Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
1. China and GF3.........wow that will be some growth!
2. Solar and battery's...wow that will be some growth!
3. ModelY......................wow that will be some growth!
4. Semi and pick up...while a way's off...wow that will be some growth!
5. Full self driving if possible.....OMG!...will that be some growth!

Ironically Bloomberg Businessweek has two auto company to watch for in 2020 and they are Toyota and VW. On VW they are excited because they are planning to release a gazillion EVs in 2020 and how they plan to overtake Tesla.

Agree that VW is a company to watch in EV space... but the list above says Tesla is set for a blockbuster 2020 and if you are interested in auto, Tesla is THE company to watch for.. while every other OEM will just react.
 
As I understand, the water supply issue isn't a manufacturing issue, it's a residential issue.

As in, they can't get enough water to build new housing for workers.
Yes, specifically you can't get a building permit without demonstrating that you have purchased water rights. Which are scarce. This is at least part of the reason Tesla chose to build Model Y at Fremont.

I think the only way GF1 expands in the future is through increased automation and robotic tooling. That will allow new production while keeping the total headcount steady.
 
I also suspect that they'll need more space for their new Tesla cell lines in order to meet Model Y battery needs in 2020

If they are at 13 lines and can fit 20, they are covered for cell space. If each line has its own oven and they are full, it might make sense to sacrifice 8% of the production capacity in the short term to allow an up to 16x expansion factor assuming Maxwell dry electrode tech.
Rumors from last year:
[Discussion] Interesting Comment on GF1 bottlenecks : teslamotors
 
Truckee water rights are a commodity bought and sold on the open market. The process for acquiring them is straightforward. 45000 acre feet per year are available. That's over 40 million gallons per day.

Water Rights | Truckee Meadows Water Authority

Prices on Truckee water have been falling significantly, not rising. As of 2016, the cost was $7500 per acre foot per year (that is, $7500 buys the rights in perpetuity, rather than it being a recurring cost). That's $8.40 per gallon of water in perpetuity:

Truckee River Surface Water Market Indicator: Prices and Activity Still Restrained

That's $840 for perpetual water rights for a typical, water-inefficient home. Not limiting. Even if prices for some reason increase tenfold, it's still not limiting.
The 40 million gallons per day equates to about 400k typical, water-inefficient homes. Not limiting.
Even if these are exhausted, there's vastly more water available through other methods, as previously described - Pyramid Lake desalination (which would be a good thing for Pyramid Lake, ecologically, as well as producing salt), funding water efficiency/recycling in Reno (and Tesla's worker communities themselves), rooftop water collection and storage, etc etc. Even trucking in water would not be a limiting cost to Tesla's expansion.

We've had this conversation before, and it always comes to the same conclusion: water cannot and will not limit GF1 expansion. It is, however, a cost that Tesla has to pay if they want to expand.
 
Last edited:
More vehicle capacity is far more important for profits than more depreciation.
I don’t see Tesla limiting it’s 7-8k per week Fremont Model 3 lines and 7-8k per week Fremont Model Y lines to just a max combined capacity of 10k per week due to battery supply limits coming from GF1. Particularly given Elon said he is working off the assumption Model Y release will not reduce Model 3 demand.

Free cash flow is now so strong it can invest in GF1, GF2, GF3 and Fremont at the same time while remaining cash flow positive.
Elon also said that Model Y will enter Volume Production of 1,000 units per week by Summer of 2020. That's well inside the limitations of GF1 battery pack production, even with 7-8K Models 3 per week. When they need more batteries, it'll be done in the most capital efficient way possible. That means new proceses, not new/expanded building.

Again, and this is not in dispute, GF4/EU is Tesla's priority for capital spending in 2020. I expect FCA/Eurozone C02 credits to cover that capital expense. Once that facility is building product and paying its way, Tesla will turn to building their next highest priority, which may by Cybertruck/Pickup with a new US Factory and Bty workshop.

Elon's also said Summer 2020 for the Plaid Model S, although I expect that's an upgrade to the existing S/X lines at Fremont, with the new Roadster being added there too. The Plaid powertrain will be common to these vehicles, why not the bty pack too w. 2x100kwh packs for the Roadster in a dual layer design. Elon says 5-10K Roadsters/yr so that's easily worked into the existing underused capacity.

Keep in mind, that GF3/Shanghai buildout is a separate issue because it is financed by non-recourse local debt. I expect them to continue the build out of GF3 continuously until they are at 20K/wk 3/Y capacity. That means another parallel building for Model Y, plus another Bty workshop, at a minimum.

All this means Tesla could be at 30K/wk (1.5M/yr) capacity by the start of 2022.
 
If they are at 13 lines and can fit 20, they are covered for cell space. If each line has its own oven and they are full, it might make sense to sacrifice 8% of the production capacity in the short term to allow an up to 16x expansion factor assuming Maxwell dry electrode tech.
Rumors from last year:
[Discussion] Interesting Comment on GF1 bottlenecks : teslamotors

Possibly. We're sort of guessing blindly at what Tesla has used all that space for, as it's constantly in flux - and not just for cell lines. My general sense is that there just isn't much left. But I could certainly be wrong.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: mongo
Whew.....caught back up.
It is fun to read all the "victory lap" post's.

Let me add mine. Since I am sorta new here I was not around for the 2013 run up. But for those that were....is this not different in several major way's?

1. China and GF3.........wow that will be some growth!
2. Solar and battery's...wow that will be some growth!
3. ModelY......................wow that will be some growth!
4. Semi and pick up...while a way's off...wow that will be some growth!
5. Full self driving if possible.....OMG!...will that be some growth!

