Happy Bear的个人主页 - 老虎社区

Happy Bear

Happy Bear

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

2关注

7粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-12-16

I suggest u wear a pair of glasses, so u can c further. Obviously u r just short sighted. End of story

Palantir: A Value Trap

2021-11-23

In ur dreams maybe

Lucid Motors Is Set Up To Surpass Tesla

2021-10-21

Loh is my boss

2021-12-22

Rivian will be in cold storage watchlist till…. I dono…..

Is Rivian Stock A Buy, Sell, Or Hold?

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":4096625678896380,"uuid":"4096625678896380","gmtCreate":1634745674754,"gmtModify":1634797305758,"name":"Happy Bear","pinyin":"happybearhappybear","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1934f9404cf96151d01868d471b7bba3","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":7,"headSize":2,"tweetSize":4,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":1,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969-3","templateUuid":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969","name":"传说交易员","description":"证券或期货账户累计交易次数达到300次","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.12.16","exceedPercentage":"93.88%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d-3","templateUuid":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d","name":"投资合伙人虎","description":"证券账户累计交易金额达到100万美元","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fbeac6bb240db7da8b972e5183d050ba","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/436cdf80292b99f0a992e78750ac4e3a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/506a259a7b456f037592c3b23c779599","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.08.20","exceedPercentage":"93.17%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37-1","templateUuid":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37","name":"博闻投资者","description":"累计交易超过10只正股","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.28","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.28","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":4,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":691836545,"gmtCreate":1640162632097,"gmtModify":1640162632234,"author":{"id":"4096625678896380","authorId":"4096625678896380","name":"Happy Bear","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1934f9404cf96151d01868d471b7bba3","crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Rivian will be in cold storage watchlist till…. I dono…..&nbsp;","listText":"Rivian will be in cold storage watchlist till…. I dono…..&nbsp;","text":"Rivian will be in cold storage watchlist till…. I dono…..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/691836545","repostId":"1123940793","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1123940793","pubTimestamp":1640153635,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1123940793?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-22 14:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Rivian Stock A Buy, Sell, Or Hold?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1123940793","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"Summary\n\nRivian stock has dropped more than 25% since our last Neutral call.\nThe company reported a ","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Rivian stock has dropped more than 25% since our last Neutral call.</li>\n <li>The company reported a slight production target miss in its FQ3 earnings call. However, we don't think investors should be overly worried.</li>\n <li>We discuss why we think RIVN stock is a Buy now.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/69bdd77748b1c27c695aff2846bb30c6\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images News</span></p>\n<p><b>Investment Thesis</b></p>\n<p>Rivian Automotive, Inc. (RIVN) recently released its first earnings reports for FQ3'21 as a public company. Notably, the company missed its 1,200 vehicle production target by \"a few hundred vehicles.\" However, we weren't surprised, given the current supply chain bottlenecks and the challenges in ramping production. Moreover, we don't think investors should be unduly concerned about its short-term production goal. Management was clear as it emphasized that its long-term production targets remain unaffected.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, we believe that ramping production successfully will continue to be a key hurdle facing CEO RJ Scaringe &amp; Co. Investors sent the stock tumbling after its earnings report, which we believe the market took the opportunity to pare down risk. After all, RIVN stock had traded at an incredible market cap of $112.8B&nbsp;when we wrote our previous article. Following the recent sell-off, Rivian's market cap has dropped to $88B. Therefore, we believe it's an appropriate time to revisit our thesis on RIVN stock post-FQ3 earnings.</p>\n<p>We also discuss why we think the stock seems fairly valued now.</p>\n<p><b>Rivian Market Cap Trend</b></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a528b02874c529215e0428c40adc5ad1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>RIVN market cap analysis (as of 17 December'21).</span></p>\n<p>Readers can quickly glean that Rivian's market cap has dropped dramatically back to where it started life as a public company. It last registered a market cap of $88B, while it began trading with a market cap of $83.6B in early November.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, Rivian's market cap still exceeded Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) market cap even as it just started making deliveries in September. Some investors find it incredulous that a company that hasn't even ramped production could be worth more than both the US auto leaders.</p>\n<p><b>Why We Think Rivian Investors Remain Optimistic Post-FQ3</b></p>\n<p>Rivian's report card wasn't a disaster, even if the company missed its production guidance for 2021. CEO RJ Scaringe offered assurances as he emphasized (edited):</p>\n<blockquote>\n For 2021, \n <i>we expect to produce a few hundred vehicles short of our initial 1,200 vehicle production target</i>. We do not believe any of our supply chain challenges represent long-term systemic issues. We remain well-positioned to capture and drive the accelerated large-scale adoption of sustainable transportation. However, a small number of suppliers or small number of components may be ramping a little slower, creating constraints or bottlenecks. Those challenges have been really a focal point for us over the last two and a half, three months. \n <i>But, these issues are short-term in nature and they are solvable problems</i>. So, we don't see any long-term systemic challenges associated with ramping the supply chain. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n</blockquote>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/36ec61d947f0a1da5f4d5883a8941a7d\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Rivian planned production capacity and delivery consensus estimates. Data source: S&amp;P Capital IQ, Barron's</span></p>\n<p>Rivian telegraphed that it would be commencing its new Georgia production facility in mid'22 and ready to begin production from 2024. Georgia's planned annual run rate is estimated at 400K. Therefore, it would afford Rivian a collective annual production capacity of 600K if we include its Illinois facility. Nevertheless, the company did not specify how long it would take to ramp production to its planned capacity. However, consensus estimates point to a relatively positive ramp through FY25. As a result, Rivian is estimated to deliver about 40K of vehicles in FY22. However, it would reach the 360K milestone by FY25, registering an estimated delivery CAGR of 108%. Its 360K estimate includes the 100K EDV orders from its exclusive last-mile delivery partner and cornerstone investor Amazon (AMZN).</p>\n<p>There's little doubt that the delivery cadence estimates look very aggressive. But, if done well, it's also not impossible. Keen investors should recall that Tesla (TSLA) took just two years to ramp Giga Shanghai from zero to its current 600K annual run rate. It has even recently made new investments to enhance its production capacity further. Rivian also seems highly confident that they can ramp successfully, as CEO RJ Scaringe emphasized (edited):</p>\n<blockquote>\n We've architected the product development to be capable of running more than one program and launching more than one program at once, but also to have those fast feedback loops between the different programs. So with that, the commercial van has actually learned a lot from the R1 platform and the R1 platform launch. What you see in terms of the facility in Georgia, is key for us from an expansion point of view. We're quite confident in the path ahead. All three of our vehicles have been certified for sale and they're being produced on two different production lines. \n <i>The organization was architected to facilitate running and operating multiple programs at the same time</i>. And so as we now look at what the ramp will look like for both R1T and R1S into next year, it really positions us to rapidly grow through the course of 2022. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n</blockquote>\n<p>While it's still early, Rivian investors are undoubtedly confident that the company can deliver on its production cadence to meet its delivery milestones. The company is not facing a demand issue compared to short-term supply constraints. They updated that R1 orders have climbed to 71K from 55K in the previous update. Nevertheless, these are cancelable orders, as their delivery timeline has been stretched to 2023 if a new order is placed now. Given that auto leaders General Motors, Ford, and Tesla will also be expected to compete with their pickup trucks soon, Rivian must maintain its production cadence. Therefore, we encourage investors to monitor their production milestones very carefully moving ahead.</p>\n<p><b>Investors Must Carefully Monitor Amazon's EDV Range</b></p>\n<p>The partnership with Amazon is critical to jumpstarting Rivian's ambitions into the commercial fleet segment. Not only does it offer the opportunity of massive fleet sales, but it also sells its fleet management subscriptions as part of its commercial sales. Consequently, it introduces a recurring software revenue stream component on top of its hardware revenue. It also applies to the Amazon fleet, as Rivian accentuated: \"That software subscription goes live basically now on the commercial side.\"</p>\n<p>Rivian is expected to deliver 10K EDV by 2022 following \"months of testing&nbsp;in 15 cities.\" Investors should remember that Amazon retains the right to change its number of orders. Therefore it's critical that Rivian can meet Amazon's expectations. We believe it has also driven Rivian to ramp production quickly. Given how quickly they secured their second production facility, we believe that the company seems confident in meeting its production targets, and consequently, Amazon's orders.</p>\n<p>Rivian emphasized that its EDV is capable of 201 miles range, and it is on track to deliver its vehicles to Amazon. However, a previous report by The Information highlighted some challenges in Amazon's testing, on top of its battery draining problem. The Information reported (edited):</p>\n<blockquote>\n Rivian said the Amazon vans would have a range of between 120 miles and 150 miles depending on their size. But one driver involved in testing the vans said the range could be much less, depending on the weather. The driver who spoke to The Information said the battery drained about 40% faster than normal if the van’s heating or cooling was on. As a result, drivers have been testing the vans on what they dubbed “nursery routes,” where vans didn’t venture too far away from the contractors’ headquarters. (The Information)\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, Amazon's director of Global Fleets and Products, Ross Rachey, noted that once the vans are in production, \"they would have a range of 150 miles, which is double the range of the majority of Amazon's routes.\" Notably, the company also quickly emphasized that these test vans are not fully developed yet.</p>\n<p>We believe a successful launch program with Amazon could open up many potential opportunities outside of the Last Mile segment. Investors should note that Amazon's exclusive partnership with Rivian is limited to Last Mile. But, the commercial space is much larger than the Last Mile segment. Rivian also raved about its market opportunities in the larger commercial space, as Scaringe added (edited):</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>Amazon represents such a large pool of demand for us.</i>So it's really critical that we do not starve them of vehicles. Nevertheless, the RCV platform was architected and designed \n <i>fully contemplating vehicles beyond Last Mile, such as in the cargo space</i>, or in the workspace. So there's a whole host of opportunities that exists both in large volumes, but also across a very long spread-out tail of commercial applications. Thus, we also have an eye on launching non-EDV versions on the RCV platform to capitalize on these opportunities. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n</blockquote>\n<p><b>So, is RIVN Stock a Buy/Hold/Sell Now?</b></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/264dc3dc91fc844d920e73a7f69cf920\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"395\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Rivian revenue and adjusted EBIT margins mean consensus estimates. Data source: S&amp;P Capital IQ</span></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1069e7fc16920da396615f6df6ff5951\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>RIVN and TSLA stock EV/Fwd Revenue valuation comps. Data source: S&amp;P Capital IQ</span></p>\n<p>Consensus estimates point to a largely successful ramp, as we explained earlier. As a result, Rivian's revenue is estimated to reach $27.84B by FY25. However, the company is not expected to be profitable based on adjusted EBIT margins by then. Therefore, investors are encouraged to monitor its production ramp and profitability dynamics moving forward carefully.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, its valuations have dropped significantly since its earlier momentum spike. The stock has declined more than 25% since our Neutral call, as we encouraged investors to wait for the dip.</p>\n<p>If we consider Rivian's valuations against Tesla moving forward, it may seem more reasonable than the EV leader. However, investors should note that Tesla is already a solidly profitable EV maker. It also has proven its production ramp capabilities exceptionally well. Moreover, its brand value has also increased tremendously globally. Therefore, comparing their revenue multiples directly without adjusting for Tesla's advantages would not make sense.</p>\n<p>Based on Rivian stock's EV/FY25 revenue multiple of 3.4x, it's trading at 50% of Tesla's FY25 revenue multiple. Therefore, we think RIVN stock looks fairly valued now. Nevertheless, we believe that RIVN stock remains a highly speculative play. However, the company seems to be getting well on track to meet its mid-term production guidance. Therefore, the current weakness could offer speculative investors a potential opportunity to add exposure at a more reasonable valuation.</p>\n<p>Consequently,<i>we revise our rating on RIVN stock to Buy.</i>However, we would like to caution that RIVN stock may be suitable for speculative investors only. Moreover, the stock could continue to exhibit tremendous volatility. Therefore, investors are encouraged to add in phases.</p>\n<p>This article was written by&nbsp;JR Research.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Is Rivian Stock A Buy, Sell, Or Hold?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIs Rivian Stock A Buy, Sell, Or Hold?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-12-22 14:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4476199-rivian-stock-buy-sell-hold><strong>Seeking Alpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nRivian stock has dropped more than 25% since our last Neutral call.\nThe company reported a slight production target miss in its FQ3 earnings call. However, we don't think investors should be ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4476199-rivian-stock-buy-sell-hold\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"RIVN":"Rivian Automotive, Inc."},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4476199-rivian-stock-buy-sell-hold","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1123940793","content_text":"Summary\n\nRivian stock has dropped more than 25% since our last Neutral call.\nThe company reported a slight production target miss in its FQ3 earnings call. However, we don't think investors should be overly worried.\nWe discuss why we think RIVN stock is a Buy now.