261–270 of 334 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That sounds nuts; it seems like a huge liability that they are putting AP2 in the hands of consumers when it can be more dangerous than just the average driver...
What liability? You're supposed to constantly be aware and in control of your vehicle when using AP2. (At which point, you may ask: What is the point of AP2..?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've contradicted yourself in the two quotes below. "Tesla is basically taking on a loan in form of a convertible notes." "So at the end of a day: Tesla is raising capital without diluting their shareholders and reducing their share values" Convertible debt is in fact dilutive. It's even specifically accounted for when calculating Diluted Earnings per Share : http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dilutedeps.asp
Sort of, but not really...the FASB has said you can treat the underlying shares as non-dilutive if the stock price isn't above the conversion price (this is called "net share settlement"). So basically, while outstanding, the debt acts like debt for accounting purposes until the stock price is above the conversion price. When it goes above the conversion price, the you treat those incremental shares as dilutive. Addi…
So Tesla is shorting TSLA?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AP2 is truly dangerous. It's incomprehensible they would release something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZ1XLqc5IUg I guess it's a good reality check for autonomous cars when you take away the LIDAR toys. One rather important point is that the car often doesn't realize it is screwing up, because quelle surprise, realizing you don't have a correctly detected lane can be just as difficult as detecting one…
That video supports what I've suspected: the SV self-driving car projects are training on wide American roads in perfect Californian weather, so that's where they might work. Put one of these things on a poorly-paved rural road or a snowy mountain pass, or in a driving rainstorm, and it will disengage and/or kill you. Just today I drove by a temporary orange sign saying "X St. closed; use Y St. detour," which I'm sur…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You dont know what youre talking about. They do make batteries. 2170s are rolling off the gig assembly line as we speak. They are already in their products. Please think before you speak.
you are correct, my bad. I did think before I spoke though so that was not necessary. It is interesting how angry people get when you say anything negative about tesla. And my point stands that anyone has access to battery technology - Samsung sdi and LG chem can scale up with any partner just as tesla and panasonic could
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, they arent
We'll see.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I doubt they are any worse than any other company introducing a new model." Except they are. The Model S is 5 years old (even the refresh model is a year old) and they are still running into parts and build issues. It has improved a long way but during the whole process they had to cut the number of interior and exterior colors/trims just to streamline the production. Other manufacturers introduces new fit/finish an…
It sounds like I won't convince you, and it probably shouldn't be convincing because it's Chrysler, but we were having problems like that and worse on a 20 year old platform. The way I got involved in Federal Torque was because we delivered a brand new vehicle that basically fell apart (lost an axle iirc) as the customer was cruising down a freeway. Even among all the problems we had, that was a pretty big deal. As a…
The in 98 along comes that infamous Daimler Mercedes merger where Mercedes basically looted Chrysler to prop themselves up. At that time Chrysler was making money hand over fist with their minivan.
Once bled dry, a lot because most new car projects dried up or worse, the platform sharing using older Mercedes setups, they got sold to an investment firm. There were even claims of value gone missing during that sale.
A more apt comparison is watching GM. After bankruptcy they still pushed out the first generation Volt, the second generation took longer but arrive in 2016. However the real kicked was how fast the Bolt went from conception to production. In 2015 it was shown in concept, Jan 2016 in production form, and in customer hands by end of the same year.
As an investor of Tesla who bought into Elon's vision I've been getting more and more nervous about how the company is actually run at this point. A modern car company is as much of a production and supply chain company as it's a product and tech company. I get the feeling that due to Tesla being cutting edge in the tech department it led to all the supply chain/production problems being treated as if they are speed…
I absolutely love Musk and the idea of Telsa. Hell, I would love to get me a Model S, if I could. But I completely agree with you. I think the Model 3 will end up costing way more that $35k, to turn a profit. The timeline will slip and it won't come out until 2018. The whole solar city deal was premature. I think Musk knows this isn't going to work, at least for a while. I think he knows Telsa is going to have a more…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the Model 3 will end up costing way more that $35k, to turn a profit. That's Tesla's biggest risk - they can't deliver profitably at the price point they pre-sold at. The Model 3 is an ambitious car to sell for $35K. Tesla is not a "lean manufacturing" operation; their head counts at the auto plant per car sold are currently quite high. They'll probably get that figured out eventually, but meanwhile, they nee…
> It assumes Government subsidies for solar, which may be going away for political reasons. Residential solar costs average out at 15c per kWh, post 30% tax credit. If the credit goes away, the 20c per kWh generation cost is still competitive compared to utility's retail rate. The bet is on solar technologies to continue incremental gains in efficiency, pushing the final price per kWh down. In the commercial and indu…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You dont know what youre talking about. They do make batteries. 2170s are rolling off the gig assembly line as we speak. They are already in their products. Please think before you speak.
Well technically Panasonic makes the batteries in a facility that it co-owns/manages with Tesla.
Uber as a ponzi scheme of ambition 1/ Basic premise was they keep highlighting their entry into larger and larger markets and so investors keep ponying up $ for the ambition. 2/ First, it was taxis 3/ Then, it was taxis + logistics 4/ Then taxis, logistics, vehicle ownership 5/ Then taxis, logistics, vehicle ownership, autonomous 6/ Then taxis, logistics, vehicle ownership, autonomous, trucking 7 / Then taxis, logist…
Tesla has created products that hundreds of thousands of people use, millions want, and hundreds of millions admire. Tens of thousands of people work in their factories. To many of us, their products hold a promise of a better future. SpaceX is reopening a chapter of human exploration that nation states had closed. Literally the most powerful organisation in human history, the United States, had all but given up on it. In my mind, landing a rocket is one of the most astonishing technological feats by humanity in decades. And it was done by a startup.
Now, I don't know what you spend your days doing, but I cannot compete with Musk. And I am just talking about his achievements until now, not the potential future ones.
I get that from an investor point of view, Tesla might have created little of value if it bankrupts soon. Eventually, though, all companies bankrupt or close in other ways, and so will Tesla. But the EV revolution that Tesla started will not stop. The cars are still there, the ideas have been proven. Is the comparison with ponzi schemes really a good one?