Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

[StealthP3D]

I don’t think so at all (that @Troy is creating fud) he is trying to crowdsource a way to get a better estimate of inventory.

Can you highlight where you found multiple vehicles listed of the exact same configuration as n the US? Because that is exactly what @Troy is looking for.

I just checked my local delivery center for Model 3's and Model Y's. Here's what stuck out to me:

If you have your mind set on a particular configuration, you often don't have a choice of colors, there is only one or two. Some configurations are not even listed.

Now, boys and girls, let's put our thinking caps on. If inventory was building up, and Tesla was trying to figure out how to move them, don't you think they would at least try to list more than one or two colors in stock for any given configuration? You know, to make that spontaneous sale to someone thinking about making a purchase, but only if it was available in a particular color?

It would be utterly foolish to have cars available in every color, more cars than you could sell, and not list each color for each configuration than you had available. Unless, of course, if those colors simply didn't exist at that location. And, if cars were building up at the factory, such that Tesla was pushing additional cars to each delivery location to clear them from the factory, don't you think they would attempt to push a mix of colors?

This whole thing reeks of Troy trying to make up a narrative that supports his earlier claims of demand problems. I don't doubt that there will be cars in inventory at the end of the quarter, there always is, and the dynamics of the Tax Incentive is such that there may be a few more than in previous quarters and years, but I fail to see where the problem is.

 

[AudubonB]

Maybe you have not been listening to the reasons I gave for believing it's a mistake to respond to every little media inquiry. For your benefit, I'll repeat:

Responding to rumors and made-up news gives credibility to those rumors and the denial is news itself which extends the life of the false narrative. Tesla does not need to babysit shareholders unless they are babies. If Tesla responds to every inquiry, then not only do the number of inquiries grow, but the expectation becomes that Tesla will respond and it's more meaningful if they decline to comment. Your claim that this would prevent shareholders from being overwhelmed by negative false information 24/7 is false.

Enron denied reports that their accounting was fictitious on a regular basis for months before we learned it was true.

Also, inquiries can be structured so that the implication is false, even when the essence is true. This provides journalists who wish to write a negative story a useful tool to provide justification for the story (normally news must happen to justify a news story). I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time explaining these easy-to-understand concepts for the tenth time.

Tesla used to have a department to handle press inquiries. Using experience and first principles thinking, they learned it was better to not say anything and to not make it easier for journalists to write pretend news stories. If you think you know better, then write a proposal for the next shareholder meeting rather than constantly demonstrating why I am glad you are not running Tesla. I'll bet such a proposal wouldn't even come close to passing, because most shareholders are smarter than that and they know the Board of Directors and Tesla management have done exactly that before and therefore have more direct experience doing exactly what you are proposing than they do. It's not that they are lazy, it's that they are smart and experienced.

I not only forcefully disagree with every single important point of this post, but challenge you directly for having written statements like the following, which I'll charge you of having zero facts to back it up - it exists only to support your narrative:
Using experience and first principles thinking, they learned it was better to not say anything and to not make it easier for journalists to write pretend news stories.

“First principles thinking”? How so? “Better to say nothing”? That would be an insultingly childish reaction. Far to the contrary, silence in the face of any report, any assertion, any claim regarding Tesla or Mr Musk is, in the eyes and ears of a less-than-informed public, tantamount to being guilty.

No first principles were present. Absolutely none.

 

[StealthP3D]

It may lead us no where. As investors we need every bit of information we can get. To me this is the most important aspect of this board. We can't shoot down every new idea or information as FUD. We need to let them try and make our own judgements to how valid it is.

Do you see the fallacy here?

No one is shooting down every piece of information as FUD. And no one is trying to suppress access to data. People *are* making a judgement on how valid specific data points are. That's exactly what you say they should be doing.

 

[Krugerrand]

When the wall is more responsive; talk to the wall - Krugerrand 2022

 

[StealthP3D]

I not only forcefully disagree with every single important point of this post, but challenge you directly for having written statements like the following, which I'll charge you of having zero facts to back it up - it exists only to support your narrative:
Using experience and first principles thinking, they learned it was better to not say anything and to not make it easier for journalists to write pretend news stories.

“First principles thinking”? How so? “Better to say nothing”? That is an insultingly childish reaction. Far to the contrary, silence in the face of a report, an assertion, a claim regarding Tesla or Mr Musk is, in the eyes and ears of a less-than-informed public, tantamount to being guilty.

No first principles were present. Absolutely none.

Your sentence structure is much improved in this rant. I approve of the form, if not the content.

Maybe you need to get mad to write clearly?

 

[nativewolf]

Who are you and what have you done with nativewolf...?

Oh I've always been a big buy and hold guy on Tesla. I just think there are some huge issues, that the board is doing a criminal job of managing EM, that Tesla has taken eyes off the ball on the battery question (3 years ago or 4). However, It pains me to see people speculating in Tesla. It was always silly. Coming from a stockbroker family where my dad made and lost a couple of fortunes due to options and speculation I've never been a fan. Just buy a great company in an emerging space with great products. Tesla is that company...especially a few years ago.

