So, that's 16 topics this week, some of which have multiple posts, and besides the one OT topic about Tim Conway all are EV or environmentally related and put in the appropriate sub-forums.
There is a Tim Conway topic? I haven't seen it appear...
So, that's 16 topics this week, some of which have multiple posts, and besides the one OT topic about Tim Conway all are EV or environmentally related and put in the appropriate sub-forums.
Writing is on the wall.cwerdna said:Tesla is buckling down for some 'hard-core' cost-cutting, report says
https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/elon-musk-tesla-hard-core-cost-cutting/
An automaker’s warranty provision – like warranty costs incurred – is commonly part of COGS and thus it directly affects automotive gross margin. Reducing warranty provisions inflates it and many observers, including me, speculate that Tesla subsumes warranty costs in part under SG&A or the precariously deficitary services and other segment, discussed below, in order to inflate automotive gross margin further.
Unlike its peers, Tesla includes neither R&D nor the operation of its own dealerships in automotive cost of revenue. The gross margin metric also is a driver for the CEO’s stock option awards. Analysts have so far refrained from questioning Tesla’s highly problematic gross margin calculation and thus heavily skewed industry peer comparison in conference calls and research notes. For Q1 2019 automotive gross margin would have come in at 15.6% instead of 20.2%, a material difference of about 25%.
Despite decades of American IC design, layout and fabrication prowess, with short-term involvement of Jim Keller of Apple and AMD IC design fame, Tesla insisted that it had to turn to Chinese experts in order to obtain the “brain” that's instrumental in its Level 5 autonomous driving effort, replacing Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA) as a supplier. The company stated: “For a product as safety critical to consumers, and critical to the essence of Tesla, we turned to industry experts who could achieve this quality and complexity in addition to the deadlines, which was not possible outside of China.” On 3rd May, U.S. trade officials rejected Tesla’s bid for relief from President Trump’s 25% tariffs on Chinese exports to the U.S., on its Chinese-made “brain” for Model 3.
A side effect of un-coordinated governmental intervention is that it often promotes, possibly inadvertently, expensive, oversized, overweight and thus highly unsustainable BEVs, making them particularly attractive for wealthy households that often purchase EVs as a secondary or even tertiary vehicle – as a material feel-good icon that shall demonstrate their concern for the environment. However, wanting to better the world by way of oversized overweight BEVs amounts to nothing but arriving at the beach to drain the ocean with a teaspoon.
The main barriers to EV adoption, particularly in sales regions with low or no subsidies, incentives and benefits, are high price and insurance premiums, followed by range, particularly during the winter season, and the lack of ubiquitous and convenient city and roadside charging infrastructure. The existing strata of high net worth individuals in the aforementioned global growth regions are too small to effect a swift substantial fleet rotation away from ICEVs. For most consumers in those regions, used cars and low-priced ICEVs will remain the dominant vehicle type of choice, the car being the costliest discretionary purchase for most households.
On 30th January 2019, Tesla’s CEO stated in the Q4 2018 shareholder letter that the company expects to deliver 360,000 to 400,000 cars in 2019. A few hours later, Tesla’s CEO said on the Q4 2018 earnings call that the company will deliver 350,000 to 500,000 Model 3s in 2019. On 19th February, Tesla’s CEO tweeted Tesla will make around 500,000 cars in 2019 to then tweet Tesla will rather achieve a 500,000 car production run-rate at the end of 2019. On 28th February, Tesla’s CEO said on a call with journalists that the company will produce 420,000 to 600,000 cars in 2019. On 3rd April 2019, Tesla’s CEO stated in the Q1 2019 shareholder letter that the company expects to deliver 360,000 to 400,000 cars in 2019, as initially stated in January. Erratic management guidance for core product production and sales does certainly not help to restore investor confidence.
How does that crow taste?Zythryn said:EatsShootsandLeafs said:...
