Julian, You may be absolutely right but you are stating that as if it were a fact. I appreciate your passion but many of the predictions you make are just ......opinions. I hope you are correct in your repeating your $400 PT by the end of the year. I will easily retire, as will many here.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Julian, You may be absolutely right but you are stating that as if it were a fact. I appreciate your passion but many of the predictions you make are just ......opinions. I hope you are correct in your repeating your $400 PT by the end of the year. I will easily retire, as will many here.
The Bolt at 30k is right in line with the rest of GM's products. People pay 32k US without incentives for the Encore. The Bolt may not have as much luxuries inside as the Encore, But it will have a great deal more tech and performance. Even ignoring the electric power train, The Bolt is a compelling vehicle in GM's line.
The ICE manufacturers will get serious about BEV eventually, the question is when and how big lead Tesla will have and also who will survive the transition.
BMW I think has the right approach by creating a separate company for it. Toyota and others are still doing fuel cells. So is BMW actually for some reason.
The vehicle platforms ICE manufacturers are launching this year and the coming years are not BEV platforms. What they do have though is PHEV and I think they will be successful selling both ICE and PHEV. Tesla will offset their sales a certain amount, the sum of Tesla's production + the people that are holding on their old car while waiting to buy a Tesla. This is still a small amount in the whole market, so the ICE manufacturers will not panic yet and can even continue to grow. This will change in five years when it is time for new platforms and then they will get serious about BEV but Tesla will have 8-10 year lead then and the advantage of no legacy tech they have to kill slowly. Add to that the SC network and AP and the possibility of access to cheaper batteries.
I have high respect for the auto manufacturers. Not all of them of course but as an industry they feel nimble and used to fierce competition. It is not like the satellite and the government contract companies SpaceX is competing against. The ICE to BEV transition will kill a few or many, hard to say but in the end I don't agree with you that there will be several startups succeeding and replacing them.
Last edited:
Yes.. Competition. According to this thread, that will never exist... But it will, and is present.
jhm
Well-Known Member
Good luck. Nice to have some math geeks around here.
You may want to look at gross margin as well. They are certainly trying to drive down the coat per unit even if that does not translate into a reduction of price per unit. However, demand can grow in the lower priced range to draw down ASP. So in the short run it could be a complicated story.
Just wanted to point out that you are using my *copyrighted* terms: :wink: More steak, less sizzle. http://youtu.be/CGXdD5aJ4E0
j/k: Use it all you want!
It is barely present at the moment. There is no competition in the high end and not really for Model 3 either because of lack of SC. And no one is fully focused on BEV but ICE and PHEV. I don't think Tesla will have "serious" competition until about 2020.
But even if big auto are well managed transition to BEV with all their resources and capital will be a massive task, but it won't start until around 2020, before that is ICE PHEV. Except the chinese, they will do BEV earlier.
jhm
Well-Known Member
Yes, I would recommend that shorts hold their position until we reach a new all time high. Until then I'd like longs to buy up the shares.
larmor
Active Member
It was mentioned earlier, if current automakers go all in on BEV or make a superior BEV automobile, they are basically capitulating on their current business model.
BMW creating a separate company for it?
Wow, good information assuming it checks out.
This by the way is the only valid solution to the innovator's dilemma.
What this would mean if strictly accurate is that someone very senior at BMW knows BMW will go bust.
Respectfully it is merely your opinion that some of the things I say in the definitive are merely an opinion. If you need me to clarify the method of arriving at one or more of these definitives then kindly just ask and I will gladly explain time permitting. It is actually out of respect for this community and to prevent explanations going on for miles of text that I simply write the answer without the workings considering that many of these ought to be obvious. If however upon explaining something the logic proves to be debatable then we will both learn something. I can assure you that I write nothing on this subject in the definitive out of passion.
