2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

[mmd]

Commuters don't use super chargers. They should be charging at home. Superchargers are only for road trips.

As @RobStark pointed out, it is about enabling people who can't charge at home.

Haven't you noticed that no one here cares about your "hybrids are great" point of view? This is a Tesla forum, meaning that most of the folks here are interested in BEV, not hybrids. Let's see how well the new Ioniq sells compared to the Model 3 and then it might be worth discussing.

Do you own a Model S? Do you have experience supercharging? Or, as usual, are you just cherry picking the most negative edge case to try to prove your negative bias?

You may be right about first part. Still, there are members who wear the facade of a greenie, and some may genuinely be so. There is a slight chance that some may be interested in actually reducing global warming, not just the share price and Tesla. Ever since it dawned upon me how hybrids are so much more efficient in reducing emissions in a world with scarce battery supplies, I have become more a hybrid fan than the large battery pack electric cars. If you don't believe battery scarcity, see Dicaprio's documentary "Before the Flood". Elon is waiting for 100 Giga factories (an underestimate, imho) to start the full steam transition to zero emission vehicles. With hybrids, that can start with just 3-5 GF at 50GWh/year each.
Since a long range BEV slows down the path to reducing global warming, what is the point?

Regarding SC slow charging: The entire thread is full of user accounts of slow charging, and some with good experiences as well. I pointed to one, which isn't the worst. You didn't want me to link to each of them, did you? You could browse on your own. I haven't read all posts myself. While your story is one data point, so are those. For example, read @Eclectic 's post on the first page. He couldn't use his Tesla due to slow charging and wait times. He ended up driving his Ford F-150. Is that helping the emissions? A hybrid has no such issues. In fact. total range is way more than even pure ICE.
There was obviously SC congestion; that's why Tesla has imposed those limits, written letters to SC abusers and are saying will double SC stalls. Your story of no waits can't be the norm.

BTW, I'm sorry, I forgot to add the average wait times to get to a super charger stall, and drive times to super chargers in the city. I looked at the SC map (with the projected ones) and the hydrogen re-fueling station map. They both appear to be equally sparse/dense in Bay area and LA. Driving time and distance to SC won't be negligible. Extra distance means extra charging.
While the H2 stations will fill to 100% in 5 mins guaranteed, the SC charging rates can vary quite a lot depending on your starting state of charge. It is really not going to be as "convenient" as stated in the blog post today.

H2 refueling stations:

SC map with upcoming (end of 2017):

PS: I would like to correct a mistake in the prior post. 56 mpg vs. 32 mpg is 43% reduction in gas consumption, not 66% as I wrote there. Still impressive for just 1.5 KWh of battery.

 

[NJ Plugin]

Well, I don't know what tomorrow looks like, but I've now joined the legions of TSLA investors with Model S's largely paid for by the shorts.

2014 S85. Love it already and I've had it for 5 hours.

Congrats and safe travels. May your second Tesla be FULLY paid by the shorts.

 

[jhm]

Possible names:

Tesla Grille
Nosecone Cafe
Jolt-n-Drive
Piston Burger
Diner at the End of Oil Age
AI Eatery

Giga-Burritos
Supercharburgers
Elon's Moo Moo Dairy
0-60 club
X HOT WINGS
Lithium Barbeque
Mouse Nut Barrel

 

[Yggdrasill]

As @RobStark pointed out, it is about enabling people who can't charge at home.

They should use slow chargers where they park for the night or at work. Superchargers aren't for daily use. For this purpose, they are too inconvenient.

We already have the first couple of large slow charger installations in Norway. 100+ slow chargers with load sharing can take a significant bite out of the charging needs for an area. With a larger range BEV, with up towards 300 miles range, most people can get away with charging once or twice per week.

You may be right about first part. Still, there are members who wear the facade of a greenie, and some may genuinely be so. There is a slight chance that some may be interested in actually reducing global warming, not just the share price and Tesla. Ever since it dawned upon me how hybrids are so much more efficient in reducing emissions in a world with scarce battery supplies, I have become more a hybrid fan than the large battery pack electric cars. If you don't believe battery scarcity, see Dicaprio's documentary "Before the Flood". Elon is waiting for 100 Giga factories (an underestimate, imho) to start the full steam transition to zero emission vehicles. With hybrids, that can start with just 3-5 GF at 50GWh/year each.
Since a long range BEV slows down the path to reducing global warming, what is the point?

