AuthorTopic: The Tesla Thread  (Read 1857 times)

Offline Palloy2

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
    • View Profile
    • Palloy's Blog
The Tesla Thread
« on: July 09, 2017, 10:51:03 PM »
Tesla Wins Contract for South Australia Energy Storage Project 

July 7, 2017

By Perry Williams, Bloomberg


Elon Musk’s Tesla Inc. has won a tender to supply what the billionaire says is the world’s largest lithium-ion battery to back up the state of South Australia’s blackout-plagued power grid, making good on a promise first made over Twitter four months ago to help solve the state’s energy woes.

Tesla will provide 100 MW of storage by Dec. 1, pairing it with a wind farm at Hornsdale north of Adelaide operated by France’s Neoen, according to a statement on Friday from South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill. The system, which will have capacity of 129 MWh, will provide enough power for more than 30,000 homes, Tesla said in a separate statement.

We’re talking about something that’s three times as powerful as the next biggest battery installation in the world,” Musk told reporters in Adelaide.

Musk had previously promised to build the system and get it working within 100 days of a contract being signed or Tesla would provide it free, a vow he backed up on Friday.


“We actually insisted when doing the contract that we be held to the 100 days or it’s free,” Musk said. “That’s what we said publicly, that’s what we’re going to do.”

full article:

While it is good that the Government have woken up to the grid-destabilising nature of wind, it is a pity they have chosen to provide a Government pool of back-up, instead of forcing the wind operator to buy it.  Talk about socialising the expense of renewables. 129 MW.h may be able to run 30,000 households, that is only 10% of South Australia's demand (1.2 - 2.1 GW) so it could theoretically run SA for 4 - 6 minutes.  Whether the battery cables could survive being run down that quickly I don't know.  The battery has to be kept fully-charged if you want rely on it to cover the state for 5 minutes, which means sometimes charging the battery with electricity that could otherwise be sold into the grid.  So the taxpayers are paying for the storage and will have to pay more for a steady supply of wind.
"The State is a body of armed men."

Offline Palloy2

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
    • View Profile
    • Palloy's Blog
The Tesla Thread
« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2017, 09:01:56 PM »
Los of useful numbers in this.
Electric Vehicles No Threat To Oil Prices Anytime Soon
David Yager via
Jul 28, 2017

Authored by David Yager via,

Hardly a day goes by without another media report about the impending demise of the Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) as petroleum powered cars and trucks are replaced by uber-clean Electric Vehicles (EV). It is just a matter of time before EVs start to materially reduce global oil demand thereby capping a meaningful oil price recovery now and creating an ever-shrinking industry in the future. EVs are yet another reason why the decline of petroleum production and consumption is inevitable.

Except it isn’t true. Your writer read dozens of articles and attended a conference on the future of EVs. The evidence overwhelming proves they pose no threat to oil prices anytime soon. Following is a summary of the major points.

    The forecasts for EV growth are all over the map. Late last year investment research outfit Morningstar figured EVs will be 10% of new vehicle sales by 2025 (only 8 years from now!) compared to 1% in 2015. Washington’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) predicted in January cumulative sales of EVs (cars and light trucks) would push 1.4 million by 2025. Last month Morgan Stanley predicted 1 billion EVs would be sold by 2050 and 70% of European vehicles would be electric. Bloomberg New Energy Finance wrote a glowing report on EVs in early July titled The Electric Car Revolution is Accelerating stating “…adoption of emission-free vehicles will happen more quickly than previously estimated because the cost of building cars is falling so fast. The seismic shift will see cars with a plug account a third of the global auto fleet by 2040 and displace about 8 million barrels a day of oil production. In just eight years, electric cars will be as cheap as gasoline vehicles, pushing the global fleet to 550 million by 2050”. When Volvo recently announced it will only produce vehicles with electric motors of some sort – pure EV or hybrid – in a couple of years made global headlines.


    EV sales forecasts don’t look intimidating once all the numbers are presented. For perspective, how many cars are there in the world? According to Automotive News, in the U.S. alone there were 18.4 million new cars and light trucks sold in 2016. A year ago, U.S. research house Alliance Bernstein reported that in 2015 there were 1.1 billion cars and 377 million trucks on the world’s roads, quantities expected to rise to 1.5 billion and 507 million respectively by 2025 and 2 billion and 790 billion by 2040. These figures are interesting because if the number of vehicles doubles but EVs are only 25% by 2050 (Bloomberg’s high case) this doesn’t equate to an 8% reduction in oil demand. If the Morningstar prediction above comes true, this would equate to 8.8 million new EVs in 2025 based on worldwide sales of 88 million units in 2016.

One of the big issues now emerging is the significant petroleum consumption and emissions of transport trucks for which electrification is not currently practical. And, of course, airplanes only run on refined crude. Bernstein figures Air Revenue Passenger Kilometers, or RPK, which was 9 trillion in 2015, will rise to 12 trillion in 2025 and more than double to 20 trillion by 2040. Oil required for transportation will continue to grow. Of a 42 US gallon barrel of crude 86% ends up transportation fuel (20 gallons gasoline, 12 diesel and 4 jet fuel). And EVs will only capture a meaningful portion of the market if several problems are solved, some highlighted below.


