Tag Archives: Model 3

More Evidence Tesla Is In A Death Spiral

Reuters  report in which the news service discovered that almost all of the solar cell production at Tesla’s solar factory in Buffalo, New York is being sold overseas, primarily to a large Asian buyer.  Tesla’s Solar City business was given $750 million in State subsidies to build the plant in NY in exchange for employing at least 1,460 people and spending $500 million per yer in the State over 10 years.

The factory employs far less than the 1,460 required and the State has no hope of ever seeing the $500 million per year. The factory has become little more than a solar cell production facility for Panasonic paid for by U.S. taxpayers.

Panasonic produces the solar cells in the factory that were supposed to be used in Solar City’s solar panels.  The problem is that Solar City’s sales are approaching zero.  In California only 21 Solar City roof systems are connected to the State’s three investor-owned utilities as the end of February.  Panasonic is seeking to use the Buffalo plant to fulfill demand for U.S. made solar sales from foreign buyers (foreign solar manufactures can then export the solar panels back the use duty-free).

Earlier this year Panasonic announced that it was suspending plans to expand capacity at Tesla’s Gigafactory. It also suspended planned investment in Tesla’s Shanghai Gigafactory. The decision to curtail investment in Tesla’s U.S. Gigafactory was based on declining sales in the Models S and X and on Model 3 sales which are running below plan.   Panasonic’s Tesla EV battery business had losses exceeding $181  million in its fiscal year that ended in March.  Panasonic was likely not interested in repeating that experience as a “partner” in Tesla’s Shanghai operations.

What’s interesting about the two situations described above is that, more than anyone outside of Tesla’s corporate suite, Panasonic has an up close inside look at the truth behind Tesla’s operations and financials.  It’s quite clear that Panasonic is in financial loss containment mode with respect to its relationship with Tesla.  In this regard, Panasonic is signaling that Tesla is in deep trouble operationally and financially.

Panasonic’s withdrawal from its relationship with Tesla reflects the same critical information about Telsa as the steady stream of high level executive departures over the last year, the rate of which accelerated over the last 4-6 months.  Clearly the message is that Tesla is now in an irreversible death spiral.

Just for the record, I believe that Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley used the recent stock and convertible bond offering to suck fees out the deal that would help offset the likely losses the two banks will incur when Musk inevitably defaults on loans he owes to both firms.  It cost Tesla $300 million to purchase derivative protection against the potential shareholder dilution affect if Tesla’s stock were to rise the conversion price of $309 in the new converts.

But those two firms know that Tesla is going to hit the wall and that the stock has no chance of sniffing anywhere close to $309 from now to eternity. It’s highly likely that Goldman and Morgan Stanley forced this hedge structure on Tesla to rake in the $10 to $20 million in fees skimmed on the derivatives used for the hedge.  It was nothing more than vultures who are closest to the carcass grabbing the choicest cuts of meat.

Ironically, Morgan Stanley’s analyst issued a ”worst case” $10 valuation on Tesla. Unless the analyst is a complete idiot with little experience in distressed situations – which is possible – the $10 dollar valuation is Morgan Stanley’s “code” for, “the stock is worthless if Tesla has to file” (which it will sooner or later).

The Wheels Are Coming Off Musk And Tesla

Literally, the wheels are coming off. Panasonic, which supplies batteries that it manufactures for Tesla at the Gigafactory in Nevada announced that it was cutting back on its plans to expand production capacity at the plant. It also announced that it was suspending plans to produce batteries at Tesla’s planned Shanghai Gigafactory. In an article in a Japanese business publication, Panasonic had less than flattering things to say about working with Tesla. The move by Panasonic at the Nevada Gigafactory likely reflects concern over the falling demand for Teslas.

Tesla is sticking by its guidance to produce and deliver 360-400k vehicles in 2019. In Q1, Tesla delivered 63k vehicles – a 252k annualized rate. David Einhorn, the proprietor of the high profile Greenlight Capital hedge fund, is vocally short Tesla. His team believes Tesla will deliver less than 250k vehicles in 2019. Q1 and Q2 will likely have higher deliveries than Q3 and Q4 because of the temporary “bump” in demand from rolling out the Model 3 in Europe and China in Q1. I believe there’s a chance that deliveries in 2019 are closer to 200k than 250k.