The scarcity is a result of a lack of investment. If the 20 largest car companies all built one 200 GWh Gigafactory each, we'd be well on our way to 100% BEVs. Why criticize the one company that is taking responsibility, instead of all the ones who are doing nothing?

BTW, I'm sorry, I forgot to add the average wait times to get to a super charger stall, and drive times to super chargers in the city. I looked at the SC map (with the projected ones) and the hydrogen re-fueling station map. They both appear to be equally sparse/dense in Bay area and LA. Driving time and distance to SC won't be negligible. Extra distance means extra charging.
While the H2 stations will fill to 100% in 5 mins guaranteed, the SC charging rates can vary quite a lot depending on your starting state of charge. It is really not going to be as "convenient" as stated in the blog post today.

Who cares about hydrogen? Hydrogen is a dead end. But:

1. No, you don't have 100% in five minutes guaranteed. At some stations it may take up to an hour, if someone came before you and used up all the pre-cooled hydrogen. It also takes more time in warm weather.
2. Hydrogen stations must fill up 100% of the needed range for a hydrogen car, superchargers are supposed to fill up maybe 10%. So, you need ten times as many hydrogen stations.
3. Superchargers are free, if you use them as intended. Hydrogen costs around 15-20 cents per mile. And hydrogen is usually produced from natural gas. So, if you support fracking - drive a hydrogen car.

 

[30seconds]

interesting article on newsweek on tesla's tooling strategy for Model 3

Tesla is skipping traditional manufacturing steps for Model 3

 

[brian45011]

For a perspective on the "multiple solutions" and on the basis of my sarcasm toward this exaggeration, the Li-Ion solution is the only one that matters in practical terms, as it dominates the market of ES and inherently will continue doing so as prices drop. In Q4 2016 Li-Ion BES represented 98.4% of the ES market, up from 96.9% QoQ (Based on GTM US Energy Monitor linked up-thread)

Da Nile may not be just the rearranged letters on a conference room sign at the Fremont Factory. Your data source appears to be incomplete, unduly focused on the battery category of energy storage and possibly driven largely by: "California’s energy storage mandate (AB 2514) added a twist to existing demand for energy storage. Adopted in 2010, the bill required California’s three largest power generating utilities to contract for an additional 1.3 GW of energy storage power generation (meeting certain criteria) by 2020, coming online by 2024....
According to records available from the Department of Energy, the following California energy storage projects are announced or underway:

"
At the Halfway Point: The Effect of California’s Energy Storage Mandate

DOE has a searchable Global Energy Storage Data Base maintained by Sandia National Laboratory. Worldwide the database shows 1,630 projects with a rated power capacity of 193.2 GW.

I ran three quick searches for the USA-only; since, aside from American Samoa, I haven't notice announcements by TSLA, SCTY or AMS about projects outside of USA.

The first search was projects "under construction": DOE Global Energy Storage Database

Results were 6 projects with total rated power capacity of 78.5 MW, size and description (1 mistake --a 20 MW, Vanadium Redox Flow Battery in China) :

• Advanced Rail Energy Storage Nevada, 50MW, Gravitational Storage
• Marengo Project, Illinois, 20 MW, Li-ion Battery
  
• Redding Utilites, California, 6 MW Ice, Thermal Storage
  
• Green Omni Terminal Demonstration Project, California, 2.6 MW, Electro-Chemical
  
• University of St. Thomas, Minnesota, 0.25 MW, Electro-Chemical
  
• Whole Food, Hawaii, NA, Li-ion Battery

The second search was "contracted" projects: https://www.energystorageexchange.org/projects?utf8=✓&technology_type_sort_eqs=&technology_type_sort_eqs_category=&country_sort_eq=United+States&state_sort_eq=&kW=&kWh=&service_use_case_inf=&ownership_model_eq=&status_eq=Contracted&siting_eq=&order_by=&sort_order=&search_page=1&size_kw_ll=&size_kw_ul=&size_kwh_ll=&size_kwh_ul=&show_unapproved={}

Results were 47 projects with total rated power capacity of 2.2 GW.