    Growth in EV sales thus far have been supported by significant government subsidies. The Tesla website points out just how much the sticker price of its vehicles can be reduced. In America, everyone gets a federal US$7,500 income tax credit then Louisiana adds on as much as US$9,500 “depending on battery choice”. A typical amount from is other states is an additional $1,000 to $2,500. In Canada Ontario will chip in a Cdn$14,000 tax rebate plus carpool lane access for a single driver. Quebec is at Cdn$3,000 according to the Tesla website. But it is noteworthy how sales plunge when subsidies end.

Website wrote on July 10 how “Nobody in Hong Kong Wants a Tesla Anymore”. Sales plummeted once the subsidy was capped at US$12,500 which raised the cost of one of the higher-end models to US$118,400 from US$72,900. In China BYD, which was once the world’s largest manufacturer of EVs thanks to domination of that market, saw EV sales drop 34% in Q1 2017 once state funding was reduced in January. Late last year Forbes wrote EV sales in Europe were declining in the fall of 2016. In April U.S. auto research firm Edmunds concluded, “Elimination of federal tax credits likely to kill U.S. EV market”, predicting EV sales would crash when the subsidies are withdrawn. Norway proudly trumpets how it has the highest level of EV adoption in the world, but the government pays people to do it.

In a great article by in mid-July, the writer reports there are no sales taxes on EVs, owners don’t pay for vehicle registration, ferries and roads tolls are free, and they can drive in bus or HOV lanes. To make sure drivers get with the program Norway charges nearly US$7 a US gallon for gasoline. Norway gets all its EV subsidy money by selling oil to the rest of the world. At US$45 a barrel Norway’s average 2016 production of 2.1 million b/d was worth US$35 billion last year and its sovereign wealth fund is currently totals US$960 billion. Britain and France have announced that by 2040 – 23 years from now – vehicles powered only by ICEs will be banned. But however gloomy that may sound for the oil industry today, that is enough time for 6 elections in both countries which could change everything, the development of new technologies to make ICEs even cleaner and more efficient, and is sufficiently distant to be meaningless for all crude producers except the supermajors.


    Are EV’s really green? There has been much written about this subject but it doesn’t make headlines. You have to hunt for it. In article in on March of 2016 the writer questioned whether or not Tesla was really environmentally friendly. If you recharge with coal-fired electricity the emissions are higher than burning gasoline. The vehicles must be lighter to extend battery life so they require a lot of high performance metals which is hardly environmentally benign to produce (more on lithium later). A researcher wrote, “…the greenhouse gas emissions footprint of electric vehicles can be pretty high on the front end, as they’re being built. We’re shifting pollution, and in the process we’re hoping that it doesn’t have the environmental impact”.

Then there’s the safe disposal of the battery after it dies and the local landfill is not the place. In June, the Montreal Economic Institute released a report that claimed subsidizing EVs was “an inefficient way to reduce CO2 emissions”. A spokesman said, “It’s just a waste. Not only do these programs costs taxpayers a fortune, but they also have little effect on GHG emissions”. The study claimed current subsidies in Quebec and Ontario, driven by lofty public government ambitions to grow EV use significantly, cost taxpayers Cdn$523 per tonne of reduced carbon emissions in Ontario and Cdn$288 in Quebec. The cap and trade system Ontario is adopting, mirroring than in California, taxes carbon at Cdn18 per tonne. Alberta’s new carbon tax, which the NDP are selling as a first step in saving the planet from climate change, is Cdn$20.


    Beware of looming electricity and lithium shortages. When Bloomberg did its analysis it predicted, “Electricity consumption from EVs will grow to 1,800 terawatt-hours in 2040, or 5 percent of global power demand, from 6 terawatt-hours in 2016”. This is a staggering 3,000 percent increase. Where will it come from? Better not be coal or possibly even natural gas.

At a conference held April 3 in Calgary sponsored by ARC Energy Research Institute (AERI) a representative of Bruce Power, the Ontario nuclear electricity generator, said to economically reduce carbon emissions recharging EVs only made sense at night, not during peak load hours. If everybody drove their EVs to work and tried to plug in at the office it would overload the system.

Meanwhile, there is speculation whether the world has enough lithium to build all the batteries skyrocketing EV growth would ensure. One analyst has predicted lithium shortages as soon as 2023 and have already delayed Tesla’s output. The solution, which is not all bad for the oil industry, is dual fuel whereby the battery is smaller, the lithium required per vehicle is lower, and mobility is augmented by a smaller ICE using good old-fashioned gasoline.


    Then there’s the morality of EV subsidies, which is rarely discussed in the pursuit of slaying the climate change beast. Until Tesla rolled out its Model 3 with a suggested sticker price of US$35,000, earlier models cost a small fortune restricting the number of people able to purchase one. At the AERI conference an automotive industry speaker noted Tesla dominated the market because it was “sexy”. But a look at used vehicle website showed these vehicles costing as much as Cdn$170,000, even second hand. Four pages of ads didn’t have one listed below Cdn$63,700. Is it politically acceptable that Ontario provides Cdn$14,000 in subsidies from all taxpayers to allow the richest people in the province to buy an EV in the same price range as a Porsche, Ferrari or Maserati?

