Nicola Tesla Wasn’t the Only One: U.S. places ‘Secrecy Orders’ on Thousands of Inventions

 

By Arjun Walia, Collective-Evolution | 

Government secrecy is running rampant in an age where more and more people are demanding transparency. Did you know that the U.S. Government classifies over 500 million pages of documents each year? Justification for the mass classification of information is (apparently) done for the sake of “national security,” but as we know:

“The dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts, far outweigh the dangers that are cited to justify them. There is a very grave danger that an announced need for an increased level of security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of censorship and concealment. That I do not tend to permit, so long as it’s in my control.” – JFK (source)

If a scholar wanted to research political, historical, scientific, or any other type of archival work, it would prove difficult and limiting seeing that most of their government’s activities are kept a secret. It is truly impossible to access the factual history of their country.

The office is supposed to legally protect the inventions of entrepreneurs and companies, some of whom have developed ground breaking technology. Unfortunately, that’s not the case as new documents obtained via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) reveal how the Patent Office has been using a secret system to withhold the approval of some applications.

This 50-page document was obtained by Kilpatrick Towsend & Stockton, LLP, who commonly represent major tech companies that include Apple, Google and Twitter (to name a few). You can view that entire document HERE. (1)

The program delaying patent applications is called the Sensitive Application Warning System (SWAS). Usually, when an application is submitted for a patent approval it requires a couple of examiners who work with the Patent office to go through their process of approval. This process usually takes approximately 1 to 2 years, but  applications that are filed in SAWS must be approved from several people, and can be delayed for a number of years.

“There is no official channel to notify an applicant once their patent is placed in the system, and the Patent Office has denied requests to divulge what applications are on the SAWS list.” (source)

The documents also indicate areas of technology that might have a patent application placed in the SAWS program – these include smartphones, internet-enabling systems and more. This information is set to be published in an online journal called “Law360” to inform the public. Tech Columnist Alyssa Bereznak at Yahoo News states that most companies are fully aware of this.

I first came across this recent information in her article, which you can view here, but I felt compelled to add more information.

As you will see below, there is more information that has surfaced prior to these documents that suggest this type of “invention secrecy” goes far beyond these technologies.

One great example (out of many) of delayed patent applications comes from Dr. Gerald F. Ross. He filed a patent application for a new invention he had devised to defeat the jamming of electromagnetic transmissions at specified frequencies. It was not until June 17, 2014 (almost 37 years later) that this patent was granted. (2)

Invention Secrecy Is Still Going Strong

As great as it is to see new information pertaining to invention secrecy come to light, it’s also important to note (as reported by the Federation of American Scientists; see annotated bibliography) that there were over 5000 inventions that were under secrecy orders at the end of Fiscal Year 2014, which marked the highest number of  secrecy orders in effect since 1994.(3)

This is all thanks to an act many people are unaware of. It’s called the “Invention Secrecy Act” and it was written up in 1951. Under this act, patent applications on new inventions can be subject to secrecy orders. These orders can restrict their publication if government agencies believe that their disclosure would be harmful to national security.(4)(5)

As mentioned earlier, “national security” has become an excuse and justification for the classification of a large amount of information on a variety of topics that the public is deliberately kept in the dark about. Apparently, many of these projects and inventions go far above and beyond presidential knowledge.

“It is ironic that the U.S. should be fighting monstrously expensive wars allegedly to bring democracy to those countries, when it itself can no longer claim to be called a democracy when trillions, and I mean thousands of billions of dollars, have been spent on projects which both congress and the commander in chief know nothing about.”  (source) – Paul Hellyer, Former Canadian Defense Minister.

So what type of technology is under restriction under the Invention Secrecy Act? We don’t really know, but a previous list from 1971 was obtained by researcher Michael Ravnitzky. Most of the technology listed seems to be related to various military applications. You can view that list HERE. (6)

As Steven Aftergood from the Federation of American Scientists reports:

“The 1971 list indicates that patents for solar photovoltaic generators were subject to review and possible restriction if the photovoltaics were more than 20% efficient. Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction if they offered conversion efficiencies in “excess of 70-80%.” (source)

Secrecy is No Secret

A couple of years before the Invention Secrecy Act of 1951, the National Security Act was created. As a result, a number of intelligence groups and executive bodies followed. None of these groups had any active congressional oversight. The United States has a history of government agencies existing in secret for years. The National Security Agency (NSA) was founded in 1952, its existence was hidden until the mid 1960’s. Even more secretive is the National Reconnaissance Office, which was founded in 1960 but remained completely secret for 30 years. Along with this secrecy is the information these agencies obtained, and continue to obtain until this day.

Special Access Programs are another great example of secrecy. From these we have unacknowledged and waived SAPs. These programs do not exist publicly, but they do indeed exist. They are better known as ‘deep black programs.’ A 1997 US Senate report described them as “so sensitive that they are exempt from standard reporting requirements to the Congress.” (7)(8)

We don’t really hear about black budget programs, or about people who have actually looked into them. However, the topic was discussed in 2010 by Washington Post journalists Dana Priest and William Arkin. Their investigation lasted approximately two years and concluded that America’s classified world has:

“Become so large, so unwieldy and so secretive that no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work.” (9)

You can read more about the Black Budget in detail HERE.

Today, it seems to be evidently clear that secrecy has lead to what Dwight Eisenhower warned us about:

“In the council of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential disaster of the rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.” (source)

What Has All This Secrecy Led To?

The fact that so much information is concealed from the public domain has led to a kind of “breakaway civilization.” A term coined by Richard Dolan.

Someone, or some groups are “in the know.” This or these groups who have had access to information over many decades that the public hasn’t is no doubt living and perceiving the world in a different way from what the masses do. This has led to a world within worlds, a separate civilization apart of our own who have access to knowledge that we don’t. Who are they? What are they doing? Why are they doing it? What do they know?

You can read what Richard has to say about it here.

Sources:

(1) http://www.scribd.com/doc/249032641/SAWS-FOIA-Response 

(2)http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,754,801.PN.&OS=PN/8,754,801&RS=PN/8,754,801

(3)  http://fas.org/sgp/othergov/invention/stats.html

(4) http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/part-II/chapter-17

(5)http://fas.org/sgp/othergov/invention/35usc17.html

About FAS: Visit their website here. View their board members here.

The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) works to provide science-based analysis of and solutions to protect against catastrophic threats to national and international security. Specifically, FAS works to reduce the spread and number of nuclear weapons, prevent nuclear and radiological terrorism, promote high standards for nuclear energy’s safety and security, illuminate government secrecy practices, as well as track and eliminate the global illicit trade of conventional, nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

FAS was founded in 1945 by many of the Manhattan Project scientists who wanted to prevent nuclear war and is one of the longest serving organizations in the world dedicated to reducing nuclear threats and informing the public debate by providing technically-based research and analysis on these issues.

FAS is a non-profit membership organization, with members from the academic, non-profit and government communities. For more information on FAS membership and to join, please visit our Membership page.

FAS staff comprise a highly skilled and dedicated team with professional experience in biology, biochemistry, chemistry, environmental science, nuclear engineering, physics, and political science. More than 65 Nobel science laureates have endorsed FAS as members of the Board of Sponsors.