This graphic shows the demand drop for the Models S&X combined in, Norway, one of Tesla’s largest markets (visit @teslacharts to see more well-produced analytic charts like this):

That chart looks similar or worse in all of Tesla’s markets, including the U.S. After a brief bump in deliveries from the effect from the start of delivering the Model 3 to Europe’s and China’s “must-have the latest tech device” crowd, the Model 3 chart will soon look like the delivery chart for the S/X. European’s are already complaining about the poor reliability and service on the Model 3.

Tesla also rolled out its leasing program, which left most analysts, including me, thoroughly baffled. The lease program ostensibly is primarily to boost demand for the Model 3. But Tesla does not offer a lease for the basic $35,000 Model 3. It also announced that the basic Model 3 would only be offered for online purchase. The lease for the Standard Range-plus Model 3 is structured such that the lessee will need to put down roughly $4k upfront. The lowest monthly payment option is $504 and there’s no purchase option at the end of the lease. I won’t go into Musk’s rationale for this because it would be a waste of your time to read about it. In short, the ill-conceived lease program will likely have a minimal effect on unit deliveries.

There’s three primary reasons Tesla’s sales are falling rapidly: 1) the 50% drop in the tax credit (which drops even lower to $1875 starting July 1st this year and goes away completely after December 31st);   2) Tesla’s growing reputation for poor reliability and even worse service;   3) Growing competition in the luxury EV space.

With each passing week, the operational decisions and musings of Musk become more bizarre. The growth narrative is over. The Company is shrinking its service centers and delivery infrastructure in order to cut costs. Senior employees are leaving pretty much on a weekly basis. In fact, last week the senior manager who was responsible for building Tesla’s lithium ion battery supply chain from May 2017 to April 2019 left the Company. Perhaps more troubling, Tesla’s Director of Global Treasury also left recently. This function of this position is to oversee the Company’s worldwide cash management and liquidity activities. It’s likely this person, Pedro Glaser, was not interested in sticking around until the cash runs out.

The Company continues to spiral downward in a toxic cloud of operational dysfunction, financial deterioration, decaying auto industry fundamentals and growing fraud. It remains a mystery to anyone who examines Tesla closely how the stock manages to remain at a level that assigns a $47 billion market cap to the Company. I suspect there’s a continuous short squeeze on the shares because the short-interest is quiet high and the “free” float of shares is low relative to the overall short-interest. Ultimately the shorts will prevail – of that I’m 100% confident.

In my view, Tesla continues to circle the drain. The stock is down nearly 20% YTD in the context of one of the most torrid upside moves in the overall stock market in history. The stock appears ready to test the $250 level again. If it drops below that, it could fall below $200 quickly.

Tesla: Enron Status Secured

Elon Musk a has long track record of being long on promises and short on deliveries – literally and figuratively.  His motive, as has been self-professed repeatedly on Twitter,  is to torment short-sellers by driving the stock higher with fraudulent tweets.  But underlying Musk’s garish bravado and overtly fraudulent financial reports is a business operation that, by all indications, is slowly disintegrating.

Musk has ushered in the long-awaited introduction of the $35,000 Model 3 with a tweet two days earlier aimed at pushing the stock higher to squeeze short-sellers. Musk’s highly questionable tweet tactic drove the stock price up $21 over two days. The stock did a $10 belly-flop when the Model 3 announcement hit the tape, accompanied by an announcement that Tesla was cutting the size of the workforce for the 3rd time this year and would transition the sales operation to online-only.

While Musk spends an inordinate amount of time scheming to squeeze short-sellers, Tesla’s business operations and financial flexibility is getting squeezed by reality. All Ponzi scheme’s eventually fall prey to the laws of economics. Musk’s Ponzi has been proliferated by a financial system flooded with printed money  and by a Government that no longer applies the Rule of Law to billionaires with the ability to buy protection from regulatory enforcement.

Arcadia Economics‘ Chris Marcus and I spent some time on Wednesday discussing the similarities between Tesla and Enron and Elon Musk and Bernie Madoff:

Just How Indebted Is Elon Musk?

Tesla continues to head south since hitting its post-earnings high of $321. It’s down nearly $100 from the $380 post “funding secured” tweet all-time high close on August 7th. The stock has diverged negatively from the SPX since mid-January. By all accounts the order-rate and delivery rate of Tesla’s 3 models is dropping quickly. While there may be a brief boost in sales from  Model 3 deliveries into Europe and China in Q1, it looks like Model 3 orders and deliveries in North America have slowed to a trickle. Complaints about the poor quality of the Model and poor service from Tesla are already populating European automobile forums.

