Connect with us

Investor's Corner

Tesla Motors is More Like NASA than GM

Published

on

Tesla-Fremont-Factory-Dash

5, 4, 3, 2, 1, We Have Liftoff

I never get too excited or depressed about Tesla’s stock price. Stock analysts worry, and a lot. I can’t imagine how they ever sleep at night knowing that during those hours they are completely off the influence grid. Because Tesla went public it made a new bed and as a consequence, has at least two major challenges it must constantly consider.

  • Build a new kind of personal transportation that must compete with a 100+ year old industrial age vertical
  • Fund itself through a traditional stock market model while not making what that model values as part of their mission

Disclaimer: I own a modest number of Tesla shares and have for years, but it’s not my retirement plan and never will be. For me the primary investment is the Mission of Tesla, which for now means the Model S. I’ve owned one since June 2013.

The idea that someone would have the courage (and smarts) to start a car company from scratch and be able to differentiate it from all other automakers, as well as their products in every way, was extremely attractive to me. Others have tried, Tucker, DeLorean, but they were trying to compete with essentially the same formula. That rarely works out. In this case we have disruption and not the bullying kind which is what we often see in tech sector firms.

Car Guys are Wired that Way

I was nearly born in a car. My mother used to regale me with the story of how she just barely made it to the hospital. Five more minutes and I would have emerged while in the back seat of a 1954 Chevrolet Delray. Growing up I was surrounded by relatives who raced cars, worked on automobile, both personal and commercial, and sold them to the public. I remember sitting in my Uncle’s Chevrolet sales room in Ohio while we were visiting one summer and seeing a sign that read, “A new Chevrolet is sold every minute.” Gasoline and oil ran through my veins and I inhaled more carbon monoxide helping my dad in the garage than was probably good for me. For the record, here’s a list of all the cars my father owned. I think it was all of them. The year column indicates when the car was manufactured, not when he purchased it.

Oscar's Car Life

[Image source: ModelScoil.com]

Yes, there’s a very big gap between 1969 and 1982. Completely unexplained. Maybe we both failed to make entries in the diary. Never mind, it’s more fun to call “slacker.” We lost my father to cancer in 1992. He would have been proud to say he preceded his latest car in death by a full year. I frequently imagine what it would be like to pull up in his driveway with my Model S and take him for a ride.

As you can see, my father’s list is heavily weighted toward U.S. carmakers, especially GeneralMotors.The recent stories about how GM covered up defective parts for decades was disturbing to me as someone who rode in, drove and owned them as an adult. The last time I owned a GM car was 1989. I switched because I couldn’t afford to pay the maintenance fees.

 Mission Control, We are Go for Launch

NASA_spacecraft_comparisonWhen President John F. Kennedy challenged America to “land a man on the moon and return him safely” in 1961, it was the catalyst for a series of missions meticulously planned and executed by NASA. Most had doubts we could do it successfully. The ones who believed worked at NASA. They developed a phased approach with three programs; Mercury, Gemini and Apollo. Mercury set out to successfully orbit the earth, study the ability to operate in space and recover both the astronaut and his craft. Gemini’s role was to study the effects of long term space missions on astronauts, perfect re-entry procedures and give astronauts extended practice time in a weightless environment. Once these were accomplished, the third program could begin. Apollo was about landing a man on the moon and returning him safely. I was enthralled with the space program growing up. I held my breath at every launch, was glued to the television for each mission and wondered what would come next.

Palo Alto, We May Have a Problem

Roadster S and XTesla is on a similar path. They started with the Roadster as a commercial prototype that would tell them lots about the viability of an electric car. From that came the Model S, an amazing form of Personal Transportation that won Motor Trend’s Car of the Year in 2013 and was rated the safest automobile ever built in tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in the same year. I view the forthcoming Model X, a SUV version of the Model S, together as a stepping stone to the third stage; the Model III. A smaller, much more affordable car within reach of a large number of U.S. households. Assuming they can progress, the Model E will bring them closer to accomplishing the Tesla mission:

To accelerate the advent of sustainable transport by bringing compelling mass market electric cars to market as soon as possible.

