In our Model X, under open and closing doors, the manual says how to release the FWD if there is a loss of power by removing the speaker grill and pulling on the release.
Last edited:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
In our Model X, under open and closing doors, the manual says how to release the FWD if there is a loss of power by removing the speaker grill and pulling on the release.
I do not believe that AES using TE products.
According to their press releases they count among their suppliers Panasonic, Mitsubishi, Samsung SDI and LG Chem, with which they have 1GWh global supply agreement.
Panasonic and AES Announce India's First Large-Scale Battery-Based ES Project
AES and Mitsubishi Corporation to Deliver India’s First Grid-Scale Energy Storage Array to Tata Power DDL
AES Advancion® Fleet Accelerates Energy Storage Market in Europe
LG Chem to Supply Battery Modules for AES Energy Storage Advancion® Solution
Last edited:
It seems that you lost me a while ago.
- The significance of the agreement (which the 500MWh one was) vs. the contract (which the 500MWh one was not) is that first signifies general battery supply agreement by the AMS to use *up to* 500 MWh Tesla batteries for their future projects. The contract indicates more specific arrangement between the parties, with the details of the specific projects.
- The fact that projects from the 50MW portfolio, that was finalized with the announced CIT financing, was also potentially covered in the battery supply agreement AMS signed earlier with Tesla does not "disqualify" from counting these projects now, when the financing is finally sorted out. Not any more than not counting 40MW/160MWh AES provided facility to be owned and operated by SDG&E, only because batteries for this facility could have been potentially covered by the Global Gigawatt-Hour Agreement announced by AES and LG Chem back in December of 2015. I can't even believe that we are discussing this.
- I apologize that my post did not come with the small print disclaimers that can potentially prevent you from playing word games with it. The point is that the projects I counted toward the scorecard had enough specificity and finality to be counted *now*, not at the time when other agreements were announced that either did not address financing, or were just general supply agreements. This is the context I used the word backlog in, to try to explain (lost cause) this concept to you.
- I am still waiting for an answer to my original question: "Projects in development but without financing, I am sure you would agree, can't be counted as a backlog, can they?"
Last edited:
larmor
Active Member
Long time ago, in a galaxy far far away, i had an opportunity to work with some very intelligent and hard working people. They were able to find the center line in a lumen of a viscus in the body-- aorta, colon, etc. This is actually a very difficult task. Even now some cars ping pong in their lane trying to keep the center line.
At that time volume reconstruction of data sets tooks hours to days. Fast forward one and half decades, and computing processing power and CAD algorithms have greatly accelerated. My assumption: the video released by tesla shows their algorithm can recognize and appropriately react to identified objects. Now they just need to feed in more situations.
The only question remains, will AI be used in situations where surrounding cars and drivers are fickle minded, -- ie they camp out in your blind spot not letting you pass, yet clearly there is a space. AI can be used, but i'm sure needs alot of example situations to learn from. Regular traffic lights, and intersections follow basic rules and are dependent on the sensors used, while highway traffic lane selection, etc are high order processes where the rules are fuzzier.
So you are saying that Mercedes engineers are so good that they can completely compensate for a 500 pound (+) engine in terms of safety but not good enough that they could design something safer without that engine being present?
erthquake
Active Member
For the most part, I get the same feeling as you: Tesla is not as close as we hope and they say they are. However, my (admittedly very limited) knowledge of neural net processing leads me to wonder if progress toward level 5 autonomy will be like an S-curve. It's slow in the beginning as data is collected and the algorithms improve, but then improvements begin to rapidly accelerate. In that case, we may be deceiving ourselves by trying to linearly extrapolate Tesla's current progress instead of recognizing that we're just early in the S-curve.
At any rate, I'm not yet convinced that autonomy is going to be the goldmine predicted by Jonas and others, and it's not affecting my investment decisions. Auto manufacturing and Tesla energy are reason enough to be very bullish for me.
You mean like the 50MW project was specifically listed in the original announcement? Which everyone except you is calling a contract?
It does if the list was based on 'projects announced in the last 30 days'. And if the project was already announced in 2015 and 2016.
Of course they can't. It's not in the backlog unless the purchase order has been signed.
erthquake
Active Member
Do you think he retweeted to validate and support her? Or was it to taunt the shorts? That is, "How you like me now Mod expurgated
Last edited by a moderator:
sundaymorning
Active Member
ValueAnalyst
Closed
Has anyone done any work around the theoretical limit of Gigafactory 1 output?
For example, can Tesla ramp it up to 10-20 million cars per year just by adding lines and speeding them up?
What is the limiting factor?
I know that the current output target is 150kWh/year by 2020 and that it makes business sense to build gigafactories in other continents instead of pushing GF1 to its theoretical limit.
But if Tesla had to stick to one gigafactory, what's the max output they can achieve?
For example, can Tesla ramp it up to 10-20 million cars per year just by adding lines and speeding them up?
What is the limiting factor?
I know that the current output target is 150kWh/year by 2020 and that it makes business sense to build gigafactories in other continents instead of pushing GF1 to its theoretical limit.
But if Tesla had to stick to one gigafactory, what's the max output they can achieve?
Reuters is out with an article that smells BS
Tesla’s big Model 3 bet rides on risky assembly line strategy
Tesla’s big Model 3 bet rides on risky assembly line strategy
jpm supposedly updated model for tesla today. please post a summary esp for q1 if you have it. thanks.
ValueAnalyst
Closed
Was the exclusive call with "an invited group of investors" noted in the article done as part of the secondary?
The only macro that has some impact on TSLA is oil.
