I apologize for any mistakees, typo's etc. If I had known how long this was going to take me to do write this...
Battery Pack and Gigafactory
Gigafactory - Production Cars and Storage Growth
In other words the major product is not GF1, it’s GF Production Line 1 (GFPL1). This has huge implications for the flexibility of setting up smaller factories, or setting up factories in phases to obtain most of the cost benefits of a larger factory.
That means, now that it's completed and working satisfactorally, they will be able to produce succeeding production lines at a substantially lower cost and more quickly than they produced the first one.
These lines can be installed anywhere that Tesla needs a multiple of one or more of these lines. I believe that it will be possible for Panasonic to produce 2170 cells in Japan, at a similar cost to the cells produced at the GF by doing two things:
1. Using one or more units of the large scale manufacturing equipment they developed for use at the GF.
2. Vertically integrating that factory. Obviously converting their existing 18650 line to produce 2170's is relatively trivial. But getting the price down requires much more than that. It probably makes more sense to shift MS-MS 2170 cell production to the NV GF (to take advantage of colocation), and setup and use more efficient production lines in Asia for Asian TM and Asian TE.
I think that it’s pretty clear the idea to use customized equipment and to use vertical integration were Elon-Tesla’s ideas, and that Panasonic’s hesitancy to invest ended when they were convinced that a 30% cost reduction was a conservative number. So it's more complicated than just scaling production. *Elon-Tesla figured this out using first principles. If it seems obvious why didn't Panasonic figure this out without having to be convinced by Tesla?
Tesla is now claiming 35% battery cost reduction at ‘Gigafactory 1’ – hinting at breakthrough cost below $125/kWh
So I believe that when the GF production hits 35 GWh (2018 or 2019) Tesla's car pack costs will be less than half of $190 per kWh (~50%-55%) or under $95 per kWh. Probably under $85 per kWh. I'm sure some of you are thinking that 50% reduction in costs is crazy, but the second generation TE products have about a 50% reduction in price and they include the invertors!
I've already pointed out two things which are major advantages for Tesla which were due to Elon Musk. I don't understand the criticism he receives on this forum. IMO he should be regarded in a similar fashion as Lebron James is regarded by the Cleveland fans. IMO he is clearly Tesla's main moat.
Suggestion for Tesla to accelerate their trajectory for reducing carbon emissions
Model 3 Production
Model 3 Production Line and CapEx
2. The concerns that Elon was crazy to suggest the possibility of 100k to 200k by the end of 2017 are exaggerated.
3. They are not building one line and then replacing the entire line.
Model 3 Cash Flow and CapEx
Elon Musk Down-Sells Model 3 On Twitter In Favor Of Model S
But that's a little hard to do since Elon is committed to making compelling cars. I believe that the reasons that they are going to delay the full reveal and the opening of the Design Studio as long as they can because the Model 3 will be compelling, especially the prices. For example Elon tweeted that pack upgrades will cost less on the M3. I also believe that they are planning to make some upgrades to the MS-MX, and reduce the prices of some of the options at the same time. They are in an awkward position until they start making profits on the M3.
No Planned Obsolescence - Ludicrous Mode is a SW upgrade
The million mile driveline, built into every Tesla, is the hardware required for Ludicrous Mode. In other words Elon just confirmed my belief that Ludicrous Mode is a software upgrade.
Battery Pack and Gigafactory
Gigafactory - Production Cars and Storage Growth
Colin said:Given the dependency on the Model 3 profitability on the Gigafactory, can you talk about timing for a full ramp on both anode and cathode assembly?
<snip>
This is a modular facility, right? So you've got machines up and running, so just the first tranche of equipment that you've installed. When is that going to be up and running at full capacity?
JB. Straubel Q4-2016 about 48 minutes said:Yes, they're pretty large increments. But those will be up and running at the full capacity for the first instances within just a few months. We're already in the stages of – we'll be doing the second instance of anode and cathode electrode assembly. So, these are needed for the ramp of Model 3. So you can get a sense of the timing here.
<snip>
First instance of the electrode manufacturing line.
<snip>
Yes, and that first instance would be achieving full volume in Q3.
Tyler Frank said:Would you need to build another Gigafactory prior to hitting 1 million units per year in 2020, or do you think that the current Gigafactory will have enough capacity?
Gigafactory - Car Pack CostsElon Musk Q4-2016 about 54 minutes said:...but if you say it's somewhere around the 60-kilowatt-hour to 70-kilowatt-hour level, then you need 70 gigawatt-hours to get to 1 million units. And we think that's the cell level. And then we think the current Gigafactory should actually be able to do in excess of 100 gigawatt-hours. So, that leaves – probably a big – Gigafactory 1 can manage – can support – it can support probably 1 million vehicles a year, plus maybe something like 30 gigawatt-hours or so of storage, depending upon how fast the storage market grows. But really, I think the storage market's probably going to grow maybe twice the rate of the automotive business. Something like that.