At the same time people need to be aware that Tesla's single greatest differentiator (Reno) won't be a moat much longer. Competing GFs are getting built at a ferocious pace.

Lots to monitor in the coming 1-2 years:

4680 has to be proven to scale. They bet it all on this, they are a year late and more. Austin won't really work without it. Berlin should have it. They are agile and engineer around it but they needed it.

The utility scale energy market has taken off and many/most sales are not tesla. They have turned to lifePo suppliers but those are Chinese. They'll need domestic suppliers. Hopefully they can get back into the game at least on the battery side of it.

Robotaxi service from Waymo is going to beat Tesla to market by a few years. I personally don't see the profits as I think you'll see 3 robotaxi alternatives, maybe 5, in all the major markets by 2026/7. I think Cathy Woods team is off their collective rockers.

I love the Tesla semi. I think in this category Tesla could gain over 50% marketshare in 6 years if they can actually produce 50k units a year as they claim and as it is currently spec'd. It is an unbeatable offering. Watch the ramp. I think the ramp news was very beneficial to the 4680 status but we'll see.

They need a PR dept.

China is a risk/opportunity to be watched and monitored.

FSD may create huge profits on software sales that have nothing to do with robotaxis. I don't want to share my truck but would love it to drive me home.

Cybertruck is really an amazing product for farmers, ranchers, masons, etc. It could be a revolution Can they build it at scale in 2024? I like products that pay for themselves like the Semi. Cybertruck would pay for itself with real working people.

Supercharger network continues to be a differentiator past 2 years so triple down on it.

 

[Cosmacelf]

BTW, Twitter has figured out I want to read stuff about TSLA (duh), but what it is showing me is FUD tweet after FUD tweet. It is isn't much of a wonder that people all over are souring on TSLA with that kind of info going on around on Elon's own platform.

However, I have yet to read anything recently that leads me to believe that 4Q numbers are going to be bad, or that Tesla is somehow off track. All the FUD is poorly sourced crap.

 

[Congo Line]

I just checked my local delivery center for Model 3's and Model Y's. Here's what stuck out to me:

If you have your mind set on a particular configuration, you often don't have a choice of colors, there is only one or two. Some configurations are not even listed.

Now, boys and girls, let's put our thinking caps on. If inventory was building up, and Tesla was trying to figure out how to move them, don't you think they would at least try to list more than one or two colors in stock for any given configuration? You know, to make that spontaneous sale to someone thinking about making a purchase, but only if it was available in a particular color?

It would be utterly foolish to have cars available in every color, more cars than you could sell, and not list each color for each configuration than you had available. Unless, of course, if those colors simply didn't exist at that location. And, if cars were building up at the factory, such that Tesla was pushing additional cars to each delivery location to clear them from the factory, don't you think they would attempt to push a mix of colors?

This whole thing reeks of Troy trying to make up a narrative that supports his earlier claims of demand problems. I don't doubt that there will be cars in inventory at the end of the quarter, there always is, and the dynamics of the Tax Incentive is such that there may be a few more than in previous quarters and years, but I fail to see where the problem is.

One criticism I have of Troy's methodology is that he does not take into account that as delivery volumes increase, the inventory should logically grow in some relation to that volume. His idea of what inventory should be for GF China is 10-15k, but that inventory value is what China has had for a number of quarters going back to when the production and delivery volume was a fraction of what it is now.

Perhaps someone more familiar with industrial production methods would know better than me, but shouldn't inventories naturally grow in some relation to total output? My rough calculation indicates that his expected end-of-quarter inventory of ~35k for China is proportional to past quarters if calculated as a % of production and sales.

 

[AudubonB]

Your sentence structure is much improved in this rant. I approve of the form, if not the content.

Maybe you need to get mad to write clearly?

Between this and your earlier damning-with-sarcastic-prose post, you are ===>this close<=== to taking an Insulting Other Poster vacation. 'Nuff said.

 

[AudubonB]

Between this and your earlier damning-with-sarcastic-prose post, you are ===>this close<=== to taking an Insulting Other Poster vacation. 'Nuff said.

With all that smarminess, you forgot to respond to my assertion your post is malarkey.

 

[Tommy O]

You people are eating each other alive and no one is learning anything.

 

[SunCatcher]

You people are eating each other alive and no one is learning anything.

I actually think we're starting to get somewhere with this, and hope we can respectfully follow it through. Please, continue. With respect.

Personally, I like the idea of a Tesla PR department, but am open to ideas about why it should continue the way it has all along. Something does need to change it seems.

"That is an insultingly childish reaction"- Mod. Please. Respect.

 

[dl003]

You people are eating each other alive and no one is learning anything.

Speak for yourself. In 3 days Ive learned more about Audie than I had in the last 3 years.

 

[Tommy O]

I actually think we're starting to get somewhere with this, and hope we can respectfully follow it through. Please, continue. With respect.

Personally, I like the idea of a Tesla PR department, but am open to ideas about why it should continue the way it has all along. Something does need to change it seems.

"That is an insultingly childish reaction"- Mod. Please. Respect.