This stock by almost any measure is a freaking steal....I pinch myself that I was able to get in when I did.

Have a good weekend!

p.s. the service center in Bloomington Ill is having a open house today from noon to 6 pm ....I'm going...anyone else?

Different in one significant way: risk
 
Autonomy Levels (my thoughts)

Safety interventions seem self-explanatory (any required human interventions to prevent an accident).
Nuisance interventions (car gets stuck somewhere / stranded, needlessly delays traffic, too hesitant, can't find parking garage exit...) These may be one of the most difficult problems of all considering all of the possible edge cases that seem to require human levels of cognition)

Level 1: Works with Supervision:
- Seems easy (relatively:) to achieve
- Safety interventions < 1 / 100 miles (although Elon simplifying it to red lights and stop signs gives me pause).
- Nuisance interventions < 1 / 100 miles

Level 1.5 - Works very well for 10k -50k miles at a stretch (this becomes a dangerous area when humans will just figure it's perfect because it never seems to make a mistake and stop supervising).

Level 2: Unsupervised
- Much more difficult
- Safety interventions < 1 / 5M miles (massive leap)
- Nuisance interventions < 1 / 100 miles ???

Level 3 :Regulator approved
- Technologically no change from Level 2

Level 4 : No driver (this is obviously required for TAAS, and may be surprisingly difficult)
- Safety Interventions < 1 / 5-10M miles
- Nuisance interventions < 1 / 10k miles ?? This is an area Waymo has found surprisingly difficult, and I am slightly concerned Elon has not addressed). I'm just guessing 1 / 10k miles. Even this often occurring would still annoy others (hopefully not too much) but with remote operators to help out maybe this many nuisance interventions required would allow deployment?

Thoughts?
 
I was wondering why the Q3 letter listed production capability for Models S & X as 90,000 per year when previously the capacity had been stated as 100,000.

It makes sense if that missing 10,000 capacity is being earmarked for the new Roadster !

Since Elon mentioned Plaid S is being targeted for mid year 2020, we might see the Roadster around the same time ! (No wonder he said Q3 and Q4 of 2020 would be amazing)
 
IIRC, Elon gave 2021 as the year for any production from GF4. I wouldn't expect anything even close to Shanghai timeline, probably more like 2X, so fall or 4Q 2021 would be my guess.

My guess is spring or summer of 2021, but I'm well aware that that puts me solidly on the optimistic side of timelines. My suspicion is that while Tesla hasn't announced the location yet, they're extremely active behind the scenes working on it already, including an extra emphasis on how to avoid / compensate for regulatory hassles.
 
I was wondering why the Q3 letter listed production capability for Models S & X as 90,000 per year when previously the capacity had been stated as 100,000.

It makes sense if that missing 10,000 capacity is being earmarked for the new Roadster !

Since Elon mentioned Plaid S is being targeted for mid year 2020, we might see the Roadster around the same time ! (No wonder he said Q3 and Q4 of 2020 would be amazing)

They lost capacity when they switched to all vehicles being 100kWh.
 
Whew.....caught back up.
It is fun to read all the "victory lap" post's.

Let me add mine. Since I am sorta new here I was not around for the 2013 run up. But for those that were....is this not different in several major way's?

1. China and GF3.........wow that will be some growth!
2. Solar and battery's...wow that will be some growth!
3. ModelY......................wow that will be some growth!
4. Semi and pick up...while a way's off...wow that will be some growth!
5. Full self driving if possible.....OMG!...will that be some growth!

This stock by almost any measure is a freaking steal....I pinch myself that I was able to get in when I did.

Have a good weekend!

p.s. the service center in Bloomington Ill is having a open house today from noon to 6 pm ....I'm going...anyone else?

Bloomington Illinois service center? Nice! Love the Normal Supper Charger.
 
I didn't find any mention of this repayment method in my searches It may be they would keep your status active, but I thought payments have to come from your paycheck. So I guess it you wrote the (ex)employer a check every month, they could remit it to the fund manager.
It appeared that you paid directly to the fund. I guess this varies with the fund.
 
BTW, it would be wrong to assume climate change with uniformly change local climate. Some areas the rainfall will increase and in some decrease. IIRC, in NW the rainfall would indeed go down helping Solar.

Global warming disrupts many normal climate patterns and normally reliable ocean currents that have established over the centuries. So not only will some areas get wetter and others drier, but there will also be reversals of those trends as AGW impacts climate over time. So it's really impossible to make absolute statements that one area will be wetter and another will be drier because of AGW. These things will change over time. The changes in *climate* are generally not understood until *after* we witness them. And by that time other processes may have developed in the oceans or atmosphere that modify or flip the previously observed changes.

I would say science understands AGW pretty well but getting a good handle on how it will change local climates is a vastly more complicated challenge. Perhaps we will get a handle on it in the coming decade by using AI and massive amounts of data and computing power. Even that might not work very well because, if AGW progresses at the rate I think it will, the changes are likely to be farther reaching than can be accurately modeled with existing climate data.
 
Last edited:
was wondering why the Q3 letter listed production capability for Models S & X as 90,000 per year when previously the capacity had been stated as 100,000.

It makes sense if that missing 10,000 capacity is being earmarked for the new Roadster !

They lost capacity when they switched to all vehicles being 100kWh.

They also reduced the number of shifts. So they are making slightly fewer cars, with on average larger battery packs, with fewer man hours.