-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
The Blue Owl
Endangerous Herbivore
Big difference, though, between going LEAPS vs. short term options. I am also contemplating converting stock to Jan18 calls.
jhm
Well-Known Member
Look a fully autonomous EV is worth at least $250k. Why would anyone want to selling to consumers for $40k? This is the opportunity that confronts all competitors entering this market. Until the ride share car market is saturated, there is no need to worry about selling such cars to ordinary consumers.
Think about it this way. Suppose you own a beautiful vacation property that you can rent for $1000 to $2000 per week. What do you do with it? You could rent it out or you could sell it to someone else who most likely will rent it out. What price would you sell it for? Would you be willing to sell it for as little as $40k? No way. Such a property easily commands $600k to $1.2M. So if you can find a buyer willing to pay at least $600k, you are most likely going to hold the asset and rent it out and net over $60k per year excluding your mortgage.
So it is with Tesla. They can make their own ride share company and rent out the cars per mile or they can find investors willing to pay what the car is worth, which is over $250k. As long long as Tesla can net at least $40k per year on a car, they have nothing to gain by selling it for $40k to anyone.
Notice that there is an enormous supply constraint here. It will take several Gigafactories to satisfy the commercial fleet market.
I think it is better to create paths where people are walking than erect fences. Let's rename this thread "Investor general chat" and be done. By definition sudden, short term news would be included in that discussion. I think there is a ton of value in encouraging a free form discussion that wanders a bit. I think oil prices, self-driving monetization, etc are completely germaine to the discussion.
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
thanks,long due reminder
...if stock somehow go down with oil ($20) to $180, would anyone agree that turning some stocks into jan18 200 calls might be smart? Wondering about selling 10% of my stocks and buy a couple of call options instead? I cant imagine this To be anything than real smart... Even when a jan18 200 call option cost $50?
But i have only had real bad luck with call options so far..:-( So maybe not..?
Glad that we are back to short term market discussion
I would not do it. It'll mean that a correlation between oil and tsla is in place. And the saudis can keep going for 4 more hears to achieve the goal that they have not reached.
Below $206 is $176. $206 is a pretty big level so I would definitely do a straddle here around Friday once volatility dies out. And another one at $200. Maybe even wait till Monday since there's currently a big incentive by market participants to keep the share price above $200, but no long term fundamental support on why.
FredTMC
Model S VIN #4925
Feb earnings call can't come soon enough. Market and TSLA getting trashed.
Anyone have an EC date yet? Probably not announced yet...
Anyone have an EC date yet? Probably not announced yet...
All.
tl;dr synopsis: The following megapost concerning Goshn's Q&A in Detroit adresses deep concepts in rebuttal of short term FUD concerning competition. I concur that earnings can't come soon enough, meanwhile this matters IMO.
Regards Goshn @ NAIS Nissan CEO Media Roundtable- NAIAS 2016 - YouTube
He describes EVs from Nissan's perspective as a regulatory burden that will instigate a transition that will be 'difficult to escape'.
He commits the standard auto industry fallacy: Selectively conflating consumer buying patterns with consumer demand in the field of EVs without identifying causality in the form of relative value for money. This is odd considering that elsewhere in the same presentation he made a cogent explanation of the automobile as a carefully considered consumer purchase inclusive of considerations surrounding total cost of ownership and residual value.
[Note: This fallacy is insupportable. It is not credible to suggest that there would be much less than a 98% consumer take-up of an offer of a same-cost straight swap of a new Model S for any new car on the road on account of lack of consumer demand for EVs. Neither is it credible to expect much more than 2% of consumers to take up of an offer of a same-cost straight swap for a Nissan Leaf on account of the fact it is a basic compact car that lacks meaningful highway capability].
He diplomatically (basically disingenuously) laid the blame at the feet of consumers as 'unwilling to pay' what it costs for the industry to supply a compelling EV. He also hedged that if regulators called for a 100% zero emissions policy then they would need ten or fifteen years notice to work on cost optimization. He also talked about connectivity and autonomy coming together in a 2020 time frame and a nebulous desire to maintain market share for the Leaf program.