(6) http://fas.org/sgp/othergov/invention/pscrl.pdf 

(7) http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CDOC-105sdoc2/content-detail.html

(8) Dolan, M. Richard and Zabel, Bryce. A.D. After Disclosure. New Page Books. 2012

(9) http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/

The post Nicola Tesla Wasn’t the Only One: U.S. places ‘Secrecy Orders’ on Thousands of Inventions appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Nikola Tesla Relied on the Power of Visualization – Here’s How to Use it in your Life (VIDEO)

 

By Dylan Charles, Waking Times | 

Although he was unique in many ways, one of the most fascinating aspects Nikola Tesla’s life was his extraordinary power of visualization. He was gifted with an unusually vivid imagination, and even from a very early age he was able to see things others could not.

“If he thought of an object it would appear before him exhibiting the appearance of solidity and massiveness. So greatly did these visions possess the attributes of actual objects that it was usually difficult for him to distinguish between vision and reality. This abnormal faculty functioned in a very useful fashion in his school work with mathematics.” [Source]

This mental faculty had a profound effect on his career, and some of his most famous inventions, such as the AC motor and the Tesla coil, were envisioned in absolute detail in his mind’s eye before he ever set anything to paper. Bernard Carlson, author of, Tesla: Inventor of the Electrical Age, writes:

“In conjuring up these schemes, Tesla realized the power of his ability to generate mental images. Not only could he use his imagination to undertake fantastic journeys, but he could also direct this talent toward creating new machines. “I observed to my delight that I could visualize with the greatest facility,”he later claimed. “I needed no models, drawings or experiments. I could picture them all as real in my mind.” Moreover, for Tesla, working with mental images meant that he could concentrate on identifying and exploring the ideal behind an invention.” ~Bernard Carlson

Tesla was ahead of his time in many regards, but his powers of visualization harken back to the original mystery schools. As noted in The Kybalion, which is based the ancient tradition of Hermeticism, “THE ALL IS MIND; The Universe is Mental.” For a very long time we have known that reality is first and foremost created within the mind.

Is there no third way in which MAN creates? Yes, there is–he CREATES MENTALLY! And in so doing he uses no outside materials, nor does he reproduce himself, and yet his Spirit pervades the Mental Creation.

…we are justified in considering that THE ALL creates the Universe MENTALLY, in a manner akin to the process whereby Man creates Mental Images.

THE ALL can create in no other way except mentally, without either using material (and there is none to use), or else reproducing itself (which is also impossible). ~The Kybalion

Inherent in our being human is the capacity to physically manifest ideas generated within the mind, and while some seem to have a greater natural ability for this than others, we all share the same anatomy. As such we can all employ visualization with great effect in our lives.

Deep within the brain is the pineal gland and a system of nonvisual photoreceptors, which, scientifically, is known to help to synchronize us with the periodic rhythms of natural light. An internal eye, if you will. Not coincidentally, the gland is also known as the third eye, or the ‘seat of the soul,’ because its widely recognized as the part of the brain which connects us to spiritual experience and facilitates as our inner vision.

It is with this mechanism of internal vision that the mind is able to project unto itself mental images of anything and everything. This is how we create reality. If we choose images that serve us well, our lives blossom, but if neglect to give attention to the mind’s visions, we create chaos in our lives.

Author Al Smith refers to this process as ‘imagineering,’ and relates it to the act of daydreaming, which unlike night dreaming (while we are asleep) is a form of conscious, intentional dreaming, where we actively choose the images we wish to see.

“The mental images you consciously or unconsciously design (imagineer) onto your mental screen are totally understood by the collective subconscious. In other words, your daydreams largely dictate your reality. Your future is largely a reflection of the most recurrent images you’ve displayed on your mind’s screen and the images of you of those who know you. The more times you mentally image a thing, the greater its chances of materializing into your reality. Think of daydreams as votes for events to happen in your future. It’s the only true democracy. And, it’s perpetually happening inside your head all day long and throughout our universe.” ~Al Smith, How We Create Reality

In the case of Tesla, much of this power came naturally to him, but as Smith points out, imagineering is a conscious process.

This is a skill that can be strengthened with effort and practice, and anyone can do it, so long as the try. Tesla was really only using a highly developed version of a mental capacity that we all share.

Regarding how Teslas put these faculties into use, Bernard Carlson explains that it was an intentional practice of a combination of imagination, designing in the mind’s eye, and persistence.

As a simple but potent example of how powerful visualization can be, the following technique can show you. It’s called the lemon visualization, and if you want to radically transform your life for the better, this is a great place to start.

---

About the Author

Dylan Charles is the editor of Waking Times and co-host of Redesigning Reality, both dedicated to ideas of personal transformation, societal awakening, and planetary renewal. His personal journey is deeply inspired by shamanic plant medicines and the arts of Kung Fu, Qi Gong and Yoga. After seven years of living in Costa Rica, he now lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains, where he practices Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and enjoys spending time with family. He has written hundreds of articles, reaching and inspiring millions of people around the world.

The post Nikola Tesla Relied on the Power of Visualization – Here’s How to Use it in your Life (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Uninvestable Tesla

Tesla is an uninvestable stock for me, not just because of its high valuation but also because it fails our fairly basic quality test, which I shamelessly borrowed from Warren Buffett: Would I still buy this stock if right after the purchase the stock market were to close for ten years? If you are a big Tesla car and stock fan, before you start throwing rocks at me, pause and wait till you finish this article – the rocks and I will still be there.

Think about the next ten years. But before you start mentally drawing upward-sloping lines from the current environment into the next decade and drooling over the rosy vision of Tesla’s future that Elon Musk has painted – produce half a million model 3s and bunches of semis and roadsters, and then send a roadster to Mars (I kid you not; that is in his 2018 plan – I’d like you to think about another version of the next ten years: higher (maybe much higher) interest rates, a recession in the US and around the globe, and a less promiscuous bond market where Tesla would have pay a substantial premium to US Treasuries (as would any other company that loses over a billion dollars a year in a highly cyclical industry). And now answer this question: Would Tesla survive this change in economic weather if it happened next year or even three years out? And the answer is … a weak “maybe” at best, and “unlikely” at worst.

The counterargument I’d get: Yes, but we are not going into a recession. Actually, we are. I (and nobody else, for that matter) just don’t know when. After nine years of appreciating stock markets and tepid economic growth, we tend to forget that recessions are a regular  economic fact of life, usually arriving every four to five years (so we are overdue for one). Most Millennials have yet to experience adulthood (have a job and a family) through a recession. They have also never had to borrow at high interest rates – but that is liable to happen, too.

Recessions are usually caused by expansions. Recessions are like the hangover that comes after the wild college party (economic expansion). It’s hard to have a good, fun college party with lots of booze and then not experience a hangover. (I am not speaking from recent personal experience but rather am trying to communicate in language to which Millennials can relate). During the expansion party, companies may build up too much inventory or erect too many factories, and consumers may overconsume.

