I can appreciate how professional analyst are used to auto manufacturers humming to perfection on inventory, parts, supplies, etc....and how " recalls" are handled (discussed) by a mature organization/mfgr.

It sounds like the battery pack might be flakey and they are "working on it" (supply and maybe other issues).

LQMT management should be able to lay out a forecast and probably has one ( a long range one).

My guess is that they don't talk details because it's considered too preliminary.

...At shareholders expense.

We'll listen to the CC later. We stopped wasting our time "holding out and hanging on a string" hoping for some bigger news.

But, we think that things can still pan out in terms of delivering to the market, but not necessarily quickly.

When they finally do get a larger contract, it could be the beginning of something bigger.

But because it has been stated that this is a "young man's stock" ( according to what a poster said that Steipp has said) implying that nothing big or fast will be occurring soon.

I have news for you, "as quickly as possible" has not been one of their objectives. Consider speaking with some key people working on the projects and you will learn that "quick" was not an objective and it was acceptable to the people involved to "take their time to get it right." This comment came from a horses mouth.

Combine that with a lead prospect that also is in no rush.

It has not been about "moving fast" and shareholders have accepted it.

Pomerantz Law Firm Has Filed a Class Action Against Tesla Motors, Inc. and Certain Officers -- TSLA

NEW YORK, Nov. 8, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP has filed a class action lawsuit against Tesla Motors, Inc. ("Tesla" or the "Company") (Nasdaq:TSLA) and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in United States District Court, Northern District of California, and docketed under 3:13-cv-05216, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Tesla securities between May 10, 2013 and November 6, 2013 both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). This class action seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

If you are a shareholder who purchased Tesla securities during the Class Period, you have until January 7, 2013 to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class. A copy of the Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at rswilloughby@pomlaw.com or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll free, x237. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address, telephone number, and number of shares purchased.

Tesla designs, develops, manufactures, and sells electric vehicles, including its flagship Model S, and electric vehicle powertrain components. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Tesla's business, including: (1) Tesla's statements about the Model S's highest safety rating and its lack of prior fire incidents were materially misleading, due to undisclosed puncture and fire risks in its undercarriage and lithium ion battery pack; (2) the Model S suffered from material defects which caused the battery pack to ignite and erupt in flames under certain driving conditions; (3) Tesla's future sales, its next generation Model X introduction, and its stock price were extremely vulnerable to the inherent risk posed by the Model S's undercarriage and battery pack design flaws; (4) Tesla was unable to maintain a level of automobile deliveries sufficient to satisfy analyst concerns and compensate for other declining revenue streams; and, (5) as a result of the foregoing, Tesla's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On October 2, 2013, a video of a Model S burning on the roadside was widely circulated, which Tesla attributed to a collision with road debris. The same day, Tesla was downgraded by an analyst who pointed to significant execution risks it faced. On this news, Tesla shares declined $12.05 per share, or more than 6%, to close at $180.95.

On October 28, 2013 a second Model S fire occurred in Mexico, which Tesla blamed on the car's rate of speed and its crash into a tree. On this news, Tesla shares fell $7.32 per share, or more than 4.3% to close at $162.86 on October 28, 2013.

Tesla's stock closed at $176.81 on November 5, 2013. That day, after hours, Tesla announced its Q3 2013 results, which failed to meet analyst expectations on key metrics, including rate of vehicle deliveries. On November 7, 2013, Tesla confirmed a third Model S fire, caused by impact with road debris during normal driving conditions. On this news, Tesla shares opened at $154.81 on November 6, 2013 - $22.00 per share (12.44%) lower than the prior day's closing price, and declined on November 6-7, 2013 to $139.77.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Florida, and San Diego, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 70 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com.

CONTACT: Robert S. Willoughby
Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP
rswilloughby@pomlaw.com
Source: Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP

Very cool. maybe those process patents will pay off.

The announcement of sales in China was a non-event.