It's not one thing. I have my own opinion on a PR department (won't help), but I'm open to hearing other reasons why it might.

The acerbic tone of so many posts are not conducive to productive discussion. Tit-for-tat arguments that carry out over pages and pages also aren't helpful.

On top of it all, the FUD is coming from within our own room. And Ross Gerber (no offense to the guy) now thinks he is going to save the stock price (???) by trying to join the board of directors (???).

There's not a lot of clear thinking going on. Most of us can recognize that, but many just can't help from polluting the thread. I know I won't be missed if I leave, but I miss you all speaking from your areas of expertise, rather than from emotion. And I miss the humorous posts, too!

 

[Skryll]

It’s a mistake to equate a responsive investor relations or PR department to one that “responds to every little media inquiry”. Who is suggesting that? Tesla should counter quickly spreading false information that damages Tesla’s public image or may strongly move the stock. Tesla’s silence was deafening when asked about reports of imminent production cuts in China related to falling demand. The terse reply from Tesla China was vague and left open many questions.

But herein exactly lies the problem. Now random made up facts can be slung at them, and they have to leak information by saying which are right and which are wrong? Because otherwise silence would be deafening?

 

[willow_hiller]

BTW, Twitter has figured out I want to read stuff about TSLA (duh), but what it is showing me is FUD tweet after FUD tweet. It is isn't much of a wonder that people all over are souring on TSLA with that kind of info going on around on Elon's own platform.

However, I have yet to read anything recently that leads me to believe that 4Q numbers are going to be bad, or that Tesla is somehow off track. All the FUD is poorly sourced crap.

Click the "..." next to the suggested FUD tweets and select "Not interested in this Tweet" and then "This tweet isn't relevant." Helps clean up your timeline, and helps train the algo not to display that kind of junk.

 

[insaneoctane]

...So why even discuss it? Tesla continues to manage demand due to supply constraints. Is this not obvious to everyone? ...

It is absolutely not obvious to everyone, I suspect because of the barrage of non-stop FUD that we are all exposed to. If you hear something enough, you start to believe it. Many investors are uncertain if Tesla does or doesn't have a demand problem. I recently commented up thread on this because I recently had the same apiphony that flexibility with margin is the magic solution to demand . But the fact that I required an apiphony in the first place demonstrates how this is no longer obvious, even to the people here on this thread who know far far more than "the average bear". The FUD is scary strong.

 

[JustMe]

But herein exactly lies the problem. Now random made up facts can be slung at them, and they have to leak information by saying which are right and which are wrong? Because otherwise silence would be deafening?

No I’m not suggesting that Tesla respond to every accusation or rumor.
Obviously that would be a judgment call according to what Tesla is willing to disclose, how much traction the story is getting, and perceived impact on Tesla’s business and shareholders. Requires level headed pros with good communication skills. It’s really not that complicated.

 

[MC3OZ]

It’s a mistake to equate a responsive investor relations or PR department to one that “responds to every little media inquiry”. Who is suggesting that? Tesla should counter quickly spreading false information that damages Tesla’s public image or may strongly move the stock. Tesla’s silence was deafening when asked about reports of imminent production cuts in China related to falling demand. The terse reply from Tesla China was vague and left open many questions.

Public denial of rumors with facts quashes the credibility of the source, NOT Tesla. Obviously, refusing to comment is not preventing stories being run and it’s not a good look.

I hope that we can agree that Tesla should not lie to the press or investors to quell uncomfortable rumors

In isolation something is or isn't true, in context something is or isn't important.

An earnings report provides "full context", even when something might be true and important, another factor may more than compensate.

A PR department provides a path for a shopping list of questions to be asked. Sooner or later someone will ask the right question which might be confirmed without context. if a PR department answers most questions be declines to answer one, a negative connotation can be implied, again without context.

As things stand, Tesla sometimes denies false rumours now, but they pick and choose which ones they respond to. If they mostly don't respond, that gives a response a bit more implied credibility. In spite of that, recent denials from Tesla China were painted as probably false.

All a PR department needs to do is make a comment which is later proven incorrect due to changed circumstances, and that is open slather for those with the shopping list to spin a particular denial as false.

Earnings can be a mixed bag, often there is a small factor which is a unexpected negative, which if known about in advance could have been blown up to be a big issue. But in context, it is less of a big deal, because the overall results are good.

A "trading risk" with Tesla is that any small issue can be blown up into a big issue with enough media hype, front running, and speculation to, move the stock price. I think being aware of the risk is the best approach, trying to prevent the risk is close to impossible, because the media are willing and motivated participants, who are not necessarily interested in the truth.

The "trading risk" is not an "investment risk" because in the long run, the actual numbers and what is really happening count, and even the media can't spin the financial numbers forever.

 

[Tachyon]

I think what Troy is trying to do is interesting, and even possibly useful to us investors. I'd like to know more about how much inventory Tesla has sitting around, it could help us calculate production vs delivery numbers, or at least estimate them better.

Just my two cents.

I guess this is how the production delivery inventory demand destruction FUD is being played out for this quarter . People are so gullible and fall for this most illogical unscientific method of data collection and analysis.