If you own high-quality companies, ones that meet Buffett’s “ten-year stock market closed rule” (as we do), you don’t have to spend a lot of time and energy thinking about when the recession will hit (we don’t). However, if you own Tesla you’d better have a very clear, shiny crystal ball that will reveal lots of detail about the direction of interest rates and the global economy.

Recessions are tough for deeply cyclical companies: The bulk of their costs are fixed, and thus lower sales usually result in significant declines in net income and often lead to losses. This is why car companies and their deeply cyclical brethren don’t trade at high price-to-earnings levels when the economy is doing well. That is when their earnings are high. The market doesn’t usually take these high earnings at face value, knowing full well that there are lower earnings (or losses) around the corner when recession comes. Tesla, however, doesn’t have to worry about this low price-to-earnings problem, because in spite of its $50 billion market valuation, it has no earnings, just losses. It trades at whatever price-to-future Elon Musk tells you it does.

If you own Tesla stock and you only see one rosy (Musk) version of the future, you are ignoring the very real risk that the benign economic environment of today will not persist indefinitely into the future . Good luck – you’ll need plenty.

One additional but very important point. In the past I was dismissive of traditional automakers’ ability to compete with Tesla. I felt their hundred-year past of producing internal combustion engine (ICE) cars was going to hold them back, the same way Nokia’s dumb-phone past prevented it from effectively competing against Apple’s iPhone. Nokia tried to take the dumb-phone operating system Symbian and turn it into a smartphone operating system. It had a lot of engineers who knew the Symbian operating system, and thus it seemed a logical path at the time. The right approach would have been the more difficult one: Hire new engineers and create a brand new operating system. There was absolutely no reason why Nokia could not have developed its own Android-like OS, even if doing so would have required either retraining or, more likely, laying off Symbian engineers.

For a while it looked like I was right about cars, as the Big Three took a hybrid (Symbian-like) approach to electric cars – they were having a hard time saying goodbye to ICE. However, as we look at the future lines of electric cars coming from  US and German automakers, we now see them severing the connection to their ICE past and embracing electric.

Disclosure: I am an unsecured lender to Tesla through my $1,000 deposit on a Model 3. 

So, how does one invest in this overvalued stock market? Our strategy is spelled out in this fairly lengthy article.

Vitaliy Katsenelson is chief investment officer at  Investment Management Associates  in Denver, Colo. He is the author of “Active Value Investing” (Wiley) and “The Little Book of Sideways Markets” (Wiley). Read more on Katsenelson’s  Contrarian Edge  blog.

Carpetbagger Paradise - by James McShirley

The term carpetbagger originally referred to post-Civil War Northerners who

moved to the South during reconstruction for either economic gain, political

gain, or both. They frequently arrived with hastily sewn suitcases made of

carpet remnants, hence the moniker “carpetbaggers.” Carpetbagging has

subsequently also become a popular description for non-native politicians who

for expediency and opportunity establish political roots in some newfound

territory. (Think: The Bush family in Texas or Hillary Clinton in New York.)

Carpetbagging has now evolved to describe virtually any unscrupulous, or

opportunistic outsider seeking financial gain. In the context of this last

definition there has never been a time when carpetbagging has experienced such a

renaissance as it has in modern finance. It’s the golden era of carpetbagging.

You could say, in fact,

we are living in a veritable carpetbagger’s paradise.

They Should have called it “Carpetbanking”

Of course, by definition

all

bankers are in the business of carpetbagging. The very nature of owning the

pieces of paper we exchange for real goods and services means there’s a constant

source of outside profiteering, at the expense of local people in useful

society. You can’t buy, sell, lease, or conduct a single transaction without a

carpetbanker somewhere getting his cut. Maybe though in the case of bankers we

need to update the term carpetbagger to “Guccibagger.” Unscrupulous outsiders

plying their trade elsewhere has been a Fed tradition since 1913.

We’re no longer in Bedford Falls, Mr. Bailey. Mr. Potter’s heirs are alive, and

prospering all over the planet.

National Pastime

Carpetbagging has indeed become so fashionable as to be a National pastime.

Fully aided and abetted by the (not) Federal (and not) Reserve, with full

cooperation from the Federal government it has morphed to new dimensions. Things

like ZIRP, stock market bubbles, housing bubbles, and everything bubblelicious

in between are all fully sanctioned events. By “sanctioned” I mean, heavily

subsidized; ultimately by YOU, dear taxpayer. Carpetbaggers thrive on OPM and

implicit guarantees of success. Why reinvent the con when you can merely pack up

your magic carpetbag and climb on the carpetbagging hypersonic loop? All aboard!

The (Dis)information Super Highway

The carpetbagging highway is in fact a 10-lane super interstate stretching all

the way from Silicon Valley to Washington DC. Buy Tesla? Of course, that Musk

chap is working on a hyper-speed of light gismo which will transport you to Mars

in the morning and still have you back by 8 PM to watch

American Idol.

With that in mind how can TSLA stock not hit $5,000? Amazon? It’s a foregone

conclusion that the Bezos machine will eventually sell

everything

to

everybody.

He’s not only going to sell everything to everybody, he’s going to be able to

read your mind and deliver it while you are still thinking of it! Gone are the

days of even having to bother with those pesky keystrokes. Yessirree, in the

land of Amazon there will be no exertion, no jobs, and no profits, yet somehow,

it’s all going to work out. Who cares about social chaos and starvation when you

can load the boat on AMZN

now

and get rich! Living in a carpetbagger’s paradise is like watching perpetual

Brady Bunch reruns. Everything works out, and it always ends with a happy song.

Vegas Hotel, or a Tree in Southern Greece?

Gold and silver owners know full well the carpetbagging nature of derivatives,

and how they are used to suppress and manipulate the underlying product. You in

fact don’t need to know a damn thing about mining, precious metals, or even

what

gold and silver are, to profit handsomely from them. Does gold come from the

ground, or does it grow on trees in southern Greece and Italy? Isn’t a golden

nugget some hotel in Vegas where Elvis hung out? Who cares, why bother, just

know that you will make money playing the cartel game. Short gold on 1% rallies,

NFP Fridays, option expirations, and other key no-no times and you will come out

like a Northern carpetbagger in 1868 Biloxi. The name of the game is take what

they give you, and it’s obvious TPTB are fully quiescent in facilitating paper

profits derived from suppressing precious metals, and in doing so ruin an entire

industry.

Hard Times (At least for Now)

These are no doubt hard times for precious metal investors. The discouragement

is understandable, the unfairness of it all hard to swallow. The Bitcoin, Tesla,

and FAANG carpetbaggers have been partying like it’s 1999, a most recent

investing mania era, in addition to the Prince song. Carpetbaggers rarely see

the violent upper cuts that hit them out of nowhere. Like a few Northerners who

got tossed out on their ear into a muddy street in the South it wouldn’t take

much to turn this carpetbagger’s paradise into a 1-way muddy street to hell.

Tesla, Amazon, and other Uber-bubbly delights can become the latest incarnation

of 1990’s dot.com stocks, which never made money and fell back their intrinsic

values: zero, or near-zero. Pack your (non-carpet) bags, we’re traveling back to

the world of real

money;

which is always gold and silver. It’s been a long journey from 2011. The return

trip should be far more pleasant, even if it isn’t on a Mars hyper-light-speed

gismo.

