https://twitter.com/Hipster_Trader/s...66768044138497

pretty funny vid

Actually hoping the stock hangs around here for another couple of week. No risk to the downside but I sold some June vol that would be nice to close before another move

Any dates to keep an eye on for news?

More bad news

https://www.latimes.com/business/aut...430-story.html

I wonder if those are the credits that were speculated on a couple pages back.

I would say that being in "material compliance" means they aren't actually in compliance, but, as a friend of mine used to like saying, "close enough for the chicks we date". Do the people that own the debt think it's close enough? We will need to wait and see.

Why does the iPACE get only 230 miles on a 90kWh battery, while the Tesla ModelX gets 260 on the same kwh

A bunch of reasons I think...the Tesla is better designed for aerodynamics, internal friction, motor efficiency, and possibly battery management. This comes with costs of course, such as energy drain keeping the battery at the right temperature. Does it matter? A little, but not as much as doing the top half and service well vs poorly, or a $15K price differential.

Tesla definitely have the premier engineering for the bottom half of an electric car right now, on multiple metrics, it truly is a car designed for a battery and it shows.

Their main problem is that a total loser/cuck/fraud is in charge of the company, their culture is toxic, most of their early talent has left (they're down to hiring Snapchat's head of monetization as their VP of engineering - no joke!!), and their customer service is awful as they've neglected it and even spare parts in favor of fake profits and from lack of good organization.

And most of all they can't produce their cars at anything approaching a profit at any price point where there's a decent market size. And now apparently they can't sell their high end either - no one wants S/X, which are down over 50% for the last four months including right now.

Not in compliance with debt covenants should trigger going concern language

Thanks, was wondering if tesla might have technology advantages that a company might be willing to pay for if tesla gets cheap enough... sounds like it's more design than anything.

I think the engineering of the entire bottom of the car is currently best in class - batteries, motors, efficiency, handling/balance and it shows. I don't believe this to be an enduring advantage or something worth paying for. Multiple major companies, apart from their various prototypes, participate in Formula E which is higher performance than Tesla's flagships, so it's not like they don't know the tech. It's been in use at its highest level for a long time. And it's clear that it's not difficult to reproduce easily. The iPace proves that - a single, small car company has created a near Tesla equivalent on the battery/electric motor end at a lower price while making a profit while not spending much on R&D.

So watched the autonomy day conference , and did not know what to think of it, other than it seems like BS on the chip side. my gf who is in software and watched some of it with me, couldnt believe how bad some of the questions from analyst were . Is this chip real though? is it truly faster than NVDA etc? has anyone been able to test it or prove it yet ? he made a statement that they are being outfitted in current model 3's already .

You were expecting integrity?

NVIDIA countered their claim but I don't think anyone has had the opportunity to do any independent testing

I don't think any testing is really needed. They compared the specs of their chip to wrong NVIDIA chip.

"Material compliance" is another way of saying "noncompliance". This sets up a trade for an adventurous hedge fund. If a company violates its debt covenants, the bondholders have the right to demand immediate repayment. A fund could buy TSLA bonds trading at 85 cents on the dollar, and demand to be paid $1.00.

If this trade was popular enough, it could cause an immediate cash crunch and either an emergency capital raise or bankruptcy, so the fund would probably want to pair it with puts to protect/exploit the downside.

Insideevs (Tesla shill) reporting awful April numbers (remember this is the SR- SR+ burst) of low margin cars

Wasn't April supposed to be the good month for this quarter ???

Zero chance Tesla's chip is more "powerful" than nVidia's chip in raw processing power.

There is a very low but non-zero chance Tesla's chip is more purpose built and better at identifying objects than nVidia's chips are, for specifically the algorithms Tesla is running.

For what it's worth, I've already felt Lidar is a lazy thing. Its biggest advantage is basically depth/distance perception (basically ability to know where objects are). With a combination of sensors, multiple image sources, there are a lot of ways to get that depth information without LIDAR. Actually implementing such solutions (and processing them hundreds of times a second) almost certainly involves piles of technical problems that seem nearly insurmountable (or Google wouldn't have given up on such easy solution). I think the most probable path to full autonomous driving is LIDAR to work out the AI portion of driving behavior given depth data then some start up manages to replace LIDAR data with a combination of cameras and some other cheap sensors (possibly already available on car such as GPS and speedometers, or scaled down LIDAR).

In the very unlikely scenario Musk's engineers manage to leapfrog and figure out how to get depth data with Model 3's existing sensors, Tesla really can take over the self-driving market. They have better chances than most just because they got literally hundreds of thousands of willing labrats feeding data. They are still massive underdogs to the field though.

Using LIDAR in the development stages has significant advantages even for what will eventually become a camera based system. It can be used to train/babysit a camera based solution. I don't know exactly how superior it is for depth and distance perception but based on everything I've read it seems like it's massive especially in corner cases.

Tesla seems to think gathering data from hundreds of thousands of cars and feeding it to a neural network that works like magic is the solution. They have an edge on quantity of data while LIDAR systems have an edge on quality of data. Nothing that Tesla has produced so far suggests their approach will work. They have the data, they have what they say is the hardware, and they have the guinea pigs. They have all the components yet what they've produced so far is such a long way from autonomous driving it would be silly to think their solution will work.

This should be high profile enough for headlines as the case goes on:
Yup. When buying a car with "autopilot", "collision avoidance", "automatic emergency braking" and "full awareness radar" you can reasonably expect it won't slam you into a concrete divider at full speed because the lanes got a bit confusing.

I've worked in finance for 7 years and the "material compliance"-language strikes me as very odd as well. I don't think I've ever seen this language being used.

In very general terms, covenants on financial instruments work like this:
Covenants are basic agreements lenders make with the company, mostly in the form of ratios (for example debt/EBITDA can not exceed 4X).

*Everything is fine if you are in compliance with your covenants.
*When you're not in compliance with your covenants, the company will need to negotiate with its lenders. In most cases, covenants are renegotiated or the breached covenants are waived for x months (meaning you no longer need to comply with the covenant for the x months, and you have time until then to meet the covenant again).
*When you're not in compliance with your covenant, and the company's lenders are not willing to provide relief, everything usually goes to ****. It will become significantly harder to get new significant credit lines secured, and the company's lenders can start various procedures which in extreme cases can result in lenders taking control over the company.


I would be surprised whether Tesla was not able to renegoiate its covenants or is unable to receive a waiver. I think either (1) The BOD preferred to use this wording instead of saying they had to ask for covenant waivers or (2) interal control failed and they did not anticipate the breach and are still busy negotiating.

Given everything else about Tesla, (2) seems most likely.

I watched one of the interviews regarding that crash and apparently the guy had told his wife the car had tried to steer him into that divider like 7-10 times and he even tried to show her once while they were in the car together. If true, it's obviously a piece of garbage system, but how many times does it have to try to kill you before you turn it off?

This would be my guess as well, but who knows with tesla

Bot a decent sized position with average close to 234-233.75.

I might be early with this one my fellas. Willing to scale out quickly if we get a any near term strength. Don't love because I'm modertately bearish S&P's over next month to couple weeks.

yeah looking to tail here. If regulator approved autopilot comes to fruition we're looking at a fair value of >$1500 a share. If it doesn't, I'll trust the numbers floated on the call. Should be a huge squeeze if they hit those delivery numbers. Q3 profitability + beyond is really promising

these dudes trolling?