Stealth Trading

2.6K posts

Stealth Trading

Stealth Trading

@Stealth_Trader1

Options Trader/Investor - Working on doing this for a living - Not Financial Advice.

Katılım Ekim 2024
36 Takip Edilen135 Takipçiler
the rabbit of caerbannog🔋
$eose checking in on 3/10 model. our primary model now for 25+ days. model is 31 days old.
the rabbit of caerbannog🔋 tweet media
English
3
0
22
1.7K
Richard Sullivan
Richard Sullivan@Rsulli6300·
@temu143 cant be , revenue numbers in q1 down from disastrous q4 . said the exited q4 at an annualized 2gw . that would produce 5x the revenue realized in q1. something is not right
English
5
0
2
204
Richard Sullivan
Richard Sullivan@Rsulli6300·
$eose delays , BMS software and performance tuning , problems with rte .
English
6
0
8
2.5K
Stealth Trading
Stealth Trading@Stealth_Trader1·
@bkfichter I think $15 is fair. But if they land another contract then absolutely. 2H26 will also be the time where they get positive.
English
0
0
1
340
B
B@bkfichter·
Who thinks $eose can hit 20 by the end of the year?
English
27
2
111
9.7K
Stealth Trading
Stealth Trading@Stealth_Trader1·
Wow…look where people are move to and away from. Almost like taxes are fucking dumb. Yet people keep voting in shit that tax them.
Stealth Trading tweet media
English
0
0
0
2
Stealth Trading
Stealth Trading@Stealth_Trader1·
@OutSideDaBox_ Cerberus will vote to increase shares to give them more money. Dilution = price drop. It will still end strong by EOY but this has to drop it for the future.
English
2
0
0
137
Stealth Trading
Stealth Trading@Stealth_Trader1·
@danielrucci Looks like based on the vote to increase shares. It may fail to break $5.50 and come back down.
English
0
0
0
13
Daniel Ⓩ🔋
Daniel Ⓩ🔋@danielrucci·
$EOSE has broken out of its recent trading channel. 👀
Daniel Ⓩ🔋 tweet media
English
2
1
28
1.9K
OhDog
OhDog@Jupupa1·
@bert_gilfoyle Maybe they discount possible orders heavily. Also no point to have high top end if market won't believe you'd hit it even if internally just meeting the guidance was a disappointment. Factoring in substantial downtime seems realistic as well
English
1
0
1
168
Reasonably Approximating 🇺🇸 🇺🇦 🔋 🅰️
$EOSE Joe said coming out of Q1, Line 1 hit 100% capacity utilization (2 GWh/yr) run rate. But, assume 90% capacity utilization throughout the year, and a modest finished product cycle time improvement from 18 seconds at the beginning of the year to 17 seconds by the end of year. All the while, (I'll assume very pessimistically) ASP decreases from $217/kWh to $208/kWh by the end of the year. That's 1.95 GWh produced by Line 1 and revenue of over $400M. Now add Line 2. I'll assume a ramp up of 8% in Q2, 38% in Q3, and 77% in Q4, and won't even credit an improved finished product cycle time, which was the whole point of the new line design in the first place. That results in a total Q4 run rate of about 3.6 GWh in Q4. And again using this very pessimistic ASP, that's still over $550M. Nothing adds up to the guidance, unless you assume some significant idle time for one or both of the lines. Especially, considering a more reasonable ASP. The top line guidance does not assume a smooth ramp up to a 4 GWh/yr run rate. The mixed messaging here has been beyond absurd.
Reasonably Approximating 🇺🇸 🇺🇦 🔋 🅰️@bert_gilfoyle

$EOSE A few thoughts. 1. If this new design drives down cycle time, increases throughput, supports redundancies etc., why is it still rated at 2 GWh/yr? 2. If they ramp to a combined 4GWh/yr run rate by EOY, in no world can they make only $300-400m. How do you reconcile this? Significant idle time in one or more lines from time to time? 3. When will the company be requesting an approximately $117M disbursement for this line? 4. Is the company still planning on following through on the DOE Project Amaze? Lines 3 and 4 would need substantial completion by December to qualify for reimbursement. That's $84M of efficient capital on the table. Is the plan that between the improved throughput of Lines 2 and 3, Line 4 is not needed to complete Project Amaze? Go back to question #1.