And while the subsidies are directed to the vehicle purchase so politicians can count sales numbers, the recharging network is years behind. This will require even more government money because in most places there is insufficient commercial demand for the private sector to justify the investment. EVs are range-restricted with 300 km. being the outer end. Then they take hours to recharge. Colder temperatures impair battery performance as every Canadian driver knows. Is this an intelligent and sustainable use of taxpayer dollars?

Kevin Libin, an editorial writer for the Financial Post, wrote a column July 11 titled, “The awesome, unstoppable revolutionary electric-car revolution that doesn’t actually exist”. He wrote, “…because nobody’s really driving these miracle machines, said mania has been limited to breathless news reports about how the EV revolution is about to rock our world. EVs comprise just two-tenths of a percent of all passenger vehicles in North America, despite the media’s endless hype and efforts of green-obsessed governments to cover much of the price tag”.

Libin continued, “The real story being missed is just how pathetic things look right now for electric cars. Gasoline prices in the U.S. turned historically cheap in 2015 and stayed cheap, icing demand for gasless cars…Tesla was rocked by a controversial Swedish study that found that making one of its car batteries released as much CO2 as eight years of gasoline-powered driving. And Bloomberg reported last week on a study by Chinese engineers that found electric vehicles, because of battery manufacturing and charging by fossil-fueled electricity, still emit-50 per cent more carbon than internal-combustion engines”.

Calgary’s voice of sober second on all matters oil, Peter Tertzakian of AERI, agreed with Libin in an article the same day. He wrote, “The demand for oil is as robust as it’s ever been, thanks to barrels that are priced 60 percent lower than they were three years ago.; the linkage of petroleum to the world economy is actually strengthening, not weakening. But it doesn’t matter. EV mania is affecting the psychology of investors who finance oil assets, services and infrastructure. Fog lights of reason are finding it increasingly difficult to see the future of oil past 2020, because a cloud of uncertainty is thickening around long-term demand”.

Tertzakian wrote how more people are asking him somewhat rhetorically, “Looks like the petroleum business is finished, eh?” He responds, “Really? Have you bought an electric car or hybrid?” and the answer is universally no. And nobody else has either. He figures there are two scenarios. The first is tighter capital will “clean out” inefficient oil producers but technology will help oil prices stay lower, “making the consumer decision to switch to EVs more difficult”. The other is shrinking capital investment reducing future production thus leading to a price spike. Tertzakian concludes, “Ironically, progressive oil companies will do well under both scenarios”.

Meanwhile, you won’t see any EVs in the oilpatch anytime soon. The EV maximum range of 300 km. remains what many in this business drive before mid-morning when there’s work to be done. And the destination is nowhere near a charging station.
"The State is a body of armed men."

Offline g

  • Golden Oxen
  • Contrarian
  • Master Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 12280
    • View Profile
Re: Electric Vehicles No Threat To Oil Prices Anytime Soon
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2017, 08:38:12 AM »
Question to forum from non techie? Do EV's use oil products for lubrication and cooling like ICE"S.

I'm thinking along lines of transmission fluid, power steering fluids, brake fluids etc.

Looked it up on WIKI but has everything but. Watching copper go up and trying to find out just what it takes to make and run an EV like Tesla or Nissan leaf. How do they keep them from overheating when they claim to go over 200 miles over 60mph?

Couldn't fix a flat tire so please keep it simple. Not for engineering purposes only investment.

Trying to get a handle on just what these things require, they are already causing speculation in copper, zinc, lithium, cobalt and I am wondering if specialty oil lubricant companies will be affected as well??  Newmarket corp in particular which makes specialty lubricants and I have owned for decades.                                                                                                     Thanks anyone, GO

This is a brief synopsis of what they make.
NewMarket Corporation, through its subsidiaries, engages in the petroleum additives businesses. It offers lubricant additives for use in various vehicle and industrial applications, such as engine oils, transmission fluids, off-road powertrain and hydraulic systems, gear oils, hydraulic oils, turbine oils, metalworking fluids, and in other applications where metal-to-metal moving parts are utilized; and engine oil, driveline, and industrial additives. The company also provides fuel additives that are used to enhance the oil refining process and the performance of gasoline, diesel, biofuels, and other fuels to industry, government, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), and individual customers. It has operations in the United States, Canada, Europe, the Asia Pacific, India, Latin America, and the Middle East. NewMarket Corporation was founded in 1887 and is headquartered in Richmond, Virginia.

Offline Palloy2

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
    • View Profile
    • Palloy's Blog
The Tesla Thread
« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2018, 08:57:25 PM »
"Tesla, Without Any Doubt, Is On The Verge Of Bankruptcy..."
Simon Black via

Just a few days ago, shareholders of Tesla approved an almost comical pay package for their cult leader CEO Elon Musk that could potentially put $50 BILLION in his pocket over the next decade.

