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

Articles/megaposts by DaveT

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yep, the ICE auto market being disrupted by Tesla is like a slow motion train wreck. And we’ve got front row seats.





I wouldn’t make too much of Morgan Stanley’s low 2020 estimate (220k Gen3 and 150 Model S/X). Yes they might have to boost their estimates with this gigafactory announcement but probably won’t do so for a long time. Also, Tesla has thrown around the 500k figure by the end of the decade. DB’s latest report forecasts 450k cars in 2020.



Yep, here’s how I look at it. The Gigafactory is costing far less than most of us expected, especially with Tesla only contributing $2b out of the $4-5b necessary. I have some ideas on how they’re arranged that but I’ll save that for a later post.

But the point is that Tesla will be able to scale Gigafactory to many Gigafactories relatively easily since $2b is really not that much money.

Also, JB Straubel’s Stanford talk last year mentioned 700k vehicles in 2019
(Articles/megaposts by DaveT - Page 17), which would mean probably over 1m in 2020, or 2021. Then scaling more from then.

So, in order to meet 700k demand in 2019, they need to start building Gigafactory #2 in 2016 (assuming it takes 3 years to build). Where do you think they’ll build it? China makes the most sense. So it will be an auto factory with a Gigafactory next to it.

But that won’t be enough since in 2020-2021 they’ll likely be able to sell more than 1 million cars (according to JB Straubel’s slide showing 700k in 2019). So, they’ll need Gigafactory #3 online by 2021. That means they need to start building Gigafactory #3 three years earlier, 2018. Where should they build it? Europe probably.

So, here’s how Gigafactory rollout looks like:
Gigafactory #1: U.S.
2014 - start building
2017 - comes online

Gigafactory #2 and auto factory #2: China
2016 - start building
2019 - comes online

Gigafactory #3 and auto factory #3: Europe
2018 - start building
2021 - comes online

Then, from 2019-2020 they might need to start building a new gigafactory every year (or at least 500k capacity of factory for both battery and auto).

Now, some might think this sounds overly optimistic.

But Elon and JB have mentioned in the past that technology adoption usually starts off slower than people think but when it moves from early to mass market adoption, the adoption rate is much faster than most people realize. Meaning, Tesla’s challenge is going to be meeting the steep demand curve for Gen3 (and maybe Gen4) where we see demand really scaling like a hockey stick. This is the only way over 50% of new vehicles sold will be electric by 2030 (Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA) - Page 32).

So today’s announcement that one gigafactory supplying 500k cars with batteries only will cost Tesla $2b provides us with a clear roadmap on how Tesla is going to scale to millions of cars. 5 million cars/year sold by Tesla by 2028 means they need 10 gigafactories (if each one has 500k battery pack production capacity). I think it’s doable.

Morgan Stanley estimates Tesla to sell 1.1m cars in 2028. I think they’re off by about 4 million.



I’ll explain a bit more what I mean by ICE auto makers are in for a slow motion train wreck.

First, as battery costs comes down EVs become increasingly more compelling and take away sales from ICE auto makers unless they’re able to make EVs that can compete with Tesla in price and performance. As the cost of batteries continue to decrease (7-8% annually), EVs will overtake ICE cars in new car sales by the year 2030 (according to Elon who think it could happen a few years earlier than this).

The problem ICE auto makers face is that every sale of a Tesla means one more person has decided not to buy an ICE car and instead has decided to buy an EV. That person is not coming back (in most cases) to becoming and ICE customer. In the auto industry, when a customer buys a different brand car it’s called a “conquest” because that person has switched from his old car brand to a new brand and this is actually more difficult than it might seem as people are quite loyal to their cars.

In order for ICE auto makers to compete with Tesla they need to compete in two main areas: performance and price. Performance increase handling/acceleration/etc and also battery range. ICE auto makers must make EVs that compete favorably with Tesla in terms of price and performance/range. Currently there’s nothing on the market that competes with the Model S in these two areas as an EV.

Some say that ICE auto makers will eventually release models that compete with Tesla and then Tesla will be overwhelmed by competition. However, in order to compete with Gen3 other ICE auto makers need to get down the cost of the battery to the same level as Tesla does. But in order to do that, they will need to build battery Gigafactories as well. However, in order to build a battery Gigafactory there needs to be significant demand for the EV car you’re making. But how can you have significant demand when you’re the price of your EV car is much higher than Gen3 (or has much less performance/range).

Thus, ICE auto makers will be hesitant to making huge battery Gigafactories until they see large demand for their sub-par (when compared to Gen3) EVs. They might be waiting for a long time. And what will probably wake them up is when their ICE cars sales start to decline, and by that time the slow motion train wreck is already in full motion. As car sales decrease, these ICE auto makers immediately feel the pinch and they can start seeing losses. Even a 10-20% drop in ICE auto sales can have serious negative effects on these businesses and they will be hit with losses, be forced to lay off workers, and close plants. As ICE auto sales drop even further, many of the assets of these ICE auto makers become liabilities as they’re forced to keep old plants running supporting a declining technology (ICE).