There have been wide-spread reports from people who are having trouble getting canceled $1,000 reservation deposits on Model 3’s refunded. Several have reported receiving the refund only to have the check bounce after it’s deposited. Consumer Reports removed its highly sought recommendation rating from the Model 3 after citing poor quality control and reliabity. This past Wednesday Tesla’s General Counsel, who left his Washington, DC law practice and took the job two months ago, announced he was leaving the Company. The stream of high-level c-suite departures has been nearly continuous over the last year.

Tesla is staring at the $920 million convertible bond maturity due next Friday (March 1st). I have no idea how Tesla will address this, as it seems by many indicators that the $3.9 billion in cash Tesla posted on its year-end balance sheet may not be accurate, in addition to showing negative working capital of $1.7 billion. That said, I would not bet that Tesla will default this soon on its debt.

On Friday it was reported that Elon Musk took out $61 million in mortgages on his five California mansions, $50 million of which was new funding and $11 million was refinancing (note:  rumor of this deal was in the market a week earlier). Morgan Stanley underwrote the mortgages. I would suggest that Musk possibly needed the money to meet margin calls on his stock-holdings, against which Musk has borrowed heavily. Otherwise it makes no sense to me why an alleged billionaire would need to trifle with $61 million in mortgages. Morgan Stanley is one of Musk’s primary stock custodians. In that regard, I’m wondering if Morgan Stanley forced the issue.  It’s a good bet that Musk has pledged and hypothecated most of his assets as collateral against indebtedness. I have no doubt that when Tesla hits the wall, Musk’s wealth will largely vanish.

Tesla: Can You Smell The Blood In The Water?

“The demand for – the demand for Model 3 is insanely high. The inhibitor is affordability. It’s just like people literally don’t have the money to buy the car. It’s got nothing to do with desire. They just don’t have enough money in their bank account.” – Elon Musk on the Q4 earnings conference call

The following commentary/analysis is from the February 3rd issue of the Short Seller’s Journal.

Tesla’s Failed Business Model – The statement above is an actual comment from Elon Musk on the earnings call. I literally had to ask a couple of people who were on the call if I had misread the transcript or if it was a mistake in transcription. I’m not sure if Elon erringly thought he was sharing profound insight into the laws of economics or if the relationship between price and demand eludes his understanding.

It was announced in late January, before Tesla posted earnings, that the Saudi Public Investment Fund had hedged its 4.9% investment in Tesla’s stock (8.33 million shares). It accomplished this via a structured note (OTC derivative) created by JP Morgan. In exchange for downside price protection, the Saudis gave up participation in any gains should Tesla’s shares rise in price. My guess is that the Saudis also paid a hefty transaction fee to JP Morgan on the order of 3-4% on the market value of the shares hedged.

It did not take long for the Saudi fund to abandon its investment in Tesla. The Saudi stake in Tesla was announced shortly after Tesla’s Q3 2018 earnings release. Musk’s infamous “funding secured” tweet was issued right after the Saudi stake was revealed to the public.

My best guess is that the 8.3 million shares where accumulated during July around an average price in the low $300’s. It’s also possible that one of the large U.S. fund holders sold a big block of shares that was crossed into the Saudi fund. Hard to say for sure but I would surmise that JP Morgan and/or Goldman Sachs (Tesla’s primary investment banks) know the truth.

If the hedging derivative was structured during the month before it was announced, the average price of the hedge is likely $320. Let’s assume the Saudis locked in a $20/share profit – $166 million. Netting out all trading and transaction fees (at a 3.5% fee, the derivative hedge would cost $93 million) the Saudi fund maybe netted about $60 million on the trade. But why did the Saudis bail on the investment after less than six months?

For me the demand/price comment exemplifies the Tesla tragicomedy. The Company reported its Q4 on Thursday after the market closed. Until the 10-K is release (40-60 days), I can not layout a detailed dissection of Tesla’s accounting games. But needless to say it appears as if Tesla’s CFO employed all of the same accounting schemes as were used in Q3 in order to manufacture a GAAP “net profit.” Notwithstanding this, the Company “missed” the Wall St consensus estimate and warned that it may or may not generate a profit in Q1 2019.

