Official Tesla Model 3 thread

[EVDRIVER]

I don’t agree with the qualification that people are simply expecting a less expensive, smaller Model S.

You obviously haven't read numerous comments from reservation holders or from those that have received an M3 delivery.
Obviously, it's not just a smaller MS, but it does have many of the key features of the MS that many value.
And what do you thing that the +400K reservation holders perceived that they were to get for $35K?

Maybe give some thought into differentiating the two Tesla products as some of the +400K reservation holders did
when the M3 was announced in 2016. Had many previously considered buying a MS before the intro of the M3?

What people think, hope and perceive is not always grounded in reality. Luckily you contacted all 400K reservation holders and got their thoughts. My guess is many of the informed subgroup have actually driven a Tesla and know better. You should try it sometime.

When do you think lower priced 3s will be available to buy next year? Plus or minus a month. I believe you stated it won't happen this year, take your best guess.

 

[GRA]

It's always been clear that the target car was the BMW 3-series, i.e. entry-level luxury sports sedan. Elon said as much:

Right, because Elon said so, please!

The price being quoted of $35K for a M3 is WHAT defines its market position and NOT what Elon says, i.e. the M3 at $35K was positioned
as an entry level BEV. The M3 entry was to re-define what the low end BEV market needed to be and to compete with GM & Nissan products.
Coincidentally, the present entry level BEV market and the entry level BMW 3 series overlap. And so what, the Nissan Maxima price starts
at about $35K too. Again, it's the perception of what the M3 priced at $35K when introduced in 2016 was, that resulted in the initial +400K
reservations and not what Elon said its market position was the time.

From the IEVS Op-Ed linked above:

The BMW 3 Series starts at $32,950. That’s a bit steep for a base model 3 Series with less than 200 hp and manually adjustable seats. The Tesla Model 3, however, is set to start at $35,000.

Or this, from electrek:

Tesla Model 3 vs BMW 3 Series: how pricing and options compare

https://electrek.co/2017/07/31/tesla-model-3-vs-bmw-3-series/

By the same author as above:

Tesla Model 3 vs BMW 3 Series vs Mercedes-Benz C-Class, per Bloomberg

http://www.bmwblog.com/2017/08/02/t...eries-vs-mercedes-benz-c-class-per-bloomberg/

Or this:

Cockpit Comparison Tesla Model 3 versus BMW 3 Series

https://thelastdriverlicenseholder....comparison-tesla-model-3-versus-bmw-3-series/

This:

Tesla Model 3 vs BMW 2 Series, 3 Series, 4 Series, 5 Series, & i3

https://cleantechnica.com/2017/06/04/tesla-model-3-vs-bmw-2-series-3-series-4-series-5-series-i3/

This:

What car is closest Tesla Model 3 competitor? Poll results

https://www.greencarreports.com/new...closest-tesla-model-3-competitor-poll-results

What car do you think is the closest Tesla Model 3 competitor?

13% Audi e-tron in 2019
35% BMW 3-Series
35% Chevrolet Bolt EV
17% Nissan Leaf

There's plenty more along those lines. Seems clear to me and pretty much everyone who's ever evaluated the cars and compared their specs which car and which market segment the Model 3 is aimed at. The only area the Bolt or the LEAF compete is in the base price category (and range for the Bolt). Anyway, enough of this.

 

[lorenfb]

It's always been clear that the target car was the BMW 3-series, i.e. entry-level luxury sports sedan. Elon said as much:

Right, because Elon said so, please!

The price being quoted of $35K for a M3 is WHAT defines its market position and NOT what Elon says, i.e. the M3 at $35K was positioned
as an entry level BEV. The M3 entry was to re-define what the low end BEV market needed to be and to compete with GM & Nissan products.
Coincidentally, the present entry level BEV market and the entry level BMW 3 series overlap. And so what, the Nissan Maxima price starts
at about $35K too. Again, it's the perception of what the M3 priced at $35K when introduced in 2016 was, that resulted in the initial +400K
reservations and not what Elon said its market position was the time.

From the IEVS Op-Ed linked above:

The BMW 3 Series starts at $32,950. That’s a bit steep for a base model 3 Series with less than 200 hp and manually adjustable seats. The Tesla Model 3, however, is set to start at $35,000.