[Note: There is a world of things that can be deduced with considerable accuracy from the above. In Goshn's view, Nissan cannot afford to escape entrenched competition from its ICE competitors. In order to compete seriously in the EV space he requires that his ICE competitors including the ICE division of Nissan are prevented from competing by regulatory action, this will allow all of the incumbents to move on in lock-step to a level playing field in EV competition. He is also reliant upon the consumer remaining captive - he even goes as far as to suggest the actions of regulators should be anticipated by consumers (something that is clearly the responsibility of business). Such businesses including Nissan routinely insult the intelligence of captive consumers by communicating via attempts to anchor NLP associations between their products and irrelevant and unrelated emotional states and would likely do so exclusively except where forced by regulations to document the fine print. It can be detected from Goshn's comments that firstly Nissan is way behind Tesla on R&D on the cost reduction curve. Nissan is essentially waiting for a regulatory imperative to even put in that effort and essentially demand that no such regulatory imperative is imposed on too short a timescale otherwise they can't respond (he's literally talking about a comfy notice period for Nissan would be to deliver results in 2030). Secondly that they require a level playing field in which the captive consumer is compelled to buy an EV throughout any cost reduction program at whatever price to performance ratio generally suits the auto industry as a whole - not the price that suits the consumer. It is also evident that they are reliant upon a common core of EV technology suppliers to ensure that auto-industry wide progress with EVs is effectively performed in industry-wide lock-step. They apparently intend to upgrade the Leaf to compete with the GM Bolt by December and LG Chem is one of their suppliers. No surprises there, just a different style of making product announcements. (Goshn operates on the basis that announcing products puts competitors on notice to start competing so he likes to announce late - apparently it does not occur to him that his plans are transparent regardless).
The take home message here is that Goshn's world view is packed with hypocrisy and is fundamentally flawed.
Here is something to help explain it, a video from SpaceX that has been greeted by some members of the press as a Hype Video (except that something actually awesome is being shown): | Recap of Falcon 9 launch and landing - YouTube
The auto industry is so used to dealing in BS that Goshn included, it has failed to recognize Tesla as anything but meaningless hype and marketing gimmickry indistinguishable from their own meaningless hype and nonsense: tough car for the mean streets etc etc, Titan Warrior: Durability, Courage blah blah blah. Ever seen a pickup truck exhibit courage? No? I thought not. I have seen a full-sized 5+2 seater emissions-free Model S sedan out-accelerate a more expensive Porsche 911 though while trouncing it on road-holding, technology and safety standards.
What Tesla (and emerging non-automotive industry competition from Apple etc.) does is drill a giant hole in bottom of the auto-industry's boat and with it Goshn's entire world-view.
Nissan is in no position to handle consumers that are no longer captive to the incumbent auto industry and consumers freed of choiceless captivity could care less if Nissan survives or not - and neither could Tesla and in their slipstream Apple, Samsung, Faraday, Foxconn and all the rest. 2030 pending regulators setting the target and leveling the playing field for the incumbents to get to work on it at a manageable pace - give me a break. Model 3 will be in the consumer's face and signing up reservation demand in ten weeks time.
As Ashlee Vance wrote recently in a Quora AMA: The CEO's of the world's auto and aerospace industries have absolutely no idea what they are up against.
Zach. I like Goshn too but he's no colleague of Musk, he's a product of the auto industry mindset that he represents and he is road-kill like all the rest. Goshn and the Leaf is a perfect illustration of the Path of Pain described in the Innovator's Dilemma. Attempting to run a company that is the slave to both legacy and a disruptive technology simultaneously. He most definitely does not have a solution to the Innovator's Dilemma. My only hope for Goshn was dashed when it was revealed that Faraday Future's occupancy of an old Nissan R&D facility was not indicative of a Goshn-backed Newco.
