Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

[mrdoubleb]

Headline coming soon, "Audi announces Tesla-semi killer'. You have been warned.

haha, no that would be MAN, the semi arm of VW.

You know who woke up to a pretty sh*t day today though? That Nikola truck company... Man, I wouldn't want to be in their shoes this morning.

 

[brantse]

An inventory of swappable uncharged batteries can be used to soak up surplus power during the day. Most of this surplus will be solar power.

There's generally not much surplus power during the day. This is only a very tiny fraction of the world that truly have excess power, resulting from PV. The rest of the world is very power hungry during normal business hours, hence the reason that on-peak rates continue to climb.

 

[Paracelsus]

I agree that battery swapping is the way to go for semis, at least for long distance trucking. There are benefits to the grid here. An inventory of swappable uncharged batteries can be used to soak up surplus power during the day. Most of this surplus will be solar power. On the flip side an inventory of charged batteries can provide peak power to grid whenever it is needed, even after sundown. Thus, the swappable inventory serves as a massive grid energy storage service. Meanwhile semis draw from this inventory as needed to power their route.

So I envision that ESemis are a part of an integrated ecosystem that harvests utility scale solar and wind energy while balancing the grid. It is both stationary and mobile storage.

For those of you who think that Elon's plan leaves out or is even hostle to utilities, I think that powering fleets is the future for utilities. It's not enough just to keep the lights on; they need to keep transport systems powered up.

I completely agree with this concept, jhm........and the creation of new large scale electric vehicle charging station systems may also serindipitously create opportunity for development of strategically located Distributed Energy Resources (DER's) in the process, thus reducing the amount of 'aging infrastructure' that must be upgraded - just like the article discussing the forward-thinking Rochester Gas & Electric RFP solicitation to implement DER's to eliminate the need to upgrade an $11.8M transformer that you posted earlier this week (BTW - thanks for sharing that article, I do think it represents a much needed approach for PUD's faced with otherwise insurmountable aging infrastructure O&M costs and land acquisition costs for new distribution).

Utilities that pro-actively embrace rapid adoption of electric vehicle transport will survive. Those that continue to embrace the pragmatic approach will suffer. The new demand that electric vehicles will put on the grid and the revenue that new load will create may actually become critical for the very survival of utilities faced with aging infrastructure, mandated energy efficiency efforts that would reduce revenue, and the relative certainty of mass adoption of renewable energy sources coupled with stationary storage that will further reduce peak-demand revenues - and in some cases take customers off the grid completely. Earlier this week the Northwest Power and Conservation Council posted a short article on the value of electric cars to the areas served by Columbia Basin generation for other reasons as well. It states that "...a conservative estimate showed by 2035 we could keep $2 billion dollars per year in the region. The main savings comes from reducing the amount of gasoline that is purchased from producers outside the region"........and I have to wonder if much of the remaining savings are in avoiding utility upgrades and DER implementation. Here is the link:

The Regional Value of Electric Vehicles

 

[ggies07]

Yeah no disagreement there. Obviously Tesla does not intend to or has to replace all 2Bn vehicles around the world.

My comment was more general in terms of Elon's vision about transportation in the next 15-20 years.

He very accurately identified 10 years ago, that you shouldn't try to change some of basic human nature. Yes most folks drive like 30 miles or less a day and a car's looks is not material to its function, yet people will never buy ugly weirdmobils with 80 miles of range even if technically they would do the job - and far more efficiently.

I think the same may be true in the ownership vs sharing/renting/automated bus discussion.

I see both sides. But if this becomes a thing in our society, with my daughter's generation growing up around it (she's 5 now), then by the time their generation starts to drive they could have a completely different take on driving. It might be hard for some of us to see this path because of how we have grown up and lived with our view of transportation. It's all about the new generation right? To quote Seinfeld - NEXT!

 

[tanner]

That's what I'm talking about - I hope this open traps some shorts and we grind up above $230 all day.

 

[bookfast]

The problem here is that powering semis en route presumes that the utilities will still be in the business of balancing the grid with dispatable generation. As battery storage enters the grid at scale, this implies that somewhere stationary batteries are being used to power semis on route. So the question is whether this fixed investment in electrifying highways is simply duplicative to the necessary battery infrastructure. Why not just put the "stationary" batteries on the trucks as needed and uses these same batteries to stabilize the grid when not in transit on trucks? Distributed batteries overcome the need for massive and duplicate energy infrastructures.