Or this, from electrek:

Tesla Model 3 vs BMW 3 Series: how pricing and options compare

https://electrek.co/2017/07/31/tesla-model-3-vs-bmw-3-series/

By the same author as above:

Tesla Model 3 vs BMW 3 Series vs Mercedes-Benz C-Class, per Bloomberg

http://www.bmwblog.com/2017/08/02/t...eries-vs-mercedes-benz-c-class-per-bloomberg/

Or this:

Cockpit Comparison Tesla Model 3 versus BMW 3 Series

https://thelastdriverlicenseholder....comparison-tesla-model-3-versus-bmw-3-series/

This:

Tesla Model 3 vs BMW 2 Series, 3 Series, 4 Series, 5 Series, & i3

https://cleantechnica.com/2017/06/04/tesla-model-3-vs-bmw-2-series-3-series-4-series-5-series-i3/

This:

What car is closest Tesla Model 3 competitor? Poll results

https://www.greencarreports.com/new...closest-tesla-model-3-competitor-poll-results

What car do you think is the closest Tesla Model 3 competitor?

13% Audi e-tron in 2019
35% BMW 3-Series
35% Chevrolet Bolt EV
17% Nissan Leaf

There's plenty more along those lines. Seems clear to me and pretty much everyone who's ever evaluated the cars and compared their specs which car and which market segment the Model 3 is aimed at. The only area the Bolt or the LEAF compete is in the base price category (and range for the Bolt). Anyway, enough of this.

So what if the media decides to compare the M3 to a 3 series BMW. Does than imply that it's only competitive with that product and doesn't
affect sales of other vehicles in that price category with similar features, e.g. BEVs - Bolt and/or Leaf 2 (40/60kWh)?

The only area the Bolt or the LEAF compete is in the base price category (and range for the Bolt).

Oh, so there is a market overlap with other BEVs and the M3, right? Good that you referred to a Marketing 101 book and gave more thought
to the issue. Furthermore, if you were responsible for corporate marketing for BEVs at either GM or Nissan, you wouldn't be concerned
about the effect the M3 would have on your BEV product if Tesla can profitably sell the M3 with similar features to the MS at $35K?
Maybe consider just continuing to track the Mirai sales, H2 & FCEVs, and the number of new Tesla SC installs, i.e. just a cut & paste.

 

[GRA]

Oh, so there is a market overlap with other BEVs and the M3, right? Good that you referred to a Marketing 101 book and gave more thought
to the issue. Furthermore, if you were responsible for corporate marketing for BEVs at either GM or Nissan, you wouldn't be concerned
about the effect the M3 would have on your BEV product if Tesla can profitably sell the M3 with similar features to the MS at $35K?
Maybe consider just continuing to track the Mirai sales, H2 & FCEVs, and the number of new Tesla SC installs, i.e. just a cut & paste.

Actually, I think I'll just return to ignoring your posts. Enjoy.

 

[hyperionmark]

Oh, so there is a market overlap with other BEVs and the M3, right? Good that you referred to a Marketing 101 book and gave more thought
to the issue. Furthermore, if you were responsible for corporate marketing for BEVs at either GM or Nissan, you wouldn't be concerned
about the effect the M3 would have on your BEV product if Tesla can profitably sell the M3 with similar features to the MS at $35K?
Maybe consider just continuing to track the Mirai sales, H2 & FCEVs, and the number of new Tesla SC installs, i.e. just a cut & paste.

Actually, I think I'll just return to ignoring your posts. Enjoy.

and miss out on the delusional humor?

 

[GRA]

Oh, so there is a market overlap with other BEVs and the M3, right? Good that you referred to a Marketing 101 book and gave more thought
to the issue. Furthermore, if you were responsible for corporate marketing for BEVs at either GM or Nissan, you wouldn't be concerned
about the effect the M3 would have on your BEV product if Tesla can profitably sell the M3 with similar features to the MS at $35K?
Maybe consider just continuing to track the Mirai sales, H2 & FCEVs, and the number of new Tesla SC installs, i.e. just a cut & paste.

Actually, I think I'll just return to ignoring your posts. Enjoy.

and miss out on the delusional humor?

I'll live. Meanwhile, via IEVS, Autmobile Magazine interviewing Franz Von Holzhausen, the Model 3's designer:

Automobile Magazine: What was the design brief for the Model 3?

