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.
It is quite necessary to ignore basic facts to conclude that operating in these countries will reduce margins and be less productive than elsewhere. Loose criticism is not helpful. Please do your homework, then come back with facts, if you think you can find some to support your case. Failing to do that makes me conclude you're just spreading pointless FUD.

I offered my views in response to a direct question from TMSE. You are correct; however, I have sinned, violating my prior intention of no longer "spreading pointless FUD" here. Henceforth, I will endeavor to accede more faithfully to your requests to discontinue suggesting anything contrary to your beliefs. By all means, please continue chatting among yourselves.
 
Yep... and once things start running, they can't shut down to clean up the mess. And so remains a mess forever after.

Gonna push pack a little here.
If it never shuts down, then it works, which is the goal, so the internal beauty of the code does not matter.

If new copies of the machine are added, then code can be updated, if there is reason to.

If new versions of the machine are made, the internal structure of the original's code comes into play, but refactoring for the sake of refactoring has little end benefit, and can introduce other bugs especially on timing critical things.
 
It also leads to writing spaghetti code at 2 am Sunday morning

If they brought the team in from Germany to fix the code, 2am in Sparks NV is 10am in Prüm. So, assuming they didn't bother acclimating to PST (PDT?), it would be a good time to code (especially if there is no 3rd shift running)

If it was the west coast team, then yeah, 2am is usually my limit for useful code (Assuming I started at 8 am).
Just did a rush project with almost 35+ hours between Friday afternoon and Monday morning. Was working at 2am 3 days in row. Would have taken less man hours if the schedule wasn't so compressed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neroden
I vaguely had a high impression of you before, and I can't see how you don't understand that embracing low margin high-risk operations is a bad idea when at best they are small relative to your main operation.

More obvious is why storage is in fact necessary to complete the overall long term plan of Tesla. I can see why this board isn't helping you with your investing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neroden
That's probably an important one. Over 5 years though?

Apple tripled its number of employees from 37,000 in 2009 to 97,000 in 2014 while its revenue increased from $47B to $200B.

I guess one big difference: Apple wasn't competing against several Big Tech companies like Apple/Facebook/Amazon/NVIDIA when wooing talent.

I think you may be spot on. So what's the solution? Let's dig one level deeper: in which area do you think Tesla will be limited in its hiring?

It's probably not law, human resources, or finance/accounting, in which departments skills are generally transferable across industries. It's probably not sales or marketing, since demand will likely be more than supply for some time. It's probably not service, since as demand for cars shifts from ICE to BEV, service staff will be able to switch after some training, and BEV needs less service anyway.

Construction, possibly, since homebuilding/construction industry is already suffering from lack of labor and subsequent gigafactories and solar roofs will need a lot of labor hours. Another reason why Tesla absolutely needs to invent "lego installation" for solar roofs.

R&D hiring is likely the area where Tesla will be limited. Which specific area of R&D? Battery tech? Machine learning? Automation? Computer Vision? Coding? Any specific language in coding?

What's the solution? We have 5 years. That's longer than college, and there's an increased interest in trade schools, which can take less than four years. Can Tesla create its own university? This isn't any different than creating its supply chain for parts or materials.

Elon knows people at Kahn Academy. Neither of the organizations are new to using the Internet to scale quickly and efficiently.

Vertical integration applied to labor: Tesla University. This is Tesla's next move.
Third cup of coffee by 6 am.

Well - that's the mission, right? To accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy. I recognize Tesla is and will grow quicker than any other company ever did, and that this is not easy, so I'm just trying to anticipate bottlenecks. This is our responsibility as long-term shareholders.

And I understand growing too quickly has elevated risks, or can be "unstable" as you put it. What exactly makes it unstable though? Demand is much higher than supply, so inventory buildup wouldn't be the issue. The executive team is capable, so that's not it either. Changing battery tech? One can argue that the quicker Tesla scales manufacturing, the less that risk becomes. What am I missing?