Let’s put this figure in perspective: at $5 billion per year, Musk would make more than every single CEO in the S&P 500. COMBINED.

In other words, if you add up the salaries of all the CEOs of the 500 largest companies in America, it would still be less than the $5 billion per year that Mr. Musk stands to earn.

That’s pretty astounding given that Tesla’s own 2017 4th quarter financial report (page 24) states that Elon “does not devote his full time and attention to Tesla”.

Or more importantly, that under Musk’s leadership, Tesla’s chronic financial incompetence has racked up more than $4.97 billion in operating losses for its shareholders.

Or that the company has been under SEC investigation (without bothering to disclose this fact to shareholders).

Yet they saw fit to reward him with the largest CEO pay package in the history of the world.

This is precisely the type of behavior that is only seen during periods of extreme irrationality when financial markets are at their peak... and poised for a serious correction.

I’ll close this brief letter today quoting John Thompson, Chicago-based value investor and Chief Investment Officer of Vilas Capital Management.

Thompson is one of the few hedge fund managers who has consistently outperformed the market, and his fund is betting big against Tesla. What follows are some passages about Tesla from Thompson’s recent investor updates:

    I think Tesla is going to crash in the next 3-6 months. . .

    . . . partially due to their incompetence in making and delivering the Model 3, partially due to falling demand for the Model S and X, partially due to the extreme valuation, partially due to their horrendous finances that will imminently require a huge capital raise, partially due to a likely downgrade of their credit rating by Moody’s from B- to CCC (default likely) which should scare their parts suppliers into requiring cash on delivery (a death knell), partially due to the market’s recent falling appetite for risk, and partially due to our suspicions of fraudulent accounting activities, evidenced by 85 SEC letters/investigations and two top finance people leaving in the last month. . .

    Tesla, without any doubt, is on the verge of bankruptcy.

    The company cannot survive the next twelve months without access to capital from Wall Street Banks or private investors.

    We estimate that Tesla will need roughly $8 billion in the next 18 months to fund operating losses, capital expenditures, debts coming due, and working capital needs.

    However, it appears that due to past SEC investigations and current investigations (which terrifyingly have not been disclosed by the company), it will likely be difficult for Tesla to access public markets.

    According to a recent analyst report, there have been 85 SEC requests for additional information and disclosures in the last 5 years.

    This compares to Ford Motor Company’s total of zero over the same time frame. This means that Tesla is pushing many, many boundaries.

    When a company is under formal investigation, it is difficult, if not impossible, to raise capital from public markets as these investigations must be made public, which generally craters the equity and debt values.

    Therefore, Tesla investors better hope there are a number of Greater Fools in China or elsewhere to keep the company solvent.

    At some point, the music stops and there aren’t any open chairs.

    No matter how good a social investment makes you feel as it is going up, extreme anger will result if most or all of your money is permanently lost, especially when it is due to false and misleading statements by senior company officers.

    This is when the [Department of Justice] steps in and escorts untruthful managements to their new living quarters.

    . . . As a reality check, Tesla is worth twice as much as Ford* yet Ford made 6 million cars last year at a $7.6 billion profit while Tesla made 100,000 cars at a $2 billion loss.

    Further, Ford has $12 billion in cash held for “a rainy day” while Tesla will likely run out of money in the next 3 months.

    . . . I have never seen anything so absurd in my career.

"The State is a body of armed men."

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41606
    • View Profile
Re: "Tesla, Without Any Doubt, Is On The Verge Of Bankruptcy..."
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2018, 10:29:15 PM »
The main question is WHEN will Elon's Ponzi finally implode here?  Also, will the inevitable Tesla failure take down SpaceX and the Boring Company also?

He's going to have to issue out more equity and dilute his stock if he expects to have operating capital for 2019.

The thing is of course, EM is TBTF.  The TBTF Banks are the ones that own most of the Tesla stock.  If Tesla goes BK, it would take some or all them down too.  So they will look for a way to stretch it out.

Save As Many As You Can

Offline K-Dog

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3895
    • View Profile
    • K-Dog
Re: "Tesla, Without Any Doubt, Is On The Verge Of Bankruptcy..."
« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2018, 10:36:57 PM »
I was behind a Tesla SUV on the way home.

The license plate was  BFT 347  <=====   Big Fucking Tesla
Under ideal conditions of temperature and pressure the organism will grow without limit.

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41606
    • View Profile
At least this is from Forbes, slightly less of a trash heap than Zero Hedge.  ::)


Mar 26, 2018 @ 12:55 PM 72,304
The Little Black Book of Billionaire Secrets
Tesla's Plummeting Share Price Shows That Musk Is Running Out Of Time

Jim Collins , Contributor
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.

It is amazing to me that Tesla stock closed the penultimate day of February above $350 per share and today is struggling to hold $295 per share.  The volatility in TSLA shares has bitten the longs with a 15% decline in 19 trading days, and the bulls are struggling to make coherent arguments.  That points to the most pressing issue facing Tesla and its CEO Elon Musk: time.

