Mega Thread for Tesla Investors

Reminds me of the investors' discussion on the old TheEEStory forum. Investors frequently professed happiness when the stock price went down, because (they said) that meant it was an advantageous time to buy more!

Stock investors -- and I mean actual investors, not short sellers: Pleased when the price goes up, pleased when it goes down. A very easy to please bunch!

 

Hmmmm. In comments to the IEVs news stories on this subject, one person said he viewed moving all sales online as an experiment, and he wouldn't be surprised to see Tesla decide to keep some stores open or to re-open some closed stores. Let's see, who was that? Oh yeah, that was me!

But more importantly, Mr. Shorty Pants, I see you didn't bother to report that other Tesla related news from Electrek; that the estimated U.S. delivery time for a Model 3 has jumped from 2 to 4 weeks, to now “6 to 8 weeks”.

Tesla pushes delivery timeline for new standard Model 3 orders as demand soars

What was it that false narrative you keep pushing, about "falliing demand for the Model 3"? But that's okay; nobody expects you to admit you are wrong about any of the pravduh you post here.

​

 

My current plan is to change the ratio:

• 40% (KL) to 60% (TSLA) by March 26, 2019
• dilute TSLA by or on April 2, 2019 to cover the Model 3 purchase

Bob Wilson

 

I want to make it clear, I have NO interest in a Model Y.

1. I have already sent $2.5K down payment on our next car, a Model 3.
2. I have no interest in a Tesla or any other SUV/CUV car ... NONE!

Bob Wilson

 

Darn! I'll have to sacrifice my $2.5 deposit.

You are f*cked.

Bob Wilson

 

Agreed! I wish there had been another way to get back to facts and data.

Bob Wilson

 

I don't know that I an informed opinion on this particular subject, since I'm not an investor and since I treasure my ignorance of financial matters.

But one thing that I do see repeated a lot by those who seem (to my admittedly somewhat pro-Tesla viewpoint) reasonably well informed and at least somewhat objective on the performance of Tesla's stock, is that the average level of the stock price, consistently so far above what the enterprise value would be, is less of a reflection of what investors think about Tesla's current corporate performance, and more a reflection of what they see as Tesla's potential market will, or at least may, grow to be over the next few years.

So if TSLA hasn't been as buoyed up by the turn to what appears to be solid profitability, perhaps that's because there is an increasing awareness that the window of time in which Tesla can rapidly expand its market without any real competition, is closing. It looks to me like Tesla won't substantially increase its production this year, because the Fremont assembly plant is more than maxed out (why else would Tesla put partial assembly lines under tents in the parking lot?), and neither the Shanghai Gigafactory nor automotive assembly lines installed to produce the Model Y at Gigafactory 1 in Nevada, will be producing in high volume this year. (There is a dark horse candidate here: In comments to IEVs news articles, Nix keeps pointing out that Tesla plans a major expansion at Fremont. Okay, but Tesla's own guidance for this year doesn't indicate the significant increase in production that Nix's remarks suggest.)

Next year is 2020, when reportedly, multiple legacy auto makers will be offering multiple plug-in EV models. And from the way they're talking, it seems reasonable to suppose that at least a few of those models -- from Volkswagen, if nobody else -- will be aimed at volume production and volume sales. So it looks like Tesla will start getting some serious competition starting next year. As an EV advocate, I look forward to that! ...even tho it won't be good for Tesla's stock price.

Of course, Elon's somewhat erratic behavior isn't helping investor confidence. I don't mean Elon taking a single drag off a doobie offered to him by the host of a marathon late-night podcast; it amazes me that that story lasted more than a day. No, I mean behaviors which cause a reasonable person to seriously question Elon's fitness to be the day-to-day CEO of a large and growing multi-billion dollar company like Tesla Inc. -- make that multiple tens of billions of revenue per year; most notably Elon's inability to filter his own remarks on Twitter, as well as disrespecting in a rather public way the SEC and disrespecting the agreement that he made with the SEC, over the very ill-advised remarks about Tesla financing which he infamously blurted out on Twitter.

Still, reading remarks from various sources, I think most investors still think Tesla is better off with Elon than without him. I have to agree that with very nearly anyone else on Earth at the helm, Tesla would likely have gone bankrupt years ago, or at best would be a tiny boutique auto maker, with very modest plans for year-on-year growth. Under just about anyone else, Tesla would at best be dreaming of becoming as big as Porsche, instead of dreaming of becoming as big as GM or Toyota or Volkswagen... or even bigger!

