Forums

Join The Community
RegisterLogin

NY Times revisits Tesla Motors

"But whether Tesla remains a good advertisement for government aid partly depends on how the company now performs. Should Tesla falter badly, it will only highlight the risks of lending to EXPERIMENTAL companies."

"“The reason the loan is being paid off is NOT BECAUSE OF VEHICLE SALES,” said Patrick J. Michaels, a director at the Cato Institute, a libertarian-leaning research group."

But it is NOT CLEAR whether the initial burst of demand for its sedan was MERELY the result of enthusiasts rushing to get their cars. Skeptics doubt the market is as big as the company projects, and expect the shares to PLUNGE when that becomes apparent.

"While Tesla has made ambitious targets for selling cars, its more immediate financial projections seem less impressive. It recently suggested that cash flows from its operations MIGHT not be positive in the second quarter and it seemed to forecast a drop in North American sales in the second half of the year." (B/C of Euro Shipments)

"In several instances, the department softened the conditions of the loan. These amendments to important covenants MIGHT have allowed Tesla to avoid falling into a default, which COULD have been embarrassing for the Energy Department after the collapse of Solyndra."

EMPHASIS MINE

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/05/22/tesla-repays-465-million-governme...

It's only a little over half my original # of shares Brian. But even if I were forced to sell at $65/share, I'd get more cash back than I'd invested.

And yes, I had dreamed that. I knew it was unrealistic, but fantasized, and it happened. Actually, I didn't start investing until early 2011. And I'm still fantasizing that TSLA will reach $1000 per share, someday.

If it does David, I'll be set for life :P
I'm not close enough for my stock to buy a MS yet, but that's ok, I still can't make up my mind between S, X, or GenIII :P


X Deutschland Site Besuchen