# TSLA Analyst Coverage - 2018 Q1



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

Wow, a particularly bad one... Valuewalk... Bullsh.. talk?! 

http://www.valuewalk.com/2017/12/tesla-inc-tsla-collapse-2018/


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

Intriguing in-depth analysis... overall encouraging except for less confident views by insiders? Maybe it's my optimism yet I read most of it as good news... which should not be so surprising as Model 3 deliveries are markedly accelerating, no?

https://www.stocknewsgazette.com/2018/01/02/analyzing-the-insider-data-for-tesla-inc-tsla/


----------



## MichelT3 (Nov 16, 2016)

Wow, the autor of that 'valuewalk'-article must have lost a LOAD of money being short!
What a rant! A mix of misconceptions, falsehoods and outdated info.
Really pathetic IMHO, but what do I know?


----------



## MichelT3 (Nov 16, 2016)

Today on nu.nl (an okay Dutch digital news platform):

"Van de Tesla Model S zijn vorig jaar 1.683 exemplaren op kenteken gezet in Nederland, waarmee het de populairste volledig elektrische auto van 2017 was.
Volgens registratiecijfers van voertuiginformatiebedrijf VWE Automotive is ook de tweede plaats voor Tesla. Van de Model X werden 1.043 stuks verkocht."
https://www.nu.nl/auto/5071052/tesl...elektrische-auto-van-nederland.amp?redirect=1

I'll translate: "1683 Tesla Model S have been registered in the Netherlands last year, making it the most popular fully electric car of 2017.
According to registry numbers by transport information company VWE Automotive, the second place is also for Tesla. 1043 Model X were sold."

Need I say more?


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

Michael Russo said:


> Wow, a particularly bad one... Valuewalk... Bullsh.. talk?!
> 
> http://www.valuewalk.com/2017/12/tesla-inc-tsla-collapse-2018/


"Our lousy performance this year was primarily due to our short position in Tesla, "

This pretty much explains the article.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

Call me dumb yet I have _no idea _what DeBord means with 'rightsizing' the car business...?
Plus, knowing BI's track record of T≡SLA-bashing, I don't know to what extent we should really care... 

http://uk.businessinsider.com/tesla...ten-company-future-musks-job-2018-1?r=US&IR=T

Having said that, a believable, yet rather aggressive 2018 build projection from Elon for Model 3, with some key elements ascertaining feasibility, issued soon (4Q17 results call?) would help alleviate concerns of those skeptics who matter, i.e. those amongst reservation holders (for the record not including me... )...


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Michael Russo said:


> Call me dumb yet I have _no idea _what DeBord means with 'rightsizing' the car business...?


"Rightsizing" is a euphemism for "downsizing". It sounds like he believes Tesla should give up on some of their new, harder-to-achieve ideas, cut back on staff & R&D, give up trying to run their own stores and sell through dealers, stop spending their own money to develop charging infrastructure, and just concentrate on making a car and becoming profitable.

In other words, Mr. DeBord doesn't have a clue. He's familiar with the automotive sector, and Tesla doesn't quite fit into his understanding of that world.


> To make matters worse, Tesla is striving and failing to build a pretty simple vehicle. The Model 3 is basically an electric Honda Accord. And Honda without noticeable effort builds and sells over 100,000 of those every single month in the US alone.


Riiiiiiiight. Since that's so simple, why hasn't Honda announced that they're going to start building 100,000 electric Honda Accords next month?


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

Michael Russo said:


> Call me dumb yet I have _no idea _what DeBord means with 'rightsizing' the car business...?


Marketing speak for downsizing. His argument is that Tesla should stop re-investing profits into expansion and accept being a boutique car manufacturer. 
It's true in the short term that if Tesla did this they would have a nicely profitable business but DeBord, like many business investors refuses to look more than two quarters ahead. For Tesla, it's grow or die. They need to get to critical mass or the big automakers will eventually grind them down.


