2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

[SwTslaGrl]

Cool! So does this system only apply to SpaceX launches? Are other companies like Blue Origin limited to longer turn-around times until they are able to develop a similar system? It was a bit hard to tell from the article (while watching the Oscars).

It looks like they aim for 48 launches a year by 2020, and I guess this requires that almost all uses new systems like SpaceX.

 

[racer26]

Tesla does pay their employees reasonably, even ignoring the stock options. Its not a fair comparison to use 'average' salaries, when most of the other automakers have workforces that have decades under their belt on average.

Tesla's Fremont employees only have 5-6 years on the high end. Paying them fairly will result in lower 'average' salaries than other automakers.

 

[Mike Smith]

About SpaceX, I think it's this: "The U.S. Air Force says the demonstration of an automated safety system on last week’s Falcon 9 rocket launch will slash and costs and hasten turnarounds between missions" Auto-destruct system seen as a key to ramping up launch tempos – Spaceflight Now

But that's already been announced.

 

[phil0909]

The case for Anaheim's Disneyland deal: Ticket taxes could hurt draw

Disneyland paid Anaheim $56M in taxes in 2015. Don't know if that is a little or a lot but seems at least fair.

Like the GF they got a 30 year tax abatement on their new $1B expansion. Like Elon, Disney CEO talks about how many thousands of jobs it brings to Orange County and the multiplier effect.

Well, sure. But that's a tax break for someone else. The GF is a tax break for us.

Seriously, Rob, are you intentionally being dense?

 

[racer26]

But that's already been announced.

I agree. It seems more likely to me to be about US Gov funding for Mars, or Falcon Heavy

 

[FredTMC]

About the only thing I'm confident in saying about this announcement is that it is not SpaceX taking Tesla private.

SpaceX just doesn't have the dollars to do it. I would also argue there is limited logic in it having anything to do with Tesla at all. SpaceX is still a long way from achieving their mission statement and needs its dollars for that. I suppose taking a minority stake in Tesla makes some sense though, right before Model 3 is about to launch TSLA into the stratosphere.

I completely agree.

 

[racer26]

r/SpaceX seems to think its likely to be SpaceX's spacesuit for Crewed Dragon, for whatever that's worth.

 

[schonelucht]

Well, that was NOT the point you were making in the post I responded to, and my response stands.

You replied first to a post where I said they don't need to run simulation, they already have all the data. (Implied conclusion : from which it would be easy to calculate the exact amount everyone earns and thus average). And then you replied to a post where I said to use averages to make a fair comparison with other companies. Maybe I should have spelled it out more clearly but seems to be the same point.

You are now bringing another point, that is not quite relevant as a 4 year term that Musk used in his comparison did NOT expire for a person hired six month later. Overall Musk did state that he expects similar returns going forward. The bigger point is that it is in employee interest not to exercise options awarded to them until just before they expire in 10 years after the award.

Now you are poking back to my first point. Yes, it may be in the employee's interest not to exercise his options. But that may be impossible to do in a high cost of living area on a $40k base salary. Taken to the extreme it's like saying that it was perfectly possible to survive on a McDonalds salary in SF because all you had to do was convert your full wages to Google options at IPO. Of course you are free to say that is the responsibility of the employee and up to a point it is. But if you are mailing out a morale boosting email that is completely out of touch with the reality the recipients face, it may backfire.

And finally, of course Musk did state that he expects similar returns going forward. He expects it all the time. But wouldn't it also make sense for an employee at his factory to hedge his bets in case Musk's expectations are not coming true in a timescale you need them to come true?

 

[schonelucht]

[QUOTE="FredTMC, post: 1988706, member: 11555"Last I checked its still a free country. Work wherever you like.[/QUOTE]

Don't get me wrong. I am not debating if Tesla can do it. Or even if what Tesla is doing is fair. I am just debating if the mail will fulfill it's purpose (ie, convince average workers on the floor that they are better of not trying to unionize)

 

[JBRR]

Sorry, but people working for Tesla are being forced to gamble. Of course they don't have to work for Tesla, but if they do they have no choice but to gamble. If Tesla does that, then they should value the stock options at zero until the proceeds are actually in people's pockets. And even then they can't predict the future -- you know the whole "past returns are no guarantee" thing.

They're playing with fire if they rely on that and then the stock is down for an extended time and people start screaming about promises. They really don't want to go there. California is pretty strong on worker protection and the assumption is going to be that the workers were too stupid to understand that it was a gamble.

If only something existed where someone with a stock option could hedge their risk. Like.. some kind of market.