The remaining macro factors have transitory effect, if any, on TSLA.
Tesla’s (TSLA) Sell Rating Reaffirmed at Goldman Sachs Group Inc
What's interesting here isn't the reality removed price target from GS - it's the notes about institutions adding in Q4.
"Hedge funds and other institutional investors have recently made changes to their positions in the company. FMR LLC boosted its position in shares of Tesla by 13.3% in the fourth quarter. FMR LLC now owns 22,050,401 shares of the electric vehicle producer’s stock worth $4,711,950,000 after buying an additional 2,582,730 shares during the period. Baillie Gifford & Co. boosted its position in shares of Tesla by 3.5% in the fourth quarter. Baillie Gifford & Co. now owns 13,289,548 shares of the electric vehicle producer’s stock worth $2,839,843,000 after buying an additional 454,467 shares during the period. Norges Bank bought a new position in shares of Tesla during the fourth quarter worth approximately $94,658,000. Renaissance Technologies LLC bought a new position in shares of Tesla during the fourth quarter worth approximately $66,541,000. Finally, Sumitomo Mitsui Asset Management Company LTD boosted its position in shares of Tesla by 578.7% in the third quarter. Sumitomo Mitsui Asset Management Company LTD now owns 281,004 shares of the electric vehicle producer’s stock worth $57,333,000 after buying an additional 239,600 shares during the period. Institutional investors and hedge funds own 57.29% of the company’s stock."
Norges bank entering a new position in TSLA seems interesting to me, given the amount of capital they manage.
Norges Bank - Wikipedia
"Norges Bank / Noregs Bank is the central bank of Norway. Apart from having traditional central bank responsibilities such as financial stability and price stability, it manages The Government Pension Fund of Norway, a stabilization fund that may be the world's largest sovereign wealth fund.[1] "
Renaissance is the most succesful fund in the world measured in return. Opened a new position during Q4.
Renaissance Technologies - Wikipedia
"Renaissance's flagship Medallion fund, which is run mostly for fund employees,[7] "is famed for one of the best records in investing history, returning more than 35 percent annualized over a 20-year span."[4] From 1994 through mid-2014 it averaged a 71.8% annual return.[8] Renaissance offers two portfolios to outside investors—Renaissance Institutional Equities Fund (RIEF) and Renaissance Institutional Diversified Alpha (RIDA).[9]"
What's interesting here isn't the reality removed price target from GS - it's the notes about institutions adding in Q4.
"Hedge funds and other institutional investors have recently made changes to their positions in the company. FMR LLC boosted its position in shares of Tesla by 13.3% in the fourth quarter. FMR LLC now owns 22,050,401 shares of the electric vehicle producer’s stock worth $4,711,950,000 after buying an additional 2,582,730 shares during the period. Baillie Gifford & Co. boosted its position in shares of Tesla by 3.5% in the fourth quarter. Baillie Gifford & Co. now owns 13,289,548 shares of the electric vehicle producer’s stock worth $2,839,843,000 after buying an additional 454,467 shares during the period. Norges Bank bought a new position in shares of Tesla during the fourth quarter worth approximately $94,658,000. Renaissance Technologies LLC bought a new position in shares of Tesla during the fourth quarter worth approximately $66,541,000. Finally, Sumitomo Mitsui Asset Management Company LTD boosted its position in shares of Tesla by 578.7% in the third quarter. Sumitomo Mitsui Asset Management Company LTD now owns 281,004 shares of the electric vehicle producer’s stock worth $57,333,000 after buying an additional 239,600 shares during the period. Institutional investors and hedge funds own 57.29% of the company’s stock."
Norges bank entering a new position in TSLA seems interesting to me, given the amount of capital they manage.
Norges Bank - Wikipedia
"Norges Bank / Noregs Bank is the central bank of Norway. Apart from having traditional central bank responsibilities such as financial stability and price stability, it manages The Government Pension Fund of Norway, a stabilization fund that may be the world's largest sovereign wealth fund.[1] "
Renaissance is the most succesful fund in the world measured in return. Opened a new position during Q4.
Renaissance Technologies - Wikipedia
"Renaissance's flagship Medallion fund, which is run mostly for fund employees,[7] "is famed for one of the best records in investing history, returning more than 35 percent annualized over a 20-year span."[4] From 1994 through mid-2014 it averaged a 71.8% annual return.[8] Renaissance offers two portfolios to outside investors—Renaissance Institutional Equities Fund (RIEF) and Renaissance Institutional Diversified Alpha (RIDA).[9]"
Last edited:
ValueAnalyst
Closed
Anyone know why Goldman is reiterating its sell rating once a week? Especially in the face of all the high-quality large institutional buys/adds in 4Q17? This is highly unusual. Could they have written a large portion of the calls?
My bet is nothing : the lineup was changed significantly last week already. I seem to remember that they've been late a few days with telegraphed price increases more than once. Helps shake out the last holdouts who were contemplating the car with the price increase looming. The price increase will come soon to make sure gross margin stays in line with Q1.
According to the GTM US Energy Monitor: 2016 Year in Review and Q1 2017 Executive Summary, there were total of 229.9 MWh of energy storage deployed in US in Q4 2016. According to the Q4 2016 shareholder letter, TE deployments were 98 MWh, all of it in US (80 MWh at Mira Loma Substation and the rest at Kauai). TE US market share - 42.6%. Clearly struggling in "crowded field with a lot of competitors and solutions"...
Last edited:
Register for a free GTM Research Webinar: U.S. Energy Storage Pipeline Surpasses 10 GW, But How Much Will Get Built?
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
