TSLA - Tesla Motors

[gfp]

I don't follow Tesla very closely, but I would say that Elan not wanting to raise capital by selling new equity doesn't mean he won't raise capital by selling new equity or preferred equity.  Adding guys like Larry Ellison to the board will help him make sure there is a billion here, a billion there, when the company is on the line.  It looks at first glance that the market cap of Tesla is still above $50 Billion.  He should sell some equity or a new convertible preferred or whatever they cook up.  I don't think private deals with billionaire friends are cut off.

[Liberty]

I don't know. I'm just saying the chart is showing a huge drop because it doesn't take into account what's going on outside the US. If you had the same chart for "worldwide", it would probably look pretty normal.

 

I also think the general theory is that over time they keep making lower-priced versions of the M3 and sell it to different segments of the market, and then open up a new segment with the Y (smaller electric crossover), and eventually with an electric pickup truck, etc.

 

It'll be hard, and they're usually late on their promises, but I don't think the worldwide market for EVs has suddenly tapped out in a single month.

 

I don`t think that matters much, because to develop new products or factories they need cash, a lot of cash. Where is that coming from? The debt markets are closed for them. The cash balance in the financial statements looks high, but that is only because they pay suppliers at the start of the quarter.  If you look at the interest payments they got on the cash, average cash balance for Q4-2018 was around 1 billion, that`s barely enough to repay the march debt. And payables on the end of last quarter were ~5.5 billion, with just 1 billion in outstanding receivables. If revenue goes down this is not sustainable, because they have to pay suppliers more than they get from customers each month. Negative working capital only works when revenue is going up.

So they have to raise capital, increase revenue by a lot or they are bankrupt sometime in 2019. Either way the stock price will go down.

 

I suspect that Deepak has left because he realized that Elon is again gambling on the future of the company (and doesn`t want to raise equity) but this time the odds are clearly against him. Elon is deep on margin on Tesla stock and his margin call is getting closer every month, because hes probably pledging more stock every month, since he can`t afford to pay the interest. None of his enterprises pay him in cash. You can`t expect him to make unbiased and reasonable decisions. I really like the cars they make, but the company is a mess.

 

And to come back to world wide EV sales, of course that market is growing, but the competition is heating up. The Porsche Taycan and the Jaguar iPace are already grabbing lots of market share from S and X sales worldwide and the model 3 is competing with the LEAF and the KIA e-Niro, which both are a lot cheaper, but offer a similar experience. I watched youtube videos on the "Autopilot" feature from the KIA e-Niro and it looks similar to that of a model 3. The only current advantage TSLA still has is the charger network, but since most people charge at home and charger stations are shooting out of the ground like mushrooms, the advantage diminishes quickly. I think that TSLA has also destroyed its brand value for luxury cars with the model 3 quality, at least i would prefer a car from another company now that i know how bad the quality of their cars really is. (And wait 4-8 weeks for a repair?? no way!)

 

And they just ended their referral program, are they really getting more revenue without this cheap advertising? I think this was part of their success, lots of youtube guys post videos of the greatness of TSLA cars and than add their referral code at the end of the video.

 

That all might be right. Or maybe not. People have been saying this is about to go bankrupt since IPO, so I don't know if they can kick the can down the road a while longer, or actually make structural improvements at some point and fix the biggest issues... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Very little return-on-brain-damage in this name so far. But you never know.

[walt373]

The company badly needs to upgrade the service network and they have big plans for expansion. Yet they have cut capex to the bone and done two layoffs in just the past few months. Employee morale is low as they are living under constant fear of being fired. A raise solves all their problems and would result in minimal dilution. Something is really off here.

[A Dhandho Investor]

More delays for the solar roof:

 

https://buffalonews.com/2019/01/31/david-robinson-for-tesla-more-delays-for-solar-roof/

 

If the South Park Avenue factory is ever going to reach its goal of employing 1,460 people by April 2020, the electric vehicle maker is going to have to sell lots of solar roofs.

 

That's not happening now, and Tesla officials indicated this week that it likely won't happen until sometime later this year, after predicting just three months ago that it would ramp up production in Buffalo by June.

 

Tesla already is facing a huge uphill climb to meet its employment goal – or face a $41.2 million penalty from the state. The plant employed about 800 people before Tesla's 7 percent company-wide job cut last month. But it needs to increase employment there by more than 80 percent in the next 14 months to avoid triggering the penalty – assuming state officials try to impose it.

 

Another article regarding the Buffalo plant:

https://www.wivb.com/news/investigates/former-tesla-workers-paint-grim-picture-of-buffalo-plant/1754568826

 

In November, Tesla gave the media its first glimpse inside the Buffalo factory.

 

Employees described it as a “dog and pony” show that was planned by Tesla for over a month. They said Tesla had walls built to hide unused equipment and blocked off large areas.

 

The tour was an extremely controlled event, with the company picking employees to speak with reporters and not letting cameras inside. Footage recorded by Tesla was provided to television outlets like News 4.

 

“It was all fabricated for show,” Witherell said.

 

“There was no actual production that day so some of the teams in their specific area were instructed to make sure they looked busy and they actually were working on the same module over and over again.”

 

Around the time of the tour, Tesla and state officials announced that 800 people work at the plant; 400 by Tesla and 400 by Panasonic, which manufactures solar cells there.

 

Some workers disputed that Tesla employs 400 people.

 

“If you took all of our shifts, there are about 50 people, maybe 60 people at best per shift, there are four shifts,” Scott said.

 

“You do the math. Are you going to tell me there are 200 people up in the front office?”

 

News 4 Investigates requested through the Freedom of Information law the job numbers at Tesla’s Buffalo plant

 

After three months passed without any documents, News 4 appealed to the state. Only then did the state provide two sheets of paper that showed employment numbers by quarter for both Tesla and Panasonic, including workers employed elsewhere in the state by Tesla. The documents did not state how the state insures the job data is accurate.

 

But the data only showed job numbers for each quarter through the end of 2017, when Tesla employed 188 workers and Panasonic employed 279 workers at the facility.

 

When News 4 asked why the job numbers did not reflect what Tesla and the state had been reporting in late 2018, a state official said they did not have the data.

 

“Tesla is required to provide employee numbers annually (broken down by quarter).  The 2018 numbers will not be reported until early 2019,” said Patricia Bucklin, vice president of Administration for Fuller Management Corporation, by email.

 

Tesla refused to provide News 4 with the 2018 job data – information that is important because Tesla can face financial penalties for failing to meet job goals.

[Leverage Capabilities]

Tesla acquiring Maxwell Technologies for $4.75 / share (all stock)

 

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/maxwell-technologies-announces-definitive-merger-agreement-with-tesla-inc-300788804.html

[A Dhandho Investor]

Someone from the bear camp that knows more about the company:

https://twitter.com/boriquagato/status/1092447227040063488

 

this deal makes zero sense as a fold in acq.  i know $MXWL well.  it was a one time fraudy promote that has been in cash incineration purgatory with flat revs, declining margins, and serial cap raises for 5 years.  the CEO, fink, is a caretaker check casher.  there's no real tech

 

even if the tech was meaningful, it wud take YEARS to integrate commercial designs.  it's mostly power storage tech for spec apps.  they have no auto revs nor any obvs crossover with tesla storage.

 

they do have a deal w geely for hybrids.  hard to see that standing up post deal.

 

they do have one short term asset that could be of use, not as a product, but as a pump.  that asset is this "dry battery electrode" tech.  this is the classic MXWL pump.  they have been claiming to have a "breakthru" tech of one sort or another for 15 years.  has not happened.

 

Another analysis:

https://www.pivotalcapitalresearch.com/home/tesla-acquires-maxwell-technologies-buyout-bailout-or

 

Tesla paid a huge premium for a struggling company on the verge of bankruptcy. The technology they acquired in the deal is going to require significant capex to develop and produce and it just so happens that 20% of the company was owned by the Chinese Government. They announced this deal the Monday after CFO Deepak Ahuja announced his departure in the final 4 minutes of the Q4 2018 earnings call, which raises more questions that I won't get to today. Was this deal part of a kickback to the Chinese Government in the form of a buyout? Possibly, as a more direct bribe would require cash that Tesla desperately needs in order to pay back the $920 million convertible debt issue that matures on March 1st (just over 3 weeks from now). Ultimately, I cannot say whether this was just a bad M&A deal or something more sinister. I do, however, find it extremely "sus" as our friend Elon would say.

 

[Liberty]

Consumer Reports satisfaction survey:

 

https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/10-most-satisfying-cars-owner-satisfaction/

 

[*]Tesla Model 3

[*]Porsche 911

[*]Genesis G90

[*]Chevrolet Corvette

[*]Tesla Model S

[*]Toyota Avalon

[*]Kia Stinger

[*]Chevrolet Bolt

[*]Toyota Prius

[*]Dodge Challenger

[rb]

Not sure that list is accurate. They have a Dodge on there.

[Liberty]

Not sure that list is accurate. They have a Dodge on there.

 

Brand inertia is a real thing.

[oddballstocks]

Not sure that list is accurate. They have a Dodge on there.

 

 

Agreed on the Dodge, same with a Kia.  Everyone I know with a Kia has said "it's junk, but was cheap."

 

Had a friend with a Kia that had the hood unlatch and fly open while on the highway.  I was shocked and they said "stuff like this happens all the time"

[Haasje]

Someone from the bear camp that knows more about the company:

https://twitter.com/boriquagato/status/1092447227040063488

 

this deal makes zero sense as a fold in acq.  i know $MXWL well.  it was a one time fraudy promote that has been in cash incineration purgatory with flat revs, declining margins, and serial cap raises for 5 years.  the CEO, fink, is a caretaker check casher.  there's no real tech

 

even if the tech was meaningful, it wud take YEARS to integrate commercial designs.  it's mostly power storage tech for spec apps.  they have no auto revs nor any obvs crossover with tesla storage.

 

they do have a deal w geely for hybrids.  hard to see that standing up post deal.

 

they do have one short term asset that could be of use, not as a product, but as a pump.  that asset is this "dry battery electrode" tech.  this is the classic MXWL pump.  they have been claiming to have a "breakthru" tech of one sort or another for 15 years.  has not happened.

 

Another analysis:

https://www.pivotalcapitalresearch.com/home/tesla-acquires-maxwell-technologies-buyout-bailout-or

 

Tesla paid a huge premium for a struggling company on the verge of bankruptcy. The technology they acquired in the deal is going to require significant capex to develop and produce and it just so happens that 20% of the company was owned by the Chinese Government. They announced this deal the Monday after CFO Deepak Ahuja announced his departure in the final 4 minutes of the Q4 2018 earnings call, which raises more questions that I won't get to today. Was this deal part of a kickback to the Chinese Government in the form of a buyout? Possibly, as a more direct bribe would require cash that Tesla desperately needs in order to pay back the $920 million convertible debt issue that matures on March 1st (just over 3 weeks from now). Ultimately, I cannot say whether this was just a bad M&A deal or something more sinister. I do, however, find it extremely "sus" as our friend Elon would say.

 

I think there are interesting/good points I didn't think about in the bearish commentary but I think the Maxwell deal is a very savvy deal. It is nowhere near enough to have me close my short position but:

 

Tesla is trading equity for cash, acquiring technology that can give its competitors a headache and it will allow Tesla to tout its proprietary and advanced battery technology. Helpful in the PR wars with the detestable short sellers.

 

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4238408-closer-look-tesla-maxwell-technologies-deal

 

However, if the tech at Maxwell Technologies is really great or important I doubt Tesla is going to end up with this prize.

 

[A Dhandho Investor]

Reuters reported yesterday that the North American delivery team was hit hard during the most recent lay-off:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-demand-exclusive/exclusive-teslas-delivery-team-gutted-in-recent-job-cuts-sources-idUSKCN1PY00J

 

Some tidbits from the article:

Some 150 employees out of a team of about 230 were let go in January at the Las Vegas facility that gets tens of thousands of Model 3s into the hands of U.S. and Canadian buyers, they said, in a sign the company expected the pace of deliveries to significantly slow in the near term.

 

The two former delivery workers said the 2018 sales push has left Tesla’s reservations list plucked clean of North American buyers willing to pay current prices of over $40,000 to get their hands on a Model 3.

 

“We sold through just about every car we had on the ground and we called almost every being on the planet who had ever expressed desire to own a Tesla to let them know the tax credit was expiring,” said the other ex-employee.

 

Musk maintains that Model 3 demand is “insanely high,” but his company has not released any figures to demonstrate that.

 

Asked about the reservations list last week by analysts, outgoing Chief Financial Officer Deepak Ahuja declined to disclose how many people remained, calling it “not relevant.”

 

 

 

[Dalal.Holdings]

Jaguar USA sells a whopping 210 I-Pace vehicles in January, and JLR is hemorrhaging cash. Another "Tesla Killer" bites the dust.

 

Chew on this: In the last 6 months of 2018, Ford generated $1.6B of automotive cash from operations while Tesla generated $2.6B with positive FCF while selling a tiny, tiny fraction of vehicles as F.

 

Amusing to see the "sources" Tesla shorts cite for "research". Lol, Tweets are valuable sources of DD now?? Good luck with that garbage.

[A Dhandho Investor]

Dalal my good friend, I thought for a minute we had lost you in this thread!

 

Jaguar USA sells a whopping 210 I-Pace vehicles in January, and JLR is hemorrhaging cash. Another "Tesla Killer" bites the dust.

 

I think you can do better than rehashing your "EV sales of Tesla competitors are non-existent in the US". As indicated earlier in the thread, until now, most competitors have been selling mainly in Europe. Let's wait for the 2nd half of 2019 to have a more clear indication of US EV sales of competitors.

 

Chew on this: In the last 6 months of 2018, Ford generated $1.6B of automotive cash from operations while Tesla generated $2.6B with positive FCF while selling a tiny, tiny fraction of vehicles as F.

 

Out of the $2,6B, $550M is related to working capital movements, $400M is related to stock-based compensation and at least $200M is related to ZEV / GHG credits. But I would not count on the remaining $1,5B cash from operations to be a sustainable amount..

 

Amusing to see the "sources" Tesla shorts cite for "research". Lol, Tweets are valuable sources of DD now?? Good luck with that garbage.

 

Some information I found over the last week/weekend re Tesla via Twitter:

- Panasonic is lowering its 2019 sales guidance, which is obviously related to Tesla: https://twitter.com/ravenvanderrave/status/1092331401796567042

- Someone has put the history of the Solarcity bailout together: https://twitter.com/TeslaCharts/status/1007692334933274624

- Elon's and NHTSA's claim that Tesla vehicles crash rate drops by 40% after installation of Autosteer function was a lie: https://twitter.com/GatorInvestor/status/1094295228801077248

- EU cars don't seem to have Autopilot: http://www.thedrive.com/tech/26437/the-mystery-of-teslas-autopilot-less-european-model-3

- Elon has allegedly been further mortgaging his houses to the tune of $62M around the timing of the failed SpaceX raise (they only raised $250M out of the foreseen $500M):

https://twitter.com/temp_worker/status/1094768599766630402

- The Marina Del Ray delivery center had a whopping sales figure of 6 Model 3's between February 1 and February 11. No scheduled sales for March or April: https://twitter.com/Latrilife/status/1094632909057622016

- This is what a totaled Model 3 looks like: https://twitter.com/zomgapocalypse/status/1094633098216726528

- Panoramic roof cracks seem to happen quite often for Model S: https://twitter.com/bobby_tips/status/1093800694459568128

 

edit: forgot to mention the website https://tslaq.org/, which is a crowdsourced effort of TSLA bears that was started via Twitter.

 

Anyway, good luck extrapolating the H2 2018 cash flow from operations figures to 2019 based on Elon his statement during the Q4 conference call that 2019 Model 3 sales will increase by 50% over 2018. I think Q1 will look ugly.

 

[meiroy]

TSLA(PUT) CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY 299,800 $99,773,000 5.78

 

Druckenmiller as per 13F.

 

[Guest cherzeca]

TSLA(PUT) CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY 299,800 $99,773,000 5.78

 

Druckenmiller as per 13F.

 

wow.  go big or don't go at all.  thanks for the 411

[Dalal.Holdings]

But srsly, how are those Tesla shorts working out tho ?  ;D

 

Chanos, Einhorn, and now Druck? So much lost time spent yapping on CNBC/Bloomberg, reading tweets for "research", losses in cost to borrow shares/options premium (overall negative returns), loss of credibility, and let's not forget opportunity cost.

 

While the "smart money" boys were hating, Elon shot his sportscar into trans-Mars injection around the Sun, has scaled Tesla into a 6 figure auto production company (with unmatched EV marketshare in the U.S. despite "Tesla killers" from the big boy automakers), and had 21 successful SpaceX launches in 2018 with plenty more to come in 2019. Bonds will be due soon for Tesla, but plenty of cash to cover it, with profitable quarters from here on out (more than can be said of some of those big boy automakers like Ford).

 

Woe be to the hedge fund manager (I guess Chanos can sit at home and admire his art collection at least). So much value created for society by the haters.

 

Me? I'm just sitting here on the sidelines eating popcorn whilst watching Elon do his magic. Watching the haters burn is just icing on the cake. What a time to be alive.  8)

[walt373]

From a 2017 article, quoting Druck:

 

I had a guy who managed some money for me come in when the stock was $82. And I think I was 62. [Note: This chronology is incompatible but whatever.] I had given myself a Tesla for my sixtieth birthday. And he had this incredibly effective analysis, like 20 pages of financials about why Tesla was a short. And at then end of this presentation – really well thought-out – I said, “Have you ever driven the car?”

 

And he said, “No.” And I sent him his redemption notice the next week.

 

So to his credit, he avoided a painful short with "have you driven one bro?"

[Castanza]

Why doesn't Tesla stop focusing on building complete vehicles and instead focus on powering the vehicles of other companies. Why couldn't they build drive trains, motors and wheel bases to be retrofitted into any number of vehicles already on the road? They could be the Cummins, Lariat, Duramax engine of the EV segment.

 

"Introducing the new 2020 BMW 530i powered by Tesla"

"Introducing the new 2020 Honda Civic powered by Tesla"

"Introducing the new 2020 Chevy Malibu powered by Tesla"

 

It seems like it would cut down on manufacturing inefficiency, time and money spent on R&D, time spent fixing issues not related to the engines and give them a clear path forward which (I'm assuming) would have a faster turnover rate. Let the big brands market the cars. Think of all the marketing money Tesla could save. If every major auto brand offered one or two cars with a Tesla powered variant they would sell themselves at a much faster rate. If they were to do this I can easily see US consumers jumping ship on foreign brands to come back to the big US brands which are currently (in the consumers eye) unreliable, outdated, relics of the boomer era (no offense meant).

 

Thoughts? I'm not well versed in manufacturing or the auto industry. maybe this is way out in left field.

[walt373]

It's a good question and I think this Credit Bubble Stocks blog post brings up a good point. For a supposed competitive advantage, why does Tesla outsource the battery production, instead of licensing it to other auto companies?

 

Lack of any disruptive technology. The test of whether you are an electric vehicle “disrupter” is: how many manufacturers are licensing your battery? If you’d actually invented a better electric battery or other EV technology (battery is the only technology that matters though), you could license them and have a 10x book business. Tesla not only did not do a battery licensing model, but they effectively did the opposite. Consider the parts of the vehicle industry that they have decided to in-source versus the ones they have decided to outsource. As we know, they decided to in-source and compete head-to-head on manufacturing. The results have shown that they are worse than their more experienced competition. They decided to in-source the automotive retail, which had not been done before and was not legal in most states. (And still is not legal in eight states). This had been a huge distraction from the manufacturing side and has resulted in abysmal customer service. But of all things to outsource, they outsourced the battery production to a joint venture with Panasonic. What should be the entire premise of an electric vehicle company is not even enough of a competitive advantage to do in house.

[Dalal.Holdings]

Why doesn't Tesla stop focusing on building complete vehicles and instead focus on powering the vehicles of other companies. Why couldn't they build drive trains, motors and wheel bases to be retrofitted into any number of vehicles already on the road? They could be the Cummins, Lariat, Duramax engine of the EV segment.

 

"Introducing the new 2020 BMW 530i powered by Tesla"

"Introducing the new 2020 Honda Civic powered by Tesla"

"Introducing the new 2020 Chevy Malibu powered by Tesla"

 

It seems like it would cut down on manufacturing inefficiency, time and money spent on R&D, time spent fixing issues not related to the engines and give them a clear path forward which (I'm assuming) would have a faster turnover rate. Let the big brands market the cars. Think of all the marketing money Tesla could save. If every major auto brand offered one or two cars with a Tesla powered variant they would sell themselves at a much faster rate. If they were to do this I can easily see US consumers jumping ship on foreign brands to come back to the big US brands which are currently (in the consumers eye) unreliable, outdated, relics of the boomer era (no offense meant).

 

Thoughts? I'm not well versed in manufacturing or the auto industry. maybe this is way out in left field.

 

Reminds me of the "why doesn't Apple just sell its software to go into IBM/Clone machines just like Microsoft (instead of worrying about hardware/manufacturing/etc)" argument of 20 years ago. Then Apple went on to also create its own retail stores and vertically integrate even more so. Tesla wants to own the entire customer experience. If it's done right, you get a tremendous, long-lasting moat as Apple has shown.

 

The big reason reason why I predict that "Tesla killers" will likely fail isn't necessarily because of inferior product. It's the entire customer experience of owning those "me too" products. Similar reason why "iPod" and "iPhone" "killers" like the Zune never stood a chance.

 

Edit: To add, Tesla is a consumer brand whose "equity" now likely exceeds that of Chevy, Honda and perhaps even BMW in many consumer minds. Turning it into a Cummins is just throwing that all away. Plus, "Chevy Malibu powered by Tesla" just sounds gross.

[Castanza]

Why doesn't Tesla stop focusing on building complete vehicles and instead focus on powering the vehicles of other companies. Why couldn't they build drive trains, motors and wheel bases to be retrofitted into any number of vehicles already on the road? They could be the Cummins, Lariat, Duramax engine of the EV segment.

 

"Introducing the new 2020 BMW 530i powered by Tesla"

"Introducing the new 2020 Honda Civic powered by Tesla"

"Introducing the new 2020 Chevy Malibu powered by Tesla"

 

It seems like it would cut down on manufacturing inefficiency, time and money spent on R&D, time spent fixing issues not related to the engines and give them a clear path forward which (I'm assuming) would have a faster turnover rate. Let the big brands market the cars. Think of all the marketing money Tesla could save. If every major auto brand offered one or two cars with a Tesla powered variant they would sell themselves at a much faster rate. If they were to do this I can easily see US consumers jumping ship on foreign brands to come back to the big US brands which are currently (in the consumers eye) unreliable, outdated, relics of the boomer era (no offense meant).

 

Thoughts? I'm not well versed in manufacturing or the auto industry. maybe this is way out in left field.

 

Reminds me of the "why doesn't Apple just sell its software to go into IBM/Clone machines just like Microsoft (instead of worrying about hardware/manufacturing/etc)" argument of 20 years ago. Then Apple went on to also create its own retail stores and vertically integrate even more so. Tesla wants to own the entire customer experience. If it's done right, you get a tremendous, long-lasting moat as Apple has shown.

 

The big reason reason why I predict that "Tesla killers" will likely fail isn't necessarily because of inferior product. It's the entire customer experience of owning those "me too" products. Similar reason why "iPod" and "iPhone" "killers" like the Zune never stood a chance.

 

But couldn't consumers still get the "me too" feeling by buying a vehicle that simply has Tesla options rather than having it be a pure Tesla. And why couldn't they do both? Market a pure Tesla as a luxury car (which it is) and also market a Chevy Cruise with Tesla power as an economy version? I mean I can see how they are sort of trying to conquer this with the Model 3.  But the auto industry has a lot of brand loyalty. You think it would be easier to reach more people by doing this. If Ford and GM were ever willing to do this.

[Dalal.Holdings]

But couldn't consumers still get the "me too" feeling by buying a vehicle that simply has Tesla options rather than having it be a pure Tesla. And why couldn't they do both? Market a pure Tesla as a luxury car (which it is) and also market a Chevy Cruise with Tesla power as an economy version? I mean I can see how they are sort of trying to conquer this with the Model 3.  But the auto industry has a lot of brand loyalty. You think it would be easier to reach more people by doing this. If Ford and GM were ever willing to do this.

 

IMO, disagree that the auto industry has a lot of "brand loyalty". Most of the car companies (Ford, GM, Hyundia, Kia, Toyota, etc etc) are commodity producers. Outside of pickup trucks, old U.S. manufacturers have near-zero brand loyalty. That's why they've lost ground to the Asian brands over decades, been in dire financial straits (low margin producers). Cars are commodity products to most people outside of luxury--and Ford/GM/FCAU don't really have competitive luxury products either--the Germans do. Tesla is on par with luxury brands, and probably the most out of any American luxury car brand (even Cadillac which is failing).

 

If you were Tesla, why would you dilute your luxury brand status by mixing with Chevy? I mean I guess Rolex could roll out a $20 watch with Casio and (temporarily) boost sales. I guess See's Candies could do some partnership with Russell Stover and destroy its brand in the process...(Note that this is a major problem of American luxury brands like Cadillac and Lincoln--they share parts/dealership lots/etc with the lower tier Chevy/Ford brands which destroys their standing in the consumer's mind).

 

Steve Jobs was very adamant that Apple software could not mix with the commoditized PC manufacturers. Macs came with cool designs that elevated the status of the brand. Shipping a cheap beige PC with Mac OS on it would only hurt Apple's standing. Instead, you got a huge moat (with huge margins) in the form of a walled garden. Compare that to an Intel or Cummins (low margin, very competitive industries, and not-as-wonderful businesses).

[alpha]

 

Has anyone come across any educated estimates on Drukenmillers option dates/strategy?

[Leverage Capabilities]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/21/tesla-tanks-subaru-soars-in-consumer-reports-new-reliability-survey.html