The only hope that Goshn presented for Nissan in this presentation to my mind was his alluding to a common regulatory playing field suppressing ICE and demanding EVs from the entire industry. No such regulation will emerge to save the auto industry, however, competition from Tesla and other well funded auto startups (like Apple) will suppress the ICE auto industry more or less universally in a somewhat similar manner. This made me rethink my theory about guaranteed bankruptcy of the auto industry as a result of the inbound tech disruption best exemplified by Tesla, reducing my level of certainty from 100% to 99.8%.
Why am I moved only 0.2%? The pace of change will not be set by regulators in concert with auto makers. It will be set by violent profit-motivated disruption setting a pace of change that will overwhelm Nissan's margins with layoffs and stranded assets and Goshn. It is just about impossible for a legacy industry to raise capital on the public markets to invest in obsoleting and replacing the core of their business while beset by signals of terminal business decline. Since the auto industry bust in 2008-2009 the auto industry has used up government rescue packages more or less the word over too. Maybe Nissan emerges as a shell of its former self but I think just like the rest they will pass through bankruptcy and their manufacturing assets and relevant non-engine related employees will move on to the management by Tesla and the aforementioned well-funded startups.
TSLA @ $205 on the basis of looming competition FUD. LOL. BUY.
tl;dr synopsis: The following megapost concerning Goshn's Q&A in Detroit adresses deep concepts in rebuttal of short term FUD concerning competition. I concur that earnings can't come soon enough, meanwhile this matters IMO.
Regards Goshn @ NAIS Nissan CEO Media Roundtable- NAIAS 2016 - YouTube
He describes EVs from Nissan's perspective as a regulatory burden that will instigate a transition that will be 'difficult to escape'.
He commits the standard auto industry fallacy: Selectively conflating consumer buying patterns with consumer demand in the field of EVs without identifying causality in the form of relative value for money. This is odd considering that elsewhere in the same presentation he made a cogent explanation of the automobile as a carefully considered consumer purchase inclusive of considerations surrounding total cost of ownership and residual value.
[Note: This fallacy is insupportable. It is not credible to suggest that there would be much less than a 98% consumer take-up of an offer of a same-cost straight swap of a new Model S for any new car on the road on account of lack of consumer demand for EVs. Neither is it credible to expect much more than 2% of consumers to take up of an offer of a same-cost straight swap for a Nissan Leaf on account of the fact it is a basic compact car that lacks meaningful highway capability].
He diplomatically (basically disingenuously) laid the blame at the feet of consumers as 'unwilling to pay' what it costs for the industry to supply a compelling EV. He also hedged that if regulators called for a 100% zero emissions policy then they would need ten or fifteen years notice to work on cost optimization. He also talked about connectivity and autonomy coming together in a 2020 time frame and a nebulous desire to maintain market share for the Leaf program.
[Note: There is a world of things that can be deduced with considerable accuracy from the above. In Goshn's view, Nissan cannot afford to escape entrenched competition from its ICE competitors. In order to compete seriously in the EV space he requires that his ICE competitors including the ICE division of Nissan are prevented from competing by regulatory action, this will allow all of the incumbents to move on in lock-step to a level playing field in EV competition. He is also reliant upon the consumer remaining captive - he even goes as far as to suggest the actions of regulators should be anticipated by consumers (something that is clearly the responsibility of business). Such businesses including Nissan routinely insult the intelligence of captive consumers by communicating via attempts to anchor NLP associations between their products and irrelevant and unrelated emotional states and would likely do so exclusively except where forced by regulations to document the fine print. It can be detected from Goshn's comments that firstly Nissan is way behind Tesla on R&D on the cost reduction curve. Nissan is essentially waiting for a regulatory imperative to even put in that effort and essentially demand that no such regulatory imperative is imposed on too short a timescale otherwise they can't respond (he's literally talking about a comfy notice period for Nissan would be to deliver results in 2030). Secondly that they require a level playing field in which the captive consumer is compelled to buy an EV throughout any cost reduction program at whatever price to performance ratio generally suits the auto industry as a whole - not the price that suits the consumer. It is also evident that they are reliant upon a common core of EV technology suppliers to ensure that auto-industry wide progress with EVs is effectively performed in industry-wide lock-step. They apparently intend to upgrade the Leaf to compete with the GM Bolt by December and LG Chem is one of their suppliers. No surprises there, just a different style of making product announcements. (Goshn operates on the basis that announcing products puts competitors on notice to start competing so he likes to announce late - apparently it does not occur to him that his plans are transparent regardless).
