The Money Mustache Community

Learning, Sharing, and Teaching => Investor Alley => Topic started by: webcat86 on May 05, 2016, 12:20:31 PM

Title: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: webcat86 on May 05, 2016, 12:20:31 PM
As the title says really. Now that they're hitting the mass market and have obvious differentiation to the rest of the market in a way that is quite convincing they won't be copied or shut out of the market, I'm tempted to pick up a few shares. Although they've averaged similar prices to now for a couple of years they do still seem expensive, which is my main reservation. On the other hand there's clearly plenty of potential upside.

And just to be clear, this will be a lump sum investment to be held long term. So it's not a short-term gamble on an individual stock, which I won't do.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Dollar Slice on May 05, 2016, 12:24:04 PM
I have a little bit (10 shares) just for fun. It's been so up and down lately I feel like I should dump it just for giving me stress... :-) 
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 05, 2016, 12:33:44 PM
I think it would be a bad investment. It's overpriced. It's also highly speculative. A lot of things would have to go really right for it to grow into the valuation that the stock currently has. If you want to buy a share for fun, OK. But don't do it as an investment.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: MissNancyPryor on May 05, 2016, 12:38:39 PM
Bought some in fall 2013 at $176.  While cool, it isn't about the car, it is about the batteries.  If they can contine to improve that technology they will be able to make so much "green" technology viable. 
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: webcat86 on May 05, 2016, 12:46:59 PM
Bought some in fall 2013 at $176.  Whole cool, it isn't about the car, it is about the batteries.  If they can contine to improve that technology they will be able to make so much "green" technology viable.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Their current achievement shows they're more than about the car, so even if that falls they'll continue. Like Samsung supplies Apple with phone screens, Tesla could conceivably supply batteries to other manufacturers or make the super chargers etc
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: webcat86 on May 05, 2016, 12:47:38 PM
I think it would be a bad investment. It's overpriced. It's also highly speculative. A lot of things would have to go really right for it to grow into the valuation that the stock currently has. If you want to buy a share for fun, OK. But don't do it as an investment.

It'd be a 20-30 year horizon hold unless there was a reason within that time to sell up
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: zephyr911 on May 05, 2016, 12:50:13 PM
Very speculative. I bought 10 shares at $100 and sold at $140, happy to collect a small profit and leave the volatility to others. Don't regret it.

I love what the company is doing, but the stock valuation is insane - up or down 5-10% on even minor news just isn't my cup of tea. To the extent that I do buy individual stocks, they tend to be more predictable ones with more tangible value to stabilize prices.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: webcat86 on May 05, 2016, 12:59:36 PM
Very speculative. I bought 10 shares at $100 and sold at $140, happy to collect a small profit and leave the volatility to others. Don't regret it.

I love what the company is doing, but the stock valuation is insane - up or down 5-10% on even minor news just isn't my cup of tea. To the extent that I do buy individual stocks, they tend to be more predictable ones with more tangible value to stabilize prices.

The valuation is definitely mad. But when would it come down? The reaction to the tesla 3 was amazing
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Abe on May 05, 2016, 01:02:05 PM
I bought some shares and haven't looked at the price until this post...made a 50% profit! I'll leave it for now, maybe they'll start paying dividends in 50 years. All my real long-term investing is in broad-based portfolios.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 05, 2016, 01:06:51 PM
Bought some in fall 2013 at $176.  Whole cool, it isn't about the car, it is about the batteries.  If they can contine to improve that technology they will be able to make so much "green" technology viable.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Their current achievement shows they're more than about the car, so even if that falls they'll continue. Like Samsung supplies Apple with phone screens, Tesla could conceivably supply batteries to other manufacturers or make the super chargers etc

Batteries will be a capital-intensive, low-margin, commodity business. Tesla is priced like a mega-growth industry disruptor. If they just turn into a battery factory, the shares will drop 90%. Tesla's upsides would be 1) a valuable brand (but others have good brands too), 2) autonomous driving technology (but Apple, Google, and a number of car manufacturers are also developing this), and 3) a first-mover advantage. But first movers often aren't the ones who make bank on a new industry. Google was maybe the 10th major search engine. Apple wasn't the first to make phones. Microsoft wasn't the first software company. Etc. The firms that make a ton of money are the ones that come along and transform it and do it better. It's much easier to improve an existing idea than create something from scratch. And anything Tesla does that is successful will be copied by others.

Very speculative. I bought 10 shares at $100 and sold at $140, happy to collect a small profit and leave the volatility to others. Don't regret it.

I love what the company is doing, but the stock valuation is insane - up or down 5-10% on even minor news just isn't my cup of tea. To the extent that I do buy individual stocks, they tend to be more predictable ones with more tangible value to stabilize prices.

The valuation is definitely mad. But when would it come down? The reaction to the tesla 3 was amazing

It may not come down. But they probably will need to raise $1.5 billion soon for capital expenditures. That will probably be an equity raise (selling a ton more stock, and diluting existing shareholders). So that could be one catalyst. But it could also just sit at that valuation for a long time (in which case, bonds would be better). Or it could hang out at that valuation until there are delays with the model 3 (and there will be delays) or some other bad news comes out and people lose faith. Or people begin to buy Bolts or Leafs with bigger batteries, etc. There are many negative catalysts pending.

People also don't realize yet that Powerwall is a failure. The batteries are just too expensive for it to be a viable product yet. Maybe in 5 or 15 years.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: zephyr911 on May 05, 2016, 01:16:01 PM

The valuation is definitely mad. But when would it come down? The reaction to the tesla 3 was amazing

Pretty well answered by forummm there. I can only add this: I can't say if it's overvalued or undervalued, and neither can the analysts. Look at the price targets. I wish them nothing but success, and I plan on owning their product eventually (subject to the right financial achievements first) but I don't have the stomach to pin my fortunes to that rollercoaster.

My latest buys are power production companies I've watched for years as they manage finances conservatively, add high-quality income-producing assets at good prices, and consistently grow their income while maintaining a cushion for hard times. Neither one will ever double in a year, but they'll probably still be steadily increasing dividends when you and I are dead.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: webcat86 on May 05, 2016, 01:16:13 PM
Bought some in fall 2013 at $176.  Whole cool, it isn't about the car, it is about the batteries.  If they can contine to improve that technology they will be able to make so much "green" technology viable.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Their current achievement shows they're more than about the car, so even if that falls they'll continue. Like Samsung supplies Apple with phone screens, Tesla could conceivably supply batteries to other manufacturers or make the super chargers etc

Batteries will be a capital-intensive, low-margin, commodity business. Tesla is priced like a mega-growth industry disruptor. If they just turn into a battery factory, the shares will drop 90%. Tesla's upsides would be 1) a valuable brand (but others have good brands too), 2) autonomous driving technology (but Apple, Google, and a number of car manufacturers are also developing this), and 3) a first-mover advantage. But first movers often aren't the ones who make bank on a new industry. Google was maybe the 10th major search engine. Apple wasn't the first to make phones. Microsoft wasn't the first software company. Etc. The firms that make a ton of money are the ones that come along and transform it and do it better. It's much easier to improve an existing idea than create something from scratch. And anything Tesla does that is successful will be copied by others.

Very speculative. I bought 10 shares at $100 and sold at $140, happy to collect a small profit and leave the volatility to others. Don't regret it.

I love what the company is doing, but the stock valuation is insane - up or down 5-10% on even minor news just isn't my cup of tea. To the extent that I do buy individual stocks, they tend to be more predictable ones with more tangible value to stabilize prices.

The valuation is definitely mad. But when would it come down? The reaction to the tesla 3 was amazing

It may not come down. But they probably will need to raise $1.5 billion soon for capital expenditures. That will probably be an equity raise (selling a ton more stock, and diluting existing shareholders). So that could be one catalyst. But it could also just sit at that valuation for a long time (in which case, bonds would be better). Or it could hang out at that valuation until there are delays with the model 3 (and there will be delays) or some other bad news comes out and people lose faith. Or people begin to buy Bolts or Leafs with bigger batteries, etc. There are many negative catalysts pending.

People also don't realize yet that Powerwall is a failure. The batteries are just too expensive for it to be a viable product yet. Maybe in 5 or 15 years.

All true, but equally Tesla aren't the first electric car makers, and they are doing it better than the competition. They also have clear advantages - the superchargers being one obvious one. And they're the first company to make a model that has been well received by the mainstream and doesn't compromise on performance or style. From that perspective all the ducks are in a row for me.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: webcat86 on May 05, 2016, 01:18:43 PM

The valuation is definitely mad. But when would it come down? The reaction to the tesla 3 was amazing

Pretty well answered by forummm there. I can only add this: I can't say if it's overvalued or undervalued, and neither can the analysts. Look at the price targets. I wish them nothing but success, and I plan on owning their product eventually (subject to the right financial achievements first) but I don't have the stomach to pin my fortunes to that rollercoaster.

My latest buys are power production companies I've watched for years as they manage finances conservatively, add high-quality income-producing assets at good prices, and consistently grow their income while maintaining a cushion for hard times. Neither one will ever double in a year, but they'll probably still be steadily increasing dividends when you and I are dead.

Yeah there's no way I could pin my fortunes to it. I'm willing to take a punt as a side "gamble" though.

How do you find and monitor those companies?
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: zephyr911 on May 05, 2016, 01:34:48 PM
I read about things that matter to me and take note of the tickers that stick out. Most things stay in my watch list a long time - reading earnings calls, getting a feel for management philosophy, etc. The two in question are BEP (first buy after years of thinking about it) and PEGI (small stake for 2+ yrs, added on lower price and rising dividend). Due diligence is everything.

Tesla is indeed a fun gamble if you like to watch your value fluctuate. Don't put in anything you wouldn't lay on a blackjack table, and you'll be fine.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: webcat86 on May 05, 2016, 01:40:04 PM
I read about things that matter to me and take note of the tickers that stick out. Most things stay in my watch list a long time - reading earnings calls, getting a feel for management philosophy, etc. The two in question are BEP (first buy after years of thinking about it) and PEGI (small stake for 2+ yrs, added on lower price and rising dividend). Due diligence is everything.

Tesla is indeed a fun gamble if you like to watch your value fluctuate. Don't put in anything you wouldn't lay on a blackjack table, and you'll be fine.
Yeah I'd even be tempted to sell early - if they go up 50% I might decide to count my blessings and cash out rather than risk a plunge a year later
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Dollar Slice on May 05, 2016, 01:42:57 PM
Tesla is indeed a fun gamble if you like to watch your value fluctuate. Don't put in anything you wouldn't lay on a blackjack table, and you'll be fine.

I think it's sort of a lottery ticket type investment, but with less risk. There's a decent chance you'll keep up with the market. There's a large chance you will not lose all your money. But you buy a few shares with the hope that it really blows up and will end up worth a small fortune.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: AlanStache on May 05, 2016, 01:49:38 PM
re PowerWall, just found this
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-04/tesla-powerwalls-for-home-energy-storage-are-hitting-u-s-market (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-04/tesla-powerwalls-for-home-energy-storage-are-hitting-u-s-market)

3k$ (before instillation) for a 6.4-kilowatt-hour  system.  That is a relatively small capacity compared to average monthly usages, but then how much of the high usage is due to AC running when it it sunny out and you dont need a battery to store your roof top solar.  The pw seems much more a niche or fashon product now than something joe-6-pack needs.  But as with most tech prices will come down and function will go up with time.

re Tesla: had some fun with it years ago, walked away +500$ish.  Not worth the effort.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Koogie on May 05, 2016, 01:51:02 PM
"anyone invested in tesla?"

Only emotionally.... :o)

FWIW, I read the recent Elon Musk biography.  I bit by the numbers but a good read nonetheless...
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: capitalninja on May 05, 2016, 01:59:35 PM
Tesla doesn't pay a dividend so no.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: webcat86 on May 05, 2016, 02:05:30 PM
Tesla doesn't pay a dividend so no.
Suits me. Reinvesting the money to change the world rather than paying out to shareholders too early
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: zephyr911 on May 05, 2016, 02:06:11 PM
"anyone invested in tesla?"

Only emotionally.... :o)
+1

I have hosted a few range-anxious Model S owners in my driveway, as I live in the middle of a big hole in the Supercharger network and have the only free publicly advertised (http://www.plugshare.com/) 40-amp vehicle charger in my county (TM roadside assistance even sent one of them). I never get tired of looking at those things.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Seppia on May 05, 2016, 03:26:48 PM
Any time you can invest in a company that loses money every time they sell a car, who trades for 28 times book value and more than 6 times their total sales and who hasn't delivered a single product in time you basically have to.

I think there's a better chance of tesla being a Ponzi scheme than a good investment to be honest.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: MissNancyPryor on May 05, 2016, 03:35:41 PM
I heard a rumor that Apple might buy Tesla, they have oodles of cash and want to do cars.  Thoughts?  Discuss. 
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Seppia on May 05, 2016, 03:40:13 PM
Wow, that would make a giant conglomerate of TWO stocks I would not touch with a pole!

They just have to subsequently merge with Twitter, take Uber public and merge with them too and we're golden :)
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: dandarc on May 05, 2016, 03:54:28 PM
Wow, that would make a giant conglomerate of TWO stocks I would not touch with a pole!

They just have to subsequently merge with Twitter, take Uber public and merge with them too and we're golden :)
One way to get to a Vertically-Integrated Self driving taxi service that's "cool" - just like MMM predicted in his Tesla article.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Heckler on May 06, 2016, 08:04:34 AM
Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?

Yes.  And Apple. and Google. And Ford. And GM. and Walmart.  And First National Bank.  And....
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: workathomedad on May 06, 2016, 08:56:09 AM
I would consider investing in them via the 35k automobile, if the credit was still available (equivalent to a 20k+ deduction in my bracket) someday!
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: zephyr911 on May 06, 2016, 09:12:22 AM
Any time you can invest in a company that loses money every time they sell a car, who trades for 28 times book value and more than 6 times their total sales and who hasn't delivered a single product in time you basically have to.

I think there's a better chance of tesla being a Ponzi scheme than a good investment to be honest.

I realize not everyone knows how to Google "Model S gross margin" (http://bfy.tw/5dEN), but I generally assume the average MMM'er does.

Criticism is great, and quantitative criticism is even better, but sticking to legitimate ones is recommended for the sake of credibility.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: effigy98 on May 06, 2016, 12:41:37 PM
I really like Tesla longterm as a power distribution company, the cars are just icing on the cake. However, I really want a lower entry point in the mid 100s, not sure if I can see that again but fingers crossed.
Title: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Seppia on May 06, 2016, 02:14:40 PM
Any time you can invest in a company that loses money every time they sell a car, who trades for 28 times book value and more than 6 times their total sales and who hasn't delivered a single product in time you basically have to.

I think there's a better chance of tesla being a Ponzi scheme than a good investment to be honest.

I realize not everyone knows how to Google "Model S gross margin" (http://bfy.tw/5dEN), but I generally assume the average MMM'er does.

Criticism is great, and quantitative criticism is even better, but sticking to legitimate ones is recommended for the sake of credibility.


Excuse me?
I admire you a lot on this forum but this comment doesn't make any sense.
Do you take advertisement expenses out of GM profitability because "they don't count on the margin made on a car"?

My statement about "losing money every time they sell a car" is maybe factually incorrect (assuming you mean just on a "product margin" level) and I could acknowledge so

Tesla is still selling for 28 times book value, 6 times sales and is currently losing money

And oh, is taking reservations on models that are not to be available in the foreseeable short term future.

You are possibly correct they do not have a negative product margin on every car they sell (which doesn't mean they don't lose money btw), but it still looks like a terrible terrible investment to me.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Driko on May 06, 2016, 08:08:45 PM
The CEO has said he doesn't care if the company bankrupts as long as EVs take over the market. That's why he is giving the tech away to the big car companies. He has a greater vision to do away with fossil fuel vehicles. That is the main reason I wouldn't invest with the company. I do love the vision and I probably will buy a tesla in the future, but as an investment it seems way too risky.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: a1smith on May 06, 2016, 08:56:37 PM
I heard a rumor that Apple might buy Tesla, they have oodles of cash and want to do cars.  Thoughts?  Discuss.