The Tesla bull case is based on the idea that TSLA will dominate a future world in which battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) and autonomous vehicles (AVs) are prevalent in global markets.  The problem with that argument is that Tesla already dominates the global market for BEVs, and yet the company burned through $3.5 billion of cash last year.  The Tesla Model S is the most important automotive product of this generation, it is undeniably the car of the century (thus far,) but what does that get Tesla shareholders?  Nothing in terms of real economic returns.

Elon Musk, founder, CEO, and lead designer of SpaceX, speaks at a news conference after the Falcon 9 SpaceX heavy rocket launched successfully from the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Fla., Tuesday, Feb. 6, 2018. (AP Photo/John Raoux)

It astounds me that the incredibly well-capitalized global auto sector--I delineated the size of their cash hoard in this Forbes article--let Musk beat them to the punch with the introduction of the Model S in 2012.  But that's history, and not a single one of my contacts at global automakers--I followed autos as a sell-side analyst for 11 years and still have many friends at the OEMs--is worried about Tesla's Model 3.  This is for the simple reason that Tesla simply cannot make this model in volume, and Musk's target of production of 2,500 Model 3s per week by mid-year is not taken seriously by my contacts in the automotive world, including those at companies that supply components for that model.

So, that's the temporal aspect again.  Eventually Tesla will make Model 3s in volume say the TSLA bulls, but the bearish argument is summed up in one word: when?  The clock is ticking for Tesla owing to the fact that the company issued $1.8 billion in debt last August. With Tesla reporting negative EBITDA for the past two quarters--and my modeling shows it will be negative again in the first quarter of 2018--something's gotta give here. 

Issuing straight debt was a colossal mistake by Tesla, and those bonds are now trading at about 92 cents on the dollar; yielding 6.65% versus a coupon of 5.3%.  Tesla has convertible bonds expiring in June this year that were issued in 2013 with a 1.5% coupon and a conversion  price of $124/share. That was a huge win for the company, and I have no idea why Tesla doesn’t keep issuing converts to its legion of numbers-blind devotees on the buy-side.  The only reasonable explanation is that Musk doesn't want to incur further dilution as a current--and TSLA's largest--shareholder.

Tesla needs to tap the equity markets for a follow-on offering very soon, but the fall in the value of TSLA shares means that to raise an appropriate amount of money, TSLA will need to offer more shares than it would have a month ago, thus incurring even more dilution.  It's a vicious circle, but if Tesla does not raise at least $2 billion, in my opinion, the company will not be able to fund its obligations in 2019.

So, time is of the essence for Tesla and Musk.  Elon needs to swallow his male pride and swamp the markets with TSLA shares, which, other things equal, will cause the shares to decline.  The alternative is for Tesla to run out of time. The company factored its leases in January, and there simply are no more financial levers to pull.  If Tesla does not raise capital in the next three months, I believe it will be increasingly difficult for TSLA to convince its business partners that it is a viable entity.  And let me tell you, that is exactly what the other automakers want to see.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Palloy2

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
    • View Profile
    • Palloy's Blog
The Tesla Thread
« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2018, 08:11:42 PM »
Tesla’s ‘day of reckoning’ is near as its plunging stock increases financing risk
Tae Kim   
30 March 2018

Tesla's big stock drop this month will have negative implications for its ability to raise critically-needed funds, according to Wall Street analysts.

The company's shares declined 22 percent in March on concerns over a fatal car crash in California last week and worries over its Model 3 production rate. Tesla's 5.3 percent bond, issued last August and maturing in 2025, also fell 4 percent to 87.25 cents Wednesday with a yield of 7.6 percent, according to FactSet. The bond's price declined 8 percent this month.

Morgan Stanley on Wednesday warned Tesla shareholders the stock's fall could be a "self-fulfilling" prophecy for further declines.

"A lower share price begets a lower share price … For a company widely expected to continue to fund its strategy through external capital raises, a fall in the share price can take on a self-fulfilling nature that further exacerbates the volatility of the share price," analyst Adam Jonas wrote.

Jonas said the company needs to accelerate its rate of Model 3 production if it wants to raise funds at an attractive price for the company.

"The precise timing of when Tesla can achieve a 2,500/week and then a 5,000/week production run-rate for its mass market sedan can make the difference between whether Tesla is potentially raising capital from a position of weakness at a price near our $175 bear case or whether it can access capital from a position of strength with a stock price near our $561 bull case," he wrote.

Another financial firm is already pessimistic over Telsa's Model 3 manufacturing capability.

Moody's downgraded Tesla's credit ratings after the close Tuesday and changed the outlook to negative from stable, citing the "significant shortfall" in the Model 3 production rate and its tight financial situation.

Tesla had $3.4 billion in cash or cash equivalents at year end 2017. The company lost nearly $2 billion last year and burned about $3.4 billion in cash after capital investments.

Given the company's cash burn rate and how it has $230 million of debt due in Nov. 2018 and another $920 million in Mar. 2019, Moody's believes the company has to raise new capital soon.

