It seems that the Radar detected the Vehicle but the camera was unable to. AEB requires that both camera and radar agrees for intervention to lower the amount of false positive actions.

The camera can and probably will be trained to better detect in this kind of situations(white car, from the side, bright light etc) in the future. It is unclear if this can be software upgraded or not.

It is not a function of the Autopilot package, it is a standard feature.

The Radar is a long range system. Can you please elaborate on which other systems use different technology?

I would assume the driver takes all the liability in this case. The driver should monitor at all time and be ready to take over.

As for the press we will see I guess, it seems that the stock is up since the accident.

This is true. I think most of the investors and the customers agree on the decision to be less cautious.

This post is pretty funny, translates to


The reason this guy died, was his autopilot was just too good. For proof please check his youtube channel.

Whoosh. No, the point was that he was apparently impressed enough with the autopilot to get complacent and use it in a dangerous way, e.g., not paying attention to the road at all while driving with it. Cruise control and adaptive cruise control are both dangerous if you use them and watch a movie and pay no attention to the road.

For all you that think this is a super serious negative issue for tesla, we can assume you would be short tesla now at 216 then?

There are lots of reasons to think this is negative for tsla and think stock is overvalued but not short the stock.

I don't see how you can credibly argue that it is a serious negative issue for Tesla if it isn't going to bring down the stock price of an already 'overvalued company'. Tesla lost nearly a third of its value because of that stupid fire story, of course it regained it within a few months though. How about some jan18 leap puts? Surely that should be enough time for the market to realize tesla is a overvalued joke, no?

This is what makes trading/investing difficult. Finding a mispriced security is only the first step. Mispriced stocks don't simply revert to fair value

Sure. But it's basically a joke for the hysterical bears in this thread to argue Musk is a fraud, gigafactory is a white elephant, model 3 execution will be bad and delayed and there will be significant competition anyway, solarcity deal is terrible, A/P death is terrible for tesla, ect, ect. And then try to hand wave away why you wont bet on it and wont even place longer term jan18 puts at current overvalued status. Opinions are cheap, isn't the market suppose to be the best tool we have for evaluating people with strong opinions?

I myself am long tesla, used the brexit drop to pick up a few itm jan18 calls that i plan to convert if successful, my bet is that those are basically freerolling as i think the worst case scenario for Tesla at this point is Musk plays his ace card and calls up his buddy Larry Page again and works out another sweet heart deal.

Your opinions and analysis need to be separate from your positions in the market. I've been bearish on TSLA since the beginning, but mostly traded it on the long side, starting on their first big e/r when it gapped up to $70. I shorted the SCTY/TSLA arb spread (which is somewhat of a long TSLA position) after hours when the news broke, which I believe was one of the better r/r plays of 2016.

It's standard for great traders to bash a company they have yet to take a position in. As a contrarian, you learn that good short opportunities frequently become great short opportunities before they pay off. Great short sellers make most of their money by waiting patiently, not by finding good shorts early.

While it would be baller to call a crash and load up now, the better EV play is probably shorting after some big negative catalyst we haven't anticipated comes up.

I guess -5 to -10% tomorrow?

This technology will be incredible and super perfected in about 10 years. Its funny to see people shocked someone died.

Its like the earliest version of windows sucking, oh im so shocked.

Im pretty excited to see what the future will hold for this. computers will always be smarter than humans and once this new craft is perfected....

TSLA stock will barely budge. Missing targets is expected of them now.

20% per quarter is still doubling production every year or so.

Sounds pretty good to me 20% increase in quarterly sales. For a manufacturer that is good. The autopilot was never marketed as a replacement to driving, it was only to be used as a guide with the driver taking over if it made a mistake. Gigafactory opens July 29th. Solarcity deal will probably fail, but will be bought in bankruptcy for 1/3 as much.

Short by not owning it.

if it was another company, but its tick is TSLA and i wouldn't be suprised if they close +2%, perhaps they even open in gapup...

Period Production In transit (EOQ) Deliveries
2014 Q4 11627 1463 9834
2015 Q1 11160 2578 10045
2015 Q2 12807 3878 11507
2015 Q3 13091 5366 11603
2015 Q4 14037 1925 17478
2016 Q1 15510 2615 14820
2016 Q2 18345 5150 14370

Exhibit A: the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay liquid.