They already have their own EV program.  I doubt they are interested.  Plus, there are people saying that if Apple and Tesla come together that Musk should be CEO.  I don't think Apple's board or Cook would allow that.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: a1smith on May 06, 2016, 09:06:13 PM
I really like Tesla longterm as a power distribution company, the cars are just icing on the cake. However, I really want a lower entry point in the mid 100s, not sure if I can see that again but fingers crossed.

At the rate it has been dropping since their "Ludicrous" Q1 conference call (and even before) you might not have to wait very long.  Just in the last 5 days it has dropped about 10%.  It's dropped about 20% since April 6th which was right after the Model 3 reveal.    People are growing tired of EM hype, overpromises, etc. and they are also disappointed that there is going to be dilution from a capital raise that just months ago Tesla said wasn't necessary.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: a1smith on May 06, 2016, 09:23:29 PM
I read about things that matter to me and take note of the tickers that stick out. Most things stay in my watch list a long time - reading earnings calls, getting a feel for management philosophy, etc. The two in question are BEP (first buy after years of thinking about it) and PEGI (small stake for 2+ yrs, added on lower price and rising dividend). Due diligence is everything.

Tesla is indeed a fun gamble if you like to watch your value fluctuate. Don't put in anything you wouldn't lay on a blackjack table, and you'll be fine.
Yeah I'd even be tempted to sell early - if they go up 50% I might decide to count my blessings and cash out rather than risk a plunge a year later

Ok, you lost me on that comment.  You're buying Tesla with a 20-30 year investment horizon but you'll sell it if it goes up 50%?!?!  For LT investments with that kind of horizon I would be planning on more return.  For example, I have some MO I bought 11/25/2009 and it is up 3.23X (223%); that's just price appreciation and doesn't include return from dividends.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: a1smith on May 06, 2016, 09:58:07 PM
The CEO has said he doesn't care if the company bankrupts as long as EVs take over the market. That's why he is giving the tech away to the big car companies. He has a greater vision to do away with fossil fuel vehicles. That is the main reason I wouldn't invest with the company. I do love the vision and I probably will buy a tesla in the future, but as an investment it seems way too risky.

Well, maybe Elon Musk should ask the investors what they think about the company going bankrupt; my bet is they do care.

In my opinion, the IP he gave away was a big publicity stunt.  Tesla has a grand total of 254 patents (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=tesla+motors&FIELD1=ASNM&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=PTXT).  To list just one example, GM was granted 1643 patents (http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2014/May/0523-patents.html..html) in 2013.  Also,
Quote
“GM is the only company to have achieved the No. 1 position 11 consecutive times in the Patent Board’s Automotive and Transportation industry ranking,” said Karl R. Wilhelm, chief executive officer of the Patent Board. “GM’s contribution to innovation in its industry has clearly put it ahead of its competitors.”

An amusing Tesla patent is 8,572,837.  It discusses a method of making a rotor for an electric motor.  It mentions braising parts.  I guess the Tesla engineers and/or the patent attorneys don't know the difference between braising (cooking) and brazing (metal joining). Hey Elon, what's for lunch?  :-D

And finally, here is a Reuters article that shows that perception doesn't always match reality - Automakers, not Silicon Valley, lead in driverless car patents: study (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-tech-ces-autos-idUSKBN0UJ1UD20160105)
Quote
Toyota is, far and away, the global leader in the number of self-driving car patents, the report found. Toyota is followed by Germany’s Robert Bosch GmbH [ROBG.UL], Japan’s Denso Corp (6902.T), Korea’s Hyundai Motor Co (005380.KS) and General Motors Co (GM.N). The tech company with the most autonomous-driving patents, Alphabet Inc's (GOOGL.O) Google, ranks 26th on the list.

Edit - added quote from Reuters article
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: webcat86 on May 07, 2016, 12:46:27 AM
I read about things that matter to me and take note of the tickers that stick out. Most things stay in my watch list a long time - reading earnings calls, getting a feel for management philosophy, etc. The two in question are BEP (first buy after years of thinking about it) and PEGI (small stake for 2+ yrs, added on lower price and rising dividend). Due diligence is everything.

Tesla is indeed a fun gamble if you like to watch your value fluctuate. Don't put in anything you wouldn't lay on a blackjack table, and you'll be fine.
Yeah I'd even be tempted to sell early - if they go up 50% I might decide to count my blessings and cash out rather than risk a plunge a year later

Ok, you lost me on that comment.  You're buying Tesla with a 20-30 year investment horizon but you'll sell it if it goes up 50%?!?!  For LT investments with that kind of horizon I would be planning on more return.  For example, I have some MO I bought 11/25/2009 and it is up 3.23X (223%); that's just price appreciation and doesn't include return from dividends.

No just thinking out loud based on what's been mentioned here about the company volatility.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: libertarian4321 on May 07, 2016, 04:58:31 AM
I'm not an investor, but my wife did order a Model 3.  Number 452,657 on the list.  Or something like that.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: a1smith on May 07, 2016, 07:19:36 AM
I'm not an investor, but my wife did order a Model 3.  Number 452,657 on the list.  Or something like that.

Can you double check that number and post it?  Tesla is not very forthcoming with data.  Musk quit posting order info in the mid 300K's and then all they've said since is "approaching 400k orders".
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: libertarian4321 on May 07, 2016, 07:24:31 AM
I'm not an investor, but my wife did order a Model 3.  Number 452,657 on the list.  Or something like that.

Can you double check that number and post it?  Tesla is not very forthcoming with data.  Musk quit posting order info in the mid 300K's and then all they've said since is "approaching 400k orders".

It was a couple of weeks ago that she ordered it.  It may have been in the low 400s.  All I remember is she told me she was 400 and something thousand.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 07, 2016, 08:17:14 AM
Musk has been consistently over promising for quite a long time. Yet people keep investing. That's one reason the stock is so volatile. A story stock that doesn't make money and has a shaky but exciting story is hard to value. So it trades a lot based on news.

And the number of patents isn't that important--it's what the patents contain. Most tech patents are worthless except as ammo in patent wars. There are probably 5 or more patents for similar things held by other firms. The patent system is such a mess now.

I heard a rumor that Apple might buy Tesla, they have oodles of cash and want to do cars.  Thoughts?  Discuss.

They already have their own EV program.  I doubt they are interested.  Plus, there are people saying that if Apple and Tesla come together that Musk should be CEO.  I don't think Apple's board or Cook would allow that.

I don't think it's especially likely that Apple buys Tesla. But if they did, there wouldn't be any reason for Musk to be CEO. That wouldn't fly with the board given that he also is CEO of another company and notoriously over busy.

Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on May 07, 2016, 10:38:03 AM
Tesla's stock is, as they say, "priced for perfection." It's valuation can only be justified long term if they perform more-or-less flawlessly on a consistent basis going forward. More concretely, it's valued at $620,000 per car delivered last year, and $63,000 for every car it hopes to deliver in 2020 (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-valuation-idUSKCN0XU20J). I believe they can pull it off, but there's a cascade of events that must go their way in order to justify this valuation, including factors beyond their control, which is another way of saying it's high risk. It's a gamble, treat it as such and don't put in anything you don't want to lose.

Don't get me wrong, I love Tesla and what they're doing. We barely drive our clown cars so they will last many more years, but I hope Tesla is around with affordable EVs when we're in the market for a car again. I just would not invest in them right now.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Seppia on May 07, 2016, 02:59:13 PM
Tesla's stock is, as they say, "priced for perfection." It's valuation can only be justified long term if they perform more-or-less flawlessly on a consistent basis going forward. More concretely, it's valued at $620,000 per car delivered last year, and $63,000 for every car it hopes to deliver in 2020 (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-valuation-idUSKCN0XU20J).

LOL
I loved the follow up

"By comparison, General Motors Co's (GM.N) $48 billion market value is equivalent to about $4,800 for every vehicle it sold last year"

But hey, they make money on the model S!

What could possibly go wrong?
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: nobodyspecial on May 07, 2016, 05:37:32 PM
GM is the one that went bust and was nationalized right ?
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: PaulMaxime on May 07, 2016, 07:10:55 PM
Bought some at $33 and some at $120 or so. Been holding it for several years and don't plan on selling it any time soon.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on May 07, 2016, 09:29:11 PM
GM is the one that went bust and was nationalized right ?

Yes and no - GM was went bankrupt and was bailed out by the feds and has since paid back the debts. What's your point though? Is a bankruptcy 4 years ago that relevant to investing decisions today?

For the record, I'm not interested in investing in GM either.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Seppia on May 08, 2016, 01:39:08 AM
Ok let's pick ford then
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/01/hyundai-4th-largest-automaker-overtakes-ford/
Market cap today is approx 54 billion

$10.000 per car (more or less, I have no data on today's production).

That's about 63 times less than tesla.
Only 6 times less their most rosy forecast for 2020 sales though (based on timelines they haven't respected one single time but yay Model S!)
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: thedayisbrave on May 08, 2016, 08:53:43 AM
I saw my first Tesla in 2013 and it took my breath away.  So I went home and bought the stock at $32.  Sold about 6 months later at $95+.

Regretted selling, obviously, but I didn't think it would break $100, much less hit the high $200s.  Bought back in at $200 and am holding.  Wish I would have averaged down when it dipped to $150 but didn't want to keep throwing dry powder at such a speculative play.

We'll see what happens... but the response to the Model 3 was mind boggling.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: webcat86 on May 08, 2016, 11:03:35 AM
I saw my first Tesla in 2013 and it took my breath away.  So I went home and bought the stock at $32.  Sold about 6 months later at $95+.

Regretted selling, obviously, but I didn't think it would break $100, much less hit the high $200s.  Bought back in at $200 and am holding.  Wish I would have averaged down when it dipped to $150 but didn't want to keep throwing dry powder at such a speculative play.

We'll see what happens... but the response to the Model 3 was mind boggling.

Would you buy in at today's prices?
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: thedayisbrave on May 09, 2016, 06:03:58 AM
I saw my first Tesla in 2013 and it took my breath away.  So I went home and bought the stock at $32.  Sold about 6 months later at $95+.

Regretted selling, obviously, but I didn't think it would break $100, much less hit the high $200s.  Bought back in at $200 and am holding.  Wish I would have averaged down when it dipped to $150 but didn't want to keep throwing dry powder at such a speculative play.

We'll see what happens... but the response to the Model 3 was mind boggling.

Would you buy in at today's prices?

No
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Scandium on May 09, 2016, 09:45:20 AM
Some cold water on this overhyped company.
http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/05/opinion-teslas-self-induced-jet-wash/#p3

Quote
Before the recent earnings release, investors had anticipated a full-year cash burn of about $820 million. Yet, if one counts Tesla's various proposed but re-evaluated capital expenditures, losses could total $1.6 billion.

Looking at Tesla’s macro finance picture, its cash balance through the end of last quarter stood at $1.4 billion. Add in the impressive $400 million-to-date deposits for the Model 3 pre-orders and you get $1.8 billion in cash reserves. Consider the cash burn-through of $1.6 billion—Tesla retains just $200 million, or about $800 million shy of what it once considered a comfortable level to run the company. Acquiring external financing looks inevitable, but Tesla’s already saddled with serious debt. Adding more loans and interest payments and losing more profitability would not be advisable and historically has proven to be the start of so many death spirals in tech, autos, and business.

And the mounting the reports of QC issues. In addition, with the highest-trim preorders being given preference, the "people's Tesla" will not be sold until long after the $7.5k Fed rebate is phased out. Putting it near (or well over) $40k, depending on what you consider essential options. More and more it sounds like a software startup that thinks it can run a car company; control everything, overhype, overpromise, release beta, delay.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: zephyr911 on May 09, 2016, 10:07:41 AM
Excuse me?
I admire you a lot on this forum but this comment doesn't make any sense.
Do you take advertisement expenses out of GM profitability because "they don't count on the margin made on a car"?

My statement about "losing money every time they sell a car" is maybe factually incorrect (assuming you mean just on a "product margin" level) and I could acknowledge so

Tesla is still selling for 28 times book value, 6 times sales and is currently losing money

And oh, is taking reservations on models that are not to be available in the foreseeable short term future.

You are possibly correct they do not have a negative product margin on every car they sell (which doesn't mean they don't lose money btw), but it still looks like a terrible terrible investment to me.
As long as we're clear that I object only to the per-vehicle wording, we're on the same page. At that level, they're not just "possibly" profitable, but have been so for years. Casual searching on the Model S shows 17% in 2013, 22% recently, and 30% projected by year-end. The X, a newer, lower-volume, over-engineered monstrosity, runs a few points lower - I see current estimates around 20% and a goal of 25%.

Like I said, I take no issue with your other points, least of all that other costs still add up to net losses, and I didn't claim it was a good investment either.

I do think for anyone invested, or thinking about investing, it's interesting that they are projecting GAAP profitability by Q4. All that capex may be paying off. But as has been pointed out above, so much growth is baked into the share price that the remaining upside is dubious.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: nobodyspecial on May 09, 2016, 11:29:22 AM
Funny - I was thinking how the existing car makers sounded like a few software companies.
Release a new model each year that doesn't do anything new but you have to upgrade because everyone else does.
Locked into a dealer network for service and support
No innovation beyond switching between rounded and square corners every few years

Suddenly surprised when something new happens and their market goes away.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 09, 2016, 12:12:25 PM
Some cold water on this overhyped company.
http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/05/opinion-teslas-self-induced-jet-wash/#p3

Quote
Before the recent earnings release, investors had anticipated a full-year cash burn of about $820 million. Yet, if one counts Tesla's various proposed but re-evaluated capital expenditures, losses could total $1.6 billion.

Looking at Tesla’s macro finance picture, its cash balance through the end of last quarter stood at $1.4 billion. Add in the impressive $400 million-to-date deposits for the Model 3 pre-orders and you get $1.8 billion in cash reserves. Consider the cash burn-through of $1.6 billion—Tesla retains just $200 million, or about $800 million shy of what it once considered a comfortable level to run the company. Acquiring external financing looks inevitable, but Tesla’s already saddled with serious debt. Adding more loans and interest payments and losing more profitability would not be advisable and historically has proven to be the start of so many death spirals in tech, autos, and business.

And the mounting the reports of QC issues. In addition, with the highest-trim preorders being given preference, the "people's Tesla" will not be sold until long after the $7.5k Fed rebate is phased out. Putting it near (or well over) $40k, depending on what you consider essential options. More and more it sounds like a software startup that thinks it can run a car company; control everything, overhype, overpromise, release beta, delay.


That's not how the $7500 credit works. It's per manufacturer, and only starts to phase out once they sell 200k cars. And then it phases out over time. So the first set of Model 3's should have the tax credit available. Now, if you go to reserve a Model 3 today, and have 400,000+ people ahead of you, and if (big if) all those people actually purchase, then you probably would get a very small credit or no credit at all.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Scandium on May 09, 2016, 12:19:02 PM
Some cold water on this overhyped company.
http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/05/opinion-teslas-self-induced-jet-wash/#p3

Quote
Before the recent earnings release, investors had anticipated a full-year cash burn of about $820 million. Yet, if one counts Tesla's various proposed but re-evaluated capital expenditures, losses could total $1.6 billion.

Looking at Tesla’s macro finance picture, its cash balance through the end of last quarter stood at $1.4 billion. Add in the impressive $400 million-to-date deposits for the Model 3 pre-orders and you get $1.8 billion in cash reserves. Consider the cash burn-through of $1.6 billion—Tesla retains just $200 million, or about $800 million shy of what it once considered a comfortable level to run the company. Acquiring external financing looks inevitable, but Tesla’s already saddled with serious debt. Adding more loans and interest payments and losing more profitability would not be advisable and historically has proven to be the start of so many death spirals in tech, autos, and business.

And the mounting the reports of QC issues. In addition, with the highest-trim preorders being given preference, the "people's Tesla" will not be sold until long after the $7.5k Fed rebate is phased out. Putting it near (or well over) $40k, depending on what you consider essential options. More and more it sounds like a software startup that thinks it can run a car company; control everything, overhype, overpromise, release beta, delay.


That's not how the $7500 credit works. It's per manufacturer, and only starts to phase out once they sell 200k cars. And then it phases out over time. So the first set of Model 3's should have the tax credit available. Now, if you go to reserve a Model 3 today, and have 400,000+ people ahead of you, and if (big if) all those people actually purchase, then you probably would get a very small credit or no credit at all.

