Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

teslamotors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 192 posts

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#141

Post by cjg_ »

guelo wrote: post #63
noname123 wrote: post #23

The reason why Tesla is able to pay the Dept of Energy loan early is because of a secondary stock and bonds offering worth about >850+ million. In another words, Tesla is raising funds by generating more debt (from bondholders) and diluting share value (from shareholders), roughly about 3.5 mil out of 40 mil float, and using that money to pay the US govt. TSLA rose on the news despite diluting shareholders is because…

Considering the terms of the government loan were very favorable (rates equal to the interest rates on Treasury notes in 2010) it doesn't make sense to me that they would want to pay it off early and get rid of all that liquidity. As a quickly growing company didn't they have something better to spend that $450 million on?

Well there are some restrictions imposed on Tesla by this load.

See http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-borrows-150-million...

There is says that the loan requires Musk to have a 65% ownership of the company which of course is expensive to maintain when they are raising money.

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#142

Post by sammathews »

ghshephard wrote: post #120
baddox wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If celebrating the actions of trendy companies and founders is what you're after, the vast majority of Hacker News should be very satisfying to you. Comments like the one you replied to are much rarer.

It's not the case that we have to blindly praise a company - but calling something as significant as raising $450mm in the public markets to pay back the government loans a "PR Ploy" saddens me, because that was a very real, and impressive accomplishment. Musk/Tesla aren't without their issues, and, as John Siracusa showed us on "Hypercritical" - you can simultaneously appreciate something but still point out all of…

Ultimately Tesla is in the business of public opinion. Paying back the goverment far ahead of schedule when there is no need to necessarily do it, considering fairly favourable terms for the loan, can be considered a "PR Ploy" to play to that public opinion. After all, wouldn't they have just stated the fact and not compared themselves to other car manufacturers, even going to lengths to spell out the fact that they weren't bailed out?

It is not a bad thing, after all it is a smart move and one done so by good businessmen. But blindly assuming they are doing this from the good of their hearts "because we want to do the right thing and pay back our government" is just naive. I don't think you should consider the above as a negative comment either, there are those among us who value the business rational behind the decision, and don't get caught up in the PR fluff. I think everyone here respects and admires what Elon Musk is doing, and doing well.

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#143

Post by abstrakraft »

varjag wrote: post #139
der3k wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I don't get your negativity here." I didn't get the negativity. He was just stating a reasonably deduced thought.

it's really hard to find a phrase starting with "make no mistake" that doesn't culminate with a negative or dismissive slam. As urbandictionary puts it, "a weasel-y, thought-terminating phrase that is supposed to lend gravitas to a weak position in an argument. Used by doomsayers and the overly dramatic."

urbandictionary also lists "superman" as a sexual maneuver. Your move.

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#144

Post by icebraining »

rz2k wrote: post #90
EGreg wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voluntarily it would take a lot to resist making maximal short-term profits from gas guzzlers for long term unproven gains such as the ones Musk's company has been doing. Are you saying governments shouldn't institute any regulations, including carbon credit systems, and everything should be decided by the free market? Sure, it's not voluntary, but then again neither is most of the stuff that producers of things do.…

I suspect that the above commenter is skeptical about carbon emissions as a legitimate externality. There are also plenty of people who do not think we should be able to address externalities through legislation. It is strange though because it is often the people who acknowledge or advocate the use market approaches who later complain about them when they are put in practice.

Usually those proponents advocate the use of market approaches free from governmental intervention; a market where the commodity is a virtual creation (carbon credits) by the government is obviously contrary to their preferences.

(Note: I'm not saying the approach is wrong, I'm just explaining the position. Personally, I still haven't found anyone making a decent libertarian position on the issue. The only ones I've read/listen boiled down to "I'm not a climatologist, but I'm pretty sure it's not a real problem")

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#145

Post by icebraining »

jabits wrote: post #115
sageikosa wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You must remember that when the government decrees that everyone must do something or else and everyone does it, it is considered voluntary.