Hope it bounces at least one standard deviation.

I didn't follow the full thread so this comment might be off:

Maybe lqmt/vpc thought that their production ready prototypes were good enough but received feedback that they weren't; or maybe a prospect had some direct contact with VPC and noticed they weren't up to par ( relative to other vendors/companies they are used to ); maybe the lack of a second sourcing strategy appeared too early stage for a prospect; maybe LQMT cut bait from VPC and started to work directly with Engel who could be more reputable.

Who knows where the snag developed; maybe it was sometime this summer when the price was driven down to .05ish as part of a strategy to keep VPC at arms length; maybe BOC has been aggressive about wanting to take over but really didn't have the background to come off well with customer prospects even if they eventually could master it.

Big companies qualify vendors based on impression also, e.g. Having to work through issues n front of a customer prospect can leave a bad impression even if a vendor can eventually work it out, especially if they already have established relationships with other companies with proven track records and reputation.

Woa is LQMT....but steady could still win the race.

How JC could have gamed it ..... He would have needed more info from the company about how they plan to address the issues and when. As it is, they left it open ( or chose not to disclose). Maybe It was a gift to Gs/JPM.

If lucky, will make it back to 160 before too long.

Maybe the stock takes off anyway like it did yesterday.

Person here is not into investing in a company that is so secretive; however, it might be a great place to work ( it looks fun in fact).

....hope that all invested, including the management, get a great return on investment.

....person here doesn't enjoy dogging a stock or a company...but only way to believe this one now is if they get into disclosure more and truly articulate a turn around plan, e.g. How will they recover from the false start with VPC ( regardless of whose issue it was).

Good luck LQMT and longs! Hope all transcend out the gutter.

Now a third fire .... Think this stock/company will be dogged....and go through a phase to deal with the bad press that will be cast on them ( a lot of competition to come, etc.).

if you want a new name stock to do well, suggestion: don't bring it up to cnbc/mad money.

Good luck all. Is disappointing to me because I bought into an earnings pop.

I personally don't see how TSLA can meet some future implied milestones of exponential/accelerating growth without addressing the vendor issues overall (lead times, need to expand, etc.) which will take a little time...so maybe they'll need to address the overall JIT challenge before they can expand again, exponentially.

To me, SCTY is a completely separate issue, but if TSLA can help it out ( with a giga factory), great. It would months away at least because they don't now location yet, etc.

When Musk was asked about "permitting" in the CC, he said it wouldn't be an issue because it would be completely green, etc. That seemed like a broad brush issue ( what about water, plumbing, etc)

....and he mentioned that SCTY ( a Musk company ) guided down and said that might also cause TSLA to sell off another day, right.

A giga factory would help SCTY business right.

SCTY ( solar city ), supposedly beat, but had insider support .... To help with some issues .....75% ownership by insiders, etc.

The shipment/revenue numbers that CNBC posted as targets during the day ( before TSLA announcement) weren't as high as what Jim Cramer rumored.

It seems to me that he helps to bring a stock down (punish it) through marketing. Notice how he positions/markets around Icahn and other big investor positions ( market up, while they get out), etc.

The bar is pretty high for tsla, they needed to throttle and as more eyes on it, more scrutiny, etc.

..... Think there is more to the battery issue than meets the eye; in a way it buys them time, etc.

It's amazing how fast they've expanded to date.

They also pointed out that the European market is as big as the US market.

Does anyone have a feel for the size of either market?

Agree that once WS/cnbc starts dogging it; it goes from there. Sure that GS/JPM are looking to get in/more lower if they can.


The miss wasn't really a miss, they just didn't exceed on all fronts ( maybe the bar was too high by analysts).

I'm thinking that the European market looks better to them, factor in the extra steps they took for shipping, country specific nuances, etc., and potential resistance in the US by other dealers, etc.

With a battery capacity issue, two things: someone else to blame, seeds seeking funding for the giga factory ( forces the issue).

