Maybe not so stupid if Model T held the record for ramp over 100 years? I'm not saying it did, but that seems to be the background comparison.I find a little bit weird (stupid?) to compare a ramp of a car in 2017 to a ramp of a car in 1908... Apples and oranges.
I guess Model S demand is infinitely higher than demand for any car in 1000 A.D. as well, how about that?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Not sure whom you are talking about as I don't see them anymore - most probably they are already on my list. Come join me here at this safe, quiet, troll-free place!
RationalOptimist
Member
Context. 5k a week on model 3 is a 250k/year run rate. If they can do that in next six months, it means more than tripling the current production capacity of the company. If they can achieve that in such a short period of time, in a company building complicated hardware, it would be a truly amazing achievement. The call really explained how this ramp up is fundamentally different from prior ones. They are creating an integrated, automated process that has not existed in the world before. It's made up of thousands of different processes. If they can achieve it, they will be the only car company in the world with a system for creating PROFITABLE electric cars for the masses. And they will be on track for growth rates unprecedented in the auto industry in a century. Still big ifs. But amidst the relentless negativity of those whose world view can't encompass the type of change Tesla is ushering in, it's easy to lose context. That's why there was the emphasis on the 100x growth of the last five years.
Even if you only had the evidence of Tesla's track record, you could believe. Throw in the fact that SpaceX has outperformed every national government program in history, and you really should be able to conclude that there is remarkable engineering vision at work here. We're witnessing a historically unique transformation in all its painful, intimate amazingness. Speaking personally, I don't want to invest on the wrong side of history.
Even if you only had the evidence of Tesla's track record, you could believe. Throw in the fact that SpaceX has outperformed every national government program in history, and you really should be able to conclude that there is remarkable engineering vision at work here. We're witnessing a historically unique transformation in all its painful, intimate amazingness. Speaking personally, I don't want to invest on the wrong side of history.
Paracelsus
Active Member
Southern California Edison calls for 1/4 of California's vehicles to be electric and the implementation of an additional 10 GW of storage for California to meet its goals. I appreciate their call for a conversion of all natural gas water heaters to electric-only as well. California is as far out in front on addressing climate issues as Tesla is on electric vehicle and battery storage solutions. And SCE & California appear to be planning their path with the successful tools Tesla has provided - to include SCE's Mira Loma storage facility as a model.
Edison says California needs one-quarter of its vehicles to be electric to meet climate change goals – Orange County Register
Edison says California needs one-quarter of its vehicles to be electric to meet climate change goals – Orange County Register
It would certainly be stupid were it not for:I find a little bit weird (stupid?) to compare a ramp of a car in 2017 to a ramp of a car in 1908... Apples and oranges.
I guess Model S demand is infinitely higher than demand for any car in 1000 A.D. as well, how about that?
Austria, China, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Japan, Portugal, Korea and Spain- have set quotas for BEV's
India, France, UK, Norway, Netherlands- have set dates after which ICE cannot be sold.
So comparison with the Model T is really stupid. That was before widespread motor vehicle use.
Now we have in these countries alone passenger car sales in 2016 of:
sales-statistics
To simplify the comparison here are the numbers for:
EU28+EFTA. 15,160,239
India 2,966,637
Japan 4,146,459
China 24,376,902
Total 46,650,237
So let's assume Tesla sells zero cars anywhere else in the world. Zero in the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Mexico, the whole continents of South America and Africa. Zero, nada, zilch. After all none of these others has set dates for elimination of ICE sales nor quotas fro BEV's.
The world's largest automaker in 2016 was Toyota. Their entire unit production of passenger cars, trucks and busses was 10,213.486
So, is it plausible that the only significant automaker producing pure BEV's could grow to produce sales in the declared countries of ~20% market share in the foreseeable future, thus achieving the same unit sales in BEV passenger sales that the world's largest automaker ddi in 2106 for all motor vehicles? That is one question.
When we add all those other markets that ahem not yet declared quotas or deadlines is it likely that Tesla could sell more than 10,500,000 units annually by, say, 2030?
if you think that implausible then don't buy TSLA.
If you realize that such an accomplishment is Model T-like, but faster because the world is already electrified and motorized so adoption of BEV's will be faster than was Model T, then maybe it is not quite so crazy to buy Tesla.
This question is not about only Model 3, although that is our question of this moment. It is about the transformation that is coming globally. For some reason many people cannot cope with the significance of this change. What we have seen so far is trivial. Is anybody other than Tesla even close to the actual reality? Has anybody other than Tesla stepping up to the magnitude of the 'fueling' question?
I think Tesla can and probably will have a global passenger market share of 10% in 2030. The global passenger car sales in 2016 were 69,464,432 so Tesla would need ~7,000,000 sales to do that, assuming that BEV sales do not actually cause a faster replacement cycle than at present and thus the 2016 market will be the 2020 market. That would not make Tesla the world's largest. Anything better would do so.
So, faster buildup than Model T? Very possible.