I agree that we will necessarily have energy storage powering the grid, the same grid trucks are drawing from. However, as a counter argument I would say it is not full duplicity because you will need far more batteries if they are installed on each truck (reduced efficiency of transport due to battery weight, reduced utilization of batteries since they are isolated from the grid when on the trucks). Also, it may be optimistic to think truck batteries will be stabilizing the grid when not installed. A truck doesn't want to pull in to a swap station to receive a 65% full battery. I would suggest transport is a very predictable and stable load. Helping reduce the battery requirements, transport consumption will be higher during business (daylight) hours, which promotes tying into the grid also.

Well I personally think it's a rather stupid concept. Our city has trolley buses like that and it is rather inflexibly when you have construction going on or when a bus breaks down, not to mention it is also frikkin ugly on the skyline and over a highway could be expensive to build out and maintain.

On the other hand, trucks would be the perfect candidates for battery swaps. Imagine if the trucking companies didn't own any battery packs (much less capital needed to replace the trucks) instead leased them or rented them from Tesla via a bank and Tesla had solar chargers and automated swapping stations along the highway. Pack keeps charging all day long, truck pulls in, automated pit stop in 90 seconds, gets a new pack, drives on.

Could be a very lucrative business for Tesla and a very good deal for trucking companies - especially when paired with autonomous trucks that can drive 24/7, safely, silently, cleanly, cheaply.

Inflexible yes, if the truck cannot leave it's lane. The siemens solution overcomes this, however. Expensive, no, particularly on highly utilized transport routes. The more trucks using it, the cheaper it becomes (through tolls, tariffs, etc). Compare the cost of building and maintaining automated battery swapping stations vs overhead power lines.

I'm not saying it must be this solution, I just think long term it is appears more efficient, which means it could (eventually) win. I am very happy Tesla is committed to advancing commercial transport. If you look at somewhere like Quebec in Canada, much of their emissions come from transportation, and the grid is 99%+ renewable hydro. Road electrification is a perfect fit.

 

[NOLA_Mike]

No volume. Daily volume has been steadily declining since mid-June. I think we might be in the summer doldrums and when Elon polled the institutional investors about their feelings on the SCTY acquisition he probably had to reach them at their beach houses in the Hamptons.

Just an observation. The Days to Cover should rise on the next couple of short reports.

Mike

 

[sdtslafan]

As with almost every Tesla product announcement over the past 3 years, there is the expectation of a "sell-the-news" reaction in the absence of concrete information (e.g. steak). Let's see how this plays out. If the drop at open is less than expected (currently less than 1%), bears might panic and cover in masses. I know I would...

 

[SBenson]

Talk is cheap. At some point investors will require a return.

GM raises full-year forecast after strong second-quarter result

GM seems to be focusing on volumes and profitability. Tesla is focusing in technological edge and excellence. It's two different things. Motorola vs Apple in 2007.

ERs are for profits. Masterplans are for world domination & empire building. Again, two different things.

 

[theschnell]

Not sure there is much in here to dramatically affect the SP. I think the market will probably shrug, or even worse, sell the news.

Like I said...

 

[tanner]

As with almost every Tesla product announcement over the past 3 years, there is the expectation of a "sell-the-news" reaction in the absence of concrete information (e.g. steak). Let's see how this plays out. If the drop at open is less than expected (currently less than 1%), bears might panic and cover in masses. I know I would...

Strong initial open, hope we don't fade down after amateur hour...

 

[anticitizen13.7]

If it covered your car payment, you might feel differently. And if not, certainly millions of others would.

It wouldn't change how I feel.

My house is empty maybe 33% of the day during work/school hours, but I wouldn't want to allow random strangers to enter to use the laundry room, sleep on the living room couch, or cook in the kitchen, even if the fees earned covered the monthly mortgage payment.

I am selfish and I don't believe in this "sharing economy"! Stay off lawn!

Google may only have 57k engineers, but jobs that benefit directly or indirectly from Google is huge, such as companies who partners" with Google, or sells to them, this goes straight down to the restaurants that eventually pops open within a 5 mile radius to feed the engineers...

Another example is if you had a $1 bill, and went to spend it, that $1 dollar doesn't stop and disappear at the store you spent it at. It could go into the pocket of the store owner, who then would take it to spend somewhere else, then the next person would do the same, etc..

Something to consider here, Tech jobs provided to engineers are high paying jobs, quality work that enables them to splurge: buy a nice house, with top of the line furniture, maybe remodeling or renovation, take some vacations, etc.

Arguably the computer was meant to replace a lot of jobs, but it actuallity, it created more. The SMP2 only shifts the market towards higher demand for engineers, designeers..students will pursue this field as long as there is demand for it. Kids today are more tech savvy than any generations before (gee I wonder why?) Those who aren't "smart" enough to enter this field can benefit indirectly, as stated above..

