EVEN MORE FIRE AND EXPLOSION ISSUES:
TESLA OWN PATENTS COULD DESTROY TESLA:
Bernard Tse, Tesla's Battery division expert, states that he fully informed Tesla of all of the explosion issues long before Tesla applied to the Department of Energy. Bernard Tse and two other top Tesla engineers (Both killed in a Tesla Plane crash in San Carlos, California, near Tesla's office) directed the inclusion, in Tesla's federal patent filings, of warnings about the dangers of the Tesla battery pack because they feared for their personal liability. Here is the actual text from Tesla federal patent paperwork which caused Elon Musk to have to give Tesla's patents away for free because they then had no value anymore and stood as a warning to consumers:
Tesla Motors discloses horrific confession of dangers with it’s cars! For nearly a decade Tesla Motors has been lying about, covering up and counter-hyping the sizeable risks about it’s cars.
Now Tesla has been forced by investigators, insurance groups and investment risk advisers to disclose what it has been hiding.
Tesla (TSLA) recently disclosed about thirty pages of risks to its earnings, a record number. Risk disclosures are standard boilerplate for publicly traded companies, but the scope of Tesla’s admissions include some eye-brow raising details — including warnings about customers getting electrocuted by its electric cars if users try to hack them.
Additionally, Federal patent documents, uncovered by investigators, show that Tesla’s own engineers admitted, in writing, to federal agencies, that Tesla’s batteries could self-ignite, burn down homes and kill your family.
Per THIS LINK, Tesla is so worried about its reputation that, for the first time, it warned in its disclosures that buyers could fry themselves if they use “unsafe charging outlets” or try to customize its vehicles. “Automobile enthusiasts may seek to ‘hack’ our vehicles to modify its performance which could compromise vehicle safety systems,” it said. Tesla noted, for instance, that customers “have installed large speaker systems that may impact the electrical systems of the vehicle.”
This is a big deal for Tesla. It can’t control what customers do to its technologically advanced cars, which appear not to be beautiful or powerful enough for some car buyers who want to pimp their Tesla ride. If it goes haywire on them, it’s Tesla that take the hits to its brand.
Tesla added: “We have not tested, nor do we endorse, such changes or products,” noting, “such unauthorized modifications could reduce the safety of our vehicles, and any injuries from such modifications could result in adverse publicity which would negatively affect our brand and harm our business, prospects, financial condition, and operating results.”
Yet another headache for Tesla, which also admits in its SEC filings that it hasn’t been profitable since it launched in 2003, except for the first quarter of 2013; it went public in 2010. Last year Tesla spilled $294 million in red ink on $3.2 billion in revenue, and its cash flow is virtually nil. Tesla’s stock has ricocheted over the past 52 weeks, to an intra-day trading high of $291.42 per share down to a low of $177.22 a share.
Despite all that, Tesla shares are valued at $25.5 billion, 42% of GM’s market cap. Last year Tesla delivered 31,655 vehicles, below estimates, compared to GM’s record 9.9 million vehicles sold last year. Tesla has to simultaneously build not just the electric cars, the factories for the batteries and the vehicles, as well as the supercharging stations to recharge the cars. It’s getting tax subsidies for its $5 billion Gigafactory; it has just about $1.9 billion in cash and equivalents on the balance sheet.
However, Tesla founder Elon Musk is optimistic. He said last month Tesla will have positive cash flow by the third quarter. Even though profits on a GAAP basis are still five years away, Musk forecasting Tesla’s market cap would equal Apple’s (AAPL) gargantuan valuation in ten years.
Optimism to Wall Street analysts on earnings conference calls are one thing. The devil is in the details, or rather, the footnotes, when it comes to possible hits to any future earnings — the stumbling blocks to being in the black.