Can Tesla do that? What do we think?
Bears will say the legacy makers can convert to BEV's but as all those buggy makers were expected to beat Ford.
Bulls will say Tesla can do better than Ford did.
From my perspective Tesla will be a handsome investment even if the other manufacturers do become fast adopters.
BTW, this ignores the real growth story which probably is stationary storage, solar roofs and public utility peaker replacement. Those will dwarf the car market for some time to come. In that arena Tesla has lots of competition. What should be that value? Frankly, it's easier to examine passenger cars.
When Elon pulls out the sleeping bag, the shorts are history
Off Shore
Off Topic Member
The second question was actually rhetorical; I had already enrolled him/her.
Krugerrand
Meow
He also stated a few weeks ago he was depressed about the situation at GF but now felt confident on the progress and outcome of their work.
People will hear what they want to hear rather than what was said.
[QUOTE="sundaymorning, post: 2390151, member: 15298"
As far as the bottleneck is concerned, it appears that Elon understands where the issue is, which contractor dropped the ball, and lines 1&2 are being worked on by Tesla’s best engineers at the GF. [/QUOTE]
I'm confident that the bottleneck(s) will be resolved over the next few months and Tesla will go on in 2018 to produce a great many M3s, if not the 350K which earlier predictions of 500K total cars in 2018 would require.
However, I was dismayed by the dog ate my homework excuse by Elon that a critical contractor dropped the ball. Thus requiring his best SW developers to parachute in and rewrite all the contractors software and others to rework hardware. This outcome could never have happened this way if the contractors work was being supervised effectively by Tesla. The contractor must have been working on their portion of the battery pack production line for 9 - 15 months and it was only learned they had failed a few weeks ago? IMO Musk, JB and other top level Tesla execs shouldn't consider Production Hell to be over, until they understand and fix their managing/supervising practices on this particular contractor project.
As far as the bottleneck is concerned, it appears that Elon understands where the issue is, which contractor dropped the ball, and lines 1&2 are being worked on by Tesla’s best engineers at the GF. [/QUOTE]
I'm confident that the bottleneck(s) will be resolved over the next few months and Tesla will go on in 2018 to produce a great many M3s, if not the 350K which earlier predictions of 500K total cars in 2018 would require.
However, I was dismayed by the dog ate my homework excuse by Elon that a critical contractor dropped the ball. Thus requiring his best SW developers to parachute in and rewrite all the contractors software and others to rework hardware. This outcome could never have happened this way if the contractors work was being supervised effectively by Tesla. The contractor must have been working on their portion of the battery pack production line for 9 - 15 months and it was only learned they had failed a few weeks ago? IMO Musk, JB and other top level Tesla execs shouldn't consider Production Hell to be over, until they understand and fix their managing/supervising practices on this particular contractor project.
Bob fits, re you’re comment,
“I'm confident that the bottleneck(s) will be resolved over the next few months and Tesla will go on in 2018 to produce a great many M3s, if not the 350K which earlier predictions of 500K total cars in 2018 would require.
However, I was dismayed by the dog ate my homework excuse by Elon that a critical contractor dropped the ball. Thus requiring his best SW developers to parachute in and rewrite all the contractors software and others to rework hardware. This outcome could never have happened this way if the contractors work was being supervised effectively by Tesla. The contractor must have been working on their portion of the battery pack production line for 9 - 15 months and it was only learned they had failed a few weeks ago? IMO Musk, JB and other top level Tesla execs shouldn't consider Production Hell to be over, until they understand and fix their managing/supervising practices on this particular contractor project.”
Actually Elon would agree with some of what you wrote here. When an analyst later brought up the notion of this sounding like the fault of the supplier, Elon explicitly said he considers this Tesla’s responsibility and not the subcontractors. He cited the point you’ve made, it was for Tesla to be more active in verifying the suppliers statements that they were on track and catching it sooner, and to have choose their suppliers well.
“I'm confident that the bottleneck(s) will be resolved over the next few months and Tesla will go on in 2018 to produce a great many M3s, if not the 350K which earlier predictions of 500K total cars in 2018 would require.
However, I was dismayed by the dog ate my homework excuse by Elon that a critical contractor dropped the ball. Thus requiring his best SW developers to parachute in and rewrite all the contractors software and others to rework hardware. This outcome could never have happened this way if the contractors work was being supervised effectively by Tesla. The contractor must have been working on their portion of the battery pack production line for 9 - 15 months and it was only learned they had failed a few weeks ago? IMO Musk, JB and other top level Tesla execs shouldn't consider Production Hell to be over, until they understand and fix their managing/supervising practices on this particular contractor project.”
Actually Elon would agree with some of what you wrote here. When an analyst later brought up the notion of this sounding like the fault of the supplier, Elon explicitly said he considers this Tesla’s responsibility and not the subcontractors. He cited the point you’ve made, it was for Tesla to be more active in verifying the suppliers statements that they were on track and catching it sooner, and to have choose their suppliers well.
