Of course, Rupert Murdoch will sit on the board of any penny stock company.

The only interesting thing will be the news coverage from some of his outlets like Fox News.

At some point between 2022 and 2030. I could see Model Y in full production from a few factories as being the point when they actually get positive revenue, but it might happen a lot later.

Making consistent earnings is not their short term goal. They will likely use any revenue they get for expansion until they run out of good ways to expand.

If they do I see a stock price of $1000-5000.

Being happy is important and I like investing in green tech. But as an ex poker pro I also get happiness from making what I think is positive EV decisions. It often happens that I am happy and everything turns out not to be fine.

Edit: EBITDA for revenue

yup.

too many ITT focused on short term, and use arguments that will take years to determine if right or wrong... this is what makes 98% of what TS posts ITT worthless; patience is a virtue

This is James Murdoch, the son of Rupert Murdoch, not Rupert Murdoch.

And yes. Big name luminaries on fraud stock boards is extremely common. Enron had a member of the House of Lords and a politician's wife.
Are you a masochist or something? Why do you keep contradicting yourself? I mean, thanks for the comedy, bull still, have some pride, man.

The bear argument for Tesla is that they're entering a cutthroat industry with zero competitive advantages. So far all they've managed to lose a small fortune even with a monopoly, subsidizing electric sports car for wealthy people, even while taking billions in government subsidies and taking billions more from their shareholders and going 20 billion in debt on top of that.

The bear argument is inherently long term - the commodification of batteries is the core of it.

On the other side of that we have a guy thinking that Tesla is going to be worth as much as the entire global auto industry put together while producing 3% of its output.

You are right, I stand corrected on the name.

Current shares outstanding is 164.26M. You expect a market cap of $164-820B in the next 5-10 years? And that's without any dilution, which I think we could all safely agree is inevitable. With dilution your share price target imputes a greater than $1 trillion market cap on the high end. For a company that you expect to be manufacturing what? 5-8M vehicles/year? GM manufactures ~10M vehicles profitably today and has a market cap of $54B.

This is where I start to feel that otherwise intelligent and thoughtful individuals begin to divorce themselves from reality as Tesla bulls.

I didn't say I expect it, I say that IF it happens that is the price my math says.

In my math I use growth in number of shares of 4.5%/year, extrapolating from past which imo is a bit conservative.

GM has more liabilities than Tesla and I expect their margins to remain lower than the margins I am hoping Tesla might reach.

I don't think the bear argument will take that long to materialize. This year may well be crunch-time.
I think the Enron comparisons are way out there. It likely discredits some of your better points in the eyes of some people. I happen to think your bear argument is quite good without Tesla being Enron and Musk being Bernie Madoff

What do you mean you don't expect it? you're investing, so surely you think it grows significantly and has positive earnings at some point not in the overly distant future, right? My issue stems from the fact that it requires heavy speculation to arrive at a point where Tesla's future valuation would warrant the significant risks and very high current price. I feel like the potential would have to be unrealistically huge and/or many of the risks would need to dissipate for me to hop in. I look forward to following along though, they are certainly one of the most interesting companies today.

It is a possible outcome I give some probability. But it is not the only possible outcome...

All investments are speculation. You can speculate any scenario and give it a very low weight, it will still have a marginal effect on the expected value.

Yeah, if you don't believe it is has a positive expected value you should not invest. But at least it will be a fun stock to observe. If it fails it will likely fail spectacularly and if it succeeds it will hopefully succeed even more spectacularly!

Let's just hope that we remember that it, no matter the outcome, will be hard to tell if it was correct or incorrect to invest in 2017.

heltok,

That is some pretty serious walking back, and about as productive as someone suggesting the stock is worth 0 because its all fraud.

If you're gonna post some pie in the sky scenario, should prob preface it that this is your .1% best case scenario (as a massive tesla bull) so that we don't get this weird talking past each other stuff.

Sorry if you think that. I thought all my posts were very clear what I was arguing against and exactly what I said. Maybe I could have been more clear. Btw, these meta debates are not making anyone of us more informed or richer, can we please keep them to a minimum thanks.

It just speaks to Musk's PR savvy, branding expertise, and need to be adored by everyone. The female he brought on is an African-American woman. Musk simply appealing to trendy liberals because identity politics matters so much in today's world.

99.5% of all Tesla owners don't know the board members. What an absolutely stupid thing to say, not sure if you don't want to delete that post.

yeah I'd buy this

Yeah it's a good point. African American woman on a board is big diversity points and a shield against the diversity warriors ("your board is all middle-aged white men!" "no it isn't! . so shut up!"). Such things are requirements for a modern messiah.

When you look at Tesla though, it's basically a mechanism - via billions in government handouts - for turning African American female minimum wage dollars into subsidized sports cars for rich middle aged white men. It's the ultimate tool of the racist patriarchy.

Tesla are going vegan:
https://electrek.co/2017/07/22/tesla...ons-now-vegan/

You think that black females are the ones subsidizing rich whites? You think black females are overcontributing their share of the tax burden?

No.

Still. Both SolarCity and Tesla are a multi billion dollar redistribution of public funds from the poor to the rich. It's a pretty awful company from that perspective.

So Tesla interiors aren't cheap and ****ty enough (reviewers bag them) without substituting real leather with fake leather? Good job, Tesla.

TS is accurate this time. Luxury cars with plastic seats are all the rage.

Just realized there's no dashboard in a Model 3. That's going to get reviewed badly. WTF? How gross does that look? The touchscreen isn't a replacement for an instrument panel.

More recent pictures of a release candidate. This is comical:



Its like someone stuck an iPad on a half built car and called it completed. From the "let's leave **** out that people need" Musk school of design.

I actually think that looks pretty cool.

Not having an instrument panel above or behind the steering wheel seems like a mistake. You shouldn't have to move your eyes that far to see your speedometer.

And TS, this notion that Tesla is a vehicle for redistributing wealth from the poor to the rich seems quite ill conceived. If you're poor in this country, you contribute less in tax than you receive in benefits. Look up the revenues vs. benefits for black women--they get way more from the state than they put in. Tesla is a vehicle for redistributing wealth primarily from the rich to the subset of rich who buy a Tesla. The bottom 62% of taxpayers, which is people earning up to $50,000 AGI (which is way more than a typical poor minority woman earns) pay 5.7% of the total taxes, and have an average income tax rate of 4.3%. They aren't subsidizing a damn thing--they are a net burden.