Though its Model S recently won an overall five star safety rating by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, it does say its lithium-ion battery cells “have been observed to catch fire or vent smoke and flame, and such events have raised concerns.” Last year, federal safety regulators closed a probe into whether Tesla’s design made its electric car vulnerable to fires. Tesla cars burst into flames on at least two known occasions in 2013; the company has moved to rectify the problem.
Tesla, which also sells its battery packs to Toyota and Daimler, notes that these type of battery has caught fire in laptop computers and cell phones. However, cell manufacturers are pursuing alternative lithium-ion battery cell chemistries to improve safety, Tesla says.
Tesla also said it’s continuing to build out its Supercharging stations in the United States, Europe and Asia, which it needs to sell its Model S vehicles. But as with any business, it must secure suitable locations, permits, negotiate leases with landowners and deal with utility companies.
It admitted it may “be unable to expand the Supercharger network as fast as we intend or as the public expects, or to place the charging stations in places our customers believe to be optimal.” It does say it will not be charging customers to access this network in addition to what they have already paid for their electric vehicles.
The other problem for Tesla: Servicing the cars for customers. “We have limited experience servicing our vehicles, especially in certain regions outside of the United States,” it said. “If we are unable to address the service requirements of our existing and future customers, our business will be materially and adversely affected.”
Given all these obstacles, it’s interesting that Tesla is largely in the hands of one man. Tesla said it is “highly dependent on the services of Elon Musk,” its chief executive officer and best marketer. Musk owns 26.7% of the company; together with other executives, insiders own about 28%, a concentration which may “prevent new investors from influencing significant corporate decisions,” Tesla said.
Tesla Discloses Risks of Lawsuits to Investors – News – F&I PALO ALTO, Calif. — In the past month, Tesla has been slapped with lawsuits in two states for operating a showroom under its franchise. And as it awaits a ruling for preliminary injunction in Massachusetts, Tesla is trying to appease investors and the industry’s national dealer group.fi-magazine.com/news/story/2012/11/tesla-discloses-risks-…
Bernard Tse, Tesla's Battery division expert, states that he fully informed Tesla of all of the explosion issues long before Tesla applied to the Department of Energy. Bernard Tse and two other top Tesla engineers (Both killed in a Tesla Plane crash in San Carlos, California, near Tesla's office) directed the inclusion, in Tesla's federal patent filings, of warnings about the dangers of the Tesla battery pack because they feared for their personal liability. Here is the actual text from Tesla federal patent paperwork which caused Elon Musk to have to give Tesla's patents away for free because they then had no value anymore and stood as a warning to consumers:
Tesla Motors discloses horrific confession of dangers with it’s cars! For nearly a decade Tesla Motors has been lying about, covering up and counter-hyping the sizeable risks about it’s cars.
Now Tesla has been forced by investigators, insurance groups and investment risk advisers to disclose what it has been hiding.
Tesla (TSLA) recently disclosed about thirty pages of risks to its earnings, a record number. Risk disclosures are standard boilerplate for publicly traded companies, but the scope of Tesla’s admissions include some eye-brow raising details — including warnings about customers getting electrocuted by its electric cars if users try to hack them.
Additionally, Federal patent documents, uncovered by investigators, show that Tesla’s own engineers admitted, in writing, to federal agencies, that Tesla’s batteries could self-ignite, burn down homes and kill your family.
Per THIS LINK, Tesla is so worried about its reputation that, for the first time, it warned in its disclosures that buyers could fry themselves if they use “unsafe charging outlets” or try to customize its vehicles. “Automobile enthusiasts may seek to ‘hack’ our vehicles to modify its performance which could compromise vehicle safety systems,” it said. Tesla noted, for instance, that customers “have installed large speaker systems that may impact the electrical systems of the vehicle.”
This is a big deal for Tesla. It can’t control what customers do to its technologically advanced cars, which appear not to be beautiful or powerful enough for some car buyers who want to pimp their Tesla ride. If it goes haywire on them, it’s Tesla that take the hits to its brand.