 

[uselesslogin]

I think that all investors should watch the video in this post:
FIRMWARE UPDATE! AP2 Local road driving...and holy crap

The entire thread is useful. I understand the bad position Tesla is in with Mobileye and I'm not sure there was any good solution there. But at the very least I question their judgement in releasing local roads at this time. Highway driving is still limited to 50 mph so I feel they should have got that up to speed and working well first. Either way these videos look real bad to me and I don't remember anything this bad with AP1.

 

[schonelucht]

Not sure how it is relevant to investors. It's part of Tesla's modus operandi. While I disagree with it from a customers perspective, there seems to be no backlash from investors over it. AP1 was at least 6 months late and it became a huge win for the company. As long as they manage to get it running in the same time frame it won't hurt Tesla in the long run. Will only hurt those who bought the car in that time frame.

 

[WarpedOne]

Hurt?

 

[uselesslogin]

Not sure how it is relevant to investors. It's part of Tesla's modus operandi. While I disagree with it from a customers perspective, there seems to be no backlash from investors over it. AP1 was at least 6 months late and it became a huge win for the company. As long as they manage to get it running in the same time frame it won't hurt Tesla in the long run. Will only hurt those who bought the car in that time frame.

I think everything about how a company operates is relevant. And this is not what they did with AP1. AP1 performed better than this when it was released. Tesla just apparently felt they couldn't wait 6 months this time to get enough data. I don't know I really don't understand why they released the local roads update at this point but I also understand they are in a tough spot with Mobileye ending badly.

 

[schonelucht]

Hurt?

Sorry, not a native speaker. I meant that it will not harm Tesla. Is that not the proper use of the word 'hurt'?

I think everything about how a company operates is relevant. And this is not what they did with AP1. AP1 performed better than this when it was released. Tesla just apparently felt they couldn't wait 6 months this time to get enough data. I don't know I really don't understand why they released the local roads update at this point but I also understand they are in a tough spot with Mobileye ending badly.

But AP1 took 6 months to release which created its own set of disgruntled users. But it turned out fine from an investing point of view. I agree it was somewhat naieve from Tesla management to hope that MobilEye would help them move away from MobilEye though.

 

[PaulRocket]

Goldman downgraded Tesla, new price target 185$. Telsa dropped to Sell at Goldman - Tesla Motors (NASDAQ:TSLA) | Seeking Alpha

 

[Runarbt]

Goldman downgraded Tesla, new price target 185$. Telsa dropped to Sell at Goldman - Tesla Motors (NASDAQ:TSLA) | Seeking Alpha

Downgraded by 5$ - 190-185. What is the point?

Of course.. to try to give the sp an extra kick downwards.. :-/

 

[Jonathan Hewitt]

So is GS saying I should sell everything now, rebuy at $180, and keep doing that forever? I mean, there is no possible way TSLA ever breaks out as the business becomes more and more valuable as they build their brand and their business.

 

[AlMc]

Interesting read about battery storage in Japan AND cost comparison of Panasonic back up versus TE.

Panasonic Eyes Storage Boost as Japan Solar Incentives Wane

<snip>

The new model with an inverter and a 5.6 kilowatt-hour storage battery will sell for 1.69 million yen ($15,000), according to Panasonic, an electronics company that makes solar panels and lithium-ion batteries.


Tesla Inc., the electric-car maker and renewable energy company led by Elon Musk, is offering a 14 kilowatt-hour Powerwall storage system for 873,000 yen, according to the company’s website. Tesla began mass production of batteries for energy storage with Panasonic at its Gigafactory in Nevada earlier this year.

 

[Buddyroe]

I can answer this. What's to disagree with is that it's just more hyperventilating about nothing important. Does Tesla have a problem? Obviously. Has Tesla done anything serious to fix it? Obviously not yet. Will this problem exist a year from now? Ah, that's the key issue, isn't it?

So what do we know? As of a few days ago, we know that Tesla has said it will double the number of supercharger locations in North America in 2017. Currently, the pace of new supercharger buildout is at a historic low. In December in a Twitter conversation with Fred Lambert, Elon wrote "There are some [solar arrays at superchargers] installed already, but full rollout really needs Supercharger V3 and Powerpack V2, plus SolarCity. Pieces now in place." and regarding V3: "A mere 350 kW ... what are you referring to, a children's toy?".

These are all facts regarding Tesla's intent. So what can we conclude from this? If you trust Tesla you'll think that they're about to go big with new technology superchargers. Probably faster charging, probably less reliant on the grid, certainly addressing existing problems, and likely improving manufacturability and installation issues. When? Tesla soon. But certainly in time for Model 3. If you don't trust Tesla then all you see is problems and no solution happening.

It's pretty obvious where you stand. If you don't trust Tesla you'll be much happier owning some other car. Meanwhile, you can be pretty sure that all your posts that come from a perspective of not trusting Tesla will generate much disagreement from those of us who do.

I can only say that I really hope you are right.