It's per manufacturer, over all models. So includes all the model S (120,000 so far. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S#Sales_and_markets. And doing 50,000 per year) and X they've sold, then the highest trim model 3. By the time the person who wanted a $30k tesla gets his/her car the credit will most likely be zero.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 09, 2016, 12:33:02 PM
Some cold water on this overhyped company.
http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/05/opinion-teslas-self-induced-jet-wash/#p3

Quote
Before the recent earnings release, investors had anticipated a full-year cash burn of about $820 million. Yet, if one counts Tesla's various proposed but re-evaluated capital expenditures, losses could total $1.6 billion.

Looking at Tesla’s macro finance picture, its cash balance through the end of last quarter stood at $1.4 billion. Add in the impressive $400 million-to-date deposits for the Model 3 pre-orders and you get $1.8 billion in cash reserves. Consider the cash burn-through of $1.6 billion—Tesla retains just $200 million, or about $800 million shy of what it once considered a comfortable level to run the company. Acquiring external financing looks inevitable, but Tesla’s already saddled with serious debt. Adding more loans and interest payments and losing more profitability would not be advisable and historically has proven to be the start of so many death spirals in tech, autos, and business.

And the mounting the reports of QC issues. In addition, with the highest-trim preorders being given preference, the "people's Tesla" will not be sold until long after the $7.5k Fed rebate is phased out. Putting it near (or well over) $40k, depending on what you consider essential options. More and more it sounds like a software startup that thinks it can run a car company; control everything, overhype, overpromise, release beta, delay.


That's not how the $7500 credit works. It's per manufacturer, and only starts to phase out once they sell 200k cars. And then it phases out over time. So the first set of Model 3's should have the tax credit available. Now, if you go to reserve a Model 3 today, and have 400,000+ people ahead of you, and if (big if) all those people actually purchase, then you probably would get a very small credit or no credit at all.

It's per manufacturer, over all models. So includes all the model S (120,000 so far. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S#Sales_and_markets. And doing 50,000 per year) and X they've sold, then the highest trim model 3. By the time the person who wanted a $30k tesla gets his/her car the credit will most likely be zero.

My understanding is that it excludes international sales and that a bunch (almost half) of S sales are abroad. So unless the 3 is really, really delayed, or S/X domestic sales go way up, the first 3s should get the full credit.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Scandium on May 09, 2016, 12:49:19 PM
Some cold water on this overhyped company.
http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/05/opinion-teslas-self-induced-jet-wash/#p3

Quote
Before the recent earnings release, investors had anticipated a full-year cash burn of about $820 million. Yet, if one counts Tesla's various proposed but re-evaluated capital expenditures, losses could total $1.6 billion.

Looking at Tesla’s macro finance picture, its cash balance through the end of last quarter stood at $1.4 billion. Add in the impressive $400 million-to-date deposits for the Model 3 pre-orders and you get $1.8 billion in cash reserves. Consider the cash burn-through of $1.6 billion—Tesla retains just $200 million, or about $800 million shy of what it once considered a comfortable level to run the company. Acquiring external financing looks inevitable, but Tesla’s already saddled with serious debt. Adding more loans and interest payments and losing more profitability would not be advisable and historically has proven to be the start of so many death spirals in tech, autos, and business.

And the mounting the reports of QC issues. In addition, with the highest-trim preorders being given preference, the "people's Tesla" will not be sold until long after the $7.5k Fed rebate is phased out. Putting it near (or well over) $40k, depending on what you consider essential options. More and more it sounds like a software startup that thinks it can run a car company; control everything, overhype, overpromise, release beta, delay.


That's not how the $7500 credit works. It's per manufacturer, and only starts to phase out once they sell 200k cars. And then it phases out over time. So the first set of Model 3's should have the tax credit available. Now, if you go to reserve a Model 3 today, and have 400,000+ people ahead of you, and if (big if) all those people actually purchase, then you probably would get a very small credit or no credit at all.

It's per manufacturer, over all models. So includes all the model S (120,000 so far. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S#Sales_and_markets. And doing 50,000 per year) and X they've sold, then the highest trim model 3. By the time the person who wanted a $30k tesla gets his/her car the credit will most likely be zero.

My understanding is that it excludes international sales and that a bunch (almost half) of S sales are abroad. So unless the 3 is really, really delayed, or S/X domestic sales go way up, the first 3s should get the full credit.
Ok. So 120k now, and another 100k over next two years before 3 is out, half domestic is 110k sold. So first ~100k 3s will get the full rebate. Those are likely the highest trims. So at best some of the first $37k model 3s will get a reduced rebate, and quickly none at all.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 09, 2016, 01:52:53 PM
Some cold water on this overhyped company.
http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/05/opinion-teslas-self-induced-jet-wash/#p3

Quote
Before the recent earnings release, investors had anticipated a full-year cash burn of about $820 million. Yet, if one counts Tesla's various proposed but re-evaluated capital expenditures, losses could total $1.6 billion.

Looking at Tesla’s macro finance picture, its cash balance through the end of last quarter stood at $1.4 billion. Add in the impressive $400 million-to-date deposits for the Model 3 pre-orders and you get $1.8 billion in cash reserves. Consider the cash burn-through of $1.6 billion—Tesla retains just $200 million, or about $800 million shy of what it once considered a comfortable level to run the company. Acquiring external financing looks inevitable, but Tesla’s already saddled with serious debt. Adding more loans and interest payments and losing more profitability would not be advisable and historically has proven to be the start of so many death spirals in tech, autos, and business.

And the mounting the reports of QC issues. In addition, with the highest-trim preorders being given preference, the "people's Tesla" will not be sold until long after the $7.5k Fed rebate is phased out. Putting it near (or well over) $40k, depending on what you consider essential options. More and more it sounds like a software startup that thinks it can run a car company; control everything, overhype, overpromise, release beta, delay.


That's not how the $7500 credit works. It's per manufacturer, and only starts to phase out once they sell 200k cars. And then it phases out over time. So the first set of Model 3's should have the tax credit available. Now, if you go to reserve a Model 3 today, and have 400,000+ people ahead of you, and if (big if) all those people actually purchase, then you probably would get a very small credit or no credit at all.

It's per manufacturer, over all models. So includes all the model S (120,000 so far. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S#Sales_and_markets. And doing 50,000 per year) and X they've sold, then the highest trim model 3. By the time the person who wanted a $30k tesla gets his/her car the credit will most likely be zero.

My understanding is that it excludes international sales and that a bunch (almost half) of S sales are abroad. So unless the 3 is really, really delayed, or S/X domestic sales go way up, the first 3s should get the full credit.
Ok. So 120k now, and another 100k over next two years before 3 is out, half domestic is 110k sold. So first ~100k 3s will get the full rebate. Those are likely the highest trims. So at best some of the first $37k model 3s will get a reduced rebate, and quickly none at all.

The credit starts to phase out after 2 quarters after the 200k is reached. It's really hard to say what kind of volume Tesla will be doing then. So it could be a lot of cars. Or not so many. Theoretically it could be a few hundred thousand cars sneaking into that window. But unlikely given their history.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Reepekg on May 09, 2016, 02:31:58 PM
I saw my first Tesla in 2013 and it took my breath away.  So I went home and bought the stock at $32.  Sold about 6 months later at $95+.

Regretted selling, obviously, but I didn't think it would break $100, much less hit the high $200s.  Bought back in at $200 and am holding.  Wish I would have averaged down when it dipped to $150 but didn't want to keep throwing dry powder at such a speculative play.

We'll see what happens... but the response to the Model 3 was mind boggling.

Would you buy in at today's prices?

No

This. I bought 150 shares TSLA at $30 and sold at $91.

Everybody has already heard of TSLA. You are too late for a speculation play and too early for buying an established business that reliably makes $$$ selling a lot of product.

If you really want to speculate on the EV revolution, look into Lithium miners... they'll be the ones supplying to whoever wins the EV/battery race, regardless of current hype and valuation level.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: zephyr911 on May 09, 2016, 03:02:21 PM
If you really want to speculate on the EV revolution, look into Lithium miners... they'll be the ones supplying to whoever wins the EV/battery race, regardless of current hype and valuation level.
And right there is another industry that fascinates me but has pretty much been ruled out from an investing standpoint.
There will be a lot of lithium mined over the next couple of decades, that's pretty much guaranteed. But such a high percentage of the lithium in a battery is expected to be recycled that even in an all- or mostly-EV* world, many analysts believe lithium mining (and other methods such as seawater extraction) will dramatically decline at some point in the not-so-distant future as the need for new ore is largely supplanted by packs returned from old vehicles and other applications.
On top of that, the very real risk of all these companies overbuilding their mining capacity and not making profits despite doing large-volume business makes it too much of a speculative play for me. I don't wanna get into anything where I'd not only have to pick winners and losers in an uncertain field but also accurately predict a likely decline of the entire industry in time to get out with profits intact.

*simplifying here, as I realize other applications are in play but EVs represent the fastest-growing and probably largest end-state market. Either way, the same dynamics can be expected to apply.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: nobodyspecial on May 09, 2016, 09:53:18 PM
Lithium is tricky to recycle from Li-Ion batteries, at the moment it an almost worthless impure waste product from trying to recover the Nickel and Cobalt. Not to say the recovery technology won't improve but Lithium is very cheap and much easier to refine from the ore than from a used battery.

The gold mine is likely to come from the rare earth elements in the motor magnets. The problem is that they are by-products of other mining, so you need to know of a lead or zinc mine in some unfriendly bit of Africa that has a high concentration of these - and be able to buy the rights before anyone else finds out !

And unless Tesla can make induction motors cheap enough for mass produced electrics.

Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: zephyr911 on May 10, 2016, 08:30:39 AM
Lithium is tricky to recycle from Li-Ion batteries, at the moment it an almost worthless impure waste product from trying to recover the Nickel and Cobalt. Not to say the recovery technology won't improve but Lithium is very cheap and much easier to refine from the ore than from a used battery.

The gold mine is likely to come from the rare earth elements in the motor magnets. The problem is that they are by-products of other mining, so you need to know of a lead or zinc mine in some unfriendly bit of Africa that has a high concentration of these - and be able to buy the rights before anyone else finds out !

And unless Tesla can make induction motors cheap enough for mass produced electrics.
I did a little searching.
From https://forums.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/no-rare-earth-metals-model-s
*******************************************************************
"Tesla does not use rare earth metals in our battery or motor. Typically, rare earth metals apply to DC motors, which use magnets. One of the reasons we use an AC induction motor is it does not require magnets, which often contain the rare earth metals."
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 10, 2016, 09:40:25 AM
If you really want to speculate on the EV revolution, look into Lithium miners... they'll be the ones supplying to whoever wins the EV/battery race, regardless of current hype and valuation level.

Selling a commodity is not usually a high margin business. There are exceptions, but only when demand is incredibly high and insensitive to cost, supply is very constrained (or monopolistically held), and the particular firm has a cost advantage over competitors (which is often hard to maintain).
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: nobodyspecial on May 10, 2016, 03:04:46 PM
And unless Tesla can make induction motors cheap enough for mass produced electrics.
I did a little searching.
From https://forums.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/no-rare-earth-metals-model-s
*******************************************************************
"Tesla does not use rare earth metals in our battery or motor. Typically, rare earth metals apply to DC motors, which use magnets. One of the reasons we use an AC induction motor is it does not require magnets, which often contain the rare earth metals."
Tesla uses induction motors for it's high perfomance (and high cost) models - as do all the other electric cars.
The cheaper, lower performance, longer range models (leaf etc) use brushless DC with permanent magnets (with rare earths)

I understand why you would use induction motors for max performance, not sure what the issue is in not using them in low end vehicles, whether it is just cost or some efficency issue ?


Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: dandarc on May 10, 2016, 03:16:21 PM
And unless Tesla can make induction motors cheap enough for mass produced electrics.
I did a little searching.
From https://forums.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/no-rare-earth-metals-model-s
*******************************************************************
"Tesla does not use rare earth metals in our battery or motor. Typically, rare earth metals apply to DC motors, which use magnets. One of the reasons we use an AC induction motor is it does not require magnets, which often contain the rare earth metals."
Tesla uses induction motors for it's high perfomance (and high cost) models - as do all the other electric cars.
The cheaper, lower performance, longer range models (leaf etc) use brushless DC with permanent magnets (with rare earths)

I understand why you would use induction motors for max performance, not sure what the issue is in not using them in low end vehicles, whether it is just cost or some efficency issue ?
https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/induction-versus-dc-brushless-motors?_ga=1.225679004.705366378.1449593580 (https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/induction-versus-dc-brushless-motors?_ga=1.225679004.705366378.1449593580)

I gather from this article that the induction motors are cheaper to build than burshless DC, but owing to more complex controller design, more expensive to develop.  So probably a cost thing - Nissan didn't want to sink too much into designing the motors for what might have been a failed experiment.  Tesla, on the other hand, is banking on electric all the way, so making the bigger investment up-front on the induction motors makes sense for them, and could lead to a longer-term cost advantage over companies that are using the DC motors.  Tesla is also making performance / luxury cars, so motor performance is even more important for them than other manufacturers.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: nobodyspecial on May 10, 2016, 08:42:30 PM
That's what I didn't understand. Induction motors have got to be cheaper once you have the controller design.
The R&D cost of a control circuit is minuscule to the likes of Toyota or VW so I imagined there must be some efficiency/size advantage for low power motors.
I suppose the toe-in-the-water electric cars were built entirely from off the shelf parts - including DC motors.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on May 14, 2016, 11:13:21 AM
Batteries will be a capital-intensive, low-margin, commodity business. Tesla is priced like a mega-growth industry disruptor. If they just turn into a battery factory, the shares will drop 90%. Tesla's upsides would be 1) a valuable brand (but others have good brands too), 2) autonomous driving technology (but Apple, Google, and a number of car manufacturers are also developing this), and 3) a first-mover advantage. But first movers often aren't the ones who make bank on a new industry. Google was maybe the 10th major search engine. Apple wasn't the first to make phones. Microsoft wasn't the first software company. Etc. The firms that make a ton of money are the ones that come along and transform it and do it better. It's much easier to improve an existing idea than create something from scratch. And anything Tesla does that is successful will be copied by others.
I think the difference with search and cell phones is that they weren't monolithic industries, at least not compared to auto manufacturing. In the open ocean (new industry), it's easier for companies to come out of nowhere and take the lead. Auto manufacturing/sales have much higher barriers to entry, both in terms of regulations and capital requirements, and are very well established.

EVs in the existing manufacturer/dealer network are also very disruptive because they have the potential to hit the repair side of dealer profit centers and the sales side of manufacturing profit centers. My sense is that manufacturers/dealers view competition with each other on EV production as a very possible lose-lose situation. They have to spend massive amounts on tooling, research, and capital, and the end result could be a product that hurts the profit centers of their customers (dealers) because of better reliability/less maintenance, and may also reduce sales down the road as battery energy density increases and outside companies start producing replacement battery packs.

I don't think we're at that point yet, given that most EVs have < 100 miles of range and a bunch are still built on platforms designed for ICEs, but once manufacturers hit a good combination of range, charging speed, and price, I could see battery replacements take a chunk out of new car sales. I think Tesla could hit that mark with the model 3 in the ~$30k-40k price range, and if they do, there's less incentive to purchase a new car compared to getting a new battery pack and driving your current EV for another decade or so.

People also don't realize yet that Powerwall is a failure. The batteries are just too expensive for it to be a viable product yet. Maybe in 5 or 15 years.
I wouldn't go that far. On one hand, people do overestimate the impact of new tech. On the other hand, the powerwall is the least expensive form of warrantied battery storage out there for someone who uses it daily, which is why there's so much excitement about it in the industry. It's not to the point where you can drop a bunch of them in your home along with some PV panels and pay less that what you would with a grid connection, but in some places (CA for instance) it's getting close. If I were building a home right now, I'd take a good hard look at self generation (demand side management + PV panels + a powerwall of few + a backup generator) before I paid for a grid hookup.