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

garsh said:


> "Rightsizing" is a euphemism for "downsizing". It sounds like he believes Tesla should give up on some of their new, harder-to-achieve ideas, cut back on staff & R&D, give up trying to run their own stores and sell through dealers, stop spending their own money to develop charging infrastructure, and just concentrate on making a car and becoming profitable.


Garsh, As usual you beat to it and did it more succinctly.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

@gravityrydr said:


> Garsh, As usual you beat to it and did it more succinctly.


Yet thanks for your input too!!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

@gravityrydr said:


> Garsh, As usual you beat to it and did it more succinctly.


I prefer to think of it as great minds thinking alike.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Forbes:
Tesla Week: The Model 3 Is Going To Ruin Tesla -- Here We Go Again

A surprisingly positive article from Forbes.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

My response to the SeekingAlpha video interview embedded in the interesting Evannex article... 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/950004317888634881


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

TSLA up 6% today. Could this be the reason?

https://electrek.co/2018/01/08/auto-executives-battery-electric-cars-fail-survey/


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

I just sold some stock when it hit $230. Which means with my track record the past 6 months we might be in for an extended rally. I'm happy to miss some potential profit if the stock will keep climbing.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

Not sure thIs totally answers the question if you're still on the fence yet decently analytical...

https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/aut...ews/when-should-you-buy-tesla-inc-nasdaqtsla/


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

Michael Russo said:


> Not sure thIs totally answers the question if you're still on the fence yet decently analytical...
> 
> https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/aut...ews/when-should-you-buy-tesla-inc-nasdaqtsla/


??? That article honestly seems like it was written by an AI to me. I've seen better fantasy football recaps on Yahoo than this. Seems very generic and almost horoscope like. If not for the typo "on the cards" rather than "in the cards" I really would expect this to have been auto-generated content.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

This analysis sums it up quite well: Tesla has a production problem, not a demand problem. Let's hope he's right!


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

@gravityrydr said:


> I just sold some stock when it hit $230. Which means with my track record the past 6 months we might be in for an extended rally. I'm happy to miss some potential profit if the stock will keep climbing.


My secret plan to boost TSLA by selling some of my stock is working . Be ready to sell folks, I just bought back in.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

<monty python>
And now for something completely different.

*Terrorists Could Use Teslas to Kill Us*
</monty python>


----------



## Badback (Apr 7, 2016)

If terrorist are not in the cars and are killed in the attack, a la suicide mission, they do not go straight to heaven and get their virgin allotment. 

Bummer.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

What.A.Joke... 

Couldn't even find a recent pic of a production car to illustrate the article. 

https://stocknews.com/news/tsla-bmws-inext-evs-could-crush-tesla-inc-tsla/


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

All talk and no substance.

Would love to see anyone other than Tesla come up with a Model 3 competitor. Only the Model S comes close and it's double the price.

Not only should other automakers come up with a single product that can compete with today's Tesla vehicles... they will need to compete with Tesla vehicles 4-5 years in the future.

Furthermore, without in-house battery production at a massive scale I'm afraid they won't be able to compete in price. So far there have been no indicators of other companies pursuing such an initiative, at least not at the same aggressive scale as Tesla's Gigafactory project. An unfortunate outcome would be that these automakers would end up producing competitors of Model 3, but sell somewhere closer to Model S prices.



Michael Russo said:


> What.A.Joke...
> 
> Couldn't even find a recent pic of a production car to illustrate the article.
> 
> https://stocknews.com/news/tsla-bmws-inext-evs-could-crush-tesla-inc-tsla/


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

*UPDATE: Tesla's roaring start to 2018 is costing short sellers $1 billion*
https://www.morningstar.com/news/ma...-2018-is-costing-short-sellers-1-billion.html


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

The new Nissan Leaf might make you cancel your Tesla Model 3 order


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

garsh said:


> The new Nissan Leaf might make you cancel your Tesla Model 3 order


'If you squint you might even think the mini air splitters at the back of the car were inspired by a McLaren.'
LOLOLOLOL!!!