Tesla "faces liquidity pressures due to its large negative free cash flow and the pending maturities of convertible bonds," the Moody's release said Tuesday. "The negative outlook reflects the likelihood that Tesla will have to undertake a large, near-term capital raise in order to refund maturing obligations and avoid a liquidity short-fall."

Some investors are betting against Tesla, citing its financial liquidity issues and cash burn woes.

"The losses and heavy capital spending are expected to continue this year. Over the next twelve months Tesla also has $1.2 billion in convertible bonds coming due," Fred Hickey, editor of High Tech Strategist, wrote in an email Wednesday. "In other words, Tesla has an enormous need for more cash and yet some are beginning to lose confidence in the company as witnessed by the recent Moody's debt downgrade and sharp selloff in Tesla bonds. It looks like a day of reckoning may be ahead."

Hickey owns Tesla put options.

One hedge fund manager believes Tesla's business model is permanently broken.

"Tesla represents a financially non-viable business. It has an upside-down balance sheet. The multi-billion cash burn is massive with no end in sight," Accipiter Capital's Gabe Hoffman wrote in an email Wednesday. "The financial need for Tesla to issue massive amounts of new equity has been glaringly obvious for quite some time."

Hoffman cited the recent departures of Tesla executives such as its chief accounting officer in early March.

"This is an incredibly ominous sign, which I believe confirms my thesis," he wrote. "Tesla is our fund's largest short position. We have not covered a single share on this decline."

Tesla did not respond to a request for comment.
"The State is a body of armed men."

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41606
    • View Profile
Re: The Tesla Thread
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2018, 08:17:58 PM »
Bye Bye Elon!  :icon_sunny:

We have too many Tesla threads.  I am going to do some merging.

Save As Many As You Can

Offline Palloy2

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
    • View Profile
    • Palloy's Blog
Re: The Tesla Thread
« Reply #9 on: June 19, 2018, 01:00:51 AM »
Why do people continually beat up Elon Musk?  Because he is continually such an idiot.
‘Only the paranoid survive’: Musk hints at sabotage as Tesla plant rattled by fire
19 Jun, 2018

A fire that has briefly disrupted operations at a Tesla plant in Fremont, California, has prompted the car-maker’s CEO Elon Musk to send a cryptic message, asking staff to be vigilant, in light of “another strange incident.”

The internal email from Musk, first reported by CNBC, revealed that a “small” fire broke out at a car body production line in the factory late Sunday, halting operations “for several hours.” Calling the blaze “a strange incident that was hard to explain,” Musk then appeared to suggest that the mishap might have been the result of malicious intent.

“Could just be a random event, but as [Intel co-founder] Andy Grove said, “Only the paranoid survive,” the electric car manufacturer’s CEO noted, before urging employees to “be on the alert for anything that’s not in the best interests of our company.”

In a tone highlighting the gravity of the matter, Musk asks workers to contact him directly if they don’t get any feedback otherwise. The fire resulted in no injuries; nor did it inflict substantial damage on equipment and nobody was present on the premises, Musk wrote, as cited in the report.

In a later update, CNBC cited another email, which was sent by Musk on Sunday, which claimed that a Tesla employee “had conducted quite extensive and damaging sabotage” against the company. The unnamed employee allegedly altered the code of the plant’s manufacturing operating system and exported data to third parties, the email claimed, adding that powerful players, including “Wall Street short-sellers” and “oil & gas companies” were not beyond playing dirty against Tesla.

The ‘unexplained’ incident follows a similar one at the plant in April, when a paint shop fire reportedly brought production to a halt for at least a full shift. Although Tesla argued that the fire was “small” and barely affected the operations, the workers cited by CNBC claimed that it was severe enough to burn down an entire section where Model 3s were being painted. However, Musk, who reportedly flew in to assess the damage, encouraged the staff to apply a quick fix and go on with production instead of putting it on hold.

The report on the latest fire comes as Tesla struggles to meet its CEO’s ambitious goal of churning out 5,000 Model 3 vehicles weekly. Earlier in June, Musk said that it was “highly likely”Tesla would reach the designated production rate by the end of this month.

In run-up to the latest fire incident, Musk had reiterated his push for a higher production rate, in an email titled “only 8 days left to reach 700 cars/day or 5k/week,” which he’d sent on Friday. In the letter calling for “radical improvements,” he stressed the need to “achieve sustained, 700+ per week on the body line,” vowing to be at the factory “almost 24/7” to oversee the process first-hand.

The electric car company and its CEO are facing a host of problems, including the need to cut costs to preserve capital in order to complete the orders for the Model 3, which has been touted as a mass-market product, as well as pending lawsuits over what some shareholders see as Musk’s poor management and enrichment at the company’s expense.

Tesla has yet to make its first profit, having accumulated some $2billion in debt last year. In a bid to “reduce costs and become profitable,” Musk last week announced a major round of layoffs that would affect some 9 percent of the company staff. The cuts will not affect those involved in the production, he stressed at the time.

