Joined: Oct 2003

Posts: 3,728

Likes: 700

Related to the subject we’ve just been discussing, you’ve liked a piece penned by an entity with an admitted massive financial interest in convincing everyone that Tesla’s completely worthless, and it reads exactly as you’d imagine... Given that I’m curious what percentage of it you actually buy into?

Joined: Oct 2003

Posts: 3,728

Likes: 700

So at an average of less than 40k cars per year Tesla was no longer a startup and should have started to play by big company rules? Ford makes 6.6 million vehicles per year, so Tesla was at less than 0.6% three years after the Model S launched...

Had Tesla stopped deficit spending at that point I hope we can agree larger manufactures would have eaten its lunch- even an established company like Volvo was unable to stay above water making 10x that volume. Tesla would have pointed the way and made an attractive aquisition target given its infrastructure spending, but without volume it would rapidly get swamped. Larger manufactures would achieve economies of scale allowing them to drive down costs, quickly undercutting Tesla’s brand, value proposition and lead in charging infrastructure and self-driving technology. To stop spending then would be to flush most of the initial investment down the toilet.

Instead Tesla has kept spending, and that has put them in an enviable position in a number of ways. They have the economy of scale advantage, and they’ve used it create the cheapest batteries in the industry (by some margins it appears). They have extended their lead in infrastructure and self-driving readiness, and they are well on track to disrupt the existing automotive marketplace. And at the end of the day a startup’s mission is to disrupt- no VC funds another niche also ran.

Could Tesla have ceased to be a startup and tried to push profitablity as a “niche manufacture” at that point? Possibly, but it would have been a massive mistake, and no CEO or board worth their salt would have supported it.

Joined: May 2018

Posts: 3,985

Likes: 1,215

Joined: Apr 2012

Posts: 10,430

Likes: 1,689

From: Northeast/Europe

Well written, well argued, article from “noisy” Twitter, with a lot of original (to me) content, thoughts, and analysis. Reads like a TSLA bull/bear suspense thriller. Just added the author to my Twitter feed for a “test-run”...

Joined: Oct 2003

Posts: 3,728

Likes: 700

All of the above are critical for startups as you well know. The question is when to go for profitability and move out of the deficit spending mode that is a required during a startup’s gestation. Too early and you fizzle. Tesla has “validated a product/ market fit” and are in the “scaling” phase. The are not “established”, however, because they can’t be expected to continue to grow greatly without further deficit spending. And holding station as a niche manufacture would destroy shareholder value, not create it.

Absolutely. And not everyone can tell the difference.

More evidence that you don’t support the model- one which has produced many of the most successful and impressive companies on the planet over the last half century. Silicon Valley as an economic growth engine is the envy of the world, and other areas and countries have been trying (and failing) to clone it virtually since its inception. VCs are perhaps the key part of that sucesss. From a founder’s perspective VCs can be dangerous and destabilizing, pushing growth beyond prudent levels, but they are often a key and necessary ingredient for a certain type of business. From the sound of it that’s a type of business you want no part of. And that’s fine, but that in itself is no reason to knock the model.

Joined: May 2015

Posts: 13,163

Likes: 3,919

And I clearly described the source as such. But I ask you, which of the three tenets he lays out is incorrect and what is your evidence of such?

Oh and the part about Musk flatly lying in the NYT interview about flying back to the factory? Is that not nucking futs? Remind you of another billionaire nut job getting a lot of press these days?

The real conundrum for me in assessing Tesla, particularly as an investor, Long or short, is that you simply can’t trust anything Musk says. For example, Musk and Tesla claim that there has been no reduction in the Model 3 reservations and demand at all. Yet they won’t disclose real numbers and there is evidence to the contrary. Who do you believe? To date I’ve believed the Company and the Model 3 statements, along with other assertions and guarantees Musk has made recently, give me pause to short them. But then he keeps lying about so many things. I will say, if it turns out that Model 3 demand has fallen and they don’t achieve profitability in Q3 or Q4, both Musk and Tesla are toast. He will get sued into bankruptcy court.

As a private startup you can make **** up and vaporware all you want. You can’t do that as a public listed company.

Joined: Oct 2003

Posts: 3,728

Likes: 700

I partially disagree with both 1 and 2 (and apparently a large number of investors agree), but I don't think I'll take the time needed to expand. My question to you would have been a very quick answer.

Joined: May 2003

Posts: 4,222

Likes: 102

From: SoCal

Joined: Aug 2018

Posts: 2

Likes: 0

Joined: May 2015

Posts: 13,163

Likes: 3,919

On what basis do you disagree? I read both sides of the Tesla aisle every day, and just like any other issue, I try to dig into and assess the underlying support for the opinions being rendered. Let’s face it, all ‘news reporting’ these days is nothing more than opinion.

In this case, I ask, what is the bull’s evidence to counter the short’s arguments? (And BTW, the underlying references in that article aren’t all shorts.). Right now, the only real counter argument to point to are claims made by Musk himself, and it’s hard right now to be confident in anything he says.

Then again we could all take a toke on the hooka pipe and just accept this gem of insight from a CleanTechnica ‘article’ today... “It is Tesla’s relentless pursuit of not just building the best electric vehicle, but the pursuit of the best vehicle, period, that has defined its trajectory more than any other.” Yeaahhhhh, riiiiiight...

Joined: Oct 2003

Posts: 3,728

Likes: 700

Joined: May 2003

Posts: 4,222

Likes: 102

From: SoCal

Joined: May 2015

Posts: 13,163

Likes: 3,919

You’re missing my point. I don’t agree with the shorts per se. I lament the lack of hard, accurate information from the Company, and the fact that Musk feels very comfortable lying when it suits him makes it even more difficult to know what to believe.

And like I said before, you never short a cult.

if I thought Musk was trustworthy I’d actually probably buy some stock at today’s price level.

Joined: Apr 2012

Posts: 10,430

Likes: 1,689

From: Northeast/Europe

Joined: May 2003

Posts: 4,222

Likes: 102

From: SoCal