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

Michael Russo said:


> What.A.Joke...
> 
> Couldn't even find a recent pic of a production car to illustrate the article.
> 
> https://stocknews.com/news/tsla-bmws-inext-evs-could-crush-tesla-inc-tsla/


I guess the logic is that a car that doesn't even exist yet, has a European spec *target* of 435 miles, and for which we know nothing of price, will somehow *crush* a car that is actually shipping in good volume (albeit below Elon's over-inflated estimates). Yes, the word "joke" doesn't even begin to describe the clutching at straws going on there.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

More tremors in Shortville...
Back to mid-October levels and +10% this year...


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

garsh said:


> <monty python>
> And now for something completely different.
> 
> *Terrorists Could Use Teslas to Kill Us*
> </monty python>


Well, if that were to happen I guess you could finally say there was a Tesla killer!
#badjoke


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

http://www.businessinsider.com/steve-wozniak-rants-against-elon-musk-and-tesla-2018-1

I wonder how much Apple stock he still holds. I've always liked Woz. But blaming the car, especially one that has been documented as having excellent traction in snow with the RWD version just tells me he's a California driver who sees snow 2 times a year when he goes skiing. No car is going to keep you from sliding off the road on ice if you don't have the proper tires (I think I'm safe in assuming someone in California is going to run summer tires all year round.)

His other big problem is that FSD has not been fully realized yet? He added:

"Man, you've got to be on your toes all the time with it." (No kidding your still the driver, pay attention!)

"It's beta, so we're not responsible" TESLA has never said that AFAIk. Although he gets sort of a pass on this, TESLA could have rolled out Autopilot better. That is one thing that TESLA needs to start getting right is messaging.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Video worth sharing


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> Video worth sharing


An Anheuser-Bush distributed friend of mine once told me that the brewmasters at Budweiser in St. Louis were perfectly capable of brewing top-notch microbrew quality beer if they wanted to. Perhaps, but they still don't. The most I've seen them do is buy out microbreweries and then proceed to destroy the brand.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

TSLA is down at around $300/share. Not even sending a Roadster to space would bring up the price. 

Whatever caused the battery module fiasco really messed things up.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> TSLA is down at around $300/share. Not even sending a Roadster to space would bring up the price.


If you try to day-trade TSLA, you'll go insane.

If you think TSLA will succeed in the long term, then this is a time to celebrate! This is the opportunity you've been waiting for to buy in. 

I'm already in at $200, $210, and $330 (oops). I'm just going to hold for now.


----------



## mig (Jul 10, 2017)

In!


----------



## MichelT3 (Nov 16, 2016)

I had almost forgotten that I still had a outstanding buying order at $ 300. And because I had enough money in my account for one share, I unexpectedly have become one share richer! However, in current value I've lost money since I bought most of my shares beginning december. Well, I expect TSLA to raise again.

The delay in delivery will help me in this respect. By the time I will get my car (2019 or ... 2020) Tesla will probably have its production in order and the value of TSLA surely will have risen to help me pay for the car.

The most real danger for me is devaluation of the $ versus the €, as a result of the losing of position of the US economy. Since the beginning of december the $ (and I) have lost 3.70% in value because of this.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

MichelT3 said:


> (...)
> The most real danger for me is devaluation of the $ versus the €, as a result of the losing of position of the US economy. Since the beginning of december the $ (and I) have lost 3.70% in value because of this.


As you know, this last trend, to the extent long-lasting, _could_ also have a positive limiting effect on T≡SLA European prices in €... though we also know that ultimately prices will also be at least as much driven by what our local markets can accept in view of competitive prices in the entry luxury segment... 
:rainbow:


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Very nice article on SeekingAlpha:

Tesla Q4 Earnings: The Outlook Is Surprisingly Good


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

And an interesting fluff piece on Business Insider:

A Tesla employee who builds robots told us why production hell is actually a good thing


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

garsh said:


> Very nice article on SeekingAlpha:
> 
> Tesla Q4 Earnings: The Outlook Is Surprisingly Good


Yeah, it's Trend Eady... he is one of the few at SA who gets it... 