James McShirley
November 30, 2017

There Is Just One Thing Preventing Elon Musk"s Vision From Coming True: The Laws Of Physics

When Elon Musk stepped on stage at Tesla’s product-launch event earlier this month, he knew the market’s confidence in Tesla’s brand had sunk to an all-time low since he took over the company a decade ago. So, he resorted to a tactic that should be familiar to anybody who has been following the company: Shock and awe.

While the event was ostensibly scheduled to introduce Tesla’s new semi-truck – a model that won’t make it’s market debut for another two years, assuming Tesla sticks to its product-rollout deadline – Musk had a surprise in store: A new model of the Tesla Roadster that, he bragged, would be the fastest production car ever sold.

Musk made similarly lofty claims about the battery life and performance of both vehicles. The Tesla semi-trucks, he said, would be able to travel for 500 miles on a single charge. The roadster could clock a staggering 620 – more than double the closest challenger.

There was just one problem, as Tesla fans would later find out, courtesy of Bloomberg: None of it was true.

In fact, many of the promises defy the capabilities of modern battery technology.

Elon Musk knows how to make promises. Even by his own standards, the promises made last week while introducing two new Tesla vehicles—the heavy-duty Semi Truck and the speedy Roadster—are monuments of envelope pushing.

 

To deliver, according to close observers of battery technology, Tesla would have to far exceed what is currently thought possible.

 

Take the Tesla Semi: Musk vowed it would haul an unprecedented 80,000 pounds for 500 miles on a single charge, then recharge 400 miles of range in 30 minutes. That would require, based on Bloomberg estimates, a charging system that"s 10 times more powerful than one of the fastest battery-charging networks on the road today—Tesla’s own Superchargers.

 

The diminutive Tesla Roadster is promised to be the quickest production car ever built. But that achievement would mean squeezing into its tiny frame a battery twice as powerful as the largest battery currently available in an electric car.

 

These claims are so far beyond current industry standards for electric vehicles that they would require either advances in battery technology or a new understanding of how batteries are put to use, said Sam Jaffe, battery analyst for Cairn Energy Research in Boulder, Colorado. In some cases, experts suspect Tesla might be banking on technological improvements between now and the time when new vehicles are actually ready for delivery.

 

“I don"t think they"re lying,” Jaffe said. “I just think they left something out of the public reveal that would have explained how these numbers work."

While Jaffe seems inclined to give Tesla the benefit of the doubt, there’s little, if anything, in Musk’s recent behavior to justify this level of credulity. In recent months, Musk has repeatedly suffered the humiliation of seeing his lies and half-truths exposed. For example, the self-styled “visionary” claimed during the unveiling of the Model 3 Sedan that he would have 1,500 copies of the new model ready for customers by the end of the third quarter. Instead, the company managed a meager 260 models as factory-line workers at its Fremont, Calif. factory struggled to assemble the vehicles by hand as the Model 3 assembly line hadn’t been completed.

Increasingly agitated customers who placed deposits with Tesla back in March 2016 have begun asking for refunds, only to be chagrined by the company’s sluggish response. While nobody in the mainstream press has (somewhat bafflingly) made the connection, Tesla revealed earlier this month that it burned an unprecedented $1.4 billion of cash during the third quarter - or roughly $16 million per day - despite Elon Musk"s assurance that Tesla had its "all-time best quarter" for Model S and X deliveries.

And let’s not forget the fiasco surrounding Tesla’s autopilot software. Musk has repeatedly exaggerated its performance claims. And customers who paid more than $8,000 for a software upgrade more than a year ago have been repeatedly disappointed by delays and sub-par performance.

Musk’s exaggerations about the Tesla Roadster were particularly egregious.

Tesla claims that its new $200,000 Roadster is the quickest production car ever made, clocking zero to 60 in 1.9 seconds. Even crazier is the car’s unprecedented battery range: some 620 miles on a single charge. That"s a longer range than any battery-powered vehicle on the road—almost twice as long as Tesla"s class-leading Model S and Model X.

 

To achieve such power and range, Musk said the tiny Roadster will need to pack a massive 200-kilowatt-hour battery. That’s twice the size of any battery Tesla currently has on the road. Musk has previously said he won"t be making the packs bigger on the Model S and Model X because of space constraints. So how can he double the pack size in the smaller Roadster?

 

BNEF’s Morsy has a twofold answer. First, he expects Tesla will probably double-stack battery packs, one on top of the other, beneath the Roadster"s floor. That creates some engineering problems for the battery-management system, but those should not be insurmountable. Still, Morsy said, the batteries required would be too large to fit in such a small frame.

 

“I really don’t think the car you saw last week had the full 200 kilowatt hours in it,” Morsy said. “I don’t think it’s physically possible to do that right now."

Is it possible that, thanks to incremental improvements in battery density and cost, Musk somehow manages to hit these lofty targets? Perhaps, though, as Bloomberg points out, the fact that Musk is basing these claims on a set of projections that haven’t yet been realized is hardly confidence inspiring.

To be sure, there’s an important caveat to Musk’s claims. While they may be staggeringly exaggerated, there’s still the possibility that incremental improvements in battery technology will make these targets more feasible by the time the models hit the market.

Again, Musk may be banking on the future. While Tesla began taking deposits on the Roadster immediately—$50,000 for the base model—the first vehicles won"t be delivered until 2020. Meanwhile, battery density has been improving at a rate of 7.5 percent a year, meaning that by the time production starts, packs will be smaller and more powerful, even without a major breakthrough in battery chemistry.

 

“The trend in battery density is, I think, central to any claim Tesla made about both the Roadster and the Semi,” Morsy said. “That’s totally fair. The assumptions on a pack in 2020 shouldn’t be the same ones you use today."

However, in its analysis of the feasibility of Musk’s claims, Bloomberg overlooked one crucial detail: Back in August, the company"s veteran director of battery technology, Kurt Kelty, unexpectedly resigned to "explore new opportunities," abruptly ending a tenure with the company that stretched for more than a decade, and comes at a critical time for Elon Musk.

Kelty’s resignation – part of an exodus of high-level executives that is alarming in and of itself - hardly inspires confidence in Tesla’s ability to innovate. We’ve noticed a trend with Tesla: The more the company underdelivers, the more Musk overpromises.

In our opinion, this is not a sustainable business strategy.  
 

Elon Musk Pulls An ICO

By Chris at www.CapitalistExploits.at

First up, this beauty received by one of the crew here at HMS Capitalist Exploits:

Marketing an ICO...

Killer!

The Tesla ICO

Speaking of ICOs, last week something amazing, breathtaking, and revolutionary happened. We had another ICO... the very first of its kind.

An Initial Car Offering.

Pundits said it was an unveiling of the Tesla semi truck, but we now all know it was actually a thinly veiled capital raise.

Like many good things in life, this also began with foreplay.

Customers and shareholders are like women ovens - they need to be warmed up first.

So a few weeks before launching the ICO, the oven was dialled up:

Amazingly, I woke up this morning and, though having watched the unveiling, I looked around me and couldn"t notice anything different (though my dog had this strange look in his eyes).