Franz von Holzhausen: It was essentially customer-driven. They saw the Model S as a great car, but there was a desire for something 10 to 20 percent smaller, BMW 3 Series or Audi A4 size. We thought the $35,000 price point would work. We wanted five seats, more interior space, and to keep the fastback silhouette.

But hey, what does the designer know about the target market?

 

[EatsShootsandLeafs]

The price being quoted of $35K for a M3 is WHAT defines its market position and NOT what Elon says, i.e. the M3 at $35K was positioned
as an entry level BEV.

The Model 3 is positioned as an entry level Tesla.

The fact it can be compared to a Leaf is because it can compete with key features of the leaf. The fact it can be compared to a bmw 3-series is because it can compete with key features of the 3-series.

Will you ever figure this out? The level of hatred by a couple of people in this thread to Tesla is remarkable. Why exactly do you hate Tesla so much, why do you want it to fail? Is it simply so you can avoid admitting you were wrong? The Model 3 has probably had half a million reservations for it now. Do you know how many reserved the the new leaf? The answer to that question is who cares.

 

[hyperionmark]

The price being quoted of $35K for a M3 is WHAT defines its market position and NOT what Elon says, i.e. the M3 at $35K was positioned
as an entry level BEV.

Will you ever figure this out? The level of hatred by a couple of people in this thread to Tesla is remarkable. Why exactly do you hate Tesla so much, why do you want it to fail? Is it simply so you can avoid admitting you were wrong? The Model 3 has probably had half a million reservations for it now. Do you know how many reserved the the new leaf? The answer to that question is who cares.

The answer is because he has real money riding on it since he is shorting the company.

 

[SageBrush]

The price being quoted of $35K for a M3 is WHAT defines its market position and NOT what Elon says, i.e. the M3 at $35K was positioned
as an entry level BEV.

Will you ever figure this out? The level of hatred by a couple of people in this thread to Tesla is remarkable. Why exactly do you hate Tesla so much, why do you want it to fail? Is it simply so you can avoid admitting you were wrong? The Model 3 has probably had half a million reservations for it now. Do you know how many reserved the the new leaf? The answer to that question is who cares.

The answer is because he has real money riding on it since he is shorting the company.

That is my guess for the Ed troll.
Loren strikes me more as someone who Tesla rebuffed when he sought employment.

 

[lorenfb]

The price being quoted of $35K for a M3 is WHAT defines its market position and NOT what Elon says, i.e. the M3 at $35K was positioned
as an entry level BEV.

The Model 3 is positioned as an entry level Tesla.

There's never been a disagreement there! But the $35K deliverable price also results in its being an entry level BEV too.

Will you ever figure this out? The level of hatred by a couple of people in this thread to Tesla is remarkable. Why exactly do you hate Tesla so much, why do you want it to fail? Is it simply so you can avoid admitting you were wrong? The Model 3 has probably had half a million reservations for it now. Do you know how many reserved the the new leaf? The answer to that question is who cares.

Actually, the M3 design nor its technology has never been denigrated, as it's basically just a scaled version of the MS with standard and
proven EV technology. The MS has achieved a level quality matching other luxury vehicles. Furthermore, I never expressed nor implied
that Tesla would fail because of its products. I would even consider a Tesla product once Tesla's long term viability becomes a reality.

The fact it can be compared to a Leaf is because it can compete with key features of the leaf. The fact it can be compared to a bmw 3-series is because it can compete with key features of the 3-series.

Yes, so we both agree. The M3 product based on price and features can overlap a wide breath of vehicles, e.g. entry BEV and lower end
luxury vehicles. My key point most seem to not understand is that given the M3's potential wide appear, it can have a significant sales
disruption in some key emerging markets, e.g. the BEV market. From the standpoint of the entry level BEV market where GM and Nissan
compete, if the M3 can really be delivered and be significantly profitable for Tesla, the M3 is a significant threat to both GM's and Nissan's
BEV product line. That's the conundrum, i.e. the M3's profitability and whether significant units will be delivered in 2018 and early 2019
at $35K. There's little question that at $45K to $50K that the M3 will generate enough gross profit as a scaled MS, but will it develop the
expected and needed overall Tesla profit without affecting the MS line to facilitate Tesla's move to profitability in 2019 - 2020.