Tesla added: “We have not tested, nor do we endorse, such changes or products,” noting, “such unauthorized modifications could reduce the safety of our vehicles, and any injuries from such modifications could result in adverse publicity which would negatively affect our brand and harm our business, prospects, financial condition, and operating results.”
Yet another headache for Tesla, which also admits in its SEC filings that it hasn’t been profitable since it launched in 2003, except for the first quarter of 2013; it went public in 2010. Last year Tesla spilled $294 million in red ink on $3.2 billion in revenue, and its cash flow is virtually nil. Tesla’s stock has ricocheted over the past 52 weeks, to an intra-day trading high of $291.42 per share down to a low of $177.22 a share.
Despite all that, Tesla shares are valued at $25.5 billion, 42% of GM’s market cap. Last year Tesla delivered 31,655 vehicles, below estimates, compared to GM’s record 9.9 million vehicles sold last year. Tesla has to simultaneously build not just the electric cars, the factories for the batteries and the vehicles, as well as the supercharging stations to recharge the cars. It’s getting tax subsidies for its $5 billion Gigafactory; it has just about $1.9 billion in cash and equivalents on the balance sheet.
However, Tesla founder Elon Musk is optimistic. He said last month Tesla will have positive cash flow by the third quarter. Even though profits on a GAAP basis are still five years away, Musk forecasting Tesla’s market cap would equal Apple’s (AAPL) gargantuan valuation in ten years.
Optimism to Wall Street analysts on earnings conference calls are one thing. The devil is in the details, or rather, the footnotes, when it comes to possible hits to any future earnings — the stumbling blocks to being in the black.
Though its Model S recently won an overall five star safety rating by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, it does say its lithium-ion battery cells “have been observed to catch fire or vent smoke and flame, and such events have raised concerns.” Last year, federal safety regulators closed a probe into whether Tesla’s design made its electric car vulnerable to fires. Tesla cars burst into flames on at least two known occasions in 2013; the company has moved to rectify the problem.
Tesla, which also sells its battery packs to Toyota and Daimler, notes that these type of battery has caught fire in laptop computers and cell phones. However, cell manufacturers are pursuing alternative lithium-ion battery cell chemistries to improve safety, Tesla says.
Tesla also said it’s continuing to build out its Supercharging stations in the United States, Europe and Asia, which it needs to sell its Model S vehicles. But as with any business, it must secure suitable locations, permits, negotiate leases with landowners and deal with utility companies.
It admitted it may “be unable to expand the Supercharger network as fast as we intend or as the public expects, or to place the charging stations in places our customers believe to be optimal.” It does say it will not be charging customers to access this network in addition to what they have already paid for their electric vehicles.
The other problem for Tesla: Servicing the cars for customers. “We have limited experience servicing our vehicles, especially in certain regions outside of the United States,” it said. “If we are unable to address the service requirements of our existing and future customers, our business will be materially and adversely affected.”
Given all these obstacles, it’s interesting that Tesla is largely in the hands of one man. Tesla said it is “highly dependent on the services of Elon Musk,” its chief executive officer and best marketer. Musk owns 26.7% of the company; together with other executives, insiders own about 28%, a concentration which may “prevent new investors from influencing significant corporate decisions,” Tesla said.
Tesla Discloses Risks of Lawsuits to Investors – News – F&I PALO ALTO, Calif. — In the past month, Tesla has been slapped with lawsuits in two states for operating a showroom under its franchise. And as it awaits a ruling for preliminary injunction in Massachusetts, Tesla is trying to appease investors and the industry’s national dealer group.fi-magazine.com/news/story/2012/11/tesla-discloses-risks-…
WATCH THIS VIDEO ABOUT TESLA'S DAMAGING PATENT SECRET:
WATCH THIS VIDEO ABOUT PART OF THE COVER-UP TO PROTECT SILICON VALLEY CAMPAIGN BACKERS WHO TOOK A MONOPOLY IN THE LITHIUM ION INDUSTRY:
Tesla Discloses Risks of Lawsuits to Investors November 13, 2012
Print PALO ALTO, Calif. — In the past month, Tesla has been slapped with lawsuits in two states for operating a showroom under its franchise. And as it awaits a ruling for preliminary injunction in Massachusetts, Tesla is trying to appease investors and the industry’s national dealer group.