My mind was surprisingly still in my skull and had not been sent into an alternate dimension, which was disappointing as I was quite excited by the prospects of that.

Anyway, so once the engine was warmed, we were treated to the de-robing of this.

I thought at first I"d missed it. Then I watched it again. And no, I hadn"t.

There was zero explanation of how Tesla would get all the dough to build this creature, where it would build it, and how (given the competition all have existing production plants, positive cashflows, dough in their treasuries, and access to credit markets) Tesla miraculously thinks that by the time it gets there it will have all of these things as well as the technology (that does not yet exist) to pull it off.

But then my nerves were calmed when they offered a warranty on the product. Wait, what? A warranty BEFORE they have a product? Killer!

I guess there"s a first time for everything.

But that wasn"t to be all.

No, then came the real showstopper as Elon went a step further in prostituting promoting Tesla. The fastest sports car in the world. And it may even just fly.

The kid in me did backflips. I sooo want a car that flies. Don"t you?

But then I remembered that there was a time when I really wanted the Easter bunny to be real, too.

Now, being older and wiser, I realise that rabbits screw up your lawn and chocolates make you fat, and I want nothing to do with either of them.

What I would like to know is how they found the time to muck around developing both a sports car and a giant truck when they can"t get a little Model 3 out?

Maybe that"s just me being a grouch. Heck, what do I know about cars? Mine"s 5 years old and smells of kids sweaty football socks which are buried in the back there somewhere.

Thankfully, I didn"t have to wait too long to figure out how they intend to fund some of this:

Now, when I saw this I"ll admit to having made the sort of noise a cat would make if fed through a mangle.

I realised then that Tesla was trying to pull off an ICO.

You see, the thing with 99% of ICOs is they"re kinda like the deals on Kickstarter, which means that you don"t actually get anything. It"s more like a donation... or part of a rewards points system. You know, like your air points where you get to trade them for a flight to Greece for a dirty weekend away or to upgrade your flight to first class so you can sit next to all the folks who eat lobsters in their bathrobes.

This works spectacularly well for anyone uneducated in investment markets. And that, my friends, is perfect for Tesla. Because you know what?

That"s about 90% of the population.

For the other 10%, here are some things to consider.

I"ll gladly admit to not really knowing a lot about cars. I like them very much as long as they take me where I want to go and do all the cool things that modern cars do.

But try explain to me about all the ins and outs of the bits inside and my brain does that man thing - it stops working and starts thinking about sex.

But what I do know a thing or two about is numbers and markets. And frankly, when Musk starts talking about these things he may as well be speaking Nepalese and explaining how to cook a yak stew because it"s all complete gibberish.

Tesla by the Colours

Last week when we were staring at Margot Robbie (don"t tell me you didn"t stare), and we said:

It was overconfidence that led the pointy-shoed suits on Wall Street to package subprime mortgages up, believing that a pile of isht when added to other piles of isht through the magic of diversification turns isht into non isht.

Like Margot explained in the Big Short (and bear with me as I"m extrapolating here): If we use Wall Street logic, you take the colour red and add it to more red... much more... you can get green.

So let"s run through Tesla by the colours, and then after that we"ll run through it by the numbers. Sounds fair?

• SolarCity: Red


• Gigafactory: Red


• Model 3: What Model 3?


• Model 3 in full production: Red


• Tax credits: Green... ah isht... no, make it red

Excellent!

So red + red + red + red + red = Green.

Tesla by the Numbers

Let"s take Q3 cashflow and toss in interest charges for 2017 (which is only fair — after all, someone has to pay them).

With that we realise that Tesla burned through about US$1.7bn or about US$500m a month.

Now, let"s be super conservative and say capital expenditures remain at 2017 levels, which is absurd and impossible given the new initial car offering and that semi truck, too (it"ll be far higher).

Anyway, let"s give it to them.

Well, let"s say they can find 1,000 fools buyers to drop a quarter million bucks on a pre-order for a car that they hope to receive some years in the future. Let"s say they can do that.

That"ll put US$250m into Tesla"s treasury, which will buy them less than 3 weeks. Killer!

I"m going to go out on a limb here and say that in the first quarter of 2018 Tesla"s going to lose US$1bn. Crazy, I know. How long for? It"ll go on until it doesn"t.

And here"s something to think about...

Here"s Venezuela"s 5-year sovereign CDS spread:

You may ask, why Chris are you posting this in an article about Tesla?

Well, Venezuela — like Tesla — made promises it couldn"t keep.

What I"d really like to know from you today is this:

Cast your vote here and also see what others think will happen

- Chris

“If you wouldn’t be short a multi-billion-dollar loss-making enterprise in a cyclical business, with a leveraged balance sheet, questionable accounting, every executive leaving, run by a CEO with a questionable relationship with the truth, what would you be short? It sort of ticks all the boxes.” — Jim Chanos

--------------------------------------

Liked this article? Then you"ll probably like my other missives on

this topic as well. Go here to access them (free, of course).

--------------------------------------

Morgan Stanley: Tesla Will Surge To $400 Before Crashing To $200

When it comes to Wall Street cheerleaders, Tesla has few closer friends than Morgan Stanley"s Adam Jonas (current price target of $379). To be sure, the relationship cuts both ways, with Jonas relentless enthusiasm "for the EV maker granting Morgan Stanley a reserved spot for any future debt, convert and equity underwriting, as well as associated IB fees.  Yet, following the recent volatility in Tesla"s business model, in which the "production hell" that is Model 3 has been quietly relegated to the latest and greatest hype involving the company"s truck (funded in turn by deposits for the new Tesla $250,000 flying roadster) as well as stock price, not even Jonas can pretend that it"s smooth sailing ahead.

And so, in his latest forecast released overnight which has the same interval of confidence as a bitcoin price prediction, Jonas previews the stock performance of Tesla over the coming year, writing that he expects "Tesla shares to be extremely volatile in 2018, divided into two stages: (1) The alleviation of production bottlenecks with strong cash inflow, and (2) mounting concerns over the sustainability of the competitive moat."

His enthusiasm is even more constrained in his thesis:

Our Equal-weight rating on Tesla expresses our view that any number of positive and negative forces influencing the stock are more or less in equilibrium. While our $379 price target offers 20% upside from current levels, we believe such upside is less interesting on a risk-adjusted basis. From a shorter-term trading perspective, we anticipate Tesla’s stock price may  reach highs in the range of $400 or more over the next few months before facing some more serious headwinds later in the year that could take the stock significantly below current levels.

While the upside forecast is hardly new for Jonas, the downside is certainly a headscratcher for the TSLA faithful, because if Musk is suddenly left without his biggest Wall Street fan, who else is left to drum up interest in a business model that would send PT Barnum in an orgasm of shivering delight.

And just in case there is some doubt about Jonas" sincerity, he provides the following five bullets to justify why even he has gotten cold feet:

1. It is our working assumption that Tesla’s battery module production bottlenecks may be resolved in weeks. It is not possible to prove precisely when problems with zone 2 will be overcome, if they ever are at all. There is only evidence that Tesla is throwing its human and financial capital at the problem. Elon Musk stated that it is better to be late and get it right than to be early and get it wrong. We agree. Tesla is trying to make battery packs with extremely high levels of volume and unprecedented automation with bespoke high-speed robotics. In high-volume battery manufacturing, robotics is a core competency and a competitive advantage.


