Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Valuation discussions are fairly pointless, because nobody knows what will ultimately happen. I don't have any faith in much of the napkin math that either bulls or bears produce, because it's usually wrong.

Valuation is great -- the only way I've ever profited in the stock market -- and easy to do. I have followed the old principle that *simpler models are more robust*. A really simple model might look like this:

In 2018, Tesla will sell X Model 3 at average sales price Y and gross margin Z, with overhead costs of A. Divide by number of shares to get profit per share.
 
I'm not afraid of competition. I agree that competition is imperative to Tesla's mission. I don't think that there won't be competition, just that there currently isn't, and all of the incumbent competitors saying they'll have a vehicle out in 2019/2020 are either full of crap, or they're just more low-volume compliance cars.
Do you count the Chinese companies as incumbents?

Until someone, ANYONE, announces they're breaking ground on a battery factory of even *kind of* comparable scale, they are not competing. They can't.
CATL is. I don't know of others.
 
What competitors do you think are worth investing in as future EV makers, excluding legacy ICE products?
I assume you mean "legacy ICE producers"... correct?... such as F, GM, etc.?

and if so... why would you exclude them?... how about this for a list:

GM
Ford
Toyota
VW
Apple
Google
Uber
etc.

virtually EVERYONE is working on the same stuff Tesla is... but there are headlines like: "Ford should Tweet pictures of their future cars so their share price goes up"... kinds of articles... which really just means...

hype... the whole story is just that... a story... the actual truth is...

TSLA goes up when volume is low after negative news on many fronts... while the market recedes back into crash mode... and after the CEO basically declares the stock overvalued... because it's a manipulation machine.
 
Tesla GF1 @ 105GWh is only enough to supply ~1M cars.

CATL might be able to supply 300k cars, if they're lucky.
Worth noting, CATL says this is just their first factory. Also, they're sort of a Siamese twin to ATL, so although they're not vertically integrated, they do have very close ties to specific automakers.

BYD is also talking about building bigger battery factories but hasn't yet.

As I've said before, I think Tesla will do just fine even if it has two, or five, major Chinese competitors.
 
Valuation is great -- the only way I've ever profited in the stock market -- and easy to do. I have followed the old principle that *simpler models are more robust*. A really simple model might look like this:

In 2018, Tesla will sell X Model 3 at average sales price Y and gross margin Z, with overhead costs of A. Divide by number of shares to get profit per share.

It's not about profits, it's about saving your billion dollar human body from destruction by auto emissions isn't it? Math is an illusion of the mind so it is pointless...prices are what they are because the profit is from the stock trades and currency trades and the long term destruction of old technology replaced by new tech. Isn't that what all the disruption buzz is about?

Moderator-deleted content.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Disagree
Reactions: CorneliusXX
They really can popup overnight because they have been building them for months. It seems like there are several new articles everyday about how x company is building a battery factory. You act as if no one is building anything today? LG Chem said it was going to double or triple its plant that supplies the bolt. I think Jeff Dahn said something like a Chinese company has a thousand engineers working on battery tech. They are sitting on their hands. If it's Tesla vs the world then its a fair fight is all im saying. No one competitor has a chance.
I agree but I do think only the Chinese companies -- and maybe LG and Samsung -- are even fighting at all.
 
sorry if this has been discussed already.
does anyone understand why energy storage revenue (excluding solarcity) dropped so sharply quarter over quarter?
I think it's super lumpy. Most of the revenue is from big utility-scale / industrial / commercial projects, so one big project can swing quarterly numbers a lot. I wouldn't even expect it to average out over a year, maybe over 2 years. It's like aircraft or train manufacturers, where *one sale* can swing a quarter's revenue.
 
They really can popup overnight because they have been building them for months. It seems like there are several new articles everyday about how x company is building a battery factory. You act as if no one is building anything today? LG Chem said it was going to double or triple its plant that supplies the bolt. I think Jeff Dahn said something like a Chinese company has a thousand engineers working on battery tech. They are sitting on their hands. If it's Tesla vs the world then its a fair fight is all im saying. No one competitor has a chance.
Do you count the Chinese companies as incumbents?


CATL is. I don't know of others.
Worth noting, CATL says this is just their first factory. Also, they're sort of a Siamese twin to ATL, so although they're not vertically integrated, they do have very close ties to specific automakers.