Also love the CNBC interview of ARK's Catherine Wood; love how she debunked the 'GM threat-related' question by the other guy! 



garsh said:


> And an interesting fluff piece on Business Insider:
> 
> A Tesla employee who builds robots told us why production hell is actually a good thing


Had seen that on Twitter earlier today... retweeted by Teslarati's Christian Prenzler, and was unsure what to think of it... On one hand this seems like good news yet isn't it surprising T≡SLA would let one of their current employees be quoted this openly?  I guess I've also become much more suspicious of BI's true motives when it comes to T≡SLA so not sure what to think any more...


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

I didn't know Bloomberg had a special cars section. They seem to be all EV or self-driving related mostly. Fairly lightweight articles.
https://www.bloomberg.com/hyperdrive

Two interesting articles to note.
This one is kind of scary from a US competitive perspective. On EVs and renewables, the Chinese government gets it. Whereas the current US government is clueless.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/feat...of-china-s-colossus-of-electric-car-batteries.

This one caught my eye as I do like graphs.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...re-finally-replacing-porsches-on-the-autobahn

The first graph is OK. An odd choice on the verticle scale and style choice. Minimally informative but OK.









The second one seems to have been put here just to give a negative spin at the end of a generally positive if lightweight article.
I guess aerodynamic drag only effects the range of electric drive vehicles. Some of the more technically inclined may be able to help me out here but the curve itself seems to be rather distorted toward the slow end. I'll leave it at that as this isn't the thread for range and efficiency discussions.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

@gravityrydr said:


> This one is kind of scary from a US competitive perspective. On EVs and renewables, the Chinese government gets it. Whereas the current US government is clueless.
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/feat...of-china-s-colossus-of-electric-car-batteries.


Yes, definitely scary. I like to point out to the pickup driving, "not with my tax money" crowd that I hope they like the look of the Chinese SUVs that are soon to hit our shores!



@gravityrydr said:


> The second one seems to have been put here just to give a negative spin at the end of a generally positive if lightweight article.
> I guess aerodynamic drag only effects the range of electric drive vehicles. Some of the more technically inclined may be able to help me out here but the curve itself seems to be rather distorted toward the slow end. I'll leave it at that as this isn't the thread for range and efficiency discussions.


Aerodynamics affect ALL vehicles, not just EVs. It's just that ICE vehicles are so inefficient to start with the effect is less pronounced. Plus if you are in slow moving traffic in an ICE vehicle, the inefficiency is so bad that your total mileage tends to swamp out the effect of aerodynamic drag at high speeds, which might lead people to believe that ICE vehicles are "immune" to the phenomena since they have better highway mileage ratings.

To help you understand the chart though, notice that the peak is at around 20mph, but look at the range at that point...400 miles for an 85kWh battery! Clearly Tesla (or any other car maker) is not advertising their range at that speed! If you look at the 60mph point, you get a pretty reasonable estimate of actual real world range (these are Model S figures, Model 3 being lighter and more aerodynamic easily exceed these).

But as you say, what is happening at the low end? So below 20 mph the "overhead" from the vehicle's systems (HVAC, infotainment, computers running everything, the drivetrain electronics and losses themselves) start to become significant. So yes, this is a realistic chart.


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Aerodynamics affect ALL vehicles, not just EVs.


I understand that. I was being snarky about the graph seeming to imply that drag only negatively affects EVs and not ICE cars. Sorry if that was not clear. Thank you for pointing out the overhead cost at low speeds of the drivetrain and electronics. I had forgotten to consider that as a factor in low-speed efficiency.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

@gravityrydr said:


> I understand that. I was being snarky about the graph seeming to imply that drag only negatively affects EVs and not ICE cars. Sorry if that was not clear.


Nope, my fault for not having my sarcasm detector on. But I think even EV enthusiasts forget that ICE vehicles suffer from drag as well.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Nope, my fault for not having my sarcasm detector on. (...)


You are forgiven... As you, this is not TMC, so if you have it off while here, just always remember to turn it back on and turn the dial to full power if you do go back there...