BMW i that makes the i3 and i8 and the rumored i5 is a subsidiary to BMW. So it is not a new company spin-off to sit at the same level as the mother company. My point was that I think it is necessary to separate the BEV business as much as possible and not have the same managers and procedures and also to allow cannibalization. And it seems BMW is leading in this currently.
Not sure what you mean with BMW managers knowing BMW will go bust. They will go bust if they screw up, but they are far from being destined to.
Last edited:
Just a division? What I thought. It's not good enough. Must strand ice business in oldco and create newco for EVs with freedom to drive oldco out of business. This is the solution to inovators dilemma for ice auto.
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
BMW is very serious about BEV cars. Relative of mine that works for corporate owned dealer (yup, there is such thing in Canada), mentioned that they have corporate training sessions or alike with 'electrify or die' message. I paraphrase, I don't remember exact wording.
They're trying to change the culture, not that they are already successful.
Good article in Forbes about the disruptive "Black Swan" potential of TESLA. The 7 in 10 theory is interesting....first I've heard of it.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/woodmac...k-swan-on-the-energy-industry/2/#66e254f5124f
http://www.forbes.com/sites/woodmac...k-swan-on-the-energy-industry/2/#66e254f5124f
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
Definitives? After all but guaranteeing $200 is the bottom, and observing $200->$140, you still use that language?
What an arrogance! You're convinced you can predict behavior of complex systems like human society, those that no one has been able to model yet. Oh, yes, except Isac Asimov ('future history'), who I loved as a kid, but he writes 'science fiction', not 'science'.
I agree you can claim with significant certainty particular events unfolding, like BEV beating ICE (eventually). But offering timelines of stock movement?
With all due respect, I think I'll have to block you. I agree with much of what you say will happen - eventually, but I don't need cheerleading, I'd like balanced inputs, and this is not your forte.
- - - Updated - - -
Was this ever reported?
Visit to Tesla factory: Tour of Tesla Factory - YouTube
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
There is only one true god that has proof of timing and $$$ amount. My crystal ball and 8 ball.
One should not state future predictions as definitive *facts*. There are many macro and micro events that are totally unpredictable. We can argue the actual probability of events happening but there is never certainty. No one here on TMC thought we would see $140s in 2016 when we were over $200 in December 2015. People who claimed we would *never* see $200 again several months ago, then the *bargain* prices of $190, 180, 170......but we did, and they were well intended, smart, long time TM followers with excellent modeling skills.
I have NO particular skills over most here in investing, finance, and modeling growth. I am a simple guy who believes in the TM mission statement and supports that belief by buying TM vehicles and doing my best to educate friends, co workers and family about all things TM.
But one thing I believe (yep opinion).....TM will succeed....but no one knows the exact path of TSLA and your *definitive posts*, while inspirational, are your opinions based on your modeling of future events that no one can predict when, and if, they will occur.
edit: Guess Zhelko and Causalien beat me to it..too slow typing..another poor skill:wink:
Last edited:
jhm
Well-Known Member
Just a clarification. ...
Shorts owe 30.3 shares on 131M outstanding, about 23%. So longs hold 123% of outstanding shares long. People often miss this point. Shares outstanding is the net of gross shares long and gross shares short. So part of why shorts are a to drag down the value of shares is that they are putting more gross shares in circulation effectively diluting value. In a squeeze, as shares short are returned to lenders, this takes gross shares long out of circulation which concentrates value.
So if there are 67% held by institutions and 27% Elon Musk, that leave 26% mostly retail. When shorts cover, who do they buy from? In most cases, other shorts for a rolling squeeze. But to buy from institutions or retail longs who have been hardened by going through this BS, they will have to pay a dear price. On the way up, momentum traders will jump in, so that's where most of the shares will come from once they think the run is about done.
That will never happen unless there is a bankruptcy or government saving the company. Governments rescuing those that did the transition wrong is going to happen I think. Auto manufacturers are a point of pride for many countries.
Anyway, I think we agree that the challenges for the ICE manufacturers will be massive and the more separation between BEV and ICE the more likely they are to overcome it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