\n\nMichael M. Santiago/Getty Images News\nInvestment Thesis\nRivian Automotive, Inc. (RIVN) recently released its first earnings reports for FQ3'21 as a public company. Notably, the company missed its 1,200 vehicle production target by \"a few hundred vehicles.\" However, we weren't surprised, given the current supply chain bottlenecks and the challenges in ramping production. Moreover, we don't think investors should be unduly concerned about its short-term production goal. Management was clear as it emphasized that its long-term production targets remain unaffected.\nNevertheless, we believe that ramping production successfully will continue to be a key hurdle facing CEO RJ Scaringe & Co. Investors sent the stock tumbling after its earnings report, which we believe the market took the opportunity to pare down risk. After all, RIVN stock had traded at an incredible market cap of $112.8B when we wrote our previous article. Following the recent sell-off, Rivian's market cap has dropped to $88B. Therefore, we believe it's an appropriate time to revisit our thesis on RIVN stock post-FQ3 earnings.\nWe also discuss why we think the stock seems fairly valued now.\nRivian Market Cap Trend\nRIVN market cap analysis (as of 17 December'21).\nReaders can quickly glean that Rivian's market cap has dropped dramatically back to where it started life as a public company. It last registered a market cap of $88B, while it began trading with a market cap of $83.6B in early November.\nNevertheless, Rivian's market cap still exceeded Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) market cap even as it just started making deliveries in September. Some investors find it incredulous that a company that hasn't even ramped production could be worth more than both the US auto leaders.\nWhy We Think Rivian Investors Remain Optimistic Post-FQ3\nRivian's report card wasn't a disaster, even if the company missed its production guidance for 2021. CEO RJ Scaringe offered assurances as he emphasized (edited):\n\n For 2021, \n we expect to produce a few hundred vehicles short of our initial 1,200 vehicle production target. We do not believe any of our supply chain challenges represent long-term systemic issues. We remain well-positioned to capture and drive the accelerated large-scale adoption of sustainable transportation. However, a small number of suppliers or small number of components may be ramping a little slower, creating constraints or bottlenecks. Those challenges have been really a focal point for us over the last two and a half, three months. \n But, these issues are short-term in nature and they are solvable problems. So, we don't see any long-term systemic challenges associated with ramping the supply chain. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n\nRivian planned production capacity and delivery consensus estimates. Data source: S&P Capital IQ, Barron's\nRivian telegraphed that it would be commencing its new Georgia production facility in mid'22 and ready to begin production from 2024. Georgia's planned annual run rate is estimated at 400K. Therefore, it would afford Rivian a collective annual production capacity of 600K if we include its Illinois facility. Nevertheless, the company did not specify how long it would take to ramp production to its planned capacity. However, consensus estimates point to a relatively positive ramp through FY25. As a result, Rivian is estimated to deliver about 40K of vehicles in FY22. However, it would reach the 360K milestone by FY25, registering an estimated delivery CAGR of 108%. Its 360K estimate includes the 100K EDV orders from its exclusive last-mile delivery partner and cornerstone investor Amazon (AMZN).\nThere's little doubt that the delivery cadence estimates look very aggressive. But, if done well, it's also not impossible. Keen investors should recall that Tesla (TSLA) took just two years to ramp Giga Shanghai from zero to its current 600K annual run rate. It has even recently made new investments to enhance its production capacity further. Rivian also seems highly confident that they can ramp successfully, as CEO RJ Scaringe emphasized (edited):\n\n We've architected the product development to be capable of running more than one program and launching more than one program at once, but also to have those fast feedback loops between the different programs. So with that, the commercial van has actually learned a lot from the R1 platform and the R1 platform launch. What you see in terms of the facility in Georgia, is key for us from an expansion point of view. We're quite confident in the path ahead. All three of our vehicles have been certified for sale and they're being produced on two different production lines. \n The organization was architected to facilitate running and operating multiple programs at the same time. And so as we now look at what the ramp will look like for both R1T and R1S into next year, it really positions us to rapidly grow through the course of 2022. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n\nWhile it's still early, Rivian investors are undoubtedly confident that the company can deliver on its production cadence to meet its delivery milestones. The company is not facing a demand issue compared to short-term supply constraints. They updated that R1 orders have climbed to 71K from 55K in the previous update. Nevertheless, these are cancelable orders, as their delivery timeline has been stretched to 2023 if a new order is placed now. Given that auto leaders General Motors, Ford, and Tesla will also be expected to compete with their pickup trucks soon, Rivian must maintain its production cadence. Therefore, we encourage investors to monitor their production milestones very carefully moving ahead.\nInvestors Must Carefully Monitor Amazon's EDV Range\nThe partnership with Amazon is critical to jumpstarting Rivian's ambitions into the commercial fleet segment. Not only does it offer the opportunity of massive fleet sales, but it also sells its fleet management subscriptions as part of its commercial sales. Consequently, it introduces a recurring software revenue stream component on top of its hardware revenue. It also applies to the Amazon fleet, as Rivian accentuated: \"That software subscription goes live basically now on the commercial side.\"\nRivian is expected to deliver 10K EDV by 2022 following \"months of testing in 15 cities.\" Investors should remember that Amazon retains the right to change its number of orders. Therefore it's critical that Rivian can meet Amazon's expectations. We believe it has also driven Rivian to ramp production quickly. Given how quickly they secured their second production facility, we believe that the company seems confident in meeting its production targets, and consequently, Amazon's orders.\nRivian emphasized that its EDV is capable of 201 miles range, and it is on track to deliver its vehicles to Amazon. However, a previous report by The Information highlighted some challenges in Amazon's testing, on top of its battery draining problem. The Information reported (edited):\n\n Rivian said the Amazon vans would have a range of between 120 miles and 150 miles depending on their size. But one driver involved in testing the vans said the range could be much less, depending on the weather. The driver who spoke to The Information said the battery drained about 40% faster than normal if the van’s heating or cooling was on. As a result, drivers have been testing the vans on what they dubbed “nursery routes,” where vans didn’t venture too far away from the contractors’ headquarters. (The Information)\n\nNevertheless, Amazon's director of Global Fleets and Products, Ross Rachey, noted that once the vans are in production, \"they would have a range of 150 miles, which is double the range of the majority of Amazon's routes.\" Notably, the company also quickly emphasized that these test vans are not fully developed yet.\nWe believe a successful launch program with Amazon could open up many potential opportunities outside of the Last Mile segment. Investors should note that Amazon's exclusive partnership with Rivian is limited to Last Mile. But, the commercial space is much larger than the Last Mile segment. Rivian also raved about its market opportunities in the larger commercial space, as Scaringe added (edited):\n\nAmazon represents such a large pool of demand for us.So it's really critical that we do not starve them of vehicles. Nevertheless, the RCV platform was architected and designed \n fully contemplating vehicles beyond Last Mile, such as in the cargo space, or in the workspace. So there's a whole host of opportunities that exists both in large volumes, but also across a very long spread-out tail of commercial applications. Thus, we also have an eye on launching non-EDV versions on the RCV platform to capitalize on these opportunities. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n\nSo, is RIVN Stock a Buy/Hold/Sell Now?\nRivian revenue and adjusted EBIT margins mean consensus estimates. Data source: S&P Capital IQ\nRIVN and TSLA stock EV/Fwd Revenue valuation comps. Data source: S&P Capital IQ\nConsensus estimates point to a largely successful ramp, as we explained earlier. As a result, Rivian's revenue is estimated to reach $27.84B by FY25. However, the company is not expected to be profitable based on adjusted EBIT margins by then. Therefore, investors are encouraged to monitor its production ramp and profitability dynamics moving forward carefully.\nNevertheless, its valuations have dropped significantly since its earlier momentum spike. The stock has declined more than 25% since our Neutral call, as we encouraged investors to wait for the dip.\nIf we consider Rivian's valuations against Tesla moving forward, it may seem more reasonable than the EV leader. However, investors should note that Tesla is already a solidly profitable EV maker. It also has proven its production ramp capabilities exceptionally well. Moreover, its brand value has also increased tremendously globally. Therefore, comparing their revenue multiples directly without adjusting for Tesla's advantages would not make sense.\nBased on Rivian stock's EV/FY25 revenue multiple of 3.4x, it's trading at 50% of Tesla's FY25 revenue multiple. Therefore, we think RIVN stock looks fairly valued now. Nevertheless, we believe that RIVN stock remains a highly speculative play. However, the company seems to be getting well on track to meet its mid-term production guidance. Therefore, the current weakness could offer speculative investors a potential opportunity to add exposure at a more reasonable valuation.\nConsequently,we revise our rating on RIVN stock to Buy.However, we would like to caution that RIVN stock may be suitable for speculative investors only. Moreover, the stock could continue to exhibit tremendous volatility. Therefore, investors are encouraged to add in phases.\nThis article was written by JR Research.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":973,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":690127583,"gmtCreate":1639648517372,"gmtModify":1639648801368,"author":{"id":"4096625678896380","authorId":"4096625678896380","name":"Happy Bear","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1934f9404cf96151d01868d471b7bba3","crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"I suggest u wear a pair of glasses, so u can c further. Obviously u r just short sighted. End of story&nbsp;","listText":"I suggest u wear a pair of glasses, so u can c further. Obviously u r just short sighted. End of story&nbsp;","text":"I suggest u wear a pair of glasses, so u can c further. Obviously u r just short sighted. End of story","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/690127583","repostId":"1143795954","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143795954","pubTimestamp":1639613655,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1143795954?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-16 08:14","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Palantir: A Value Trap","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143795954","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nPalantir is an overvalued government contractor.\nThe business has no intrinsic scale value.","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Palantir is an overvalued government contractor.</li>\n <li>The business has no intrinsic scale value.</li>\n <li>Palantir’s revenue growth, estimated at 40% this year, is still grossly overvalued.</li>\n</ul>\n<p></p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Palantir (NYSE:PLTR), a software company, has seen its share price fall significantly recently as investors exited high-growth, high-multiple stocks. At 24 times sales, I believe PLTR stock is still significantly overvalued, and investors should brace themselves for new lows.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p><b>A Government Consulting Business With Three Major Issues</b></p>\n<p>Someone needs to explain to me what all the fuss is about with the big data analytics company Palantir. Palantir is frequently lauded for its software capabilities, which provide customers with data intelligence insights that, ostensibly, improve managerial decision making, but I do not see Palantir as what everyone else does: a unique platform business cashing in on the big data market.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Palantir is best known for its various \"foundries.\" Palantir's foundries are data management and aggregation systems that assist institutions in efficiently centralizing and storing data. As businesses and government agencies collect more data, the complexities grow rapidly, necessitating the use of software solutions. Palantir is collaborating with businesses and governments to reduce complexity and make use of large data volumes for algorithmic predictions. Palantir has had some success with this type of business, if success is defined solely by sales growth. For example, Palantir's 3Q21 revenue increased by 36% YoY to $392 million. Palantir's main source of revenue, government revenues, increased by 34% YoY, while commercial revenues, which include all of Palantir's business activities outside of government, increased by 37% YoY.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Revenue growth, on the other hand, is not a concern for Palantir. Palantir's problems are much deeper, and there is clearly more than one issue here.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>The first issue with Palantir is that, while the company's sales are increasing at a healthy clip, this is not translating into profits for shareholders. Palantir's revenue increased by 44% to $1.11 billion in the first three quarters of 2021. The sales forecast for 2021 calls for up to a 40% increase in sales. That's a good start, but what about profits?</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Despite a 44% increase in revenue in 2021, Palantir's profit picture appears to be dire. The company lost $364 million in 2021 alone, and the year isn't even over yet. The total loss for the year could exceed $400 million. Not bad for a company that has been in operation for nearly 20 years and \"grows revenues at a 40% annual rate,\" right? Profits after nearly two decades of operation appear to be too high a bar for Palantir to clear.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>The second major issue for Palantir, despite its big data allure, is its lack of scalability. Contrary to popular belief, Palantir is little more than a well-paid government consultant whose consulting business is not scalable in any way, shape, or form. Palantir also does not operate a \"platform business\" in the same way that Metaverse (NASDAQ:FB) or Netflix (NASDAQ:NFLX) do. For example, Metaverse collects customer data through a single platform, the Facebook platform. Netflix scales its moving streaming platform, which can add new customers at near-zero marginal costs. Palantir requires personnel to work with each individual client, coach them, and explain platform features. This is not a sustainable business model. It is a software-based consulting business model.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>The third issue with Palantir, aside from its inability to operate profitably after two decades and its business model's lack of inherent scalability, is that profits made in Palantir's business are siphoned off by insiders who are compensated royally through stock packages at the expense of shareholders. Palantir has increased the number of shares by 12% in one year, and it now has more than 2 billion shares outstanding. As a result, business profits are primarily distributed to highly compensated insiders, rather than to the company's shareholders.