You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ah bummer, I was assuming the daily strategy you have been trading would have made today a good day for you.Would have been a great week, if not for the freeriding restriction. But grats to all longs out there.
Current demand right this second is probably 0. So it is all about the time window you use. Anything else than per quarter is too short if you want to determine if current production rate is aligned with current demand rate. Tesla can and will increase demand for both S and X without incurring advertising cost or any other activity that lowers GM. More people seeing them om the road, talking to people that owns them, more stores opening etc... it is a positive feedback loop.
Do you really think demand in California is naturally at-least 10x higher than rest of the world? Tesla is growing in many countries sales with over 100% but from low numbers. Selling 200 cars vs 100 a year ago does not make a huge difference yet compared to sales in western US but it will soon, you know because of exponential growth.
Hey Curt,Max Pain today is $220. Today's options expiration is a monthly one, therefore with more open interest than most weeklies. That could make Max Pain more meaningful today.
Today is an excellent example of how the MM tractor beam can work. Nicely called mejojo, Curt, Fred, and others.
Panasonic's FY2016 annual earnings presentation and Q&A session. These took place on April 28, 2016.
In the Q&A session, while answering to questions on the Model 3, Panasonic had this to say on its rechargeable batteries business (where Tesla is a large factor):
Sales to Tesla didn't grow as much as expected … Model X number was not sufficient in terms of production. Rather difficult situation
@ 12:00 (question), 13:00 (answer), regarding FY2016 - ended on March 2016
Ah bummer, I was assuming the daily strategy you have been trading would have made today a good day for you.
Like I said I am looking at the production from recent quarters and from that you can infer a demand of around that same runrate being around 50k/year or a bit above. CA sales has benefited from a lot of Tesla buzz and the population being relatively tech savvy combined also being a fairly green state and having an additional $5k incentive ontop of the $7.5k. I'm not sure how much weight the different factors bear but it really has been an almost perfect market for Tesla, I don't think we will get close to those sales in many areas even with advertisement.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/397...s-tesla-seeking-alternative-battery-suppliers
Check what Tesla's closest partner said. No wonder why Panasonic doesn't want to commit the Gigafactory investment upfront and no other partners jumping on the board.
Even though you will likely be banned soon, and are clearly just a troll that shouldn't be fed, I'll bite.Yup. It's true that model 3 doesn't have demand issue. While Panasonic clearly said they are not satisfied with model S/X demand. I think Panasonic's comments says the truth many TSLA bulls not willing to face though.
The reason many of us are so meh about these demand arguments is that we've heard them nonstop for the past three years and yet with very similar conditions the production and demand keep rising. Obviously there's a limit, but there's no serious evidence that we're there yet because all the evidence offered by the bears is the same evidence that has been offered in the past, and it hasn't held water. Elon Musk has clearly stated his method for keeping production and demand reasonably in sync: demand levers. He pulls one or more as they're needed. So far, the demand levers have not included advertising, but that's an option if it is needed to keep the production lines running at desired capacity. Take a look, for example, at Model X. One enormous lever is placing the X in stores. Here in Hawaii we're seeing our first Demo X arrive in the store next week. It'll be available for demo drives and for inspection and will generate lots of orders. When word gets into the wild that Model X production line is running smoothly with few complaints by new owners, that news will be both a SP catalyst and a Model X demand catalyst. The fact that wait times remain about 6-8 weeks out as production continues to grow (and Model X wait times are gravitating toward that number) is proof that Tesla is managing demand very well. People get discouraged if wait times are too great, and Tesla gets nervous if wait times are too short. Thus, demand levers are pulled as necessary. Are we almost out of levers? Nope, Model S redesign will stimulate lots of upgrades for 2012 and 2013 Model S owners (especially when you consider the advantages of autopilot, which itself turned out to be a mega-demand-lever). Expansion of the supercharger network and stores are demand levers. Expansion into Korea and other countries are demand levers. The bottom line is that demand is growing appropriately for production growth because demand is being managed skillfully by Tesla.
The reason why I complain of pages upon pages of recycled arguments is that it distracts short-term traders from short-term discussions, such as the possibility of TSLA rising to 220 at the end of today. Some of our members made money by trading on that speculation, some could have if they had not been distracted by other lengthy posts.
The evidence I present is not the same the bears were saying 2 or 3 years ago. Firstly we didn't have the same amount of data back then so it was much harder to draw any conclusion with a high certainty. Secondly over the past year Tesla has been expanding production slower than it has ever done and the kicker is that we know that there isn't a backlog of demand from this slow production ramp.
I mostly just want to evade the waste of my precious time. Speaking of which, you might want to evaluate the use of your time here.Demand issue would the last thing TSLA permabull want to confess. With more evidence come out and more investors realize this. They just want to evade this topic at all.
About my suggestion not long back that perhaps the timing and size of the secondary was a function of one large investor being responsible for essentially the entire $1.4bn of new issue -
I had prefaced it by saying that was on the far-fetched end of the scale. Reasonable proof of same is that we now see that, as is normal, there was a consortium of underwriters: Morgan, Goldman, DB, Citi, ML and so forth. Compelling evidence that the underwriters also were spreading their own exposure/risk - ie, that there had not been one Mr. Big on the phone to Goldman saying "Get me a Big Hunk of TSLA". So the far-fetched now recedes to the truly improbable.
As far as the question of "will we ever know who bought....?" - there are enough services checking funds' 13-Fs that yes, after another quarter, one can get a modest approximation of who the new, or augmented, players are.