Speaking of the CFO, it was announced at the end of call – literally before the Company hung up the phone in order to avoid questions on the matter – that the CFO would be leaving the Company sometime in early 2019 though no specific date was set. He is to be replaced by a little-known 34-year old VP in the finance department, Zach Kirkhorn. Kirkhorn prior to Tesla was a “business analyst” McKinsey & Co. This is a fancy term for someone who helps design computerized enterprise applications for McKinsey clients. Prior to McKinsey, Kirkhorn worked at Microsoft.

Kirkhorn was a curious choice becasue he stunningly has little apparent experience in accounting and finance. Typically CFO’s have either worked their way up the accounting/controller side of a company or are hired from a similar role from the outside. This move left everyone scratching their head but reflects the general dysfunctionality that pervades the Company.

Telsa has experienced a stunning drop-off in orders since the end of 2018 that appears to have begun during late December. The $7500 tax credit was cut in half starting January 1st. Data from Europe show that EV sales fall off a cliff when the tax credit disappears. The chart to the right illustrates this by showing Tesla’s Model 3 sales over the last 12 months (from @TeslaCharts).

The jump in December M3 sales is a product of huge incentive programs Tesla implemented to stimulate sales ahead of the cut in the tax credit. As you can see, since July TSLA has averaged 20,000 unit sales per month. The January number is largely the expected cliff dive related to the drop in the tax credit. However, the large drop-off is also likely attributable to potential EV buyers waiting for the spring roll-out of the Audi E-Tron and Porsche Taycan. Porsche announced in January that it was doubling production in response to demand.

Briefly on Tesla’s numbers. Taking $139 million of net income attributable to stockholders at face value – i.e. assuming the accounting is 100% clean – nearly $100 million of that is from Tesla’s sale of greenhouse gas and zero emission vehicle credits. If we assume just $39 million worth of GAAP manipulation used to generate “income” (the real number is multiples of $39 milion) small amount of accounting games were used to generate GAAP “income,” reversing out the GHG/ZEV credits takes Tesla’s actual net income to zero. This means that the ability of Tesla’s business model to generate actual cash income is based solely energy credit sales. This is not a valid sustainable business model.

In the short term, the next big event is the maturity of the $920 million convertible bond due in March. It looks like Tesla’s stock price will be below the price at which bondholders will want to convert. Additionally, the deadline to reset the conversion price lower has passed. This suggests that Tesla will use cash to pay off the converts.

But here’s the problem:  At quarter end, Tesla’s balance sheet showed a working capital deficit (current assets minus current liabilities) of $1.7 billion.  Of the $8.3 billion in current assets, $3.6 billion is cash. However, of the $9.99 billion in current liabilities, $3.4 billion is accounts payable. It would appear that Tesla will be stiffing its suppliers, vendors and service providers if it uses the cash, as reported, to pay the converts.

I don’t know how Tesla will resolve this issue but I suspect the maturing bond will paid. Otherwise the Company will be forced to file for bankruptcy of some flavor. I don’t see this event happening until at least the end of 2019. This is why I moved my long-dated Tesla OTM puts out to June 2020.

Regardless of this immediate issue, I expect to see continued deterioration in Tesla sales across all three of its models. Snapshots from around the country from major metropolitan areas show lots full of unsold Teslas – all three models – with the inventory stored in these lots growing by the week.

Since I wrote the above analysis for the Short Seller’s Journal issue released this past Sunday, it was reported that Tesla has not received EU approval to sell Model 3’s with autopilot installed. Most of the Model 3’s pre-ordered in Europe were for the Model 3 with autopilot. This little factoid was in direct contradiction to the Company’s announcement, reiterated by Musk in the earnings letter to shareholders, that the Model 3 was fully approved in Europe.

There’s clearly something amiss with Tesla’s liquidity. It’s been reported by customers in Germany that Tesla is demanding full payment for Model 3’s ordered before the Company will deliver the vehicle. Perhaps a tempest in a teapot? A Model S owner who had canceled his Model 3 order and requested a refund of the $1000 deposit posted a copy of the refund check on Twitter – only Tesla had placed a “stop payment” on the check:  LINK

Meanwhile the Company has been laying of workers and cutting prices on feverishly on the Model 3. This is in response to a cliff-dive in demand since January 1st, especially in China. Based on this new evidence, I don’t know if Tesla will be able to make the $920 million convertible bond payment. I would seem possible, given the anecdotal evidence, that Tesla has misrepresented the cash balance on its year-end financials (unaudited as of December 31st). No one knows the answer to that question right now except the banks holding the alleged cash as shown on Tesla’s year-end balance sheet.