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p><b>A Fantasy Valuation</b></p>\n<p>Let's be clear about what we're talking about. We are dealing with a company that is growing its sales by 30-40% per year, which means Palantir will have revenues in the $1.5 billion range by 2021. Give or take fifty million dollars. It is the same company that has a misunderstood \"platform business model,\" no profits after twenty years of operations, and prioritizes insider stock compensation over shareholder dilution in recent years. They are likely to see further dilution in the coming years.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Nonetheless, this company continues to trade at a sales multiple of twenty-four. This means that an investor pays 24 times the expected sales amount for the opportunity to invest in Palantir's loss-making \"big data prediction\" business. Palantir remains outrageously overvalued, despite a significant correction since November.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p></p>\n<p><b>My Conclusion</b></p>\n<p>I'd say the valuation is a joke or a calculation error if I didn't know any better. However, this does not appear to be the case. Apparently, a sizable portion of the investor population believes that Palantir, despite its lack of profits and excessive dilution, is worth 24 times sales. In normal circumstances, 24 times earnings would be excessive. Palantir's business has no scale, which calls into question the company's positioning as a growth stock. Palantir is expected to fall further as investors begin to exit high-multiple stocks. PLTR is nothing more than a value trap, nothing less.</p>","source":"lsy1638401102509","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Palantir: A Value Trap</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nPalantir: A Value Trap\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-12-16 08:14 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4475365-palantir-a-value-trap><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nPalantir is an overvalued government contractor.\nThe business has no intrinsic scale value.\nPalantir’s revenue growth, estimated at 40% this year, is still grossly overvalued.\n\n\n\nPalantir (...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4475365-palantir-a-value-trap\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc."},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4475365-palantir-a-value-trap","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143795954","content_text":"Summary\n\nPalantir is an overvalued government contractor.\nThe business has no intrinsic scale value.\nPalantir’s revenue growth, estimated at 40% this year, is still grossly overvalued.\n\n\n\nPalantir (NYSE:PLTR), a software company, has seen its share price fall significantly recently as investors exited high-growth, high-multiple stocks. At 24 times sales, I believe PLTR stock is still significantly overvalued, and investors should brace themselves for new lows.\n\nA Government Consulting Business With Three Major Issues\nSomeone needs to explain to me what all the fuss is about with the big data analytics company Palantir. Palantir is frequently lauded for its software capabilities, which provide customers with data intelligence insights that, ostensibly, improve managerial decision making, but I do not see Palantir as what everyone else does: a unique platform business cashing in on the big data market.\n\nPalantir is best known for its various \"foundries.\" Palantir's foundries are data management and aggregation systems that assist institutions in efficiently centralizing and storing data. As businesses and government agencies collect more data, the complexities grow rapidly, necessitating the use of software solutions. Palantir is collaborating with businesses and governments to reduce complexity and make use of large data volumes for algorithmic predictions. Palantir has had some success with this type of business, if success is defined solely by sales growth. For example, Palantir's 3Q21 revenue increased by 36% YoY to $392 million. Palantir's main source of revenue, government revenues, increased by 34% YoY, while commercial revenues, which include all of Palantir's business activities outside of government, increased by 37% YoY.\n\nRevenue growth, on the other hand, is not a concern for Palantir. Palantir's problems are much deeper, and there is clearly more than one issue here.\n\nThe first issue with Palantir is that, while the company's sales are increasing at a healthy clip, this is not translating into profits for shareholders. Palantir's revenue increased by 44% to $1.11 billion in the first three quarters of 2021. The sales forecast for 2021 calls for up to a 40% increase in sales. That's a good start, but what about profits?\n\nDespite a 44% increase in revenue in 2021, Palantir's profit picture appears to be dire. The company lost $364 million in 2021 alone, and the year isn't even over yet. The total loss for the year could exceed $400 million. Not bad for a company that has been in operation for nearly 20 years and \"grows revenues at a 40% annual rate,\" right? Profits after nearly two decades of operation appear to be too high a bar for Palantir to clear.\n\nThe second major issue for Palantir, despite its big data allure, is its lack of scalability. Contrary to popular belief, Palantir is little more than a well-paid government consultant whose consulting business is not scalable in any way, shape, or form. Palantir also does not operate a \"platform business\" in the same way that Metaverse (NASDAQ:FB) or Netflix (NASDAQ:NFLX) do. For example, Metaverse collects customer data through a single platform, the Facebook platform. Netflix scales its moving streaming platform, which can add new customers at near-zero marginal costs. Palantir requires personnel to work with each individual client, coach them, and explain platform features. This is not a sustainable business model. It is a software-based consulting business model.\n\nThe third issue with Palantir, aside from its inability to operate profitably after two decades and its business model's lack of inherent scalability, is that profits made in Palantir's business are siphoned off by insiders who are compensated royally through stock packages at the expense of shareholders. Palantir has increased the number of shares by 12% in one year, and it now has more than 2 billion shares outstanding. As a result, business profits are primarily distributed to highly compensated insiders, rather than to the company's shareholders.\n\nA Fantasy Valuation\nLet's be clear about what we're talking about. We are dealing with a company that is growing its sales by 30-40% per year, which means Palantir will have revenues in the $1.5 billion range by 2021. Give or take fifty million dollars. It is the same company that has a misunderstood \"platform business model,\" no profits after twenty years of operations, and prioritizes insider stock compensation over shareholder dilution in recent years. They are likely to see further dilution in the coming years.\n\nNonetheless, this company continues to trade at a sales multiple of twenty-four. This means that an investor pays 24 times the expected sales amount for the opportunity to invest in Palantir's loss-making \"big data prediction\" business. Palantir remains outrageously overvalued, despite a significant correction since November.\n\n\nMy Conclusion\nI'd say the valuation is a joke or a calculation error if I didn't know any better. However, this does not appear to be the case. Apparently, a sizable portion of the investor population believes that Palantir, despite its lack of profits and excessive dilution, is worth 24 times sales. In normal circumstances, 24 times earnings would be excessive. Palantir's business has no scale, which calls into question the company's positioning as a growth stock. Palantir is expected to fall further as investors begin to exit high-multiple stocks. PLTR is nothing more than a value trap, nothing less.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":662,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":875515924,"gmtCreate":1637668498217,"gmtModify":1637668534512,"author":{"id":"4096625678896380","authorId":"4096625678896380","name":"Happy Bear","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1934f9404cf96151d01868d471b7bba3","crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"In ur dreams maybe","listText":"In ur dreams maybe","text":"In ur dreams maybe","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/875515924","repostId":"1170981862","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1170981862","pubTimestamp":1637656549,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1170981862?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-11-23 16:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Lucid Motors Is Set Up To Surpass Tesla","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1170981862","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"First-movers are often assumed to carry a lasting advantage. This is not the case and, especially with the EV market, the first-mover advantage is not a powerful long-term asset.Tesla’s success has made Lucid’s challenge far more effective than it otherwise would’ve been, creating a market for the car and the investor interest required to fund the company.Lucid looks to be a far more nimble company than Tesla, allowing it to take the industry’s rapid evolution in stride, with a superior vehicle ","content":"<p>Summary</p>\n<ul>\n <li>First-movers are often assumed to carry a lasting advantage. This is not the case and, especially with the EV market, the first-mover advantage is not a powerful long-term asset.</li>\n <li>Tesla’s success has made Lucid’s challenge far more effective than it otherwise would’ve been, creating a market for the car and the investor interest required to fund the company.</li>\n <li>Lucid looks to be a far more nimble company than Tesla, allowing it to take the industry’s rapid evolution in stride, with a superior vehicle platform.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/876e502aba19c09f0db1a83835e9bcd9\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"512\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Spencer Platt/Getty Images News</span></p>\n<p>Lucid Motors (LCID) only recently began delivering its first vehicles to customers, yet it has&nbsp;already received&nbsp;the laurels of MotorTrend’s 2022 Car of the Year. The vehicle’sindustry-leading drivetrain technology, great design, and solid build quality earned it that title. Yet, Tesla (TSLA) remains the king of the EV. Of course, one car with limited volume isn’t going to change anything, though that’s not the way things are set to stay.I wrote on Lucid’s growth prospects&nbsp;some time ago, so that’s not the focus of today’s article. Instead, I’m here to discuss why Lucid Motors is well-positioned to surpass Tesla due to a rapidly eroding first-mover advantage. In&nbsp;an article on TeslaI published earlier this year, I discussed how the brand’s cache is already starting to slip. While we can sit here and debate that General Motors (GM) was actually the first EV manufacturer with its EV1 back in the ’90s, I think we all know that Tesla really earned that title. This article will discuss why that may not be such a good thing.</p>\n<p>The First-Mover Fallacy</p>\n<p>Oftentimes, the first-mover in a major new market is identified as said market’s future leader. It’s easy to see why, as they’re often associated with the market that they’ve created. Yet, think web browser and you probably think of Alphabet’s (GOOG) Google Chrome. Think of email, you’re again most likely going to think of a Google product -- this time Gmail. Social media? Facebook (FB). Cell phone? iPhone. You get the idea. What’s one thing all of these different products have in common? None of them were the first to market. Yet, despite this, they’ve all become the pinnacle of each of their respective markets.</p>\n<p>So, the big question is “Why?” Why are none of these transformative first-movers the leaders of their industry? Well, there’s not really one blanket answer.A 2005 publication&nbsp;to The Harvard Business Review discusses the idea of this fallacy.</p>\n<blockquote>\n “But for every academic study proving that first-mover advantages exist, there is a study proving they do not. While some well-known first-movers, such as Gillette in safety razors and Sony in personal stereos, have enjoyed considerable success, others, such as Xerox in fax machines and eToys in Internet retailing, have failed. We have found that the differences in outcome are not random—that first-mover status can confer advantages, but it does not do so categorically. Much depends on the circumstances in which it is sought.”\n</blockquote>\n<p>I find this last sentence to be particularly powerful, as every industry is vastly different and allows for alternate outcomes. There will always be some level of unpredictability, dumb luck if you will, though The Harvard Business Review identified two factors that seem to reliably indicate whether or not the first-mover advantage will last. “The pace at which the technology of the product in question is evolving and the pace at which the market for that product is expanding” are these two critical factors.</p>\n<p>The rate of innovation in the EV sector is currently one of the most impressive global efforts I’ve ever seen, as is the rate at which the market is expanding.Since 2015, global sales of EVs have grown at an average rate of 50%. Yet, this is heating up. Global EV sales in 2021are expected&nbsp;to rise 83% over last year, increasing the rate of adoption as more options flood the market. In order for first-movers to be successful, there needs to be substantial interest in the market. This plays into Tesla’s hands. However, the extreme level of growth in the market necessitates more competition. This opens the door for others to combat Tesla.</p>\n<p>Let’s come back to the idea of rapid innovation as well. Companies likeNano One(OTCPK:NNOMF) andSES(IVAN), both of which I’ve covered, are looking to introduce industry-shifting innovations. They’re not alone either. CATL, a Chinese battery producer, is&nbsp;on the verge&nbsp;of becoming the country’s second-largest company. CATL&nbsp;is on pace&nbsp;to spend nearly $1 billion on R&amp;D this year, up 115% over the first half of last year. In this market of rapid innovation, it is nigh on impossible for any one company to stay at the forefront.</p>\n<p>The EV industry has failed what The Harvard Business review deemed the two most important litmus tests in determining whether a first-mover truly has any advantage. Not great news for the incumbent leader, Tesla. Though, I argue that there is more that can bring down the power of a first-mover. Complacency can create opportunities for others to thrive. In the next section, I will discuss how Tesla’s complacency, as well as a few other factors, mean that there are more reasons than a highly innovative and quickly-growing market for Tesla to fall.</p>\n<p>Where Tesla’s Faltering</p>\n<p>I think that there’s no question Lucid owes a majority of its early success to Tesla. Tesla essentially created the market for Lucid and, maybe even more importantly, got investors to pay attention to them. All of that attention&nbsp;allowed Lucid Motors&nbsp;to raise $4.4 billion in its SPAC merger with Churchill Capital. That money was enough for Lucid to bring the Air to market, continue development work on its SUV, and expand its production footprint. That’s something that Tesla never had and will be immensely powerful for Lucid Motors. Now, I’m not saying that Lucid has an easy road to mass production, far from it, but there’s no question that it’s easier than Tesla’s was. This is the first stage in which Lucid is benefiting from Tesla’s prior struggles.</p>\n<p>Though, a good start means nothing if the company can’t build on it. This is where I believe that Tesla is simply holding the door open for Lucid Motors. Tesla has seemingly become lazy and no longer has that fire to continue innovating. I can’t say I blame them, they’ve got several years on their closest competition and their cars are some of the best in the category. Well, perhaps before the Air came to market.</p>\n<p>The quality control issues&nbsp;that plagued Tesla&nbsp;in its early days were an issue, though forgivable given the company’s tumultuous path to production. Yet, there are still&nbsp;a number of reports&nbsp;concerning poor build quality. These issues&nbsp;are even present&nbsp;on the company’s $130,000 Model S Plaid. At this point, these issues are inexcusable. Especially on a $130,000 car. Lucid&nbsp;has worked hard&nbsp;to make sure it avoided making the same mistakes, even delaying initial production to do so, and&nbsp;it’s paid off. We’ll have to wait and see if a larger sample size produces the same result but, so far, the quality of the Air looks to be on par with its luxury price tag.