The cost of the three NASA programs is hard to pin down, but many sources say that Mercury cost about cost $277 million in 1965 dollars, Gemini cost $1.3 Billion in 1967 dollars and Apollo $20.4 Billion in 1970 dollars. Obviously these number increase greatly when you convert them to today’s dollars. These missions were a stunning achievement and brought innovative technology to the private sector in numerous ways. In other words, we all gained benefit from these programs.

The point of quoting the cost figures is to bring perspective into the discussion. Today’s dollars always appear small when we look back a decade or two. The difference in these programs is that NASA was appropriated the funds from Congress, Tesla must navigate the murky waters of being a public company.

Advertisement

Elon Musk’s release of all of Tesla’s patents was a courageous move. He realizes that no single car company can deliver enough electric vehicles to make a real difference in the planet’s climate. The intellectual property is out there. Others can choose to assist or ignore.

BMW and Chevrolet have purchased, taken apart and reassembled the Model S in their war rooms. Why? Most likely to see how they can defeat Tesla. It’s a competitive game after all, including how Tesla sells its cars. A combined mission here, like the one NASA mounted would be an amazing feat of American collaborative engineering on a level never before achieved, this time on ground vehicles. Automakers coming together, including Tesla, could bring about a change much faster than we could even imagine. I know I’m describing a fantasy in the world of stocks and profits.

Can Tesla really do it? Well, they landed the real estate for the Gigafactory. A great start. I believe it can be done and am pulling for them to succeed. Actually more than pulling for them. I drive the car and and am an ambassador for the brand everyday. I wish them success, not just to disrupt, but to innovate on a grand scale. To change history. A chance like that doesn’t come along all that often.

Image Credits: NASA, Tesla Motors, ModelScoil.com

Originally posted on ModelScoil

 

Advertisement

Investor's Corner

Tesla enters new stability phase, firm upgrades and adjusts outlook

Dmitriy Pozdnyakov of Freedom Capital upgraded his outlook on Tesla shares from “Sell” to “Hold” on Wednesday, and increased the price target from $338 to $406.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla China

Tesla is entering a new phase of stability in terms of vehicle deliveries, one firm wrote in a new note during the final week of October, backing its position with an upgrade and price target increase on the stock.

Dmitriy Pozdnyakov of Freedom Capital upgraded his outlook on Tesla shares from “Sell” to “Hold” on Wednesday, and increased the price target from $338 to $406.

While most firms are interested in highlighting Tesla’s future growth, which will be catalyzed mostly by the advent of self-driving vehicles, autonomy, and the company’s all-in mentality on AI and robotics, Pozdnyakov is solely focusing on vehicle deliveries.

The analyst wrote in a note to investors that he believes Tesla’s updated vehicle lineup, which includes its new affordable “Standard” trims of the Model 3 and Model Y, is going to stabilize the company’s delivery volumes and return the company to annual growth.

Tesla launches two new affordable models with ‘Standard’ Model 3, Y offerings

Advertisement

Tesla launched the new affordable Model 3 and Model Y “Standard” trims on October 7, which introduced two stripped-down, less premium versions of the all-electric sedan and crossover.

They are both priced at under $40,000, with the Model 3 at $37,990 and the Model Y at $39,990, and while these prices may not necessarily be what consumers were expecting, they are well under what Kelley Blue Book said was the average new car transaction price for September, which swelled above $50,000.

Despite the rollout of these two new models, it is interesting to hear that a Wall Street firm would think that Tesla is going to return to more stable delivery figures and potentially enter a new growth phase.

Many Wall Street firms have been more focused on AI, Robotics, and Tesla’s self-driving project, which are the more prevalent things that will drive investor growth over the next few years.

Wedbush’s Dan Ives, for example, tends to focus on the company’s prowess in AI and self-driving. However, he did touch on vehicle deliveries in the coming years in a recent note.

Advertisement

Ives said in a note on October 2:

“While EV demand is expected to fall with the EV tax credit expiration, this was a great bounce-back quarter for TSLA to lay the groundwork for deliveries moving forward, but there is still work to do to gain further ground from a delivery perspective.”