I don't disagree with the premise that highly paid workers boost the local economy around them. My point is that these newer tech companies typically don't employ as many people as older big companies, because they just don't need as many people to achieve the same (or in many cases, greater) productivity. The total % of jobs that compensate enough for a comfortable middle class life is going down.

I was going to post something about this. I firmly belive we are moving towards a sufficiently productive future that these sorts of systems will work. It's all about the productivity. In a sufficiently productive society, no one needs to work.

(I abhor neo-luddism.)

I am not one of those people who advocates turning back the clock. It's impossible to do so as the automation genie is already out of the bottle.

What I do advocate is for people and organizations to think about the implications of rapid technological progress due to unprecedented inexpensive computing power, advanced robotics, and algorithms. Continuing to walk down this path without much thought for what this means for humans in the future is foolhardy. I don't take a road trip without figuring out where I am going and what I might need along the way. Neither should society. I did read some posts above from others about basic income, and I think that could be one strategy for coping with current trends that are causing a lot of economic stress for people.

Many of my colleagues and friends in the tech industry love new gadgets and services and stuff. I think people tend to be blinded by the glitter of it all, and not consider the longer term implications.

 

[theschnell]

Strong initial open, hope we don't fade down after amateur hour...

Strong initial open???

 

[tanner]

Strong initial open???

Check out the first two 5 minute candles... It WAS looking good.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

Strong initial open???

I was going to say the same thing.

NASDAQ composite is flat to slightly up.

TSLA is down $3 and change, or -1.4%, which does not surprise me at all. I talk to a lot of people who aren't really knowledgeable about electric cars, Elon Musk, or solar power. Many people think Elon is completely crazy, and that the things he proposes are outlandish, unrealistic, or even frightening. Those of us here who share Elon's vision are still very much in the minority, albeit a growing minority.

Basically, I think it is pointless to attempt to trade on announcements like SM2. The price movements are small and not that predictable.

SM2 was a great fireworks show with extraordinary sizzle, but much of "the market" won't be moved until actual product moves and revenue comes in. The trick is to get on board and stay on board before that happens.

 

[mmd]

Short manipulation in early hours.

They push the stock down on purpose to propel the sense that market didn't receive the plan well. There was a Cramer video on this type of manipulation somewhere.

Add: longs with dry powder can easily exploit this.

Is this meant to be a joke? We just heard from Doug Kass yesterday that there were no shares to short. Are the shorts covering to push the price down?

 

[JRP3]

Not surprising, the market doesn't get it, yet. This article is typical:
Elon Musk's dream for Tesla could be an investor's nightmare

Tesla has historically had trouble hitting its deadlines, and few take the goal of 500,000 vehicles by 2018 seriously. But in his post Musk seemingly hinted that the Model 3 might be falling behind, saying that a "factory machine" described as "version 0.5" will be ready next year "with version 1.0 probably in 2018."

No, Elon was not hinting that Model 3 might be falling behind at all.

Margins could also be an issue. Tesla -- at least on a GAAP basis -- loses money on each vehicle sold today.

Meanwhile, competition is brewing in every one of the markets Tesla has identified. In its core automotive market, Tesla will soon face its first serious rivals as General Motors ( GM) and Nissan ( NSANY) introduce their own long-range electric vehicles, with others including BMW not far behind.

More

 

[SBenson]

Is this meant to be a joke? We just heard from Doug Kass yesterday that there were no shares to short. Are the shorts covering to push the price down?

And you are Doug Kass's _____??

And one would have to be an idiot to not be able to find the stock to short today. And why can't shorts slowly accumulate a bunch of shares days ahead, only to sell in a big push right after the announcement?

 

[MitchJi]

The problem here is that powering semis en route presumes that the utilities will still be in the business of balancing the grid with dispatable generation. As battery storage enters the grid at scale, this implies that somewhere stationary batteries are being used to power semis on route. So the question is whether this fixed investment in electrifying highways is simply duplicative to the necessary battery infrastructure. Why not just put the "stationary" batteries on the trucks as needed and uses these same batteries to stabilize the grid when not in transit on trucks? Distributed batteries overcome the need for massive and duplicate energy infrastructures.

I think that powering semi's with swappable Powerpacks would work well.

 

[mmd]

Notes from Adam Jonas, Rod Lache, Joseph Spak, Colin Rusch.
Elon Musk's new master plan for Tesla: what Wall Street's saying