Someone pointed out that there was a lot of insider selling a few months ago. They probably saw the writing in the wall with the battery issue ( capacity and ....)

They are deciding to slow marketing, etc., until capacity issue cam be addressed ( battery, and other components) with no mention of "when" the issues will be addressed.

It sounds like that by being ambiguous, they have a window to develop Europe more, etc.

They basically met and exceeded.

What concerns me is that in CC they didn't emphasize "when" they thought the capacity issue cold be met. If they could have done that, it seems like the investors could see past the glitch.

It's possible the stock is too high visibility.

If they can execute ( next year us forecasted at 4xx% growth), it cold still be red hot. I don't think they addressed battery issue satisfactorily. It was left open.

Actually, I think also that shipping to Europe slowed things down a little bit.

My bet is that TSLA is running into resistance in the US ( notice how they dodged the question about the planned cross country trip)....or maybe the battery doesn't last long enough or something.

There are high growth stocks that keep going...this one has alot of eyes on it.

Tsla is look bad pre-market .... Lesson, don't hold over earnings.

Steve Grassco on Fast Money just gave TSLA a thumbs up ( meaning he still sees it as a growth stock and on target with their plans) vs. the other nay sayers, etc. He's been on to this stock for awhile and call it right. Let's hope he is still on target. A rerun of the TSLA segment on Fast Money can be seen on the cnbc website, ipad app, etc.

But it didn't bounce today and after hours,it's down from close ....we'll see.; still 2 days left in the week.

We might be in deep you know what if we don't get a bounce .... Where's that dude with the OTM options position ( the clock).

I hope you're right.

John carter thinks so in his yesterday's free simpleroptions video.

Bringing futuristic into reality is a notable feat, right. "Giga" factory, what a trippy name. Why not just fast forward and co e out with a Jetson scooter or bubble car, lol.

... Because there were some more positives to discuss (CFO hints) that Musk was hesitant to bring up. Maybe he's sand bagging. It sounds like they have a lot of challenging to juggle at once, mostly optimization and capacity oriented.

I have to admit that the futuristic companies run by engineers kind of get on my nerves ( being one, etc.). For PR/IR I think it would be better for investors to hear the cull story by the CFO, etc. I'm sure E.Musk is being cautious about any forward looking statements, etc...so it tends to sound fluid. But their progress to date is remarkable. When they can be a little more lucid about the giga factory ( sounds almost surreal), this stock could really move. I need to listen to the CC again, but didn't catch their timeframe for it. I'm willing to bet that TSLA might forego some N.A. for Asia and Europe where there's less resistance, etc.

European and Asian demand could absorb the US market demand.

GS and JPM, et al, would love for the shares to drop to pick up more. What's interesting is that they "raised" their targets anyway.

Ask yourself, if TSLA can get enough pending orders, financing shouldn't be a problem. Wonder what China might bring or expect with "approval".

I don't know but my guess is that they might want a mfgr stake. Wonder how that might blend with TSLA's wholistic philosophies.

I think they didn't say more on CC about giga factory because they are uncertain on location, etc. If it's all green ( according to them) and if solar is used, the location selected would take that and other factors into consideration. North America is favored but not pinned down. it sounds like this is the only gating factor (and maybe capex to fuel it); they has positive FCF.

Think of all the large investors that already own it, need to make YE numbers, and see the future as positive even though not cast in concrete yet (pent up demand waiting for flood gates to open); an issue, backlog of Christmas orders.

$153 by notable analyst, e.g. Morgan Stanley.

Morgan Stanley's release seems to have halted the decline.

Morgan Stanley raised price target to $153 and Goldman Sachs also " raised" their target. Both are positive for TSLA. With an approval by Chinese authorities, could start looking even more interesting again. TSLA has a production constraint they are working on. As their plans solidify, it will sound better to investors.

They met/beat in several areas....guess it's not that exciting unless buyers see current price as a discount.