or anything about TRPs, GRPS and/or ROS'. But isn't that why you'd hire an ad agency? Companies can outsource HR, IT, etc. so why not marketing? I think you said some car companies spend $1700/car on marketing. For my theoretical 9000 car demand boost, that would put the cost of the campaign at around $15.5 million, not a big deal.
I'd also note that since the 2012 introduction, much has changed that would make non-first adopters receptive to the MS. Improved finances, the Supercharger network, more service centers and nearly 2 years of real world feedback and reviews by various organizations (like Edmunds, CR, etc.) as well as owners should allay many concerns of many prospective buyers, a far cry from those who ordered the car years before the 2012 introduction and even those who ordered it 6 months after.
Almost completely agree. It seems to be a philosophical hatred that possesses the anti-Tesla crowd, short or not. Many hate the government subsidies and the mere fact that many on the left love EVs. I have some agreement with the anti-subsidy position but as a Republican (I think you said you're a Republican, maybe a Conservative) I don't fit their stereotype. I want Tesla the company to succeed not just because I'm a shareholder but because it'll be good for California and the U.S. while harming Russia, Iran, etc.
Who would want to be on the other side of that?
Where I disagree is in admiring their persistence. In many cases, I don't think it's persistence-it's more like a mania or psychosis driven by a deep hatred. The character assassination of Elon and Tesla, the number of posts, so many of which (the ones I read, which is a sampling of some that aren't on ignore yet or again) are old but reposted as current or are speculation or fabrication posted as fact, etc. are what you'd expect from someone who wants to demonize, not inform or become informed. Although he's not the sharpest knife in the drawer, consider tieisoptional and his multiple posts calling the MS a coal powered car even after he's been informed several times that that is misleading and inaccurate at best. I'd say it's false but you could come up with a (very) few % of MS' that are mostly powered by coal.
Characterizing everything that Elon and Tesla do as misleading, dishonest or for some ulterior motive is not persistence IMO, it's something far, far darker.
His Seeking Alpha profile pic was that of Charles Manson, complete with swastika tattoo. He changed it sometime after I called him out. Between this, the quantity and idiocy of his posts, you are being generous when asking if he's mentally handicapped. I haven't put him back on ignore (yet) but the few posts I preview are always the same dumb routine.
Good points. I thought he had at least an 85 but could be wrong.
BTW I appreciate the balance in your posts, like calling out the idiot trying to hype a $630 buyout.
Doesn't sound like "the king" got very much. Good riddance:
"MADISON, Wis. -- Tesla Motors has settled a lawsuit alleging the company sold a defective electric car to a Wisconsin doctor.
The deal calls for the California-based company to pay Franklin physician Robert Montgomery nearly $127,000 to cover the car's cost, his taxes and his attorney fees."
I'm not sure Gundlach actually made the comments about large cells, it may have been the author of the article. Also, Gundlach isn't an engineer, he's a bond guy so maybe he should be given some slack.
Regardless, here's what Elon said when discussing the 787's battery problems last year.
"So Mr Musk wants to see a conclusive fix. Here’s what he told Bloomberg TV today regarding the 787 Dreamliner and its challenges:
“The 787 batteries have very large cells, the battery cells are very big and they’re quite close together and there’s not enough insulation between the cells. So if one cell goes into thermal runaway and catches on fire, it’s going to cascade into the other cells.
The approach we take at Tesla and SpaceX is we have smaller battery cells with gaps between them, and we make sure that if there’s a thermal runaway event which creates quite a bit of fire and smoke that it directs that fire away from other cells, so you don’t have this domino effect….
The long term solution for having a battery pack that’s reliable and safe and lasts a long time is to reduce the size of the cells, and have more cells that are smaller and have bigger gaps and better thermal insulation between the cells.”
"Regarding the number of cells, is it your opinion that Leaf batteries are more prone to thermal runaway?"
Intuitively Elon's comments make sense to me and since I have no expertise in this area I'll defer to and agree with him and JB Straubel and say yes. Note that "more prone" doesn't mean unsafe.
What do you think?
Maybe not "one big battery" but how about the Volt or Leaf batteries? In the non-automotive category, the batteries for the Boeing 787? While it may be more accurate to say the batteries in the battery packs, isn't the basic idea accurate? Elon has said that using many smaller cells vs. fewer large ones provides better protection against thermal runaway.
"Anyway, the cost of a national advertising program is irrelevant."
"It's true that advertising does not provide guarantees, but their effectiveness can be measured statistically. Obviously all the other car manufacturers and many dealerships think they work...."
I agree. Apparently he thinks advertising only works for the conventional car biz. Google "seems" to be doing ok with advertising. Anyway I relied by saying:
"$150 million for a national campaign in 1990? Pretty much irrelevant. If you assume Tesla's U.S. sales pace is around 18,000/year, doing enough advertising to add only 9000 more cars/year (yes that's 50% but still only 9000 cars) wouldn't require a massive national campaign. On the contrary, increasing U.S. sales to 27,000/year would take up 55% of the planned year end capacity of 50,000 and would mean overseas delivery times would get unsatisfactorily longer. It would hurt Tesla, not help it."
"I agree that there's a limit as to how many people can afford a fully loaded P85. However, there are plenty of people that can afford the MS60 with the Supercharging option, for whom it would be a better choice than an equivalent ICE and yet they know nothing about it. I talk to many people who have never even heard of Tesla. These are the people for which an ad campaign would be effective."
BTW you might want to take him off ignore when Tesla beats his 27k unit forecast for 2014. It's bound to be entertaining to hear how he missed it.