In its Nov. 7 filing with the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), Tesla warned investors that its operations in New York and Massachusetts are being threatened by state dealer associations. In New York, the dealer association there is attempting to get Tesla's dealer license revoked, while the dealer association in Massachusetts is attempting to limit its business activity in that state.
“Although we believe that Massachusetts and New York laws were not designed to prevent our distribution model, such challenges in these states, and possible similar challenges in other states, if successful, could restrict or prohibit our ability to sell our vehicles to residents in such states,” the filing read.
In an Oct. 22 blog post, Tesla Chairman and CEO Elon Musk wrote that his stores and gallery locations take advantage of educating the customer and then direct the shopper to go online, making the lawsuits “starkly contrary to the spirit and the letter of the law.”
He wrote, “Automotive franchise laws were put in place decades ago to prevent a manufacturer from unfairly opening stores in direct competition with an existing franchised dealer that had already invested time, money and effort to open and promote their business. That would, of course, be wrong, but Tesla does not have this issue. We have granted no franchises anywhere in the world that will be harmed by us opening stores.”
The National Automobile Dealers Association, however, said the laws do, in fact, suggest that the manufacturer itself should not operate a showroom. The association’s chairman Bill Underriner wrote in an e-mail that the NADA has serious concerns about Tesla’s intentions and it is seeking a meeting with Tesla executives, including Musk.
“Tesla may not yet recognize the value of the independent, franchised dealer system, but as its sales increase, the NADA is confident it will re-examine its business model,” wrote Underriner, who cited Daewoo as an example of a company who changed course to comply with existing laws.
“Over the years, other manufacturers have tried operating their own retail networks, but have concluded that the franchised new-car dealer system is the best method of serving the public for its vehicle transportation needs,” Underriner noted.
The NADA’s stance is that this is a state-by-state issue depending on specific franchise laws. "Individual state dealer associations will decide whether to proceed with legal action against Tesla Motors,” Underriner wrote. “NADA supports the franchised new-car dealer system, and will provide legal support to state dealer associations if necessary.”
Tesla also disclosed concerns in its SEC filing about its global operations, as it is registered as both a motor vehicle manufacturer and dealer in Canada, Australia, and Japan, and has obtained licenses to sell vehicles in other places such as Hong Kong and Singapore.
“While we have performed an analysis of the principal laws in the European Union relating to our distribution model and believe we comply with such laws, we have not performed a complete analysis in all foreign jurisdictions in which we may sell vehicles,” Tesla said in the SEC filing, going on to note that the company could suffer from ongoing and potential lawsuits.
“Accordingly, there may be laws in jurisdictions we have not yet entered or laws we are unaware of in jurisdictions we have entered that may restrict our vehicle reservation practices or other business practices. Even for those jurisdictions we have analyzed, the laws in this area can be complex, difficult to interpret and may change over time.”
Aside from the dealer operations claims, Tesla stated that its use of lithium-ion battery cells in the Tesla Roadster and the Model S was another area of concern for lawsuits since the batteries have been found to catch fire or vent smoke in Chevy Volt vehicles.
“There can be no assurance that a field or testing failure of our Model S or other battery packs that we produce will not occur, which could damage the vehicle or lead to personal injury or death…” Tesla wrote.
“We may have to recall our vehicles or participate in a recall of a vehicle that contains our battery packs and redesign our battery packs, which would be time consuming and expensive. Also, negative public perceptions regarding the suitability of lithium-ion cells for automotive applications or any future incident involving lithium-ion cells such as a vehicle fire, even if such incident does not involve us, could seriously harm our business.”
