Forward Looking Guru

Mid-cap, energy, natural resources, technology
Forward Looking Guru
Mid-cap, energy, natural resources, technology
Contributor since: 2013
"The Bolt EV is also expected to use a variation on the same next-generation Gamma platform that will underpin the updated Sonic."
"The production version of the Bolt EV will be built at the same plant as the next generation of the Chevy Sonic subcompact, with which it shares some understructure."
"Unconfirmed industry rumors say GM is planning to build roughly 25,000 Bolts a year."
Chevy Sonic sales are falling. The Chevy Sonic does not compete with Tesla in any category. GM does not currently have any production vehicle that competes with Tesla. Also, GM does not have the fast charging stations Tesla has.
http://bit.ly/1L7EFch
http://bit.ly/1L7EFcj
So, Volvo "invested" (wasted) $11 billion to come up with an SUV that uses obsolete technology, to compete with the Model X, a vehicle that will be available in a few months, that will rely on state of the art technology?
I suggest you check out Solar City's Homebuilder Program. http://bit.ly/1dkOlHf
It's only a matter of time before Tesla Battery Storage will be incorporated into many new homes.
1) BYD doesn't produce any vehicles that compete with high end luxury sedans, and doesn't current sell vehicles in the USA.
2) Most people outside of China don't know what BYD is.
3) Panasonic, a company with a very strong, positive, and mutually beneficial partnership with Tesla, just raised $4 billion dollars via a bond offering to invest in projects that sound Tesla related.
4) It would make a lot more sense for BYD to partner with Tesla. BYD is involved in a joint venture with Daimler to produce electric vehicles. Daimler has a very strong, positive, and mutually beneficial partnership with Tesla.
There are a number of ways Tesla could do this, that would solve the "range problem", and make Tesla owners very happy. Tesla stated the Model 3 will have AT LEAST 200 miles of range. Disclaimer: These two scenarios are 100% speculation.
1) All Model S owners will be given the opportunity to upgrade to a 500 mile battery for a fee, say $10,000 + a certain amount, dependent on how many miles the vehicle has on it along with whatever else needs to be accounted for. The upgrade provides owners with an extended warranty on the battery, essentially for free.
2) The Model 3 may have an entry level model with 200 - 300 miles of range. It will be possible to upgrade the Model 3 to a 400 or 500 mile battery pack for a fee, say $10,000 + a certain amount dependent on how many miles the vehicle has on it along with whatever else needs to be accounted for. It will be possible to upgrade the battery pack at any point after the vehicle is purchased. The upgrade provides owners with an extended warranty on the battery, essentially for free.
I suggest you read the following article.
Better Warranty? Check! Upgradeable Cars? Sure! 500-Mile Batteries? Maybe Soon!
http://onforb.es/11E3Ihp
"He [Elon] suggested a 500-mile battery — nearly twice as good as the best they can offer today — could be available at about the 4-5 year mark in the life of Model S, which launched last year. “That’s about the point at which you’d see a significant change and it would allow us in the same volume and weight to put in a lot more range. ” So that would be 2016 or 2017. And when asked whether current owners could possibly purchase it replied, “ I think that’s a pretty good likelihood, yeah.”
1) Is the Chevy Bolt an EV or an E-REV?
2) $35,000 GM vehicle with 200 miles of range vs a $35,000 Tesla vehicle with 300-400 miles of range. Competition? Not exactly.
Any responsible researcher would see a problem with attempting to measure "demand" for a product no-one has seen, or had the chance the use. Also, no-one involved in this study knows what the functionality of the Apple Watch will be or what it will cost. Rather than proving "only" 3-5% of iPhone owners "plan to" purchase the Apple Watch, this study basically shows 3-5% of iPhone owners trust Apple enough to "plan to" purchase a $350-$2000 mystery box because it's a new Apple product. The study may as well have asked if iPhone owners would purchase a new Apple "mystery box" that costs $350 -$2000.
Anyone looking at EV sales, and the sales numbers from the "conventional automobile manufacturers" might want to look at dealership inventory numbers. Tesla doesn't have dealers, and therefore one sale equals one vehicle that will be sold. As I understand it, this isn't true for most automobile manufacturers. http://bit.ly/1whCVsO
http://on.wsj.com/172mjgt
What do you base this statement on?
As I understand it, based on the data I have seen, depending on what model you are ordering, and what country you are in, you may have to wait up to six months for delivery.
http://bit.ly/1uttvad
I'll agree Tesla is not listed as having a "press conference" at the Detroit Auto Show. That still doesn't prove Tesla won't be hosting a press conference at the event, and could simply mean a press conference hasn't been scheduled yet. It could also mean Tesla is planning to host its own event. Furthermore, Elon Musk will be "speaking" at the 2015 Automotive World Congress on January 15th, which coincides with the Detroit Auto Show.
http://bit.ly/1yre4C7
" I interpret this to mean the December quarter is extremely back-end loaded and therefore likely on the weak side."