</p>\n<p>The other major area that Tesla seems to be lacking in is powertrain development. Having just released a car that goes 0-60 in less than two seconds, this may seem like a bit of an unjustified claim. But that’s not the only way to measure the capability of a powertrain. In&nbsp;an older article, I reviewed the quality of Lucid’s core product offering. That article focused on its powertrain efficiency. The Air is capable of&nbsp;up to 520 miles of range, at an efficiency of 4.64 miles/kWh (the electric equivalent to miles/gallon). Granted, this is for the company’s Grand Touring trim,which costs a whopping $139,000. The base version of the Air, which costs $77,400, has an efficiency of 5.41 miles/kWh, traveling 406 miles on a single charge (using an estimated battery size of75 kWh). Tesla’s Long Range Model S, which travels412 miles&nbsp;on a single charge, is Tesla’s most efficient vehicle with an efficiency of 4.12 miles/kWh. I’m not going to get into the specifics on how this was achieved, as this was all explained in&nbsp;that previous article. For our purposes here, it’s just important to understand that it&nbsp;<i>was</i>&nbsp;done.</p>\n<p>Now, it’s easy to point to Tesla’s batteries and say that they’re the most advanced in the world. I wouldn’t argue with you there, though I’m not sure that’ll be the case for very long. It’s already becoming far less obvious than it once was, as improvements become increasingly more iterative and less significant. Essentially, Tesla’s stuck making small incremental changes while its competitors, which once were far behind, have had the chance to catch up. The company hopes that its new 4680 cells will give it the next big leap, but I think they’re moving in the wrong direction. Below is a visual representation, a top-down view of what a Tesla battery pack looks like.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dfb24c19eee013cc09407af804bcfc65\" tg-width=\"757\" tg-height=\"521\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: Author’s Creation</span></p>\n<p>All of the red space you see is wasted space. Trying to fit a bunch of cylinders in a rectangular container is always going to be inefficient. Hence, from a volumetric density perspective, the prismatic cell architecture is superior. In vehicles, where space is a premium, volumetric density is a critical performance benchmark. Though, I think that this speaks to a larger issue in Tesla’s battery cell development. Ina previous article, I discussed how Tesla’s batteries are becoming a liability. The company’s unwillingness to consider lithium metal batteries as the next generation of lithium-ion batteries could see the company’s battery advantage completely erode by the end of the decade.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d9f51e943a3340831639c2db1513cc4a\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"486\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source:C&amp;EN</span></p>\n<p>The fact that Lucid isn’t reliant upon their own battery technology means that it is far more nimble during this time of significant battery iteration. As noted in the above section, the EV industry is likely to be driven by a series of disruptive technologies through the foreseeable future, and a company that is easily able to consistently pivot to these disruptive technologies has a better chance of staying on top of the market. To give Tesla credit, its cells are some of the best on the market. However, it’s hard to stay at the top of two different fields, car design and battery design, and the desire to do so often results in failure. The fact that Lucid walloped Tesla in drivetrain efficiency speaks to the fact that Tesla is no longer engineering the best electric vehicles and all signs point to Tesla’s battery advantage dwindling.</p>\n<p>Investor Takeaway</p>\n<p>Look, I don’t think that Tesla, or Lucid Motors for that matter, should be valued close to where they are today but the fact of the matter is that they are. If Lucid will ultimately be the stronger of the two, take that as you will. I won’t pretend that I can predict the flow of the market with companies like Tesla and Lucid, which trade so far removed from any fundamentals, but I do think that time will prove that Lucid is the better of the two companies.</p>\n<p>Ignoring share prices, Lucid Motors is gearing up for some pretty extreme growth. The company has a lot of cash on hand and is using it to invest in growing its production and product offerings. Similar to Tesla, Lucid plans to introduce mass-market vehicles after its niche offerings begin generating capital and brand awareness. As the disclosure below notes, I own shares of Lucid Motors. This may seem strange, as I just said that their fundamentals don’t come close to justifying their valuation. Though, when shares were under $20, it was far more appealing. To be completely honest, at this stage, I’m just holding to see where it goes.</p>","source":"seekingalpha","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Lucid Motors Is Set Up To Surpass Tesla</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nLucid Motors Is Set Up To Surpass Tesla\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-11-23 16:35 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4471273-lucid-motors-lcid-stock-surpass-tesla><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nFirst-movers are often assumed to carry a lasting advantage. This is not the case and, especially with the EV market, the first-mover advantage is not a powerful long-term asset.\nTesla’s ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4471273-lucid-motors-lcid-stock-surpass-tesla\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"LCID":"Lucid Group Inc","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4471273-lucid-motors-lcid-stock-surpass-tesla","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1170981862","content_text":"Summary\n\nFirst-movers are often assumed to carry a lasting advantage. This is not the case and, especially with the EV market, the first-mover advantage is not a powerful long-term asset.\nTesla’s success has made Lucid’s challenge far more effective than it otherwise would’ve been, creating a market for the car and the investor interest required to fund the company.\nLucid looks to be a far more nimble company than Tesla, allowing it to take the industry’s rapid evolution in stride, with a superior vehicle platform.\n\nSpencer Platt/Getty Images News\nLucid Motors (LCID) only recently began delivering its first vehicles to customers, yet it has already received the laurels of MotorTrend’s 2022 Car of the Year. The vehicle’sindustry-leading drivetrain technology, great design, and solid build quality earned it that title. Yet, Tesla (TSLA) remains the king of the EV. Of course, one car with limited volume isn’t going to change anything, though that’s not the way things are set to stay.I wrote on Lucid’s growth prospects some time ago, so that’s not the focus of today’s article. Instead, I’m here to discuss why Lucid Motors is well-positioned to surpass Tesla due to a rapidly eroding first-mover advantage. In an article on TeslaI published earlier this year, I discussed how the brand’s cache is already starting to slip. While we can sit here and debate that General Motors (GM) was actually the first EV manufacturer with its EV1 back in the ’90s, I think we all know that Tesla really earned that title. This article will discuss why that may not be such a good thing.\nThe First-Mover Fallacy\nOftentimes, the first-mover in a major new market is identified as said market’s future leader. It’s easy to see why, as they’re often associated with the market that they’ve created. Yet, think web browser and you probably think of Alphabet’s (GOOG) Google Chrome. Think of email, you’re again most likely going to think of a Google product -- this time Gmail. Social media? Facebook (FB). Cell phone? iPhone. You get the idea. What’s one thing all of these different products have in common? None of them were the first to market. Yet, despite this, they’ve all become the pinnacle of each of their respective markets.\nSo, the big question is “Why?” Why are none of these transformative first-movers the leaders of their industry? Well, there’s not really one blanket answer.A 2005 publication to The Harvard Business Review discusses the idea of this fallacy.\n\n “But for every academic study proving that first-mover advantages exist, there is a study proving they do not. While some well-known first-movers, such as Gillette in safety razors and Sony in personal stereos, have enjoyed considerable success, others, such as Xerox in fax machines and eToys in Internet retailing, have failed. We have found that the differences in outcome are not random—that first-mover status can confer advantages, but it does not do so categorically. Much depends on the circumstances in which it is sought.”\n\nI find this last sentence to be particularly powerful, as every industry is vastly different and allows for alternate outcomes. There will always be some level of unpredictability, dumb luck if you will, though The Harvard Business Review identified two factors that seem to reliably indicate whether or not the first-mover advantage will last. “The pace at which the technology of the product in question is evolving and the pace at which the market for that product is expanding” are these two critical factors.\nThe rate of innovation in the EV sector is currently one of the most impressive global efforts I’ve ever seen, as is the rate at which the market is expanding.Since 2015, global sales of EVs have grown at an average rate of 50%. Yet, this is heating up. Global EV sales in 2021are expected to rise 83% over last year, increasing the rate of adoption as more options flood the market. In order for first-movers to be successful, there needs to be substantial interest in the market. This plays into Tesla’s hands. However, the extreme level of growth in the market necessitates more competition. This opens the door for others to combat Tesla.\nLet’s come back to the idea of rapid innovation as well. Companies likeNano One(OTCPK:NNOMF) andSES(IVAN), both of which I’ve covered, are looking to introduce industry-shifting innovations. They’re not alone either. CATL, a Chinese battery producer, is on the verge of becoming the country’s second-largest company. CATL is on pace to spend nearly $1 billion on R&D this year, up 115% over the first half of last year. In this market of rapid innovation, it is nigh on impossible for any one company to stay at the forefront.\nThe EV industry has failed what The Harvard Business review deemed the two most important litmus tests in determining whether a first-mover truly has any advantage. Not great news for the incumbent leader, Tesla. Though, I argue that there is more that can bring down the power of a first-mover. Complacency can create opportunities for others to thrive. In the next section, I will discuss how Tesla’s complacency, as well as a few other factors, mean that there are more reasons than a highly innovative and quickly-growing market for Tesla to fall.\nWhere Tesla’s Faltering\nI think that there’s no question Lucid owes a majority of its early success to Tesla. Tesla essentially created the market for Lucid and, maybe even more importantly, got investors to pay attention to them. All of that attention allowed Lucid Motors to raise $4.4 billion in its SPAC merger with Churchill Capital. That money was enough for Lucid to bring the Air to market, continue development work on its SUV, and expand its production footprint. That’s something that Tesla never had and will be immensely powerful for Lucid Motors. Now, I’m not saying that Lucid has an easy road to mass production, far from it, but there’s no question that it’s easier than Tesla’s was. This is the first stage in which Lucid is benefiting from Tesla’s prior struggles.\nThough, a good start means nothing if the company can’t build on it. This is where I believe that Tesla is simply holding the door open for Lucid Motors. Tesla has seemingly become lazy and no longer has that fire to continue innovating. I can’t say I blame them, they’ve got several years on their closest competition and their cars are some of the best in the category. Well, perhaps before the Air came to market.\nThe quality control issues that plagued Tesla in its early days were an issue, though forgivable given the company’s tumultuous path to production. Yet, there are still a number of reports concerning poor build quality. These issues are even present on the company’s $130,000 Model S Plaid. At this point, these issues are inexcusable. Especially on a $130,000 car. Lucid has worked hard to make sure it avoided making the same mistakes, even delaying initial production to do so, and it’s paid off. We’ll have to wait and see if a larger sample size produces the same result but, so far, the quality of the Air looks to be on par with its luxury price tag.\nThe other major area that Tesla seems to be lacking in is powertrain development. Having just released a car that goes 0-60 in less than two seconds, this may seem like a bit of an unjustified claim. But that’s not the only way to measure the capability of a powertrain. In an older article, I reviewed the quality of Lucid’s core product offering. That article focused on its powertrain efficiency. The Air is capable of up to 520 miles of range, at an efficiency of 4.64 miles/kWh (the electric equivalent to miles/gallon). Granted, this is for the company’s Grand Touring trim,which costs a whopping $139,000. The base version of the Air, which costs $77,400, has an efficiency of 5.41 miles/kWh, traveling 406 miles on a single charge (using an estimated battery size of75 kWh). Tesla’s Long Range Model S, which travels412 miles on a single charge, is Tesla’s most efficient vehicle with an efficiency of 4.12 miles/kWh. I’m not going to get into the specifics on how this was achieved, as this was all explained in that previous article. For our purposes here, it’s just important to understand that it was done.\nNow, it’s easy to point to Tesla’s batteries and say that they’re the most advanced in the world. I wouldn’t argue with you there, though I’m not sure that’ll be the case for very long. It’s already becoming far less obvious than it once was, as improvements become increasingly more iterative and less significant. Essentially, Tesla’s stuck making small incremental changes while its competitors, which once were far behind, have had the chance to catch up. The company hopes that its new 4680 cells will give it the next big leap, but I think they’re moving in the wrong direction. Below is a visual representation, a top-down view of what a Tesla battery pack looks like.\nSource: Author’s Creation\nAll of the red space you see is wasted space. Trying to fit a bunch of cylinders in a rectangular container is always going to be inefficient. Hence, from a volumetric density perspective, the prismatic cell architecture is superior. In vehicles, where space is a premium, volumetric density is a critical performance benchmark. Though, I think that this speaks to a larger issue in Tesla’s battery cell development. Ina previous article, I discussed how Tesla’s batteries are becoming a liability. The company’s unwillingness to consider lithium metal batteries as the next generation of lithium-ion batteries could see the company’s battery advantage completely erode by the end of the decade.\nSource:C&EN\nThe fact that Lucid isn’t reliant upon their own battery technology means that it is far more nimble during this time of significant battery iteration. As noted in the above section, the EV industry is likely to be driven by a series of disruptive technologies through the foreseeable future, and a company that is easily able to consistently pivot to these disruptive technologies has a better chance of staying on top of the market. To give Tesla credit, its cells are some of the best on the market. However, it’s hard to stay at the top of two different fields, car design and battery design, and the desire to do so often results in failure. The fact that Lucid walloped Tesla in drivetrain efficiency speaks to the fact that Tesla is no longer engineering the best electric vehicles and all signs point to Tesla’s battery advantage dwindling.\nInvestor Takeaway\nLook, I don’t think that Tesla, or Lucid Motors for that matter, should be valued close to where they are today but the fact of the matter is that they are. If Lucid will ultimately be the stronger of the two, take that as you will. I won’t pretend that I can predict the flow of the market with companies like Tesla and Lucid, which trade so far removed from any fundamentals, but I do think that time will prove that Lucid is the better of the two companies.