BYD is also talking about building bigger battery factories but hasn't yet.

As I've said before, I think Tesla will do just fine even if it has two, or five, major Chinese competitors.
I agree but I do think only the Chinese companies -- and maybe LG and Samsung -- are even fighting at all.

Am I the only one that understands that GF1 is literally the second largest building in the world, full stop? We know from Elon that to achieve 105GWh of capacity in the second largest building in the world, Tesla is using new techniques for how to maximize the factory's space efficiency. That means that other factories that intend to compete on capacity need to use those same innovations, or else be a physically larger building.

Sure we frequently see articles about new battery factories - but their capacity is usually measured in MWh, not GWh. You can't build a factory large enough to compete with GF1 and do so silently - it takes a lot of land and serious dollars to come from somewhere. Building smaller saves on capital cost, but doesn't give nearly the same economies of scale, and so will make competing difficult.

LG doubling or tripling the plant that supplies the Bolt still leaves it able to supply less than 20% of the initial design capacity of the Model 3 line.

I concede that CATL is at least talking about playing the same game as Tesla. Whether or not they can successfully execute remains to be seen. Their current capacity is about 5% of GF1's planned output. In fairness to CATL, it still remains to be seen if Tesla can actually produce the advertised 105GWh at GF1 too, but GF1's funding is fully secure and as far as I can tell CATL needs the investment to show up still.
 
Hmm, how are you getting to 20 car tunnels to 1 subways tunnel? Subways come 5 minutes apart
That's from a standard capacity calculation -- I think I got it from an Australians source.

This can be brought down to 1.5 minutes, but most of the numbers I've seen use 3 minutes.

Anyway, there's actual measurements of this stuff.

Cars can come at higher frequency 10 per minute or more and travel at a higher average speed
So 10 cars carries, typically, less than one quarter as many people as a *bus*, let alone a train.

And no, the cars in traffic actually travel at a slower average speed. Go figure out why you got this wrong (hint: it partly has to do with exits and entrances and the associated disruption to traffic flow. To avoid this, Musk would have to add acceleration lanes to every tunnel which would double their size....)

I'm not interested in doing remedial education on this unless it's for someone like Musk who's actually doing a project. Believe whatever stupid crap you want to believe, or do your research.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: T3SLA3
I assume you mean "legacy ICE producers"... correct?... such as F, GM, etc.?

and if so... why would you exclude them?... how about this for a list:

GM
Ford
Toyota
VW
Apple
Google
Uber
etc.

virtually EVERYONE is working on the same stuff Tesla is... but there are headlines like: "Ford should Tweet pictures of their future cars so their share price goes up"... kinds of articles... which really just means...

hype... the whole story is just that... a story... the actual truth is...

TSLA goes up when volume is low after negative news on many fronts... while the market recedes back into crash mode... and after the CEO basically declares the stock overvalued... because it's a manipulation machine.

I keep hearing this "story" narrative and maybe I am naive as I am not a paid analyst and I dont speak in buzz words. I read stories to my daughter at night and she loves Star Wars which is an awesome story full of all kinds of cool futuristic tech. The difference hear is that Tesla is a great story that is also full of futuristic tech and the fact is that the tech is actually real and you can touch it. As a matter of fact, I touched some of that tech with my butt on the way to work today. A car that everyone said was impossible. With FWD that where full of hubris.

Its actually not just a story, its an actual reality. This silly narrative that its just a great story, is just that.. a sad, sad story. Its a story told by childlike people who cant understand or with whom all this tech is just so foreign and seems so unreal like light sabers and Jedi to my 8 year old daughter.
 
BBzzzzzttttt. Can't do it. Any physical hardware failure in the sleds, which does happen, causes a pile up. It'll never be authorized as safe.

Physics is a real limit.

Really? Then maybe the U.S. Freeway should be barred as unsafe (it is)

Pileups? Try the Freeways. Dime a dozen.

I'll go out on a large limb and say this Sled & Tunnel system is over 10x safer than existing U.S. Freeways.

Sled failure rate will be extremely low, when it does happen, all sleds behind the stalled sled go backwards to get out of Tunnel. Then another sled pushes or pulls the dead sled out of the tunnel.
 
Am I the only one that understands that GF1 is literally the second largest building in the world, full stop? We know from Elon that to achieve 105GWh of capacity in the second largest building in the world, Tesla is using new techniques for how to maximize the factory's space efficiency. That means that other factories that intend to compete on capacity need to use those same innovations, or else be a physically larger building.

