2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

[MartinAustin]

$318 in pre-market. Bears & shorts are going to have to work hard...

 

[MXWing]

I hope I can stay solvent longer than the market stays irrational on Tesla.

A battle of two analysts.

 

[Lessmog]

Wrong. The car is fully paid for. Elon has been ultra clear about this. Cars do not leave the hands of Tesla unless someone pays for it. It's unclear if Ira will pay for VIN1 or Elon himself. But one of them will buy the car.

Just to nick a little pick ... (NB, I haven't had time to engulf all material on the subject of SN1)

While it seems to be designated to Elon, it is not clear to me that this car actually has left the hands of Tesla, as you put it. I expect it to be one of the 30 on the 28th.

 

[JBRR]

VW r&d chief sees need for more battery production capacity

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Matias]

VW r&d chief sees need for more battery production capacity

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

As has been said ad nauseam, Tesla has huge head start on this.

 

[ValueAnalyst]

Huge battery = lots of charging. It won't be free. The infrastructure will be expensive but Tesla could probably turn a very good profit from supplying the juice. I could picture a few hundred Kauai sized micro grids attached to Supercharger truck stops with 700KWh charging. Could sell the juice for 12c per KWh but generate it at 4c.

Could see Tesla becoming one of the biggest utilities in the world just from solar on superchargers and factories. With all the advantages of solar adjacent to the chargers with little lost to transmission, it should be very profitable. Certainly could make money from model 3 charging as well, but nothing like the semi.

Thank you. How did you calculate the 4c cost per kWh cost to Tesla? What's the marginal cost of electricity if using solar + storage? Isn't it closer to zero?

 

[SPadival]

Something I found on the internets. Not really accurate, but inspiring nevertheless. Bear attack today? Bite me..

 

[Reciprocity]

Thank you. How did you calculate the 4c cost per kWh cost to Tesla? What's the marginal cost of electricity if using solar + storage? Isn't it closer to zero?

Solar panels and batteries are not free so no it's not zero. The 4c is more of a back of napkin cost and it's based on the cost of the panels, batteries, install and maintenance over roughly 25 years divided by total KWh generated, minus some precent lost in inverters and round trips through the batteries. In short, I pulled it out of my arse but it's probably close enough to assume it would be very profitable. I'm sure you could find some info on utility grade solar + battery cost and assume Tesla is 40% cheaper because they are eating their own dog food.

I think someone posted an article about growth in EV used of electricity going from 6TWh to 1,800TWh by 2024. If Tesla has half of that and half charge at superchargers, that's 450TWh x .12c/KWh = 36,000,000,000 per year in net margin. That would make Tesla one of the biggest utilities in the world. The biggest contribution would come from the 300,000 semis driving 120,000 miles per year with very little choice but to charge with Tesla, up to 2MW/shift to go 500 miles.

What I don't get is how they will supply city based superchargers with solar + battery. Not nearly enough room on most roofs for enough solar for a 12+ stall Supercharger. They could just setup some utility sized projects outside each city and offset what is used, and they should, but that is not quite as efficient.

 

[AlMc]

$318 in pre-market. Bears & shorts are going to have to work hard...

Don't poke the bear. Just sit quietly back and enjoy any green days!

 

[Stretch2727]

Wrong. The car is fully paid for. Elon has been ultra clear about this. Cars do not leave the hands of Tesla unless someone pays for it. It's unclear if Ira will pay for VIN1 or Elon himself. But one of them will buy the car.

My comment was in reference to where the car is in the process. Yes it will be sold to Elon, but currently it has just been produced. There were many comments regarding not having Monroney stickers and EPA numbers. These will need to be available to sell the cars.

 

[kbM3]

Solar panels and batteries are not free so no it's not zero. The 4c is more of a back of napkin cost and it's based on the cost of the panels, batteries, install and maintenance over roughly 25 years divided by total KWh generated, minus some precent lost in inverters and round trips through the batteries. In short, I pulled it out of my arse but it's probably close enough to assume it would be very profitable. I'm sure you could find some info on utility grade solar + battery cost and assume Tesla is 40% cheaper because they are eating their own dog food.

I think someone posted an article about growth in EV used of electricity going from 6TWh to 1,800TWh by 2024. If Tesla has half of that and half charge at superchargers, that's 450TWh x .12c/KWh = 36,000,000,000 per year in net margin. That would make Tesla one of the biggest utilities in the world. The biggest contribution would come from the 300,000 semis driving 120,000 miles per year with very little choice but to charge with Tesla, up to 2MW/shift to go 500 miles.

What I don't get is how they will supply city based superchargers with solar + battery. Not nearly enough room on most roofs for enough solar for a 12+ stall Supercharger. They could just setup some utility sized projects outside each city and offset what is used, and they should, but that is not quite as efficient.

That could be a great profit center for Tesla. However, it does have high upfront costs and Tesla is currently capital constrained. I wonder if they may do something like offer pre-paid electricity for the life of the truck.

 

[jhm]

I didn't find any proof the quote about share price was from this year.

Thanks! I've sent the link along to Dana Hull. She is of the impression that Guardian was quoting a recent interview, but she may be unaware of this older quote that puts this into question.

 

[mrdoubleb]

Let's not fool ourselves. The availability of 30 cars/month is not what the market expects. It's a good first sign but there needs to be a follow up. Remember the 5 Model X delivered in September 15 followed by nearly half a year of nothing significant. Should it turn out that the following 6 months Tesla releases on average at most a few hundred Model 3 per month that would be a major disappointment. Therefore it is still too soon to say that those who predicted no deliveries in 2017 were wrong. Because a few hundred, from a business and investor perspective, that's really nothing.