Whether or not Tesla can complete a financial hail Mary and address the convertible bond repayment, this company is circling the drain. As far superior competitive models hit the market, demand for Teslas could possibly disappear completely. The stock will drop to zero and the creditors will be left to fight for standing and priority in bankruptcy. I can smell that blood in the water.

In the Short Seller’s Journal I cover economic analysis combined with ideas for shorting the stock market, including market timing, capital management and the use of options.  In the latest issue I presented ideas for using puts to short Tesla, including full disclosure of my trades in the name.  You can learn more about this newsletter here:  Short Seller’s Journal.

Upper Management Exodus At Tesla Continues – Why?

Phil Rothenberg, VP of Legal at Tesla, is leaving the company.  He’s been at Tesla for nearly 8 years; previously worked at the SEC.  I assume Phil has a lot of stock and a lot of stock options, having been at the Company for eight years, including a nice chunk of options he’s leaving on the table because they will never vest.  If everything at the Company was as amazing as presented by Musk and his meat-puppet CFO in the 3rd quarter earnings report, why leave now?

Apparently Phil, trained in securities law,  would have been the designee of reviewing and monitoring Musk’s Tweets and other social media venues per the terms of the SEC settlement.   Jonathan Chang, the other VP-level lawyer at TSLA, was not a trained securities lawyer.  I have to believe that the potential legal liabilities connected to being legally responsible for overseeing the manner in which Musk operates as his own PR organization weighed heavily on Phil’s decision to flee Telsa’s corporate Sodom and Gomorrah.

Although the SEC, for whatever reason, let Musk and Tesla off the hook on a slam-dunk securities fraud case with a mere wrist-slap, the provisions of the settlement will likely create a sticky legal spider web that can be utilized to snare Musk and those around him at the Company on several counts down the road.  I am certain a desire to legally disconnect from Tesla/Musk  explains the sudden exodus of high-level executives in the past 12 months.

After Tesla’s post-earnings price spike, the torrid stock market run-up that started October 30th played a major role in keeping Tesla’s stock propped up over the last two weeks. At the beginning of the week after Tesla reported (Monday, October 29th) Tesla’s stock was about to sell-off. But the major stock market indices began to shoot up, keeping Tesla’s stock supported. Today’s action in Tesla stock reinforces this theory, as TSLA plunged 5.5% while the SPX dropped just under 2%. Tesla’s stock is going lower – a lot lower.

Tesla will eventually implode – all Ponzi schemes fail. But Musk has proven to be adept at kicking the can down the road. In the analysis I did of Tesla’s Q3 10-Q that I presented to my Short Seller’s Journal on Sunday evening, I didn’t drill down into the 10Q as thoroughly as I could have because of lack of time. But I’ve never seen this degree of manipulation in the numbers from a company the size and profile of Tesla. Bernie Madoff’s company was private so there were never publicly available numbers to scrutinize. Tesla’s operations will eventually collapse under the weight of liabilities and a collapse in auto sales related to the economy and competition.

Tesla’s Bag Of Halloween Tricks

I have not had a chance to scour the 10-Q, which was finally filed this morning. GM and Ford are 7-8x larger than Tesla in terms of revenues and 40-50x larger in terms of number of vehicles sold worldwide.  Those two companies file their 10-Q almost immediately after filing the quarterly 8-K financial summary.  There’s no reason for TSLA to delay the filing of its 10-Q by over a week other than it needs the extra time to make its fraudulent numbers conform to SEC-filing standards (which have a low bar as it is).   I will be sharing my observations with my Short Seller’s Journal subscribers on TSLA’s 10-Q either this week or next.

For me the big event last week was Tesla’s earnings report. And Musk did not disappoint. With regard to that, I’m wondering if it’s possible to be astonished and not surprised at the same time.

Tesla originally was going to report earnings this week. But, curiously,  moved up its earnings release by a week to last Thursday. At the same time, the CFO exercised stock options that did not expire until 2022. While this is technically legal, it begs scrutiny. Why exercise options with a $31 exercise price that do not expire until 2022 unless your intent is to unload the shares when the blackout period is lifted?

For me the obvious answer is that the CFO knew the earnings report would cause a big spike-up in the stock price of which he wanted to take advantage. However, if the CFO truly believed that Tesla was undervalued and was going to be worth a lot more in the long run, he would have held onto the $160k in cash he spent exercising the options until the options approached expiration. Anyone who takes a basic finance class knows that you always hold free in-the-money money options for as long as possible, especially if you believe there’s a good probability that they’ll become more valuable over time – unless you have inside information and know that the stock is going to go lower before the options expire.

