tie, I seriously can't figure out if you're a fool or just trying to stir the pot. It seems very appropo to point out that the guy who asked the question about how long Elon would stay also said he was a "philosopher, a "level 2 genius" and asked to be co-CEO and when that was declined then asked for a seat on the board of directors.
Elon isn't confused. He talks, plans and acts like the physicist that he is. There may be someone who's confused but it's not Elon.
Yes and yes but that's not because of anything I heard at the meeting. The course has been pretty clear for some time: ramp up MS production, get the Model X finished and into production, begin work on the Gigafactory, continue work on Gen 3, release Gen 3. Elon said he didn't know what the demand limit would be (can't remember if he was referring to MS or MX) but would keep increasing until it was hit. He said quite some time ago that he didn't want to have a backlog, that he'd prefer people to be
able to get their car quickly after ordering.
Possible deviations from the course could include whatever Elon mentioned regarding Tesla's patents and maybe some other surprise deal. Doesn't appear we'll see improved batteries until Gen 3 despite the advancements that have been made since the MS was designed.
BTW re parking at the factory: the parking areas run the length of the factory, at least on the side that you can drive on. Signs say private property but no one seems to care. Anyway, there aren't just a couple hundred spaces-it's closer to 1000+ than 100 and I'd guess that there were several hundred more cars there than last year.
Lastly, there are over 1260 open positions at Tesla-the highest I've ever seen. All things considered, it's hard to see anything that indicates slowing sales or future expansion.
From a previous post, thanks for the warm introduction crocster.
Since the meeting can be seen online, not much for me to add but a few observations:
Fewer dumb questions this year (thankfully no one asked for the umpteenth time about solar panels on the roof).
The "4-5" year time frame that Elon will stay at the minimum is disconcerting albeit it's a long time away. Still...
Disappointed there was no date and location given of initial ground breaking of Gigafactory(s).
The "freeway" self driving feature which should be out in less than a year will be interesting.
I can't remember the exact phrasing but the initial version or something like that of Gen 3 should be out the end of 2016. Seems a bit earlier than we've been hearing although maybe the 2017 date bandied about relates to volume production.
The end of the deal with Toyota: never thought much of the RAV4 EV nor did buyers (and most here didn't like it either) but while that was one reason to end the program the other was that Toyota wanted a high volume car. Tesla can't supply enough battery packs for such a car as they don't even have enough batteries for their own cars. I think Elon said they'll revisit in a couple years.
While expectations up to now are for a 30% reduction in battery cost with the Gigafactory, Elon said that's looking conservative.
Did you enjoy the crazy guy who wanted to be CEO or at least given a seat on the board after telling Elon he was "also a level 2 genius"? Was already annoyed when he introduced himself as a "philosopher" and shareholder although he did initially ask a good question. However, he then went off the deep end and we gave him too much time IMO before we started grumbling to get him off the mic.
I drove by the Fremont plant again this year. While there were a lot of employee cars there last year, this time there were almost no, and I mean NO, open spaces. Can't put production numbers to it but Tesla has clearly hired a many more people.
The question about Gracias was asked at the meeting. Apparently the guy who asked it was sitting very close to Gracias so Elon handed the mic to him. You can watch the video but basically he said he was reducing the size in his fund by selling 25% of his position. Prudent risk management as mentioned in your post although not likely he'll get a bunch of options at a big discount. If he sells more in the near future at anything other than much higher prices we can discuss whether it's merely "risk management".
I haven't looked to see whether any or many options have been awarded at discounted strikes which I assume you mean beyond say 10% of the current price. I'd guess that most of the options that are being exercised at very prices were awarded when the stock...was at a very low price. Not much incentive in incentive options if they're too aggressively discounted.
Good post and I want to respond to some of the points with which agree and others that I see things differently but leaving for the shareholder meeting and am short on time. Will respond later.
I would somewhat disagree. Insomuch as the Volt and i3 are "hybrids", I prefer them to conventional hybrids because their engines function as generators, not motors, thereby removing some of the mechanical parts and complexity. I love my Volt and if GM had located the battery compartment as Tesla and BMW did at the bottom of the car which would provide more passenger space, increased battery size ie range by maybe 15 miles, I think the car would be selling far better.
I wonder how much the initial and but dead smear campaign against the car has and still affects sales. The "battery fire" stories should have resulted in legal action and repeated, profuse apologies by those who broadcast them.
I talked about cash that Tesla "suddenly" had? I brought up "new cash"? You "caught" me? With what? Where? I mentioned that Tesla has cash and that the balance sheet (and stockholders) are $200 million to the better in the most recent quarter. You'd dispute either comment?
"Musk is a retailer? IMO, he isn't. That much is clear. He sees zero interest in advertising."
Yep, I'm thoroughly confused. Tesla doesn't advertise because Elon has no interest in advertising, a viewpoint based on his philosophy irrespective of MS supply or demand? So he would be against doing some advertising if demand for the MS was far below Tesla's ability to produce the cars? If that's not what you're saying, can you or someone else bring it down to my level?
Cash on hand, roughly $2.4 billion, is more than convertible debt ($590 million) and long-term debt ($1.52 billion) combined.
Isn't that more significant and in context than "The sum of the cash on hand right now is less than the sum total of the three bond issuances."?
"But that number is going to be whittled down somewhat fast going through the next three quarters."
Tesla said just 3 weeks ago that for the year they would be "slightly" cash flow negative. At the time of the statement, they would likely have visibility through the first 6 months of the year so what do you see that they don't for the next 6 months?
Never thought the characterization was directed specifically at me but regardless while no apology is necessary, it was very classy of you to offer one. It's not lost on me that it comes after my harsh criticisms of some of your posts. I've ended some of these posts with "you're better than this" and your post shows it.
