asg70 wrote: .... ad hom...
You too can make posts that actually contain facts instead of just ad homs, asg/mos/ennui.
Why not try it?
Who knows....it might even lead to actual conversations.
Cheers!
asg70 wrote: .... ad hom...
mousepad wrote:Outcast_Searcher wrote:dolanbaker wrote:Car transporter companies probably need to reevaluate the loadings on their vehicles and carry one car less to avoid the possible overloading that is causing the brakes to overheat.
That's a point worth considering. I suppose it matters how how much margin such trucks are designed for. And perhaps the expected terrain for the delivery. Typical Indiana terrain is far different than, say, a Rocky Mountain pass.
You'd think such things should be obvious to a trucking company, but with the tendency to maximize profit and minimize employee pay (where the perception is it "won't matter") to get that profit -- perhaps not.
What about drivers who actually know how to drive a truck?
You know, jake brake, and shifting to lower gears when going down a mountain pass. The good old skill of actually driving a truck.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:mousepad wrote:
What about drivers who actually know how to drive a truck?
You know, jake brake, and shifting to lower gears when going down a mountain pass. The good old skill of actually driving a truck.
Are you implying that such skill means weight won't impact brake performance? Yeah, things like engine braking (by using a lower gear) will help -- it even helps with an automatic in a sedan -- but that doesn't mean things like the weight of the cargo doesn't matter.
mousepad wrote:Outcast_Searcher wrote:mousepad wrote:
What about drivers who actually know how to drive a truck?
You know, jake brake, and shifting to lower gears when going down a mountain pass. The good old skill of actually driving a truck.
Are you implying that such skill means weight won't impact brake performance? Yeah, things like engine braking (by using a lower gear) will help -- it even helps with an automatic in a sedan -- but that doesn't mean things like the weight of the cargo doesn't matter.
A skilled driver understands his load and he understands the limits of his truck. You can feel when brakes are pushed too far, because they loose effectiveness. A skilled driver knows how to listen to the little things the machine tells him.
Coasting down on high gear from a mountain pass while constantly braking is surely going to set any brakes on fire. Even car brakes can be made to glow red in such situations.
It all comes down to how skilled you are a the job you do.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:Weight certainly matters.
The competition is going to just keep accumulating relentlessly.
asg70 wrote:I have to admit that I have stopped watching every move with Tesla. I thought they were near death when all of its executive started fleeing and its stock tanked but they seem to be able to limp onward like a zombie.
tita wrote:asg70 wrote:I have to admit that I have stopped watching every move with Tesla. I thought they were near death when all of its executive started fleeing and its stock tanked but they seem to be able to limp onward like a zombie.
There was quite a slowdown this year, but Tesla managed to keep sales numbers up, introducing gradually cheaper variants and lowering prices of the more expensive variants. Anyway, Model S/X sales plunged while Model 3 sales increased. Also, Tesla cut costs wherever they could.
Each quarter seems like a challenge. Now, Tesla must reach 106k deliveries in Q4 to reach lower guidance. So far, Tesla lost $1.1 billions in the first two quarters and is expected to show a loss in Q3.
The major things this year was the fundraising of over $2 billions and the financing of the Shanghai Factory by Chinese lendors.
As long as investors throw money, there is no reason for Tesla to fail.
BBC wrote:Tesla has been added to the Chinese government's list of approved car manufacturers according to a list published by the ministry of industry and information technology.
The electric carmaker intends to produce at least 1,000 Model 3s a week from its Shanghai factory by the end of this year.
EdwinSm wrote:I guess this is good news for the beleaguered company, if they can reach the numbers hoped for.BBC wrote:Tesla has been added to the Chinese government's list of approved car manufacturers according to a list published by the ministry of industry and information technology.
The electric carmaker intends to produce at least 1,000 Model 3s a week from its Shanghai factory by the end of this year.
[The quote was from the "Live Business report" so any link might be old by the time you read this]
asg70 wrote:I think the competition right now is equivalent to nipping at Tesla's heels. It's going to take a while for the competition to reach critical mass, with VW group being the biggest contender.