English
19
0
68
18.5K
Stealth Trading
Stealth Trading@Stealth_Trader1·
@MarketNewsLLC You do know they just appointed someone to the board? They would be dumb to go anywhere at this point...
English
0
0
0
99
🔋Chuck🔋
🔋Chuck🔋@MarketNewsLLC·
$EOSE If I was a baby I’d be scared too that cerb was going to come in jun and dump on me. I guess that’s where money is made, take risks when others are not willing to (will delete if cerb dumps on me)
English
4
1
19
1.6K
Teslaloosa ❎🏠
Teslaloosa ❎🏠@teslaloosa·
Virtually no one knows what their kWh rate is. Except for one friend who's worked for the power company, I don't personally know anyone who knows. Every time I ask people, I get 🤷‍♂️. It's part of why people are hesitant to go EV. What's a kWh? No one knows. ⚡🔋🔌
English
205
2
126
15.6K
Stealth Trading
Stealth Trading@Stealth_Trader1·
@dmottco @realDonaldTrump yo if you don’t get a contract with $EOSE after claiming you want American made. All walk no talk. They are ready to take on the DOD requirements. Get it done! Thank you for your attention to this matter.
English
0
2
9
448
DM
DM@dmottco·
$eose My thoughts on Fick The DOD has approximately 800 domestic installations. Every one of them has a microgrid resilience requirement under EXORD 18-02 — a standing executive order requiring DOD installations to achieve 14 days of energy independence from the commercial grid. That’s not a nice-to-have. It’s a mandatory operational requirement. Current status — almost no DOD installation meets this requirement. The gap between current capability and the 14-day mandate represents hundreds of gigawatt hours of storage that needs to be deployed. At $200-250/kWh ASP for defense grade storage — and DOD pays premium prices for domestic non-flammable secure deployable storage — a program to address even 10% of the 800 installation gap represents potentially $5-10B of hardware revenue over 5-7 years. That’s not speculative demand. That’s a mandatory congressional requirement that DOD is legally obligated to fulfill. The Indensity Defense Spec Sheet Every Indensity specification maps to a defense requirement. Non-flammable — essential for occupied military facilities. Lithium fires on military bases are catastrophic operationally and politically. Indoor rated — forward operating bases and hardened facilities need storage that can be placed inside protected structures. Forklift serviceable — military logistics are built around ISO containers and forklift operations. No cranes needed in forward environments. 25-year lifespan — military infrastructure investments need to outlast political cycles and budget cycles. Domestic manufacturing — Buy American requirements. No Chinese mineral content. Defense Industrial Base qualification. DawnOS with cybersecurity hardening — NIST cybersecurity framework compliance. Network isolation capability. Tamper detection. These are not utility product features. They’re defense product requirements. Fick spent four years as Ambassador at Large for Cyberspace writing the exact cybersecurity standards that defense energy storage systems must meet. He knows precisely what DawnOS needs to do to qualify for DOD deployment. He’s on the board to make sure it does.
English
9
2
75
3.5K
🔋Ben Larson🔋
🔋Ben Larson🔋@Ben_son_of_Lars·
@Shay_Hartis Fireproof American-made LDES with cheap abundant materials 7x YoY growth, $701M backlog + $23.6B pipeline, $625M cash, NDAA/DOD compliant, full domestic content, hockey stick ramp, Line 2 soon, DOE/DOD partner, overseas sales, NY & CA soon
English
1
0
6
376
Shay Hartis
Shay Hartis@Shay_Hartis·
Anyone care to share their opinion on $EOSE?
English
11
0
11
3.7K
The Long Investor
The Long Investor@TheLongInvest·
$BTC will return to its ATH $ETH will return to its ATH $SPY will return to its ATH $AMZN will return to its ATH $GOOG will return to its ATH $NVDA will return to its ATH $MSFT will return to its ATH $META will return to its ATH $TSLA will return to its ATH $UNH will return to its ATH
English
63
30
726
109.3K
Stealth Trading
Stealth Trading@Stealth_Trader1·
@LamarMK Or...Or...now hear me out. SELL THE VEHICLE WITH IT INCLUDED. Tesla is just turning out to be yet another sub company.
English
1
0
1
13
Lamar MK
Lamar MK@LamarMK·
A lot of people don't want to pay $99 a month for FSD. So they don't even try it. Drop the price to $49.99 and suddenly it's an easy decision. Add a 6-month plan for $279 or a yearly plan for $499, and now it's a no-brainer. We saw what happened when Tesla offered the Cybertruck for $59K. Demand took off. Same thing would happen with FSD. Lower the price. Get more people in the door. Let the tech sell itself.
Lamar MK tweet media
English
512
156
2K
97.1K
Stealth Trading
Stealth Trading@Stealth_Trader1·
@LamarMK It will probably cost $80k base. Which is not cooler than a minivan. As you can get a nice minivan for like $50k...so @elonmusk is wrong.
English
0
0
0
4
Lamar MK
Lamar MK@LamarMK·
The minivan era is over. Elon just confirmed Tesla is working on something cooler than a minivan. Many are hoping it's a Cyber SUV built on the Cybertruck platform. Same durability. Same tech. Same futuristic design. This would be the next evolution of what an SUV should be. Who's ready to order theirs?
Lamar MK tweet media
English
643
340
6.3K
602.2K
Stealth Trading
Stealth Trading@Stealth_Trader1·
@Dolphins19845 Such a short minded take. How about buy, sell CCs for premium and 2H26 you make money? Pretty easy game.
English
0
0
0
130
Fin’ StockWillis
Fin’ StockWillis@Dolphins19845·
Time to go night night $EOSE 5.28 is saying you shall no pass Historic run though
English
5
0
12
3.5K
Stealth Trading
Stealth Trading@Stealth_Trader1·
As someone that owns both a $TSLA and $RIVN I will say $TSLA Smokes them in the tech department. Their recognition, FSD, etc. Blows $RIVN out of the water But, $RIVN smokes them in "driver" experience. It drives sooo smooth! The adjustments are nice!
English
0
0
1
36