\nIgnoring share prices, Lucid Motors is gearing up for some pretty extreme growth. The company has a lot of cash on hand and is using it to invest in growing its production and product offerings. Similar to Tesla, Lucid plans to introduce mass-market vehicles after its niche offerings begin generating capital and brand awareness. As the disclosure below notes, I own shares of Lucid Motors. This may seem strange, as I just said that their fundamentals don’t come close to justifying their valuation. Though, when shares were under $20, it was far more appealing. To be completely honest, at this stage, I’m just holding to see where it goes.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":702,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":853852249,"gmtCreate":1634791727414,"gmtModify":1634792840012,"author":{"id":"4096625678896380","authorId":"4096625678896380","name":"Happy Bear","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1934f9404cf96151d01868d471b7bba3","crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Loh is my boss","listText":"Loh is my boss","text":"Loh is my boss","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/853852249","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":548,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":690127583,"gmtCreate":1639648517372,"gmtModify":1639648801368,"author":{"id":"4096625678896380","authorId":"4096625678896380","name":"Happy Bear","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1934f9404cf96151d01868d471b7bba3","crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"I suggest u wear a pair of glasses, so u can c further. Obviously u r just short sighted. End of story&nbsp;","listText":"I suggest u wear a pair of glasses, so u can c further. Obviously u r just short sighted. End of story&nbsp;","text":"I suggest u wear a pair of glasses, so u can c further. Obviously u r just short sighted. End of story","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/690127583","repostId":"1143795954","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143795954","pubTimestamp":1639613655,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1143795954?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-16 08:14","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Palantir: A Value Trap","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143795954","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nPalantir is an overvalued government contractor.\nThe business has no intrinsic scale value.","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Palantir is an overvalued government contractor.</li>\n <li>The business has no intrinsic scale value.</li>\n <li>Palantir’s revenue growth, estimated at 40% this year, is still grossly overvalued.</li>\n</ul>\n<p></p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Palantir (NYSE:PLTR), a software company, has seen its share price fall significantly recently as investors exited high-growth, high-multiple stocks. At 24 times sales, I believe PLTR stock is still significantly overvalued, and investors should brace themselves for new lows.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p><b>A Government Consulting Business With Three Major Issues</b></p>\n<p>Someone needs to explain to me what all the fuss is about with the big data analytics company Palantir. Palantir is frequently lauded for its software capabilities, which provide customers with data intelligence insights that, ostensibly, improve managerial decision making, but I do not see Palantir as what everyone else does: a unique platform business cashing in on the big data market.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Palantir is best known for its various \"foundries.\" Palantir's foundries are data management and aggregation systems that assist institutions in efficiently centralizing and storing data. As businesses and government agencies collect more data, the complexities grow rapidly, necessitating the use of software solutions. Palantir is collaborating with businesses and governments to reduce complexity and make use of large data volumes for algorithmic predictions. Palantir has had some success with this type of business, if success is defined solely by sales growth. For example, Palantir's 3Q21 revenue increased by 36% YoY to $392 million. Palantir's main source of revenue, government revenues, increased by 34% YoY, while commercial revenues, which include all of Palantir's business activities outside of government, increased by 37% YoY.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Revenue growth, on the other hand, is not a concern for Palantir. Palantir's problems are much deeper, and there is clearly more than one issue here.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>The first issue with Palantir is that, while the company's sales are increasing at a healthy clip, this is not translating into profits for shareholders. Palantir's revenue increased by 44% to $1.11 billion in the first three quarters of 2021. The sales forecast for 2021 calls for up to a 40% increase in sales. That's a good start, but what about profits?</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Despite a 44% increase in revenue in 2021, Palantir's profit picture appears to be dire. The company lost $364 million in 2021 alone, and the year isn't even over yet. The total loss for the year could exceed $400 million. Not bad for a company that has been in operation for nearly 20 years and \"grows revenues at a 40% annual rate,\" right? Profits after nearly two decades of operation appear to be too high a bar for Palantir to clear.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>The second major issue for Palantir, despite its big data allure, is its lack of scalability. Contrary to popular belief, Palantir is little more than a well-paid government consultant whose consulting business is not scalable in any way, shape, or form. Palantir also does not operate a \"platform business\" in the same way that Metaverse (NASDAQ:FB) or Netflix (NASDAQ:NFLX) do. For example, Metaverse collects customer data through a single platform, the Facebook platform. Netflix scales its moving streaming platform, which can add new customers at near-zero marginal costs. Palantir requires personnel to work with each individual client, coach them, and explain platform features. This is not a sustainable business model. It is a software-based consulting business model.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>The third issue with Palantir, aside from its inability to operate profitably after two decades and its business model's lack of inherent scalability, is that profits made in Palantir's business are siphoned off by insiders who are compensated royally through stock packages at the expense of shareholders. Palantir has increased the number of shares by 12% in one year, and it now has more than 2 billion shares outstanding. As a result, business profits are primarily distributed to highly compensated insiders, rather than to the company's shareholders.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p><b>A Fantasy Valuation</b></p>\n<p>Let's be clear about what we're talking about. We are dealing with a company that is growing its sales by 30-40% per year, which means Palantir will have revenues in the $1.5 billion range by 2021. Give or take fifty million dollars. It is the same company that has a misunderstood \"platform business model,\" no profits after twenty years of operations, and prioritizes insider stock compensation over shareholder dilution in recent years. They are likely to see further dilution in the coming years.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p>Nonetheless, this company continues to trade at a sales multiple of twenty-four. This means that an investor pays 24 times the expected sales amount for the opportunity to invest in Palantir's loss-making \"big data prediction\" business. Palantir remains outrageously overvalued, despite a significant correction since November.</p>\n<p></p>\n<p></p>\n<p><b>My Conclusion</b></p>\n<p>I'd say the valuation is a joke or a calculation error if I didn't know any better. However, this does not appear to be the case. Apparently, a sizable portion of the investor population believes that Palantir, despite its lack of profits and excessive dilution, is worth 24 times sales. In normal circumstances, 24 times earnings would be excessive. Palantir's business has no scale, which calls into question the company's positioning as a growth stock. Palantir is expected to fall further as investors begin to exit high-multiple stocks. PLTR is nothing more than a value trap, nothing less.</p>","source":"lsy1638401102509","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Palantir: A Value Trap</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nPalantir: A Value Trap\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-12-16 08:14 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4475365-palantir-a-value-trap><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nPalantir is an overvalued government contractor.\nThe business has no intrinsic scale value.\nPalantir’s revenue growth, estimated at 40% this year, is still grossly overvalued.\n\n\n\nPalantir (...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4475365-palantir-a-value-trap\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc."},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4475365-palantir-a-value-trap","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143795954","content_text":"Summary\n\nPalantir is an overvalued government contractor.\nThe business has no intrinsic scale value.\nPalantir’s revenue growth, estimated at 40% this year, is still grossly overvalued.\n\n\n\nPalantir (NYSE:PLTR), a software company, has seen its share price fall significantly recently as investors exited high-growth, high-multiple stocks. At 24 times sales, I believe PLTR stock is still significantly overvalued, and investors should brace themselves for new lows.\n\nA Government Consulting Business With Three Major Issues\nSomeone needs to explain to me what all the fuss is about with the big data analytics company Palantir. Palantir is frequently lauded for its software capabilities, which provide customers with data intelligence insights that, ostensibly, improve managerial decision making, but I do not see Palantir as what everyone else does: a unique platform business cashing in on the big data market.\n\nPalantir is best known for its various \"foundries.\" Palantir's foundries are data management and aggregation systems that assist institutions in efficiently centralizing and storing data. As businesses and government agencies collect more data, the complexities grow rapidly, necessitating the use of software solutions. Palantir is collaborating with businesses and governments to reduce complexity and make use of large data volumes for algorithmic predictions. Palantir has had some success with this type of business, if success is defined solely by sales growth. For example, Palantir's 3Q21 revenue increased by 36% YoY to $392 million. Palantir's main source of revenue, government revenues, increased by 34% YoY, while commercial revenues, which include all of Palantir's business activities outside of government, increased by 37% YoY.\n\nRevenue growth, on the other hand, is not a concern for Palantir. Palantir's problems are much deeper, and there is clearly more than one issue here.\n\nThe first issue with Palantir is that, while the company's sales are increasing at a healthy clip, this is not translating into profits for shareholders. Palantir's revenue increased by 44% to $1.11 billion in the first three quarters of 2021. The sales forecast for 2021 calls for up to a 40% increase in sales. That's a good start, but what about profits?\n\nDespite a 44% increase in revenue in 2021, Palantir's profit picture appears to be dire. The company lost $364 million in 2021 alone, and the year isn't even over yet. The total loss for the year could exceed $400 million. Not bad for a company that has been in operation for nearly 20 years and \"grows revenues at a 40% annual rate,\" right? Profits after nearly two decades of operation appear to be too high a bar for Palantir to clear.\n\nThe second major issue for Palantir, despite its big data allure, is its lack of scalability. Contrary to popular belief, Palantir is little more than a well-paid government consultant whose consulting business is not scalable in any way, shape, or form. Palantir also does not operate a \"platform business\" in the same way that Metaverse (NASDAQ:FB) or Netflix (NASDAQ:NFLX) do. For example, Metaverse collects customer data through a single platform, the Facebook platform. Netflix scales its moving streaming platform, which can add new customers at near-zero marginal costs. Palantir requires personnel to work with each individual client, coach them, and explain platform features. This is not a sustainable business model. It is a software-based consulting business model.\n\nThe third issue with Palantir, aside from its inability to operate profitably after two decades and its business model's lack of inherent scalability, is that profits made in Palantir's business are siphoned off by insiders who are compensated royally through stock packages at the expense of shareholders. Palantir has increased the number of shares by 12% in one year, and it now has more than 2 billion shares outstanding. As a result, business profits are primarily distributed to highly compensated insiders, rather than to the company's shareholders.\n\nA Fantasy Valuation\nLet's be clear about what we're talking about. We are dealing with a company that is growing its sales by 30-40% per year, which means Palantir will have revenues in the $1.5 billion range by 2021. Give or take fifty million dollars. It is the same company that has a misunderstood \"platform business model,\" no profits after twenty years of operations, and prioritizes insider stock compensation over shareholder dilution in recent years. They are likely to see further dilution in the coming years.\n\nNonetheless, this company continues to trade at a sales multiple of twenty-four. This means that an investor pays 24 times the expected sales amount for the opportunity to invest in Palantir's loss-making \"big data prediction\" business. Palantir remains outrageously overvalued, despite a significant correction since November.\n\n\nMy Conclusion\nI'd say the valuation is a joke or a calculation error if I didn't know any better. However, this does not appear to be the case. Apparently, a sizable portion of the investor population believes that Palantir, despite its lack of profits and excessive dilution, is worth 24 times sales. In normal circumstances, 24 times earnings would be excessive. Palantir's business has no scale, which calls into question the company's positioning as a growth stock. Palantir is expected to fall further as investors begin to exit high-multiple stocks. PLTR is nothing more than a value trap, nothing less.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":662,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":875515924,"gmtCreate":1637668498217,"gmtModify":1637668534512,"author":{"id":"4096625678896380","authorId":"4096625678896380","name":"Happy Bear","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1934f9404cf96151d01868d471b7bba3","crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"In ur dreams maybe","listText":"In ur dreams maybe","text":"In ur dreams maybe","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/875515924","repostId":"1170981862","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1170981862","pubTimestamp":1637656549,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1170981862?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-11-23 16:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Lucid Motors Is Set Up To Surpass Tesla","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1170981862","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"First-movers are often assumed to carry a lasting advantage. This is not the case and, especially with the EV market, the first-mover advantage is not a powerful long-term asset.Tesla’s success has made Lucid’s challenge far more effective than it otherwise would’ve been, creating a market for the car and the investor interest required to fund the company.Lucid looks to be a far more nimble company than Tesla, allowing it to take the industry’s rapid evolution in stride, with a superior vehicle ","content":"<p>Summary</p>\n<ul>\n <li>First-movers are often assumed to carry a lasting advantage. This is not the case and, especially with the EV market, the first-mover advantage is not a powerful long-term asset.</li>\n <li>Tesla’s success has made Lucid’s challenge far more effective than it otherwise would’ve been, creating a market for the car and the investor interest required to fund the company.</li>\n <li>Lucid looks to be a far more nimble company than Tesla, allowing it to take the industry’s rapid evolution in stride, with a superior vehicle platform.