----------



## MichelT3 (Nov 16, 2016)

@gravityrydr said:


> On EVs and renewables, the Chinese government gets it. Whereas the current US government is clueless.


Exactly!


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

An encouraging perspective for stockholders and investors by a self proclaimed long analyst (funnily his name is Lango, where 'lang' in German means 'long'... )... based on LT fundamentals driven mainly by the expected significant Model 3 ramp, he see TSLA reach $450 this year!! :rocket:

https://investorplace.com/2018/02/tesla-model-3-drive-tsla-stock-450-share/


----------



## MichelT3 (Nov 16, 2016)

Michael Russo said:


> An encouraging perspective for stockholders and investors by a self proclaimed long analyst (funnily his name is Lango, where 'lang' in German means 'long'... )... based on LT fundamentals driven mainly by the expected significant Model 3 ramp, he see TSLA reach $450 this year!! :rocket:
> 
> https://investorplace.com/2018/02/tesla-model-3-drive-tsla-stock-450-share/


That would be great, especially since I don't expect the dollar to fall equally fast ... Which has eaten up 6 % of the value of my shares. Nearly all of the increase in TSLA value ...


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Good article over on Seeking Alpha (it's a rarity, but it happens  ):

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4148137-tesla-bears-boys-cried-wolf

Excerpts:




> That means nearly 18% of the shares outstanding are applying downward pressure on the share price. In fact, the share price would *rise* *dramatically *if short interest declined. So, we can objectively agree that there is no dearth of enthusiasm for Tesla stock.
> But then again, us shareholders are punch drunk on Elon's Kool-Aid, according to bears. Our heads are in space with the Roadster.
> A cacophony of bearish voices, which increasingly sounds like an echo chamber from a support group, continues their relentless pursuit of sullying anything and everything Tesla. I'm unsurprised by the voluminous opinions, but I'm surprised at the regularity of the authors. They have the audacity to continue bashing despite *years* of a continued elevated share price and incorrect projections. Instead of being embarrassed by their numerous and unfulfilled draconian conclusions, they double and triple and quadruple down ad infinity.





> Why, you ask? Perhaps they never heard of this:





> If you're in a hole, stop digging.


-------------------


> The second piece of good news is that even when bears cried wolf and proclaimed that the rollout of the Model 3 will break Tesla once and for all, the logjams are dissolving (albeit slowly) and the production rate is increasing. Yesterday, Tesla announced Model 3 production will reach 2,500 per week by the end of the quarter.





> I can practically hear the groans from the bear chorus doubting that mark, but let me ask you what is more surprising:





> Believing Tesla is off the mark yet again with its overly optimistic forecast?
> or
> Believing the share price will tank if that projection is actually missed, when it almost never has during previously missed ambitious forecasts?
> Bulls are clearly familiar with the "shoot for the moon, land in the asteroid belt" theme from Musk and Tesla management. But bears keep falsely clinging to one thing after the next as the next best catalyst for Tesla's demise.


-------------------



> Third, liquidity concerns (a favorite of Tesla bears), where Tesla would have to scramble to raise money to keep up with capex and other obligations, seem highly overstated. Earlier this month, the company sold half a billion dollars of bonds, most of which came in at just a .3% premium to the benchmark swap rate and assigned the highest possible credit rating. It also has over $3 billion in cash to keep it from tapping the equity market again.





> But if circumstances deteriorated quickly and Tesla did have to offer a secondary, is there any empirical evidence to demonstrate there wouldn't be eager buyers chomping at the bit?
> No, there's not. In fact, the evidence points to the contrary. Bears chiming "I told you so" in that instance will serve as small consolation for the steady share price that will result (as it has in previous iterations).



Couldn't agree more.

(ED: Annoying how this forum doesn't allow multi-paragraph quotes, and decides to mess with the font size on everything :Þ)


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Good article over on Seeking Alpha (it's a rarity, but it happens  ):
> (...)