I agree with much of your 2nd paragraph and would like to end on a somewhat tongue in cheek note with a quote from that "famous philosopher" Rodney King:
"Can't we all get along?"
It's not clear that the battery was completely drained when he the REX kicked and was driving at highway speeds. That's critical.
Here's what he said:
"...after a few minutes I realized the bar graph that showed the battery's state of charge had stopped falling. That meant the REx range extender must be holding the battery charge at a steady state."
If the battery's state of charge "had stopped falling", it would imply that the battery wasn't completely drained.
Here's what was said in an earlier review, also on the same website:
"According to the reviewer, the car slowed to just 44 mph or so heading up an incline, proving an impediment to even heavy commercial trucks that are limited to 56 mph in the UK.
Once it return to flat roads, the car crept slowly back up to motorway speeds.
The reason is simple, as BMW explains. When charge in the battery pack falls too low, the car prioritizes boosting the battery during range-extended mode, rather than maintaining performance.
But that may be little consolation if you're attempting a longer journey.
What the journalist should have done, says BMW, is engage the range-extender when there's still 30 to 40 percent of the charge left in the battery. That way, it's always kept topped-up and consistent performance is maintained for longer.
That's all very well, but what you end up with is a zero-emission electric car whose electric range is compromised by the need to use the range extender much earlier if the i3's performance is to stay consistent."
For city driving, which was the main intention for the i3, it's totally fine. I test drove it 5 months ago and liked the car. But 60mph on longer highway trips won't cut it for many of us. Also, uphills, headwinds or running the AC or heater will modestly to severely impact speed and range.
I think the i3 is more competition for the Leaf, maybe the Volt, the plug in Prius or some of the other Ford/GM plug ins. Not convinced that it'll pull sales from Tesla but we'll see.
Yeah, it could be those. For everyone else, it's the Panasonic agreement as n0m0renancy noted which can be viewed with various figures redacted.
Your SEC "source" wasn't able to provide more info?
"You see what happens when people start hiding #$%$? People like me start speculating...."
In a similar spirit, you should post your full name, employer, SS#, address and mother's maiden name on this board so we can verify that you're not working for or part of some nefarious group or company.
As you would say, when I think of popular cars I won't think about the ELR.
BTW enjoyed the "BMW and MB are joining forces" topic!
"What is there to decipher? The monies are nothing more than the "fruits" of taking on much more massive debt."
Um, Mr. Balance Sheet Expert, so you're saying if Tesla borrows $1 billion, stockholder equity would increase by $1 billion? No debits and credits? No liabilities and assets?
"I'm not going to get into the advantages/disadvantages of advertising. Obviously you don't understand the concept. Nor do you have a grasp of Musk's philosophy as it pertains to retailing. You REALLY don't understand it."
I dunno, isn't it to attract more business? Does that mean that Elon's philosophy is NOT to attract more customers to a business that, according to you, has falling and/or inadequate demand? I'm clearly not as smart as you so can you explain it so even a simpleton or "low information type" as n0m0renancy would describe me can understand it?
"Nobody needs 85kWh on board."
" People buy performance cars knowing they have the power at hand but hardly ever use it. It is greed, not necessity."
Air conditioning? Unnecessary.
Heating? Greed. Put on a jacket.
Anything larger than a 300 square foot house? Gluttony.
Income over $40,000? All 3 of the above.
I wonder how many of those that hate Telsa, of which a good number are right of center politically, actually agree with your views.
You drive a Volt, not the Smart Car. Hypocrisy, no?
"I suspect you well know that Musk selling share one would be a terrible signal and roil the market."
I agree but only because he explicitly said at the last shareholder meeting that he'd be "the last one out". I'd have preferred that he not have made that commitment and sold enough shares to avoid any loans. I think a one-time sale of say $400 million would only cause a short term hit. It wouldn't sway me if there weren't other sales behind it.
Do you know if any of the loans were used for SpaceX or conversely were used to return the funds he invested in SpaceX? I don't know how much of his own money went into it but with no plans to go public perhaps the loans are a means to get back his own capital. The $88 million net he "pocketed" could possibly represent his original investment in SpaceX and if this is the case, he has yet to personally profit from either venture.
Elon's has a big payday coming when a large block of options that have been granted become vested. The milestones to achieve this include a number of items that the skeptics say will never happen, to severely understate it.
I look forward to the vesting of each tranche.
It's interesting how you note my comment, which I stand by, and offer it for "a more complete perspective" under a new topic while not mentioning that it was in reply to a different topic of yours nor did you respond to the original topic which would have kept it in context:
"n0m0renancy • May 29, 2014 12:54 PM
More Insider Dumping
Director Gracias just made an additional 20,000 shares available to the market. As a Director he has access to inside information but he can trade on it (and you can't) because he filed a 10b5 plan at the end of February.
What does he know that you don't?"
to which I replied:
“The largest single shareholder, with the most "inside" information, …that hasn't sold any shares is Elon Musk. He's also the one that bought stock and bonds during an offering in the $90s and did so in an amount larger than many of the directors and employees combined.”
Hmm, "what does he know that you don't"? Director Gracias or Elon Musk? Who knows more about the company and it's prospects?
..." low information types..."
If the i3 was 1/3 the price of the Tesla you were looking at, it wasn't the base model so the comparison is a bit off.
More importantly, the rated range with extender cannot be achieved while driving at highway speeds so if you're going on a long trip, forget averaging 60 mph especially if there are hills.
The i3 is fine for the city but not interstate trips.
Perhaps you can decipher the sequential $240 million increase in stockholder equity. I mean, with the company doing so poorly and the lack of funds (according to you) to advertise, this would seem to indicate that perhaps you didn't bother to "decipher" the balance sheet.