Yes, many were in the Li-ion Battery Category (26 of the 47). The largest LI-ion provider appeared to be AES with 100 MW at Los Alimitos, 30 MW at Escondido and 7.5 MW at El Cajon, but I did not see AES' 20 MW in Kauai. Second place appeared to be TSLA in its various forms: 20 MW at Mira Loma, SCTY's 13MW in Kauai, and AMS' 50 MW for hybrid buildings (SCE), 3.5 for Inland Empire Utilities, and 0.75 MW for Cal State, but I did not see the 7 MW for Irving Ranch Water District.

There also multiple other Li-ion providers, including:

• Convergent's 35 MW for SCE
• Hecate had 3 projects, totaling 51 MW
• GE/Con Ed had at least one 2 MW project

Other solutions included:

• Two Pumped Hydro projects totaling 1.7 GW!
• Three Flywheel projects totaling 28.32 MW
• An Ice Thermal Storage project for 25.6 MW
  
• A Lithium Ion Titanate Battery and a Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt Battery project, each 10 MW
• Two Zinc Air projects totaling 13 MW
• Four Li-PO4 projects totaling 4.04 MW
• A Vanadium Redox Flow Battery 2 MW
• Miscellany: Zinc Iron Flow Battery and various Electo-Chemical projects including STEM's 85 MW which appears to be similar to AMS' hybrid buildings and likely Li-ion.

The 3rd search was "announced" projects (obviously the most tenuous): DOE Global Energy Storage Database

Results were 112 projects with total rated power capacity of 5.3 GW.
I downloaded the file and sorted it by size. The largest Li-ion project was No. 13 at 15 MW.
Nine of the eleven biggest were pumped hydro, totaling 4.53 GW.
The other two in the top ten were in-ground compressed air with 317 MW and 300 MW each.
Axion Power made the top 20 with two lead carbon battery projects at 12.5 MW and 9.1 MW.

Those you have convinced that saying energy storage is "a crowded field with lots of competitors and solutions" is an exaggeration and misleading might benefit from running a few searches on DOE's database site and not just limit them to the USA. Take a look at what's going on in the rest of the world and who all the players are. Tesla's business plan is to leverage its auto sales and service locations to market solar and battery storage products. That may be fine for residential buyers; but utility-scale and behind-the-meter industrial and commercial customers expect well engineered proposals adapted to their individual situations with convincing economics.

 

[dennis]

Regarding SC slow charging: The entire thread is full of user accounts of slow charging, and some with good experiences as well. I pointed to one, which isn't the worst. You didn't want me to link to each of them, did you? You could browse on your own. I haven't read all posts myself. While your story is one data point, so are those. For example, read @Eclectic 's post on the first page. He couldn't use his Tesla due to slow charging and wait times. He ended up driving his Ford F-150. Is that helping the emissions? A hybrid has no such issues. In fact. total range is way more than even pure ICE.
There was obviously SC congestion; that's why Tesla has imposed those limits, written letters to SC abusers and are saying will double SC stalls. Your story of no waits can't be the norm.

BTW, I'm sorry, I forgot to add the average wait times to get to a super charger stall, and drive times to super chargers in the city. I looked at the SC map (with the projected ones) and the hydrogen re-fueling station map. They both appear to be equally sparse/dense in Bay area and LA. Driving time and distance to SC won't be negligible. Extra distance means extra charging.
While the H2 stations will fill to 100% in 5 mins guaranteed, the SC charging rates can vary quite a lot depending on your starting state of charge. It is really not going to be as "convenient" as stated in the blog post today.