Thanks, Karen, you are right. It does take staying power to sieve thru the mud and find gems though... have a nice day.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> (ED: Annoying how this forum doesn't allow multi-paragraph quotes, and decides to mess with the font size on everything :Þ)


The fonts are messed up because it tries to maintain font information from the source. This is a mistake, and it often doesn't work correctly. The easy work around is to hold down SHIFT when you go to paste the information. That performs a "plain-text paste", and the fonts will be the default forum font.

As for multi-paragraph quotes - it works just fine. I'm not sure why you would have a problem there.
Example, first two paragraphs of the article:


> There are few better representations of supply versus demand dynamics than a company's share price. There's only an absolute number of outstanding shares in a company's float. A company's share price, therefore, is a reflection of the total participants in the market demand for equity ownership of the stock. When that share price is elevated like with Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA), there is incredible pent-up demand. When a company's share price languishes, then demand is low, since buyers are missing to buoy the stock.
> 
> But that doesn't tell the whole story. Individuals can short a company's stock by borrowing shares they don't own, thereby artificially suppressing the perceived demand of the shares. In a case like Tesla, approximately 30 million shares are sold short:


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

The weird thing is, I tried several times to edit it to make it work - deleting the excess quote blocks, highlighting whole chunks of text and clicking on the font size icon and choosing a constant size (4)... no luck.

Oh well, not like it matters much.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

Here's one guy who must be thinking... Shoot, if I had only waited just an hour or two before hitting save or send... 

https://stocknewsjournal.com/2018/02/22/tesla-inc-tsla-from-top-to-bottom-8/


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

*Tesla: The Breakout Appears Imminent, New All-Time Highs Very Likely*

quote: _"My year end price target for Tesla is $500"_​

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717414130836058113


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

Solid jump today, possibly driven by enthusiasm around expected March ramp up of Model 3 production after the reported brief; 4 day pause late February?! Time to feel encouraged!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Should I feel guilt about having schadenfreude watching the Seeking Alpha shorts lose money?

I don't, I'm just wondering if I should.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Should I feel guilt about having schadenfreude watching the Seeking Alpha shorts lose money?
> 
> I don't, I'm just wondering if I should.


Have all the Schadenfreude you want... they deserve it...


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Long term encouragement from HyperChange.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Good explanation to the naysayers why Tesla won't go bankrupt anytime soon. The details are economics 101 and should be obvious to all, but the media keeps painting a bleak picture regarding Tesla's cash burn. Also, it provides some hints that Tesla may one day become more valuable than Apple.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

More than 70% of Tesla's biggest fans didn't buy a Model 3 when offered, analyst finds

_Bernstein Research analyst Toni Sacconaghi Jr. said among that the most recent group of reservation holders to receive purchasing privileges - existing owners of the company's previous cars, the Model S and Model X - less than 30% opted to configure and purchase the car when given the chance. That was just the second group to receive access to purchase a Model 3, after Tesla employees.

"If correct, this take rate would be substantially worse than predicted by our July 2017 survey, which had indicated that up to 69% of S/X owners with reservations were likely/very likely to take delivery of their Model 3," Sacconaghi wrote._​
I would expect the reason to be that many of those existing Tesla owners are waiting for either dual-motor or a performance version. If they could afford an S/X, they'll probably have no problem affording a higher-end 3. The article does indeed get into various possible reasons, but that doesn't stop them from using the click-bait headline, now does it?


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Naturally they try to make it sound like "they don't want a Model 3", rather than "they want literally *any* of the following: different interior, no PUP (-$5k), SR (-$9k), performance, 4WD, air suspension, or other such upcoming options"


----------



## Tesla Ninja (Sep 8, 2017)

Stock bouncing just above $300


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Wow they're sure make it tempting to buy in right now... I hate the thought of throwing away 2% in fees at the time of purchase (not a big deal if you're going long, but I'm in the middle of building a house). But near-$300, right before the Grohmann line gets installed and Model Y gets unveiled? Hmm....

I wonder how much of this has to do with the broader slump in markets? Automakers generally don't fare well in trade wars...


