Mega Thread for Tesla Investors

I doubt your wife is gonna be impressed with financial advice from someone who has repeatedly stated he treasures his ignorance of financial matters.

 

It's amazing how you can "spin" good news into bad, by deliberately ignoring the most relevant part of what you're citing, innit? But then, you probably didn't pull that bit out yourself to spin into FUD; that was probably done by someone with a lot more creativity than you. Presumably as usual you're just parroting other Tesla FUD-mongers.

The rather important bit from the article, which you left out of what you parroted:

The Tesla employee said that the Model 3 vehicles going to China are to be used as showroom vehicles and/or to train Service Center personnel.​

Go Tesla! Keep going Tesla!

 

At one time, I had been on the "TrueDelta.com" but something was always fishy about them. They pestered me about 'what broke in the past 90 days.' Then I visited their web site and the light came on:

Notice the "Get Dealer Quote" for the Tesla Model 3 and the "Looking for a warranty? Get a quote." In reality, they are scraping your name, home address, email, and phone number to 'forward to a dealer.' A dealer in junk mail, SPAM, and telemarketer call centers.

I compared TrueDelta survey results against the Consumer Reports owner survey and soon realized the TrueDelta sample set was too small and imprecise. There was a five year period we had dropped Consumer Reports but TrueDelta was not even close to a replacement. For example, we had a Gen-1 and Gen-3 Prius that TrueDelta would ask about but not volunteer how others were fairing. My last communication:

Over the past twelve years, Gayla and I have done everything we could to provide site members with the best car reliability information.. It has become too much for just two of us. Though the site will continue, this is likely the final round of the Car Reliability Survey.

Or goal: a record number of responses, to make the final set of stats as comprehensive as possible. Now, with July over, we are about 1,000 responses short, and really need your help.

Respond to the survey here. It's usually quick--best guesses okay.

Everyone who responds this round will retain a free membership. Other accounts will be deactivated around the end of August, after which there will be a fee to join or reactivate.

Q: What if I no longer have a car?
A: Click the link, then click "My Garage" in the top right. There's a link to report this following each car.

Q: How do I add a new car?
A: Click the link, then click "My Garage" in the top right. There's an orange button to add a car on that page.

Other questions people often have:

Q: The link isn't clickable. What should I do?
A: Let us know in a reply to this email. We can send a link in a different form.

Q: I have no idea what the odometer reading is.
A: It's okay to guess, then later make an adjustment (if one is needed). It is now possible to edit readings on the site.

Q: What if I have a different problem with the survey, or have a comment?
A: Please email me--unless people let us know about a problem, we often don't know it exists.

Thank you, once again, for being part of this project. Other members and I certainly appreciate your help.

Michael Karesh
TrueDelta

Those receiving this email signed up to help provide the best, most up-to-date car reliability information.
Change of heart? Respond with "unsubscribe." Consider telling us why, to help us improve.​

Meanwhile, Consumer Reports went through two editorial/management changes that cured their anti-Prius bias and badly broken car testing. In January-February, I had picked up a magazine rack copy at Costco and was surprised to read a fair review of our 2017 Prius Prime that matched my experience. Even their reviews of the Hyundai Blue and Gen-4 Prius, cars I had test driven, matched my experience. So we are subscribed again to Consumer Reports.

Bob Wilson

ps. Writing about Consumer Reports reminds me of what the old version did: (1) left out tax advantages in the Prius Gen-2 cost to own; (2) consistently too low MPG metrics; (3) snark when the Owner Survey showed exceptional Prius owner loyalty and enthusiasm that Consumer Reports did not share, and; (4) support for "Bell The Hybrid" noise makers without reviewing the flawed reports claiming a problem. <gerrrrrr>

 

That seems to have been replaced by snobbish resistance to what their own annual surveys of customer satisfaction consistently show, year after year. Their own surveys put the Tesla Model S at #1, and the Model X among the top 10. Yet Consumer Reports continues to flip-flop over whether or not they'll even recommend Tesla's cars at all!

Of course I can't see into the hearts of the editors there, to see what they are really thinking, but from the outside it looks like either there is a strange lack of consistency, first publishing articles praising Tesla's cars and then condemning them... or else it's a deliberate case of sensationalism, the print journal equivalent of click-bait, with CR splashing their covers with Tesla headlines first proclaiming they were dis-recommending a Tesla car, then perhaps no more than 2-3 months later, flip-flopping their position to give them another excuse to splash Tesla across the cover with a new article on exactly the same subject, but the opposite conclusion.

