Tesla Preparing to Go Public?

Terry Olaes

Terry Olaes

I Used to be the [H] News Guy
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
4,646
Electric car maker Tesla is preparing to go public, according to MSNBC. The IPO is expected “any day” so if you think this much maligned company has what it takes to deliver a return on your investment, get your broker on the horn. According to the article, this IPO would be the 1st US automaker to go public since Ford in 1956. Wow.

Tesla's IPO would follow the successful debut of lithium-ion battery maker A123 Systems, whose shares rallied 50 percent on their first day of trading on Sept 25. Analysts have said that the success of A123, the first green technology IPO this year, would encourage more venture capital-backed green companies to go public.
Click to expand...
 
Oil makers are going to turn this car into tiny cubes :( So much for changing the world.
 
I want in!! As soon as they get their affordable mass-market $20k after tax credit car out their stock will EXPLODE.
 
People need to stop sucking the electric cars dick and realize algae based biofuel is pretty much the best long term option for fuel and it lets us keep our basic current infrastructure.
 
Methadras said:
They still won't produce a sub-$35k electric car.
Click to expand...

Their plan is to take the money from the Roadster and produce a mid-level car (Model-S), and from that they will build an even cheaper car. The only thing that is holding electric cars back is the cost and energy density of the batteries.

As for the "sucking the electric cars dick" comment, electric is the way to go for transportation. No matter what the fuel (biofuel, gasoline, ethanol), there are always limitations to the chemical conversion process. Unless a major breakthrough is made in the next 100 years, chemical efficiency will always lag behind electrical efficiency.
 
The question for me is when they will have multiple cars in different price brackets.

Rolling out one car kinda puts people in a box. You either love it or hate it. Give the people choices and they should be successful.
 
As for the "sucking the electric cars dick" comment, electric is the way to go for transportation. No matter what the fuel (biofuel, gasoline, ethanol), there are always limitations to the chemical conversion process. Unless a major breakthrough is made in the next 100 years, chemical efficiency will always lag behind electrical efficiency.
Click to expand...
Yeah, good luck making all that electricity that's so efficient. What, what's that? You can't? Oh, yeah.. didn't think so.
 
Tesla's going public? ZOMG!
tesla.jpg
 
Achron said:
As for the "sucking the electric cars dick" comment, electric is the way to go for transportation. No matter what the fuel (biofuel, gasoline, ethanol), there are always limitations to the chemical conversion process. Unless a major breakthrough is made in the next 100 years, chemical efficiency will always lag behind electrical efficiency.
Click to expand...

Yea okay... electricity is efficient? Please go take a general course in physics. Where do you thinking your electicity comes from? Falls out of the air, travels through wires and comes to your home with no loss at all?

energy from chemical process (think oil burning) is the most used method in which we get our electricity right now. that electricity then needs to be carried to you through wires which have resistance. that electrical energy is lost as heat through resistance before it comes to you. Why do you think things using electricity gets hot. Now lets say you have a car that needs to be charged... Have you ever charged your batteries and notice them get warm. I think you know where im headed here. The point is, electrical efficiency is dependent on chemical efficiency. Its not independent... theres going to be energy loss. So really, your comment should say Unless a major breakthrough is made in the next 100 years, electrical efficiency will always lag behind chemical efficiency.
 
Concerning Ford and Tesla are now cash-flow-positive/profitable (repaying debts maybe) it might make sense to go public. One idea could this: "Its been over 50 years since a US auto company went public, lets go before 'The New GM' does.", its just a thought.
I believe It might be best for Tesla to wait until the first Model S is on the road.

Midterms are coming soon, as most of us know, some (or most) where not happy with the auto loans (or bailout), some may lose there seats. There is some speculation right now about Congressional pressure to get GM public before midterms, even if they are not ready. I don't think Tesla has did problem, but who knows, the DoE/ATVM loans where not apart of the auto loans/bailout.

Just some thoughts.
 
peterhoang2002 said:
Yea okay... electricity is efficient? Please go take a general course in physics. Where do you thinking your electicity comes from? Falls out of the air, travels through wires and comes to your home with no loss at all?

energy from chemical process (think oil burning) is the most used method in which we get our electricity right now. that electricity then needs to be carried to you through wires which have resistance. that electrical energy is lost as heat through resistance before it comes to you. Why do you think things using electricity gets hot. Now lets say you have a car that needs to be charged... Have you ever charged your batteries and notice them get warm. I think you know where im headed here.
Click to expand...

What's the charge/discharge efficiency on a typical Lithium Ion battery pack? Don't know? It's typically over 80%, FYI.

How about the PEAK operating efficiency of a typical gasoline Internal Combustion Engine? 30%. Now, before you start figuring out the other inefficiencies involved in transporting electricity, keep in mind that this efficiency only occurs at "peak", most of the time your ICE is getting less than 20%.

How about a Natural Gas Turbine power-plant? What's its input-energy -> output electricity efficiency? Typically over 80%. Power lines? You're likely to sustain more than 90%, obviously depending on distance. So you start with 100, down to 80 from the power plant itself(assuming you don't use nuclear), from there to 72%(90% trans. eff.), then to 57%(80% batt. eff.). 57% sounds crappy, but it's still more than double what your car is likely capable of. Often electricity comes from less-efficient sources, but it can also come from sources whose efficiency is far harder to measure(such as nuclear). For the sake of an argument about the "future" of transportation and energy needs, considering the most efficient methods makes the most sense.

How about a diesel engine? You get a bit of an improvement there, but you're still going to sit under 40%.

