Analyst Offers Up Glowing “Review” Of Tesla Model 3

Tesla Model 3


Tesla Model 3

Tesla Model 3

From “relatively poor” to a “true” Tesla, analysts seem to disagree over the Tesla Model 3.

Tesla Model 3

Blue Tesla Model 3

Over the weekend, analysts/investors in New York had the opportunity to check out and drive the Tesla Model 3. While at least one analyst found the Model 3 to be subpar, another described it as a “true” Tesla.

What’s meant by a “true” Tesla? Well, our take is that he’s saying the ~$50,000 Model 3 (it’s likely Tesla wasn’t displaying a $35,000 base version) is on par with its $100,000-plus siblings, the Model S and Model X.

Guggenheim analyst Robert Cihra is the one who described the Model 3 as a “true” Tesla. In his eyes, the Model 3 impresses, or “delivers” as he says.

Cihra added that he doesn’t see anything that’s “particularly unmanufactureable” in the Model 3, so he concludes that production issues are more related to Tesla trying to automate the process as much as possible and not to the actual car.

We should point out that “Cihra has a $430 price target and a Buy rating on Tesla stock,” according to Value Walk.

On a separate note, the Tesla employee and Model 3 owner offered up his take on the electric car.

Source: Value Walk

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

62 Comments on "Analyst Offers Up Glowing “Review” Of Tesla Model 3"

newest oldest most voted

A true Tesla could have poor quality.

Hah! It’s funny, because it’s true. In fifteen years Tesla hasn’t managed to reach industry standards.

How do you arrive at 15 years? Model S production started in 2012, so that is only 5 years.

If you count the Roadster, which probably is stretch since it was mostly hand-built and based on a Lotus, that started production in 2008, so that is only 9 years.

Explain how you come up with 15?

Zaphod is right. Also, I’m surprised that Mr “Four Electrics” would not realize something so obvious. Anyone who has “Four Electrics” would surely know that Telsa was not making cars in 2002, right? Makes we wonder who some of these commenters are.

Russian troll/bots. Russia’a economy will collapse with mass even adpotion.

The serial Tesla basher posts from “Four Electrics” don’t lead me to believe he’s a Russian. He’s likely just another short-selling FUDster of the sort you can see posting scores or hundreds of Tesla bashing posts every day over at Desperately Seeking FUDsters — er, Seeking Alpha.

But USA not colaps…20 trilions $

Tesla was founded/registered 1 Jul, 2003 so I find rounding to 15 from 14.4 to be quite reasonable. They have been working every day since to produce better vehicles after all.

Tesla was a “MICKEY MOUSE”‘Company Until Musk took it over, So you can’t really count those early years.

Hmmm, apparently neither General Motors nor Nissan thought the early Tesla Motors was a “Mickey Mouse” company, because it was reports of Tesla putting the Roadster into production that inspired both of them to make the first mass produced EVs, the Volt and the Leaf.

Elon Musk has followed the “Dark Star — White Star — Blue Star” business plan set out by founders Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning, who also managed to found the company and lead it company to design the Roadster and form a partnership with Lotus to build the car bodies, all before Elon took over.

So, L’amata, it looks like those in a position to know, didn’t consider Tesla to be a “Mickey Mouse” company at the time.

That’s poor reasoning.

GM is 100 years old and yet all of their cars I’ve had or seen have poor fit and finish. Panel gaps are the worst.

Don’t see anyone getting worked up about that….

Yeah, when I was contemplating buying a new toy I took a brand new Corvette for a test drive. I brought it back to the dealer just as a Florida spring rain was rolling in. After a 15-minute downpour I went back to the car and my butt got SOAKED when I sat in it. The salesman laughlingly said that ‘Vettes aren’t known for staying dry. Body panel gaps were abysmal. I bought a Honda S2000 instead.

Yeah, no cops have passed out from exhaust fumes. Industry standards, what an Fing joke.

In every case of the Fords, the leaks we’re caused by aftermarket modifications. One cannot blame the manufacturer for that.
I suppose in America one can, but only because we are ruled by lawyers.