 

Just having an EV design without battery production and charging network is not enough. Without ore-to-cell manufacturing, a car maker is just making gliders at the pleasure of the battery maker(s). The battery maker is free to sell to whoever makes them profitable. There have been reports that Panasonic is not making any money from the Gigafactory operation.

Although 90% of EV miles can be handled by home and local retail chargers, the remaining 10%, cross country, really needs a network of fast DC chargers. Yet dealers who have chargers are usually under-rated, L2, and worse, locked up at night. Neither the dealers nor the manufacturers have figured this out ... only Tesla.

I identify with Elon who like many brilliant people I've known have often been rascals to deal with. No doubt, I have shared some of his habits BUT it is because we're fascinated by technology. When given a puzzle, we disconnect from anything but the problem in front of us. We also are confused by those who do not share our passion for the problem.

What surprises me are the number of pretenders who think 'any businessman could do better.' I'm also reminded of John Sculley who almost sank Apple. Jack Welch started the dismantling of General Electric when I worked there. Then there are the "Vulture Capitalists" who are chomping at the bit to take Tesla apart because they don't share Elon's vision.

Bob Wilson

 

My counter-cyclical gold mining stock, KL, was down. I was hoping to convert another 5% of my stock from KL to TSLA. Oh well ... there is the SEC 'contempt' hearing due today.

Bob Wilson

 

"What the heck?" indeed!

There was a torrent of almost entirely negative comments today to the IEVs News article about Tesla walking back its decision to close all its stores, and to raise prices by 3% on all Tesla cars except the base $35k TM3. A torrent of comments mostly along the line of "chaos at Tesla" and "Elon is clueless".

So it's doubly surprising to me that the stock price actually went up today. Perhaps most investors took the rather calmer view of things that I did? The view that Tesla raising prices is an indication of significantly increased demand... which is very positive news!

My reaction to the news a week or two ago about Tesla announcing plans to close most of its Stores and convert the remaining ones to Galleries, was "This is an experiment, and I won't be surprised if Tesla re-opens some of the stores it will be closing." Of course I was as surprised as anyone when Tesla abruptly walked back the plan before actually closing many Stores, but I was only surprised at the timing -- not at the change in business plans.

 

I think long term, by which I mean the outlook for more than just the next 5 years, all major auto makers are going to have their own battery factories... by which I mean, they will partner with battery cell makers to build high volume factories whose output is controlled by the auto maker, not by the cell maker. Quite clearly cell makers are not willing to build new production any faster than they get confirmed orders, and that's not expanding supply nearly fast enough for the now-exponential growth of the EV market.

However, in the short term, VW has committed many billions of dollars to secure what appears to be a high volume of batteries over the coming few years. That may be only a stopgap measure, but at least it does show a real commitment, which (other than Tesla) no other auto maker outside China has done.

Things likely will be different in China, where the government provides massive subsidies to industries, and it looks to me like China has a national strategy to corner the market on EV batteries, as they previously accomplished with solar panels. With massive subsidies, it may be that Chinese battery cell makers can keep up with rapidly rising demand over the next few years, so perhaps auto makers building their own battery cell factories there won't be necessary.

* * * * *
Here's hoping that China won't be as successful at creating an international monopoly this time; I hope that at least the S. Korean battery cell makers, if not also Panasonic and other Japanese cell makers, as well as companies in other countries, can find a way to compete successfully. Admittedly that's going to be very difficult, but I can still hope!

 

IMHO, Maxwell technology under Tesla direction may break the Asian battery monopoly. Their polymer binder has some excellent properties:
http://biz.maxell.com/en/rechargeable_batteries/knowledge_core_technology_maxell_batteries.html



Bob Wilson

 

On second thought, that was unfair of me. Nissan has spent at least a middling amount of money (in an industry where investments are measured in billions of dollars) on building AESC battery factories for the Leaf. Sadly, Nissan chose the wrong battery cell making partner -- NEC -- and wound up with inferior battery cells. So, it's not merely a matter of auto makers spending the money to build battery cell factories whose output they control; they must also choose the right cell maker to partner with.

​