2. We believe that Tesla baked in flexibility to allow for a highly unpredictable production ramp. Tesla’s Model launch timeline was always seen as extremely aggressive. When the July 2017 launch date was originally communicated to the market, we had seen it as a stretch goal and a form of supply chain management to increase the probability of a successful volume ramp in 2018. Given Tesla’s experience with the Model S and X launches and the unprecedented level of vertical integration and automation of the battery assembly, we believe Tesla had negotiated unusual levels of flexibility with its supply base compared to its prior launches and the industry standard.


3. The motivation of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 supplier base to be involved with the Model 3 project is a relevant factor in de-risking the ramp. It is our understanding that the Model 3 has been seen as a ‘trophy contract’ for the supply base. For any Tier 1 supplier wanting to be associated with the cutting edge of automotive technology (electric, autonomous) the Model 3 was a ‘must win.’ Tesla’s early success with Model S had a profound impact on its image in the supplier community. Where suppliers previously viewed Tesla with high degrees of  skepticism/trepidation, many of the same suppliers were willing to prioritize supply of key systems and even to colocate key production facilities near Tesla’s factory. We believe flexibility on working capital during the sensitive early ramp phase could have reasonably been a part of the negotiation process.


4. The Model 3 working capital arrangement may be highly favorable to Tesla, at least in the short term, during the inflection of the ramp… substantially alleviating concerns over near term liquidity. Like many auto OEMs, Tesla pays its suppliers over many weeks (as long as 60 to 90 days depending on the supplier) while it collects from its customers far faster, particularly given Tesla’s ownership of its distribution channel. Tesla’s own financials bear this out as it collects on its receivables 10 to 20x faster than it pays its suppliers. During times of fast production growth (as we’d expect through 1Q/2Q18), this can pull forward significant amounts of cash which can serve to address much of the market’s concerns over near-term liquidity.


5. Following a hypothetical 1H18 pop in the share price, we could see scope for longer-term risks in the story to come to the fore. The key drivers of our downgrade last May are 2-fold: (1) our view that the global addressable market may not be as accessible as the market expects, and (2) increasing encroachment from consumer electrics and mega-tech firms who are planning comprehensive strategies focused on shared, electric and autonomous transport systems in direct competition with Tesla. We expect a steady and increasing amount of evidence to hit the market as 2018 develops that could stunt the enthusiasm of surmounting the Model 3 production hurdles. Admittedly, we cannot be precise with the timing of positive (1H) and negative (2H) catalysts that could move the stock significantly in the quarters ahead, leaving us EW on the stock.

As a result of the above, Jonas now assumes only 1,000 Model 3 deliveries in 4Q, down from 10,000 deliveries previously. That said, he leaves his 2018 forecast of 120,000 Model 3  deliveries unchanged, and some more details: 

We took 2018 GAAP operating profit from ($688) to ($1,001). Our 2018 GAAP EPS (ex stock comp) estimates went from ($3.66) to ($6.17) and our US GAAP EPS estimate went from ($6.58) to ($9.00). From 2018 through 2020, our average GAAP OP forecast moved from positive $280mm to negative $70mm. From 2021 through 2025, our average GAAP OP forecast moved from $4,491 to $4,242…. A 5% cut. The cuts are even smaller in the out-years. Our Tesla Mobility forecasts remain unchanged. We roll forward our DCF start date to December 1st, and our price target remains unchanged at $379

As of this moment, investors appear just as confused about Tesla"s future as its former biggest fanboy, located almost exactly halfway betwen the two stated extremes...

Tesla Unveils Its "Mind-Blowing" Semi And New Roadster, The "Fastest Production Car Ever Made"

Update 2: there were some rumors of a surprise during tonight"s presentation, and Musk did not disappoint when just as the semi-introduction was ending, Tesla also unveiled a new Roadster, the new version of its original sports car. According to Musk, It’s the fastest production car ever made, with speeds of just 1.9 seconds for 0 to 60 and 4.2 seconds for 0 to 100. It can handle a quarter mile in 8.9 seconds.

“This is the base model,” Musk said, then went on to mention that its top speed is above 250 mph. and it has a 200 kWh battery pack that offers 630 miles of highway driving range.

This just drove out of the Tesla Semi. A next gen Roadster!!!!! #TeslaSemiTruck pic.twitter.com/3gmyzhPHkl

— Lance Ulanoff (@LanceUlanoff) November 17, 2017

* * *

Update 1: this is what the new Semi truck, which Tesla will give a 1 million mile guarantee for, looks like:

This doesn"t look bad #TeslaSemiTruck pic.twitter.com/VrwHXb6qN8

— Madi ?????? (@Phalanxia) November 17, 2017

* * *

Tonight"s the night!! In what has been promised to "blow your mind," Elon Musk will unveil an all-electric Class 8 semi truck.

In the works for two years, it’s a project that’s aimed squarely at cleaning up the freight industry, which accounts for one-fifth of global oil demand... and which Goldman Sachs has warned will cost 300,000 jobs per year.

As Bloomberg notes, Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk has promised a truck that will “out-torque any diesel semi” and drive “like a sports car.” Seeing what an all-electric semi is capable of may be the most entertaining part of the night, even if it’s not a key metric for Tesla’s trucking customers.

It can transform into a robot, fight aliens and make one hell of a latte pic.twitter.com/8h9vvWu4f5

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 15, 2017

“If you had a tug-of-war competition,” Musk bragged at a Ted Talk in April, “the Tesla Semi will tug the diesel semi uphill.”

The show is due to start at 8pmPT, 11pmET.

If the transmission is interrupted, readers can go to Tesla’s website by clicking the image below...

Here"s what to watch for - including some potential wild cards (via Bloomberg)

1. How Long Is Long Range?

The range of any electric vehicle is the critical metric—it defines how the vehicle can be used and the size of its potential market. Five years ago, few would have thought that a long-range heavy duty-truck was even possible. That’s changing fast. Daimler, the leader in Class 8 diesel trucks, recently unveiled a 220-mile range electric big rig, establishing a new bar for the industry. Long-range hauling across vast stretches of the U.S. would likely require more than 500 miles of range.

2. At What Cost?

Batteries are the single most expensive component of any electric truck, and the battery of a cross-country hauler could cost $100,000 even before you build the truck around it. The sticker price, regardless of size, is going to be higher than its diesel equivalent because of those pricey batteries.

Can Tesla keep the upfront price low enough to be offset by cheaper operating costs from fuel savings and simpler maintenance? Tesla may provide such figures, though many fleet operators will want to put them to the test with hundreds of thousands of road miles before they’ll be convinced.

Source: Bloomberg analysis

3. Platooning on Autopilot

Will the truck, expected to roll out by 2020, come with some level of autonomous driving? Tesla has been in talks with California and Nevada regulators about testing semis that can automatically follow a lead vehicle, a technique known as “platooning.” Platooning cuts fuel costs by reducing wind drag. And if the autonomous driving system is good enough to run without a driver, it could also dramatically cut labor expenses.

