Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2013

[FANGO]

-tesla develops new battery that can go 500+ miles between charges

Why? Who goes 500 miles in a day, and who would want to pay twice as much for a battery pack to go 500 miles a day when they could get one that goes 250 miles a day and still cover literally all of their driving ever?

People talk a lot about huge range numbers, but they are not practical. I actually think Tesla has overshot and 300 miles is too much already, but 500 is flat-out silly. People should not expect ever-increasing range numbers, because people just don't go that far, and it would not be a good idea to carry around all those batteries all the time. It just makes the car more expensive and inefficient, and makes it harder for manufacturers to sell. People might think they want something with that range, but manufacturers won't want to make something with that range, because it's wholly unnecessary. Especially with superchargers in existence every 100 miles on major roads in the future. 500 is too much larger than 100 for it to make any sense whatsoever.

 

[mitch672]

Just an FYI another Bear hit piece comparing Tesla to GM over on "Seeking Mediocrity"
Like that's any kind of comparision that's meaningful currently. I'd take Tesla over 10 GMs any day.

 

[Noble Ninja]

Looks like we ventured out of the channel only to get pulled back in...for now. Today and tomorrow will be very telling of the strength of this channel.

Thanks for the chart update but to be honest, this whole venturing out of channel and getting pulled back in (basically trading sideways) and the whole "today and tomorrow will be telling of strength" has been happening for the last full week. I'm not surprised by this as there currently doesn't appear to be significant news lately to start a rally in either direction.

 

[clmason]

Why? Who goes 500 miles in a day, and who would want to pay twice as much for a battery pack to go 500 miles a day when they could get one that goes 250 miles a day and still cover literally all of their driving ever?

1) Model X may need a more powerful battery to go the same distance as Model S. That's a good reason to make a bigger pack.
2) Then put that pack into an S and you get a more range just because you can.
3) Just because you can is the reason a lot of luxury buyers actually buy something. There are countless buyers to "max out" their computer or phone and only use a fraction of the capabilities. Same may happen here.

 

[RobStark]

Why? Who goes 500 miles in a day, and who would want to pay twice as much for a battery pack to go 500 miles a day when they could get one that goes 250 miles a day and still cover literally all of their driving ever?

People talk a lot about huge range numbers, but they are not practical. I actually think Tesla has overshot and 300 miles is too much already, but 500 is flat-out silly. People should not expect ever-increasing range numbers, because people just don't go that far, and it would not be a good idea to carry around all those batteries all the time. It just makes the car more expensive and inefficient, and makes it harder for manufacturers to sell. People might think they want something with that range, but manufacturers won't want to make something with that range, because it's wholly unnecessary. Especially with superchargers in existence every 100 miles on major roads in the future. 500 is too much larger than 100 for it to make any sense whatsoever.

The Model S is not about necessity but about want. And so is any future coupe or roadster in this price class. Sports cars and sense do not mix.

Bigger battery means more ridiculous acceleration. It means driving from LA to Vegas at 75 mph with ice cold AC tunes blasting without worrying about the elevation of the highway or finding the next supercharger. And skipping the supercharger if is completely occupied.

Nissan Leaf is about the bare necessities. It is about making rational arguments for purchase to the environmentalist.

If Tesla wants to continue to see people trading in Porsche, Ferrari, AMG Mercedes, M Series BMWs for Teslas in the very profitable $100k plus range they will continue to push the KWH capacity of the battery packs.

That does not mean they can't offer a compact sedan with 200 miles of range that does 0-60 in 9 seconds for $25k in the future.

That is what it means to be a full line manufacture.

You sell Eco Cruzes as well as Corvette ZR1s.

 

[mershaw2001]

We can just move on and keep in mind that there are paid posters and ppl with multiple accounts on this forum. That's what I didn't like. I actually really respect shorts like Realist.