Let's see, I've charged at Fremont, Gilroy, Harris Ranch, Dublin, Roseville, Truckee, Vacaville, Atascadero, Burbank, Tejon Ranch, San Juan Capistrano, Indio, Reno, Rancho Cucamongo and a few others I can't remember off the top of my head. So I claim my story of waiting <5% of the time is in fact the norm. People don't post about their great supercharging experiences because it is just a matter of course. And it's even better now that I can see how crowded the Superchargers are in real time on the display on my car. But you wouldn't know that because you have no experience driving and charging a Tesla.

Nice of you to offer up the false equivalence of H2 fueling stations vs. Superchargers. Of course you fail to point out that the ONLY place you can fill up a FCEV is at one of those stations. Not at home, not at work, not at a destination, not at any of the many public charging locations. Hell, in my town of 30K people there are public chargers with at least 2 chargers at half a dozen locations downtown.

So here's how I expect it to go down with the Model 3:
1) People who live in a single family dwelling - no problem
2) People who can charge at work - no problem
3) People who live in an apartment - no problem if there are charging stalls, otherwise they can use a city center supercharger or as a last resort a public charger. And let's not forget about all of those non-Tesla chargers that are being installed by VW, ChargePoint, public investment, etc. All available to Model 3 owners.

It looks to me like a huge percentage of the market is available to Tesla. More demand than Tesla can fulfill with AD 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, maybe even 3.0. Time for you to go look for another Achilles heel, because it ain't charging. Tesla just made sure of that with today's announcement.

 

[ValueAnalyst]

Let's see, I've charged at Fremont, Gilroy, Harris Ranch, Dublin, Roseville, Truckee, Vacaville, Atascadero, Burbank, Tejon Ranch, San Juan Capistrano, Indio, Reno, Rancho Cucamongo and a few others I can't remember off the top of my head. So I claim my story of waiting <5% of the time is in fact the norm. People don't post about their great supercharging experiences because it is just a matter of course. And it's even better now that I can see how crowded the Superchargers are in real time on the display on my car. But you wouldn't know that because you have no experience driving and charging a Tesla.

Nice of you to offer up the false equivalence of H2 fueling stations vs. Superchargers. Of course you fail to point out that the ONLY place you can fill up a FCEV is at one of those stations. Not at home, not at work, not at a destination, not at any of the many public charging locations. Hell, in my town of 30K people there are public chargers with at least 2 chargers at half a dozen locations downtown.

So here's how I expect it to go down with the Model 3:
1) People who live in a single family dwelling - no problem
2) People who can charge at work - no problem
3) People who live in an apartment - no problem if there are charging stalls, otherwise they can use a city center supercharger or as a last resort a public charger. And let's not forget about all of those non-Tesla chargers that are being installed by VW, ChargePoint, public investment, etc. All available to Model 3 owners.

It looks to me like a huge percentage of the market is available to Tesla. More demand than Tesla can fulfill with AD 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, maybe even 3.0. Time for you to go look for another Achilles heel, because it ain't charging. Tesla just made sure of that with today's announcement.

Elon had said Alien Dreadnaught 1.0 will be achieved by Summer 2018. So 500k cars run-rate per year for v1.0.

And I believe he had also said two years for each subsequent version thereafter: v2.0 in 2020, v3.0 in 2022 etc.

Alien Dreadnaught v3.0 is expected to have no humans in the production line. People will maintain the machines, upgrade them, and deal with anomalies. This is when I expect the "twenty-fold increase" in production speed.

............

This is important:

"Gigafactories 3, 4, and possibly 5"

Given Tesla's one-liner in 1Q17 investor letter, it's reasonable to expect Tesla to announce locations in 2H17, break ground at each location by 1Q18 at the latest, and start volume production at each location by 4Q20. This timeline is in-line with Gigafactory 1 timeline and assumes no improvement in construction speed due to experience and easier access to capital now that Tesla is a much larger and more established company than in 2014, which is a conservative assumption Tesla's history of order of magnitude improvements.

Since Gigafactory 1 is expected to ramp up to 1.5 million cars/year full production capacity (with the third half million used for Tesla Energy), it's reasonable to expect the subsequent three Gigafactories to have at least that level of capacity, but most likely a lot more as they will be Alien Dreadnought v2.0.

