Gigafactory

Quote: kenarman

If you read about the Tesla batteries the heat is more of a concern than the cold as far as damaging the battery.

Tesla engineered their cars so that the heat produced by friction in the motor is distributed to the battery pack.

GM says they're paying $145 per kWh to South Korea's LG Chem for the battery cells inside the Chevy Bolt. If that's true, then GM's cost for the Bolt's 60kWh battery is $8,700.

The car is A) Small and B) Expensive-- over $36,000. Considering how small it is, couldn't the rest of the Bolt (excluding the battery) be manufactured for about $15,000? The Bolt is only a couple inches longer & wider than a Honda Fit, which retails for $16,000. So couldn't GM's total cost per vehicle in the neighborhood of $25K? In other words, how is this car not profitable? (Bloomberg says Chevy loses $9K on each one it sells.)

Here's where I'm going with this: there are 5,000 Norwegians who've put down deposits to receive the Chevy Bolt (it's marketed in Europe under the brand name Opel Ampera-E) and GM has instructed their Norwegian car dealers to stop taking new orders for the vehicle. GM won't say it out loud, but their actions suggest they want to stop selling the car in Europe.

Quote: Fred Lambert

Opel spokesperson Christopher Rux responded that they have indeed “suspended taking new orders for the Ampera-e,” but he claims that it is “to focus first on satisfying customers with existing contracts and who are waiting for their cars.”

He says that “nearly 1,000 Ampera-E vehicles” have been delivered in Europe so far, with most of them in Norway, but deliveries have also started in Germany, Switzerland, and Netherlands.

On the other hand, Rux confirmed that almost 5,000 people have placed orders for the electric car in Norway alone.

Rux couldn’t say when those people could expect to get their vehicles – only saying that they “will continue to serve the demand as effectively as possible.”

The 5,000 Norwegians on the waiting list have been told they might get their car by 2019.

Quote: reno

GM says they're paying $145 per kWh...

So if gasoline is $2.98 per gallon with 33.1 kWh/gallon that means gasoline cost 9 cents per kWh. Electricity already costs more than 9 cents per kWh, and you have to pay $145 for enough battery to store that energy.

It's difficult to make those numbers add up.

These new bionic boots let a person run at speeds up to 25 mph. Even more than bicycles they make sense for urban transit.

Tesla three said to have major problems.

/. claims insufficient rare earth metals for the batteries needed by zillions of electric cars.

Bionic boots are an offshoot of a DARPA project intended give infantry soldiers ability to cover open ground rapidly and to leap over boulders, ditches, etc.

Quote: Pacomartin

These new bionic boots let a person run at speeds up to 25 mph. Even more than bicycles they make sense for urban transit.

Maybe with dedicated, confined lanes. Otherwise, you're looking at a tort lawyer's dream.

Quote: Fleastiff

Tesla three said to have major problems.

/. claims insufficient rare earth metals for the batteries needed by zillions of electric cars.

Bionic boots are an offshoot of a DARPA project intended give infantry soldiers ability to cover open ground rapidly and to leap over boulders, ditches, etc.

Just reported a huge loss and to not my surprise they are having huge problems with the Model 3.

Like I said, their CEO is too worried about blasting people into space and boring tunnels and not enough about running the store.

Sooner or later the markets will not finance this loser any longer.

Quote: AZDuffman

I already heard the conspiracy theory that lots of TSLA stockholders are putting down deposits to pump the stock.

You wrote that in April 2016. The 455,000 deposits they received aren't even real, the whole thing's a conspiracy!

Quote: AZDuffman

Just reported a huge loss and to not my surprise they are having huge problems with the Model 3.

Yeah, they promised to build 1,500 in September, but they've only built a couple hundred so far. But why should it it matter, if the 455,000 deposits are fake? LOL. Ok, jokes aside Tesla claims that they're having problems with the robots welding steel. All their previous cars were aluminum, so they're still learning about steel-- a material every other manufacturer mastered 80 years ago.

Quote: AZDuffman

Tesla has a cash burn rate such that they will burn it all within a year or so and cannot take losses same as GM.

That's another golden quote from April 2016. As of August 2017, Tesla still had $3 billion in cash reserves.

Quote: reno

I'm a Tesla apologist, and even I'm doubtful that they'll be able to make deliveries of the Model 3 by the end of 2017 as promised.

I wrote that in April 2016. I got that wrong. I predicted they'd deliver zero, but they've delivered a couple hundred. The company promised to be manufacturing 5,000 Model 3s per week by January. That was a %#$@*&^$%! stupid promise for them to make. It makes them look arrogant and/or delusional.

Quote: AZDuffman

Like I said, their CEO is too worried about blasting people into space and boring tunnels and not enough about running the store.

I agree.

Quote: reno

You wrote that in April 2016. The 455,000 deposits they received aren't even real, the whole thing's a conspiracy!

Yeah, they promised to build 1,500 in September, but they've only built a couple hundred so far. But why should it it matter, if the 455,000 deposits are fake? LOL. Ok, jokes aside Tesla claims that they're having problems with the robots welding steel. All their previous cars were aluminum, so they're still learning about steel-- a material every other manufacturer mastered 80 years ago.

That's another golden quote from April 2016. As of August 2017, Tesla still had $3 billion in cash reserves.

I an not changing my opinion of Tesla at this time. Cash is still burning and if the $3 Billion includes 400,000 cash deposits then they are at this point illiquid. They have yet to make any significant profit from operations. Their stock just had a big fall on news of the Yuppie EV Subsidy being dropped.

I have to look at this closer as the new statements are not up yet, but as of Jan 1 they have $3.5B in cash yet $3B in accounts payable. All of that cash is spoken for. In 2016 they sold $2B worth of stock and borrowed $1.7B more. This accounts for more than all of that $3.5B.

Put another way, I got yelled at when I said "Musk is selling stock, not cars." In 2016 the total revenue is $7B. I cannot tell if that $2B is inside or outside that number. If it is, nearly 1/3 of revenue was sale of stock. If it is not, then 1/5 of revenue was stock. This can continue just as long as the investors believe the story. When you cannot do basic welding to produce cars, the story is a harder sell.

I watch "Autoline" daily. This week was the first time the talking heads were all generally down on Tesla.

Musk might do well to pursue a merger with FCA or Mazda while his stock is still hot.

Quote: AZDuffman

Their stock just had a big fall on news of the Yuppie EV Subsidy being dropped.

There might be a dozen good, legitimate reasons for their stock price to plummet. (#1 reason: their market cap is vastly overinflated. #2 reason: they don't know how to weld steel.)

But Congress' plan to eliminate the tax credit is a dumb reason for Wall Street to care about. The tax credit was already set to expire when they deliver 200,000 vehicles to US customers, and Tesla is only 60,000 deliveries away from crossing that threshhold. With 455,000 customers waiting in line, why should a tax credit for 60,000 vehicles be of interest to Wall Street? The vast majority of those 455,000 customers won't get their credit anyway, regardless of what Congress does.

Wall Street isn't always rational, is it?

Quote: reno

Wall Street isn't always rational, is it?

Maybe, maybe not. Even if the subsidy does not have direct effect, it shows that the Trump administration is not going to give other push like Obama did.