Aside from its financial and performance woes, Tesla is now under increased scrutiny for a series of incidents in which several of its cars in the US and Europe burst into flames. Last week, a Tesla vehicle was again making headlines for all the wrong reasons, when US actress Mary McCormack wrote on Twitter that her husband’s electric car caught fire “out of the blue.” The video, showing the flames shooting underneath the car, went viral on social media.
"The State is a body of armed men."

Offline Palloy2

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
    • View Profile
    • Palloy's Blog
Re: The Tesla Thread
« Reply #10 on: June 23, 2018, 08:05:18 PM »
Musk Went Ballistic" - The Inside Story Of Tesla's Feud With Federal Regulators
Tyler Durden

Given the bizarre outbursts and increasingly grandiose performance-related promises (even as his company's Fremont factory has continued to struggle), many have speculated that Tesla CEO Elon Musk has been cracking under the pressure. In one sign that the pressures of running Tesla (not to mention SpaceX and Neuralink) have been weighing on the CEO, some have pointed out that he's becoming increasingly vindictive toward anybody who doubts or questions him: for example, he recently spent $25 million of his own money on Tesla shares just to blow up a few shorts after tweeting threats of "unreal carnage".

In a story that lays bare Musk's obsession with his public image and his  inability to tolerate criticism or dissent from his employees or the media, Buzzfeed published a piece late Thursday that's packed with alarming details, including the story of Musk's meltdown during a conversation with regulators from the National Transportation Safety Board.


An outburst from Musk that ended the conversation prompted the NTSB to announce that Tesla would no longer be cooperating with the investigation. In a separate incident, Musk went "ballistic" during a conversation with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration after a representative informed Elon Musk that the agency would be announcing an investigation into a May 2016 crash involving a Tesla Model S in Florida.

    No one lectures Elon Musk. In April, the head of the National Transportation Safety Board discovered this after a call about his organization’s investigation into one of Tesla Motors’ autopiloted vehicles devolved into a heated exchange, leading the billionaire entrepreneur to hang up on the federal regulator. That fiery interaction eventually leaked to the press and ricocheted around the internet as further evidence that Musk was losing it.


    For example, in June 2016 the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration had contacted Tesla as a courtesy heads-up that it would be announcing an investigation into a May crash that killed the driver of a Model S sedan on Autopilot. It was the kind of call that, at most companies, would require executive restraint and sensitivity. Musk was not originally supposed to be on the call with NHTSA officials, Tesla’s general counsel, and the head of its Autopilot team, but chimed in as the conversation got underway. It was unfair that NHTSA was targeting his company, he said, noting that skeptics would just use the public investigation as evidence that Tesla was in trouble.

    After failing to convince the government officials to keep their investigation private and forgo their announcement scheduled for the next day, Musk went ballistic and embarked on a profanity-laced tirade. He threatened to sue NHTSA for what he saw as unfair scrutiny and then abruptly disconnected the phone, leaving the people left on the line shocked.

    "I couldn’t believe it," said a former Tesla employee familiar with the call.

Musk's recent behavior isn't a deviation: It's more or less how he's always acted around his employees.

    But the thing is: None of this is new for Musk. He has always been the architect of his own image and has long run roughshod over journalists and his own communications team alike. In interviews with BuzzFeed News, nine people who previously worked with Musk, and who requested anonymity to preserve their personal and professional relationships, said that while the level of scrutiny on the CEO may be new, his behavior is not. What we are seeing is less a crack in his well-being than his facade. It is Elon unbound.

His short temper has "long been legend" inside Tesla and SpaceX, according to Buzzfeed. The only thing that's changed, they say, is that Musk's profile - and the company's share price - has risen.

    What’s changed is simply that Musk’s profile has risen while his staff’s ability to keep him in check has waned. As pressure continues to mount and Musk sheds the executives who once provided advice and insulation, he’s no longer just the Mars-bound genius with a promising electric car company. Depending on who you ask, he’s an icon, an environmental champion, or an attention-hungry micromanager, wielding Steve Jobs–level influence in 240-character Twitter diatribes, occasional public appearances, or mocking conference calls with analysts. But no matter which Elon you choose, it’s become more apparent that there’s no one who can rein him in.

Musk's inability to let go of anything remotely negative spouted by his critics and the media makes working on his communications staff - whether at Tesla or at SpaceX - a waking nightmare.

    This obsession with the media makes working in communications under Musk, whether at Tesla or SpaceX, an unpredictable and grueling gig. Multiple former staffers recalled being kept up late or woken up in the middle of the night because Musk was upset about a headline or an article. Two other former senior employees described Musk as notoriously thin-skinned. "He'll read an obscure critical post by, like, some Belgian blogger at 3 in the morning and he'll wake up people on the comms team and demand this person be crushed," one former employee said. "It's all utterly disproportionate in response."

If you're thinking that some of Musk's tendencies - particularly his treatment of the media - sound familiar, well, former Musk employees would agree. Several of Buzzfeed's sources independently compared working for Musk with working in the Trump White House, the outlet said.

    The lack of control and continual need to put out PR fires wore on professionals, even those who personally liked Musk and believed in the missions of Tesla and SpaceX. Tesla is known for a high rate of turnover, and some communications staffers only last a few months. Some have done multiple stints, though have left or were fired after clashing with the chief executive. Three people familiar with Musk’s communications team independently compared the pressure and publicity, and chaos of the job to working in President Donald Trump’s White House.