Edit - I'm not saying that Tesla won't fail, especially considering the challenges they're taking on, but there's a good chance they'll succeed, which is why there stock is where it is IMO. Even if I ignored that Paypal, SolarCity, SpaceX, and Tesla have already been pretty successful, Tesla's success has correlated pretty well with the volume of "Watch out Tesla!" articles I see in online media. If that trend holds, the 3 will do very well. ;)

https://teslamondo.com/2014/05/25/yipes-watch-out-tesla-move-over-tesla/
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on May 16, 2016, 05:16:11 PM
Edit - I'm not saying that Tesla won't fail, especially considering the challenges they're taking on, but there's a good chance they'll succeed, which is why there stock is where it is IMO. Even if I ignored that Paypal, SolarCity, SpaceX, and Tesla have already been pretty successful, Tesla's success has correlated pretty well with the volume of "Watch out Tesla!" articles I see in online media. If that trend holds, the 3 will do very well. ;)

Sure, but the question being discussed here is whether or not Tesla is a good investment at current valuation. It's possible that they succeed in their business while the stock underperforms because the expected success is already priced in.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on May 19, 2016, 07:06:34 AM
It's definitely possible. The thing is, they're expanding in a way that IMO could put them close to a GM or Toyota in a decade or two, and they make batteries on top of all that. I have no idea if they'll succeed, but if they do, I think current prices are under-valued. Putting it another way, current prices already have the (significant) odds of them failing built in.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 19, 2016, 09:42:46 AM
It's definitely possible. The thing is, they're expanding in a way that IMO could put them close to a GM or Toyota in a decade or two, and they make batteries on top of all that. I have no idea if they'll succeed, but if they do, I think current prices are under-valued. Putting it another way, current prices already have the (significant) odds of them failing built in.

If they succeed, what would you think they'd be worth? They are already worth almost as much as GM.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on May 19, 2016, 08:06:05 PM
That's a tough question. If they can build ~350k cars/year at ~$50k/car and maintain their 20% profit, that translates to ~$3.5 billion in profit, which is apparently enough to justify ~$500-1000/share.

https://www.caseyresearch.com/articles/what-is-tesla-motors-really-worth

I dunno if that'll happen, but Tesla's pushing things pretty hard.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on May 20, 2016, 12:20:42 AM
I wouldn't assume they can maintain 20% profit margin in the mass market - all the big automakers have lower margins. You can be sure other automakers will enter the market with competitive EV offerings, such as the Chevy Bolt. 

I'll say it again: Tesla is priced for perfection. If it can build 350k cars/year, and it can continue charging $50k per vehicle (btw - the Model 3 comes in lower than this), and it can maintain 20% profit margin then it will justify a higher price. However, I don't see any big barriers to entry for other brands to flood this market and drive down margins. The graveyards of industry are full of companies that were early innovators that many expected would become immensely profitable, only to later succumb to competitive pressures as others entered the market.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Vagabond76 on May 20, 2016, 05:27:21 AM
So Tesla announced it would fund the next model product, Elon Musk's taxes, and a donation to charity by diluting current shareholders with another secondary offering.

By owning shares in this company, you are not changing the world. You are subjecting yourself to the whims of management. Most everyone in here is indirectly invested in Tesla through an index fund. That is enough of an investment in the company for most people.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: TheStachery on May 20, 2016, 06:45:07 AM
According to Bloomberg, the adjusted total of reservations received comes in at 373,000. This after about 8,000 customers canceled their orders, and the company removed another 4,200 duplicate orders from the list.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Greenpez on May 20, 2016, 07:20:38 AM
So Tesla announced it would fund the next model product, Elon Musk's taxes, and a donation to charity by diluting current shareholders with another secondary offering.

By owning shares in this company, you are not changing the world. You are subjecting yourself to the whims of management. Most everyone in here is indirectly invested in Tesla through an index fund. That is enough of an investment in the company for most people.

If, and it's a huge if, this offering results in tesla hitting its production goals I don't think most shareholders will really care. Musk's involvement most likely has more to do with him not wanting another paypal to happen.

 I agree though that buying shares now is an emotional decision unless you've done a lot of DD and really believe the company will take off.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Vagabond76 on May 20, 2016, 07:49:16 AM
So Tesla announced it would fund the next model product, Elon Musk's taxes, and a donation to charity by diluting current shareholders with another secondary offering.

By owning shares in this company, you are not changing the world. You are subjecting yourself to the whims of management. Most everyone in here is indirectly invested in Tesla through an index fund. That is enough of an investment in the company for most people.

If, and it's a huge if, this offering results in tesla hitting its production goals I don't think most shareholders will really care. Musk's involvement most likely has more to do with him not wanting another paypal to happen.

 I agree though that buying shares now is an emotional decision unless you've done a lot of DD and really believe the company will take off.

???
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: TheStachery on May 20, 2016, 07:51:03 AM
My justification:
You cannot ignore the fact that people love this car.  The demand is huge.
They are just as close to anyone else in the self driving car race.
Battery tech, not just for the cars, but tapping into a home/solar market.
They are making some good hiring decisions, they just hired the Audi exec for production.  Audi, if you haven't noticed, was kicking ass in the last several years.

This will be played out fro the next several years, and if you like playing the market, buy on the bad news, (missed production targets) and sell on the good news.  or buy and hold, like me.  If the stock drops below 200 again, i'm buying another lot.

Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Greenpez on May 20, 2016, 07:54:57 AM
So Tesla announced it would fund the next model product, Elon Musk's taxes, and a donation to charity by diluting current shareholders with another secondary offering.

By owning shares in this company, you are not changing the world. You are subjecting yourself to the whims of management. Most everyone in here is indirectly invested in Tesla through an index fund. That is enough of an investment in the company for most people.

If, and it's a huge if, this offering results in tesla hitting its production goals I don't think most shareholders will really care. Musk's involvement most likely has more to do with him not wanting another paypal to happen.

 I agree though that buying shares now is an emotional decision unless you've done a lot of DD and really believe the company will take off.

???

Musk was in a situation where he didn't own enough stock to control the outcome of the company. He doesn't want that to happen again.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 20, 2016, 09:44:37 AM
That's a tough question. If they can build ~350k cars/year at ~$50k/car and maintain their 20% profit, that translates to ~$3.5 billion in profit, which is apparently enough to justify ~$500-1000/share.

https://www.caseyresearch.com/articles/what-is-tesla-motors-really-worth

I dunno if that'll happen, but Tesla's pushing things pretty hard.
They can get 20% profit margin on a luxury car that's really a one-of-a-kind offering. It's a statement car for people who can afford to make a $120k statement. You can't do that on the $35k car level. And they will be competing at that price point against many other manufacturers, which will also drive margins down. EVs will be more like regular ICEs in terms of how common they are. That's Tesla's goal BTW--not to make a ton of money.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Vagabond76 on May 20, 2016, 09:53:25 AM
So Tesla announced it would fund the next model product, Elon Musk's taxes, and a donation to charity by diluting current shareholders with another secondary offering.

By owning shares in this company, you are not changing the world. You are subjecting yourself to the whims of management. Most everyone in here is indirectly invested in Tesla through an index fund. That is enough of an investment in the company for most people.

If, and it's a huge if, this offering results in tesla hitting its production goals I don't think most shareholders will really care. Musk's involvement most likely has more to do with him not wanting another paypal to happen.

 I agree though that buying shares now is an emotional decision unless you've done a lot of DD and really believe the company will take off.

???

Musk was in a situation where he didn't own enough stock to control the outcome of the company. He doesn't want that to happen again.

Complete insider control is a huge turnoff for me.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 20, 2016, 10:16:11 AM
So Tesla announced it would fund the next model product, Elon Musk's taxes, and a donation to charity by diluting current shareholders with another secondary offering.

By owning shares in this company, you are not changing the world. You are subjecting yourself to the whims of management. Most everyone in here is indirectly invested in Tesla through an index fund. That is enough of an investment in the company for most people.

If, and it's a huge if, this offering results in tesla hitting its production goals I don't think most shareholders will really care. Musk's involvement most likely has more to do with him not wanting another paypal to happen.

 I agree though that buying shares now is an emotional decision unless you've done a lot of DD and really believe the company will take off.

???

Musk was in a situation where he didn't own enough stock to control the outcome of the company. He doesn't want that to happen again.

Complete insider control is a huge turnoff for me.
How much does Musk control?

Zuckerberg's complete stranglehold on FB is one of many reasons I wouldn't be excited about buying it. He even just changed the share structure to allow him to part with economic value of his shares without losing control of voting shares.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Greenpez on May 20, 2016, 11:14:15 AM

How much does Musk control?

Zuckerberg's complete stranglehold on FB is one of many reasons I wouldn't be excited about buying it. He even just changed the share structure to allow him to part with economic value of his shares without losing control of voting shares.

 A quick google search says ~30%, given the percentage of the new offering he's buying, I'd say thats fairly accurate. I would say it's very important to him to maintain control of his companies. Which is one reason space x prolly won't go public.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on May 20, 2016, 12:32:56 PM
They can get 20% profit margin on a luxury car that's really a one-of-a-kind offering. It's a statement car for people who can afford to make a $120k statement. You can't do that on the $35k car level. And they will be competing at that price point against many other manufacturers, which will also drive margins down. EVs will be more like regular ICEs in terms of how common they are. That's Tesla's goal BTW--not to make a ton of money.
Maybe. People said the same thing about 20% margins on the Model S before they built it, and they may not have had those margins at launch, but they do now even though. If Tesla can roll out the 3, the closest competition is the Chevy Bolt. The specs on the Bolt look good too, but GM probably won't have the same options (auto-pilot, supercharging, etc...).

While other manufacturers could make comparable EVs with similar features, they haven't so far, possibly because those EVs can hurt their existing business model. The difference between that delay and Tesla's aggressive expansion is where Tesla's competitive advantage is.

It could be that their average sales price is $120k with the high end Model X sales, but a base S starts at $71.5k + TTL - the Federal tax credit - state rebates if they exist - the difference in the cost of gas/electricity +/- the difference in maintenance costs. They're still very expensive cars that aren't within the reach of the average driver, but someone doesn't have to shell out $120k to get one.

https://www.thestreet.com/story/13198798/1/the-average-tesla-driver-isnt-who-youd-expect.html
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 20, 2016, 01:35:48 PM
The Leaf will also be 200ish miles by then for at least one option or trim combination. They are already stepping up the battery to 30kWh for the 2017 model for SL/SV.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on May 20, 2016, 02:36:18 PM
EVs will 'disrupt' the auto industry which, I think, is part of the reason the big automakers have dragged their feet on EVs. So I'm glad Tesla has forced them to get serious by establishing the market.

That said, I don't think this is why the big automakers don't include high-end features on their EVs. Instead, I believe they've determined that the $30k market is not willing to pay for luxury features. After subsidies, the Model 3 will be priced at $35k whereas the Bolt can be had for as little as $30k. While it's true that you get more functionality for the Model 3, what matters is whether or not this creates enough value for consumers to justify the price difference. These cars are getting into economy car segment territory, where buyers are primarily interested in getting from point A to point B cheaply. Is it worth the extra $5k for these consumers to have autopilot or supercharging for a car they primarily use on a predictable commute or short trips around town?
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on May 20, 2016, 11:05:59 PM
The Leaf will also be 200ish miles by then for at least one option or trim combination. They are already stepping up the battery to 30kWh for the 2017 model for SL/SV.
I'm hoping the 3 will force them to bring down prices on the lower capacity models. I'd love to see them offer a ~30kWh next gen leaf for < $25k.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: bradleylsmith on May 21, 2016, 02:21:48 AM
EVs will 'disrupt' the auto industry which, I think, is part of the reason the big automakers have dragged their feet on EVs. So I'm glad Tesla has forced them to get serious by establishing the market.

That said, I don't think this is why the big automakers don't include high-end features on their EVs. Instead, I believe they've determined that the $30k market is not willing to pay for luxury features. After subsidies, the Model 3 will be priced at $35k whereas the Bolt can be had for as little as $30k. While it's true that you get more functionality for the Model 3, what matters is whether or not this creates enough value for consumers to justify the price difference. These cars are getting into economy car segment territory, where buyers are primarily interested in getting from point A to point B cheaply. Is it worth the extra $5k for these consumers to have autopilot or supercharging for a car they primarily use on a predictable commute or short trips around town?

Model 3 is $35k before incentives not after. It is the cheaper of the two options, on base price anyway.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 21, 2016, 07:21:11 AM
The Leaf will also be 200ish miles by then for at least one option or trim combination. They are already stepping up the battery to 30kWh for the 2017 model for SL/SV.
I'm hoping the 3 will force them to bring down prices on the lower capacity models. I'd love to see them offer a ~30kWh next gen leaf for < $25k.

I think their pricing (including the incentives) is as competitive as they can be today. But batteries keep getting cheaper, so that will help bring down the cost by itself. I paid $25k to Nissan for my 24kWh Leafs 2 years ago (both of them). And they gave me 0% financing on top of that as well (and I got tax credits from the state and feds). I think the battery cost will drop enough such that the 30 will cost what a 24 did back then. They are limiting the 30 to the more expensive trims now, but I imagine that the 30 or larger will be the base trim in the future and the 48 or 60 will be the top trim.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on May 21, 2016, 09:19:41 AM
EVs will 'disrupt' the auto industry which, I think, is part of the reason the big automakers have dragged their feet on EVs. So I'm glad Tesla has forced them to get serious by establishing the market.

That said, I don't think this is why the big automakers don't include high-end features on their EVs. Instead, I believe they've determined that the $30k market is not willing to pay for luxury features. After subsidies, the Model 3 will be priced at $35k whereas the Bolt can be had for as little as $30k. While it's true that you get more functionality for the Model 3, what matters is whether or not this creates enough value for consumers to justify the price difference. These cars are getting into economy car segment territory, where buyers are primarily interested in getting from point A to point B cheaply. Is it worth the extra $5k for these consumers to have autopilot or supercharging for a car they primarily use on a predictable commute or short trips around town?

Model 3 is $35k before incentives not after. It is the cheaper of the two options, on base price anyway.

So it is, until the incentives phase out once the manufacturer has sold 200k subsidized vehicles I think.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: dandarc on May 21, 2016, 11:04:23 AM
EVs will 'disrupt' the auto industry which, I think, is part of the reason the big automakers have dragged their feet on EVs. So I'm glad Tesla has forced them to get serious by establishing the market.

That said, I don't think this is why the big automakers don't include high-end features on their EVs. Instead, I believe they've determined that the $30k market is not willing to pay for luxury features. After subsidies, the Model 3 will be priced at $35k whereas the Bolt can be had for as little as $30k. While it's true that you get more functionality for the Model 3, what matters is whether or not this creates enough value for consumers to justify the price difference. These cars are getting into economy car segment territory, where buyers are primarily interested in getting from point A to point B cheaply. Is it worth the extra $5k for these consumers to have autopilot or supercharging for a car they primarily use on a predictable commute or short trips around town?

Model 3 is $35k before incentives not after. It is the cheaper of the two options, on base price anyway.

So it is, until the incentives phase out once the manufacturer has sold 200k subsidized vehicles I think.
Model 3 base is $35K.  If you happen to luck out and get the federal subsidy (probably requires your reservation to already be in), then your net cost might be $27,500.

Chevy Bolt base is $37,500.  You're likely get the federal subsidy, and your net cost might therefore be $30,000.

So the Bolt, absent subsidies, is the more expensive vehicle.  A subsidized Bolt is likely less expensive than an unsubsidized Model 3.  Once the subsidized / unsubsidized differential phases out, the Bolt is more expensive, absent a price change.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on May 21, 2016, 11:13:37 AM
EVs will 'disrupt' the auto industry which, I think, is part of the reason the big automakers have dragged their feet on EVs. So I'm glad Tesla has forced them to get serious by establishing the market.

That said, I don't think this is why the big automakers don't include high-end features on their EVs. Instead, I believe they've determined that the $30k market is not willing to pay for luxury features. After subsidies, the Model 3 will be priced at $35k whereas the Bolt can be had for as little as $30k. While it's true that you get more functionality for the Model 3, what matters is whether or not this creates enough value for consumers to justify the price difference. These cars are getting into economy car segment territory, where buyers are primarily interested in getting from point A to point B cheaply. Is it worth the extra $5k for these consumers to have autopilot or supercharging for a car they primarily use on a predictable commute or short trips around town?