The take home message here is that Goshn's world view is packed with hypocrisy and is fundamentally flawed.
Here is something to help explain it, a video from SpaceX that has been greeted by some members of the press as a Hype Video (except that something actually awesome is being shown): | Recap of Falcon 9 launch and landing - YouTube
The auto industry is so used to dealing in BS that Goshn included, it has failed to recognize Tesla as anything but meaningless hype and marketing gimmickry indistinguishable from their own meaningless hype and nonsense: tough car for the mean streets etc etc, Titan Warrior: Durability, Courage blah blah blah. Ever seen a pickup truck exhibit courage? No? I thought not. I have seen a full-sized 5+2 seater emissions-free Model S sedan out-accelerate a more expensive Porsche 911 though while trouncing it on road-holding, technology and safety standards.
What Tesla (and emerging non-automotive industry competition from Apple etc.) does is drill a giant hole in bottom of the auto-industry's boat and with it Goshn's entire world-view.
Nissan is in no position to handle consumers that are no longer captive to the incumbent auto industry and consumers freed of choiceless captivity could care less if Nissan survives or not - and neither could Tesla and in their slipstream Apple, Samsung, Faraday, Foxconn and all the rest. 2030 pending regulators setting the target and leveling the playing field for the incumbents to get to work on it at a manageable pace - give me a break. Model 3 will be in the consumer's face and signing up reservation demand in ten weeks time.
As Ashlee Vance wrote recently in a Quora AMA: The CEO's of the world's auto and aerospace industries have absolutely no idea what they are up against.
Zach. I like Goshn too but he's no colleague of Musk, he's a product of the auto industry mindset that he represents and he is road-kill like all the rest. Goshn and the Leaf is a perfect illustration of the Path of Pain described in the Innovator's Dilemma. Attempting to run a company that is the slave to both legacy and a disruptive technology simultaneously. He most definitely does not have a solution to the Innovator's Dilemma. My only hope for Goshn was dashed when it was revealed that Faraday Future's occupancy of an old Nissan R&D facility was not indicative of a Goshn-backed Newco.
The only hope that Goshn presented for Nissan in this presentation to my mind was his alluding to a common regulatory playing field suppressing ICE and demanding EVs from the entire industry. No such regulation will emerge to save the auto industry, however, competition from Tesla and other well funded auto startups (like Apple) will suppress the ICE auto industry more or less universally in a somewhat similar manner. This made me rethink my theory about guaranteed bankruptcy of the auto industry as a result of the inbound tech disruption best exemplified by Tesla, reducing my level of certainty from 100% to 99.8%.
Why am I moved only 0.2%? The pace of change will not be set by regulators in concert with auto makers. It will be set by violent profit-motivated disruption setting a pace of change that will overwhelm Nissan's margins with layoffs and stranded assets and Goshn. It is just about impossible for a legacy industry to raise capital on the public markets to invest in obsoleting and replacing the core of their business while beset by signals of terminal business decline. Since the auto industry bust in 2008-2009 the auto industry has used up government rescue packages more or less the word over too. Maybe Nissan emerges as a shell of its former self but I think just like the rest they will pass through bankruptcy and their manufacturing assets and relevant non-engine related employees will move on to the management by Tesla and the aforementioned well-funded startups.
TSLA @ $205 on the basis of looming competition FUD. LOL. BUY.
Last edited:
CALGARYARSENAL
Member
dreamingof3
Member
Hello All,
I am new to this forum but not to Tesla or the stock. I must say I have been reading this thread for several months. I am pretty discouraged with the recent price action. I was optimistic at the end of 2015 that we would surge over 250 and head towards new highs. As usual, the market has intentions of it's own and we are now at 204.80. Are people really trimming their positions this much or is this pain intentionally inflicted by the short interest which is very high? Short interest has been rising for several months. Fidelity is obviously thinking this is a clear bargain and I agree. Still shocked over the 15% decline in TSLA shares into 2016. The selling- or intent to drive the shares lower has been relentless.