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/876e502aba19c09f0db1a83835e9bcd9\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"512\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Spencer Platt/Getty Images News</span></p>\n<p>Lucid Motors (LCID) only recently began delivering its first vehicles to customers, yet it has&nbsp;already received&nbsp;the laurels of MotorTrend’s 2022 Car of the Year. The vehicle’sindustry-leading drivetrain technology, great design, and solid build quality earned it that title. Yet, Tesla (TSLA) remains the king of the EV. Of course, one car with limited volume isn’t going to change anything, though that’s not the way things are set to stay.I wrote on Lucid’s growth prospects&nbsp;some time ago, so that’s not the focus of today’s article. Instead, I’m here to discuss why Lucid Motors is well-positioned to surpass Tesla due to a rapidly eroding first-mover advantage. In&nbsp;an article on TeslaI published earlier this year, I discussed how the brand’s cache is already starting to slip. While we can sit here and debate that General Motors (GM) was actually the first EV manufacturer with its EV1 back in the ’90s, I think we all know that Tesla really earned that title. This article will discuss why that may not be such a good thing.</p>\n<p>The First-Mover Fallacy</p>\n<p>Oftentimes, the first-mover in a major new market is identified as said market’s future leader. It’s easy to see why, as they’re often associated with the market that they’ve created. Yet, think web browser and you probably think of Alphabet’s (GOOG) Google Chrome. Think of email, you’re again most likely going to think of a Google product -- this time Gmail. Social media? Facebook (FB). Cell phone? iPhone. You get the idea. What’s one thing all of these different products have in common? None of them were the first to market. Yet, despite this, they’ve all become the pinnacle of each of their respective markets.</p>\n<p>So, the big question is “Why?” Why are none of these transformative first-movers the leaders of their industry? Well, there’s not really one blanket answer.A 2005 publication&nbsp;to The Harvard Business Review discusses the idea of this fallacy.</p>\n<blockquote>\n “But for every academic study proving that first-mover advantages exist, there is a study proving they do not. While some well-known first-movers, such as Gillette in safety razors and Sony in personal stereos, have enjoyed considerable success, others, such as Xerox in fax machines and eToys in Internet retailing, have failed. We have found that the differences in outcome are not random—that first-mover status can confer advantages, but it does not do so categorically. Much depends on the circumstances in which it is sought.”\n</blockquote>\n<p>I find this last sentence to be particularly powerful, as every industry is vastly different and allows for alternate outcomes. There will always be some level of unpredictability, dumb luck if you will, though The Harvard Business Review identified two factors that seem to reliably indicate whether or not the first-mover advantage will last. “The pace at which the technology of the product in question is evolving and the pace at which the market for that product is expanding” are these two critical factors.</p>\n<p>The rate of innovation in the EV sector is currently one of the most impressive global efforts I’ve ever seen, as is the rate at which the market is expanding.Since 2015, global sales of EVs have grown at an average rate of 50%. Yet, this is heating up. Global EV sales in 2021are expected&nbsp;to rise 83% over last year, increasing the rate of adoption as more options flood the market. In order for first-movers to be successful, there needs to be substantial interest in the market. This plays into Tesla’s hands. However, the extreme level of growth in the market necessitates more competition. This opens the door for others to combat Tesla.</p>\n<p>Let’s come back to the idea of rapid innovation as well. Companies likeNano One(OTCPK:NNOMF) andSES(IVAN), both of which I’ve covered, are looking to introduce industry-shifting innovations. They’re not alone either. CATL, a Chinese battery producer, is&nbsp;on the verge&nbsp;of becoming the country’s second-largest company. CATL&nbsp;is on pace&nbsp;to spend nearly $1 billion on R&amp;D this year, up 115% over the first half of last year. In this market of rapid innovation, it is nigh on impossible for any one company to stay at the forefront.</p>\n<p>The EV industry has failed what The Harvard Business review deemed the two most important litmus tests in determining whether a first-mover truly has any advantage. Not great news for the incumbent leader, Tesla. Though, I argue that there is more that can bring down the power of a first-mover. Complacency can create opportunities for others to thrive. In the next section, I will discuss how Tesla’s complacency, as well as a few other factors, mean that there are more reasons than a highly innovative and quickly-growing market for Tesla to fall.</p>\n<p>Where Tesla’s Faltering</p>\n<p>I think that there’s no question Lucid owes a majority of its early success to Tesla. Tesla essentially created the market for Lucid and, maybe even more importantly, got investors to pay attention to them. All of that attention&nbsp;allowed Lucid Motors&nbsp;to raise $4.4 billion in its SPAC merger with Churchill Capital. That money was enough for Lucid to bring the Air to market, continue development work on its SUV, and expand its production footprint. That’s something that Tesla never had and will be immensely powerful for Lucid Motors. Now, I’m not saying that Lucid has an easy road to mass production, far from it, but there’s no question that it’s easier than Tesla’s was. This is the first stage in which Lucid is benefiting from Tesla’s prior struggles.</p>\n<p>Though, a good start means nothing if the company can’t build on it. This is where I believe that Tesla is simply holding the door open for Lucid Motors. Tesla has seemingly become lazy and no longer has that fire to continue innovating. I can’t say I blame them, they’ve got several years on their closest competition and their cars are some of the best in the category. Well, perhaps before the Air came to market.</p>\n<p>The quality control issues&nbsp;that plagued Tesla&nbsp;in its early days were an issue, though forgivable given the company’s tumultuous path to production. Yet, there are still&nbsp;a number of reports&nbsp;concerning poor build quality. These issues&nbsp;are even present&nbsp;on the company’s $130,000 Model S Plaid. At this point, these issues are inexcusable. Especially on a $130,000 car. Lucid&nbsp;has worked hard&nbsp;to make sure it avoided making the same mistakes, even delaying initial production to do so, and&nbsp;it’s paid off. We’ll have to wait and see if a larger sample size produces the same result but, so far, the quality of the Air looks to be on par with its luxury price tag.</p>\n<p>The other major area that Tesla seems to be lacking in is powertrain development. Having just released a car that goes 0-60 in less than two seconds, this may seem like a bit of an unjustified claim. But that’s not the only way to measure the capability of a powertrain. In&nbsp;an older article, I reviewed the quality of Lucid’s core product offering. That article focused on its powertrain efficiency. The Air is capable of&nbsp;up to 520 miles of range, at an efficiency of 4.64 miles/kWh (the electric equivalent to miles/gallon). Granted, this is for the company’s Grand Touring trim,which costs a whopping $139,000. The base version of the Air, which costs $77,400, has an efficiency of 5.41 miles/kWh, traveling 406 miles on a single charge (using an estimated battery size of75 kWh). Tesla’s Long Range Model S, which travels412 miles&nbsp;on a single charge, is Tesla’s most efficient vehicle with an efficiency of 4.12 miles/kWh. I’m not going to get into the specifics on how this was achieved, as this was all explained in&nbsp;that previous article. For our purposes here, it’s just important to understand that it&nbsp;<i>was</i>&nbsp;done.</p>\n<p>Now, it’s easy to point to Tesla’s batteries and say that they’re the most advanced in the world. I wouldn’t argue with you there, though I’m not sure that’ll be the case for very long. It’s already becoming far less obvious than it once was, as improvements become increasingly more iterative and less significant. Essentially, Tesla’s stuck making small incremental changes while its competitors, which once were far behind, have had the chance to catch up. The company hopes that its new 4680 cells will give it the next big leap, but I think they’re moving in the wrong direction. Below is a visual representation, a top-down view of what a Tesla battery pack looks like.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dfb24c19eee013cc09407af804bcfc65\" tg-width=\"757\" tg-height=\"521\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: Author’s Creation</span></p>\n<p>All of the red space you see is wasted space. Trying to fit a bunch of cylinders in a rectangular container is always going to be inefficient. Hence, from a volumetric density perspective, the prismatic cell architecture is superior. In vehicles, where space is a premium, volumetric density is a critical performance benchmark. Though, I think that this speaks to a larger issue in Tesla’s battery cell development. Ina previous article, I discussed how Tesla’s batteries are becoming a liability. The company’s unwillingness to consider lithium metal batteries as the next generation of lithium-ion batteries could see the company’s battery advantage completely erode by the end of the decade.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d9f51e943a3340831639c2db1513cc4a\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"486\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source:C&amp;EN</span></p>\n<p>The fact that Lucid isn’t reliant upon their own battery technology means that it is far more nimble during this time of significant battery iteration. As noted in the above section, the EV industry is likely to be driven by a series of disruptive technologies through the foreseeable future, and a company that is easily able to consistently pivot to these disruptive technologies has a better chance of staying on top of the market. To give Tesla credit, its cells are some of the best on the market. However, it’s hard to stay at the top of two different fields, car design and battery design, and the desire to do so often results in failure. The fact that Lucid walloped Tesla in drivetrain efficiency speaks to the fact that Tesla is no longer engineering the best electric vehicles and all signs point to Tesla’s battery advantage dwindling.</p>\n<p>Investor Takeaway</p>\n<p>Look, I don’t think that Tesla, or Lucid Motors for that matter, should be valued close to where they are today but the fact of the matter is that they are. If Lucid will ultimately be the stronger of the two, take that as you will. I won’t pretend that I can predict the flow of the market with companies like Tesla and Lucid, which trade so far removed from any fundamentals, but I do think that time will prove that Lucid is the better of the two companies.</p>\n<p>Ignoring share prices, Lucid Motors is gearing up for some pretty extreme growth. The company has a lot of cash on hand and is using it to invest in growing its production and product offerings. Similar to Tesla, Lucid plans to introduce mass-market vehicles after its niche offerings begin generating capital and brand awareness. As the disclosure below notes, I own shares of Lucid Motors. This may seem strange, as I just said that their fundamentals don’t come close to justifying their valuation. Though, when shares were under $20, it was far more appealing. To be completely honest, at this stage, I’m just holding to see where it goes.</p>","source":"seekingalpha","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Lucid Motors Is Set Up To Surpass Tesla</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nLucid Motors Is Set Up To Surpass Tesla\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-11-23 16:35 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4471273-lucid-motors-lcid-stock-surpass-tesla><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nFirst-movers are often assumed to carry a lasting advantage. This is not the case and, especially with the EV market, the first-mover advantage is not a powerful long-term asset.\nTesla’s ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4471273-lucid-motors-lcid-stock-surpass-tesla\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"LCID":"Lucid Group Inc","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4471273-lucid-motors-lcid-stock-surpass-tesla","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1170981862","content_text":"Summary\n\nFirst-movers are often assumed to carry a lasting advantage. This is not the case and, especially with the EV market, the first-mover advantage is not a powerful long-term asset.\nTesla’s success has made Lucid’s challenge far more effective than it otherwise would’ve been, creating a market for the car and the investor interest required to fund the company.\nLucid looks to be a far more nimble company than Tesla, allowing it to take the industry’s rapid evolution in stride, with a superior vehicle platform.\n\nSpencer Platt/Getty Images News\nLucid Motors (LCID) only recently began delivering its first vehicles to customers, yet it has already received the laurels of MotorTrend’s 2022 Car of the Year. The vehicle’sindustry-leading drivetrain technology, great design, and solid build quality earned it that title. Yet, Tesla (TSLA) remains the king of the EV. Of course, one car with limited volume isn’t going to change anything, though that’s not the way things are set to stay.I wrote on Lucid’s growth prospects some time ago, so that’s not the focus of today’s article. Instead, I’m here to discuss why Lucid Motors is well-positioned to surpass Tesla due to a rapidly eroding first-mover advantage. In an article on TeslaI published earlier this year, I discussed how the brand’s cache is already starting to slip. While we can sit here and debate that General Motors (GM) was actually the first EV manufacturer with its EV1 back in the ’90s, I think we all know that Tesla really earned that title. This article will discuss why that may not be such a good thing.\nThe First-Mover Fallacy\nOftentimes, the first-mover in a major new market is identified as said market’s future leader. It’s easy to see why, as they’re often associated with the market that they’ve created. Yet, think web browser and you probably think of Alphabet’s (GOOG) Google Chrome. Think of email, you’re again most likely going to think of a Google product -- this time Gmail. Social media? Facebook (FB). Cell phone? iPhone. You get the idea. What’s one thing all of these different products have in common? None of them were the first to market. Yet, despite this, they’ve all become the pinnacle of each of their respective markets.\nSo, the big question is “Why?” Why are none of these transformative first-movers the leaders of their industry? Well, there’s not really one blanket answer.A 2005 publication to The Harvard Business Review discusses the idea of this fallacy.\n\n “But for every academic study proving that first-mover advantages exist, there is a study proving they do not. While some well-known first-movers, such as Gillette in safety razors and Sony in personal stereos, have enjoyed considerable success, others, such as Xerox in fax machines and eToys in Internet retailing, have failed. We have found that the differences in outcome are not random—that first-mover status can confer advantages, but it does not do so categorically. Much depends on the circumstances in which it is sought.”\n\nI find this last sentence to be particularly powerful, as every industry is vastly different and allows for alternate outcomes. There will always be some level of unpredictability, dumb luck if you will, though The Harvard Business Review identified two factors that seem to reliably indicate whether or not the first-mover advantage will last. “The pace at which the technology of the product in question is evolving and the pace at which the market for that product is expanding” are these two critical factors.\nThe rate of innovation in the EV sector is currently one of the most impressive global efforts I’ve ever seen, as is the rate at which the market is expanding.Since 2015, global sales of EVs have grown at an average rate of 50%. Yet, this is heating up. Global EV sales in 2021are expected to rise 83% over last year, increasing the rate of adoption as more options flood the market. In order for first-movers to be successful, there needs to be substantial interest in the market. This plays into Tesla’s hands. However, the extreme level of growth in the market necessitates more competition. This opens the door for others to combat Tesla.