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.
In densely populated megacities, I see self-driving services being banned quite quickly because of the massive gongestion increase. Loitering self-driving cars is the menace of the future =)

I see this tech working best in lower density areas. As it has been said here many times, mass transit is there for a reason.

IIRC there were ideas that Tesla would set up a central car station with self-charging, parking and possibly service/sales facilities in major urban centers. This would alleviate the "roaming car" conundrum (I know all about that, having grown up in and about NYC, often it is impossible to find parking, so someone gets dropped off to do the shopping/errand while the driver does endless circles waiting for the shopper to show up at some predesignated point [pre cell phone era]).

In large enough urban centers there may be a need for multiple buildings. That's why I foresee a potential for a Tesla REIT in the future to help with these kinds of infrastructure needs.

Also, a belated welcome to TMC (I see it was post number 3)!
 
Good. ValueAnalyst, however, is counting on it, which is making a mess of her predictions.

I have said repeatedly that whether Tesla gets to FSD in 2018 or 2021 makes nearly zero difference to my intrinsic value estimate due to majority of cash flows being assumed in outer years.

I know that you know enough finance to figure this out on your own, but as always, you continue on your straw man argument, which is very intriguing.
 
In densely populated megacities, I see self-driving services being banned quite quickly because of the massive gongestion increase. Loitering self-driving cars is the menace of the future =)

I see this tech working best in lower density areas. As it has been said here many times, mass transit is there for a reason.

Predictions on FSD run the gamut from "not in a million years" to "it'll quickly cause massive congestion."

Welcome to TMC :D
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Jonathan Hewitt
I find it difficult to project financial results from level 5 automated driving. I've mostly stayed out of any of this discussion because I think we are too far out to wrap our heads around it for stock valuation. Its fun to talk about future stuff like this, but not really something to be looked at from a financial modeling perspective.

I think we will have level 4 for a very long time. Tesla's FSD is basically a level 3/4, which means a licensed driver must be available in the car. The take over is not immediate, but it won't be at the level where you can expect to throw your kids into the robot car and give it an arbitrary address and it will be fine going there completely on its own. If we are at level 3 for 2-3 years, then level 4 for another 5-7, we're talking 7-10 years before we can really talk about Tesla Network. That's too far out to make any projections.

The thing is, we don't need level 5 to have an extremely robust sales level and stock price. As it stands, there are cadres of people that buy Tesla's in order to deal with mind numbing traffic each day. As the vehicle gets better and better at handling 95+% of the every day commute, to the point where you can sleep or read a book safely while the car is driving itself in traffic, that's all that is necessary to drive sales to be production constrained. The next part is the ability to drop off all passengers and find its own parking spot and charge at a local shopping center. That's on private property and can be done with special toll tags/parking areas if need be, so that Tesla owners never need to hunt for a parking space. That's a game changer. No need for full Uber/Lyft replacement in some distant future in order for Tesla to be production constrained. Of course, the issue is then monetization by the mile or by the trip rather than by the sales/service of the vehicle. Sure, we've all seen the various calculations. I just don't think we'll have a handle on that for quite some time. And again, it depends on how quickly it arrives.

As for level 5 fully automated driving, I'm looking forward to red-eye drives. Especially at slow speeds. If you want to get to a destination that is about 300 miles away, you can get into the car at night and wake up at your destination. The car can go as slow as possible so that you can arrive at the right time in the morning. If that means driving 40 mph, then great... lower energy consumption, smoother ride. We can't do that today because humans don't want the drudgery of driving for an even longer period of time, not to mention the safety and strain of driving overnight. And multiple speeds of vehicles on the highways is dangerous today. But maybe that won't come to pass. It might be that every trip is a service fee, as I get a vehicle on demand that suits for the number of passengers, the distance, and the speed required. Maybe we go back to the pod concepts with exchangeable power modules. So much is unknown as we move forward into this new automated driving world.

Thank you for your insight.