Now, I don’t see this happening within the next few to several years. That’s why it’s a slow motion train wreck. It won’t be until the 2020s sometime where ICE makers notice declines in sales due to increasing EV sales. And then it probably won’t be until another several years where we see the auto industry massively change as companies restructure, go bankrupt, merge or get acquired.

In the future (15-20 years) I see the auto industry consolidating much like the cell phone industry consolidated when it was disrupted by Apple and also Google. In the auto industry, I can it largely dominated by 3-4 massive players with man smaller players disappearing through a series of mergers, acquisitions and bankruptcy. Tesla (at this rate) will likely be the dominant player with high gross margins and operating profit. There might be 1-2 other players who are a result of consolidation in the ICE auto industry. And then there might be another tech company, like Google.

Great analysis as always. I like this new DaveT who just through his cautious numbers out the window.

You are going to need to raise your PT a lot higher based on this new analysis :wink:
 
Great analysis as always. I like this new DaveT who just through his cautious numbers out the window.

You are going to need to raise your PT a lot higher based on this new analysis :wink:

The Gigafactory announcement (at least what we know of it) really took me by surprise. I was shocked by the low $2b investment by Tesla and (if they're able to execute as they say) how clear the path to scalability is for Gen3 (to reach millions of cars).

Today's Gigafactory announcement is a major game-changer. Huge. It's hard not to get excited about it.
 
Today's Gigafactory announcement is a major game-changer. Huge. It's hard not to get excited about it.

THIS! I was away from home and I saw the headline on my phone and instantly got really really excited. I started dreaming about all it could mean. I excitedly texted my friend who wasn't so excited, " It's more like a long term investment." AHH! I then come onto the forums a few hours later and people are more bullish than I was in my dreams, haha. Good stuff.
 
Dave, I'm just going to stick this here for your use:

TSLA Analyst Rankings.png


The markets often move on analyst reports in direct proportion to the performance ranking seen here, because many algos trade on these performance numbers when predicting how far each analyst's price targets will move a stock. Note the #1 ranked analyst. :)
 
Last edited:
Dave, I'm just going to stick this here for your use:

The markets often move on analyst reports in direct proportion to the performance ranking seen here, because many algos trade on these performance numbers when predicting how far each analyst's price targets will move a stock. Note the #1 ranked analyst. :)

Thanks Fluxcap. That's helpful. I think though that the institution matters apart from the rankings. For example, even though Goldman is last in the ranking they are so influential with so many institutions and high net worth individuals that while algos might not pay attention much, lots of people and institutions do.
 
Thanks Fluxcap. That's helpful. I think though that the institution matters apart from the rankings. For example, even though Goldman is last in the ranking they are so influential with so many institutions and high net worth individuals that while algos might not pay attention much, lots of people and institutions do.

Yes indeed. Maybe you can find a friend with a Bloomberg terminal who will let you have at it for a bit. Bloomberg clients have access to real-time data on every order in every market, analyst rankings, short interest, even real-time institutional ownership/orders. That kind of info is helpful, but I still believe unnecessary for we here on this forum to trade with a vision about TSLA that those tools don't help us (or anyone) achieve.

Basically what I'm saying is, don't sweat the lack of access to investment bank levels of info and data too much. We're doing just fine here. :)
 
Thanks Fluxcap. That's helpful. I think though that the institution matters apart from the rankings. For example, even though Goldman is last in the ranking they are so influential with so many institutions and high net worth individuals that while algos might not pay attention much, lots of people and institutions do.

This is true. Goldman will still have more pull than Andrea James even though she is higher ranked. It is about the size of the clients that you cater to as well.
 
Yep, the ICE auto market being disrupted by Tesla is like a slow motion train wreck. And we’ve got front row seats.

...
I’ll explain a bit more what I mean by ICE auto makers are in for a slow motion train wreck.

An additional dynamic DaveT - my understanding, though I haven't done the research, is that the high end luxury market provides a disproportionate share of the ICE industry profits, at least on a car by car basis. Therefore losing a high end car sale to Tesla isn't just any old sale - it's one of the most valuable sales. We might be able to make use of high end sales among the various manufacturers to provide a more frequently updated and nearer term view into the ongoing slow motion train wreck :)

Also worth noting - though I think of the Model S as directly competing with other ~$100k vehicles, I believe that it will also be providing some noticeable degree of disruption down to the ~$50k market. That's clearly a much larger market, so we'll need larger numbers of Model S sales to clearly see a shift in sales volume away from other manufacturers at these lower levels. As you point out, any shift though is a big deal.

To reinforce your point about conquest sales, how many of us here in our own lives have realized some variant of "I'm buying Tesla for the remainder of my life" to "I'm never buying a car with a gas engine again".
 
To reinforce your point about conquest sales, how many of us here in our own lives have realized some variant of "I'm buying Tesla for the remainder of my life" to "I'm never buying a car with a gas engine again".

I haven't met a Model S owner yet that would go buy a gasoline-powered car ever again. I'm sure there are some out there, but I'm certainly not one of them.
 
I haven't met a Model S owner yet that would go buy a gasoline-powered car ever again. I'm sure there are some out there, but I'm certainly not one of them.