Print PALO ALTO, Calif. — In the past month, Tesla has been slapped with lawsuits in two states for operating a showroom under its franchise. And as it awaits a ruling for preliminary injunction in Massachusetts, Tesla is trying to appease investors and the industry’s national dealer group.
In its Nov. 7 filing with the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), Tesla warned investors that its operations in New York and Massachusetts are being threatened by state dealer associations. In New York, the dealer association there is attempting to get Tesla's dealer license revoked, while the dealer association in Massachusetts is attempting to limit its business activity in that state.
“Although we believe that Massachusetts and New York laws were not designed to prevent our distribution model, such challenges in these states, and possible similar challenges in other states, if successful, could restrict or prohibit our ability to sell our vehicles to residents in such states,” the filing read.
In an Oct. 22 blog post, Tesla Chairman and CEO Elon Musk wrote that his stores and gallery locations take advantage of educating the customer and then direct the shopper to go online, making the lawsuits “starkly contrary to the spirit and the letter of the law.”
He wrote, “Automotive franchise laws were put in place decades ago to prevent a manufacturer from unfairly opening stores in direct competition with an existing franchised dealer that had already invested time, money and effort to open and promote their business. That would, of course, be wrong, but Tesla does not have this issue. We have granted no franchises anywhere in the world that will be harmed by us opening stores.”
The National Automobile Dealers Association, however, said the laws do, in fact, suggest that the manufacturer itself should not operate a showroom. The association’s chairman Bill Underriner wrote in an e-mail that the NADA has serious concerns about Tesla’s intentions and it is seeking a meeting with Tesla executives, including Musk.
“Tesla may not yet recognize the value of the independent, franchised dealer system, but as its sales increase, the NADA is confident it will re-examine its business model,” wrote Underriner, who cited Daewoo as an example of a company who changed course to comply with existing laws.
“Over the years, other manufacturers have tried operating their own retail networks, but have concluded that the franchised new-car dealer system is the best method of serving the public for its vehicle transportation needs,” Underriner noted.
The NADA’s stance is that this is a state-by-state issue depending on specific franchise laws. "Individual state dealer associations will decide whether to proceed with legal action against Tesla Motors,” Underriner wrote. “NADA supports the franchised new-car dealer system, and will provide legal support to state dealer associations if necessary.”
Tesla also disclosed concerns in its SEC filing about its global operations, as it is registered as both a motor vehicle manufacturer and dealer in Canada, Australia, and Japan, and has obtained licenses to sell vehicles in other places such as Hong Kong and Singapore.
“While we have performed an analysis of the principal laws in the European Union relating to our distribution model and believe we comply with such laws, we have not performed a complete analysis in all foreign jurisdictions in which we may sell vehicles,” Tesla said in the SEC filing, going on to note that the company could suffer from ongoing and potential lawsuits.
“Accordingly, there may be laws in jurisdictions we have not yet entered or laws we are unaware of in jurisdictions we have entered that may restrict our vehicle reservation practices or other business practices. Even for those jurisdictions we have analyzed, the laws in this area can be complex, difficult to interpret and may change over time.”
Aside from the dealer operations claims, Tesla stated that its use of lithium-ion battery cells in the Tesla Roadster and the Model S was another area of concern for lawsuits since the batteries have been found to catch fire or vent smoke in Chevy Volt vehicles.
“There can be no assurance that a field or testing failure of our Model S or other battery packs that we produce will not occur, which could damage the vehicle or lead to personal injury or death…” Tesla wrote.
“We may have to recall our vehicles or participate in a recall of a vehicle that contains our battery packs and redesign our battery packs, which would be time consuming and expensive. Also, negative public perceptions regarding the suitability of lithium-ion cells for automotive applications or any future incident involving lithium-ion cells such as a vehicle fire, even if such incident does not involve us, could seriously harm our business.”