Tesla has some things to figure out before it can truly consider guaranteed stability from a delivery standpoint. Initially, the next two quarters will be a crucial way to determine demand without the $7,500 EV tax credit. It will also begin to figure out if its new affordable models are attractive enough at their current price point to win over consumers.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Bank of America raises Tesla PT to $471, citing Robotaxi and Optimus potential

The firm also kept a Neutral rating on the electric vehicle maker, citing strong progress in autonomy and robotics.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Bank of America has raised its Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) price target by 38% to $471, up from $341 per share.

The firm also kept a Neutral rating on the electric vehicle maker, citing strong progress in autonomy and robotics.

Robotaxi and Optimus momentum

Bank of America analyst Federico Merendi noted that the firm’s price target increase reflects Tesla’s growing potential in its Robotaxi and Optimus programs, among other factors. BofA’s updated valuation is based on a sum-of-the-parts (SOTP) model extending through 2040, which shows the Robotaxi platform accounting for 45% of total value. The model also shows Tesla’s humanoid robot Optimus contributing 19%, and Full Self-Driving (FSD) and the Energy segment adding 17% and 6% respectively.

“Overall, we find that TSLA’s core automotive business represents around 12% of the total value while robotaxi is 45%, FSD is 17%, Energy Generation & Storage is around 6% and Optimus is 19%,” the Bank of America analyst noted.

Still a Neutral rating

Despite recognizing long-term potential in AI-driven verticals, Merendi’s team maintained a Neutral rating, suggesting that much of the optimism is already priced into Tesla’s valuation. 

Advertisement

“Our PO revision is driven by a lower cost of equity capital, better Robotaxi progress, and a higher valuation for Optimus to account for the potential entrance into international markets,” the analyst stated.

Interestingly enough, Tesla’s core automotive business, which contributes the lion’s share of the company’s operations today, represents just 12% of total value in BofA’s model.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla analyst: ‘near zero chance’ Elon Musk’s $1T comp package is rejected

“There is a near-zero chance that $TSLA shareholders will vote down Elon’s new proposed comp plan at the Nov 6 shareholders’ meeting.”

Published

on

tesla elon musk

A Tesla analyst says there is “zero chance” that CEO Elon Musk’s new compensation package is rejected, a testament to the loyalty and belief many shareholders and investors have in the frontman.

Tesla investors will vote on November 6 at the annual Shareholder Meeting to approve a new compensation package for Musk, revealed by the company’s Board of Directors earlier this month.

The package, if approved, would give Musk the opportunity to earn $1 trillion in stock, an ownership concentration of over 27 percent (a major request of Musk’s), and a solidified future at the company.

The Tesla Community on X, the social media platform Musk bought in 2023, is overwhelmingly in favor of the pay package, though a handful of skeptics remain.

Nevertheless, the big pulls of this vote are held by proxy firms and other large-scale investors. Two of them, Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and Glass Lewis, said they would be voting against Musk’s proposed compensation plan.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm

Today, the State Board of Administration of Florida (SBA) said it would vote in favor of Musk’s newly-proposed pay day, making it the first large-scale shareholder to announce it would support the CEO’s pay.

One analyst said that Musk’s payday is inevitable. Gary Black of the Future Fund said today there is a “near-zero chance” that shareholders will allow Musk’s pay package to be rejected:

There is a near-zero chance that $TSLA shareholders will vote down Elon’s new proposed comp plan at the Nov 6 shareholders’ meeting.”

He added an alternative perspective from Wedbush’s Dan Ives, who said that he had a better chance of starting for the New York Yankees than the comp package not being approved.

Black’s the Future Fund sold its Tesla holdings earlier this year. He explained that the firm believed the company’s valuation was too disconnected from fundamentals, citing the P/E ratio of 188x and declining earnings estimates.

The firm maintained its $310 price target, and shares were trading at $356.90 that day.

Shares closed at $452.42 today.

The latest predictions from betting platform Kalshi have shown Musk’s comp package has a 94 percent chance of being approved:

Continue Reading

Trending