A teaser animation released by Tesla on Wednesday suggests the realization of one of Musk’s design aspirations: cameras instead of side door mirrors.

Tesla Semi unveil, 8pm PT tomorrow — watch live at https://t.co/8uVlhvzpu5 pic.twitter.com/hCIm5iCW6J

— Tesla (@Tesla) November 15, 2017

 

4. Who Are the First Customers?

The biggest players in freight are good at keeping their trucks in top driving condition and averse to messing with the supply chain. Convincing companies like Swift, Ryder, and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to bring an electric drivetrain into their fleets will be a tough sell. Musk says Tesla has been gathering feedback from trucking companies throughout the development process (at least one, Ryder, confirmed it), so it would be a good sign if Tesla comes out of the gate with some early partnerships.

It could be that Musk’s own empire will be the first demonstration customer of the big rig. Tesla’s automotive reach is growing, and its SolarCity arm is the biggest rooftop solar installer in the U.S. Musk"s SpaceX could potentially use the vehicles to transport rockets, satellites, capsules, and equipment.

During earlier unveilings of Tesla’s passenger cars—the Models S, X and 3—the company started taking paid reservations immediately, at least 18 months before the first deliveries. Is that a strategy that can work with commercial trucks? How long until the first rigs hit the road?

A new 40-stall Supercharger station and customer lounge opens in Kettleman, California.

Source: Tesla

5. Infrastructure Solutions

A lot of infrastructure goes into servicing big rigs. Truck stops line the world’s highways, and fleet operators stand by with mountains of replacement parts ready to fix anything that might go wrong. How does Tesla plan to deal with these hurdles? Will they introduce a whole new type of charging system, with ultrafast chargers or a robot that swaps out used batteries for fresh ones? Who will build out and operate the charging network? Who handles maintenance and roadside assistance?

6. Location, Location, Location

Tesla’s car factory in Fremont, California, is running out of room. Musk wants to build 500,000 electric passenger cars there next year, and even if he misses that goal by half, it’s very unlikely Tesla would be able to squeeze in a big rig assembly line. Tesla’s massive battery factory near Reno, Nevada, which is still under construction, seems like a more natural fit. That factory is also where Tesla makes electric motors and drivetrains—primary components for an electric semi.

7. “Driver Comfort Features”

In a profile in this week’s Rolling Stone, Musk hinted at an unspecified “driver comfort feature” that he’s fond of. “Probably no one will buy it because of this,” he said, “but if you’re going to make a product, make it beautiful.” One possibility? A sweet coffee maker. In a Twitter post on Wednesday, Musk joked that the truck “can transform into a robot, fight aliens and make one hell of a latte.”

The Model 3 motor sits in line with the wheel axle. The semi will use multiple Model 3 engines in tandem to power the big rig semi trucks.

Source: Tesla

8. Shared Parts

Perhaps Tesla’s biggest advantage over other truck makers is that its Semi will share some core parts with its first mass-market car, the Model 3. Musk disclosed during an earnings call in May that the Semi uses “a bunch” of Model 3 motors, which sit in line with the truck’s axles. These relatively cheap electric motors will give the Semi unparalleled electric torque for getting quickly up to speed with a heavy load.

Tesla’s foray into commercial trucking is coming at an impossibly tough time for the company. The Model 3 is already months behind schedule, and Tesla is spending $1 billion a quarter to get things cranking.

But if Musk can get Model 3 production lines up to their promised rates, and the motors and battery cells are truly interchangeable between the Semi and the new passenger car, the scale of those operations would be profound. While traditional diesel truck makers are testing truck-suitable electric motors by the hundreds, Tesla could be making them by the hundreds of thousands—even before its first big rig hits the road.

*  *  *

Tesla shares have been on the downtrend since mid-September...

So this event could be just what Musk needs to turn things around and distract investors from the massive cash burn the company is suffering while hand-making Model 3s...

Musk Fires Back: Blasts "Hotbed Of MISinformation" In Racial Discrimination Lawsuit

A couple of days ago we noted a lawsuit filed against Tesla in the Superior Court in Alameda County which, among other things, alleged that his Fremont manufacturing facility was a "hotbed for racist behavior" in which employees and supervisors "regularly use the "N word."" Bloomberg summarized the case as follows:

Tesla Inc.’s production floor is a "hotbed for racist behavior," more than 100 African-American employees claimed in a lawsuit in which they alleged black workers at the electric carmaker suffer severe and pervasive harassment.

 

The employees are seeking permission from a judge to sue as a group and are seeking unspecified general and punitive monetary damages as well as an order for Tesla to implement policies to prevent and correct harassment.

 

"Although Tesla stands out as a groundbreaking company at the forefront of the electric car revolution, its standard operating procedure at the Tesla factory is pre-Civil Rights era race discrimination," the employees said in the complaint, filed Monday in California’s Alameda County Superior Court.

 

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Marcus Vaughn, who worked in the Fremont factory from April 23 to Oct. 31. Vaughn alleged that employees and supervisors regularly used the “N word” around him and other black colleagues. Vaughn said he complained in writing to human resources and Musk and was terminated in late October for "not having a positive attitude."

But, in an angry blog post published on Tesla"s website, the embattled electric car darling has fired back saying that media reports of a "hotbed of racist behavior" at Tesla are nothing more than a "hotbed of misinformation" spread by a trial lawyer who "has a long track record of extorting money for meritless claims and using the threat of media attacks and expensive trial costs to get companies to settle."

There are a number of other false statements in the class action lawsuit alleging a so-called “hotbed of discrimination”:

 

- There is only one actual plaintiff (Marcus Vaughn), not 100. The reference to 100 is a complete fabrication with no basis in fact at all.

 

- The plaintiff was employed by a temp agency, not by Tesla as claimed in the lawsuit.

 

- Marcus was not fired, he was on a six month temp contract that simply ended as contracted.

 

- His email to Elon was about his commute and Tesla’s shuttles, which was addressed as he requested. There was no mention of racial discrimination whatsoever.

 

- The trial lawyer who filed this lawsuit has a long track record of extorting money for meritless claims and using the threat of media attacks and expensive trial costs to get companies to settle. At Tesla, we would rather pay ten times the settlement demand in legal fees and fight to the ends of the Earth than give in to extortion and allow this abuse of the legal system.

Given those silly fiduciary duties he has as a Tesla board member, Elon may not want to openly flaunt his willingness to "pay ten times" more in legal fees just to settle a personal vendetta...just a thought.

Meanwhile, Elon also decided to address a portion of a firm-wide email published by Bloomberg suggesting the Tesla employee who felt discriminated against should have been more "thick-skinned" by publishing the entire email that, in fact, confims that Elon said the guy should be more "thick-skinned."

We would also like to clear up the description of Elon’s prior email to employees. It is dedicated to ensuring that Tesla employees always try to do the right thing, that being a jerk is not allowed, that everyone should be contributing to an atmosphere where people look forward to coming to work in the morning and that no one should feel excluded, uncomfortable, or unfairly treated. As one of many points in that email, Elon also explained that if someone makes an offensive or hurtful statement on a single occasion, but subsequently offers a sincere apology, then we believe that apology should be accepted. The counterpoint would be that a single careless comment should ruin a person’s life and career, even if they truly regret their action and do their best to make amends. That would be a cold world with no forgiveness and no heart.