Your Lurfy statement is patently wrong. Owners who are not cops, and have not installed aftermarket equipment have complained about carbon monoxide fumes. At least get your information straight when you try to flame Tesla.

LMAO at serial anti-Tesla troll and FUDster 4E again.

Ask MB how Tesla Model S “…not reaching industry standards” has managed to decimate the former reigning champion in the lucrative S Class segment.

What a desperate loser you are 4E, you think by telling the same big lies over and over again you can change reality like the Trumpster?

Not according to Consumer Reports.
Tesla quality is above average.
Even they don’t project Model 3 reliability to be anything less than average.

True. Lucky for them they are so far ahead in so many ways that minor perceived quality issues haven’t mattered (yet).

I’ll take a few panel gaps any day if it gets me a car that actually gets better over time for free, without a dealer visit. That is unheard of in the industry.

Tesla created and leads the EV revolution. The transition will be difficult for some.

In your mind, perhaps. For me, who lives in Norway where EVs are real and normal people are buying them, it is a fairly ridiculous statement. Even though Tesla is selling quite well in Norway. Plenty of people were driving Reva, Buddy and Think in Oslo long before Tesla was founded. And with the LEAF and the triplets things really got going in 2011. There was a baby-blue Roadster in Oslo that was kinda famous among the specially-interested folks, driven by Bellona leader Fredrik Hauge, but Tesla only started to be generally known in Norway in 2013. Even now, the LEAF and the e-Golf are much more important cars for “the EV revolution” than Tesla. Granted, that may change with Model 3. But it does seem that by the time it arrives on our shores, it will do so with specficiations that are much closer to the norm than today. It really stands out only in two areas: performance and brand. Tesla is perceived as a luxury brand here too, because most people haven’t paid much attention and have no idea what the “master plan” is. I wish the best for Tesla and especially Model 3. I may even hold… Read more »

All those little EV companies were not the ones to sway manufacturers to jump into ev’s like they are now. Here’s a quote from Bob Lutz back in 2006: Lutz is the man in charge of developing GM’s new products, and he says he owes Tesla and its Roadster a debt of gratitude. “If a small Silicon Valley start up believes that they can do a commercially viable electric car, are we going to sit here at General Motors and say, ‘Well, a guy in California can do it, but we can’t?’ Well, that didn’t sound very good.”

Terawatt said:

“In your mind, perhaps.”

Also in reality.

The GM EV-1 did not kick off the modern EV revolution. The thrice-failed Th!nk certainly didn’t! And I’m surprised you’d even mention a car as embarrassing as the Buddy.

No, it most definitely was Tesla that changed the public perception of EVs as punishment cars that only “green” fanatics would drive, to sexy, desirable cars that are better than gasmobiles in many ways.

It was also Tesla that demonstrated a company could not only make a profit selling pure EVs, but could be so successful at it that the company is growing by leaps and bounds every year!

Those other companies you mentioned, Terawatt? Th!nk and Buddy and many others — CODA and Geely, for example — not so much!

If it wasn’t for Tesla, EV enthusiasts would still be talking about conversion cars and clown cars made by cottage industry companies like Buddy; and the closest we’d have to a mainstream EV is the Prius.

The Buddy EV

Go Tesla!

You wouldn’t HAPPEN to work at Watson Chevrolet and sell Volts….WOULD you?

Funny, but no. They are nearby, however.

First, I’m a Model 3 reservation holder.

Second, Watson Chevrolet doesn’t sell Volts or Bolts, but they do move a lot of trucks.

I agree, building and fine tuning the “Machine that makes the machine” is causing the delays. When the ‘kinks’ are worked out, Tesla will be able to duplicate the Model 3 automated production line in other factories such as Shanghai and ramp up production relatively quickly.

I’m sure all analysts will come up with opinions that reflect their investment positions. Early reviews of people who don’t have a short/long position on the line are very positive like

What are you waiting for when you have 100 analysts up to their necks in concrete?

The last load of concrete.

What do you call 100 analysts encased in concrete and dropped in the middle of the Atlantic?

A start.

(That’s actually a lawyer joke, but I see it works equally well for analysts.)

I think it’s important conceptually to keep things all in the family, though the spartan interior, goes a bit off the deep end imho.
I will get a HUD.

If the “Spartan interior” makes it a bit less expensive and easier to manufacturer, then I hope Tesla can make 500k Model 3s in the next 30 months, before they start ramping up the Model Y for approximately the same delivery schedule.

Well for one they won’t to worry about bottle necks caused by lack of buttons or knobs.


I’d feel a LOT better about the Model 3 if a HUD becomes available, even as an aftermarket item.

Do you really think this is possible?

Aftermarket HUDS are already around, a custom one made for the Model 3: Not Yet.


Heck, I think it’s inevitable. And likely from more than one aftermarket supplier.

I’m still hoping Tesla will come to (at least one of) its senses and offer a HUD display, even if it’s only a service-center installed add-on.

@ OP Eric Loveday, Thanks for this balanced & in-context article.

This article covering a Tesla stock pumper advertisement pretending to be an “analysis” is “balanced” only in the sense that two days ago this same InsideEVs writer, Eric Loveday, wrote another article two days ago about a stock dumper advertisement pretending to be an “analysis”.

Coverage of two faux “analysis” Tesla stock promoter advertisements written from opposing extreme positions do not add up to one real, informed analysis.

So in the last few days, we’ve learned that the Model 3 has fit and finish issues from the analyst who thinks Tesla shares should drop; the car is a true Tesla from the analyst who thinks Tesla shares should rise; and it’s so good you won’t be able to stand driving anything else ever again from a Tesla employee.

Hopefully we’ll soon get more reviews from people who aren’t so clearly biased by their jobs.

@Counterpoint said: “Hopefully we’ll soon get more reviews from people who aren’t so clearly biased by their jobs.”

Here is one:

Yes, and I’m glad it’s out there. I’m also excited for several more.

The car reviewed this this video is exactly what I’d want, but I don’t know if I could take delivery of one with such a glaring mismatch in the door trim. It’s visible 20 feet away.

“…a glaring mismatch in the door trim. It’s visible 20 feet away.”

Just like most real cars, and unlike the impossibly perfect computer renders shown these days in TV and magazine ads for cars and light trucks.

After owning a RWD Model S I now find a desire for AWD. Better on bad roads and more fuel efficient in addition to being faster.

I’m waiting for the AWD version of the model 3……or a used 90D.

Thankfully it will be awhile. My old 2012 is doing just fine….and even better–

I don’t have to waste more money on cars. The problem is that Teslas are like drugs. Very addicting. and you always want MORE!!

I love RWD, but confess to being an AWD convert in Model S. The sub-frame in the 2012-Q1’13 had a reputation for “porpoising”, especially in the P versions. You’d apply throttle in turns and find the outside rear would squat while the inside front would lift. Later RWD did it less, but it all seems to iron out with AWD. You’ll enjoy it.

It could be like the Mustang as far as popularity goes, the mystique, the cache’. Of course the Mustang really sucked as an actual car, but it looked so cool.

The most important test-drives, analyses, and buy/sell reviews will not be made public – they will be the internal reviews by TSLA’s major institutional stockholders. Top five, in-order:

Baillie Gifford
T Rowe Price

Collectively, these five 30% of TSLA, and combined with the other institutional owners, control 57% of TSLA. If they get nervous and decide to sell off en mass, it would have far more impact on stock value than the opinions of Morgan Stanley, Bernstein, etc.

FYI, FMR, Baillie Gifford, and T Rowe Price have all reduced their TLSA stock holdings this past year. TRP apparently has sold off half of their stock.

The dispassionate money appears to be edging closer and closer to “sell”.

I suppose that’s why the stock is going up today. Great resistance at $300 which is now crumbling, in yet another short squeeze.

With a stock as volatile as TSLA, it would be remarkable if day traders did not frequently buy and sell a lot of the stock, as it rises and falls. That’s how financial companies like those make money!

Why are you presenting this as if it’s unusual, HVACman? Heck, I would think it’s not merely usual, but expected!

HVACMAN’s comment is interesting as it is dispassionate.

The problem for an incidental former Tesla owner is – I agree the car he reviewed was a “TRUE TESLA” and all that goes with that.

The problem is the reviews to date have been “I like this” or “I don’t like that.”.

Doesn’t tell me much more about the car other than it is worth $50,000. Of that there is no doubt since with the number of reservations – plenty will pay that I THINK.

HVCvacman comments, in regards to Tesla stock are regrettable as they are completely wrong-headed, uninformed and amateurish.

Sooooooooo analysts with price targets in the 200s say it’s a poor fit/finish car and those in the 400s say it’s a great car.


Well… it is a great car that generaly happens to have poor fit and finish which some people look past or they got one that happened to be good…
In the long run Tesla needs to have perfect fit and finish if they want to be compared with BMWs or even Toyotas as those companies will be producing a lot of BEVs in the comming years…
In the very near future and especally a self driving one with BEVs autos with be nothing more than an appliance and the badge will be irrevelant so quality and price will be all that matter for most…

In the long run BMW and Toyota need to have simple, free OTA updates and about 100 times better overall software game if they want to be compared with Teslas.

Here’s a hint: it’s 2017 and basic navigation that doesn’t even update on it’s own shouldn’t be a $1,000+ option on a car anymore.

It’s a very important point that many overlook. Although I would say at least as good software and OTA updates to compete.

In taxi fleets on the high end, we see Tesla’s virtually taking over the space. This in turn adds a great deal to Tesla’s DB with frequently traveled routes in many areas of the world, this in turn improves the AI, and so on.

Its the “Hare and the Tortoise”, and as long as Tesla does not fall asleep, they will win.

“In the long run Tesla needs to have perfect fit and finish if they want to be compared with BMWs or even Toyotas…”

I challenge you to post close-up photos of any BMW with “perfect” fit of exterior trim and body panels.

Go ahead, just one.

I swear, it’s like most people posting about fit-and-finish have never looked closely at real cars, and have been fooled by the impossibly perfect computer renders seen in all modern commercials for passenger vehicles.

Where is poopoo to complain about FUD..? Oh, I guess this is a case that didn’t fit his narrative.

Does he really have to say anything about a review from a analyst with a low stock target? Are we supposed to get car reviews from stock market speculators now?

“Are we supposed to get car reviews from stock market speculators now?”

Thank you! That is exactly my opinion on this and similar advertisements from stock pumpers and dumpers; advertisements masquerading as “analyses”.

I’d love to see real, unbiased, in-depth reviews of the Tesla Model 3 from people with the expertise to do so. Sadly, such reviews are unlikely to come from well-known, respected sources. Sadly, auto review magazines have a well established reputation for running lopsidedly positive reviews of almost all cars. Even Consumer Reports has tarnished its image by running articles about Tesla cars that seem to be aimed more at generating sensationalism and raising CR’s circulation, than being honest objective reviews.

I do recall a video review by “Two Car Guys” of the MX posted to YouTube; hopefully they’ll do the same for the TM3. But such reviews don’t have the kind of impact on public opinion as a review by, let’s say, Motor Trend or Car & Driver.

For a truly objective, authoritative review from a well-known and respected source, we might have to wait for to do a long-term driving review of the Tesla Model 3, as they did for the Tesla Model S.

“Where is poopoo to complain about FUD..?”

I see you’re still splashing around in the kiddie pool, Terawatt, giggling about bodily waste because it’s “naughty”. The appropriate diminutives for Pushmi-Pullyu are “Pushy” and “PMPU”. Insults at the level of a five-year-old aren’t going to impress anyone, unless it’s to impress them with your extreme immaturity.

* * * * *

Terawatt, clearly you don’t know what the term “FUD” means. So here is your chance to learn something today; check out the link below.

FUD is always negative. This article is about a stock pumper advertisement masquerading as an “analysis”, and stock pumpers don’t write FUD. Their fake “analyses” may be as biased in the positive direction as FUD is biased in the negative direction, but a positive bias is exactly the opposite of FUD.,_uncertainty_and_doubt

Poopoo FUD is toxic stuff. Beware! Before you know it, you’re eye-deep in the stuff!