This may be extreme, but I certainly agree that the one thing these investor reports tend to miss--mostly because it's hard to quantify--is just how compelling the product is. I literally have not talked to one single person that has test-driven a Tesla that hasn't come away wanting one. That's amazing, and it's what makes Tesla (at least right now) unique in the marketplace.

I did read through the MS report, and while it's long, I didn't find it particularly persuasive. I still don't think that the autonomous driving market is a significant stand-alone thing, and even if it were I don't see it as being particularly additive for a company like Tesla. In other words, even if MS is right and Tesla is way ahead of everyone else on this (something I am not sure I agree with), how do they monetize that? Is it anything other than a competitive advantage that helps them sell more cars? MS talks a bunch about content creation/curation, but I don't buy that. Exclusive content is just not a model that I see translating to the automotive space; why would a content provider want to sign an exclusive agreement with any car company, let alone Tesla, given the low overall volume that Tesla will offer (even 500K cars a year is still a drop in the bucket in the worldwide auto market)? This isn't something that MS really answers in their report.

I don't doubt that autonomous driving is important, or that it will create new economic sectors, or change the way we interact with the world. I do seriously question whether there will be a particular company with a vast lead in that sector and, even if there were, whether that company will be Tesla, or even if it was, whether that would allow Tesla to be any more disruptive of the automotive space than it will already be, or make significantly more money.

Anyway. I remain bullish on Tesla, but after reading the MS report, I am not so bullish on Morgan Stanley.
 
Tesla had 40+ open positions for Autonomous Driving Engineers recently and there are far fewer now. This is also not something that simply exists, it is literally being invented, and the invention and competitive advantage is at least 90% software. Neither Detroit nor Munich nor Tokyo are the leaders in consumer software. That's in Silicon Valley. So, a large chunk of people in the world that can pull this off are either working for Google or Tesla Motors currently, or will be soon.

It's the people that Elon attracts -- that's the true competitive advantage and that is what I think Adam Jonas realized. I remain convinced that most of the other automakers are culturally (and perhaps even physically) incapable of the kind of innovation Elon inspires.

Also, I helped someone buy a Mercedes S-Class recently, which has long been the "standard-bearer" for technology in the global luxury auto market. Great car. Truly great engineering for a traditional ICE car. But compared to the pure elegance and intuitiveness of the software-powered Model S, the Mercedes S-class feels archaic, outdated, and not worth the price to me.

I don't see the other automakers just magically hiring 500 of Silicon Valley's best and brightest engineers overnight...or maybe ever. That's why they will fall behind. They will either buy Tesla drivetrains and rebrand them in the future, or they may just cease to exist.
 
Well, that wasn't very nice of you...

I know...I'm just an extremely good negotiator for car purchases, and have done it well my whole life, so when family/friends go into the dealership shark pit, they often ask to take me with them. There wasn't a chance this person was going to take my advice on a Model S.

I view myself as a pretty nice guy, but I heard later from another dealership that I crushed the Mercedes' dealership's price so hard that the salesperson was later fired. Saved the buyer $10k off already discounted price, and I'm pretty sure the dealership lost significant money on it.

I guess guys like me are another small reason why Tesla's direct sales model is good for the car business :).
 
Last edited:
Tesla released their annual report last week on Feb 26. I personally like to read annual and quarterly reports of all the companies I’m invested in and also considering to invest in. I find tidbits of information that help me get a better overview of the company and it’s direction. I highly recommend reading TSLA’s 2013 annual report:
http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ABEA-4CW8X0/2330621879x0xS1193125-14-69681/1318605/filing.pdf

Here are just a few tidbits I found interesting:

“As of December 31, 2013, we had 5,859 full-time employees.“ - Wow, almost 6,000 employees! In their 2012 annual report, they say “As of December 31, 2012, we had approximately 2,964 full-time employees.” So, basically Tesla doubled in employee count over the past year.

Also, a few days before the Detroit show pre-announcement of 6900 deliveries Tesla granted stock options to several executives. The conditions of those stock options weren’t known at that time. But the annual report shares more info regarding this:
“In January 2014, to create incentives for continued long term success beyond the Model S program and to closely align executive pay with our stockholders’ interests in the achievement of significant milestones by our company, the Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors granted stock options to certain employees to purchase 782,500 shares of our common stock. Each such grant consists of four vesting tranches with a vesting schedule based entirely on the attainment of future performance milestones, assuming continued employment and service to us through each vesting date.
• 1/4th of the shares subject to the options are scheduled to vest upon completion of the first Model X Production Vehicle;
• 1/4th of the shares subject to the options are scheduled to vest upon achieving aggregate vehicle production of 100,000 vehicles in a trailing 12-month period;
• 1/4th of the shares subject to the options are scheduled to vest upon completion of the first Gen III Production Vehicle; and
• 1/4th of the shares subject to the options are scheduled to vest upon achievement of annualized gross margin of greater than 30.0% in any three years.”

Overall, I like these performance/milestone-based stock incentives for the executive team. It gives them focus and keeps them motivated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.