How do you reconcile between the LA to NY demo later this year that Elon says will be able to handle dynamic rerouting with no controls touched at all throughout the whole trip which will include real city traffic in both cities and your prediction of level 5 FSD in ten years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: everman
IIRC there were ideas that Tesla would set up a central car station with self-charging, parking and possibly service/sales facilities in major urban centers. This would alleviate the "roaming car" conundrum (I know all about that, having grown up in and about NYC, often it is impossible to find parking, so someone gets dropped off to do the shopping/errand while the driver does endless circles waiting for the shopper to show up at some predesignated point [pre cell phone era]).

In large enough urban centers there may be a need for multiple buildings. That's why I foresee a potential for a Tesla REIT in the future to help with these kinds of infrastructure needs.

Also, a belated welcome to TMC (I see it was post number 3)!

Thank you.

I think those central buildings do not scale up very easily to satisfy the needs of true mass transit. That also puts the cost structure in a new light. Think about a skyscraper with thousands of workers coming and going in a day. That is a massive amount of traffic if served by cars. And the traffic is usually very concentrated in certain hours. And if there is many such buildings in a small area, it will be total chaos.

That is the reason I think megacities should be counted out ot the calculations at this moment. Of course Elon knows this. That's why he is dabbling with ideas such as boring etc. I think those projects in mass scale are long way away.
 
Hmmm... waited until the end of quarter to reveal new features. I'm thinking they aren't worried about making Q2 numbers (which is guided low anyways).

Most curious thing about the new S75 and S75D is whether or not they are using Model 3 derived technology. In other words, did they just put in the same 90D/100D 2nd gen drive units, including inverter to allow the 75's to have near matching performance, or did they choose to incorporate the 3rd gen, built for Model 3 drive units with new inverters. Electrek wrote about this earlier:

Tesla Model 3 exclusive leaked specs: 300kW+ inverter architecture putting its power capacity near Model S

From the article:


It would be just like Tesla to incorporate this into the S/X on the eve of the 3 launch.

I'll bet they're using the same inverters (keep costs down and speed up production). This would imply to me that the Model 3 will be in the low 5s range for AWD, and mid 5s for RWD since the S AND X are now sub 5s. Also Elon had said that the Semi would be using many part from the Model 3, which implies it will be in the Semi as well... any thoughts on 0-60 for the Semi?

Just my WAG.
 
Predictions on FSD run the gamut from "not in a million years" to "it'll quickly cause massive congestion."

Welcome to TMC :D

Thank you.

Yes, for unproven tech it is normal to have wildly differing estimations and predictions.

I am not technically savvy enough to guess how far we are from true self-driving, but I see the potential in it. I have no idea how the value of it can be calculated at all at this moment. Is it meant to be mass transit or is it just superuber? If mass transit, then I would not count peer-to-peer network being able to serve the load. Mass transit brings mass infrastructure needs.

I think the discussion is very interesting but I wouldn't put my (non existing) money in it.

And sorry about my grammar mistakes. English is not my first language.
 
  • Love
Reactions: neroden and MitchJi
<snip> I think we will have level 4 for a very long time. Tesla's FSD is basically a level 3/4, which means a licensed driver must be available in the car. The take over is not immediate, but it won't be at the level where you can expect to throw your kids into the robot car and give it an arbitrary address and it will be fine going there completely on its own. If we are at level 3 for 2-3 years, then level 4 for another 5-7, we're talking 7-10 years before we can really talk about Tesla Network. That's too far out to make any projections. <snip>

I don't understand why you need Level 5 to have a robust network of autonomous cars. As I mentioned a while back, I think you could take the low-hanging fruit first and start the network in areas like Phoenix or Los Angeles that have well-marked, wide roads, relatively low numbers of pedestrians, good weather, etc., and as the system becomes more robust move to more complex or challenging environments. Eventually the Level 4 network could be active the vast majority of the time in most metropolitan areas without needing to be Level 5.

What am I missing?