Unstable means "marked by frequent and unpredictable changes." Is going from 500,000 cars to 10 million cars really more unpredictable than going from zero to 500,000?

Maybe product quality? Elon can't pull out sleeping bags at multiple Gigafactories simultaneously. Maybe labor? Culture needing time to permeate through an organization? How do you accelerate that sustainably? Tesla University would also help to that end. Feed two birds with one hand.

As we discussed in August, and now confirmed on the latest earnings call, labor is a primary limiting factor for Tesla's growth.

"Tesla University" should have been established years ago.
 
Last edited:
your favorite site! SA!

read it... then tell me how this guy's wrong:

Tesla: Buying Their Own Cars? - Tesla Motors (NASDAQ:TSLA) | Seeking Alpha
I read it. The author Donn Bailey claims to have done a stint as CFO but he doesn't understand the difference between the Balance Sheet and the Income Statement.

Bailey homes in on Deepak's statement that Tesla capitalizes inventory cars used as service loaners (Balance Sheet) and claims that means they are selling cars to themselves (Income Statement ). He doesn't understand the basics of accounting, but styles himself an expert.

Bailey is one of the few SA authors whose articles I read and comment on. The reason is that he speaks as an authority when he isn't. He once part owned a Ford dealership and thinks he's an expert on the car business. The most telling thing he has revealed is that he only invests in stocks that pay dividends. So he's missed out on FB, AMZN, GOOG, NFLX - and TSLA.

In Deepak's statement that Bailey misconstrued he said that when Tesla sells a service loaner it books the mileage/time depreciation in COGS. This negates the bear thesis that Tesla was putting those costs in SG&A in order to inflate GM.
 
Last edited:
Gonna push pack a little here.
If it never shuts down, then it works, which is the goal, so the internal beauty of the code does not matter.

If new copies of the machine are added, then code can be updated, if there is reason to.

If new versions of the machine are made, the internal structure of the original's code comes into play, but refactoring for the sake of refactoring has little end benefit, and can introduce other bugs especially on timing critical things.

The problem is that poorly written code usually results in difficult to diagnose, intermittent problems. "Why the heck did that just happen?". And it becomes difficult to maintain; nobody but the programmer understands how the thing works, and so it's difficult to maintain / extend / modify.

There's a huge value in writing the software properly, the first go around.
 
A start would be if Tesla could reverse the trend of ever increasing bottom line losses so that they start getting smaller rather than larger. The losses for the most recent year have been:

4Q16 $121.3 million
1Q17 $330.3 million
2Q17 $336.9 million
3Q16 $619.4 million

I suspect the trend will continue for at least another quarter since the SH letter's Outlook section stated:

"Due to a higher mix of temporarily lower margin Model 3 deliveries in Q4 compared to Q3, we expect non-GAAP automotive gross margin to temporarily decline slightly in Q4 to about 15% and then recover starting in Q1."
The growing losses make sense when you take into account flattish S+X sales while investing heavily in engineering, manufacturing and service/supercharging infrastructure for Model 3. 60K M3's per quarter with ASP of $50K and 20% GM yields $600M in gross profits. With modest growth in R&D and SG&A that should get Tesla close to break even.
 
Per Earning/CC
To date, our primary production constraint has been in the battery module assembly line at Gigafactory 1, where cells are packaged into modules

Question - For S/X, cell packaging is in house right? So this is not like something new for Tesla right?

(The more familiarity and know-how they have on this, the quicker the turn around will be)
 
The problem is that poorly written code usually results in difficult to diagnose, intermittent problems. "Why the heck did that just happen?". And it becomes difficult to maintain; nobody but the programmer understands how the thing works, and so it's difficult to maintain / extend / modify.

There's a huge value in writing the software properly, the first go around.
Good god, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve decided to simply scrap the steaming pile that was handed to me and re-write it from scratch instead of trying to decipher and correct. (Shudders at the memory.) I’m glad I don’t program any more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.