Tesla unveiling Model 3...

Will I ever say my HEMI V8 farewell?
Can't imagine a life without the sound of a V8 anymore...

Probably will buy a Tesla model 3 for my wife ;-)

If you think dicking about in little electric cars or fitting useless lightbulbs in your house would make any iota of difference to the global heating, sit down and watch.

http://www.shipmap.org/

No, global heating is a non-issue for me, it can't be changed in my opinion!
I use LED lights in the house only to reduce my electricity bill, like you Fishtigua, I live on an Island with high rates...

Yes, I know mate, save my bloody batteries.

It's the city folk I worry about, they keep buying imported crap instead of just making their own.

(Ducks a lobbed shoe from a near cockpit)!

And probably gone in a year due to being way overpriced.

$40k for what is basically a hot hatch. Did GM learn nothing with the Volt debacle? If you insist on spending that kind of money on a small car, why not get a Fiat 500e($31k before tax credit/incentives) or a Tesla($35k before tax credit/incentives) for less than a Bolt. Just a couple examples. And they look better.

The one question nobody seems to have answered yet is this. I can go to work in my EV and back on a charge, but that means I also have to own a proper car/truck to do all the other towing/work/long trips. So that means double insurance, double testing, double maintainance. Who wants to pay double to save a little to drive an EV?

Actually, I had a woman who worked for me and she and her husband both drove small and not trip worthy cars. For vacation, they rented a car that would accommodate their entire family well. Having no car payments gave them a lot of freedom.

I guess that's true for me too. I ride to work on my ATV quadbike 700, when there I've got my Land Rover mobile toolchest/tow wagon. It mostly stays around the yard and slipway.

What Volt debacle. They sold over 100,000 cars, more than Tesla has

Or how about this

GAAP (Generally Agreed Accounting Principles, sometimes avoided by companies, like Dracula avoiding garlic) numbers do not bode well for Elonville.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...ron-ponzi-scheme-scathing-new-research-report

GAAP-Generally ACCEPTED Accounting Principles....

Now, they do and, in my opinion should not, present some interesting numbers. However, their public filings with the SEC are required to conform to GAAP. They reflect a company that loses money, that has lost most of it's investment, that has an inordinate amount of liabilities compared to assets (especially current). This is what the company is. Any investment with them is speculative. There clearly is no assurance they'll ever be profitable. On the other hand, those investing do so on the basis of the potential upside.

Here is a link to their annual report. All other filings also available on this site. Annual report is form 10-K.

http://ir.teslamotors.com/sec.cfm?D...PageNum=3&FormatFilter=&CIK=&NumberPerPage=10

I think the comparisons made in the above are a bit far fetched. Enron's reporting issues were with misrepresentations on public filings under GAAP. Allowing such was the death of Arthur Andersen.

Without subsidies, without gambling investors, no, they wouldn't exist. They are still for all practical purposes a start up company.

Make sure you only look at the financials and footnotes. MD&A are unaudited.

I do. I know quite well what to look at. Been through enough preparation of 10-K's myself as well as looking at others.

The forward looking statements are the worst part. In an established company you can minimize those, so that you make no promises. Obviously in Tesla's stage they make some pretty spectacular forward statements and have been sued as a result.

That wasn't necessarily directed at you. I haven't had time to read the link and was just providing some insight.

Ok...I go straight to Balance Sheets and Income Statements, then look at cash flow just to see how much additional funding they required during the year to keep going.

Now, I will be the first to admit that while I know a great deal about investing in ongoing businesses based on their performance and earnings, I don't have any grasp on investing in potential business, projections, or possibilities. I'm just too conservative. I wouldn't have invested in the early days of Apple or Microsoft. Those who did, did quite well.

That's the huge difference between this and Enron. People were investing in Enron thinking performance was there and then a huge part of the investment in Enron was the retirement funds of the employees. Employees also purchased a lot of stock. Here, the majority of investors are wealthy and can afford to lose what they invest plus understand the risks.

Still I find it just amazing that a company can raise $3.6 Billion without ever turning a profit. But that's just not the world I live in.

Olderboater and Germanyachting are hereby authorized to handle my meager portfolio--you dudes rock.

"Agreed v. Accepted"...when hairs are split as such, I'll surrender every time, OB.

BTW, the Publisher will not be pleased to read all this...