The definition of Level 4 is:

Level 4 (”mind off”): As level 3, but no driver attention is ever required for safety, i.e. the driver may safely go to sleep or leave the driver's seat. Self driving is supported only in limited areas (geofenced) or under special circumstances, like traffic jams. Outside of these areas or circumstances, the vehicle must be able to safely abort the trip, i.e. park the car, if the driver does not retake control. Autonomous car - Wikipedia

Once AP2 is sufficiently reliable to be fully autonomous in the Phoenix or Los Angeles metropolitan areas (for example), there is no reason I can think of that a geo-fenced Tesla Network could not be started in that area, subject to regulatory approval. And TN-enabled metropolitan areas could be linked via Interstate corridors for longer distance travel.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why you need Level 5 to have a robust network of autonomous cars. As I mentioned a while back, I think you could take the low-hanging fruit first and start the network in areas like Phoenix or Los Angeles that have well-marked, wide roads, relatively low numbers of pedestrians, good weather, etc., and as the system becomes more robust move to more complex environments. Eventually the Level 4 network would be active the vast majority of the time in most metropolitan areas without needing to be Level 5.

What am I missing?

Tesla is not launching Tesla Network in New Delhi?

india-new-delhi-traffic.jpg
 
20 million all-electric cars replace only 1 million barrels per day of oil demand.

The world consumes nearly 100 million barrels of oil per day.

Y'all berate me for predicting Tesla will manufacture 10-15m all-electric cars in 2025.

Yet at the same time say "peak oil in 2022!"

Smh...... :rolleyes:
Well my view has been 20 to 30 M EVs by 2025, which is enough to tip oil into perpetual decline.

However, peak oil may come several years before EVs alone are able to do the job. Residual fuel oil consumption peaked in 2007, and diesel appears to have peaked in 2015. Once gasoline consumption peaks, it is probably all over for crude.

There is an important distinction to make between peak demand and peak consumption. Peak demand has to do with consumers becoming unwilling to unwilling to pay fuel prices high enough to sustain growth in production. Peak consumption has to do with the quantity demanded actually beginning to decline. EVs and other fuel saving technologies are eroding demand elasticity. While the market remains over supplied, we simply do not know how the market will respond to higher prices. Once the supply becomes tight again, we will see how high demand is willing to go in price and how long it will sustain high prices to drive up production.

If consumers are not willing to sustain oil prices above $60/b, then the supply will wither and decline, and this could easily be the case by 2022. There is no guarantee that, if production declines, the price of oil will go high enough drive production back up to new a new peak. Because of enormous inventory, consumption will only decline after production declined for a sustained period of time. Thus, my outlook is that demand peaks before production peaks, which happens before consumption peaks. But the relevance here is that the oil industry fails economically after demand peaks because it fails to obtain a sustainable price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neroden
Thank you for your insight.

How do you reconcile between the LA to NY demo later this year that Elon says will be able to handle dynamic rerouting with no controls touched at all throughout the whole trip which will include real city traffic in both cities and your prediction of level 5 FSD in ten years?

That demo, by definition, will be level 3/4. The vast majority of the trip is on divided highways and can be done with a level 3 vehicle. The Supercharger stops will be the hardest... and that is mostly level 4. It is not going to be level 5. As I posted in an earlier comment, we're going to have to re-define our level system.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm... waited until the end of quarter to reveal new features. I'm thinking they aren't worried about making Q2 numbers (which is guided low anyways).

Most curious thing about the new S75 and S75D is whether or not they are using Model 3 derived technology. In other words, did they just put in the same 90D/100D 2nd gen drive units, including inverter to allow the 75's to have near matching performance, or did they choose to incorporate the 3rd gen, built for Model 3 drive units with new inverters. Electrek wrote about this earlier:

Tesla Model 3 exclusive leaked specs: 300kW+ inverter architecture putting its power capacity near Model S

From the article:


It would be just like Tesla to incorporate this into the S/X on the eve of the 3 launch.
I was speculating to my self whether or not it is possible that they changed the battery cells in the S and X to the new format, and that caused the acceleration change? Seems unlikely since Elon just said they were not going to, but who knows?
 
And sorry about my grammar mistakes. English is not my first language.
But you have the best system of education in the world! so no grammar mistakes detected. Most of us don't speak correct English, anyway. I was on a Russian language program tour in the old Soviet Union where our leader once ask us the word for fluency in three or two languages, and then the one for fluent in only one: "American." (Which is misused by all of us--meant U.S. citizen by birth.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.