Sure we frequently see articles about new battery factories - but their capacity is usually measured in MWh, not GWh. You can't build a factory large enough to compete with GF1 and do so silently - it takes a lot of land and serious dollars to come from somewhere. Building smaller saves on capital cost, but doesn't give nearly the same economies of scale, and so will make competing difficult.

LG doubling or tripling the plant that supplies the Bolt still leaves it able to supply less than 20% of the initial design capacity of the Model 3 line.

I concede that CATL is at least talking about playing the same game as Tesla. Whether or not they can successfully execute remains to be seen. Their current capacity is about 5% of GF1's planned output. In fairness to CATL, it still remains to be seen if Tesla can actually produce the advertised 105GWh at GF1 too, but GF1's funding is fully secure and as far as I can tell CATL needs the investment to show up still.

No one has to believe either of us. Tesla is operating like there is going to be a lot of competition in the near future. And that's why I feel very comfortable that they are not thinking like you and that they are thinking more like me. The model 3 could have been just a little better then the Bolt and they could have sold hundreds of thousands of them, but that's not good enough for the competition that is coming. They are pushing every limit they can find to keep ahead. But based on what your saying they could just cruz into a million cars a year. I am glad they see the future and the future will be crowded, which is good. Its great for their mission, its great for solar and its great Tesla. Without the competition, there would be a limit to how many electric vehicles they could sell, because not everyone knows what Tesla even is and they arent going to search it and Tesla doesn't advertise.
 
I assume you mean "legacy ICE producers"... correct?... such as F, GM, etc.?

and if so... why would you exclude them?... how about this for a list:

GM
Ford
Toyota
VW
Apple
Google
Uber
etc.

virtually EVERYONE is working on the same stuff Tesla is... but there are headlines like: "Ford should Tweet pictures of their future cars so their share price goes up"... kinds of articles... which really just means...

hype... the whole story is just that... a story... the actual truth is...

TSLA goes up when volume is low after negative news on many fronts... while the market recedes back into crash mode... and after the CEO basically declares the stock overvalued... because it's a manipulation machine.
No, I really did mean products, not producers. If GM or Ford had to scrap their ICE business within 6 years and only get by on their EV products going forward, would either one be a good investment? I could care less about hype. What I am interested in is a good nearly pure play in EV makers and other companies that will do well in a post carbon world.
 
Has anyone began modeling how a Pence administration would affect Tesla in the medium-to-long term? Assuming a decent Model 3 ramp, I think Tesla is now pretty resilient to any outside forces, but I'd still like to understand any possible risks that a competent, pro-fossil fuel administration would bring.

Trump is terrified at not being viewed as a winner, and he's said he misses his old life (when everybody sucked up to him). Based on this, and his increasing apparent inability to run a productive administration, I believe the chances of him resigning are increasing, though not assured.

If he can figure out a way to frame a resignation in a populist fashion by saying he can do more good for the people by leaving office, he might do it. He can then go on the road, hold rallies and receive the adulation he desperately seems to need (and earn a ton of money).
 
I assume you mean "legacy ICE producers"... correct?... such as F, GM, etc.?

and if so... why would you exclude them?... how about this for a list:

GM
Ford
Toyota
VW
Apple
Google
Uber
etc.

virtually EVERYONE is working on the same stuff Tesla is...

Toyota is still on the hydrogen bandwagon, although they have a high-level group looking at EV adoption. Latest story from them is a fuel cell big rig.

I doubt Apple will build their own cars, because cars do not have the kinds of margins that the company enjoys. Apple and Google win simply by having their technology integrated into existing vehicles. Google's entire mission is gathering and organizing data: they only need to get info, not make the car. Uber is in chaos with severe cultural problems.

The other companies like GM, VW, and Ford may or may not survive, but I don't see that they have the same growth trajectory as Tesla.


TSLA goes up when volume is low after negative news on many fronts... while the market recedes back into crash mode... and after the CEO basically declares the stock overvalued... because it's a manipulation machine.

Emotional responses are the enemy of profits. Frantically posting about hype is not going to help your investment strategy.

I would recommend Index funds, since they naturally balance over time and have broad exposure to the companies on your list.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveG3
Status
Not open for further replies.