Model 3 is $35k before incentives not after. It is the cheaper of the two options, on base price anyway.

So it is, until the incentives phase out once the manufacturer has sold 200k subsidized vehicles I think.
Model 3 base is $35K.  If you happen to luck out and get the federal subsidy (probably requires your reservation to already be in), then your net cost might be $27,500.

Chevy Bolt base is $37,500.  You're likely get the federal subsidy, and your net cost might therefore be $30,000.

So the Bolt, absent subsidies, is the more expensive vehicle.  A subsidized Bolt is likely less expensive than an unsubsidized Model 3.  Once the subsidized / unsubsidized differential phases out, the Bolt is more expensive, absent a price change.

I wonder if they will adjust prices as the subsidies phase out. As a consumer I wonder how you're supposed to make a price comparison if either company is close to the phase out? I suppose with the Bolt it may be possible to negotiate somewhat on the price.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 21, 2016, 11:16:42 AM
I think it's impossible to know what the exact prices are of these cars that are not currently available to buy and drive home. Announced prices (and availability timelines) may shift somewhat.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: bradleylsmith on May 21, 2016, 09:43:24 PM
the idea that the two are even close to each other in price makes the tesla that much better of a car. The bolt's subsidy isn't going to last long either. It may actually be less - as of Dec. 2015 they were at 95,000 sales that count against them and they are the closest carmaker to having their credit expire.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on May 22, 2016, 08:12:07 AM
the idea that the two are even close to each other in price makes the tesla that much better of a car. The bolt's subsidy isn't going to last long either. It may actually be less - as of Dec. 2015 they were at 95,000 sales that count against them and they are the closest carmaker to having their credit expire.

We'll see. The 3 probably won't be as tricked out as the S or X. And may be harder to buy for a long time. I hope the 3 is great and they can make (and sell) 500k a year starting in 2018. But who knows.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: TheStachery on June 02, 2016, 09:06:20 AM
Has anyone looked into Mobileye?  It appears that Tesla and other manufactures use their technologies.  This maybe the company with the brains behind the self driving / automation. 
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: a1smith on June 03, 2016, 11:05:18 PM
I hope the 3 is great and they can make (and sell) 500k a year starting in 2018. But who knows.

There is no way Tesla will make and sell 500K Model 3's in 2018.  The design isn't even locked down yet.  No capacity to build that many cars and 2-3 year time frame to build it.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 04, 2016, 02:24:04 PM
I hope the 3 is great and they can make (and sell) 500k a year starting in 2018. But who knows.

There is no way Tesla will make and sell 500K Model 3's in 2018.  The design isn't even locked down yet.  No capacity to build that many cars and 2-3 year time frame to build it.

I agree. The "I hope" was in the context of wishing the company well right after I had been casting a lot of doubt about their future prospects and the wisdom of investing in their stock. I want them to succeed. But doubt that they will be as successful and as quickly as Musk's stated goals.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on June 11, 2016, 05:30:39 PM
Ok. So 120k now, and another 100k over next two years before 3 is out, half domestic is 110k sold. So first ~100k 3s will get the full rebate. Those are likely the highest trims. So at best some of the first $37k model 3s will get a reduced rebate, and quickly none at all.
It's possible, but Elon has I tink alluded to structuring vehicle production so that (most? all?) reservation holders will see the full tax credit. This idea lines up pretty well with their plans to quickly ramp production.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/716709914911989760
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 12, 2016, 01:13:06 PM
Ok. So 120k now, and another 100k over next two years before 3 is out, half domestic is 110k sold. So first ~100k 3s will get the full rebate. Those are likely the highest trims. So at best some of the first $37k model 3s will get a reduced rebate, and quickly none at all.
It's possible, but Elon has I tink alluded to structuring vehicle production so that (most? all?) reservation holders will see the full tax credit. This idea lines up pretty well with their plans to quickly ramp production.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/716709914911989760

His focus is solely to get as many cars made and delivered as quickly as possible. If it came to the point that they could hold back 500 cars and deliver them the first day of the next quarter, they might do that. But otherwise they just need to deliver cars ASAP. They have major cash burn and will continue to for years. They need to keep the stock price as high as possible because of the need to do equity raises (sell lots of new share to raise cash for business operation). That means keeping Wall Street happy. Which means hitting sales and revenue targets. Maximizing the number of cars that qualify for the tax credit could also help increase sales. So I'm sure it's something they would like to do. But they have a lot of pressures on them.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 21, 2016, 07:50:18 PM
Let's hope no one is invested in TSLA. If so, Musk has decided to screw you by buying SCTY. One business that's way overvalued and burning cash and will need to do a number of more equity raises in order to meet incredibly aggressive and expensive goals is buying another business that's even more overvalued and burning cash and has lots of debt coming due and whose business is dying and has massive liabilities that the market doesn't understand. That purchase is also diluting the TSLA stock, which will further increase the future dilutions that will occur to continue the equity raises. Disaster. If TSLA's board has any sense they will veto this stupid acquisition.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: mrpercentage on June 21, 2016, 07:57:17 PM
Share holders aside, let's give him credit. Maybe he does have the capability to completely take a house of the grid for an affordable price but only by using the synergy of this acquisition. I give Musk credit but my money isn't on the line. This once again proves to me that only dividend companies really care about share holders. Non-dividend care only about their own growth or prospects
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on June 21, 2016, 09:52:00 PM
Purchasing Solar City may be more about minimizing the cost of the Supercharger network than anything else, especially if enough regions/utilities allow a corporation to offset their own electricity consumption via generation.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Rustycage on June 22, 2016, 12:06:25 AM
Musk seems like a visionary ....... but he's far from a legendary capital allocator. Maybe someone with a bit of financial prudence can come in to Tesla to balance him out.


Even Sir Isaac Newton was a scientific genius but investing failure ...
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: nobodyspecial on June 22, 2016, 06:45:54 AM
Or more cynically he is using a company he owns to buy a company he owns that is in trouble ?
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Vagabond76 on June 22, 2016, 09:00:54 AM
I mentioned shareholder dilution and complete insider control a month ago.  Both policies are destructive to shareholder wealth.  I equate "complete insider control" to investing in a personality, which is fine as long as the personality is in vogue.  In this case, the personality is fucking the minority shareholders.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: smedleyb on June 22, 2016, 10:02:25 AM
Or more cynically he is using a company he owns to buy a company he owns that is in trouble ?

Which would be less problematic if TSLA itself wasn't in trouble going forward (burning through lots of cash as it speeds toward developing a car it will not make any money on).  Like the internet back in the late 90's, I suspect we'll see a lot of failures and bankruptcies in the electric/solar space before the long-term winners emerge.  Musk is a visionary, a genius, but I think we will see TSLA as a single digit stock at some point over the next 24 months.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 22, 2016, 10:57:58 AM
Share holders aside, let's give him credit. Maybe he does have the capability to completely take a house of the grid for an affordable price but only by using the synergy of this acquisition. I give Musk credit but my money isn't on the line. This once again proves to me that only dividend companies really care about share holders. Non-dividend care only about their own growth or prospects

There isn't synergy. SCTY's business model is dying and they generate negative returns on each install they do. Their short term cost of capital (in a historically low interest rate environment) is higher than their long term overly optimistic return on capital.

Your comments about dividends aren't quite right. Lots of firms providing dividends aren't focused on shareholder value. And lots of firms that don't provide dividends are very focused on shareholder value. BRK is a great example.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 22, 2016, 11:06:10 AM
Purchasing Solar City may be more about minimizing the cost of the Supercharger network than anything else, especially if enough regions/utilities allow a corporation to offset their own electricity consumption via generation.

That doesn't make sense. Today Tesla has the freedom to pick any vendor to do the install, and can pick the lowest cost one if they want. And the Supercharger network isn't really related to what SCTY does. SCTY installs solar panels on roofs with a leasing model. A Supercharger is a huge grid connection and Tesla electronics to deliver that electricity to a car. The Superchargers might have solar panels on them some day--but they could get those anywhere. SCTY doesn't make solar panels anyway. They might start making them someday, but their optimistic projections about the costs of their panels is higher than what experienced manufacturers already produce at. SCTY is a dog.

Or more cynically he is using a company he owns to buy a company he owns that is in trouble ?

Bingo.

I mentioned shareholder dilution and complete insider control a month ago.  Both policies are destructive to shareholder wealth.  I equate "complete insider control" to investing in a personality, which is fine as long as the personality is in vogue.  In this case, the personality is fucking the minority shareholders.

Musk says he won't vote his shares. So hopefully the other shareholders realize this is a bad deal. There's some chance Musk doesn't expect it to go through and is just doing this to screw the SCTY shorts or to start a bidding war for SCTY. But if so, it's a high risk, highly costly gambit. He's tarnishing his personal brand--and that's the only thing that has allowed his firms to get such generous treatment in the markets.

Or more cynically he is using a company he owns to buy a company he owns that is in trouble ?

Which would be less problematic if TSLA itself wasn't in trouble going forward (burning through lots of cash as it speeds toward developing a car it will not make any money on).  Like the internet back in the late 90's, I suspect we'll see a lot of failures and bankruptcies in the electric/solar space before the long-term winners emerge.  Musk is a visionary, a genius, but I think we will see TSLA as a single digit stock at some point over the next 24 months.

I worry that this is true. He may take TSLA down with SCTY. Without this purchase, TSLA would likely have been OK (still way overvalued, but a firm with a future). Here, he's burning TSLA cash and making it harder to raise more TSLA cash (which it desperately needs). What a crackpot idea.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: mrpercentage on June 22, 2016, 11:18:46 AM
Share holders aside, let's give him credit. Maybe he does have the capability to completely take a house of the grid for an affordable price but only by using the synergy of this acquisition. I give Musk credit but my money isn't on the line. This once again proves to me that only dividend companies really care about share holders. Non-dividend care only about their own growth or prospects

There isn't synergy. SCTY's business model is dying and they generate negative returns on each install they do. Their short term cost of capital (in a historically low interest rate environment) is higher than their long term overly optimistic return on capital.

Your comments about dividends aren't quite right. Lots of firms providing dividends aren't focused on shareholder value. And lots of firms that don't provide dividends are very focused on shareholder value. BRK is a great example.

Really there isn't synergy bridging the gap for solar panels at night with Tesla batteries so you can completely disconnect from your local utility and have all the components come from one company? Or even use solar panels and Tesla batteries in SpaceX. I see a lot he can do with that.

BRK-B is the only non dividend company I would even consider
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: retiringearly on June 22, 2016, 11:21:43 AM
I really do not like Tesla or this acquisition.  Both companies are burning cash like firewood.
This may very well work out, but I wouldn't invest my money in either company.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Vagabond76 on June 22, 2016, 01:17:39 PM
Musk says he won't vote his shares. So hopefully the other shareholders realize this is a bad deal. There's some chance Musk doesn't expect it to go through and is just doing this to screw the SCTY shorts or to start a bidding war for SCTY. But if so, it's a high risk, highly costly gambit. He's tarnishing his personal brand--and that's the only thing that has allowed his firms to get such generous treatment in the markets.

Maybe true, but this only relates to Solar City's shareholders.  If I was one of them and I had the opportunity to dump trade my shares for Tesla shares, I might take it.  More likely, I would trade the shares for cash, but that is irrelevant to a vote.

Tesla's shareholders, on the other hand, do not vote on anything.  Only the board votes.  Is Musk going to refrain from voting for board members for, suppose, the next five years to alleviate concerns of undue influence?  Of course not.  The point is he controls the board, even those not named "Musk."
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: ShoulderThingThatGoesUp on June 22, 2016, 02:50:18 PM
I saw a pretty solid comment about this: Elon (Tesla) is bailing out Elon (SolarCity) so that Elon (SpaceX) doesn't lose his shirt on all the solar bonds he bought.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Dollar Slice on June 22, 2016, 02:57:32 PM
C'mon guys. Just like Donald Trump, Elon Musk is a billionaire. Therefore he is obviously very good with money, and therefore he is very smart, and therefore this must be a great idea! ;-)
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: nobodyspecial on June 22, 2016, 03:18:05 PM
Who was it who said: "how do you get to be a billionaire? Start with $2Bn and buy an airline!"
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: rocketpj on June 22, 2016, 03:57:07 PM
I have a dozen shares I bought ages ago (when I still bought individual companies - meaning pre-mustache).  I see no particular reason to sell them (along with the jumble of other shares I have sitting around).  Every one of those companies was a solid buy (or so I thought), with Tesla probably being the most risky.  I guess I'll see in 20 or so years when I start selling them off if I was half as smart as I thought.

Now I just buy indexes.  No muss, no fuss.  But interesting to watch the graphs go up and down on all the other stuff.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 22, 2016, 05:15:30 PM
Share holders aside, let's give him credit. Maybe he does have the capability to completely take a house of the grid for an affordable price but only by using the synergy of this acquisition. I give Musk credit but my money isn't on the line. This once again proves to me that only dividend companies really care about share holders. Non-dividend care only about their own growth or prospects

There isn't synergy. SCTY's business model is dying and they generate negative returns on each install they do. Their short term cost of capital (in a historically low interest rate environment) is higher than their long term overly optimistic return on capital.

Your comments about dividends aren't quite right. Lots of firms providing dividends aren't focused on shareholder value. And lots of firms that don't provide dividends are very focused on shareholder value. BRK is a great example.

Really there isn't synergy bridging the gap for solar panels at night with Tesla batteries so you can completely disconnect from your local utility and have all the components come from one company? Or even use solar panels and Tesla batteries in SpaceX. I see a lot he can do with that.

BRK-B is the only non dividend company I would even consider

Using Li-ion batteries at home to time shift demand costs much more to implement than it could save you on your bill. Li-ion batteries are too expensive, and degrade quickly with frequent deep cycling of that nature. The Powerwall is uneconomic for most applications. And the math is only going to get worse as more and more solar is added to the grid, pushing daylight electricity prices downwards.

Musk says he won't vote his shares. So hopefully the other shareholders realize this is a bad deal. There's some chance Musk doesn't expect it to go through and is just doing this to screw the SCTY shorts or to start a bidding war for SCTY. But if so, it's a high risk, highly costly gambit. He's tarnishing his personal brand--and that's the only thing that has allowed his firms to get such generous treatment in the markets.

Maybe true, but this only relates to Solar City's shareholders.  If I was one of them and I had the opportunity to dump trade my shares for Tesla shares, I might take it.  More likely, I would trade the shares for cash, but that is irrelevant to a vote.

Tesla's shareholders, on the other hand, do not vote on anything.  Only the board votes.  Is Musk going to refrain from voting for board members for, suppose, the next five years to alleviate concerns of undue influence?  Of course not.  The point is he controls the board, even those not named "Musk."

SCTY's shareholders should vote for this deal as it overpays them for their shares. I read that TSLA shareholders must approve the acquisition too.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: acroy on June 23, 2016, 07:03:41 AM
Hold on -

We're talking about a company taking massive losses manufacturing glitzy ultra-lux personal enclosed couch-potato transport systems.

Doesn't this belong in 'Antimustachian Wall of Shame and Comedy'?
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: TheStachery on June 23, 2016, 09:01:57 AM
I really do not like Tesla or this acquisition.  Both companies are burning cash like firewood.
This may very well work out, but I wouldn't invest my money in either company.

The same could have been said about AMZN 10-15 years ago.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Vagabond76 on June 23, 2016, 09:15:21 AM
I really do not like Tesla or this acquisition.  Both companies are burning cash like firewood.
This may very well work out, but I wouldn't invest my money in either company.

The same could have been said about AMZN 10-15 years ago.

Sometimes people get lucky.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 23, 2016, 09:20:15 AM
I really do not like Tesla or this acquisition.  Both companies are burning cash like firewood.
This may very well work out, but I wouldn't invest my money in either company.

The same could have been said about AMZN 10-15 years ago.

Sometimes people get lucky.
It's MUCH easier and MUCH less capital intensive to scale up a website and warehouses than it is to learn how to manufacture cars and batteries and scale that up to production levels that exceed Toyota's at the same factory, while at the same time producing high quality cars and dramatic reductions in cost in a relatively new vehicle propulsion technology area.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: TheStachery on June 23, 2016, 09:23:38 AM
I really do not like Tesla or this acquisition.  Both companies are burning cash like firewood.
This may very well work out, but I wouldn't invest my money in either company.