\nLet’s come back to the idea of rapid innovation as well. Companies likeNano One(OTCPK:NNOMF) andSES(IVAN), both of which I’ve covered, are looking to introduce industry-shifting innovations. They’re not alone either. CATL, a Chinese battery producer, is on the verge of becoming the country’s second-largest company. CATL is on pace to spend nearly $1 billion on R&D this year, up 115% over the first half of last year. In this market of rapid innovation, it is nigh on impossible for any one company to stay at the forefront.\nThe EV industry has failed what The Harvard Business review deemed the two most important litmus tests in determining whether a first-mover truly has any advantage. Not great news for the incumbent leader, Tesla. Though, I argue that there is more that can bring down the power of a first-mover. Complacency can create opportunities for others to thrive. In the next section, I will discuss how Tesla’s complacency, as well as a few other factors, mean that there are more reasons than a highly innovative and quickly-growing market for Tesla to fall.\nWhere Tesla’s Faltering\nI think that there’s no question Lucid owes a majority of its early success to Tesla. Tesla essentially created the market for Lucid and, maybe even more importantly, got investors to pay attention to them. All of that attention allowed Lucid Motors to raise $4.4 billion in its SPAC merger with Churchill Capital. That money was enough for Lucid to bring the Air to market, continue development work on its SUV, and expand its production footprint. That’s something that Tesla never had and will be immensely powerful for Lucid Motors. Now, I’m not saying that Lucid has an easy road to mass production, far from it, but there’s no question that it’s easier than Tesla’s was. This is the first stage in which Lucid is benefiting from Tesla’s prior struggles.\nThough, a good start means nothing if the company can’t build on it. This is where I believe that Tesla is simply holding the door open for Lucid Motors. Tesla has seemingly become lazy and no longer has that fire to continue innovating. I can’t say I blame them, they’ve got several years on their closest competition and their cars are some of the best in the category. Well, perhaps before the Air came to market.\nThe quality control issues that plagued Tesla in its early days were an issue, though forgivable given the company’s tumultuous path to production. Yet, there are still a number of reports concerning poor build quality. These issues are even present on the company’s $130,000 Model S Plaid. At this point, these issues are inexcusable. Especially on a $130,000 car. Lucid has worked hard to make sure it avoided making the same mistakes, even delaying initial production to do so, and it’s paid off. We’ll have to wait and see if a larger sample size produces the same result but, so far, the quality of the Air looks to be on par with its luxury price tag.\nThe other major area that Tesla seems to be lacking in is powertrain development. Having just released a car that goes 0-60 in less than two seconds, this may seem like a bit of an unjustified claim. But that’s not the only way to measure the capability of a powertrain. In an older article, I reviewed the quality of Lucid’s core product offering. That article focused on its powertrain efficiency. The Air is capable of up to 520 miles of range, at an efficiency of 4.64 miles/kWh (the electric equivalent to miles/gallon). Granted, this is for the company’s Grand Touring trim,which costs a whopping $139,000. The base version of the Air, which costs $77,400, has an efficiency of 5.41 miles/kWh, traveling 406 miles on a single charge (using an estimated battery size of75 kWh). Tesla’s Long Range Model S, which travels412 miles on a single charge, is Tesla’s most efficient vehicle with an efficiency of 4.12 miles/kWh. I’m not going to get into the specifics on how this was achieved, as this was all explained in that previous article. For our purposes here, it’s just important to understand that it was done.\nNow, it’s easy to point to Tesla’s batteries and say that they’re the most advanced in the world. I wouldn’t argue with you there, though I’m not sure that’ll be the case for very long. It’s already becoming far less obvious than it once was, as improvements become increasingly more iterative and less significant. Essentially, Tesla’s stuck making small incremental changes while its competitors, which once were far behind, have had the chance to catch up. The company hopes that its new 4680 cells will give it the next big leap, but I think they’re moving in the wrong direction. Below is a visual representation, a top-down view of what a Tesla battery pack looks like.\nSource: Author’s Creation\nAll of the red space you see is wasted space. Trying to fit a bunch of cylinders in a rectangular container is always going to be inefficient. Hence, from a volumetric density perspective, the prismatic cell architecture is superior. In vehicles, where space is a premium, volumetric density is a critical performance benchmark. Though, I think that this speaks to a larger issue in Tesla’s battery cell development. Ina previous article, I discussed how Tesla’s batteries are becoming a liability. The company’s unwillingness to consider lithium metal batteries as the next generation of lithium-ion batteries could see the company’s battery advantage completely erode by the end of the decade.\nSource:C&EN\nThe fact that Lucid isn’t reliant upon their own battery technology means that it is far more nimble during this time of significant battery iteration. As noted in the above section, the EV industry is likely to be driven by a series of disruptive technologies through the foreseeable future, and a company that is easily able to consistently pivot to these disruptive technologies has a better chance of staying on top of the market. To give Tesla credit, its cells are some of the best on the market. However, it’s hard to stay at the top of two different fields, car design and battery design, and the desire to do so often results in failure. The fact that Lucid walloped Tesla in drivetrain efficiency speaks to the fact that Tesla is no longer engineering the best electric vehicles and all signs point to Tesla’s battery advantage dwindling.\nInvestor Takeaway\nLook, I don’t think that Tesla, or Lucid Motors for that matter, should be valued close to where they are today but the fact of the matter is that they are. If Lucid will ultimately be the stronger of the two, take that as you will. I won’t pretend that I can predict the flow of the market with companies like Tesla and Lucid, which trade so far removed from any fundamentals, but I do think that time will prove that Lucid is the better of the two companies.\nIgnoring share prices, Lucid Motors is gearing up for some pretty extreme growth. The company has a lot of cash on hand and is using it to invest in growing its production and product offerings. Similar to Tesla, Lucid plans to introduce mass-market vehicles after its niche offerings begin generating capital and brand awareness. As the disclosure below notes, I own shares of Lucid Motors. This may seem strange, as I just said that their fundamentals don’t come close to justifying their valuation. Though, when shares were under $20, it was far more appealing. To be completely honest, at this stage, I’m just holding to see where it goes.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":702,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":853852249,"gmtCreate":1634791727414,"gmtModify":1634792840012,"author":{"id":"4096625678896380","authorId":"4096625678896380","name":"Happy Bear","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1934f9404cf96151d01868d471b7bba3","crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Loh is my boss","listText":"Loh is my boss","text":"Loh is my boss","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/853852249","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":548,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":691836545,"gmtCreate":1640162632097,"gmtModify":1640162632234,"author":{"id":"4096625678896380","authorId":"4096625678896380","name":"Happy Bear","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1934f9404cf96151d01868d471b7bba3","crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Rivian will be in cold storage watchlist till…. I dono…..&nbsp;","listText":"Rivian will be in cold storage watchlist till…. I dono…..&nbsp;","text":"Rivian will be in cold storage watchlist till…. I dono…..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/691836545","repostId":"1123940793","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1123940793","pubTimestamp":1640153635,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1123940793?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-22 14:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Rivian Stock A Buy, Sell, Or Hold?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1123940793","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"Summary\n\nRivian stock has dropped more than 25% since our last Neutral call.\nThe company reported a ","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Rivian stock has dropped more than 25% since our last Neutral call.</li>\n <li>The company reported a slight production target miss in its FQ3 earnings call. However, we don't think investors should be overly worried.</li>\n <li>We discuss why we think RIVN stock is a Buy now.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/69bdd77748b1c27c695aff2846bb30c6\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images News</span></p>\n<p><b>Investment Thesis</b></p>\n<p>Rivian Automotive, Inc. (RIVN) recently released its first earnings reports for FQ3'21 as a public company. Notably, the company missed its 1,200 vehicle production target by \"a few hundred vehicles.\" However, we weren't surprised, given the current supply chain bottlenecks and the challenges in ramping production. Moreover, we don't think investors should be unduly concerned about its short-term production goal. Management was clear as it emphasized that its long-term production targets remain unaffected.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, we believe that ramping production successfully will continue to be a key hurdle facing CEO RJ Scaringe &amp; Co. Investors sent the stock tumbling after its earnings report, which we believe the market took the opportunity to pare down risk. After all, RIVN stock had traded at an incredible market cap of $112.8B&nbsp;when we wrote our previous article. Following the recent sell-off, Rivian's market cap has dropped to $88B. Therefore, we believe it's an appropriate time to revisit our thesis on RIVN stock post-FQ3 earnings.</p>\n<p>We also discuss why we think the stock seems fairly valued now.</p>\n<p><b>Rivian Market Cap Trend</b></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a528b02874c529215e0428c40adc5ad1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>RIVN market cap analysis (as of 17 December'21).</span></p>\n<p>Readers can quickly glean that Rivian's market cap has dropped dramatically back to where it started life as a public company. It last registered a market cap of $88B, while it began trading with a market cap of $83.6B in early November.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, Rivian's market cap still exceeded Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) market cap even as it just started making deliveries in September. Some investors find it incredulous that a company that hasn't even ramped production could be worth more than both the US auto leaders.</p>\n<p><b>Why We Think Rivian Investors Remain Optimistic Post-FQ3</b></p>\n<p>Rivian's report card wasn't a disaster, even if the company missed its production guidance for 2021. CEO RJ Scaringe offered assurances as he emphasized (edited):</p>\n<blockquote>\n For 2021, \n <i>we expect to produce a few hundred vehicles short of our initial 1,200 vehicle production target</i>. We do not believe any of our supply chain challenges represent long-term systemic issues. We remain well-positioned to capture and drive the accelerated large-scale adoption of sustainable transportation. However, a small number of suppliers or small number of components may be ramping a little slower, creating constraints or bottlenecks. Those challenges have been really a focal point for us over the last two and a half, three months. \n <i>But, these issues are short-term in nature and they are solvable problems</i>. So, we don't see any long-term systemic challenges associated with ramping the supply chain. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n</blockquote>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/36ec61d947f0a1da5f4d5883a8941a7d\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Rivian planned production capacity and delivery consensus estimates. Data source: S&amp;P Capital IQ, Barron's</span></p>\n<p>Rivian telegraphed that it would be commencing its new Georgia production facility in mid'22 and ready to begin production from 2024. Georgia's planned annual run rate is estimated at 400K. Therefore, it would afford Rivian a collective annual production capacity of 600K if we include its Illinois facility. Nevertheless, the company did not specify how long it would take to ramp production to its planned capacity. However, consensus estimates point to a relatively positive ramp through FY25. As a result, Rivian is estimated to deliver about 40K of vehicles in FY22. However, it would reach the 360K milestone by FY25, registering an estimated delivery CAGR of 108%. Its 360K estimate includes the 100K EDV orders from its exclusive last-mile delivery partner and cornerstone investor Amazon (AMZN).</p>\n<p>There's little doubt that the delivery cadence estimates look very aggressive. But, if done well, it's also not impossible. Keen investors should recall that Tesla (TSLA) took just two years to ramp Giga Shanghai from zero to its current 600K annual run rate. It has even recently made new investments to enhance its production capacity further. Rivian also seems highly confident that they can ramp successfully, as CEO RJ Scaringe emphasized (edited):</p>\n<blockquote>\n We've architected the product development to be capable of running more than one program and launching more than one program at once, but also to have those fast feedback loops between the different programs. So with that, the commercial van has actually learned a lot from the R1 platform and the R1 platform launch. What you see in terms of the facility in Georgia, is key for us from an expansion point of view. We're quite confident in the path ahead. All three of our vehicles have been certified for sale and they're being produced on two different production lines. \n <i>The organization was architected to facilitate running and operating multiple programs at the same time</i>. And so as we now look at what the ramp will look like for both R1T and R1S into next year, it really positions us to rapidly grow through the course of 2022. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n</blockquote>\n<p>While it's still early, Rivian investors are undoubtedly confident that the company can deliver on its production cadence to meet its delivery milestones. The company is not facing a demand issue compared to short-term supply constraints. They updated that R1 orders have climbed to 71K from 55K in the previous update. Nevertheless, these are cancelable orders, as their delivery timeline has been stretched to 2023 if a new order is placed now. Given that auto leaders General Motors, Ford, and Tesla will also be expected to compete with their pickup trucks soon, Rivian must maintain its production cadence. Therefore, we encourage investors to monitor their production milestones very carefully moving ahead.</p>\n<p><b>Investors Must Carefully Monitor Amazon's EDV Range</b></p>\n<p>The partnership with Amazon is critical to jumpstarting Rivian's ambitions into the commercial fleet segment. Not only does it offer the opportunity of massive fleet sales, but it also sells its fleet management subscriptions as part of its commercial sales. Consequently, it introduces a recurring software revenue stream component on top of its hardware revenue. It also applies to the Amazon fleet, as Rivian accentuated: \"That software subscription goes live basically now on the commercial side.\"</p>\n<p>Rivian is expected to deliver 10K EDV by 2022 following \"months of testing&nbsp;in 15 cities.\" Investors should remember that Amazon retains the right to change its number of orders. Therefore it's critical that Rivian can meet Amazon's expectations. We believe it has also driven Rivian to ramp production quickly. Given how quickly they secured their second production facility, we believe that the company seems confident in meeting its production targets, and consequently, Amazon's orders.