Seeking Alpha

Analysis: Model X to boost Tesla Motors

  • Pacific Crest analyst Brad Erickson thinks Tesla Motors (TSLA +4%) is "attractively valued" when looking at the EV's growth trajectory out to 2016.
  • The investment firm is sticking to a shorter time-frame when making its Tesla analysis, which takes some execution risk off the table with the Gigafactory and Model III launch.
  • Optimism over the Model X will continue to rise, forecasts Erickson.
  • A price target of $316 on TSLA by Pac Crest factors in a valuation of 4X EV/2016 revenue.
From other sites
Comments (53)
  • keefwotspeaksthetroof
    , contributor
    Comments (578) | Send Message
     
    Model X...coming real soon..... send MORE MUNNY!!!
    SNORE......snore....Zz...
    :)
    6 Aug, 12:33 PM Reply Like
  • surferbroadband
    , contributor
    Comments (1713) | Send Message
     
    So why don't you buy some TSLA?

     

    Are you working for the oil companies?
    6 Aug, 02:46 PM Reply Like
  • fiwiki2
    , contributor
    Comments (1994) | Send Message
     
    surferbroadband 12

     

    So why don't you buy some TSLA?

     

    Are you working for the oil companies?******** And there it is !!!!!

     

    If anyone can't understand why Tesla followers are disparaged, there you have it. Tesladites have squared off, " us against them". Most are looney leftist, that just can't deal with reality, that fossil fuels will provide the vast majority of world energy for any foreseeable future. 2017, 2020, 2050, batteries aren't going to be the answer to the question !!!
    6 Aug, 03:00 PM Reply Like
  • Stephen Pace
    , contributor
    Comments (451) | Send Message
     
    @fiwiki2 Fair enough, but as long as you admit that there are an equal number of green hating, climate change denying, obsessive kooks on the other side. @keefwotspeaksthetroof is just a retired engineer who thinks Elon is a con artist and knows better than Elon how to build a rocket and electric vehicles, because, you know, Keef was an engineer and engineers know everything. But any Tesla article linked to by Drudge brings out plenty of the other kind.
    6 Aug, 03:44 PM Reply Like
  • fiwiki2
    , contributor
    Comments (1994) | Send Message
     
    number of green hating, climate change denying, obsessive kooks on the other side.****** the only people that I witness as " green hater" are so only because of " green zealots", using the Climate Change as a political platform to increase taxes and regulations, trample state's rights and sending jobs out of the country, the same ones that want everyone to believe that putting a 'no peeing zone' in a swimming pool is "virtuous and green".
    6 Aug, 04:02 PM Reply Like
  • Nigel D'Souza
    , contributor
    Comments (180) | Send Message
     
    It would be very interesting to see the analyst's DCF model for the $316 target

     

    At 4x EV/Sales @ $316/share would translate into nearly $10 billion annual revenue by 2016.

     

    Tesla's revenue YTD is $1.3 billion. Let's assume $3 billion in revenue for 2014. To hit $10 billion by 2016 that's a 333% increase (or $7 billion+ is 2 years) over 2014.

     

    To top this off, the assumption is 4x EV/Sales which is NOT a cheap valuation measure. Cheap is less than 2x EV/Sales.

     

    What is this analyst smoking??
    6 Aug, 12:41 PM Reply Like
  • Mostapasta
    , contributor
    Comments (30) | Send Message
     
    @Nigel D'Souza
    Elon stated in the last earnings call that they will hit an annual production rate of 100,000 by the end of 2015.

     

    Here is a very rough napkin calculation assuming Tesla doesn't further increase production and there is enough demand:
    4 multiple * 100,000 vehicles * $105,000 ASP / 141,000,000 shares = 297.9
    A little more aggressive hits their target:
    4 multiple * 105,000 vehicles * $106,000 ASP / 141,000,000 shares = 315.7

     

    Sounds crazy, but if Tesla continues at their current path...
    6 Aug, 01:02 PM Reply Like
  • Nigel D'Souza
    , contributor
    Comments (180) | Send Message
     
    A 100,000 Model X/S sales in 2016 is a bit more than optomistic given that we are already seeing stagnation in Model S sales and that Tesla currently is not on track to hit 2014's target of 35k units (Tesla requires a huge Q4 to hit this target).

