1/ Thread: The Great TSLA MNPI Mystery- A Theory By QL
Mystery #1: It's been almost a year since any unplanned insider sales at Tesla. (The last was Dec 7)
This is highly unusual. Before we typical saw sales every few weeks, if not more frequently.
Mystery #1: It's been almost a year since any unplanned insider sales at Tesla. (The last was Dec 7)
This is highly unusual. Before we typical saw sales every few weeks, if not more frequently.
2/ Mystery #2: During this same period, $TSLA's balance sheet has become extremely ugly- massively negative working capital, even as they've cut back on critical CapEx. CapEx they need to develop the Semi & Y. Previously $TSLA had never been shy about raising.
3/ They've never let their balance sheet become this bad. If Elon wants to hurt the shorts, raising $3B would destroy us. Most of us are betting on a relatively quick BK based on their terrible financials. That won't happen if they raise.
4/ Shorts are puzzled by these two items- no insider sales, no raise. It's been almost a year. What's going on?
5/ One theory that explains both facts is undisclosed Material Non-Public Information (MNPI). If insiders know MNPI they cannot sell until the information is publicly revealed. In a raise, all MNPI would have to be disclosed. AFAIK, there's no other theory that fits both facts.
6/ But the theory has a problem- what MNPI could be so catastrophic?
This is a stock which shrugs of SEC & DoJ investigations! It shrugs off CAO's leaving after 1 month. Shrugs off execs leaving by the boat load. It shrugs off years of missed production targets!
This is a stock which shrugs of SEC & DoJ investigations! It shrugs off CAO's leaving after 1 month. Shrugs off execs leaving by the boat load. It shrugs off years of missed production targets!
7/ It would have to be something very meaningful, but not criminal, or outright fraud. Also something they could plausibly keep hidden as an internal trade secret to justify not disclosing. I've never figured out what it could possibly be- but now I've got an idea.
8/ In the legendary Q1 melt down, what precipitates "go to YouTube"?
It's NOT the CapEx questions. The question is: "of the reservations that actually opened and made available to configure, can you let us know like what... percentage have actually taken steps to configure?"
It's NOT the CapEx questions. The question is: "of the reservations that actually opened and made available to configure, can you let us know like what... percentage have actually taken steps to configure?"
9/ They've delivered something around 47K RWD, and that now includes a substantial # of non-resv configurations. If the # of eligible US/CA configurations is like 250K, that's somewhere between a 15% and 19% take rate!
10/ The Resv. take rate is what they desperately don't want to disclose. In Q1 it was well under 20%, which is a disaster from the standpoint of a 10k or even 5k/wk production rate.
It's probably still under 33% even with AWD/P now released.
It's probably still under 33% even with AWD/P now released.
11/ This one number would blow up the whole story. Every analyst could see that come Nov, TSLA is in big trouble from a demand perspective. TSLA's valuation is predicated on unlimited demand. Take that away and now it doesn't matter if they get to 10k/wk- they can't sell them
12/ If TSLA had announced these numbers, every analyst would know that demand was a problem. They'd know that most of the 400K were either fictitious, scalpers, or $35K buyers (who'd also want the $7.5K credit)
13/ Everything they have done since Dec has served to obscure this number- a number which TSLA could easily produce. From TMC and other data sources we can now be confident that the take rate is <33%, but analysts still have plausible deniability.
14/ That's my theory. The execs inside have known the take rate since early Dec. They can't sell and they cannot raise- that 400K number is now obsolete since they know the true expected number of sales.
15/ This raises the possibility that they will disclose this soon. They will give some bogus guidance about sales to placate analysts and maybe a close to $0 loss for Q3. Use the decent production GAAP and production #'s to try to raise? Serious risk for Bulls.
16/ One more data point- my recollection is that a Q about take rates was asked in Q4 call, and Elon obfuscated with talk about historical take rates. Unfortunately, I cannot find a Q4 transcript to confirm this. If anyone has that confirmation (or contradiction) would be great
Just to be clear, there will be continuing non-resv. demand. But all signs point to this being in the 1-2K/wk range. 2K is still a big number- 4x the Model S sales rate in US! But far below current production, and well below any sort of breakeven for TSLA.