The same could have been said about AMZN 10-15 years ago.

Sometimes people get lucky.

Or the revolutionized an industry with technology.  traditional car companies are so far behind, they can't keep pace with tesla, where is their charging network? 
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 23, 2016, 09:40:50 AM
I really do not like Tesla or this acquisition.  Both companies are burning cash like firewood.
This may very well work out, but I wouldn't invest my money in either company.

The same could have been said about AMZN 10-15 years ago.

Sometimes people get lucky.

Or the revolutionized an industry with technology.  traditional car companies are so far behind, they can't keep pace with tesla, where is their charging network? 

Much of the charging network is already built. It's in nearly every building in America right now. You can charge a Leaf with a standard household outlet. If you buy an EV, maybe you want to install a quicker charging option in your garage for <$1k. The rest (quick charge along freeways) will get built by someone else. The car companies don't build and operate gas stations.

I have never once charged either of my 2 Leafs anywhere besides my garage in the 2 years I've had them.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: talltexan on June 24, 2016, 09:37:12 AM
I guess I've finally realized that "making money" is a necessary but not sufficient condition for building a truly great business. Many times, people are using these businesses more like personal ATM's than for creation of genuine social and shareholder value.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 24, 2016, 10:57:21 AM
I guess I've finally realized that "making money" is a necessary but not sufficient condition for building a truly great business. Many times, people are using these businesses more like personal ATM's than for creation of genuine social and shareholder value.

Corporate governance in the US is pretty bad. But it's worse in some other countries. You have situations like Facebook where Zuckerberg can literally do whatever he wants to (other than possibly something illegal) because he controls a majority of the voting weight of the shares. He even just changed the share structure so that he could sell or give away the economic value of his shares but still retain complete control. So he can cash out $40 billion (or whatever he's worth) but still run the whole company. Craziness.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: AlanStache on June 24, 2016, 04:36:59 PM
...
Using Li-ion batteries at home to time shift demand costs much more to implement than it could save you on your bill. Li-ion batteries are too expensive, and degrade quickly with frequent deep cycling of that nature. The Powerwall is uneconomic for most applications. And the math is only going to get worse as more and more solar is added to the grid, pushing daylight electricity prices downwards.


If more solar comes online and day light power prices go down while the PowerWall is charging would the economics of the PW get better not worse?  Not sure the PW would end up make sense financially but it would move in the right direction.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 26, 2016, 10:46:18 AM
...
Using Li-ion batteries at home to time shift demand costs much more to implement than it could save you on your bill. Li-ion batteries are too expensive, and degrade quickly with frequent deep cycling of that nature. The Powerwall is uneconomic for most applications. And the math is only going to get worse as more and more solar is added to the grid, pushing daylight electricity prices downwards.


If more solar comes online and day light power prices go down while the PowerWall is charging would the economics of the PW get better not worse?  Not sure the PW would end up make sense financially but it would move in the right direction.

The Powerwall is uneconomic now. Rates vary a lot by location. For me they are 12 cents day and 6 cents night. In some places its more like 35 cents day and 15 cents night. The bigger the disparity between night and day rates, the better the economics. So if there is more and more solar energy, it pushes the daytime prices down closer and closer to the nighttime prices. So time shifting no longer yields any savings. Eventually daytime  prices could become cheaper than night time, or middle of the day could be the cheap zone and early morning/early evening (times with somewhat high demand and limited sunlight) could be the expensive zones. But middle of the day (solar) prices would have to become REALLY cheap (maybe negative price) in order for the math to be the same as it is today--which is still uneconomic.

So, until Li-ion prices come down a lot, Li-ion time shifting is going to be uneconomic.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on June 26, 2016, 11:20:53 AM
Using Li-ion batteries at home to time shift demand costs much more to implement than it could save you on your bill. Li-ion batteries are too expensive, and degrade quickly with frequent deep cycling of that nature. The Powerwall is uneconomic for most applications. And the math is only going to get worse as more and more solar is added to the grid, pushing daylight electricity prices downwards.
I agree and disagree. The powerwall is still on the expensive side, ~15c/kWh if cycled daily over it's 10-year warrantied lifespan, but at the same time, it's not only competing with utility scale PV costs, it's competing with utility scale PV (or wind, or w/e), transmission, delivery, and administrative costs, and for most customer's it's only competing with those costs at night. If residential PV is 4c/kWh, and a residential customer uses a third of their total electricity use at night, then their costs will be 4c/kWh*.66 + 19c/kwh*.33 = ~9c/kWh, which is pretty close to the cost of electricity from the grid.

That's only possible because T/D/Admin are about half the cost of residential electricity, utility rates don't always reflect the underlying market, and to some extent utilities subsidize customers with excessive energy and power consumption. On the flip side, customers who can both reduce and time-shift their consumption may be able to realize off-grid electricity rates that are lower than what the utility charges. What Tesla brings to the table by purchasing Solar City is the ability to sync/manage PV generation, daily storage (eg a powerwall or few), and infrequently used back-up storage (The 2-ton rolling battery pack that is a Tesla), ideally with some DSM thrown in for good measure.

I wouldn't worry a whole lot about lifespan either. The chemistry that Tesla, Toyota, and I imagine a few other manufacturers use is fairly tolerant to cycling. Heat is it's biggest enemy, which is why Tesla's BMS put them in the driver's seat IMO.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on June 26, 2016, 12:15:58 PM
I don't know what you're using to come up with the 15c/kWh number. But you have to keep in mind that Li-ion batteries are not designed to do deep-cycle charge cycles daily. And can't be charged to 100% or discharged to 0% (without seriously decreasing useful life). And over 10 years they will have at least 30% (or likely 40%) degradation even with the cooling unit, and the degradation happens more quickly at first (i.e. more years with lower capacity). And there are significant conversion losses to store and retrieve the power from the battery. As well as the cooling unit that the Powerwall has to keep the battery from heating up too much. And I think you're making baseless assumptions that Tesla's chemistry is special. They've been using standard Li-ion cells for the cars. There's no indication that they have been doing amazing research of their own to improve chemistry that has yielded fantastic improvements.

And you are blending the night/day cost of electricity. What you should be doing is comparing it to the alternative cost. Instead of paying 19cents (your number, which is certainly too cheap) at night, your alternative is to pay 10 cents or 6 cents or 15 cents (depending on the nighttime cost in your area). So you're buying a huge battery, dealing with the noise it produces, taking a risk, etc, and the effect is that you pay more for nighttime electricity--not less. You can still pay only 4 cents for power through your solar panels during the day time regardless of whether you have your own storage or whether you use the grid for storage.

Here's one analysis of the real cost.
http://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/how-the-cost-of-powerwall-storage-doubled-in-11-months/

Key illustration.
(http://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/powerwall-degradation.png)
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on June 26, 2016, 01:08:19 PM
It's just the cost divided by the storage power assuming a daily discharge of 80% of capacity for the 10 year warranty period. That analysis is accurate too, but it's an extreme scenario (Edit - See below). Looking at the warranty document they referenced, In Australia, Tesla warranties the product to maintain 60+% of capacity after 10 year or 18000MWh, which is $3000/18000000kWh = $.16+/kWh. It's unlikely that every single powerwall will drop dead at the end of it's warranty period, so overall storage costs will likely be lower than that. Granted, the worst case scenario would be if someone purchased a powerwall and threw it off a cliff. That would be very expensive storage. ;)

https://naturalsolar.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Tesla_Powerwall_Warranty_Australia_R1-04_en1.pdf

Degradation also isn't a huge issue for NCA cells, but since heat has a substantial influence on lifespan, I can see why Tesla would have a relatively restrictive warranty in Australia. With that said, I'm not sure why you're resorting to ad-hominem attacks when a few minutes searching for NCA cell performance would have provided you with that information.

http://www.nrel.gov/transportation/energystorage/pdfs/45048.pdf

Data from over a decade ago (page 18) shows NCA cells can handle DoDs of ~70%  and only lose ~2+% capacity/year as long their operating temps are regulated. Tesla, Toyota, and whoever else isn't using some special chemistry. They're using a battery chemistry that's been around for at least a decade, and has probably been improved over that time. If they were using something that died after a few years, they'd be bleeding money by offering to warranty these batteries at ~16+c/kWh. Odds are, the actual energy storage costs will be lower than the warrantied storage costs, and the cost of a cell replacement on an existing powerwall will be much lower than the cost of a new powerwall, which means storage costs going forward will drop.

Anyone can pay 10c, or 6c, or whatever at night from the grid, but with every utility co I've heard of, they also have to purchase electricity from them during the day, which can be far more expensive, instead of using less expensive power they generate themselves. Like I said before, this is primarily advantageous when someone can control their own production and use. If they absolutely positively have to power their "grow lights" at night, then a powerwall wouldn't work out for them. On the other hand, if they can bias their energy use towards day time power consumption, a powerwall + solar PV may be less expensive because customers that use less and can control their consumption still have to pay about the same amount for transmission, distribution, and admin overhead from the utility, but can actively reduce their self-generation/storage costs by going with PV panels and minimizing the amount of energy they use at night and need to store.

Edit - Now that I'm looking at it some more, that link you posted has some issues. The author's graph assumes the capacity warrantied at the end of each period will be the same during that whole period, which isn't accurate. If someone's powerwall has dropped to 85% of capacity (6.4kWh) at any time prior to the 2-year/4MWh mark, Tesla will replace or repair it. In fact, the author's assumption includes a powerwall that is only operating per the warranty spec 3 days out of the 3650 day warranty, which is, um... interesting.

So yeah, a defective powerwall that Tesla is never asked to fix, even though the defect is present through virtually the product's entire life, can be more expensive than a functional powerwall that is within the specs of Tesla's warranty. :D
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on June 26, 2016, 03:27:10 PM
Edit - Now that I'm looking at it some more, that link you posted has some issues. The author's graph assumes the capacity warrantied at the end of each period will be the same during that whole period, which isn't accurate. If someone's powerwall has dropped to 85% of capacity (6.4kWh) at any time prior to the 2-year/4MWh mark, Tesla will replace or repair it. In fact, the author's assumption includes a powerwall that is only operating per the warranty spec 3 days out of the 3650 day warranty, which is, um... interesting.

So yeah, a defective powerwall that Tesla is never asked to fix, even though the defect is present through virtually the product's entire life, can be more expensive than a functional powerwall that is within the specs of Tesla's warranty. :D

The graph is spot on because it's graphing what the warranty guarantees. In fact, it is titled 'The minimum warranted energy you can get from the Powerwall cycling it daily' which is accurate. His point is that you, the consumer, can only count on what Tesla warranties. Which makes sense because you can be sure they want to advertize the best performance they believe they can stand behind. Any additional kWh you may get is a "bonus."
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on June 27, 2016, 09:18:53 PM
That's what I thought initially, but the graph is flat out wrong. In fact, I was wrong to assume it was even right 3 out of 3650 days. The warranty states that the batteries shall have >85% capacity after 2 years (or however many MWh). The author of that blog article assumes the battery will have exactly 85% capacity, which is less than >85% capacity, from the first day through the first 2 years, which means their battery never performs at the minimum level specified in the warranty. They continue to do this for the other two time periods specified in the warranty. For that matter, I don't know anyone who would purchase a powerwall that only has 85% capacity from day 1 and not return it. To put it mildly, it's annoying. But at the same time, Tesla could really hurt the auto manufacturing, electricity generation, and utility industries, so I can see why there are so many "articles"/"posts" throwing horse-hockey their way.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on June 27, 2016, 09:47:21 PM
That's what I thought initially, but the graph is flat out wrong. In fact, I was wrong to assume it was even right 3 out of 3650 days. The warranty states that the batteries shall have >85% capacity after 2 years (or however many MWh). The author of that blog article assumes the battery will have exactly 85% capacity, which is less than >85% capacity, from the first day through the first 2 years, which means their battery never performs at the minimum level specified in the warranty. They continue to do this for the other two time periods specified in the warranty. For that matter, I don't know anyone who would purchase a powerwall that only has 85% capacity from day 1 and not return it. To put it mildly, it's annoying. But at the same time, Tesla could really hurt the auto manufacturing, electricity generation, and utility industries, so I can see why there are so many "articles"/"posts" throwing horse-hockey their way.

From the warranty (bold added):
Quote
The product shall maintain >85% of its initial rated capacity until the earliest to occur of:...2 years have expired from the Original Installation Date.


The graph, showing warrantied (not actual) kWh, is not wrong. The warranty allows it to go as low as just above 85% during the first two years. So on the same day as installation it could be as low as 85.1% and still be within spec.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: AlanStache on June 28, 2016, 06:41:26 AM
...
Using Li-ion batteries at home to time shift demand costs much more to implement than it could save you on your bill. Li-ion batteries are too expensive, and degrade quickly with frequent deep cycling of that nature. The Powerwall is uneconomic for most applications. And the math is only going to get worse as more and more solar is added to the grid, pushing daylight electricity prices downwards.


If more solar comes online and day light power prices go down while the PowerWall is charging would the economics of the PW get better not worse?  Not sure the PW would end up make sense financially but it would move in the right direction.

The Powerwall is uneconomic now. Rates vary a lot by location. For me they are 12 cents day and 6 cents night. In some places its more like 35 cents day and 15 cents night. The bigger the disparity between night and day rates, the better the economics. So if there is more and more solar energy, it pushes the daytime prices down closer and closer to the nighttime prices. So time shifting no longer yields any savings. Eventually daytime  prices could become cheaper than night time, or middle of the day could be the cheap zone and early morning/early evening (times with somewhat high demand and limited sunlight) could be the expensive zones. But middle of the day (solar) prices would have to become REALLY cheap (maybe negative price) in order for the math to be the same as it is today--which is still uneconomic.

So, until Li-ion prices come down a lot, Li-ion time shifting is going to be uneconomic.

thanks for the reply.

What you are saying is that now with high day time prices it is much better to be paid (by the local utility) for the solar power on my roof than to store that solar power in a PW for my night time usage because I can buy power cheaply at night. (?) 

Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on June 28, 2016, 09:42:21 AM
That's what I thought initially, but the graph is flat out wrong. In fact, I was wrong to assume it was even right 3 out of 3650 days. The warranty states that the batteries shall have >85% capacity after 2 years (or however many MWh). The author of that blog article assumes the battery will have exactly 85% capacity, which is less than >85% capacity, from the first day through the first 2 years, which means their battery never performs at the minimum level specified in the warranty. They continue to do this for the other two time periods specified in the warranty. For that matter, I don't know anyone who would purchase a powerwall that only has 85% capacity from day 1 and not return it. To put it mildly, it's annoying. But at the same time, Tesla could really hurt the auto manufacturing, electricity generation, and utility industries, so I can see why there are so many "articles"/"posts" throwing horse-hockey their way.

From the warranty (bold added):
Quote
The product shall maintain >85% of its initial rated capacity until the earliest to occur of:...2 years have expired from the Original Installation Date.


The graph, showing warrantied (not actual) kWh, is not wrong. The warranty allows it to go as low as just above 85% during the first two years. So on the same day as installation it could be as low as 85.1% and still be within spec.
Even if Tesla could sell batteries that only came with 85.1% of capacity from day one, the blog post author's assumption of 85% capacity for the first two years is outside of the > 85% capacity warrantied by Tesla.

Practically speaking, no battery is going to sit at discrete capacity levels and decline every couple years. They usually start at or above their rated capacity and decline at whatever percent per unit time depending on operating conditions. Legally, at least in the US, there's no way Tesla can sell a 6.4kWh battery that on average comes from the factory with even 90% of the rated capacity. Manufacturers are legally required to accurately represent their products.