The Q3 earnings report produced by Telsa did not disappoint in terms of the high level accounting magic performed. It’s important to note that quarterly financials are not audited. The CEO and CFO can essentially do what they want with the numbers. Automotive sales soared from Q2 to Q3, from $3.1 billion to $5.8 billion. Yet, every other major expense and balance sheet item as a percentage of sales is completely out of whack with same items over the previous four quarters. Perhaps this chart captures the essence of the matter (@TeslaCharts has prepared a stunning visual summary of Tesla’s numbers):

In general, there should be some relative degree of continuity in any company’s income statement and balance sheet accounts, barring some major fundamental change, like a merger or large asset restructuring.

The cash from operations in TSLA’s Q3 this year sticks out like a sore thumb. Over 40% of this came from stretching out the accounts payable by $566 million (more on this below).
The other portion of this “cash” generated by operations came from “net income.” Over the last four quarters, TSLA’s average net loss per quarter was around $760 million. Then suddenly net income swings nearly a billion dollars from a $743 net loss in Q2 to net income of $255 million in Q3. This is simply not credible without fraudulent accounting schemes at work. Please note that these are GAAP accounting numbers. In order to verify that real cash was produced by Tesla’s operations, we would have to see an independent audit of Tesla’s bank accounts, something that will never happen.

From Q2 to Q3, TSLA’s automotive gross profit improved by $882 million based on delivering 42,760 more cars. That’s $20,655 of incremental gross profit on a car that sells for as little as $49,000. The weighted average sales price for the Model 3, S and X combined is around $63,000 (based on the number of each sold). This suggests a gross profit margin of nearly 33% per incremental car sold, which is impossible in the automotive business. No other auto manufacturer in the world comes even remotely close to this level of gross margin.

For it’s latest quarter, GM’s gross profit was 10%; in 2017, Daimler Benz’s gross profit was 20%. It’s simply not credible that Tesla generated this level of profitability on its vehicles without accounting fraud. This is especially true given that Tesla claimed that it built and used its own delivery trailers to make deliveries. This should have caused a noticeably large jump in cost of automotive revenues. Yet, miraculously TSLA’s automotive sales gross margin soared from 20.5% in Q2 to over 25% in Q3. Simply not believable and reeks of fraudulent accounting.

One area of Tesla’s income statement that contains probable fraud is SG&A expenses (sales, general and administrative expenditures). Over the previous four quarters, TSLA’s level of SG&A was running around 20% percent of revenues. It was 18.7% of revenues in Q2 2018. But this quarter, Musk somehow parted the Red Sea and was able drive SG&A down to 10.7% of revenues. SG&A outright actually fell from Q2 to Q3. SG&A has averaged $19,000 per vehicle delivered every quarter since 2014.

In Q3 TSLA reports that SG&A plunged to around $9,000 per vehicle delivered. We know Tesla brought in mechanics from its service centers around the country to help push production levels to the limit. This should have caused a large jump in SG&A.  It’s impossible to explain how a drop in SG&A expense like this occurred without access to the inside books. My best guess is that millions of dollars worth of expense invoices were mysteriously misplaced and not recorded for the quarter. This would partially explain by accounts payable soared by over half a billion dollars.

Another area of cost accounting that has red flags waving and warning flares firing is depreciation. Depreciation expense as a percent of revenues plunged from 12.1% in Q2 to 7.3% in Q3. It was 13.4% in Q3 2017.  Generically, part of the depreciation is straight-line useful life of equipment. The “tent” built in Q2 should have added to this part of depreciation.  But there’s also depreciation expense attached to each car produced and sold on a per car basis. This too should have caused an increase in depreciation. From the cash flow statement, TSLA’s depreciation expense in Q3 was $502.8 million, or $6,021 per car delivered. In Q2 the depreciation expense was $485.2 million, or $11,922 per car delivered. Again, this is theoretically and realistically unexplainable, other than fraud.

Tesla shows a cash balance of $2.967 billion at the end of Q3, up from $2.2 billion at the end of Q2. However, Telsa’s accounts payable surged by $566 million vs. Q2. It’s hard to imagine how this occurred when capital expenditures and SG&A declined. The only explanation is that TSLA stretched out its payment of bills to suppliers and vendors in order to conserve cash. This is consistent with the steady flow of smaller vendors who are forced to file legal complaints in order to get court-ordered payment judgments.