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I don't believe the Model 3 news changes the fundamental direction of the company, but there is a good chance that it will have a destabilizing effect until the ramp is improving visibly, which I doubt will happen until some time in 2018. And the effects may still linger until Tesla hits 20-25% margins on the Model 3 program, which hopefully it will be able to report by late 2018 or early 2019.
Also, as with the Model X delays, the confidence hit is likely to have ripple effects on other parts of the business -- including confidence in Tesla's ability to ramp the Semi, Solar Roof, Y, FSD, Powerpack/Powerwall, Pickup, etc. It could also aggravate the market's reactions to any early quality problems the Model 3 experiences, which are almost inevitable with a new model. On the other hand, the ramp delay may have a silver lining in terms of allowing Tesla time to address quality issues experienced by employee-owned vehicles before the Model 3 hits high volume production. Finally, it may cause Tesla to slow down major capital outlays on other GFs, which could impact the speed at which Tesla grows, although it will still be expanding at a mind-boggling pace for the foreseeable future.
It was a relief to learn that Powerwall/Powerpack production is not impacted by the pack production issues experienced by the Model 3. Perhaps good news on TE from Puerto Rico, Australia and elsewhere along with the Semi reveal will buffer the effects of the Model 3 news to some extent. But since most investors don't seem to react much to TE news or product announcements it may not have that much of an effect.
The same is true with the Solar Roof ramp beginning next year -- very good news IMO for long-term investors but may get ignored by the market in the short term.
Visible improvements in AP2 are a good sign, but Elon's comments predicting AP2 achieving only human-level FSD performance will probably not be well received (even with the promises of swapping processors if needed for past FSD purchasers). It will be interesting to see what Tesla has up its sleeve in terms of FSD development, but again I think the market will be skeptical until it sees real-world performance.
So IMO the bottom line is Tesla's long term prospects still look as bright as ever. Two or three years from now the Model 3 ramp issues may just be a dim memory. But we could be in for some rough sledding over the next 6-12 months.
On a side note, @SBenson you were absolutely right that 500K in 2018 was a pipe dream. Whether I was insane or not for believing that was achievable is a judgment I will leave to mental health professionals.
Also, as with the Model X delays, the confidence hit is likely to have ripple effects on other parts of the business -- including confidence in Tesla's ability to ramp the Semi, Solar Roof, Y, FSD, Powerpack/Powerwall, Pickup, etc. It could also aggravate the market's reactions to any early quality problems the Model 3 experiences, which are almost inevitable with a new model. On the other hand, the ramp delay may have a silver lining in terms of allowing Tesla time to address quality issues experienced by employee-owned vehicles before the Model 3 hits high volume production. Finally, it may cause Tesla to slow down major capital outlays on other GFs, which could impact the speed at which Tesla grows, although it will still be expanding at a mind-boggling pace for the foreseeable future.
It was a relief to learn that Powerwall/Powerpack production is not impacted by the pack production issues experienced by the Model 3. Perhaps good news on TE from Puerto Rico, Australia and elsewhere along with the Semi reveal will buffer the effects of the Model 3 news to some extent. But since most investors don't seem to react much to TE news or product announcements it may not have that much of an effect.
The same is true with the Solar Roof ramp beginning next year -- very good news IMO for long-term investors but may get ignored by the market in the short term.
Visible improvements in AP2 are a good sign, but Elon's comments predicting AP2 achieving only human-level FSD performance will probably not be well received (even with the promises of swapping processors if needed for past FSD purchasers). It will be interesting to see what Tesla has up its sleeve in terms of FSD development, but again I think the market will be skeptical until it sees real-world performance.
So IMO the bottom line is Tesla's long term prospects still look as bright as ever. Two or three years from now the Model 3 ramp issues may just be a dim memory. But we could be in for some rough sledding over the next 6-12 months.
On a side note, @SBenson you were absolutely right that 500K in 2018 was a pipe dream. Whether I was insane or not for believing that was achievable is a judgment I will leave to mental health professionals.
On a side note, @SBenson you were absolutely right that 500K in 2018 was a pipe dream. Whether I was insane or not for believing that was achievable is a judgment I will leave to mental health professionals.
Pipe dream? Oh My God!. Look - every media outlet, analyst on wall street and Tesla fan read this as "this is what they are going to do". The tease in 2016 was "100k-200k Model 3 in 2017 H2" by Elon himself. That itself is a cold-start 200k-400k run-rate. Inconceivable!
This is market manipulation at its finest - by "everyone". Come on - just writing it off as a pipe dream when in fact it was most likely a specific "anchor" to build a media hypestorm over (look up hundreds of press articles regarding moving 500k from 2020 to 2018). This is material. And it speaks to both culpable board members, stock analysts, everyone. This is not proper corporate governance. But this is "how we do it" in the finance world. Running stocks and hope the companies keep up. Nice.
Waiting4M3
Active Member
Not just a sleeping bag, he pulled out the tent this time.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