If the author wants to make stuff up to throw shade at Tesla, that's their deal. I'm still basing my opinion off of physics, research, and law.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Metric Mouse on July 01, 2016, 05:24:57 PM
Tesla driver killed while using their auto pilot - Thoughts?

http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/01/technology/tesla-driver-death-autopilot/index.html?iid=hp-stack-dom
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Seppia on July 01, 2016, 07:04:44 PM
Just another clue as to why investors shouldn't touch tesla with a 10 ft pole.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: nobodyspecial on July 01, 2016, 07:56:29 PM
As opposed to those most traditional of traditional car makers Mercedes Benz?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYY7OfQ4-5A (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYY7OfQ4-5A)
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on July 02, 2016, 10:45:28 AM
Even if Tesla could sell batteries that only came with 85.1% of capacity from day one, the blog post author's assumption of 85% capacity for the first two years is outside of the > 85% capacity warrantied by Tesla.

Practically speaking, no battery is going to sit at discrete capacity levels and decline every couple years. They usually start at or above their rated capacity and decline at whatever percent per unit time depending on operating conditions. Legally, at least in the US, there's no way Tesla can sell a 6.4kWh battery that on average comes from the factory with even 90% of the rated capacity. Manufacturers are legally required to accurately represent their products.

If the author wants to make stuff up to throw shade at Tesla, that's their deal. I'm still basing my opinion off of physics, research, and law.

You're missing the main point of the article/graph by getting caught up on the difference between 85% and >85%, an argument about open vs. closed intervals. This difference isn't materially significant, and noting this level of detail on a graph would be pedantic and unnecessary.

The author is not making stuff up. You can say you're basing your opinions off physics, research, and law, but stating that ideal doesn't mean you are correct. I very much doubt that you have any empirical data on the actual performance of the PW. If you do I welcome you to post it here, otherwise stop being a Tesla apologist. Would also like to know specifically which laws you believe apply here, both US and AU (since the author is in Australia).

The author is very clear on his point: For ROI purposes batteries are only as good as the warranty. Capacity above what is warrantied should be treated as bonus because there's no guarantee you'll get it.  I can understand if you disagree with this premise, but don't accuse the author of "making stuff up" just say that you disagree on this method of ROI. Curious to know what alternative you would propose, since the warranty is the only promise from Tesla.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Seppia on July 03, 2016, 01:05:23 AM
As opposed to those most traditional of traditional car makers Mercedes Benz?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYY7OfQ4-5A (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYY7OfQ4-5A)

I have zero individual shares of both, but I would take ANY car maker before tesla if I had to invest with a long term horizon.

Tesla is an unsustainable business as is, has little or no competitive advantage, a ridiculous market valuation and its owner is proposing to overpay to buy a semi failed company (that coincidentally, he owns), by paying with tesla stock.

What could possibly go wrong?
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on July 05, 2016, 05:51:06 PM
...
Using Li-ion batteries at home to time shift demand costs much more to implement than it could save you on your bill. Li-ion batteries are too expensive, and degrade quickly with frequent deep cycling of that nature. The Powerwall is uneconomic for most applications. And the math is only going to get worse as more and more solar is added to the grid, pushing daylight electricity prices downwards.


If more solar comes online and day light power prices go down while the PowerWall is charging would the economics of the PW get better not worse?  Not sure the PW would end up make sense financially but it would move in the right direction.

The Powerwall is uneconomic now. Rates vary a lot by location. For me they are 12 cents day and 6 cents night. In some places its more like 35 cents day and 15 cents night. The bigger the disparity between night and day rates, the better the economics. So if there is more and more solar energy, it pushes the daytime prices down closer and closer to the nighttime prices. So time shifting no longer yields any savings. Eventually daytime  prices could become cheaper than night time, or middle of the day could be the cheap zone and early morning/early evening (times with somewhat high demand and limited sunlight) could be the expensive zones. But middle of the day (solar) prices would have to become REALLY cheap (maybe negative price) in order for the math to be the same as it is today--which is still uneconomic.

So, until Li-ion prices come down a lot, Li-ion time shifting is going to be uneconomic.

thanks for the reply.

What you are saying is that now with high day time prices it is much better to be paid (by the local utility) for the solar power on my roof than to store that solar power in a PW for my night time usage because I can buy power cheaply at night. (?)

Yes, for most scenarios. Batteries are too expensive right now for most electric rates in the country. And as daytime prices come down (due to lots of solar added to the grid), the math gets worse for batteries.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on July 05, 2016, 06:00:09 PM
I'm not sure why you're resorting to ad-hominem attacks

Pretty sure I wasn't doing that. I was responding solely to the evidence for/against your arguments, and made no comments about you personally. I don't really know you, but you seem like a reasonably intelligent and well meaning person.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on July 07, 2016, 12:03:23 AM
Even if Tesla could sell batteries that only came with 85.1% of capacity from day one, the blog post author's assumption of 85% capacity for the first two years is outside of the > 85% capacity warrantied by Tesla.

Practically speaking, no battery is going to sit at discrete capacity levels and decline every couple years. They usually start at or above their rated capacity and decline at whatever percent per unit time depending on operating conditions. Legally, at least in the US, there's no way Tesla can sell a 6.4kWh battery that on average comes from the factory with even 90% of the rated capacity. Manufacturers are legally required to accurately represent their products.

If the author wants to make stuff up to throw shade at Tesla, that's their deal. I'm still basing my opinion off of physics, research, and law.

You're missing the main point of the article/graph by getting caught up on the difference between 85% and >85%, an argument about open vs. closed intervals. This difference isn't materially significant, and noting this level of detail on a graph would be pedantic and unnecessary.

The author is not making stuff up. You can say you're basing your opinions off physics, research, and law, but stating that ideal doesn't mean you are correct. I very much doubt that you have any empirical data on the actual performance of the PW. If you do I welcome you to post it here, otherwise stop being a Tesla apologist. Would also like to know specifically which laws you believe apply here, both US and AU (since the author is in Australia).

The author is very clear on his point: For ROI purposes batteries are only as good as the warranty. Capacity above what is warrantied should be treated as bonus because there's no guarantee you'll get it.  I can understand if you disagree with this premise, but don't accuse the author of "making stuff up" just say that you disagree on this method of ROI. Curious to know what alternative you would propose, since the warranty is the only promise from Tesla.
I agree that 85% versus 85.1% isn't a big difference, but assuming that...

... in order to support their blog article is hyperbolic and possibly astroturfing. There are plenty of valid criticisms they could focus on without making things up.

Making up this bizarre scenario up where the batteries are barely within Tesla's spec (which they still managed to mess up somehow, even if it was only by .1%) and lose capacity in a way that flies in the face of everything we know about batteries in general as well as specific data on this battery chemistry is ridiculous IMO. They might as well post a blog article on how every *insert thing here* costs $X/*unit measurement* to operate because every warrantied part will fail the day after it's warranty expires and/or only perform in a way that will meet the minimum threshold of the warranty.

Don't get me wrong, I imagine companies would love that much control over their product's planned obsolescence, but that's just not possible (or legal in some cases). Assuming something is only as good as the warranty is, in the vast majority of situations, incorrect. There may be cases where that happens, if the author uses the roughly monotonically decreasing loss of capacity we see in every battery instead of some step function that no one's ever seen in a battery, but that's not what they did.

Hell, they could just say they think the batteries will degrade at twice the rate specified in the warranty and that Tesla will go out of business within a year or two. Sure, that flies in the face of existing data on how that battery chemistry ages, but at least it would be a little closer to reality, and it might even be possible with sufficiently poor quality control by Panasonic/Tesla. But they didn't do that. Instead, they used fallacious assumptions to support some bizarre use case that, as far as I understand it, is physically impossible.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on July 07, 2016, 12:08:21 AM
I'm not sure why you're resorting to ad-hominem attacks
Pretty sure I wasn't doing that. I was responding solely to the evidence for/against your arguments, and made no comments about you personally. I don't really know you, but you seem like a reasonably intelligent and well meaning person.
YMMV, but claiming that others are making "baseless assumptions" seems like an ad-hominem attack to me, especially when there's data out there associated with the claim that can be found with a little effort. Granted, you're not throwing down 4chan style, but I don't see a place for any derisive comment to someone else in construction conversation, even if the comment is relatively mild.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on July 07, 2016, 10:09:55 AM
I agree that 85% versus 85.1% isn't a big difference, but assuming that...
  • The batteries behave in a way that is contrary to the laws of physics (eg discrete reductions in capacity after being flat for years)
  • The batteries lose capacity far faster than 10+ year old research suggests they'll lose capacity (NREL pdf I posted earlier in the thread)
  • Tesla can somehow legally sell a product that doesn't meet the specified and warrantied capacity (violating consumer law in the US, and I imagine in other countries)

... in order to support their blog article is hyperbolic and possibly astroturfing. There are plenty of valid criticisms they could focus on without making things up.

Again, the blogger clearly labels the graph as the warrantied capacity. This doesn't mean capacity is going to drop in discrete steps. It could, however, degrade down to just above 85% relatively quickly and still function to spec. Many design and environmental factors affect battery performance. How will the PW perform in the real world? No one other than Tesla has PW specific data at this point in time. If you really believe PW is going to perform much better than the warranty indicates (you still haven't posted any PW data here!) then you should take issue with Tesla for not standing behind their product, not a blogger who's just doing an analysis with what little information is available.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on July 07, 2016, 10:32:20 AM
Don't get me wrong, I imagine companies would love that much control over their product's planned obsolescence, but that's just not possible (or legal in some cases). Assuming something is only as good as the warranty is, in the vast majority of situations, incorrect. There may be cases where that happens, if the author uses the roughly monotonically decreasing loss of capacity we see in every battery instead of some step function that no one's ever seen in a battery, but that's not what they did.

But there are situations where this is correct and, IMO this includes batteries. A warranty on a car or something similar is designed primarily to protect against manufacturing defects because these are complicated mechanical products. So consumers correctly assume that the 60000 mile warranty is not the full lifespan of the product, they are just guaranteed to have any issues covered before then. After 60k the consumer must cover any repairs, but if properly maintained most cars will operate almost indefinitely. A battery, on the other hand, is more like a roof. When I have a new roof installed the warranty is typically something like 30 or 50 years. A roof degrades relatively evenly over time, so even excluding manufacturing defects, I will eventually need to replace the entire roof once it degrades to a certain point. So anything beyond the warrantied period on a roof is a bonus. Batteries are very similar in that the capacity degrades relatively evenly throughout the array, so at some point you need to replace the entire array. Just like a roof, I would not assume that the life of a battery extends much beyond the warranty.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on July 10, 2016, 09:59:40 AM
I'm not sure why you're resorting to ad-hominem attacks
Pretty sure I wasn't doing that. I was responding solely to the evidence for/against your arguments, and made no comments about you personally. I don't really know you, but you seem like a reasonably intelligent and well meaning person.
YMMV, but claiming that others are making "baseless assumptions" seems like an ad-hominem attack to me, especially when there's data out there associated with the claim that can be found with a little effort. Granted, you're not throwing down 4chan style, but I don't see a place for any derisive comment to someone else in construction conversation, even if the comment is relatively mild.

Saying your assumption was baseless is the definition of critiquing your argument (and the assumptions underlying it) and not you. Saying "only an idiot would think that" is attacking you and not the argument.

Quote
ad ho·mi·nem
ˌad ˈhämənəm/
adverb & adjective
adverb: ad hominem; adjective: ad hominem
1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
"vicious ad hominem attacks"
2.
relating to or associated with a particular person.
"the office was created ad hominem for Fenton"
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on July 17, 2016, 01:29:16 PM
I agree that 85% versus 85.1% isn't a big difference, but assuming that...
  • The batteries behave in a way that is contrary to the laws of physics (eg discrete reductions in capacity after being flat for years)
  • The batteries lose capacity far faster than 10+ year old research suggests they'll lose capacity (NREL pdf I posted earlier in the thread)
  • Tesla can somehow legally sell a product that doesn't meet the specified and warrantied capacity (violating consumer law in the US, and I imagine in other countries)

... in order to support their blog article is hyperbolic and possibly astroturfing. There are plenty of valid criticisms they could focus on without making things up.

Again, the blogger clearly labels the graph as the warrantied capacity. This doesn't mean capacity is going to drop in discrete steps. It could, however, degrade down to just above 85% relatively quickly and still function to spec. Many design and environmental factors affect battery performance. How will the PW perform in the real world? No one other than Tesla has PW specific data at this point in time. If you really believe PW is going to perform much better than the warranty indicates (you still haven't posted any PW data here!) then you should take issue with Tesla for not standing behind their product, not a blogger who's just doing an analysis with what little information is available.
Sure, if Tesla somehow builds a battery where capacity declines in a step-wise manner, and can misrepresent their products without breaking the law, then the author's assumptions would work.

The problem with their graph is that it represents no battery capacity versus cycle graph I've ever seen. If you seen something like that, feel free to post it. The NREL link I posted earlier on NCA cells, which is what Tesla uses, shows a logarithmic drop in capacity, and every other graph I've seen at least decreases monotonically. The author used a step function, which I've never seen in any research on battery cycling versus capacity.

In addition, selling a 6.4kWh battery that at best is a 5.4kWh battery is illegal in the US. Australia's laws may allow manufacturers to misrepresent their product, but they can't do that here.

In the context of this thread, eg how much will storage actually cost, warrantied lifespan isn't the same as actual lifespan. If it was, Chevy and Toyota would be neck and neck in terms of reliability. But they aren't...

http://www.newsday.com/classifieds/cars/consumer-reports-best-and-worst-car-brands-in-2015-include-lexus-mazda-and-toyota-1.10387053

Last but not least, the author also has a spreadsheet for warrantied battery storage costs where they use relatively favorable methods for other batteries.

https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/comparison-table/

The linked warranty for the first example (LG battery) explicitly states that storage more than 1920kWh/year, which is 300 100% cycles per year, but the author didn't include that in the total warrantied capacity at 1 cycle per day.

Long story short, I'm not going to believe the claims of someone who ignores warranty limitations for one battery while focusing on similar limitations of another battery, assumes the battery will decline in capacity in a way's never been observed, and assumes that manufacturers can legally misrepresent their products. If you want to believe those things, knock yourself out. :)
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on July 17, 2016, 01:30:18 PM
Saying your assumption was baseless is the definition of critiquing your argument (and the assumptions underlying it) and not you. Saying "only an idiot would think that" is attacking you and not the argument.

Quote
ad ho·mi·nem
ˌad ˈhämənəm/
adverb & adjective
adverb: ad hominem; adjective: ad hominem
1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
"vicious ad hominem attacks"
2.
relating to or associated with a particular person.
"the office was created ad hominem for Fenton"
I can see how you wouldn't perceive it as an Ad-Hominem attack. I view it as an indirect Ad-Hominem attack, but it seems to be universally perceived as being nil/besides the point. There's no way in hell it's a critique though. There were no facts presented that refuted my position or suggested anything else. Elenchi ignoratio is probably most accurate.

https://www.quora.com/What-kind-of-fallacy-is-insulting-an-argument-but-not-refuting-it

Regardless of how I view it, I think it's safe to say that most of the responses to my posts in this thread haven't been reasonable. ;)

Quote
That would also fail the test of logic/reasoning, but people who argue like this are rarely amenable to reason.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: forummm on July 17, 2016, 01:55:12 PM
Saying your assumption was baseless is the definition of critiquing your argument (and the assumptions underlying it) and not you. Saying "only an idiot would think that" is attacking you and not the argument.

Quote
ad ho·mi·nem
ˌad ˈhämənəm/
adverb & adjective
adverb: ad hominem; adjective: ad hominem
1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
"vicious ad hominem attacks"
2.
relating to or associated with a particular person.
"the office was created ad hominem for Fenton"
I can see how you wouldn't perceive it as an Ad-Hominem attack. I view it as an indirect Ad-Hominem attack, but it seems to be universally perceived as being nil/besides the point. There's no way in hell it's a critique though. There were no facts presented that refuted my position or suggested anything else. Elenchi ignoratio is probably most accurate.

https://www.quora.com/What-kind-of-fallacy-is-insulting-an-argument-but-not-refuting-it

Regardless of how I view it, I think it's safe to say that most of the responses to my posts in this thread haven't been reasonable. ;)

Quote
That would also fail the test of logic/reasoning, but people who argue like this are rarely amenable to reason.