I agree with you, that Tesla has used up just about all the good will the market (or consumers) had with the Model X launch in terms of trusting their delivery dates. So yes, no one should expect a significant TSLA move up related to Model 3 until they start cranking out 1000s per week, reliably, without major recalls or quality issues - so, hopefully, September/October.

Having said that... let`s remember, that during the Model 3 reveal last March, Elon announced the delivery date for mid-2018. A few days (weeks?) later, due to the huge demand, he came back saying they will try the impossible and cut the time to market by half and deliver the car mid-2017. He also shared, that their internal target date is June 30, 2017, that`s what they are communicating to suppliers, but he said he was quite certain, they won`t have volume production until sometime late summer, early fall as they will be bottlenecked by their "unluckiest supplier".

Right now, it seems like they made the impossible possible, not only bringing the car out in half the time, but meeting the admittedly unrealistic deadline of end of June. In my book, having volume production by September is still surpassing expectations and, more importantly, if you look at most analysts original estimates for 2017, they`d agree.

 

[WarpedOne]

That "unluck" can still happen.

 

[ValueAnalyst]

Latest publicly available article fresh off the press:

How Many Electric Vehicles Would It Take To Replace 1 Mbd Of Oil Demand? - Tesla Motors (NASDAQ:TSLA) | Seeking Alpha

Assistance in responding to questions and bear FUD in comments section very much welcome.

 

[MitchJi]

At 150 GWh annual production capacity in 2020, Gigafactory 1 can produce enough battery packs for 2.5 million cars at 60 kWh avg pack size.

And Elon mentioned the 150 GWh target in May 2016, nearly six months before the Grohmann acquisition. Having spent nearly a decade in and around the M&A industry, I know all too well that there are a million ways a deal can fall through until all parties sign the dotted line. So, it is my educated opinion that Elon's guidance did not incorporate any significant Alien Dreadnought improvements that may come about as a result of the Grohmann acquisition.

Why do you continue to believe that Elon's Production Epiphany (alien dreadnaught) has anything to do with Tesla's purchase of Grohmann?

And why are do you continue to believe that that will have any impact on Panasonic's cell manufacturing equipment? Did Panasonic start using Grohmann to help them redesign their equipment, which Elon said is amazing or something similar?

 

[ValueAnalyst]

Why do you continue to believe that Elon's Production Epiphany (alien dreadnaught) has anything to do with Tesla's purchase of Grohmann?

"Tesla Grohmann Automation is a world-leader in highly automated methods of manufacturing."

Tesla Grohmann Automation | Accelerating a Sustainable Energy Future

Tesla may already have had come up with ideas/plans to advance manufacturing (I am not assuming any advancements in my DCF from this), but the Grohmann acquisition will likely add to that (I am not assuming any advancements in my DCF from this either).

We talked about this before, and I know we have differing views on this. For me it basically comes down to: why acquire Grohmann if working with them (i.e. the relationship between the two companies when Elon guided 150 GWh output for Gigafactory 1) would be sufficient. So the decision to acquire has to have additional benefit to Tesla's production capacity. It can't just be "execution is more certain." I agree with that, but that's not enough to acquire the full company. Tesla was just one client, now it's the only client. Say, if 10 Grohmann engineers were working on Tesla projects, now 100 will be working (making up numbers for illustration); so yes, the execution is more likely this way, but it's gotta be more than that.

 

[Reciprocity]

That could be a great profit center for Tesla. However, it does have high upfront costs and Tesla is currently capital constrained. I wonder if they may do something like offer pre-paid electricity for the life of the truck.

Yes, upfront costs will be high, but no one is going to buy a semi without charging and no one is going to buy a model 3 without adequate supercharging. These are not optional things for Tesla, the are integral to their business model. What is new is that they could become profitable by adding solar/battery and paying cost instead of paying retail to a utility.

 

[MitchJi]

Lols renin, if anyone on this forum doesn't need a spokesperson stepping in, it's myusername. I would quite like it if myusername would respond, what's more, I would quite like if myusername's response is an answer to my question, ie, names the year he/she thinks Tesla will fall below 50% ex-China market share in the 200+ mile (EPA standards) pure EV segment.

Fwiw, I'm afraid I can't focus at all on your comment until I hear back from myusername- none of us would want to see myself or the board get distracted from this question and m-u-n's answer, would we? I'll be happy to respond to your comment after myusername answers my question.

Who cares what someone on many ignore lists thinks? The reason we put him there is not only that we don't care but we'd strongly prefer not to know.

 

[winfield100]

Nope. If you actually read the article, he says,



He restates it as:



So he's already wrong on the availability... there will clearly be production Model 3's in July of 2017.

Now, the real question is still...

And so... what volumes of BEVs do you think all of the luxury auto marquees will produce in 2018? 2019? 2020? Which models will ship and at what price points and what volume? What is the marketshare of all of the rest of the auto industry in long range BEVs in 2020 or 2021? I'm curious what marketshare you think Tesla will have versus everyone else, restricting ourselves to vehicles designed and available for purchase in EU and U.S. (ie. Chinese production of scooters and vehicles that cannot pass worldwide homologation excluded).

try asking Montana Skeptic for an answer. All i got were aspersions of my intelligence and character when I pointed out he was over a year off, and also asked if he would update his acceptence of his long range options shorting Tesla going to zero value, a few bots attacked me for that.
(i reported the personal attacks and they were deleted by the mods)