Your "intrepretation"' lacks any logic and basically goes something like this; Since Tesla hasn't formally announced a press conference, that might include a revealing of the Model 3, you assume demand for the Model S is weak? That's "a bit"of a stretch.
When is the last time Tesla revealed a new vehicle at a "formal press conference"? Never.
Seekingalpha, please delete this article. Tesla is listed as being at the Detroit auto show. The author of this article is 100% misinformed.
@Frank
The last 20% likely takes about as long as the first 80%, implying BMW's "fast chargers" add a maximum of 60-70 miles per hour vs 58 miles per hour for Tesla's detination chargers. Tesla's destination chargers cost ~$1000 each vs. ~$6000 for BMW's.
http://bit.ly/1zMw7U4
One GIGANTIC difference. Daimler's CEO has never said anything about "applying to emigrate to Musk's colony on Mars", but Daimler has said that Daimler's partnership with Tesla remains.
There is a difference between "continuing to lose money" and investing in increasing factory production, and future product development.
@Logical Thought
"Expects to commercialize by 2020". By 2020, Tesla could easily be selling more vehicles than BMW.
Check out my article "Will Tesla Motors Need A Second Factory?", then tell me if you still believe that.
"In my view, barring any production or supply constraints, [Tesla] will eventually meet or surpass the 1.8 million new vehicles BMW sold in 2012"
http://bit.ly/12DF6g7
Also, who's to say Toyota won't partner with Tesla to bring new technology to market?
Check out my article "Tesla Model S Owners Could Realize Amazing Savings", then tell me if you still believe that.
http://seekingalpha.co...
BMW is investing a significant amount of money deploying outdated technology, that BMW isn't personally managing. Tesla is directly handling the deploying and management of its Superchargers, and is building and overseeing the deployment and management of its "destination chargers"
When will the fossil fuel subsidies end?
http://bit.ly/NuX2yH
"In the United States, credible estimates of annual fossil fuel subsidies range from $10 billion to $52 billion annually yet these don’t even include costs borne by taxpayers related to the climate, local environmental, and health impacts of the fossil fuel industry.
Internationally, governments provide at least $775 billion to perhaps $1 trillion annually in subsidies. This figure varies each year, but it is consistently in the hundreds of billions. Greater transparency would allow for more precise figures."
"Roger Stern, an economic geographer at Princeton University says the U.S. has “mis-allocated” — others might say “wasted” — $8 trillion since 1976 protecting the oil flow from the Persian Gulf that fuels much of the global economy."
http://ti.me/L3AEyp
I guess everyone forgot Tesla mentioned this?
"Tesla Aims to Charge Electric Cars in Five Minutes"
http://bit.ly/14e3VNZ
BMW's "fast chargers" are more like Tesla's "destination chargers" (not the same thing as the Superchargers), and will not be handled or maintained by BMW.
http://bit.ly/1rGSc7I
@TFTF
Statement from Toyota:
"There are still possibilities in certain areas of their operations especially in North America where we may find common ground," said the executive, who declined to be named. "It's not like we have severed our ties."
http://reut.rs/1vegal7
Can you show me any complete statement from a specific Daimler or Tesla representative, where the person explicitly states Daimler is not interested in working with Tesla to build future EV models that will have "Tesla Inside"?
http://bit.ly/12nFD5J
http://bit.ly/1vdLctm
Speech by Vice-President Jyrki Katainen, responsible for Jobs, Growth, Investment and Competitiveness
When I wrote that article, TSLA was trading at around $50. Tesla's 52 week high is currently $291, around 3 percent from $300.
"Analyst Simon Moores said Monday via his Benchmark Mineral Intelligence newsletter that construction of the gigafactory is “up to one year ahead of schedule as preparation for the site continued in Q4 2014 at an accelerated pace.”
http://bit.ly/12nt8Hl
It is very irresponsible for any analyst to use "rumors" based on "rumors" related to a "rumored" product that no one has seen to upgrade or downgrade a stock. Any analyst evaluating Apple, who claims they are "pricing in" any growth, or new products that have not been announced should be ashamed of themselves and probably fired for either being incompetent, or outright making stuff up.
The Oxen Groups's thesis assumes Tesla will only sell 90,000 vehicles in 2017. There is no basis for this figure, that is the lowest sales forecast I have seen from anyone.
My sales forecast, that I published earlier this year, unlike this arbitrary 90,000 figure, is based on facts.
http://bit.ly/11Rs8WH
“Because each module within the battery pack is, by design, isolated by fire barriers to limit any potential damage, the fire in the battery pack was contained to a small section in the front of the vehicle.
What's overlooked by most news outlets is that Tesla engineered its battery pack in a way that limits/restricts the severity of a thermal event such as this.
The Model S’ battery pack contains a gel that solidifies when heated to a certain degree. This gel seems to have prevented the thermal event from reaching the rear section of the battery pack. "
http://bit.ly/1e6EvU6