2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

[jhm]

Dude, I was having the theme song to Laverne and Shirley rolling around in my head.

 

[vgrinshpun]

Perhaps it's the seam between the cap and the outer casing?

That sounds about right, thanks. Note both terminals on the top of the cell, consistent with the new architecture of the P100D pack...

 

[steve3]

Apparently, they have not lost enough market share to Tesla yet.

Indeed. And a dire attachment to a view that the future of transport must fall within their existing but reconfigured infrastructure because "it's too big to fail." Sounds like the Titanic revisited. To what degree will Tesla be able to scale up when they have cheap access to legacy mfg'r stranded (but outdated) assets? They'll need to be updated to the then-current Alien Dreadnought version production lines.

 

[sundaymorning]

So keeping this definition in mind, Tesla and Panasonic indeed started mass production of the cells at the GF.

I posted this in the 2016 short term investor thread after attending the solar roof event at Universal Studios. Several sources I spoke with indicated that either cells, PowerPacks, or Powerwalls (I can't recall) were to be produced in December of 2016 and delivery to start in January of 2017 at the GF.

 

[Kenriko]

I believe that was 2 weeks of downtime followed by 6 weeks of slow production. I don't want to see Tesla repeat that with an interior upgrade.

Interior door panels and pieces can be swapped out with nearly zero downtime. IIRC the dash is installed as a single pre-built piece so given the dash line can switch to HUD production without halting progress too much I think it'll be less intrusive then having to rewire the whole car like they needed to for AP 2.0.

 

[GoTslaGo]

Short and hold. Probably only a loss when you sell, and/or these are not necessarily entities who are required to publically report anything.

Even with the squeeze in 2013, I think the short position never went below about 15% of float, to my understanding, far far more than the average publicly traded company.

So perhaps a baseline of about 15% short as part of this PR campaign, and then typically another 10% or so of 1) traders jumping in on the volatility, 2) innocent bystanders getting doused with that "Tesla scam" koolaide.

Yes, still amazed that the SEC lets them get away with that. Seems these hedge funds just fill out the handy little box saying "Decline to disclose" and go on their merry way. Of course with the usual statement from the SEC that they don't check the filings for accuracy. Makes me wonder if that's what Madoff did...

 

[dennis]

Interior door panels and pieces can be swapped out with nearly zero downtime. IIRC the dash is installed as a single pre-built piece so given the dash line can switch to HUD production without halting progress too much I think it'll be less intrusive then having to rewire the whole car like they needed to for AP 2.0.

We can take this OT and debate the impact severity of various production line changes. My point is that every hardware upgrade of any significance has taken longer than Tesla forecast and slowed production impacting its ability to meet delivery guidance. RHD, D, Next Gen Seats, Facelift, AP2. All of them.

 

[3Victoria]

It would have been fine if they had forecast the 6 weeks of slowdown in production. Instead they had to tell us about it after the fact when they missed the number. Credibility is important not just for Wall Street but also when dealing with suppliers. As Tesla keeps missing forecasts their credibility with suppliers suffers.

First, do we know there was sox weeks of slow down? Second, if there was it was not predicted, could hardly forecast it, and third it really isn't a hill of beans. Supply lines deal with worse.

 

[CALGARYARSENAL]

Bullish.

 

[dennis]

First, do we know there was sox weeks of slow down? Second, if there was it was not predicted, could hardly forecast it, and third it really isn't a hill of beans. Supply lines deal with worse.

From yesterday's press release:

Because of short-term production challenges starting at the end of October and lasting through early December from the transition to new Autopilot hardware

 

[mrdoubleb]

Going back to the quote from Panasonic regarding the start of mass production at the GF, I think that the key which was overlooked by everybody including myself, but which clearly stands out now is that source at Panasonic did not indicate that mass production will start by April, they said that all they can say is that they guarantee that mass production starts by April. This essentially does not contradict to today's event in any way - their guarantee still stands, as they, to be intentionally abstruse IMO, put limit on the latest start date, without saying anything about the earliest projection.

Overall, it is very interesting how Tesla and Panasonic managed to pull this off in 100% stealth mode, without a peep coming from any sources. This strict discipline is very impressive.

To the question about what constitutes start of mass production, it is in my mind is not so much linked to the quantity of the output, but to the fact that it is coming from the production line designed for mass production, after proper validation and testing is completed. Clearly production will start with the lowest output possible and then will be gradually brought up to the maximum. So keeping this definition in mind, Tesla and Panasonic indeed started mass production of the cells at the GF.

Ok, here is another interpretation of this misalignment in announcements. It is a little "out there", but bear with me.

While Elon has publicly set the target date for M3 production at July 1st, 2017, I always translated this to myself as September(ish), with deliveries starting end of October (long validation for the first few batches, working out quality and production issues... we know the deal, Model X ramp process, except, hopefully, with much less trouble).

Yesterday Tesla said volume cell production started at GF1 for TE and will start for M3 in Q2. Now, once again, I translated that to Elon-time, meaning, second half of June, with enough stockpile of cells for that September production start of M3. But that too was a little odd to me, I mean how much in advance do you need to start spitting out cells. 2-3 months, really?

So what if Panasonic's comment was a little bit of a slip-up? At this point TE cell production is probably a fraction of what M3 cell production will be, so what if by April, Pana was referring to M3 cells?

The implication of that would be huge. If they actually started volumes for cars in April, that could mean they anticipate vehicle production much sooner than September. Dare I say, around the actual target date (for a change)? This would also coincide with recent reports by Fred, that suppliers say Tesla is Hell-bent of getting all ducks in a row by July 1st.