Am I being cynical? Maybe, but I doubt it. Flip-flopping on recommendations, and repeatedly reviewing the same product within a single year, isn't normal behavior for consumer ratings magazines. It very much looks to me like CR is trying to ride the coat-tails of Tesla's popularity.

​

 

In this case, the product, a Tesla, can significantly change due to over-the-air updates:

• Consumer Reports correctly identified that after the first maximum brake, the subsequent ones too longer. They shared their finding with Tesla.
• Tesla agreed and came up with a software fix that corrected the problem. This was sent 'over-the-air.'
• Consumer Reports repeated their tests and confirmed the fix worked.

This was over a 3-4 week period and validated both companies. The winners are the Tesla owners who have much improved, emergency braking in their Model 3.

No my problem with the old Consumer Reports is their testing failed to produce trustable MPG numbers and their 'rating' score was biased for a comfy chair:


Bob Wilson

 

ROTFL!!


Every internet discussion is improved with random Monty Python references.

 

You left out a chapter or two.

First Consumer Reports recommended the car, citing Tesla's promise to improve the braking via an over-the-air update. Then after a few weeks, CR published a new article dis-recommending the car because Tesla had not yet gotten around to issuing the update! Then -- as you say -- Tesla got around to issuing that update, and CR soon after published another article -- the third on the same car within a few months! -- re-recommending that car.

This strikes me as the height of hypocrisy, or poor judgment, or both, depending on just how cynical they were about flip-flopping in that manner. It's the same fracking car they originally recommended! Nothing changed except their attitude! How could CR dis-recommend the car after first recommending it? And if they thought the braking update was so important, why didn't they hold off recommending the car until Tesla updated that?

If they recommended the car even before Tesla updated the braking system, then they were saying in effect "This is good enough to recommend even though the braking could be better." Changing their mind on that is nothing but pure flip-flopping! And they didn't flip-flop just once; they did it twice -- on the same car, same model year!

Okay... down off my soapbox now.

​

 

I see this as the flexibility of both to adapt to change in real-time. Historically auto companies had to release a new model or bring them to the dealer shop to fit a recall. Worse if the brake system was from a subcontractor.

Regardless, problem found and fixed.

Bob Wilson

 

Regarding the, shall we say, counter-factual video "TeslaInvestors" linked to, which repeated the years-old, increasingly absurd anti-Tesla FUD about "collapsing demand":

 

I listened to the first 5 minutes of this Tesla-bashing collection of lies.

I started counting the number of false statements and lies, but there were too many so I lost count before I shut it off.

Hey, did you know that Tesla only accumulated about 200,000 reservations for the Model 3? Did you know that there's a video of Elon Musk "driving" a Tesla car hands-free? Did you know Tesla promised you could crawl into the back seat and let Autopilot drive the car unattended? Did you know that Tesla promised the Model 3 would sell for $27,500?

I didn't know any of those things... Because none of them are true!

I swear, one could make an entire career of listing and debunking all the lies that anti-Tesla smear campaigners tell. This video may be the most extreme example I've ever seen of the "Gish Gallop" dishonest debate strategy of throwing out a perfect blizard of false claims, so rapidly and in such volume that nobody could ever hope to counter all of them in detail.

Once again we see that the professional Tesla bashers (like the guest in this video) are growing ever more desperate to deny the reality that Tesla is making strong strides toward becoming net profitable while at the same time growing to the size of a major auto maker!

Honestly, I can't understand why anyone who's not literally, clinically insane would hold onto a Tesla "short" investment at this time, unless they're very short-term or "day" traders who plan to sell before Tesla releases its 3rd quarter earnings statement. Sure, there will be more opportunities to "short" Tesla stock as a very short-term investment, because TSLA is a highly volatile stock, with lots of short-term ups and downs. But it looks increasingly certain that there's no way to make money on a long-term "short" investment here, and won't be for at least a couple of years.

I'm very much forward to seeing what the market has to say about Tesla's coming quarterly earnings statement.

If there really are short investors out there who have actually managed to convince themselves that the lies seen in this video are true -- the same lies currently being parroted by Tesla FUD-mongers everywhere... Well, as they say: It's sad when someone starts believing his own lies! And I'm going to have no sympathy at all for the "short" investors who lose their shirt in the next couple of weeks. If they are that determined to ignore reality and believe a pack of lies, then they need a harsh lesson in what happens when you practice invincible ignorance. Reality bites!

Tesla FTW! Tesla über alles!