Volvo has a new XC40 EV coming out as well which has the overall guts of Polestar 2. I don't know the dimensions of it but it doesn't look a hell of a lot bigger than the Kona but it takes 78kwh to achieve 200+ mile range. Poor efficiency, but it has twice the HP and a frunk, faster DC charging, google onboard and ota updates. Overall it looks like a competent vehicle but all the offerings at present have their pros and cons. I do think Hyundai and Kia did a great job achieving the efficiency they did on the Kona and Niro despite their conventional shape. This XC40 and Audi eTron are the equivalent of gas-guzzlers in comparison.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50159963Tesla shares have surged to their highest levels since February, after it told investors that manufacturing at its Chinese factory and plans for its next model were ahead of schedule.
The firm also reported an unexpected profit of $143m (£110.7m) for the three months to 30 September.
That beat forecasts, but was down more than 50% from a year earlier.
Shares in the electric carmaker jumped by more than 17% in after-hours trade to about $300 apiece.
Tesla has struggled with years of losses, fuelling investor doubts and casting a shadow over the shares in recent years.
The firm has yet to turn an annual profit, although it recorded positive results in the final two quarters of 2018.
Tesla's Surprise Profit Conceals Deteriorating Fundamentals* On Oct. 23, Tesla reported a surprise profit for the third quarter of 2019.
* The profit was largely attributed to efficiency gains and cost reductions, but the scale of the sequential change looks improbable.
* A deeper dive into the financials shows that the profit came thanks to a mix of deferred revenue recognition, elevated regulatory credit sales, throttled-back capex, and stretched payables.
* Tesla showed year-over-year declines to auto margins, revenues, and net income; that is not a healthy trend for a company priced for growth.
* It appears that Tesla pulled out all the stops to engineer a profitable quarter, but the underlying problems facing the business remain; sustainable profitability remains very much in doubt.
On the surface, it appears that Tesla bulls have much to crow about. Virtually no one expected a profit, after all. However, upon a closer inspection of the financial results reported in Tesla's Q3 update letter, it is clear that the profit was largely ephemeral. Indeed, Tesla appears to be far from "financially self-sustaining", despite CEO Elon Musk's latest boasts.
However, the rosy profit picture starts to wilt almost immediately upon deeper inspection. Consider the top line: Tesla brought in $6.3 billion in revenue, which was a sequential decline from Q2, in addition to falling below analysts' expectations. But, if the top line did not grow, how did Tesla make a profit?
Diving Deeper
by stretching payables and expanding accrued liabilities, Tesla was able to keep more than $200 million in negative cash flow from trickling into its other financial statements. Netting out just this maneuver would see Tesla's GAAP positive income turn into a loss. Moreover, virtually all of Tesla's expanded cash balance can be accounted for by its growing debt.
Coming Up for Air
At this point, it is abundantly clear that Tesla has manufactured another "miracle quarter" in much the same fashion that it did in Q3 and Q4 of 2018. Stretching payables, slashing capex, adjusting depreciation, recognizing deferred revenue, and cashing in piles of regulator credits can help create the appearance of profitability. However, they are not sustainable maneuvers. Tesla has suffered a significant year-over-year decline on both top and bottom lines.
That is the real crux of the challenge facing Tesla. Though the company has managed to engineer another profit thanks to a number of accounting gimmicks and one-off maneuvers, it could not come anywhere near its performance of the same period last year. That is a very bad sign for a company with a market capitalization of about $50 billion.
Investor's Eye View
The market is not valuing Tesla as an automaker with wafer-thin margins and occasional profitability; it is valuing Tesla on the basis of massive top line and bottom line growth over the next few years. That Q3 profit does not look too great when viewed in this light.
Investors hoping for Tesla to grow into its already-eye-watering valuation must ask themselves how it can achieve its promised growth goals in light of year-over-year declines to top and bottom lines, sequential decline in revenues, and the visible absence of any meaningful growth capex.
Plantagenet wrote:I wouldn’t be surprised to see TESLA issue more stock, now that they have reported a good quarter.
Thats been their pattern for the last several years. The company loses huge amounts of money quarter after quarter until their cash reserves run low ——— then they report a sudden huge shift to the upside ——- then they issue billions in new stock ———- then when the new issue is sold out they go back to losing money and teetering towards disaster again
Cheers
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 218 guests