DEADLY levels of ionizing radiation being emitted from electric cars

 They blow up, burn while locking the driver inside because of digital switching. And they radiate enough deadly radiation to cancer the dickens out of the inmates of the cars over a not very long time.

Lovely. The future is cooked alive in a tesla and imolated while driving.

https://yeshuafreedom.com/w/7sEHTduHqAMNkjDMtHbyyV

 

Mainly due to fudging the books, fake GAAP earnings reports, and car model specs that are mostly fictitious in every category.

Tesla to Lose Half its Value by Next Year, According to Bank of America

Bank of America (BofA) expects Tesla’s shares to plummet nearly 50 percent because of the electric vehicle maker’s decision to acquire beleaguered solar panel provider SolarCity in November. Tesla shares will fall within the next year to $165, a 46 percent drop from where the stock closed Monday at $308.03 a share, according to BofA research analyst John Murphy. He expects the Silicon Valley company to lose $2 per share over the next year, which is up from the $0.25 loss per share he forecast earlier this year.

“We believe the SolarCity acquisition introduces material risks to the longer-term viability of TSLA, while the recent capital raise only serves to further dilute potential shareholder value,” Murphy said in a note to investors Tuesday.

Goldman Sachs issued similar warnings to Wall Street in February.

Tesla has done terrible work in producing electric vehicles, Goldman Sachs’ analyst David Tamberrino said at the time, but “our concerns are more near-term oriented with respect to operational execution on the Model 3 launch, an unproven solar business, and cash needs.” These rolling turds use more energy to run, than any gasoline car on the planet, when the costs of producing electricity are actually tallied. In addition to REAL OPERATING COSTS, they are mechanical lemons with the worst record of repairs per 100 vehicles per year over all cars made worldwide. Teslas are expensive ego toys that do not go very far, cost a great deal to charge, and are made of plastic parts that constantly break. One in every Three Tesla cars are in the repair shop at any given time, an industry record of 100 years.
Tamberrino was also worried the company would have to sell stock to raise $1.7 billion in order to make room for a possible loss if the Model 3 doesn’t make the grade. The financial institution ultimately downgraded the company from “neutral” to “sell.”
The complexity of the $2.6 billion Tesla-SolarCity merger almost certainly played a part in BofA and Goldman Sachs’ position. Prior to the merger, auto analysts covered the electric vehicle maker, but now, energy analysts are jumping in the fray.

Neither of these industries are likely to have a logical meeting point upon which to make an accurate forecast. Mixed in will be the energy-storage and battery-manufacturing components of the company.
A disturbingly high number of analysts do not expect the electric company’s value to increase over time. More than 14 analysts expect Tesla’s valuation to fall $48 below its current stock price, the outlets report noted.
Bloomberg’s report suggests analysts are expressing doubt that Tesla can accomplish all of its lofty goals — in particular, they think GM and Ford will eat the fledgling electric vehicle maker alive. It’s the most pessimistic view Wall Street has made on Tesla since the company went public in 2010.
One reason for concern is Tesla’s comparatively poor sales numbers compared to big hitters Ford and General Motors, both of which sell millions of cars a year — the California-based vehicle maker delivered fewer than 80,000 vehicles in 2016.
Elon Musk, Tesla’s chairman, has promised to deliver between 100,000 and 200,000 Model 3s to the market in the second half of 2017. Analysts are dubious.
Musk’s fortunes are intimately tied to the company’s share price, so poor future expectations portend terrible news for Tesla going forward. The company relies on capital to keep its ever-increasing pet projects afloat.

“Tesla is a serial capital raiser,” Adam Jonas, a Morgan Stanley analyst with a bullish view on Tesla, told reporters.
“As such, its ability to sustain its operations and fundamental value is inextricably linked to the very performance of its share price, creating a self-reinforcing momentum.”

Bloomberg also used a technical analysts tool called a Relative Strength Index (RSI) to measure the speed and change of Tesla’s stock health.

An RSI reading above 70, the outlet noted, suggests that a stock is “overbought” and anything below 30 is considered “oversold” — in other words, the happy-medium is in between 70 and 30.
Tesla’s RSI topped out above 83, the highest number analysts have seen on any company in four years. The “sell signal” for a stock occurs when the elevated reading falls back below 70 — that moment happened for Tesla last week.
The market insanity might be a result of the company’s consistent inability to hit delivery marks. Its deliveries were 15 percent less than its forecast and were even lower than the first quarter of 2016, and managed to sell only 14,370 cars, down from the 17,000 it expected to sell, according to a July letter sent to shareholders.
Tesla’s SolarCity merger will almost certainly add a layer of complexity to the forecasts. Back then, only auto analysts covered the electric vehicle maker, but now, energy analysts are jumping in the fray.
Neither of these industries are likely to have a logical meeting point upon which to make an accurate forecast. Mixed in will be the energy-storage and battery-manufacturing components.
Colin Langan, an analyst at UBS, expects the company’s shares to hit about $160 and pick up a “sell” rating on the stock.