Accounting fraud would explain why there’s been a steady exodus of accounting and finance executives over the last year. The number of senior executives leaving the Company accelerated over the summer, including the Chief Accounting Officer, who quit in early September after less than a month on the job.

By the most stringent measure, TSLA is technically insolvent. Current assets less current liabilities is negative $1.855 billion. Cash balance less customer deposits is $2.062 billion. TSLA has a $230 million convertible bond payment due in November. Less this, cash is $1.832 billion. If we were to assume that accounts receivable and payable – theoretically the most liquid assets on a balance after cash – were settled tomorrow, net of cash it would leave a cash deficit of $609 million. That’s insolvency. On top of that, after the November convertible maturity, another $1 billion in debt is due by March 2019.

Keep in mind TSLA’s cash balance was artificially generated by stretching payables, slashing capex to the bone and somehow miraculously cutting back on expenses. This is simply not sustainable, let alone not credible. Note: Tesla’s capex as a percent of revenues was 7.5%. Over the last six quarters TSLA’s capex as percent of revenues has averaged 25% of revenues. In other words, Tesla is plundering its asset base and burning furniture to pay bills and show cash on the balance sheet.

To make things more interesting for the Company, it was reported last week that Tesla slipped several spots in the Consumer Reports reliability ranking. In its analysis of 29 auto brands, Tesla ranks 27th. CR characterized the Model 3 as having “average reliability.” Also of interest is the effect of newly available competition. In Norway month-to-date, Jaguar has delivered 365 newly available Jaguar i-Pace while there were 185 Tesla X+S combined. The EU has not approved the Model 3 for deliveries yet, but the i-Pace competes with the X and S models. When Audi’s e-Tron is available, I doubt there will be any demand for the Model 3 plus it will put a huge dent in European demand for Telsa’s X & S models.

Add on to this the news report that the FBI/Justice Department is probing whether Tesla misstated information about production of the Model 3 for the purpose of misleading investors. The FBI has subpoenaed former employees seeking to interview them. The FBI is looking into Musk’s public forecasts about Model 3 production vs. the actual production numbers, which turned out to be substantially lower that Musk’s continual assertions that deliveries would be significantly higher. It will be hard for Tesla to raise money with this investigation in process.

It’s been suggested that TSLA insiders knew that the FBI report was going to hit on Friday and that’s why the Company moved its earning release up a week with two days’ notice. It would also explain why the CFO exercised deep in-the-money stock options that do not expire until 2022. Musk knew that the news report would have less impact on the stock if it hit the tape a day after the fraudulently inflated earnings report. At some point, many of the large mutual fund companies with big positions in the shares will have to consider the possibility of facing breach of fiduciary duty charges for continuing to hold TSLA shares given latest the Justice Department/FBI development. Keep in mind the Justice Department has several other areas of inquiry and the SEC is examining other issues beyond the issue recently settled with Musk.

TSLA’s stock likely would have sold off this week absent the massive short-squeeze that has caused the Dow and SPX to go vertical. In fact, Tesla stock declined from it’s opening level on Monday through Tuesday’s close. In all probability, TSLA would be below $300 if the Dow and SPX simply flat-lined or drifted lower the past three days.

While not a Ponzi scheme in a strict sense because TSLA does generate revenues, TSLA requires a steady inflow of funding from the capital markets to remain solvent. At some point it will need a few billion to address the money it owes to suppliers and contractors and to service its enormous and growing pile of debt. Like Enron, at some point its cash furnace will run out of printed money to fuel it and the stock will collapse. I provide my Short Seller’s Journal subscribers with both short-term and long-term short-sell and trading ideas on Tesla.

The Demise Of Tesla: We’ve Seen This Movie Before

Enron was a product of the late 1990’s dot.com / tech bubble.  Similar to Tesla’s “production tent,”  Enron would set entire floors of buildings to look like elaborate energy trading rooms.  The operations were nothing more than a fraudulent shell game, set-up for the benefit of Wall Street analysts and journalists.

Bear Stearns was a product of the mid-2000’s mortgage bubble.  It created catastrophically leveraged mortgage-backed securities hedge funds that would inevitably collapse.  The managers of these funds kept these funds alive by hiding positions from upper management and fraudulently over-marking the value of the underlying assets, which eventually proved worthless.