This has already been a rough week for Tesla. Musk has already had to downsize Solar City's residential solar business and finish laying off 9% of Tesla's staff (while continuing to deny that the company is having funding troubles). And this embarrassing Buzzfeed story is one more distraction for the mogul, who's desperately trying to bring Model 3 production up to 2,500 cars a week by the end of June. If he fails at that task, we imagine there will be another round of outbursts as Musk continues his crusade against the Tesla bears and everybody else who doubts his vision.
"The State is a body of armed men."

Offline Surly1

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18654
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Sabotage at Tesla?
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2018, 09:57:34 AM »
And some would have you believe that Musk is the "idiot."

Just ask yourself the ageless question: Cui bono? Would would benefit from Elon Musk having manufacturing problems and being unable to meet demand?

Tesla sabotage/data theft scandal becomes even crazier

Tesla sabotage/data theft scandal becomes even crazier

- Jun. 21st 2018 2:52 pm ET


With leaked emails from Elon Musk on Monday, we first revealed that a Tesla employee had sabotaged software in the automaker manufacturing system and stolen data.

Now things have escalated as Tesla has sued the employee, Martin Tripp, and Tripp is attacking Tesla in the media in return.

As we reported yesterday, Tesla filed a lawsuit against Tripp after starting to get an understanding of the extent of his hacking and theft of documents discovered on Monday.

Tesla has accused him of hacking into its system from the workstations of his coworkers, presumably to hide his trace, and then sending the data to third parties and misrepresenting some of the data to media.

Now Tripp is firing back in the media claiming to be a whistleblower.

He told CNN:

I am being singled out for being a whistleblower. I didn’t hack into system. The data I was collecting was so severe, I had to go to the media,

CNN reported that media outlets had “yet to do a story about it,” but now that we have a better idea of the information that he obtained, it sounds extremely similar to stories published by CNBC and Business Insider over the last few weeks.

Tripp is now going on a media tour trying to push his side of the story.

He gave the Washington Post a screenshot of an email exchange he had with Musk in which he appears to be threatening him:

Things get crazier. Tesla said that a friend of Tripp told them that he was threatening to shoot up the Tesla Gigafactory 1 (via CNBC):

Yesterday afternoon, we received a phone call from a friend of Mr. Tripp telling us that Mr. Tripp would be coming to the Gigafactory to ‘shoot the place up.’ Police have been notified and actions are being taken to enhance security at the Gigafactory.

The local sheriff department responded to the potential threat.

They issued a statement saying that they found no credible threat but they are still investigating:

On 06/20/18 the Storey County Sheriff’s Office received information of a potential threat to the physical security of the Tesla Gigafactory. Deputies responded to investigate the potential threat.

After several hours of investigation deputies were able to determine there was no credible threat. Further investigation into the threat’s origin continues. No additional information concerning the ongoing investigation will be released until it’s [sic] conclusion to protect the investigative process.

The names of all involved parties are being withheld pending the completion of the investigation.

Gerald Antinoro


Electrek’s Take

It’s certainly turning into a ‘he said/she said’ situation, but it is also certainly not looking good for Tripp.

Regardless of the possible terror threats, I don’t see how he thought it would be a good idea to not only send that email to Musk but also leak it to the media thinking he is coming out of it looking good.

On top of it, it now looks like he is clearly admitting to everything, but he claims that he is doing it as a whistleblower.

But as Musk explained in the email, what he is blowing the whistle on is fairly insignificant.

Business Insider had already reported on the alleged waste – seemingly based on information leaked by Tripp, but the story was debunked as it didn’t explain how the waste is any more significant or mismanaged than any other plant of this size.

If you want my opinion, the guy sounds like your average social media Tesla hater. Reading those emails, I can almost see the Twitter handles of the most notorious Tesla bashers out there.

Also it is interesting CNBC’s Lora Kolodny, who likely used Tripp as a source for a series of scathingpieces on Tesla, isn’t mentioning that fact in the current reporting of his “shooting up the place”. No retractions or updates to those stories have been made.

But that’s just my two cents based on what has come out so far.

What about you? What do you think of this weird situation? Let us know in the comment section below.




Tesla is a transportation and energy company. It sells vehicles under its 'Tesla Motors' division and stationary battery pack for home, commercial and utility-scale projects under its 'Tesla Energy' division.

About the Author

"...reprehensible lying communist..."

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9741
    • View Profile
Re: The Tesla Thread
« Reply #12 on: June 24, 2018, 10:10:44 AM »
Gremlins  :icon_mrgreen:

<a href="" target="_blank" class="new_win"></a>

Thanks for the Sunday funnies Surly, hah...
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind


Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
Last post September 28, 2016, 07:53:07 PM
by Palloy
6 Replies
Last post August 24, 2018, 02:23:07 PM
by Eddie
0 Replies
Last post November 21, 2019, 09:58:57 AM
by azozeo