So if they started "pilot" M3 production in July and actually ramping in August, that would give them almost 2 quarters of production. Meaning, we could be looking at the 100k+ M3 numbers this year that Elon was predicting. Hmm...

 

[PaulRocket]

Love the video, makes me really excited! Can't wait for the report from AudubonB.
Now we need to try and figure out how many cells this production line can produce. This quarter will be the first with the new Powerwalls and Powerpacks and I'm expecting more Powerwall sales in units then car sales in units.

 

[graphix25]

In the spirit of gigafactory production start today. I have seen repeated on this forum referencing the 2170 have 30% increase in energy density. Where is this information coming from? When I do volumetric comparison between the 1865 and the gigafactory 2170 cells it equates to a 46.58% increase in volume. There would have to be a massive improvement in the chemistry to have a 30% increase in energy density wh/L. Are they referencing the pack density improvement? Curious mind is wondering.

1865 cell: 66188 mm^3
2170 cell: 97020 mm^3
46.58% increase in volume

 

[everman]

We can take this OT and debate the impact severity of various production line changes. My point is that every hardware upgrade of any significance has taken longer than Tesla forecast and slowed production impacting its ability to meet delivery guidance. RHD, D, Next Gen Seats, Facelift, AP2. All of them.

So is your point then that they should just stop updating their models? There is some delay in the line while implementing improvements, as you've pointed out. You state that you don't want any slowdowns anymore. Is your conclusion then that they shouldn't update the dash for a HUD? Seems you've painted Tesla into a corner.

 

[dennis]

So is your point then that they should just stop updating their models? There is some delay in the line while implementing improvements, as you've pointed out. You state that you don't want any slowdowns anymore. Is your conclusion then that they shouldn't update the dash for a HUD? Seems you've painted Tesla into a corner.

Not at all. I want Tesla to learn from their past efforts how long it actually takes to implement hardware changes on the production line and forecast deliveries accordingly. That simple.

 

[WarpedOne]

I am satisfied with production figures.
I could not care less about them meeting their forecasts. Forecasts are just talk, same talk as you get from Audi, VW, BMW, Merc, Toyota, Honda, GM.
Growth of production rate is what sets Tesla in a class of its own.

 

[RobStark]

U.S. industry sets new high behind solid GM, Nissan, Honda gains

Volume rose 10 percent at GM for a second straight month. Nissan Motor Co. advanced 9.7 percent and American Honda posted a 6.4 percent gain. Toyota Motor Corp. rose 2 percent and Ford Motor Co. edged up 0.1 percent, while Fiat Chrysler recorded its third straight double-digit decline.

All four of GM’s U.S. brands rose. Chevrolet led the way with a 13 percent increase, followed by GMC (5.8 percent), Cadillac (3.2 percent) and Buick (2.8 percent).

At Ford Motor, sales were off 0.8 percent at the Ford division and up 18 percent at Lincoln. Toyota said volume edged up 2.6 percent at the Toyota division but slipped 0.5 percent at Lexus last month.

Nissan Motor's December increase reflected an 8.3 percent gain at its namesake division and a 21 percent jump at Infiniti.

The Nissan division set an all-time record with 1,426,130 U.S. sales in 2016, up 5.5 percent.

Among other brands, Infiniti, Kia, Land Rover, Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai, Subaru, Audi and Porsche also set annual U.S. sales records in 2016.

 

[Zhelko Dimic]

while one might have been swayed to buy the dips on these dramatic swings over the last few days... no one could have timed it in advance without relying on luck... 213 to 220 to 211 to 226 in 3 days?... wtf is going on with this stock?

i did not play this week... i was too busy... and I'm glad... i'll try to review the charts soon and see how our recent trends correlate with this madness.

TSLA is the ultimate ball in the 'where's ball?' shell game that MM use to empty pockets of retail

 

[Zhelko Dimic]

Apparently, they have not lost enough market share to Tesla yet.

They think infrastructure is the problem for EVs, but at what scale do EVs face a critical infrastructure problem. I don't see a hard edge here. At current scale, EV owners do fine and charge mostly at home. Clearly this is not a problem for utilities either. Suppose the fleet of EVs gets 10 time larger. People still charge mostly at home and utilities have not shorted out. Meanwhile, technology for faster charging has emerged and charging station are more widely available and more heavily utilized. So I don't see how advancing the scale brings EVs any closer to failure, just the opposite. Increasing scale improves the infrastructural challenges. This would be true of hydrogen vehicle. The problem however is that hydrogen infrastructure requires substantial geographical density before it is adequate. So it will be much harder at small scale than large scale. And may never get past that critical scale.

Like I said, they just have not lost enough market share yet. As EVs scale up, the infrastructure will become even more supportive.

Well, Germans seem to have lost enough to start caring. This is function of luxury market they serve, market that Tesla adopted as a first playground. Wait for truck to be released, and let's see what Ford says few years after

 

[SebastianR]

You say:

Apparently, they have not lost enough market share to Tesla yet.

... and this seems to support this:

U.S. industry sets new high behind solid GM, Nissan, Honda gains

Volume rose 10 percent at GM for a second straight month. Nissan Motor Co. advanced 9.7 percent and American Honda posted a 6.4 percent gain. Toyota Motor Corp. rose 2 percent and Ford Motor Co. edged up 0.1 percent, while Fiat Chrysler recorded its third straight double-digit decline.

If you just now these two things, then Tesla is just taking a tiny piece in an overall growing market. I guess the picture turns once, you get into the market for large luxury vehicles:

(source from @RubberToe - including November sales only - so handle with care, December numbers may shift things a little)

So maybe they are bleeding without realizing it yet? Or - maybe we are chasing the wrong rabbit: How is the Model X doing vs. the Q7, the Cayenne etc.?