So it's mostly likely that "Gigafactories 3, 4, and possibly 5" will each have at least 1.5 million cars/year full production capacity, probably 2.0+ million cars/year, and potentially 2.5+ million cars/year. And this projection assumes zero incremental innovation in the next 3-5 years above what Elon/Tesla envisions today. We all know the chances of that is almost zero.

With v2.0 Gigafactories 3, 4, and possibly 5 in volume production (defined as 1.0-1.5 million cars/year, and full production defined as 2.0-2.5 million cars/year run-rate by 4Q22), Tesla can be producing 5-6 million cars/year run-rate by 4Q20, with one-third of that capacity being used for Tesla Energy. So, 3.5-4 million cars/year and the rest used for Tesla Energy.

This is why my base case expectation of 4 million cars/year run-rate by 4Q20 is indeed very reasonable. It's clear that Tesla knows the Model 3 demand will be much higher than currently anticipated by the market and that they are planning ahead with "Gigafactories 3, 4, and possibly 5."

 

[JRP3]

Weak bear arguments should be allowed anywhere they wish to post them.


I don't agree with most of what you post but I'm staunchly anti-censorship.

I'm suggesting he "censor" himself by posting better arguments, if he has them, and remaining silent if not. A thread full of irrelevant previously debunked "points" is useless.

 

[JRP3]

You may be right about first part. Still, there are members who wear the facade of a greenie, and some may genuinely be so. There is a slight chance that some may be interested in actually reducing global warming, not just the share price and Tesla. Ever since it dawned upon me how hybrids are so much more efficient in reducing emissions in a world with scarce battery supplies, I have become more a hybrid fan than the large battery pack electric cars.

Except it's not scarce battery supplies which limits the progress of EV's it's the scarce will to build full EV's. By building compelling EV's and fast charging network Tesla is pushing the technology and showing the public and the industry what can actually be done. Hybrids are a stop gap dead end technology that simply delays the transition to full EV's and sustainability by extending the ICE age.

 

[ggr]

interesting article on newsweek on tesla's tooling strategy for Model 3

Tesla is skipping traditional manufacturing steps for Model 3

There are simultaneous bear articles today with opposite viewpoints. Some are saying that Tesla is being irresponsible by streamlining the manufacturing process using simulations. Others are saying that Tesla is only just learning to do stuff that all the other manufacturers have been doing for ages. Which is right? (A: neither.)

 

[Drax7]

everybody trying to undermine Tesla, mostly envy and threatening To their
Existence

 

[Runarbt]

...Tesla just made sure of that with today's announcement.

Did I miss out on an announcement?

 

[jbcarioca]

Those who think there is not a major European push to BEV's might look at these:
Electric innovation drives group's long-term strategy - Business - Chinadaily.com.cn
Foreign automakers embrace China as EV development hub
For a sound perspective one needs to look at China, which is both the largest world market for motor vehicles and the locus for development and production of BEV with more than a third of all global production.

If bears want to think realistically they should be thinking about Chinese competition, including the German R&D and production in China that is very rapidly accelerating their learning curve. Frankly they can ignore GM, FiatChrysler and maybe Ford because all three are very slow adopters and still see 'compliance cars' rather than open market competition. One very good data point supporting that is CharIN which is bent on developing global fast changing networks. These factors are competitive threat to Tesla. The Chinese makers themselves will be but Lucid and the like are probably to about to become threats.

The bears also would have sound basis to question potential continuing critical shortages of cobalt. There are several serious efforts to expand supply, but most of them have no assured success and all of them have the very long lead times that any mining operation usually has. Will there be other technologies to replace cobalt, and lithium? Probably, but shortages continue to be worries for the next several years.

Then, why don't the bears worry about the risk of losing Elon and/or JB? That is a very legitimate worry.

The strange arguments posited by mmd and others are superficial and even neglect the genuine risks. I still read the posts, hoping that someday he might actually make legitimate points.

Several times I've posted on these subjects quoting various sources. Quite a few of us have done so. Only a foolish bull ignores reality and fails to understand risks.