Hopefully, some will now have a better insight to the issue. It's really not that difficult of marketing issue.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Will you ever figure this out? The level of hatred by a couple of people in this thread to Tesla is remarkable. Why exactly do you hate Tesla so much, why do you want it to fail? Is it simply so you can avoid admitting you were wrong? The Model 3 has probably had half a million reservations for it now. Do you know how many reserved the the new leaf? The answer to that question is who cares.

The answer is because he has real money riding on it since he is shorting the company.

That is my guess for the Ed troll.
Loren strikes me more as someone who Tesla rebuffed when he sought employment.

“Ed” is just the grumpy old guy... it’s not just Tesla that’s an issue for him. I’ve had him blocked for years.

I actually like watching TSLA short-sellers (or otherwise alienated from Tesla as a failed applicant for employment, or outright fired) like “Lorenb” because they intentionally stuck their finger in the light socket, and can never let it go. Great sport for me.

For those that bet against Tesla, every day Tesla succeeds is a day these “folks” lose. Love it.

While we are way off topic, here’s a silly t-shirt I put together for Tesla aficionados:

http://shop.quickchargepower.com/T-Shirt-TESLA-TEAM-570A-TSHRT570A.htm

 

[lorenfb]

The answer is because he has real money riding on it since he is shorting the company.

That is my guess for the Ed troll.
Loren strikes me more as someone who Tesla rebuffed when he sought employment.

“Ed” is just the grumpy old guy... it’s not just Tesla that’s an issue for him. I’ve had him blocked for years.

I actually like watching TSLA short-sellers (or otherwise alienated from Tesla as a failed applicant for employment, or outright fired) like “Lorenb” because they intentionally stuck their finger in the light socket, and can never let it go. Great sport for me.

For those that bet against Tesla, every day Tesla succeeds is a day these “folks” lose. Love it.

While we are way off topic, here’s a silly t-shirt I put together for Tesla aficionados:

http://shop.quickchargepower.com/T-Shirt-TESLA-TEAM-570A-TSHRT570A.htm

And then we have the incoherent ones! Who use the forum to promote their business, in a side note without getting banned.

 

[lpickup]

That's the conundrum, i.e. the M3's profitability and whether significant units will be delivered in 2018 and early 2019
at $35K. There's little question that at $45K to $50K that the M3 will generate enough gross profit as a scaled MS, but will it develop the
expected and needed overall Tesla profit without affecting the MS line to facilitate Tesla's move to profitability in 2019 - 2020.

Help me understand this: If you say that the $45-50K M3 will generate "enough" gross profit, and there happens to be sufficient demand for that trim/battery level to consume 100% of Tesla's ability to produce said trim level until late 2018/early 2019, then why is it so important for them to deliver $35K units in that time period? Certainly the more expensive trim levels will generate more profit margin for them, so why wouldn't they milk that cow as long as possible and not move on to the base model until demand for the LR/PUP model starts to peter out? And once that happens, then yes, I would expect them to transition to the base model at that time. But I would say whatever time that is is determined by the demand, not by some arbitrary "late 2018 / early 2019" date.

Offhand I can only think of 2 reasons:
1) The LR/PUP model will cannibalize Model S sales. I actually expect this to happen, not so much because the Model 3 is considered a "scaled" Model S, but simply because I think many Model S buyers stretched their finances beyond what they would normally spend on a vehicle, and now that the Model 3 is available, they won't have to do that. I expect Tesla will wind up refreshing the S to create some separate between it and the Model 3.

2) Potential buyers of the base model will get sick of waiting and move to Bolt or LEAF 2. But here's the problem with that logic: if there really are a significant number of them, that means that demand for the LR/PUP version will peter out sooner and Tesla will likely start producing the base model sooner. On the other hand if there is still enough demand for the LR/PUP that they can still maintain a backlog while ramping up their line to full capacity, then hey, I don't see a problem for Tesla just continuing to sell the higher end vehicles that end up making them more money anyway.

 

[EatsShootsandLeafs]

CNBC has lots of articles on Tesla and this one came up just now about delays and problems. All a bit nasty.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/25/tesla-employees-say-gigafactory-problems-worse-than-known.html

Not great news, a bit demoralizing as I'm still hoping to get one this year. And then half down the article this picture.

That right there is why many of us put money down and why we're waiting. The problems a real, but there it is.

 

[lpickup]

CNBC has lots of articles on Tesla and this one came up just now about delays and problems.