Yes, because our government is there by our voluntary action. If we find our government is making us do things involuntarily, we can change it.

That's a little simplistic, don't you think? What about, for example, the minorities who are made to do things involuntarily?

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#146

Post by [deleted] »

benaiah wrote: post #82
EGreg wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voluntarily it would take a lot to resist making maximal short-term profits from gas guzzlers for long term unproven gains such as the ones Musk's company has been doing. Are you saying governments shouldn't institute any regulations, including carbon credit systems, and everything should be decided by the free market? Sure, it's not voluntary, but then again neither is most of the stuff that producers of things do.…

Don't confuse free market advocacy with anarchy. Buying up judges, bribing other officials, and other fraudulent transactions, including stuff like misrepresentation of goods and other deceptive business practices, are not necessarily okay in a free market. However, direct government interference is. I don't advocate for a completely dog-eat-dog, caveat emptor society, but I do advocate for one in which those in powe…

[deleted]

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#147

Post by simonh »

Shivetya wrote: post #53
mncolinlee wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's something bizarre about griping that they reached profitability from green credits. To clarify, these green credits were voluntarily paid by OTHER CAR COMPANIES like Fiat who did not innovate enough to develop their own green cars. In essence, these credits work similarly to carbon credits or sulfur credits. They are NOT paid by taxpayers or by the government in any way. It was a capitalist regulation in Cali…

they are not free, they are paid by any consumer who directly or indirectly has a relationship with someone who purchases a vehicle from one of the makers who is paying these credits. Voluntary my ass. If they don't pay what happens? Your fined. Its a tax. It is paid by consumers because they buy cars. If anything its California's way of having people in other states fund their initiatives. I guess kudos can go to Mu…

The problem with this attitude is that pollution actually does have an economic, social and environmental cost. Putting in place regulations to ensure that the polluters pay that cost, instead of unfairly foisting it on everyone else, is perfectly sensible free market economics.

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#148

Post by newbie12 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #96
noname123 wrote: post #23

The reason why Tesla is able to pay the Dept of Energy loan early is because of a secondary stock and bonds offering worth about >850+ million. In another words, Tesla is raising funds by generating more debt (from bondholders) and diluting share value (from shareholders), roughly about 3.5 mil out of 40 mil float, and using that money to pay the US govt. TSLA rose on the news despite diluting shareholders is because…

" TSLA rose on the news despite diluting shareholders is because coupled with the announcement, Elon Musk mentions that he will personally put an additional 100mil into the secondary offer " Dilution doesn't care who does the diluting - a share issued to Elon Musk dilutes as much as a share issued to TIAA-CREF. Regarding the double down, I do not believe Elon Musk's commitment to Tesla was in doubt previously. Its ef…

I've been a vocal critic of Tesla and the DoE loan program, and I'm really glad to see Tesla pay off the loan and move into private markets. I want to root for this company to succeed and now I feel like I can do that. Taxpayers still got ripped off given the size of the loan relative to the company, and the huge downside risk, but I'm glad Musk pulled it off!

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#149

Post by [deleted] »

noname123 wrote: post #23

The reason why Tesla is able to pay the Dept of Energy loan early is because of a secondary stock and bonds offering worth about >850+ million. In another words, Tesla is raising funds by generating more debt (from bondholders) and diluting share value (from shareholders), roughly about 3.5 mil out of 40 mil float, and using that money to pay the US govt. TSLA rose on the news despite diluting shareholders is because…

[deleted]

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#150

Post by jjuliano »

noname123 wrote: post #23

The reason why Tesla is able to pay the Dept of Energy loan early is because of a secondary stock and bonds offering worth about >850+ million. In another words, Tesla is raising funds by generating more debt (from bondholders) and diluting share value (from shareholders), roughly about 3.5 mil out of 40 mil float, and using that money to pay the US govt. TSLA rose on the news despite diluting shareholders is because…

I'm looking at the 'Not Cool Dude' button.
Post reply on HN