I am new to this forum but not to Tesla or the stock. I must say I have been reading this thread for several months. I am pretty discouraged with the recent price action. I was optimistic at the end of 2015 that we would surge over 250 and head towards new highs. As usual, the market has intentions of it's own and we are now at 204.80. Are people really trimming their positions this much or is this pain intentionally inflicted by the short interest which is very high? Short interest has been rising for several months. Fidelity is obviously thinking this is a clear bargain and I agree. Still shocked over the 15% decline in TSLA shares into 2016. The selling- or intent to drive the shares lower has been relentless.
This is the last chance saloon for oversold shorts - relentless bear attack to be expected. Obviously the smart play is to deny liquidity for short covering (don't sell, and get rewarded by giant short squeeze). The market is not normally that smart. Trouble is squeeze will kick off in mid to late Feb.
It's all about comps. TSLA and everybody else is down. GM is even down as much as TSLA in YTD 2016.
You need to realize in the short term thread people will trim their positions because it's advantageous at that specific moment and they try to time things. Short term (in my mind) is the 1 year horizon. The people that really move the market are the institutional investors & financial instutions who gobbled things up at $242.
I believe all of us thought we'd surge up given that we closed 2015 at ~$240. Heck even 6 months ago we were at $280. It's a wild ride and right now people just want to see Tesla's management projections and more concrete development on Model X (which we've seen here... production VIN's starting) and Tesla Energy (Australia/NZ are starting up). The next time we see a step change is some time this year when Tesla goes CF positive. 2016 is going to be the year of Model 3 reveal, execution, and Gigafactory buildout.
Careful what you wish for, forecast for Q1 deliveries could be problematic. Lots of S deliveries pulled forward into Q4 and X ramp may have issues. imo
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
We need to curtail the cashflow positive thinking. At most, we have enough time in the lull between the transition of ModelX to startup of Model 3 R+D spend to have one quarter of positive cash. Provided that the new delay of X full ramp up is less than 1 month and provided that no feature creep happened with model 3 that increases RD spend. The recent news and sentiments of increasing efforts in autonomous driving says that R&D spend will probably go a lot more up than actually go through a lull.
Last edited:
CALGARYARSENAL
Member
Actual numbers from Nissan-Renault speak louder than your words:
Renault-Nissan Alliance sells its 250,000th electric vehicle - media.renault.com
PS: Note this was achieved back in June 2015. Work continues on various future long-range EVs from both alliance partners (with both in-house as well as LG Chem-sourced battery options, dual sourcing possible).
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
Calgary, you might as well be useful and provides some ingisght into what's happening with the oil sands sector if you are going to stick around and make fun of others
The Blue Owl
Endangerous Herbivore
Really, are you going to attack him because he doesn't post in the right thread? How is your question relevant to this or any other thread? If you have actual counter-points to make I'll read them with interest, but let's not devolve into low-class innuendo.
dreamingof3
Member
What is the main reason for 27,676,000 shares short?
A. Large entities believe Tesla is overvalued and won't ever become a mainstream car
B. People dislike the perceived arrogance of Elon Musk and believe/want him to fail
C. People believe all companies in the auto industry are doomed for bankruptcy
D. People believe market will fall tremendously into and through 2017
E. Some combination of above
F. Other (fill in)
I feel the biggest players are accumulating quietly here. Why push the price up if you can accumulate from the suckers who want to sell here? And if you are an even bigger fool and want to sell shares you don't own here well.......
A. Large entities believe Tesla is overvalued and won't ever become a mainstream car
B. People dislike the perceived arrogance of Elon Musk and believe/want him to fail
C. People believe all companies in the auto industry are doomed for bankruptcy
D. People believe market will fall tremendously into and through 2017
E. Some combination of above
F. Other (fill in)
I feel the biggest players are accumulating quietly here. Why push the price up if you can accumulate from the suckers who want to sell here? And if you are an even bigger fool and want to sell shares you don't own here well.......
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