“With the closure of the SCTY merger (SolarCity), TSLA (Tesla) is assuming numerous risks. … We continue to believe SCTY is an unneeded distraction during a very challenging launch period,” Langan wrote in a research note.

SolarCity’s bizarre business model will also scare away the most bullish of bulls.
The solar panel provider, which leases its panels to customers, reached long-term lease agreements with homeowners who later defaulted on the mortgages, according to a Feb. 22 report from The New York Times. There could be even more default cases, the report notes.
Murphy also suggested that the dip in shares would lead to a sagging confidence in CEO Elon Musk’s ability to mass produce the company’s stable of electric vehicles.

“While we recognize that TSLA is a growing top-line business, we think it is unlikely that investors would continue to supply the company with incremental low cost capital in perpetuity if investments fail to generate return,” Murphy said.

http://dailywesterner.com/news/2017-04-27/tesla-to-lose-half-its-value-by-next-year-according-to-bank-of-america/

Electric Cars Are Doing More Harm Than Good" Professor Warns (the whole "green" movement has been one big carbon taxing, freedom restricting con from day one) this is why TESLA MOTORS, even though they sell a car that only the rich can afford, costs a fortune to charge up, and leaves you stranded often as not, and also, without heavy government subsidies, would have been bankrupt out of the gate, has stock that sells above $35 a share

 

"An electric car does not make you green... You’re better off filling up at the pump," if you live in Canada. According to a new study by professor Chris Kennedy, even if every driver in Canada made the switch - from gas to electric - the total emissions might not actually go down... since in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia, electric cars generate more carbon pollution over their lifetimes than gas-powered cars. Paging Al Gore...

As CBC reports, trying to go green by replacing your gas guzzler with an electric car? In some provinces, that may actually be worse for the environment, a University of Toronto researcher says.

In Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia, electric cars generate more carbon over their lifetimes than gas-powered cars, said Chris Kennedy, a professor of civil engineering at the University of Toronto, in an interview with CBC's The Current Tuesday.

• Hear the full interview on The Current

That's because those provinces generate much of their electricity by burning coal, so consuming more electricity – by charging your electric car battery, for instance – significantly boosts carbon emissions.

"So… literally, if you're living in Alberta, Saskatchewan or Nova Scotia, an electric car does not make you green?" asked Anna Maria Tremonti, host of The Current. "You're better off filling up at the pump?"

"You're better off filling up at the pump," Kennedy agreed. "Or if you really want to go for something greener, you should be buying a conventional hybrid car."

However, in the rest of Canada, driving an electric car is the greener choice, he found.

He figured that out by looking at the carbon emissions generated by gas and electric cars over their entire life cycle, taking into account the source of electricity used to charge their batteries and how the gas used to fuel a conventional car is produced in different parts of the world.

The carbon emissions from electricity generation are measured in tonnes of CO2 emitted per gigawatt hour of electricity produced. That ranges from:

• Close to 0 for hydroelectric, nuclear and renewable energy.
• 500 to 600 for natural gas power plants.
• 1,000 for coal-fired power plants.

For a given country or province, if average emissions were under 600 tonnes of CO2 per gigawatt hour, then switching from conventional to electric cars, buses and trucks will lead to a reduction in carbon emissions, Kennedy reported in a study published in the journal Nature Climate Change earlier this month.
In some Canadian provinces, that reduction in emissions can be quite dramatic – B.C., Quebec, Manitoba, and Newfoundland all produce less than 20 tonnes of CO2 per gigawatt hour of electricity, so driving an electric car can reduce emissions to close to zero.

Ultimately, however, the study's goal isn't to help consumers make decisions about what car to buy, Kennedy said.

The take-home message is actually for governments in some Canadian provinces and other countries: That they need to get their average emissions below the 600-tonne threshold so they can benefit from technology like electric cars.

"Electrification," he said, "is the most pivotal strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions worldwide."

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-march-24-2015-1.3006711/switching-to-an-electric-car-isn-t-always-good-for-the-environment-1.3006734

Rigging the game - and not just with cars

Tesla motors is about AGENDA 21