This company is on the ropes. It truly is on its back. It's unbelievable to me still that it is still valued at $45B. Tesla is at a critical point. Within weeks they will be out of money unless they raise more cash.
...
You really are just trolling here aren't you?
First, why be vague? Care to nail down what "within weeks" means? 3 weeks, or 3000 weeks?
As you already noted, Tesla has already indicated they are considering raising cash, however they could have three more quarters just like this one and not be out of cash.
So with that in mind, I don't see them running out of cash within "weeks".
Looks like the next level of support is around $180. If it goes below that, then looks like the next one is at around $140.EatsShootsandLeafs said:Down 6%+ today, no end in sight.
I will repeat as I have before: anybody long this stock should not be. The price premium is too high and does not make sense
...
Its main strategy at this point appears to be the hyperbolic claims of its CEO.
webb14leafs said:Is this thread about tesla's corporate outlook, or their stock price?
These two are highly related to one another. They are also more closely related than they used to be.webb14leafs said:Is this thread about tesla's corporate outlook, or their stock price?
webb14leafs said:Is this thread about tesla's corporate outlook, or their stock price?
smkettner said:I will hold my breath until the 2nd quarter sales and financials are released.
Tesla has been in constant transition making it difficult to determine a trend.
I disagree. There is a strong trend. Here is what it looks like:smkettner said:I will hold my breath until the 2nd quarter sales and financials are released.
Tesla has been in constant transition making it difficult to determine a trend.
EatsShootsandLeafs said:I disagree. There is a strong trend. Here is what it looks like:smkettner said:I will hold my breath until the 2nd quarter sales and financials are released.
Tesla has been in constant transition making it difficult to determine a trend.
- semi-constant losses followed by
- occasional profitable quarter and promises of more of the same followed by
- more losses followed by
- promises of "next quarter it will be different"
This company has been promising pending, sustainable profits for many years. They have been unable to deliver. Here we are almost two years out from production start of the model 3 and all they can do is burn cash.
This is a very difficult business to break into as the numerous failed car companies attest to.
It's taking a lot of my willpower not to short this stock. I am not doing it only because last time I tried I got burned on put options, even though I was correct in the direction, and they bailed in value shortly thereafter--but with TSLA the timing is also critical due to the massive cost of options and decay. This stock is extremely dangerous to trade. Both longs and shorts have held that view for a long time.
There is no reason this company cannot do what many others before it have done, which is file for bankruptcy. It absolutely can happen. They need to right this ship very quickly and have been unable to do so. I can easily envision (not saying this will happen) a liquidation scenario, selling the brand and assets off to a Chinese company or similar. The idea that Musk is going to right it and they'll start cranking out money, robo fleet next year, cars appreciating in value, stock going over $1k, etc. it's nothing but a fantasy.
I agree if Tesla had stopped with the Model S.EatsShootsandLeafs said:I disagree. There is a strong trend. Here is what it looks like:smkettner said:I will hold my breath until the 2nd quarter sales and financials are released.
Tesla has been in constant transition making it difficult to determine a trend.
- semi-constant losses followed by
- occasional profitable quarter and promises of more of the same followed by
- more losses followed by
- promises of "next quarter it will be different"
This company has been promising pending, sustainable profits for many years. They have been unable to deliver. Here we are almost two years out from production start of the model 3 and all they can do is burn cash.
This is a very difficult business to break into as the numerous failed car companies attest to.
LTLFTcomposite said:In some ways the model 3 is merely following in the footsteps of the Volt just on a bigger scale. Unfortunately coolness takes you only so far and having the wrong form factor for today's market where people want crossovers not cars is rate limiting. The amazing part to me is they've sold as many as they have. Chalk that up to a segment of the population that just really wanted to have a Tesla. The model 3 took out a slice of that adoption pyramid, but relying on fanbois is wearing thin and at some point they need to start selling to everybody else. In EM's mind apparently they think they can do so without any advertising or salespeople. Until those problems are fixed the real market opportunity for them will remain unaddressed.
Enter your email address to join: