Seeking Alpha

JRP3

JRP3
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View JRP3's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Tesla's New $120,000 Flagship Matches The $61,000 Dodge [View article]
    "Its really up to you to show evidence that the range ICE cars fail as badly as the Tesla in hot weather, cold weather, high speed, and hilly areas."

    Please quote where I said that? Of course you can't, because it never happened. I'll quote what I actually said, and you can try and figure out the rather obvious difference:

    "Everyone knows that range is always variable in all vehicles."

    As usual you try and create something out of nothing, and as usual you fail.
    Oct 28 09:27 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla's 'D', A Disappointment And Huge Financial Risk [View article]
    They don't seem to know much about building EV's however.
    Oct 28 09:19 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Motors discloses sales growth for September in North America [View news story]
    Probably because it's so much fun to watch the shorts spit and sputter about it. Why give up that source of amusement?
    Oct 28 09:13 AM | 15 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Motors discloses sales growth for September in North America [View news story]
    How many years have you and others been saying the exact same thing?
    Oct 28 09:10 AM | 11 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla's New $120,000 Flagship Matches The $61,000 Dodge [View article]
    I love it when Tom claims victory after being soundly defeated. Of course I never said Teslas have "serious range issues", just as I've never claimed that range is not variable. Everyone knows that range is always variable in all vehicles. That is a fact, and I deal with facts, not fantasies. Your job of spreading FUD is indeed done, and doomed to fail from the beginning.
    Oct 27 08:43 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla's 'D', A Disappointment And Huge Financial Risk [View article]
    Even if the cars fetch "poor" prices it's not going to create large losses.
    Oct 27 08:39 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla's 'D', A Disappointment And Huge Financial Risk [View article]
    "I would also anticipate that by 2017, the guaranteed buyback amount for that time period will be significantly greater than $109 million."

    I expect by 2017 the lease/loan buyback program will have ended, since traditional leases are already becoming available.

    http://yhoo.it/1rvpUWK
    Oct 27 08:36 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla's New $120,000 Flagship Matches The $61,000 Dodge [View article]
    Sorry tommy, I've already torn you apart so badly that you're the one trying to change the parameters, as usual. I've never pretended that car doesn't have less range in extreme conditions, all vehicles suffer in those conditions. I'm only pointing out the fact that most owners have no issues getting 200+ miles most of the time.
    Oct 26 09:18 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla's 'D', A Disappointment And Huge Financial Risk [View article]
    "About 10% of Tesla's were "leased" in the first 6 months of 2014. That is a material amount, even if you call it a small percentage."

    It is in fact a small percentage.

    "Tesla non-GAAP Net Income for the same time frame was was $33.16 million. $109 million in buyback guarantees was included in that non-GAAP Net Income as best as I can determine. So, a return rate of just 30% (30% OF $109 MILLION) would ESSENTIALLY wipe out all n0n-GAAP Net Income..."

    That's only if you buy into your scenario that the buy back will only be a drain on Tesla and ignore the fact that those cars are valuable assets that will be sold again. I don't think we need to have that argument again since neither of us is going to change our opinions on that one. Not to mention Tesla's Net Income in 2017 is going to be far greater, so it will in fact have no material effect on the company.
    Oct 26 09:07 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla's 'D', A Disappointment And Huge Financial Risk [View article]
    You still don't understand that only a small percentage of Model S's were purchased under the loan buy back agreement, and that buy back offer doesn't come into effect until 3 years after purchase? Not to mention that most of those upgrading to the D were former P85 and P85+ owners, not people likely to worry about the loan buy back program. They're just selling them on the open market. Finally, a RWD vehicle with the performance, looks, and efficiency of a Model S will never become obsolete in it's lifetime. Bottom line, no material effect on Tesla, as I've always said.
    Oct 25 09:14 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is Cadillac's ELR A Tesla Competitor? Maybe [View article]
    "Ford CEO Mark Fields says the company has the expertise and ability to build a Tesla-style full-size, high-tech, high-performance, long-range electric vehicle."

    Actually they don't, because part of ability is will and desire, and they have neither. I also question their expertise to build such an EV since they have never demonstrated such. More importantly, what does it say that Ford has to defend itself for failing to compete directly with the upstart Tesla?
    Oct 25 09:00 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla's New $120,000 Flagship Matches The $61,000 Dodge [View article]
    "Full speed, in all weather, just like a real car."

    I never drive a car at full speed, in any weather. Try again.

    "Consumer Reports got 176 miles."

    From the article you linked:
    "With 240 miles on the car's range indicator,"

    Guess what? Just as I said previously, that's not a full charge.

    " we heed Tesla's advice against charging for "max range" due to the adverse effect on battery life, as any other owner would, and charge in "standard" mode."

    No, any other owner would know that using the charge timer to make sure that a full range charge is completed only a bit before driving limits the time the pack sits at higher voltage, and limits any negative impact on the pack. They would also know that if they need a full charge they should get a full charge.

    Notice the 381 wh/mi energy use display in the pictures. 381 x 177 miles = 67.437kWh's, far short of the 85kWh pack capacity. The car was not fully charged.

    Tom wrote:
    "You know, the sub 200 mile numbers for the 85 kwh battery that testers from Consumers and other car mags got?"

    Tom also wrote"
    "Car and Driver got 211."

    So 211 is "sub 200"?

    "And here's a rather humorous article from Motor Trend on how to actually get your kind of numbers:"

    Yeah, don't drive in the desert at 101F. As usual, you failed to prove your premise.

    Tommy, next time you come in, you come heavy, or not at all.
    Oct 25 08:54 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla: Why This One Thing Is The Biggest Game Changer Yet [View article]
    Me, and anyone who understands the physics of the entire HFCV system.
    Oct 25 08:05 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Motors: China Update [View article]
    " even when an owner was unaware, some batteries were replaced"

    " Whether the problem was some bad cells, or damaged internal connections, or whatever, the fact that the batteries were replaced means that they were, as far as the owner was concerned, totally degraded"

    Interesting. So as far as the unaware owner was concerned the batteries were totally degraded, they just didn't notice it. I see....
    Oct 25 07:58 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla's New $120,000 Flagship Matches The $61,000 Dodge [View article]
    I know range is always variable, so any range claims within reason can be "true". However without specific notations about charge levels and driving conditions claims of significantly less range than EPA ratings can't be trusted. Quite simply one would need to average more than 400Wh/mi to get less than 200 miles of range from a full charge, and 400Wh/mi means above normal energy consumption for the S.
    Oct 24 09:31 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
7,884 Comments
9,380 Likes