Moving on, the algorithm of the bot that's pointed to Tesla stock is new. Like Curt pointed out. It begins about an hour after market starts as its signature, indicating it is only one bot. I haven't been following the stock market closely, it might be a new trend amongst bot programmers to use thinner volume to manipulate easier. Which means that the bot is not a scalping bot that earns based on. volume, but written to trigger stop losses.

If it is the general trend observed in other stocks, do correct me.

I see that bot going all the time at exactly the time that i don't want it to be going. I see volume start to trail off and I'm thinking "now's when it could drop" and then bang! Someone throws a shiiiitload of shares on to drop it 50 cents. And I cry.

 

[FANGO]

The Model S is not about necessity but about want. And so is any future coupe or roadster in this price class. Sports cars and sense do not mix.

Bigger battery means more ridiculous acceleration. It means driving from LA to Vegas at 75 mph with ice cold AC tunes blasting without worrying about the elevation of the highway or finding the next supercharger. And skipping the supercharger if is completely occupied.

Nissan Leaf is about the bare necessities. It is about making rational arguments for purchase to the environmentalist.

If Tesla wants to continue to see people trading in Porsche, Ferrari, AMG Mercedes, M Series BMWs for Teslas in the very profitable $100k plus range they will continue to push the KWH capacity of the battery packs.

That does not mean they can't offer a compact sedan with 200 miles of range that does 0-60 in 9 seconds for $25k in the future.

That is what it means to be a full line manufacture.

You sell Eco Cruzes as well as Corvette ZR1s.

But you don't sell 40k wants a year. You sell 5k or 1k or something. The roadster was the "want" car. The Model S is more than that.

Anyway, JB himself said that he never sees batteries getting beyond the 300-400 range (at least year's cleantech conference). One of the guys from AC Propulsion whose name I forget says he thinks EV batteries will end up leveling out around 100 mile range for most cars. 500 is silly and people should not expect it, which is why I say this every time someone comes up with silly numbers for battery packs. It doesn't make sense for a manufacturer to make a car like that. And it doesn't make sense for people to talk about it, because then prospective buyers will say "oh, I'll wait for the 500 mile version, because I need 500 miles." There are plenty of people who think they need 500 miles, and that it's not a matter of wants, and one reason they think that is because they think ranges will keep getting bigger. So we need to be realistic here, and let everyone know that, no, range will not just keep getting bigger.

 

[Causalien]

I see that bot going all the time at exactly the time that i don't want it to be going. I see volume start to trail off and I'm thinking "now's when it could drop" and then bang! Someone throws a shiiiitload of shares on to drop it 50 cents. And I cry.

Yeah, it's pretty clever however. There's a risk of a competing house that develop the algorithm to do the exact opposite, but that'll take a few months. I wonder if it does the opposite on the way up and might be a trend of a new type of algo that takes out stop loss levels because scalping algorithms have reached the speed of light and limits of physics. I wonder why they choose 1 hour in instead of lunch time though.

Anyway, still need to keep on observing for longer period to be sure it is an algo. Just like the 2008~2009 period when the bots first took over 60% of the trading. It takes some time to weed out the possibility that a human can trade like that with the aid of computer order.

 

[RobStark]

But you don't sell 40k wants a year. You sell 5k or 1k or something. The roadster was the "want" car. The Model S is not that.

Anyway, JB himself said that he never sees batteries getting beyond the 300-400 range (at least year's cleantech conference). One of the guys from AC Propulsion whose name I forget says he thinks EV batteries will end up leveling out around 100 mile range for most cars. 500 is silly and people should not expect it, which is why I say this every time someone comes up with silly numbers for battery packs. It doesn't make sense for a manufacturer to make a car like that. And it doesn't make sense for people to talk about it, because then prospective buyers will say "oh, I'll wait for the 500 mile version, because I need 500 miles." There are plenty of people who think they need 500 miles, and that it's not a matter of wants, and one reason they think that is because they think ranges will keep getting bigger. So we need to be realistic here, and let everyone know that, no, range will not just keep getting bigger.

Yes, you can sell more than 100k wants per year world wide.

Nobody needs a Model S, S Class, 7 Series or A8.

Nobody needs a $70k-130k luxury sports sedan.

Maybe some Silicon Valley CEOs think they need a P85+ but people in the real world don't need these large powerful sedans.

Aside from work trucks and vans, nobody needs anything more than a Honda Accord or Dodge Grand Caravan.

Like I-phones and I-pads I think people will get used to the fact that Tesla is going to be constantly upgrading their products. There will be no plateau point were you can get the definitive product for the next decade. No " I can get a Model S now knowing there will not be a much better one a year or 3 years from now."

We shall see what happens when cleantech conference consensus meets the competitive market place.

I think the point of Tesla is not simply to sell to the Ed Baigly Jr types.

But to transform and electrify ground transport.

That means selling EVs to redneck America that currently buys F-150s and Camaro Z28s they don't need and selling to Investment Bankers and Corporate lawyers in Manhattan and West LA that drive Porsche's and Ferrari's they don't need.

Selling EVs simply to environmentally conscious upper and upper middle class in blue state American won't do.

 

[DaveT]

500 is silly and people should not expect it, which is why I say this every time someone comes up with silly numbers for battery packs.

On the 4/26/13 conference call (service announcement) Elon hinted at a 500-mile Model S.

 

[Subhuman]

But you don't sell 40k wants a year. You sell 5k or 1k or something. The roadster was the "want" car. The Model S is more than that.

Anyway, JB himself said that he never sees batteries getting beyond the 300-400 range (at least year's cleantech conference). One of the guys from AC Propulsion whose name I forget says he thinks EV batteries will end up leveling out around 100 mile range for most cars. 500 is silly and people should not expect it, which is why I say this every time someone comes up with silly numbers for battery packs. It doesn't make sense for a manufacturer to make a car like that. And it doesn't make sense for people to talk about it, because then prospective buyers will say "oh, I'll wait for the 500 mile version, because I need 500 miles." There are plenty of people who think they need 500 miles, and that it's not a matter of wants, and one reason they think that is because they think ranges will keep getting bigger. So we need to be realistic here, and let everyone know that, no, range will not just keep getting bigger.

While I agree with your sentiment about a 500 mile battery pack not being needed, one should watch how the word "silly" is tossed around considering Elon himself has discussed the possibility of a 500 mile battery pack. I think it was mentioned during the Q2 earnings call.

Oops Dave-T beat me to it

 

[carrerascott]

My wife went from Charlottesville to overnight in DC. There are no SCs in NOVA or DC. So it was somewhat of a pain. With current charging infrastructure, a 400-500 mile pack would have been great. As it is, she had to find charging. Most of the charging was slow (HPWC was the fastest). An hour or so at Tysons put on about 50 miles of charge. But this morning she had to drive back from DC, plus about 20 miles south to drop my son @ school, then back to our house, about 20 miles north of Cville. So without charging she would not have made it.

In fact, she ended up leaving the car with Tesla in downtown DC overnight and they gave it a full charge overnight, so they left this morning with about 254 miles. She's on her way home now after a few errands in town and she's has 39 miles of range left, about 15 miles from home.

So without that full charge at Tesla, and without a real charging infrastructure (and likely nothing any time soon around here), yes a 400-500 range car would be MUCH more desirable to a lot of people.

Maybe not for you.

Why? Who goes 500 miles in a day, and who would want to pay twice as much for a battery pack to go 500 miles a day when they could get one that goes 250 miles a day and still cover literally all of their driving ever?

People talk a lot about huge range numbers, but they are not practical. I actually think Tesla has overshot and 300 miles is too much already, but 500 is flat-out silly. People should not expect ever-increasing range numbers, because people just don't go that far, and it would not be a good idea to carry around all those batteries all the time. It just makes the car more expensive and inefficient, and makes it harder for manufacturers to sell. People might think they want something with that range, but manufacturers won't want to make something with that range, because it's wholly unnecessary. Especially with superchargers in existence every 100 miles on major roads in the future. 500 is too much larger than 100 for it to make any sense whatsoever.

 

[DaveT]

While I agree with your sentiment about a 500 mile battery pack not being needed, one should watch how the word "silly" is tossed around considering Elon himself has discussed the possibility of a 500 mile battery pack. I think it was mentioned during the Q2 earnings call.

Oops Dave-T bet me to it

On another note, Elon recently pointed out that they are seeing a 8% annual improvement in batteries. Following the Rule of 72, that means in 9 years (from 2012 when the Model S was introduced) we'll see a doubling of the battery capacity for the same cost (or they could lower the cost of the battery but not double the capacity). Elon's also mentioned several times that every 4-5 years they will introduce a step change with the battery pack. So, here's my rough estimates based on those two quotes from Elon (8% annual improvement, 4-5 years step change introduced) if Tesla chooses to maximize range and not reduce battery pack costs.

2012 - 60kwh, 85 kwh
2016-2017 - 85kwh, 120 kwh
2021 - 120kwh, 170kwh

Tesla could keep the 60kwh as an entry-level car, so in 2016-2017 the lineup could be 60kwh, 85kwh, 120kwh.

The 2021 battery pack lineup could keep the 85kwh so it would be 85kwh, 120kwh, 170kwh.

 

[sub]

If 500 miles is sold as an "option" and Tesla can increase profits that way, why not? I think a true 300 mile car is plenty, meaning 300 miles with no worries about speed, terrain, AC etc. The current 250 or so miles is just short of what I need to make some pretty regular trips and currently there are no convenient superchargers for some of those, including getting to and from the Bay area from where I live in the Sierra foothills.

 

[Larken]

Regarding a 500 mile battery, I think Elon talked about it at the Teslive conference this summer. He said someting like "We could make a 500 mile battery today if we want to"

 

[justthateasy]

Sooooo anyways.... short-term price movement.....

Looks like we ventured out of the channel only to get pulled back in...for now. Today and tomorrow will be very telling of the strength of this channel.

I'll have to go with Ninja on this and say that today's price action is essentially another sideways day considering we finished the day not too far away from Friday's close but to the downside and staying within pennant formation. The day started off strong with pre-market being well above Friday's close. It managed to hit level 2 (~125.50) resistance but quickly sold off. Starting the day off big and the selloff throughout the day could be attributed to one of or a combination of: Elon's statement about Q4 orders, a test of the resistance, scalping, or even an algorithm ensuring that TSLA finishes the day well within pennant formation and below the 123.70 level 1 resistance.

Thanks for the chart update but to be honest, this whole venturing out of channel and getting pulled back in (basically trading sideways) and the whole "today and tomorrow will be telling of strength" has been happening for the last full week. I'm not surprised by this as there currently doesn't appear to be significant news lately to start a rally in either direction.

Well the channel Robot drew does show outliers so today's peak/test of the resistance line and fall shouldn't be all that significant. What would have been significant is if TSLA finished finished on the other side of the resistance line and above 123.70. Just keep in mind that there's plenty of downside to the support level and look what happened the last time we a tight formation like this.

 

[FANGO]

Regarding a 500 mile battery, I think Elon talked about it at the Teslive conference this summer. He said someting like "We could make a 500 mile battery today if we want to"

Right, and then he went on to discuss why they don't want to, because it doesn't make sense to. Superchargers or occasional fast-swapping make a lot more sense. Heck I don't even think fast-swapping makes sense, I think it's just been talked about to get rid of some of this silly "I'll buy it later when it's as fast as filling up on gas" mentality.

 

[justthateasy]

Yeah, I just wanted to hold you guys up for being objective and honest. I fully get it and do take it all with a grain of salt. It takes some guts as I've learned to share objective bearish opinion here, which is unfortunate. These guys that immediately criticize obvious bulls that offer objective bearish analysis or opinion are frustrating. This thread is short term, not long term price movements. I'm such a TSLA bull that I can get caught up in the optimism and unfortunately purchased at 137, when I should have waited as I did in the 150's. If I knew what I knew now I would not purchase at current levels. I think the price needs to come down considerably and build a base and then reverse.