</p>\n<p>Rivian emphasized that its EDV is capable of 201 miles range, and it is on track to deliver its vehicles to Amazon. However, a previous report by The Information highlighted some challenges in Amazon's testing, on top of its battery draining problem. The Information reported (edited):</p>\n<blockquote>\n Rivian said the Amazon vans would have a range of between 120 miles and 150 miles depending on their size. But one driver involved in testing the vans said the range could be much less, depending on the weather. The driver who spoke to The Information said the battery drained about 40% faster than normal if the van’s heating or cooling was on. As a result, drivers have been testing the vans on what they dubbed “nursery routes,” where vans didn’t venture too far away from the contractors’ headquarters. (The Information)\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, Amazon's director of Global Fleets and Products, Ross Rachey, noted that once the vans are in production, \"they would have a range of 150 miles, which is double the range of the majority of Amazon's routes.\" Notably, the company also quickly emphasized that these test vans are not fully developed yet.</p>\n<p>We believe a successful launch program with Amazon could open up many potential opportunities outside of the Last Mile segment. Investors should note that Amazon's exclusive partnership with Rivian is limited to Last Mile. But, the commercial space is much larger than the Last Mile segment. Rivian also raved about its market opportunities in the larger commercial space, as Scaringe added (edited):</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>Amazon represents such a large pool of demand for us.</i>So it's really critical that we do not starve them of vehicles. Nevertheless, the RCV platform was architected and designed \n <i>fully contemplating vehicles beyond Last Mile, such as in the cargo space</i>, or in the workspace. So there's a whole host of opportunities that exists both in large volumes, but also across a very long spread-out tail of commercial applications. Thus, we also have an eye on launching non-EDV versions on the RCV platform to capitalize on these opportunities. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n</blockquote>\n<p><b>So, is RIVN Stock a Buy/Hold/Sell Now?</b></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/264dc3dc91fc844d920e73a7f69cf920\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"395\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Rivian revenue and adjusted EBIT margins mean consensus estimates. Data source: S&amp;P Capital IQ</span></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1069e7fc16920da396615f6df6ff5951\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>RIVN and TSLA stock EV/Fwd Revenue valuation comps. Data source: S&amp;P Capital IQ</span></p>\n<p>Consensus estimates point to a largely successful ramp, as we explained earlier. As a result, Rivian's revenue is estimated to reach $27.84B by FY25. However, the company is not expected to be profitable based on adjusted EBIT margins by then. Therefore, investors are encouraged to monitor its production ramp and profitability dynamics moving forward carefully.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, its valuations have dropped significantly since its earlier momentum spike. The stock has declined more than 25% since our Neutral call, as we encouraged investors to wait for the dip.</p>\n<p>If we consider Rivian's valuations against Tesla moving forward, it may seem more reasonable than the EV leader. However, investors should note that Tesla is already a solidly profitable EV maker. It also has proven its production ramp capabilities exceptionally well. Moreover, its brand value has also increased tremendously globally. Therefore, comparing their revenue multiples directly without adjusting for Tesla's advantages would not make sense.</p>\n<p>Based on Rivian stock's EV/FY25 revenue multiple of 3.4x, it's trading at 50% of Tesla's FY25 revenue multiple. Therefore, we think RIVN stock looks fairly valued now. Nevertheless, we believe that RIVN stock remains a highly speculative play. However, the company seems to be getting well on track to meet its mid-term production guidance. Therefore, the current weakness could offer speculative investors a potential opportunity to add exposure at a more reasonable valuation.</p>\n<p>Consequently,<i>we revise our rating on RIVN stock to Buy.</i>However, we would like to caution that RIVN stock may be suitable for speculative investors only. Moreover, the stock could continue to exhibit tremendous volatility. Therefore, investors are encouraged to add in phases.</p>\n<p>This article was written by&nbsp;JR Research.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Is Rivian Stock A Buy, Sell, Or Hold?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIs Rivian Stock A Buy, Sell, Or Hold?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-12-22 14:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4476199-rivian-stock-buy-sell-hold><strong>Seeking Alpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nRivian stock has dropped more than 25% since our last Neutral call.\nThe company reported a slight production target miss in its FQ3 earnings call. However, we don't think investors should be ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4476199-rivian-stock-buy-sell-hold\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"RIVN":"Rivian Automotive, Inc."},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4476199-rivian-stock-buy-sell-hold","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1123940793","content_text":"Summary\n\nRivian stock has dropped more than 25% since our last Neutral call.\nThe company reported a slight production target miss in its FQ3 earnings call. However, we don't think investors should be overly worried.\nWe discuss why we think RIVN stock is a Buy now.\n\nMichael M. Santiago/Getty Images News\nInvestment Thesis\nRivian Automotive, Inc. (RIVN) recently released its first earnings reports for FQ3'21 as a public company. Notably, the company missed its 1,200 vehicle production target by \"a few hundred vehicles.\" However, we weren't surprised, given the current supply chain bottlenecks and the challenges in ramping production. Moreover, we don't think investors should be unduly concerned about its short-term production goal. Management was clear as it emphasized that its long-term production targets remain unaffected.\nNevertheless, we believe that ramping production successfully will continue to be a key hurdle facing CEO RJ Scaringe & Co. Investors sent the stock tumbling after its earnings report, which we believe the market took the opportunity to pare down risk. After all, RIVN stock had traded at an incredible market cap of $112.8B when we wrote our previous article. Following the recent sell-off, Rivian's market cap has dropped to $88B. Therefore, we believe it's an appropriate time to revisit our thesis on RIVN stock post-FQ3 earnings.\nWe also discuss why we think the stock seems fairly valued now.\nRivian Market Cap Trend\nRIVN market cap analysis (as of 17 December'21).\nReaders can quickly glean that Rivian's market cap has dropped dramatically back to where it started life as a public company. It last registered a market cap of $88B, while it began trading with a market cap of $83.6B in early November.\nNevertheless, Rivian's market cap still exceeded Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) market cap even as it just started making deliveries in September. Some investors find it incredulous that a company that hasn't even ramped production could be worth more than both the US auto leaders.\nWhy We Think Rivian Investors Remain Optimistic Post-FQ3\nRivian's report card wasn't a disaster, even if the company missed its production guidance for 2021. CEO RJ Scaringe offered assurances as he emphasized (edited):\n\n For 2021, \n we expect to produce a few hundred vehicles short of our initial 1,200 vehicle production target. We do not believe any of our supply chain challenges represent long-term systemic issues. We remain well-positioned to capture and drive the accelerated large-scale adoption of sustainable transportation. However, a small number of suppliers or small number of components may be ramping a little slower, creating constraints or bottlenecks. Those challenges have been really a focal point for us over the last two and a half, three months. \n But, these issues are short-term in nature and they are solvable problems. So, we don't see any long-term systemic challenges associated with ramping the supply chain. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n\nRivian planned production capacity and delivery consensus estimates. Data source: S&P Capital IQ, Barron's\nRivian telegraphed that it would be commencing its new Georgia production facility in mid'22 and ready to begin production from 2024. Georgia's planned annual run rate is estimated at 400K. Therefore, it would afford Rivian a collective annual production capacity of 600K if we include its Illinois facility. Nevertheless, the company did not specify how long it would take to ramp production to its planned capacity. However, consensus estimates point to a relatively positive ramp through FY25. As a result, Rivian is estimated to deliver about 40K of vehicles in FY22. However, it would reach the 360K milestone by FY25, registering an estimated delivery CAGR of 108%. Its 360K estimate includes the 100K EDV orders from its exclusive last-mile delivery partner and cornerstone investor Amazon (AMZN).\nThere's little doubt that the delivery cadence estimates look very aggressive. But, if done well, it's also not impossible. Keen investors should recall that Tesla (TSLA) took just two years to ramp Giga Shanghai from zero to its current 600K annual run rate. It has even recently made new investments to enhance its production capacity further. Rivian also seems highly confident that they can ramp successfully, as CEO RJ Scaringe emphasized (edited):\n\n We've architected the product development to be capable of running more than one program and launching more than one program at once, but also to have those fast feedback loops between the different programs. So with that, the commercial van has actually learned a lot from the R1 platform and the R1 platform launch. What you see in terms of the facility in Georgia, is key for us from an expansion point of view. We're quite confident in the path ahead. All three of our vehicles have been certified for sale and they're being produced on two different production lines. \n The organization was architected to facilitate running and operating multiple programs at the same time. And so as we now look at what the ramp will look like for both R1T and R1S into next year, it really positions us to rapidly grow through the course of 2022. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n\nWhile it's still early, Rivian investors are undoubtedly confident that the company can deliver on its production cadence to meet its delivery milestones. The company is not facing a demand issue compared to short-term supply constraints. They updated that R1 orders have climbed to 71K from 55K in the previous update. Nevertheless, these are cancelable orders, as their delivery timeline has been stretched to 2023 if a new order is placed now. Given that auto leaders General Motors, Ford, and Tesla will also be expected to compete with their pickup trucks soon, Rivian must maintain its production cadence. Therefore, we encourage investors to monitor their production milestones very carefully moving ahead.\nInvestors Must Carefully Monitor Amazon's EDV Range\nThe partnership with Amazon is critical to jumpstarting Rivian's ambitions into the commercial fleet segment. Not only does it offer the opportunity of massive fleet sales, but it also sells its fleet management subscriptions as part of its commercial sales. Consequently, it introduces a recurring software revenue stream component on top of its hardware revenue. It also applies to the Amazon fleet, as Rivian accentuated: \"That software subscription goes live basically now on the commercial side.\"\nRivian is expected to deliver 10K EDV by 2022 following \"months of testing in 15 cities.\" Investors should remember that Amazon retains the right to change its number of orders. Therefore it's critical that Rivian can meet Amazon's expectations. We believe it has also driven Rivian to ramp production quickly. Given how quickly they secured their second production facility, we believe that the company seems confident in meeting its production targets, and consequently, Amazon's orders.\nRivian emphasized that its EDV is capable of 201 miles range, and it is on track to deliver its vehicles to Amazon. However, a previous report by The Information highlighted some challenges in Amazon's testing, on top of its battery draining problem. The Information reported (edited):\n\n Rivian said the Amazon vans would have a range of between 120 miles and 150 miles depending on their size. But one driver involved in testing the vans said the range could be much less, depending on the weather. The driver who spoke to The Information said the battery drained about 40% faster than normal if the van’s heating or cooling was on. As a result, drivers have been testing the vans on what they dubbed “nursery routes,” where vans didn’t venture too far away from the contractors’ headquarters. (The Information)\n\nNevertheless, Amazon's director of Global Fleets and Products, Ross Rachey, noted that once the vans are in production, \"they would have a range of 150 miles, which is double the range of the majority of Amazon's routes.\" Notably, the company also quickly emphasized that these test vans are not fully developed yet.\nWe believe a successful launch program with Amazon could open up many potential opportunities outside of the Last Mile segment. Investors should note that Amazon's exclusive partnership with Rivian is limited to Last Mile. But, the commercial space is much larger than the Last Mile segment. Rivian also raved about its market opportunities in the larger commercial space, as Scaringe added (edited):\n\nAmazon represents such a large pool of demand for us.So it's really critical that we do not starve them of vehicles. Nevertheless, the RCV platform was architected and designed \n fully contemplating vehicles beyond Last Mile, such as in the cargo space, or in the workspace. So there's a whole host of opportunities that exists both in large volumes, but also across a very long spread-out tail of commercial applications. Thus, we also have an eye on launching non-EDV versions on the RCV platform to capitalize on these opportunities. (Rivian's FQ3'21 earnings call)\n\nSo, is RIVN Stock a Buy/Hold/Sell Now?\nRivian revenue and adjusted EBIT margins mean consensus estimates. Data source: S&P Capital IQ\nRIVN and TSLA stock EV/Fwd Revenue valuation comps. Data source: S&P Capital IQ\nConsensus estimates point to a largely successful ramp, as we explained earlier. As a result, Rivian's revenue is estimated to reach $27.84B by FY25. However, the company is not expected to be profitable based on adjusted EBIT margins by then. Therefore, investors are encouraged to monitor its production ramp and profitability dynamics moving forward carefully.\nNevertheless, its valuations have dropped significantly since its earlier momentum spike. The stock has declined more than 25% since our Neutral call, as we encouraged investors to wait for the dip.\nIf we consider Rivian's valuations against Tesla moving forward, it may seem more reasonable than the EV leader. However, investors should note that Tesla is already a solidly profitable EV maker. It also has proven its production ramp capabilities exceptionally well. Moreover, its brand value has also increased tremendously globally. Therefore, comparing their revenue multiples directly without adjusting for Tesla's advantages would not make sense.\nBased on Rivian stock's EV/FY25 revenue multiple of 3.4x, it's trading at 50% of Tesla's FY25 revenue multiple. Therefore, we think RIVN stock looks fairly valued now. Nevertheless, we believe that RIVN stock remains a highly speculative play. However, the company seems to be getting well on track to meet its mid-term production guidance. Therefore, the current weakness could offer speculative investors a potential opportunity to add exposure at a more reasonable valuation.\nConsequently,we revise our rating on RIVN stock to Buy.However, we would like to caution that RIVN stock may be suitable for speculative investors only. Moreover, the stock could continue to exhibit tremendous volatility. Therefore, investors are encouraged to add in phases.\nThis article was written by JR Research.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":973,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}