And now, Tesla’s path to demise seems quite similar to the recent implosion of Theranos.  Theranos was biotech company which collapsed after it was revealed that it had fraudulently promoted claims about its blood testing technology.   This story resonates in Tesla’s decision to skip a critical brake test in order to meet a superficial production goal last week.  Anyone who takes delivery and pays for a Tesla Model 3 is putting themselves and their families at risk.

While not widely reported, there has been a rapid exit of high level executives, including the chief engineer, who resigned the day after Elon Musk issued the command to skip the brake test.  After this story broke, one of my subscribers emailed me:  “I design and build (from my bare hands) electrical testing equipment for the automotive industry. Plants shutdown rather than let their stuff go out the door untested.”  Now we know why the chief engineer bolted from the Company.

The proprietor of the Adventures  In Capitalism blog published a comparison between Tesla and Theranos.  He focuses on the recent erratic behavior of the CEO and potentially lethal production decisions implemented:

The question is, who would want to invest new capital when Tesla is now admitting to knowingly selling cars without testing the brakes in order to hit some arbitrary one week production target? When a company admits that it will sacrifice vehicle quality and even risk killing its customers to win a twitter feud and start a short squeeze, regulators must step in. The question is; what else has Tesla done illegally to hit its targets? We know that Tesla long ago passed over the ethical threshold of selling faulty products that have killed people—what other allegations will soon come to light? Elon Musk demanded that Tesla stop testing brakes on June 26. Doug Field, chief engineer, resigned on June 27. Is this a coincidence? Of course not—Doug Field doesn’t want to be responsible for killing people…

You can read the rest of this here: Tesla Is The New Theranos

The only ingredient missing from the chain of events that precedes the complete collapse of Tesla is a table-pounding, frothing-at-the-mouth “buy” recommendation from CNBC’s Jim Cramer.

Another Blow-Off Top In Stocks?

And just like  that, the  VIX index crashes right back to where it was before the late-January 10% drop in the stock market – a reflection that the remaining stock market speculators and hedge fund bots have been completely cleansed of any fear impulse that hit daytrader keyboards in the first quarter of 2018:

Hedge funds went from insanely short VIX futures to long VIX futures after the market had dropped 10% and the VIX soared. They were slaughtered on their shorts, now they are getting bludgeoned on their long position. But guess what?  They went net short again about  four days ago.  Selling volatility again at the bottom of the volatility index.  Not a good omen for perma-bulls.

The Dow has recovered about 56% of the decline that occurred from January 26th to March 23rd. Correction over and on to higher highs? Possibly. The Russell 2000 broke out to all-time highs starting in mid-May. The Nasdaq hit an all-time high Tuesday. Everything appears to be heading higher…or is it?

The Dow is being driven primarily by Boeing (BA), Microsoft (MSFT), Caterpillar (CAT) and United Health. On Tuesday, I calculated by hand that the big move higher by AMZN was responsible for 43% of the performance in the S&P 500. If AMZN had just been flat that day, the SPX would have closed lower from Monday instead of up 8 pts. By all indicators, the move in the Russell is being driven by a short-squeeze. TSLA was up $28 – 9.6% – yesterday because Elon Musk whispered the phrase, “Model 3 production target,” into the ears of the romance-starved Tesla bulls. Also known as a “shot of short-squeeze Viagra.”

When the market was plunging earlier in the year, the hedge fund bots shifted from insanely long to recklessly short.  Now they are being squeezed.

The Italian debt and Latin American currency crises have not only not gone away but they are getting worse.  As long as the reports don’t hit the headlines, the problems do not exist for moronic daytraders and hedge fund computer program news spiders.

Economically in the U.S. the bold propaganda-laced, heavily “adjusted” Government-manufactured economic reports continue to diverge from the economic and financial reality on Main Street.  Housing, auto and retail sales are deteriorating now as the majority of U.S. households have found themselves stuffed like a French goose readied for foie gras production.

Of course, the smart money is not hanging around for Part Two of what’s to come.  The “smart money index” shows that professional money is leaving the stock market at a rate that has only been equaled in the last 20 years in 2000 and 2008…

There’s no telling how much longer this insanity can persist this time around.  But it brings to mind Hemingway’s description of how to bankrupt as conveyed in “The Sun Also Rises” – “Two ways: gradually then suddenly.”

By the way.  Keep an eye on gold. The majority of the market looking to the sky for stocks and down over the cliff for gold, we could get a surprise move higher in precious metals and mining stocks.