If you have evidence that Tesla is doing a lot of battery chemistry research and has developed new and superior chemistries that they are building into their PowerWall batteries, I'd love to see it. If you don't have evidence, then I think it's pretty definitional to say that your assumption that they are doing this is baseless (i.e. you're basing the assumption off of no evidence). My understanding is that they are still just using the same mass produced, standard, Li-on cells they've been building their batteries out of all along. Some of the efficiencies they might be able to gain from doing that at the Gigafactory include leaving out some components that the individual cells normally have and centralizing them. But doing original battery chemistry research is a big undertaking that usually involves years (and takes years to test appropriately as well).
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: FINate on September 04, 2016, 04:05:24 PM
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-02/musk-e-mail-urges-workers-to-cut-costs-in-bid-to-woo-investors

The e-mail says that Tesla is “on the razor’s edge of achieving a good Q3, but it requires building and delivering every car we possibly can, while simultaneously trimming any cost that isn’t critical, at least for the next 4.5 weeks.”

Although it's probably legal, doesn't give me warm fuzzies that they are essentially gaming quarterly results.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Seppia on September 05, 2016, 09:46:42 AM
"At least for the next 4.5 weeks".

For a guy who claims he want to save the world he has a pretty short term horizon.

My opinion of Tesla is so bad that if I owned a broad US index fund I would make sure to short the equivalent amount of Tesla stock to make sure my net position with them would be zero
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Proud Foot on September 09, 2016, 08:52:51 AM
"At least for the next 4.5 weeks".

For a guy who claims he want to save the world he has a pretty short term horizon.

My opinion of Tesla is so bad that if I owned a broad US index fund I would make sure to short the equivalent amount of Tesla stock to make sure my net position with them would be zero

My guess is that he needs to have the quarterly numbers look good so he can issue more stock to be able to infuse cash into the company to keep from running out of money. A good quarter will keep the stock price up and he will get more cash from the new shares.  Has he ever had a company that was good from the investment standpoint?  SolarCity, SpaceX, and Tesla all are hard nos for me right now.  Not sure what Paypal was like before it got bought.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: piethief on September 15, 2016, 08:56:32 AM
I love the company and what they are doing.  Their cars are super cool.  I'd love to own one or at least drive one a bunch.  But I've had bad luck owning individual stocks in the past so I don't really do it anymore.  I stick with fire and forget mutual funds.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Metric Mouse on September 16, 2016, 03:47:00 PM
I love the company and what they are doing.  Their cars are super cool.  I'd love to own one or at least drive one a bunch.  But I've had bad luck owning individual stocks in the past so I don't really do it anymore.  I stick with fire and forget mutual funds.

Yeah, a portfolio with Telsa in it could burn down faster than a Galaxy S7...
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: pha999 on September 19, 2016, 09:39:00 PM
bought some a few years ago, and now its sitting in my motif account.

My position is so small compared to my net worth. That its not gonna make or break me. either way. I dabble with single stocks with some fun money and the majority of it is in vanguard index funds.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: jinga nation on September 20, 2016, 07:00:40 AM
All true, but equally Tesla aren't the first electric car makers, and they are doing it better than the competition. They also have clear advantages - the superchargers being one obvious one. And they're the first company to make a model that has been well received by the mainstream and doesn't compromise on performance or style. From that perspective all the ducks are in a row for me.
They have a disadvantage that Google, Apple, Microsoft didn't have: the dealership system and their feeding of lobbyist pockets at federal and state levels. That is the biggest factor preventing them from going mainstream.
High net-worth people I know won't buy a Tesla as there's no dealership system to get their cars serviced. That what-if scenario for a new tech car is what is holding people back. It's also a mindset issue.
If my guv'nor Rick Scott were as pro-business as he claims to be, we'd be seeing Tesla dealerships all over South Florida, Central FL, Tampa Bay and Sarasota, Jax, even Tallahassee to pander to them lawmakers. But we know even Skeletor has been bent over by lobbyists.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: AlanStache on September 20, 2016, 07:37:52 AM
All true, but equally Tesla aren't the first electric car makers, and they are doing it better than the competition. They also have clear advantages - the superchargers being one obvious one. And they're the first company to make a model that has been well received by the mainstream and doesn't compromise on performance or style. From that perspective all the ducks are in a row for me.
They have a disadvantage that Google, Apple, Microsoft didn't have: the dealership system and their feeding of lobbyist pockets at federal and state levels. That is the biggest factor preventing them from going mainstream.
High net-worth people I know won't buy a Tesla as there's no dealership system to get their cars serviced. That what-if scenario for a new tech car is what is holding people back. It's also a mindset issue.
If my guv'nor Rick Scott were as pro-business as he claims to be, we'd be seeing Tesla dealerships all over South Florida, Central FL, Tampa Bay and Sarasota, Jax, even Tallahassee to pander to them lawmakers. But we know even Skeletor has been bent over by lobbyists.

There are five Tesla service centers in FLA and ten sales locations.
https://www.tesla.com/findus/list/services/United+States (https://www.tesla.com/findus/list/services/United+States)
https://www.tesla.com/findus/list/stores/United+States (https://www.tesla.com/findus/list/stores/United+States)

This may be a problem of public perception rather than fact.  Not saying FLA is not crooked or there is a service center near you but people are accustomed to seeing dealers every five miles along the freeway and that simply is not the case with Tesla.  Until recently I did not know of one public car charging location but then I looked online and there are tons near me, problem is they dont have huge signs at every major intersection like gas stations do. 

You were implying that Google, Apple, Microsoft are competing with some someone who had a dealership system or with each other where Apple has there mall stores?  I dont follow your point.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: jinga nation on September 20, 2016, 08:02:03 AM
All true, but equally Tesla aren't the first electric car makers, and they are doing it better than the competition. They also have clear advantages - the superchargers being one obvious one. And they're the first company to make a model that has been well received by the mainstream and doesn't compromise on performance or style. From that perspective all the ducks are in a row for me.
They have a disadvantage that Google, Apple, Microsoft didn't have: the dealership system and their feeding of lobbyist pockets at federal and state levels. That is the biggest factor preventing them from going mainstream.
High net-worth people I know won't buy a Tesla as there's no dealership system to get their cars serviced. That what-if scenario for a new tech car is what is holding people back. It's also a mindset issue.
If my guv'nor Rick Scott were as pro-business as he claims to be, we'd be seeing Tesla dealerships all over South Florida, Central FL, Tampa Bay and Sarasota, Jax, even Tallahassee to pander to them lawmakers. But we know even Skeletor has been bent over by lobbyists.

There are five Tesla service centers in FLA and ten sales locations.
https://www.tesla.com/findus/list/services/United+States (https://www.tesla.com/findus/list/services/United+States)
https://www.tesla.com/findus/list/stores/United+States (https://www.tesla.com/findus/list/stores/United+States)

This may be a problem of public perception rather than fact.  Not saying FLA is not crooked or there is a service center near you but people are accustomed to seeing dealers every five miles along the freeway and that simply is not the case with Tesla.  Until recently I did not know of one public car charging location but then I looked online and there are tons near me, problem is they dont have huge signs at every major intersection like gas stations do. 

You were implying that Google, Apple, Microsoft are competing with some someone who had a dealership system or with each other where Apple has there mall stores?  I dont follow your point.
I've told the rich folks about the Tesla service center and sales location in East Tampa/ Brandon; I used to work in that area and it is industrial. However, it isn't the location rich folks will drive to. If you want to sell a high-end vehicle in Tampa, you want to be on N Dale Mabry Highway. That's where MB, Lexus, Infiniti, etc. hold court. Or N Florida Avenue. Location matters.

My next car will be some/full electric. Whether it's a Tesla Model 3 or Chevy Volt, I'll see when my 10 year Honda Accord gives up.

Regarding the software companies: they did not have to deal with lobbyists for the incumbents preventing their entry in the marketplace. Did Altavista, Lycos, etc. lobby CA/federal lawmakers to prevent Google's Search engine? Did IBM lobby to prevent MS-DOS from being sold? Tesla has to deal with a fuck-all dealer lobby preventing manufacturer-owned dealerships.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Dicey on September 20, 2016, 08:29:11 AM
Interesting discussion. I have a large portfolio, but I own no individual stocks. LIke the low information diet, it lets me sleep better at night.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: AlanStache on September 20, 2016, 09:01:09 AM
...
I've told the rich folks about the Tesla service center and sales location in East Tampa/ Brandon; I used to work in that area and it is industrial. However, it isn't the location rich folks will drive to. If you want to sell a high-end vehicle in Tampa, you want to be on N Dale Mabry Highway. That's where MB, Lexus, Infiniti, etc. hold court. Or N Florida Avenue. Location matters.

My next car will be some/full electric. Whether it's a Tesla Model 3 or Chevy Volt, I'll see when my 10 year Honda Accord gives up.

Regarding the software companies: they did not have to deal with lobbyists for the incumbents preventing their entry in the marketplace. Did Altavista, Lycos, etc. lobby CA/federal lawmakers to prevent Google's Search engine? Did IBM lobby to prevent MS-DOS from being sold? Tesla has to deal with a fuck-all dealer lobby preventing manufacturer-owned dealerships.

ok. thanks, good points.  Google/Apple/MS did have to educate the public about what to do with there products, but yes there was no established opposition. 

Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: nobodyspecial on September 20, 2016, 09:41:48 PM
but people are accustomed to seeing dealers every five miles along the freeway and that simply is not the case with Tesla. 
Isn't that a good thing?

The reason Tesla don't have dealers is that the dealer profit on new cars = zero
They make money on expensive routine servicing -  with no oil changes, almost no brake changes and no engines/transmissions that fall apart after 100K, it's difficult for a Tesla dealer to make a living
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: AlanStache on September 21, 2016, 06:31:45 AM
but people are accustomed to seeing dealers every five miles along the freeway and that simply is not the case with Tesla. 
Isn't that a good thing?

The reason Tesla don't have dealers is that the dealer profit on new cars = zero
They make money on expensive routine servicing -  with no oil changes, almost no brake changes and no engines/transmissions that fall apart after 100K, it's difficult for a Tesla dealer to make a living

Yes is a good thing.  I was only trying to say that people have been trained to think that it is normal/good to have there manufacturers dealer & service center always very near and are comforted by that.  But the need for service centers is much reduced with the maintenance needs of a Tesla.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DavidAnnArbor on September 23, 2016, 09:37:51 AM
I'm glad Tesla is suing Michigan's governor and attorney general  over not allowing Tesla to have their own car sales storefronts.

http://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2016/09/22/tesla-sues-state-officials-sell-cars-michigan/90832684/
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: TheStachery on February 09, 2017, 07:12:54 AM
Tesla going strong for the past couple weeks.  Looks like it's up in premarket too.

They are reconfiguring a plant to begin production of the model 3.  Good news to all the Tesla stock owners.  Financials on Feb 22.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DavidAnnArbor on February 09, 2017, 01:17:37 PM
I won't personally buy individual stocks, it's a fools game in my opinion, nonetheless I want Tesla to succeed and transform our society toward electric vehicles, solar power, and battery storage.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Kroaler on February 09, 2017, 02:54:54 PM
I think I would rather donate to tesla than invest.   I truly believe in what their vision, but as an investment its not for me.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Mr Mark on February 10, 2017, 06:56:55 AM
I too like the vision and moves Tesla are making to make it a reality.  But I think the net cash flow may disappoint. Instead I bought some stock in a lithium mine. 
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: talltexan on February 10, 2017, 07:19:39 AM
that last post made me think of the Christmas song "Santa Baby"...

"Santa, baby, there's one more thing I really do need--the deed...to a lithium mine!"
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Mr Mark on February 10, 2017, 08:42:13 AM
that last post made me think of the Christmas song "Santa Baby"...

"Santa, baby, there's one more thing I really do need--the deed...to a lithium mine!"

Well your Santa can buy a share for you! I think lithium demand is going to get much larger than supply for a while...EVs and solar power just makes too much sense to not take off over the next decade IMHO. but you need batteries.  the mine is one of the lowest cost in the world. $3000 a ton of LiCa that's currently going for over $10k. OROCF
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: robartsd on February 10, 2017, 09:19:42 AM
I don't know if lithium based batteries will turn out to be the best primary storage for stationary applications (but it's unlikely to be dethroned for mobile applications). I last week I watched NOVA's "Search for the Super Battery". It explored the battery technology needed for both mobile and stationary applications. Tesla's major contribution is the development of the largest lithium-ion battery factory in the world (and they'll standardize on larger cells built in their new factory). The host visited with a researcher who has developed a polymer electrolyte for lithium batteries that prevents thermal runaway (even if the battery is physically damaged). This electrolyte may also enable energy density in rechargeable lithium batteries to be increased. This technology has a high chance of being developed into the best mobile battery that will ever be developed. Several technologies for stationary storage were also looked at and I believe the grid will likely have a blend of many technologies for storage to balance cost, storage capacity, and load capacity. Lithium may well be part of the blend due to it's exceptional ability to charge and discharge quickly (as well as high energy density), but other technologies will likely continue to provide a better ratio of storage capacity to cost.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: flyersman on February 13, 2017, 09:52:04 AM
Up $10+ already today.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: effigy98 on February 13, 2017, 02:34:27 PM
I have an automated investment thru loyal3 (no fees/commissions) for a couple hundred a month per company (tesla, amazon, and google). It dollar costs averages at these nosebleed prices. Sometimes I look at the balance and it blows my mind as I do not really notice it. I like to "donate" to companies that are changing the world for the better and I may even make some money in the distance future. I always max out all tax sheltered accounts and pay down mortgage already. This is just 20 year bet/donation on companies I really want to succeed and to say I own some.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: zazpowered on February 14, 2017, 10:48:09 PM
I'm a huge believer in Tesla and Elon Musk. He will definitely find a way to make this company huge.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: rocketpj on February 15, 2017, 11:15:14 AM
I bought a dozen shares a long time ago and am happy to leave them there.  They have already shocked the auto industry out of their complacency, and I like being a (tiny) part of that.

I suppose I could sell now at a significant profit (percentage wise), but it is a tiny fraction of my overall portfolio now, so I doubt I'll bother.  Maybe I'll sell them if/when I buy an electric car.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: GoingConcern on February 15, 2017, 12:00:20 PM
I bought in November when it was around $190 and put in around $5.5k because I have bought into the hype and believe Telsa will either dominate the auto industry in 10 years or will go bankrupt.   So far I'm up 50% but I realize the stock is extremely volatile right now and I wouldn't be suprised if it took a big dip if some bad news came out especially if the news is related to the Model 3. 
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DarinC on April 21, 2017, 10:03:11 AM
If you have evidence that Tesla is doing a lot of battery chemistry research and has developed new and superior chemistries that they are building into their PowerWall batteries, I'd love to see it. If you don't have evidence, then I think it's pretty definitional to say that your assumption that they are doing this is baseless (i.e. you're basing the assumption off of no evidence). My understanding is that they are still just using the same mass produced, standard, Li-on cells they've been building their batteries out of all along. Some of the efficiencies they might be able to gain from doing that at the Gigafactory include leaving out some components that the individual cells normally have and centralizing them. But doing original battery chemistry research is a big undertaking that usually involves years (and takes years to test appropriately as well).
They hired Jeff Dahn.

https://qz.com/690936/teslas-newest-hire-may-be-proof-elon-musk-is-ready-to-hear-some-hard-truths-about-batteries/

He's one of the leaders, if not the leader, in research on battery capacity loss/lifespan.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxP0Cu00sZs

Apparently, Dahn's pretty confident that his research is going into Tesla's battery design/chemistry moving forward.

https://electrek.co/2017/02/07/tesla-battery-research-longevity-breakthrough-products/

I wouldn't be surprised if they had tweaked their battery chemistries prior to this, but Dahn working for them takes that to another level given his experience/capabilities.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: Marathon_runner on April 21, 2017, 02:29:48 PM
TSLA isn't for me.  I do own 1,000 shares of F though.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: DavidAnnArbor on April 21, 2017, 08:35:55 PM
One of the takeaways is Jeff Dahn stating that battery technology for energy storage needs to improve in order to move the planet decisively toward renewable energy.
Title: Re: Anyone invested in Tesla?
Post by: talltexan on April 25, 2017, 12:21:15 PM
TSLA isn't for me.  I do own 1,000 shares of F though.

I'm at 400 shares of F. That dividend (of $240/year) would be enough to finance a $6K play on TSLA. I should do it.