 

I do not have 58 minutes to waste watching the talking heads. Fortunately the description has one huge paragraph (see post script.) The ignorant could read it and walk away shaking their heads because it leaves off:

1. Manufacturing is front-end loaded with huge capital and personnel costs.
2. Production speed and efficiency follows an "S" curve that starts slow and ramps up rapidly.
3. Production Teslas are superior to all but a fist full of hand built, ~50x more expensive cars.
4. New owners are nearly universal in praise for their Model S, Model X, and Model 3.
5. Tesla continues to improve the cars AFTER delivery.
6. SuperChargers are the largest and most capable charging network.
7. Integration from battery-to-charger avoids 3d party dependence.

Buyers will stand in line to pay more to get the best:


Seven days and counting.

Bob Wilson

ps. Captan Obvious says,

On August 1st, Tesla reports the largest quarterly loss in its history showing a GAAP loss of $717 million and free cash flow of negative $812 million. But shares rise on Musk’s claims of positive cash flow and profit in the second half of 2018, and signs of more consistent Model 3 production. In this Q2 release Tesla claimed that it would be GAAP profitable in Q3 & Q4 baring a “force majeure.” I’ve asked Mark Spiegel for his take on this and his response is: “I’ve run numbers every which way I can and the best I can come up with for Q3 is a GAAP loss of around $100 million.” On August 7th, Elon Musk tweets that he is “considering taking Tesla private at $420 a share,” and then follows up by saying “funding secured.” On August 15th, Charlie Gasparino reports that the SEC has started a probe into violations made by Elon Musk. On August 15th, ex-Tesla employee and whistleblower Martin Tripp tweets photos that he alleges came from inside the company showing battery scrap, trailers containing battery waste, and documentation of punctured battery parts in Model 3 vehicles. On August 16th, a Tesla ex-security employee files a whistleblower complaint with the SEC, accusing the electric vehicle maker of spying on employees, hiding significant theft of raw materials, and alleging drug dealing at company. On August 16th, Elon conducts a tearful interview with the New York Times. On August 20th, (or thereabouts) reports emerged that Lucid Motors (a silicon valley electric car startup) is in talks with Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund for a reported $1 billion in funding. On August 24th, Elon Musk released a public statement about his decision to keep Tesla public. On September 6th, Elon Musk does “the Joe Rogan Experience,” smoking marijuana during the show. On September 7th, Tesla’s chief accounting officer Dave Morton resigns after a month on the job. On September 7th, Tesla’s Chief People Officer Gaby Toledano announces she is leaving the company. On September 8th, it is reported that Justin McAnear, vice president of worldwide finance and operation, is parting ways with Tesla. On September 17th, British diver and cave explorer Vernon Unsworth sues Elon Musk for libel in a California district court. On September 17th, it is reported that Lucid Motors closed a $1 billion deal with Saudi Arabia to fund electric car production. On September 17th, reports emerge that the justice department has opened a criminal probe into Tesla over public statements made by Elon Musk.​

 

Well, I thank you for bringing this to my attention, "TeslaInvestors", even though that brief footage of Elon showing "hands-off" driving is buried in yet another video edited to create yet another anti-Tesla smear campaign.

I'm pretty sure this is the very first time you've ever been able to correct me on my facts. But hey, do keep trying! I need people to keep me on my toes and help ensure that what I post is as factually accurate as I can possibly make it.

And I hope, for your sake, despite your ongoing public stance denying Tesla's runaway success, and your pretense at believing that Model 3 demand is collapsing, that you're not really going to keep your "short" investment in TSLA for another week. I hope you have not actually bought into your own false statements to that degree. I don't think you're really that foolish.

​

 

Three business days, six calendar days, and Q3 ends.

Bob Wilson

 

Yeah, but Tesla doesn't report its quarterly earnings for a couple of days after that, right?

Not that the shorters could count on such a "grace period", because Elon might leak some good news before that. As I recall, he did that at the end of last quarter!

Go Tesla! Keep going Tesla!

 

Accurate press releases can come out anytime. But the quarterly financials come out within 4 weeks, November 1. Regardless, I suspect the production and sales numbers can fit in a press release. For example, Toyota publishes their vehicle sales numbers the first of each month:
https://pressroom.toyota.com/releases/

Bob Wilson

 

The trouble with these types of articles is that you never get the whole story. Details and context are important.

So let's just let the reported financials in November do the taking.

 

Some of the shorts are getting antsy. They'll need some new Tesla FUD to stand their ground.

The problem with 'short squeeze' is the unstable effect on stock price.

Bob Wilson