By far, one of the worst ideas I think anyone's had, is the idea of a "hydrogen economy". I could go on and on about all the technical reasons why electricity is better both from a safety standpoint and an efficiency standpoint, but why? All you need to do is look to the fact that Oil companies like Shell are getting behind Hydrogen like nobody's business. Shell, and other oil companies, LOVE selling you 3x as much energy as you actually need.
 
Spewn, I couldn't have agreed more. Kudos, my friend.

As for the comment of myself having to take a general physics course, I'm not going to bother responding with the obligatory "I have xxx level of degree in xxx and xxx years working with xxx". I was referring to the fact that no matter what you do, combustion (chemical) engines suck. Always have, always will. They are, in fact, a heat engine. Remember Carnot?

Electric motors are extremely efficient. Batteries are the weak spot in the equation, but I suspect within the next 5-10 years, they will at least triple their capacity and density. Biofuels will only be a step to wean the country off of oil. Where does the electricity come from, however? Coal. However, most states have RPS that limit them as to how much electricity generation comes from non-renewable resources...and hopefully in our lifetime, that electricity will happen to "fall out of the sky" (solar, wind, hydro, if you get my drift).

As for Tesla...I'll be first on board to buy some stock. That Model-S of theirs is a sexy piece of machinery.
 
Spewn said:
What's the charge/discharge efficiency on a typical Lithium Ion battery pack? Don't know? It's typically over 80%, FYI.

How about the PEAK operating efficiency of a typical gasoline Internal Combustion Engine? 30%. Now, before you start figuring out the other inefficiencies involved in transporting electricity, keep in mind that this efficiency only occurs at "peak", most of the time your ICE is getting less than 20%.

How about a Natural Gas Turbine power-plant? What's its input-energy -> output electricity efficiency? Typically over 80%. Power lines? You're likely to sustain more than 90%, obviously depending on distance. So you start with 100, down to 80 from the power plant itself(assuming you don't use nuclear), from there to 72%(90% trans. eff.), then to 57%(80% batt. eff.). 57% sounds crappy, but it's still more than double what your car is likely capable of. Often electricity comes from less-efficient sources, but it can also come from sources whose efficiency is far harder to measure(such as nuclear). For the sake of an argument about the "future" of transportation and energy needs, considering the most efficient methods makes the most sense.

How about a diesel engine? You get a bit of an improvement there, but you're still going to sit under 40%.

By far, one of the worst ideas I think anyone's had, is the idea of a "hydrogen economy". I could go on and on about all the technical reasons why electricity is better both from a safety standpoint and an efficiency standpoint, but why? All you need to do is look to the fact that Oil companies like Shell are getting behind Hydrogen like nobody's business. Shell, and other oil companies, LOVE selling you 3x as much energy as you actually need.
Click to expand...

Yeah, once you take into account having to rebuild our entire electrical infrastructure and the way we build cars, safety standards, all that junk, I'm sure you'll understand why bio fuel is the way to go. Also, Natural Gas? Can't wait for that to run out. Or Coal. Or really any method for making electricity that's efficient. That's why they're working on solar power. Unfortunately they have yet to realize it's much easier to utilize organisms that already exist and are far more advanced (and efficient) than any technology we can produce, at this time, to make electrical energy from the sun (i.e. algae).
 
Powerage said:
Yeah, once you take into account having to rebuild our entire electrical infrastructure and the way we build cars, safety standards, all that junk, I'm sure you'll understand why bio fuel is the way to go. Also, Natural Gas? Can't wait for that to run out. Or Coal. Or really any method for making electricity that's efficient. That's why they're working on solar power. Unfortunately they have yet to realize it's much easier to utilize organisms that already exist and are far more advanced (and efficient) than any technology we can produce, at this time, to make electrical energy from the sun (i.e. algae).
Click to expand...


We have to rebuild the electrical infrastructure anyway...it's crap. It's old and falling apart. You know that whole Smart Grid thing they're talking about? Coal will not run out in your lifetime. Natural gas probably won't either (50ish years left at today's technology).

As for algae being more efficient...that's wrong. What's the efficiency number, something like 10-20%, tops? Multijunction cells already hit 40%. Theoretical maximum is about 70-80%. Thin fillms and organic cells are at low teens.
 
Achron said:
We have to rebuild the electrical infrastructure anyway...it's crap. It's old and falling apart. You know that whole Smart Grid thing they're talking about? Coal will not run out in your lifetime. Natural gas probably won't either (50ish years left at today's technology).

As for algae being more efficient...that's wrong. What's the efficiency number, something like 10-20%, tops? Multijunction cells already hit 40%. Theoretical maximum is about 70-80%. Thin fillms and organic cells are at low teens.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well considering we don't have to spend thousands making algae and they reproduce incredibly quickly, I call your logic flawed.
 
As for grid infrastructure, the high transmission lines are "fine". Its the local "wooden pole" infrastructure that needs replacement.
 
All I have to say is fat freaking chance of that. Tesla has been promoting their roadster and company for years and they still have no market share. About 4 years ago there were news stories about Tesla making a big push and opening dealerships nation wide.

This company is never going to come to market with a competitive product.
 
To add, a forward looking objective is to move away from the "big power plant and big grid" model to a distributed and independent customer based one.
 
Although I would love to see them become public (I want my greedy hands on some of that!), there is probably no way they will do so. They have plenty of private investors, so it isn't money they are needing. If they ever do become public, it will be years down the road, but I highly doubt before they introduce their next car or the car after that.
 
They've only sold about 750 in the since the Roadster was introduced. My theory is that up until a year or so ago they were banking on getting California to give the funds to promote "green companies". When California declined due to its own financial issues, they looked to the only people left who are willing to lose money....the public.
 
i think hydrogen is the best way to go so long as fuel cells become cost effective and plentiful enough.... thats a big '....' though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top