GM is making billions in pure profit. So is Ford. This is insanity.

-5% premarket
http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/tsla/premarket

Yep. Tesla costs over 60% of what Ford does, for:

- 100x fewer cars made (60K vs 6 million)
- Massive cash loss (billions/year) vs $6+ billion/year in profit and P/E below 10 and a dividend yield of 4%.
- Negative cash flow vs massive cash flow
- Constant secondary dilution vs no dilution
- A childish mentally unstable cowboy CEO without a single profitable company, who believes he's on a mission to save the world, vs a world class CEO
- Massive execution risk vs low execution risk.
- Large upcoming competition vs a strong competitive moat/economies of scale/large reliable global supplier networks.
- A single product line vs a heavily diversified one
- Terrible corporate governance (he buys out his cousin's failing, deeply indebted, cash burning solar company) vs excellent corporate governance
- Poor disclosure vs excellent disclosure
- $10 billion in assets (1/3 of market cap) and <$1 billion in net assets (1/30 of market cap) vs $220 billion in assets (4.5x market cap) and $30 billion in net assets (1/2 of market cap).

You would have to have something wrong with you to own Tesla vs Ford for the long term.

Even if Tesla grows to be the size/profit of Ford - a 100x production ramp - it will take 10+ years, burn large amounts of cash in the process/much more dilution, only to be exactly where Ford are now.

The only scenario for owning Tesla over Ford in the long run is if you believe in some kind of weird moonshot where Tesla takes over the global auto industry - displacing Ford, GM, Toyota, etc. Which is just so hilariously never going to happen - no one company or even five can control the global auto industry. There's too much money and complexity and regulation in it for a single company to own it.

Which leaves you with...what? Tesla turning into a $1 trillion energy storage company? Some other Musk genius from the guy who decided to put gull wings on a car?

It's just ridiculous.

Again you are incorrect on facts. SolarCity is actually Elon's company (he is the largest single shareholder by a large amount).

http://qz.com/713045/here-are-all-of...ith-solarcity/

I'm well aware that Elon is paying himself with this bailout, which is also an example of terrible corporate governance. The terrible deal was widely panned and his ownership discussed. I mentioned the cousin because it makes it all the more hilarious/wrong.

You must be here just to troll rather than invest, if that's the only thing you mention out of that long list, and don't get that Elon owning lots of failing SCTY makes it WORSE, not better.

I can only see what you write and not what you "claim" to know. His cousin's are the third and fourth largest individual shareholders. Both with less than 10% stake as Elon.

I'm not sure why I'd need to invest to participate in a business forum. I think Tesla is an interesting business and like to discuss it. You seem to post a number of incorrect statements regarding the facts of the business. I'm sorry you feel the need to personally attack me when I point our your errors.

Tesla reminds me of Amazon. Amazon evaluations made no sense as "just" a bookseller but it expanded into adjacent industries and is now a retail giant well beyond book business.

That said, I think it's foolish to get on Musk, or anyone really, to pull off the same stunt.

Musk would have to turn Tesla into some hybrid business that's a luxury sports EV leader, dominant battery supplier (for industries beyond EV), power distribution/generator, and some other "adjacent" industries it ends up picking up while building its supercharger network.

Amazon's valuation, even in the height of the tech bubble, never came close to the balls-out insanity of Tesla. It wasn't anywhere near industry leaders. This is despite being in an industry that's far larger and far more profitable than Tesla's potential industries [global retail >>>>> cars].

In 2000 for example, their sales growth was incredible, and their gross profit growth was over 100%/year at $600 million. Their cash flow was excellent as well.

Despite this, even Amazon - the most successful of the tech bubble stocks - bought at these metrics took 10 years to get to new highs, during which you collected zero dividends, and could have gotten in 10x cheaper in subsequent years.

People are making the same mistake with Tesla. Worse, I would argue, since Tesla is playing in a much harder field than ecommerce, with lower network effects, and a substantially less intelligent/capable/stable CEO.

AMZN wasn't perceived to be competing against WMT until much later.

It was competing within the book industry... the biggest players of which were Borders and Barnes&Noble, each with roughly 3 billion market cap at their heights.

I don't believe this to be true. From their 2000 annual report (an interesting read, actually):

The narrative and in fact reality of Amazon as a possible Walmart competitor/one of the premier online department stores was well established by the time of the tech bubble.