Of course, somehow we suspect that Tesla shareholders would prefer that Elon focus on learning how to weld rather than spend his time publicly responding to what he clearly views to be a "frivolous" lawsuit.

When Will The Tesla Stock-Promote Finally Fail

Via AdventuresInCapitalism.com,

The history of industry leading consumer tech products has not been kind to investors who overstay their welcome. You need look no further than all the hundreds of notable recent failures, to realize that these companies almost always flame out. The list below (in no particular order) is a nice trip down memory lane of former favorites, that are now either bankrupt or shells of their former selves—often consumed by some other entity that fortunately put them out of their misery. Of course, the list below, is just from the past decade or two;

Palm, Gateway, Research In Motion, GoPro, FitBit, Heelys, Handspring, Compaq, BlueRay, Garmin, Delorean, Casio, Sega, Tamaguchi, TiVo, Betamax, AOL, Walkman (Sony), Set Top Boxes (Scientific American), Kodak, Atari, Napster, Netscape, Polaroid, etc.

Let’s just say, it’s hard at the top. You must guess each change in technology, each generation of improvement and design it for fickle consumers, while constantly outlaying capital for research and development that may never go anywhere. All the time, others are constantly trying to overtake you.

If you look at the lifecycles of these companies, they often follow a similar trajectory from ingenious creation with huge margins, to a few generations of new products with smaller margins, to massive competition as deep pocketed competitors and venture capitalists try and emulate your product, to missing a product cycle, to becoming obsolete. These consumer product companies rarely last more than a decade; often just a few years. In the end, consumer focused tech is vicious and Darwinian, with very few long-term competitive advantages.

Of course, Tesla (TSLA – USA) is something of an anomaly here. While the companies in the above list, all produced prodigious cash while they were industry leaders, Tesla seems to incinerate cash while in the lead—using repeated equity and now debt offerings to plug the hole. While other companies had a huge stash of cash to fall back on when others overtook them, Tesla’s cash balance leaves it only a few quarters from insolvency. Add in a host of questionable related party transactions, convoluted financial statements (what the hell is pro-forma revenue?), the inability to ever hit company guidance, deceptive disclosures and a business that seems to lose more money with each vehicle it produces, is it any wonder that Tesla is one of the most shorted large-cap stocks today? If I had to choose the most obvious pending bankruptcy of a large-cap stock, it is clearly Tesla.

At the same time, I have to give Elon Musk credit. He has created a company that is a rather successful cult, even if it is still a failing auto company. Every time that skeptics ask real questions, he deflects them with futuristic sci-fi pronouncements. What other automobile CEO is obsessed with Mars while his assembly line fumbles along? What other CEO talks of hyperloops, while his main product on auto-pilot will kill you if used as currently designed. This “visionary “status has deferred timelines and made all logical financial metrics meaningless to investors—which may be the point of all his hubristic talk in the first place. Extend, pretend, blatantly mislead investors, raise more capital. It’s the junior mining model—applied to auto production—on a scale that would make anyone in Vancouver blush.

Automobile production is a decidedly unsexy industry, with massive capital outlays, high fixed costs, huge cyclicality and low returns on invested capital throughout the cycle—the technical definition of an awful business. The leading players produce millions of vehicles a year, yet trade at mid-single digit cash flow multiples, due to how awful the industry is. Why is Tesla valued like a high-tech growth stock, where investors ignore accelerating operating losses; if the best-case outcome is that it becomes a cyclical auto manufacturer with depressing returns on capital? A new technology like electronic vehicles (EV) sounds cutting edge, but so was automatic transmission, air conditioning, power steering, fuel injection, etc. All the other auto makers copied these technologies and caught up within a few years—much like what is now happening in EV. So, how has Tesla become such an epic bubble, if it is competing (poorly) in an industry that is notorious for destroying capital? It is clearly the promotional genius of Elon Musk. Naturally, he won’t be the first or last “visionary” to have a comeuppance.

So, going back to my question, which is the genesis of this article; when will the Tesla stock promote finally implode?

Long-time readers of this site know that I no longer short companies. This was a hard-learned lesson from when I was short Research in Motion, about two years too soon and watched as it went up 3-fold on me—before ultimately collapsing as I had predicted. Unfortunately, I was not short much by the time of the collapse as a small position had mushroomed into something pretty large and I was forced to keep covering at accelerating losses—lest I be forced to sell good longs to fund the repeated margin requirements of the short. While my thesis had been right, my timing was wrong. As long as investors believed in Blackberry, it didn’t matter that Apple and Samsung were building competing products that were likely to be better. It didn’t matter that Chinese players were producing low-end models that were likely to be almost as good, but at a fraction of the cost. It didn’t matter that competition from cash rich competitors grabbing for market share would crush margins. No one on Wall Street cared—until the iPhone finally showed up and people realized it was better. Then the Research in Motion collapse began.

For the past year, Tesla was a bet on pending mass production of affordable EV cars. Earlier this summer, we saw the first of the Tesla Model 3s to be produced. Even the normally ebullient journalists struggled to hide their disappointment with the product. This is understandable, dozens of competing EV models are coming, starting as soon as 2018. Will they be better than the Model 3? Based on what we know thus far, they’re unlikely to be worse. As they continue to advance EV technology, auto companies with far greater resources than Tesla, will eventually surpass it—much like with Blackberry. Then again, Research in Motion was coining money while at the top of its game—Tesla consumes money, while racking up debt. This won’t be a game of margins and profits—all the incumbents need to do is show that they can break even producing a comparable vehicle. At that point, the funding for Tesla will subside and its debt will bury it.

I was too early with RIMM and I don’t want to be too early with TSLA. So, I’ve been patient. I’ve been waiting for the competitors to show up. They’re now coming. The Tesla Model 3 is a dud—competing products will begin showing up in 2018 and they look much better. However, I’m not going to short TSLA. I’m going to use long-dated puts—much like I’ve played all subsequent dead-man-walking companies with an uncertain mortality date.

The problem with puts, is that long-dated puts are expensive. Fortunately, there’s a way to offset this cost, the bear put spread. This is the purchase of a put and the sale of a put at a lower price. By doing this, your gains are capped by the price of the put you’ve sold, but since your cost is much lower, you get to play with many more of them. Besides, you don’t need Tesla at zero to win with these, you just need Tesla’s share price to drop materially from here. If my timing is wrong, my losses are small and I can reload when they expire. Besides, I don’t expect TSLA to be a zero immediately. It is much more likely to limp towards zero, as opposed to imploding towards zero—making the bear put spread even more attractive than straight puts. Let’s just say that for the past few months, I’ve been adding to this position. The net cost of the spread is cheap and the timing now seems increasingly pregnant.

When will Tesla’s stock promote finally implode? When people realize that it’s a cash incinerating vanity project for Elon Musk, at a time when new, better products are coming to the market. That point is coming soon. Very soon.