Here is my critique of this article. The headline and opening of the article makes it sound like battery [packs] (get the terminology right, please!) are still being manually assembled, but within the article it says this:

Once the machines in the factory were able to crank out bandoliers as fast or faster than the manual laborers, Tesla began sending Panasonic workers back to their employer, sources said.

Today, Tesla is winding down manual assembly as much as possible at the Gigafactory, a hopeful sign.

Note that this is past tense, and not so much different than what I thought/what we've been told that mid-December (mentioned elsewhere in the article) is when the bottleneck was resolved.

And then there is this:

Two current engineers told CNBC that they are concerned some of the batteries being shipped do not have the minimum gap required between lithium-ion cells. These engineers warned that this "touching cells" flaw could cause batteries to short out or, in worse cases, catch fire.

Does this even make sense? I am by no means an expert in 2170 cells, but am I interpreting this statement correctly? Aren't the jackets of the cells all at the same electrical potential (ground, if you will)? I don't see why they couldn't actually be touching, electrically. Of course this could just be sloppy reporting and what they are talking about are tolerances within the cells themselves, but then that would be a Panasonic issue, not a Tesla battery pack issue. I don't know--something just doesn't sound right to me there. Sounds like sensationalism more than anything.

 

[lorenfb]

That's the conundrum, i.e. the M3's profitability and whether significant units will be delivered in 2018 and early 2019
at $35K. There's little question that at $45K to $50K that the M3 will generate enough gross profit as a scaled MS, but will it develop the
expected and needed overall Tesla profit without affecting the MS line to facilitate Tesla's move to profitability in 2019 - 2020.

Help me understand this: If you say that the $45-50K M3 will generate "enough" gross profit, and there happens to be sufficient demand for that trim/battery level to consume 100% of Tesla's ability to produce said trim level until late 2018/early 2019, then why is it so important for them to deliver $35K units in that time period? Certainly the more expensive trim levels will generate more profit margin for them, so why wouldn't they milk that cow as long as possible and not move on to the base model until demand for the LR/PUP model starts to peter out? And once that happens, then yes, I would expect them to transition to the base model at that time. But I would say whatever time that is is determined by the demand, not by some arbitrary "late 2018 / early 2019" date.

1. You're focusing on gross profit and NOT the GAPP bottom line profit which has been the ongoing issue for Tesla.
2. Your assumption that the $45K - $50K demand is represented by most all the reservations.
3. It's still questionable whether Tesla can deliver the M3 at $35K even in late 2018 and have just a positive gross profit,
irrespective of a positive GAPP.

 

[jlv]

The first time you open the door on the 3 you realize it is not a scaled-down S at all. The S/X door handles are magical compared to the more pedestrian pivot on the 3.

(of course, there are as many threads on TMC about failures for the door handle to present on the S as there are here about battery degradation on the LEAF).

 

[lorenfb]

Two current engineers told CNBC that they are concerned some of the batteries being shipped do not have the minimum gap required between lithium-ion cells. These engineers warned that this "touching cells" flaw could cause batteries to short out or, in worse cases, catch fire.

Does this even make sense? I am by no means an expert in 2170 cells, but am I interpreting this statement correctly? Aren't the jackets of the cells all at the same electrical potential (ground, if you will)? I don't see why they couldn't actually be touching, electrically. Of course this could just be sloppy reporting and what they are talking about are tolerances within the cells themselves, but then that would be a Panasonic issue, not a Tesla battery pack issue. I don't know--something just doesn't sound right to me there. Sounds like sensationalism more than anything.

do not have the minimum gap required between lithium-ion cells

Remember, each independent cell, i.e. a 2170, "floats" electrically in its serial location in the final battery pack,
and has an insulation cover around the negative side of the body of the cell.

 

[lpickup]

1. You're focusing on gross profit and NOT the GAPP bottom line profit which has been the ongoing issue for Tesla.
2. Your assumption that the $45K - $50K demand is represented by most all the reservations.
3. It's still questionable whether Tesla can deliver the M3 at $35K even in late 2018 and have just a positive gross profit,
irrespective of a positive GAPP.

I'm focusing on what YOU said. I guess once again, you've decided to change your story once it's been shown that your thesis doesn't hold water.