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Wow they're sure make it tempting to buy in right now... I hate the thought of throwing away 2% in fees at the time of purchase (not a big deal if you're going long, but I'm in the middle of building a house). But near-$300, right before the Grohmann line gets installed and Model Y gets unveiled? Hmm....
> 
> I wonder how much of this has to do with the broader slump in markets? Automakers generally don't fare well in trade wars...


Sorry to advertise (it's not really intentional--I have nothing to gain by doing so), by have you checked out FolioFirst? They used to be LOYAL3 and you can buy Tesla stock absolutely free. I guess that wasn't a sustainable business model, so now there is a $5 monthly fee, but if you're talking a large enough investment, it may save you on those fees.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Sorry to advertise (it's not really intentional--I have nothing to gain by doing so), by have you checked out FolioFirst? They used to be LOYAL3 and you can buy Tesla stock absolutely free. I guess that wasn't a sustainable business model, so now there is a $5 monthly fee, but if you're talking a large enough investment, it may save you on those fees.


Advertisement welcome! So I assume that it's $5 every month as long as you own any stock managed by them, unless you transfer your stocks to some other brokerage service, and there's surely fees associated with doing so? Or is it just $5 every month in which you plan to do trades? I've never owned stocks individually, only ever through retirement funds. But I follow Tesla in detail and am a strong believer in its future, and particularly in its ability to get past the main thing that's depressing its stock value right now (Model 3 production woes).


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Advertisement welcome! So I assume that it's $5 every month as long as you own any stock managed by them, unless you transfer your stocks to some other brokerage service, and there's surely fees associated with doing so? Or is it just $5 every month in which you plan to do trades? I've never owned stocks individually, only ever through retirement funds. But I follow Tesla in detail and am a strong believer in its future, and particularly in its ability to get past the main thing that's depressing its stock value right now (Model 3 production woes).


Unfortunately it's a $5 fee every month regardless of whether you trade or not and regardless of how many different equities you own. But there is no fee associated with the trade itself.

Hmmm...I just looked into this a bit more. While my monthly fee is $5/month, it looks like the general FolioFirst fee is much higher, so sorry about that. I think I am grandfathered in from the company I used to use: Loyal3--which was 100% free. It was basically set up to provide a direct path from company to investor, bypassing traditional investment brokers. There was an extremely limited number of companies that participated, but Tesla was one of them. When FolioFirst took over Loyal3 they instituted the $5/month fee, but it looks like maybe you had to be a Loyal3 customer.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

oilprice.com: Is Tesla In Crisis?


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Unfortunately it's a $5 fee every month regardless of whether you trade or not and regardless of how many different equities you own. But there is no fee associated with the trade itself.
> 
> Hmmm...I just looked into this a bit more. While my monthly fee is $5/month, it looks like the general FolioFirst fee is much higher, so sorry about that. I think I am grandfathered in from the company I used to use: Loyal3--which was 100% free. It was basically set up to provide a direct path from company to investor, bypassing traditional investment brokers. There was an extremely limited number of companies that participated, but Tesla was one of them. When FolioFirst took over Loyal3 they instituted the $5/month fee, but it looks like maybe you had to be a Loyal3 customer.


That's a shame. Wish there was a way to buy into the company without having to shell out a huge chunk of money just in the purchase.

Articles like the one Garsh posted are part of the very reason why I think it's underpriced. I disagree with almost everything that was written therein, but the fact that that's the prevailing wisdom is the very thing that's keeping Tesla's stock down.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

The Bullish Story Buried In Tesla's Gross Profit Data

A nice silver-lining story among the current doom-and-gloom.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Just purchased 48 shares in TSLA today. First time in my life I've ever owned individual stocks.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

@KarenRei I'm happy for you! Let's hope you timed it right and that Tesla's quarterly announcement brings good news.

As for me, I can relate to this guy... ranting and all.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I'm not even so focused on the quarterly report. I'm more focused on where Tesla's going to be 9-12 months from now.


----------