I come to this site looking for solid insight and hopefully I can share some at some point. I have a deposit on an MX and have an MS on order. I bought at 36 and sold at 185, then shorted at earnings at 175 and covered way too premature at 151 because I believe so strongly in the company and because I wasn't counting on a 3rd fire going viral immediately after the close. This 3rd fire did wake me up to the volatile nature of TSLA and the very real potential downside for going long again. Any negative catalyst or catalysts effect TSLA at an alarming level. I only shorted because I felt WS expectations were ridiculously high and nothing less than perfection would do. The rapid increase in price reminded me of 1999. When I invested at 36 I was hoping for maybe 60 in 6-months. Never would have thought 185. It had to come down. Plus, Elon's interview in Germany about the the high valuation was a tip off to me to go defensive. I'm one of the good guys that was just trying to figure out if Friday was a sign of a reversal or not. Just looking for some opinions to hopefully help me from making another mistake. I'm a short term trader until there has been a definitive reversal. I wish I could just go long again like I did at 36, but I just don't think it is a reality yet. I tend to think the NFLX scenario is possible as much as I hate it, but I figure the sooner we get to the bottom, then sooner I can go long again and get off this roller coaster.

I think it's very easy to be blindsided by things we are a fan of and the performance of the company's stock when things are well and to easily ignore the any of the warning signs before a stock breaks down. This happened with me when I was invested in AAPL. Apple the company was doing phenomenally well and did nothing but beat expectation after expectation and Wall Street rewarded AAPL for quite a while. I was there when AAPL hit 700 and started to sell off but I thought that this was a blip on the radar and since they'll have a blowout quarter, it was nothing to worry about and I stuck around. Well Apple did have a blowout quarter but was punished by Wall Street anyway. Long story short, I ended up selling all of my AAPL shares at a loss and took this experience as a valuable lesson to pay attention to the change in headwinds to avoid losing so big.

 

[Chickenlittle]

My wife went from Charlottesville to overnight in DC. There are no SCs in NOVA or DC. So it was somewhat of a pain. With current charging infrastructure, a 400-500 mile pack would have been great. As it is, she had to find charging. Most of the charging was slow (HPWC was the fastest). An hour or so at Tysons put on about 50 miles of charge. But this morning she had to drive back from DC, plus about 20 miles south to drop my son @ school, then back to our house, about 20 miles north of Cville. So without charging she would not have made it.

In fact, she ended up leaving the car with Tesla in downtown DC overnight and they gave it a full charge overnight, so they left this morning with about 254 miles. She's on her way home now after a few errands in town and she's has 39 miles of range left, about 15 miles from home.

So without that full charge at Tesla, and without a real charging infrastructure (and likely nothing any time soon around here), yes a 400-500 range car would be MUCH more desirable to a lot of people.

Maybe not for you.

there will be a tyson corner supercharger by the map in the near future. another possible route would have been to supercharge in richmond area. i believe that may have add 45 minutes to drive but made it more doable. just issue of patience with super charger deployments.

 

[TSLAopt]

Right, and then he went on to discuss why they don't want to, because it doesn't make sense to. Superchargers or occasional fast-swapping make a lot more sense. Heck I don't even think fast-swapping makes sense, I think it's just been talked about to get rid of some of this silly "I'll buy it later when it's as fast as filling up on gas" mentality.

Whats silly is the reality that a 500 mile battery is probably around the corner, even if just initially at limited battery swap stations for long road trips. I would say there is a 50% chance of a 500 mile battery being announced (even if just for 'rent' at a few select battery swap stations) within a year to be available in some capacity.
the same reason Elon wants there to be a 500 mile battery is the same reason he wants to create the hyperloop, or build faster planes, or go to Mars. He wants to further the boundaries of where we can go (literally) with technology.

I have a feeling within 2-3 years we'll have one Giga Factory in the making and be talking about getting more Giga Factories set up.