I'm not assuming that the LR/PUP model demand is anything. My response covers the continuum from all reservations are for LR/PUP to none are and how Tesla will shift production at an appropriate time when the demand crosses over from LR/PUP to base model, but likely not before.

Your #3 comment is the only one that makes sense, and it's a fair question. If that's your concern then, why did you not mention that once? And if you have inside information regarding the profitability or lack thereof, please share it. Otherwise you're just speculating. And hey, I get that when you're used to evaluating traditional established carmaker, Tesla may seem completely foreign. GM, BMW, VW, etc. aren't building the company from scratch. They haven't grown from 0 to hundreds of thousands of cars in a single decade. To do that takes a capital which a small company like Tesla 10 years ago didn't have. That doesn't mean it's not an opportunity. Just because they don't have 15 other models generating revenue to fund development of the Model 3 doesn't necessarily mean that they can't turn that enormous investment into a valuable company.

YOU are focused too much on past results, which no surprise, do not reflect a nice consistent profit and dividend. That's simply because that's not the stage of life the Tesla company is at right now. They are growing at an extraordinary rate. What you should be looking at is whether there is something that is fundamentally preventing them from EVENTUALLY turning a healthy profit on their cars, and especially the Model 3. And nothing I've seen you say has convinced me of that. You seem uber focused on what car it's positioned against and losing sight of the fact that there is more genuine hype and demand for this car than probably any in history, and technically it blows everything else away. Yes, they are ramping up more slowly than anyone would like. But if there are any true competitors out there to the Model 3 when you look at the whole package (price, features, performance, looks, capability, charging networks) that have such a rabid following, I'm just not seeing it. Yes, the delay is shortening the lead that Tesla has (assuming the competition is really serious about rolling out their vehicles in 2020), but they still have quite the lead, and guess what: they are not standing still.

I think I've said enough. You won't be bothered to read it, and you'll just change your story to some other unjustified complaint anyway.

 

[lorenfb]

1. You're focusing on gross profit and NOT the GAPP bottom line profit which has been the ongoing issue for Tesla.
2. Your assumption that the $45K - $50K demand is represented by most all the reservations.
3. It's still questionable whether Tesla can deliver the M3 at $35K even in late 2018 and have just a positive gross profit,
irrespective of a positive GAPP.

I'm focusing on what YOU said. I guess once again, you've decided to change your story once it's been shown that your thesis doesn't hold water.

I'm not assuming that the LR/PUP model demand is anything. My response covers the continuum from all reservations are for LR/PUP to none are and how Tesla will shift production at an appropriate time when the demand crosses over from LR/PUP to base model, but likely not before.

Your #3 comment is the only one that makes sense, and it's a fair question. If that's your concern then, why did you not mention that once? And if you have inside information regarding the profitability or lack thereof, please share it. Otherwise you're just speculating. And hey, I get that when you're used to evaluating traditional established carmaker, Tesla may seem completely foreign. GM, BMW, VW, etc. aren't building the company from scratch. They haven't grown from 0 to hundreds of thousands of cars in a single decade. To do that takes a capital which a small company like Tesla 10 years ago didn't have. That doesn't mean it's not an opportunity. Just because they don't have 15 other models generating revenue to fund development of the Model 3 doesn't necessarily mean that they can't turn that enormous investment into a valuable company.

YOU are focused too much on past results, which no surprise, do not reflect a nice consistent profit and dividend. That's simply because that's not the stage of life the Tesla company is at right now. They are growing at an extraordinary rate. What you should be looking at is whether there is something that is fundamentally preventing them from EVENTUALLY turning a healthy profit on their cars, and especially the Model 3. And nothing I've seen you say has convinced me of that. You seem uber focused on what car it's positioned against and losing sight of the fact that there is more genuine hype and demand for this car than probably any in history, and technically it blows everything else away. Yes, they are ramping up more slowly than anyone would like. But if there are any true competitors out there to the Model 3 when you look at the whole package (price, features, performance, looks, capability, charging networks) that have such a rabid following, I'm just not seeing it. Yes, the delay is shortening the lead that Tesla has (assuming the competition is really serious about rolling out their vehicles in 2020), but they still have quite the lead, and guess what: they are not standing still.

I think I've said enough. You won't be bothered to read it, and you'll just change your story to some other unjustified complaint anyway.

Seems you need to highly leverage all your assets to buy as much Tesla stock as possible, as Elon now has the needed elixir (M3), right?