     

    I mean....what are we doing here gentlemen? Does risk and valuation even matter in this market anymore?
    6 Aug, 01:22 PM Reply Like
  • Mostapasta
    , contributor
    Comments (30) | Send Message
     
    Tesla already has the majority of their forecast for this year reserved. Look at the warranty reserves on their most recent balance sheet (subtract out Model X). The only looming concern is if they will get their production line back up in time to produce enough.
    6 Aug, 01:35 PM Reply Like
  • tech01x
    , contributor
    Comments (723) | Send Message
     
    Mr. D'Souza wrote, "Tesla currently is not on track to hit 2014's target of 35k units (Tesla requires a huge Q4 to hit this target)."

     

    Tesla has re-affirmed their guidance for the year. Therefore, which is more likely... your take on the target or theirs? They have been hitting production targets for quite a while now.

     

    The idea that there is any stagnation in Model S sales is laughable. Production is up and therefore sales are up, since each one built is sold.
    6 Aug, 02:11 PM Reply Like
  • Nigel D'Souza
    , contributor
    Comments (180) | Send Message
     
    @tech01x

     

    Let's change the phrasing a bit.

     

    In order to hit their 35K unit target Tesla requires a huge Q4 of over 12K+ units which is nearly double the units sold in each Q this year.

     

    So Tesla is not on track on a per quarter basis to meet their 2014 target. They require Q4 units to make up for the lag over the first 3 quarters.

     

    So the assumption is that Tesla will ramp from 35K to 100K by 2015 year end. I find that a stretch. You believe otherwise, that's fine, as time will prove one of us right, and one of us wrong.

     

    However, even when assuming 100K sales in 2015, you have to put a 4x EV/Sales multiple for Tesla to be work $300 in 2016. People keep forgetting to discount this to the present with a WACC of 8-10% which works out to $250.

     

    So even with very (x10) aggressive assumptions, the stock price is at its uppper end of a semi-reasonable valuation.
    6 Aug, 02:25 PM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (679) | Send Message
     
    Have posted this elsewhere, but here is a very simple way they hit the numbers based on the other information they have already given us:

     

    Here, to help you understand how they can hit 35,720 (which would give them a cushion of around 600 deliveries).

     

    Let's break this down another way. We have guidance for 9000 produced in Q3. At 800 a week pre-shutdown that would be 2,400 produced. with 8 weeks remaining (factory should be back up as of today), that leaves 6,600 cars to be made, or an average run of 825 a week. Starting Q4 it will be 1K a week, that if you are considering a "drop dead" value to hit the end of year target, using these numbers. Let's say you take delivery on Dec 31st. So Your car will roll off the line Dec 17th. This means their run rate up through that point will be 11.5 weeks at 1k production. So that would be 11,500 from Q4 and 6,600 from now through end of Q3. Total being 18,100 add on the 2,400 pre shutdown and you are looking at around 20,500 cars between now and their last possible date of Dec 17th to make a car hit before the end of the year. Throw in the "produced but not delivered" cars from Q2 as an additional 1,184 cars; bringing the value up to 21,684 total potential deliveries before the end of the year.

     

    Total deliveries up to the end of Q2: 14,036
    Potential Deliveries for 2H: 21,684
    Total Potential Deliveries by year end: 35,720

     

    Keep in mind I am suggesting using their provided guidance for Q3 to extrapolate the 825 a week from the time the factory started back up to the end of the quarter. We don't know when they will go to 1k a week exactly, but it will be before the end of Q3. All they need to do is average 825 to hit their target which should be really easy.
    6 Aug, 03:49 PM Reply Like
  • Stephen Pace
    , contributor
    Comments (451) | Send Message
     
    @Nigel D'Souza Is your question that Tesla will have an issue selling the cars to meet their target? Or making them? Making them is taken care of by the second line and additional improvements that have just been enabled. Selling them is just not an issue. Perhaps you didn't hear the tone of Elon's answer on this last call when he repeated his mantra, "Demand is not an issue." 35k vehicle is a tiny, tiny amount into the global automotive market. I stopped by my local Tesla store this past Saturday and you would be very surprised at the number of people doing test drives and talking about the car they just ordered. I also live by the service center and cars are arriving by the car carrier load. Tesla isn't going to have an issue selling 60k Model S per year, much less 35k. And they haven't even started traditional advertising yet!
    6 Aug, 03:53 PM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (679) | Send Message
     
    Also Elon has addressed the demand question many, many times. I swear I thought he was going to lose his mind this conference call in how many times he was trying to explain to people that demand is not the issue. The terms they were throwing around was that, if needed, they have a demand button they can start to press to get more numbers.

     

    This is why they are not focused on building out more stores but rather service centers, because they aren't trying to get new customers, they are trying to manage the ones they already have.

     

    And with waittimes up over 3 months for a US customer (it is 4-5 additional weeks for international) and customers throwing tools through windshields over the displeasure of having the already long wait time, they don't want to drive up the sales any further because they are hugely production constrained.

     

    Then take into account that there is already high demand for the Model X and noone even has a price or product to really set their eyes on, and sales deflects people away from the product and onto the Model S, and it is easy to see how they will get at least as many customers per year out of that product (maybe more) when compared to the S.

     

    So it is pretty easy to say that Model S global demand is *at least* 50k and Model X global demand is going to *at least* match that... and we arrive with the conclusion that 100k a year is still potentially not going to tap all of the demand...
    6 Aug, 03:57 PM Reply Like
  • Nigel D'Souza
    , contributor
    Comments (180) | Send Message
     
    @chicken @stephen

     

    We are having two completely different conversations here.

     

    I'm talking about valuation and both of you are writing essays on the ability to meet production targets.

     

    Here's what I am saying. Even assuming Tesla can hit 100K units in 2016, the stock is already pricing that in at $250/share.

     

    Now, I believe 100K is optomistic but this is irrelevant. Let's not waste each others time by arguing about demand. Time will prove one of us right.

     

    Again, my point is that Tesla is already trading at the high end of its valuation even when assuming it will hit an aggressive target of 100K units in 2016 (And please try to resist arguing about whether the target is aggressive or reasonable. That's not the point!!!)
    6 Aug, 04:10 PM Reply Like
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (1488) | Send Message
     
    @Nigel writes: """""I mean....what are we doing here gentlemen? Does risk and valuation even matter in this market anymore?"""""

     

    Nope! At least, not yet. But I have the popcorn and pretzels handy to watch how this saga plays out!

     

    I remember fondly the dot.com era... anyone else? History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes.
    6 Aug, 05:09 PM Reply Like
  • Mr. Cat
    , contributor
    Comments (159) | Send Message
     
    Dear Chickensevil, brilliant job. Thanks for the maths which has given faith to those doubted and erase any sound argument from those blindly denying or paid against the guidance of delivery. When tesla has kept beating it's own guidance for all past Q, why not just keep following.....
    6 Aug, 06:35 PM Reply Like
  • mjklimek
    , contributor
    Comments (53) | Send Message
     
    @Occam's_Razor,
    A lot of successful companies came out of the dot.com era.
    Amazon, E-Bay, Shutterfly to name a few.
    11 Aug, 11:59 AM Reply Like
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (1488) | Send Message
     
    Hello mjklimek: I just pulled up a chart of AMZN, EBAY going back to 1995. Can you guess what the stocks you mentioned have in common?

     

    Amazon, for example, is still below the high reached in December of 1998. In other words, right now it's about 40 points BELOW where it traded over 16 years ago! Don't take my word for it... just pull up a chart.

     

    Ebay traded at 354.25 in March of 1999; guess where it's at right now?.... How about $53.88/share. Again, anyone reading this, just pull up a chart.

     

    Thank you for helping me make my point more succinctly.

     

    One final note. I love Tesla the brand (Elon is PT Barnum, however) and nows how to manipulate. I, myself, drive an electric car and I see the potential. However, I do not agree with the valuation. That certainly doesn't mean I believe Tesla in not viable as a company.

     

    I wish every one luck who is trading this beast with Options (as I am).

     

    Peace.
    11 Aug, 05:29 PM Reply Like
  • mjklimek
    , contributor
    Comments (53) | Send Message
     
    @Occam's_Razor,
    Your point has been well made and taken.
    I am just noting that some good companies came out of the dot.com era and all was not lost despite 90% of the companies no longer exist.

     

    I know you were making a point on TSLA's valuation.
    I too, think the stock is trading way ahead of itself, but not complaining.
    I have a stop-loss set to protect my gain in my long position. No options trading for me.

     

    Many fortunes gained and lost with the dot.coms companies and TSLA.
    Hope you are on the right side of the market.

     

    Good talk
    12 Aug, 09:10 AM Reply Like
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (1488) | Send Message
     
    @mjklimek: Good luck with your Long position. FWIW, I think TSLA probably trades north of 300, before it settles back to reality. But that probably put me in the contrarian camp.
    12 Aug, 05:43 PM Reply Like
  • David at Imperial Beach
    , contributor
    Comments (4205) | Send Message
     
    Pacific Crest's methodology is not a reasonable way to look at this company. Why would you assign a valuation of 4X EV/2016 revenue when other auto companies are being valued at much lower multiples? You should only do so because Tesla offers substantial upside potential going out many years beyond 2016. Tesla is currently on course to double capacity several times between now and 2020. And even then, they will have only about .5% of the overall market so they will have lots of growing room out at least to 2030.
    6 Aug, 12:42 PM Reply Like
  • Nigel D'Souza
    , contributor
    Comments (180) | Send Message
     
    Even if you assign a higher multiple you have to look at the implied revenue.

     

    Let's say we assign a multiple of 10x EV/Rev @ $316 in 2016. This results in an implied revenue of $4 billion. Tesla is on track to hit $3 billion this year. This leaves $1 billion in sales which has to be driven by the Model X.

     

    Just keep in mind that 10x EV/Sales is an enormous multiple. 4x EV/Sales is reasonable given the risk and competition Tesla faces in the auto industry. But since we're in a raging bull market reasonable multiples go out the window.

     

    Also, keep in mind that 4x EV/Sales means you are paying at least 4 times more for Tesla than any other player in the auto industry.
    6 Aug, 12:54 PM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (679) | Send Message
     
    What crazy math are you doing?

     

    100k cars * $100k ASP = 10B in revenue not 4... which a 4x off of that makes them a $40B company. That would be $283 a share. 100k cars is the absolute bottom for 2016. They said they could reasonably push up to 150k-200k cars before Panasonic would be fully tapped out without building the gigafactory, so 150k cars * $100k ASP = 15B. A 4x multiple would put them at a $60B value which translates to $425 a share. These are not difficult numbers here... But I don't actually see them hitting 150k cars in 2016, might be a little too optimistic.
    6 Aug, 04:04 PM Reply Like
  • Nigel D'Souza
    , contributor
    Comments (180) | Send Message
     
    Here's the math:

     

    Diluted share count from Google Finance = 124.25 million shares

     

    Market Cap assuming $316 a share target = 316 x 124.25M = $39.26 Billion (We will make market cap = enterprise value since net debt is neglible)

     

    Assign a 10x EV/Sales multiple to a $39 billion market cap requires sales of ~$4 billion.

     

    $4 billion is the implied revenue required for the stock to be worth $316 using a 10x Ev/Sales multiple

     

    The analyst in the article uses a 4x EV/Sales revenue which requires an implied revenue of ~$10 billion

     

    My point is simple. The stock has already priced in 100k unit sales when it trades at $250.
    7 Aug, 09:40 AM Reply Like
  • Nigel D'Souza
    , contributor
    Comments (180) | Send Message
     
    @chicken

     

    another quick point.

     

    Even assuming they hit the 100K units in 2016 that yields a share price of $283. Most people forget the second step here of discounting this price to the present.

     

    Using a modest required rate of return of 8%; a $283 share price in 2016 is worth $243 today.

     

    So by your own math, Tesla is currently priced above the 100K unit valuation when using a 4x EV/Sales multiple.
    7 Aug, 11:50 AM Reply Like
  • chipdoctor
    , contributor
    Comments (914) | Send Message
     
    Wouldn't it be prudent to know the final price of the Model X before making silly stock predictions?
    6 Aug, 12:54 PM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (679) | Send Message
     
    It is physically larger and has two motors, it will be *at least* the cost of the Model S, maybe more. Noone I know of, whether customer or investor thinks the X will be cheaper.
    6 Aug, 04:15 PM Reply Like
  • rkw29
    , contributor
    Comments (160) | Send Message
     
    The model X and it being wildly successful beyond any expectations is already priced in. As is the fabled affordable model.
    6 Aug, 01:02 PM Reply Like
  • pat1000
    , contributor
    Comments (508) | Send Message
     
    rkw

     

    Assuming there are no kinks in the model X it will quickly become the most popular SUV or whatever genre it falls into----
    The demand for it will knock the socks off any previous new car in history----
    The beauty is we can all go along for the ride---By way of the stock or owning the car---
    6 Aug, 01:30 PM Reply Like
  • rkw29
    , contributor
    Comments (160) | Send Message
     
    Model X sales will likely cannibalize Model S sales as everyone will want the new one to show off instead of the older model. Lets face it. Most people who buy a Tesla are those who want to make a statement. They will sell well I'm sure, but Tesla will still be losing money GAAP. When you are a fad, you should be making money, not losing it.
    6 Aug, 01:45 PM Reply Like
  • skibbi
    , contributor
    Comments (57) | Send Message
     
    lulz

     

    "The demand for it will knock the socks off any previous new car in history--"
    6 Aug, 01:51 PM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (4954) | Send Message
     
    "Assuming there are no kinks in the model X it will quickly become the most popular SUV or whatever genre it falls into"

     

    Do you know the sales numbers of popular SUVs? I doubt it if you make such statements.

     

    TSLA probably won't even beat the sales of expensive SUVs like the Porsche Cayenne or Macan for years to come.

     

    Porsche sold 84k Cayenne units in 2013 and it's hardly a volume SUV maker (that was even without the new popular Macan coming in 2014!):

     

    http://bit.ly/X3rhok

     

    Other SUV makers sell a lot more compared to Porsche.
    7 Aug, 01:41 AM Reply Like
  • nwdiver
    , contributor
    Comments (313) | Send Message
     
    What ever happened to John Peterson? I miss him... he always made me laugh...
    6 Aug, 01:30 PM Reply Like
  • John Mazza
    , contributor
    Comments (6) | Send Message
     
    People believe in Tesla, and that's why it will succeed.
    6 Aug, 01:49 PM Reply Like
  • PH.D
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    Hallelujah,
    Tesla is running a car business, not a religion. If belief and hope pays the bread and wine of the parson, it won't finance any dividends or buybacks (except through indulgences but Telsa's hype is not there yet).
    6 Aug, 02:16 PM Reply Like
  • rkw29
    , contributor
    Comments (160) | Send Message
     
    WWJB. What Would Jesus Buy?
    6 Aug, 02:37 PM Reply Like
  • surferbroadband
    , contributor
    Comments (1713) | Send Message
     
    Jesus would buy a Model 3.

     

    Jesus was a frugal man and only need what is necessary to get to the next hilltop to give another sermon.
    6 Aug, 02:49 PM Reply Like
  • James Peartree
    , contributor
    Comments (96) | Send Message
     
    Jesus never existed. Its the biggest con of all times. http://bit.ly/V0CUe3
    As Carlin said, as far as bullsh*t goes, a businessman cannot hold a candle to a reverend or a priest. They have the greatest bs story of all times.
    7 Aug, 09:43 AM Reply Like
  • Doc's Trading
    , contributor
    Comments (1300) | Send Message
     
    TSLA... Modification on stop loss of short taken at 243: stop loss was 250.22....add "on closing only" to this stop.
    more later.....
    6 Aug, 01:54 PM Reply Like
  • pat1000
    , contributor
    Comments (508) | Send Message
     
    Doc

     

    Just out of curiosity if you are willing to cover a short to prevent a further loss why would it not be prudent to go long at the same time????
    6 Aug, 02:12 PM Reply Like
  • Seekinggreatwealth
    , contributor
    Comments (45) | Send Message
     
    Just want to Thank Elon for improving my net worth and paying my fair share in taxes, i'm hoping Elon runs for POTUS, i know he can't becuz he was not born in the USA, i would suggest another exception be made except this guy will make a difference.
    6 Aug, 03:13 PM Reply Like
  • stir krazy
    , contributor
    Comments (24) | Send Message
     
    TSLA, love the car and Company, hate the stock. Overvalued and too far ahead of itself at this time. A mountain of obstacles to negotiate. A slip at any of them will crush the stock as it is priced for perfection.I'll buy after the fall.
    6 Aug, 07:55 PM Reply Like
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (1488) | Send Message
     
    Lots of superlatives in the news today coming from none other than Elon's buddy at Morgan Stanley. Mr. Jonas really spouted out the praises today. Oh where, oh where do we go from here????
    6 Aug, 08:12 PM Reply Like
  • spike01
    , contributor
    Comments (10) | Send Message
     
    In 15 months Tesla has gone from a $60 stock to where it is today. Let's count the mind fields and hand grenades. Bogus fire blame, can't open up stores because dealers of America nonsense, oil company lobbyist, a fat governor who double crossed Mr. Musk. You know what "haters" thank you because Elon Musk and Tesla aren't going away and all you valuation experts, we'll keep on figuring! Just once haters why not grill Mary Barra and GM, like she had zero clue what was going on. Tesla has 1 slip up and people yell for the safety board on the safest car made today, GM hides crap for years and everyone plays dumb. Thanks ,see you at $300
    6 Aug, 10:02 PM Reply Like
  • Frank Greenhalgh
    , contributor
    Comments (1842) | Send Message
     
    The model X has some disadvantages. Its Falcon doors do not allow a roof rack and it's priced about twice that of a fully equipped Jeep ICE. The front wheel drive will change the handling. No trailer hitch and less range than the Model S. There are less than 20,000 preorders, and the prototype isn't out yet and deliveries will start in mid 2015?
    Go Beta Testers.
    7 Aug, 07:53 AM Reply Like
  • TheBanker
    , contributor
    Comments (1343) | Send Message
     
    Prototype of what? I've seen a MX on tv with Musk standing next to it.

     

    Who cares about the preorders when the price hasn't even been fully disclosed?

     

    You really ran out of BS to complain about lately? You can do better than that.

     

    The AWD will improve the handling so what the hell are you talking about acting as if FWD will hurt the performance?

     

    Are you saying there is no possibility to add a trailer hitch after purchasing the model x? Have you gotten under one to see if they can be installed?

     

    Nice FUD so early in the morning. You don't have better things to do with your retirement days?
    7 Aug, 10:36 AM Reply Like
  • Frank Greenhalgh
    , contributor
    Comments (1842) | Send Message
     
    Just because Musk stood next to a model doesn't mean it is ready to ship.
    Detroit takes about three years testing Musk does it in days?
    If Tesla doesn't offer a trailer it may be tough to attach another hitch. Also with a trailer your Range indicator would be screwed up.
    The AWD will probably improve handling but balancing the regen brakes and extra weight on the front wheels will change the handling.
    Someone has to add some negative objectivity to the mix.
    7 Aug, 11:17 AM Reply Like
  • chipdoctor
    , contributor
    Comments (914) | Send Message
     
    Testing? We do not no stinking testing (sorry for the Blazing Saddles shameless copy).

     

    It clear that with all the hype that people will buy whatever crap we give them and at ridiculous prices. Not testing helps our profit margin and give me a higher stock price. We can always fix it in the field, and by then, we will have even a newer better model coming out to continue the hype.

     

    Our customers are idiots though I am glad to profit from them. Give them some Tesla Kool-aid, an overpriced vehicle with limited range, a belief that we are better than those oil burners cars and stock escalation and they will promote our story to everyone....
    7 Aug, 11:33 AM Reply Like
  • TheBanker
    , contributor
    Comments (1343) | Send Message
     
    You got the negative part right but no objectivity. You claim AWD will change the performance but clearly neglected to state that it will improve performance until challenged on that point. With AWD you will be able to hit the accelerator and not spin the tires nearly as much. You will be able to accelerate much faster out of a corner without losing control. Let's not forget about actually STAYING ON THE ROAD in a snowstorm without killing yourself. Maybe you'll even avoid getting stuck in the mud with all tires helping?

     

    I saw a video of Musk getting in and out of the Model X. They have already built one at least. How do you know they aren't testing it right now???

     

    Who cares about the range indicator being 100% accurate while pulling a trailer? Anyone that pulls a trailer knows their range is going to drop. When 100 miles driven reduces the range by 120 you'll know the trailer is reducing your mileage by 20%. Don't pull a trailer if you're not smart enough to figure out basic math.
    7 Aug, 11:43 AM Reply Like
  • fseminario
    , contributor
    Comments (53) | Send Message
     
    same reduction in range for pulling a trailer happens for ICE too. The only current and temporary downside I see is the availability for charging locations. I have noticed a there is a large general assumption by the naysayers that everything is fixed (charger locations) and their will be no increase in locations in the near future. This is the argument they use to bash this aspect.

     

    Tesla has so far delivered and all charger expectations...why start to doubt them now? By end of 2014 charger locations, I think, are expected to double.
    7 Aug, 11:54 AM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (4954) | Send Message
     
    As I had mentioned in earlier comments, I find it curious TSLA is still mum on the X price. With AWW, falcon doors and additional weight/material input I'm not sure the X will be "only" up to 10% more expensive than a similar S (as TSLA promised).

     

    The SUV market is very competitive with new high-end SUVs from Volvo, BMW and Porsche (many of those also available in PHEV variants) are coming in 2014-2015.

     

    The Porsche Macan and Cayenne PHEV look especially promising and could be cheaper than the X. The Macan starts at just $50k (!), for example.

     

    The other question is S vs X cannibalization (if the S gains AWD one day and with all the delays in X delivery since 2013).
    7 Aug, 12:20 PM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (4954) | Send Message
     
    * typo: "With AWD..."
    7 Aug, 12:51 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector