Tesla Motors is joining the Nasdaq-100

Eagle

Nemo me impune lacessit
Moderator
TCG Premium
Mar 1, 2008
63,904
4,732
Woodsticks, IL
Tesla Motors, Inc. to Join the NASDAQ-100 Index Beginning July 15, 2013

Tesla joining Nasdaq-100 - Jul. 9, 2013

What say you, TCG? Does this finally affirm that Tesla is here for the long haul? Or does it make them out to be the latest stock fad?


Tesla will replace software company Oracle (ORCL, Fortune 500), which announced last month it is moving to the NYSE. Both moves are slated to take place on July 15.

Shares of Tesla (TSLA) were up in premarket trading Tuesday on the news. Its shares are up 259% so far this year through Monday's close, lifting its market value to $14 billion.

130709072955-tsla-620xa.png
 

Mike K

TCG Elite Member
Apr 11, 2008
13,214
2,586
There's just too much hype now for a company with no news and 1 quarter of modest profit. I'm the biggest fanboy for Tesla but I have a hard time seeing how the company is worth it's stock price right now.

Of course I wish I would have held on to my stock longer but oh well. I still made a nice chunk of change in 4 weeks.
 

Mook

Mr. Manager
Staff member
Admin
May 23, 2007
206,715
117,601
Elgin
Real Name
Mike
There's just too much hype now for a company with no news and 1 quarter of modest profit. I'm the biggest fanboy for Tesla but I have a hard time seeing how the company is worth it's stock price right now.

Of course I wish I would have held on to my stock longer but oh well. I still made a nice chunk of change in 4 weeks.

[MENTION=396]Mike K[/MENTION]

IJ8LbEE.jpg
 

sickmint79

I Drink Your Milkshake
Mar 2, 2008
26,906
16,620
grayslake
2014 Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid manages 53.45 mpg in real-world tests

0-60 in 5.2 seconds
top speed 167 mph
416 hp
435 ft lb torque
real world journalist test:
average: 53 mpg
best: 84 mpg

zero compromise to usage patterns
zero compromise on heat a/c creature comforts
ability to travel anywhere easily today via network of gas stations
2.5 hour charge from l2 charger

what will happen first - technology like this and better trickles down to the middle class motorist?

or tesla will be able to create a car/infrastructure free of the compromises above at a price point that is both 1. affordable and 2. profitable?
 

sickmint79

I Drink Your Milkshake
Mar 2, 2008
26,906
16,620
grayslake
Currently, the "zero-emissions" Tesla Model S generates a fossil fuel footprint that is not much different than the Honda Civic. There are scenarios in which the Tesla's imprint could be lower, but they are all in the future

20130529_TSLA.jpg


An explanation of the scenario analysis in the second chart:
0. Tesla, Current: see table on next page for the energy math.
1. Vamp: Tesla figures out how to reduce the vampire (standby) electricity loss by 80%, an issue in the car’s software which some users report as draining ~3.5 kWh per day from the battery when the car is idle
2. C->NG: Within fossil fuels, the split between coal and natural gas, which is currently 63/37, falls to 50/50 as older coal plants continue to be shut down and more natural gas plants are built
3. Foss: Fossil fuels fall from their current 67% share of US electricity generation to 60%. This sounds like a small change, but they have ranged from 65% to 72% for the last 30 years in the US. For an even larger decline on a national level, more nuclear and/or a break-through on battery storage of intermittent renewable energy would probably be needed
4. Therm: Thermal efficiency of coal and gas plants rise closer to theoretical maximums. However, on coal, emissions standards and greater coal plant cycling impose parasitic loads that may make theoretical maximums hard to reach.
5. Assume that 1, 2 and 3 take place simultaneously
6. Assume that 1, 2 and 3 take place simultaneously, and that the Tesla is used just in low-fossil fuel states
 

Mike K

TCG Elite Member
Apr 11, 2008
13,214
2,586
I wanted to respond to this but I know how long winded I get and couldn't find the time to commit to responding until now... So then, a few different points.

First and foremost, you seem to be hell bent on convincing everyone what the consumer wants, why the consumer shouldn't want the Tesla or should want a different model, etc. The problem is that's not how things work. You can attempt to convince people that there's a better product until you're blue in the face but why? Sales are a combination of product quality, marketing, consumer perception, etc. It's for this reason a certain company named after fruit can sell a laptop for $2500 that most other companies couldn't sell for $1500.

So personally I feel like arguments like this are kind of missing the point. Also, when you benchmark against Tesla you acknowledge that they are the benchmark.

Now on to the technology and the cars...

With hybrids most of the technology hasn't trickled down; it's trickled up. Most hybrids up to this point have been based on economy cars. Luxury brands really didn't start adding it until they realized that they could add the power of an electric motor to boost the output of their traditional gas engines while also boosting MPG. So I don't except the premise that this will trickle down and I also don't see how it would be a game changer if it did.

The Tesla is an all electric plug-in. As such, there's no fuel put into it. You plug it in. I buy the car and on average I believe the cost of electricity to fuel it is about 20% of the cost of fuel. So there's a substantial savings there. This means that many people that shop for a Tesla are going to account for those savings in the purchase price. I.E. - If their budget is $60,000 for a traditional fossil fuel vehicle, maybe it's $75,000 for a Tesla since they know they'll realize the $20,000 in savings over time. In this vain I don't see a 100k Porsche as direct competition to a 100k Tesla. I view the Tesla as the cheaper car despite the initially equal price-tag.

Likewise, I can't find any info as far as how the Porsche system works but it sounds like it's exactly the same as the Fisker Karma, just with more power. Also like the Fisker Karma, it only gets 21 miles of all electric power (the Fisker got up to 27) and here's where I have a problem with MPG ratings on cars like these...

On a Fisker you'd get 54mpge on all electric mode. Hey that sounds great only this:

1. You didn't get full horsepower from the car unless the gasoline engine was also running which severely hampered MPG ratings.
2. The car couldn't even travel as far as it's MPG rating on one charge.

And so yes, you technically got great MPG until that battery died at which point you're left with a gas only engine that will net you 20mpg, embarrassing for a Hybrid.

So if this is the way the Porsche works, eventually I'll be on all gas power and you can't fight physics, that's not going to be very efficient with that kind of horsepower. In fact, if you look at the Cayenne S Hybrid (which apparently uses the same setup) it's not very good at all. If you're driving over 40 miles a day the Tesla quickly becomes the better bet. It's faster, runs on electric longer (so you're fully realizing the MPGe estimates) and it's cheaper for the sake of this direct comparison.

265 miles is a lot. I don't drive 265 miles in a week out in Chicago. So for me the Tesla becomes a no compromise car that I wouldn't have to plug in every single day like the Porsche just to get my mileage out of it. I think you're vastly over-estimated the inconvenience it places on people, mostly because people tend to vote with their wallet and so far they don't seem to care about the things you seem to insist they should.

All that said, the Porsche looks bad-ass.
 

sickmint79

I Drink Your Milkshake
Mar 2, 2008
26,906
16,620
grayslake
I wanted to respond to this but I know how long winded I get and couldn't find the time to commit to responding until now... So then, a few different points.

First and foremost, you seem to be hell bent on convincing everyone what the consumer wants, why the consumer shouldn't want the Tesla or should want a different model, etc. The problem is that's not how things work. You can attempt to convince people that there's a better product until you're blue in the face but why? Sales are a combination of product quality, marketing, consumer perception, etc. It's for this reason a certain company named after fruit can sell a laptop for $2500 that most other companies couldn't sell for $1500.

i'm a free market libertarian dude, you don't need to lecture me on how markets work. i gets. your apple comparo is better between a standard and luxury auto not autos with completely different internals btw.


So personally I feel like arguments like this are kind of missing the point. Also, when you benchmark against Tesla you acknowledge that they are the benchmark.

i think you are missing my point, if you think i'm saying "consumers don't/shouldn't want teslas" as above. my points are

1. that i'm hilariously occasionally accused of religious faith in gold (which is not how/why i purchase it) yet the only reason to believe tesla is worth it's $120 share price is technological delusion and economic ignorance or simply blind faith in tesla or celebrity ceo musk. it's not worth this $120/share.
2. that speculation of true tesla market penetration and technology rely on making the car
a. affordable to the middle class
b. more attractive than full gas or hybrid cars
c. profitable to tesla
3. teslas are not as green as my green friends think they are (who would have knew, heavy cars take more energy to move?)
4. my critique for all the above is not just tesla (outside of share price) but on fully electric vehicles in general


Now on to the technology and the cars...

With hybrids most of the technology hasn't trickled down; it's trickled up. Most hybrids up to this point have been based on economy cars. Luxury brands really didn't start adding it until they realized that they could add the power of an electric motor to boost the output of their traditional gas engines while also boosting MPG. So I don't except the premise that this will trickle down and I also don't see how it would be a game changer if it did.

none of this makes sense to me. i mean isn't the whole idea of tesla that this tech will trickle down into an affordable everyman car - aren't you relying on tesla's too? as far as the way hybrid internal comubstion engine tech entered - what is so unbelievable about that? they targeted middle class cars for consumers concerned about high mileage / greenhouse gas reduction. the latter of course is widely debatable in fact, but not in perception, certainly people who buy a prius believe they are doing wordly good. and the technology will trickle everywhere as the benefits of it (and other unreleased technology) are attractive to all. particularly as the price of oil goes up. the american car of the future is going to look more like the european or japanese car of today - where gas prices are already double ours. in europe this is because lack of supply and heavy taxation - in the US it's simple going to be a downstream effect of the ever increasing cost of crude. you appear to be making the flawed assumption that over time tesla tech just gets better, while internal combustion tech stands still. the reality is there's a huge amount of space for improvements in internal combustion tech, as well as some simple driving behavioral changes that people can sacrifice vs. those for a full EV car. as far as full EV tech, people seem to think it follows moore's law. however battery technology does not follow this type of advancement at all.

The Tesla is an all electric plug-in. As such, there's no fuel put into it. You plug it in. I buy the car and on average I believe the cost of electricity to fuel it is about 20% of the cost of fuel. So there's a substantial savings there. This means that many people that shop for a Tesla are going to account for those savings in the purchase price. I.E. - If their budget is $60,000 for a traditional fossil fuel vehicle, maybe it's $75,000 for a Tesla since they know they'll realize the $20,000 in savings over time. In this vain I don't see a 100k Porsche as direct competition to a 100k Tesla. I view the Tesla as the cheaper car despite the initially equal price-tag.

i did not intend to post the porsche as something to cross shop nor do i think a model s vs. porsche comparison is valid for any full EV to ICE/ICE hybrid that will be available in 2017. no need to run the numbers. neither is my critique based on electricity being cheaper than fuel nor possibly the bigger thing you should argue for, reduced maintenance on an EV.

Likewise, I can't find any info as far as how the Porsche system works but it sounds like it's exactly the same as the Fisker Karma, just with more power. Also like the Fisker Karma, it only gets 21 miles of all electric power (the Fisker got up to 27) and here's where I have a problem with MPG ratings on cars like these...

On a Fisker you'd get 54mpge on all electric mode. Hey that sounds great only this:

1. You didn't get full horsepower from the car unless the gasoline engine was also running which severely hampered MPG ratings.
2. The car couldn't even travel as far as it's MPG rating on one charge.

And so yes, you technically got great MPG until that battery died at which point you're left with a gas only engine that will net you 20mpg, embarrassing for a Hybrid.

i never paid attention to fisker but you are missing the point that you had to make no sacrifice for it. when you run out of battery you can still drive anywhere you want. when you run out of battery on a tesla you have to spend hours recharging it, or are at a supercharge station no one is interested in building, or a battery swap station which suffers equally and is the same business model that put better place into bankruptcy 2 months ago.

So if this is the way the Porsche works, eventually I'll be on all gas power and you can't fight physics, that's not going to be very efficient with that kind of horsepower. In fact, if you look at the Cayenne S Hybrid (which apparently uses the same setup) it's not very good at all. If you're driving over 40 miles a day the Tesla quickly becomes the better bet. It's faster, runs on electric longer (so you're fully realizing the MPGe estimates) and it's cheaper for the sake of this direct comparison.

again i don't think this is a very good comparison for the end game - which is affordable middle class cars. we are still talking about things only rich people can buy. i have pointed out in the past teslas are simply toys for rich people. they are to be shown off to friends and talked about at parties, one of the 4 cars they own. this does not justify a market cap 1/4 the size of GM nor the leg humping many of my friends do who expect to be buying their own teslas in a few years. and again i'll point out that if you get in the tesla and behave with the pedal, and the heat, and the a/c, then you will get some decentish range to go somewhere that you pray has a spot to charge and can do it quickly enough. the porsche, as does any ICE car, has 100% freedom built in. i don't know how much gas is in my tank right now - and i don't have to worry or care about it. i can go walk to my car right now with zero plans and drive it to fucking mexico. that came built in with my car. does that come built in to a model s? will it be 5 years from now?


265 miles is a lot. I don't drive 265 miles in a week out in Chicago. So for me the Tesla becomes a no compromise car that I wouldn't have to plug in every single day like the Porsche just to get my mileage out of it. I think you're vastly over-estimated the inconvenience it places on people, mostly because people tend to vote with their wallet and so far they don't seem to care about the things you seem to insist they should.

i don't disagree, but today 265 miles costs a shit ton of money, and i take enough longer trips that i would have to worry about things. so no tesla for me, or eleventy billion other people. of course the they you refer to above don't care - again they are a bunch of rich people, and people that own multiple cars. you seem to act as if the points i make are trying to convince rich people not to buy these cars, which isn't even remotely my point. my point is that tesla, and doubtfully anyone, can produce full EV cars at a price point that makes them competitive and profitable - period.

i think some day a small amount of people will have full EV cars and live happily with them, but they fill a niche and are not a solution. maybe a middle class 2 car family does eventually have 1 ev and 1 ice/hybrid. i don't think that's soon, i don't think that's the majority, and although tesla tech may be inside i don't think it will be saying tesla anywhere on it.

since i put my money where my mouth is too, i am short TSLA now also, via puts. so far my position is net down $580 but we'll see how it turns out. one is jan 2014 expiration the others are all jan 2015 so i have some time for my theories to work out.

i consider the reality of this hyperloop being more of an actual threat to my position than full EV vehicles are. although i'm skeptical enough of the feasibility of it that i'm not about to rush out of any of my positions.
 

sickmint79

I Drink Your Milkshake
Mar 2, 2008
26,906
16,620
grayslake
We get it, you don't like Tesla. Yay.

I give up. Thank you for convincing me that Tesla is garbage.

They're still sexy looking inside and out and move out for weighing 2 tons
You're wrong. You shouldn't like the car or the company. Let me show you a graph that demonstrates that.

apparently you don't get it, since you think i'm saying you shouldn't have admiration for the cars. i think the tesla s is an impressive piece of machinery. nowhere have i said that it is not. so you really don't get what i'm saying.
 

Mike K

TCG Elite Member
Apr 11, 2008
13,214
2,586
apparently you don't get it, since you think i'm saying you shouldn't have admiration for the cars. i think the tesla s is an impressive piece of machinery. nowhere have i said that it is not. so you really don't get what i'm saying.

I don't think anyone knows what you're arguing... Seriously, I know you think the car is ok but you seem hell bent on telling us how shitty and non-viable the company is and to that I just don't care any more. I disagree but the conversation with you gets so convoluted and confusing that at the end of a post I'm not even sure what I'm arguing.

All I see is someone consistently bumping a post only with info that suits their narrative, despite the fact that no one else is responding to the thread.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 90 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant. Consider starting a new thread to get fresh replies.

Thread Info