Despite Automotive News and dealer groups arguing that Tesla support model will not work most of us recognize that Tesla really is not driven by incentives and tax rebates, although such factors have had benefit. The repeated example of Georgia USA is instructive. When they eliminated BEV incentives and added tax BEV sales plummeted, except for Tesla which had a two month decline followed by renewed growth. Certainly individual markets (e.g. Hong Kong, Norway) can and do change sales by reducing BEV support. Tesla, however, continues to do well in those markets. Inevitably as new entrants bring attractive vehicles Tesla will lose market share. As Elon has said, that is a Good Thing, that is why Tesla patents are free to use in good faith.

So, I continue to accumulate TSLA, buying mostly on short term dips. I will not risk my livelihood entirely on TSLA but I am too heavily committed to call it a 'fling' either. Those are venture capital deals which have no established business base nor customer pool. Tesla has a loyal, thoughtful, enthusiastic customer base. In my view most of the customer base seems realistic about weaknesses, but still has that 91% intention to buy Tesla again.

I find myself respecting Alexander Potter above most analysts because he did quite serious research and visited China in the process. MarketWatch describes it pretty well, (as does the long thread here on the subject). for those who are not Piper Jaffray customers:
Tesla surges to fresh record after Piper Jaffray upgrades to buy, raises price target by 65%
2017 Investor Roundtable: TSLA Market Action

 

[everman]

Elon is waiting for 100 Giga factories (an underestimate, imho) to start the full steam transition to zero emission vehicles.

This is incorrect. Elon is waiting for nothing. He started long ago and has shown no sign of letting up. At no point did he say 100 GF were required to get anything started.

 

[everman]

While the H2 stations will fill to 100% in 5 mins guaranteed,
*** this is incorrect. Supply pressure per station varies, and can lead to > 10 min fill times accordingly.

H2 refueling stations:
View attachment 224343

SC map with upcoming (end of 2017):
View attachment 224345

Comparing H2 stations with SC is disingenuous as well. SC not required for many EV owners at all. H2 owners are completely dependent on these stations as sole source.

 

[DurandalAI]

Comparing H2 stations with SC is disingenuous as well. SC not required for many EV owners at all. H2 owners are completely dependent on these stations as sole source.

I'm sure it would blow his mind to know I've never used a SC, considering I do my daily commute using L2 charging only, either at home or at work. Yes, I can charge during the day at work for free, but I often just do it at home because it's convenient. People get obsessed about fast charging, especially those who don't own EVs, because they're so accustomed to the gas station model. The only time I'm going to be concerned with fast charging with my Model 3 is when I go on a trip that's longer than 250 miles. (I'll opt for the larger battery.) Otherwise, it will be me plugging it in 2x a week at home!

 

[winfield100]

Possible names:

Tesla Grille
Nosecone Cafe
Jolt-n-Drive
Piston Burger
Diner at the End of Oil Age
AI Eatery

perhaps more appropo
"Experiencing A Significant Gravitas Shortfall" or "Sweet and Full of Grace"
etc List of spacecraft in the Culture series - Wikipedia

 

[winfield100]

Regarding the growth of supercharger quantities, I see in Truckee, CA, and Reno, NV, that Tesla is moving superchargers from venues with limited space to venues with more room. Undoubtedly the idea is to increase the number of supercharger stalls in popular locations so as to prepare for Model 3s joining the fleet. The change is happening.

note also in Florida, co-locating Superchargers with Sonnys Barbeque restaurants.....
Supercharger Station Being Constructed in Florida City, FL

 

[winfield100]

So here's how I expect it to go down with the Model 3:
1) People who live in a single family dwelling - no problem
2) People who can charge at work - no problem
3) People who live in an apartment - no problem if there are charging stalls, otherwise they can use a city center supercharger or as a last resort a public charger. And let's not forget about all of those non-Tesla chargers that are being installed by VW, ChargePoint, public investment, etc. All available to Model 3 owners..

4) neither admitting nor denying "Guerilla chargers" who may or may not live in apartments, running 10-12 gauge 'hidden' extension cords gaining ~1.2kWh/hr spotted 'here and there', 50ft out to the car who pay for their electric usage as apartment managers get "up to speed".
and i am not advocating anything illegal