<snip>
Yes, I currently think that we should build 500k vehicles next year and 1 million vehicles by 2020. That's 500k vehicles in total, Model S, Model 3, and Model X...
Tesla believes the Gigafactory will drive down the cost of its battery packs 30% by at least 2017 and 50% by 2020.
Elon Musk Q2-2014 said:In your question you had [something that] should be corrected, like the -- so the 30% savings is not just due to logistics. Logistics is a big factor. We are ---
JB Straubel Q2-2014 said:It's not even the biggest though.
The following is clearly less important than using custom equipment and vertical integration for achieving their 30%-50% cost reduction estimates:Elon Musk Q2-2014 said:Logistics [indiscernible] the fact that it's just go to one station to the next instead of going from multiple entities to multiple entities. But really when you get to the kinds of scale that we're talking about, you really get to design custom equipment that's much better at processing each step. And you really get to design the machine that makes the machine, not just do so with off-the-shelf equipment. So it took -- everything about it is going to get a whole lot better. That's why we think the 30% number when the Giga Factory is at full production is a conservative number.
Summarizing they said that the use of custom large scale manufacturing equipment and secondarily colocation (aka vertical integration) are the main reasons for the GF cost reductions. This scale of this equipment is so large, that each instance of anode and cathode electrode assembly is big enough to produce a significant percentage of the worlds current battery production. Designing and building this custom large scale equipment only makes sense because of the massive scale of the GF, and also partially because they need to build more than one of these production lines. So they will setup some kind of production system to reduce the cost and the time required for of producing the succeeding cell production lines.Further price reductions are achieved by manufacturing cells that have been optimized for electric vehicle design, both in size and function.
In other words the major product is not GF1, it’s GF Production Line 1 (GFPL1). This has huge implications for the flexibility of setting up smaller factories, or setting up factories in phases to obtain most of the cost benefits of a larger factory.
That means, now that it's completed and working satisfactorally, they will be able to produce succeeding production lines at a substantially lower cost and more quickly than they produced the first one.
These lines can be installed anywhere that Tesla needs a multiple of one or more of these lines. I believe that it will be possible for Panasonic to produce 2170 cells in Japan, at a similar cost to the cells produced at the GF by doing two things:
1. Using one or more units of the large scale manufacturing equipment they developed for use at the GF.
2. Vertically integrating that factory. Obviously converting their existing 18650 line to produce 2170's is relatively trivial. But getting the price down requires much more than that. It probably makes more sense to shift MS-MS 2170 cell production to the NV GF (to take advantage of colocation), and setup and use more efficient production lines in Asia for Asian TM and Asian TE.
I think that it’s pretty clear the idea to use customized equipment and to use vertical integration were Elon-Tesla’s ideas, and that Panasonic’s hesitancy to invest ended when they were convinced that a 30% cost reduction was a conservative number. So it's more complicated than just scaling production. *Elon-Tesla figured this out using first principles. If it seems obvious why didn't Panasonic figure this out without having to be convinced by Tesla?
Tesla is now claiming 35% battery cost reduction at ‘Gigafactory 1’ – hinting at breakthrough cost below $125/kWh
The tripling of capacity (aka alien dreadnaught production), which were also due to **Elon-Tesla innovations will also have an important impact on cell and pack costs. Because they will get 3x the production for the same fixed costs. Tesla originally said that they conservatively expected cost reductions of 30% by 2017 (beating their projections on price), and 50% by 2020. I believe that the additional 20% by 2020 projection came largely from the fact that they were planning on the cost reductions from producing multiple units of the large scale cell manufacturing equipment. If that's correct (what else could it possibly be?) their costs will be even less when they hit 35 GWh of cell production in the current GF, because when they hit 35 GWh production they will have achieved all of the cost reductions originally planned for the 35 GWh goal, but have only incurred about a third of the building costs.Tesla is now claiming 35% battery cost reduction at ‘Gigafactory 1’ – hinting at breakthrough cost below $125/kWh.
The company was aiming for at least a 30% reduction from its battery cost before the Gigafactory and it now claims a “35% cost reduction” in a new promotional video.
Tesla has never officially disclosed its battery cost beyond claiming to be “below $190/kWh” in early 2016. That was before any battery cell manufacturing was taking place at the Gigafactory.
<snip>
The “holy grail” of battery cost, meaning when most battery-powered vehicles will be cost competitive with gas-powered ones even before accounting for gas saving, is believed to be $100/kWh. In the past, Musk said that he would be “disappointed” if Tesla doesn’t hit the milestone before 2020, but that was before they accelerated the Gigafactory production plan by two years in order to meet the new Model 3 production plan.
So I believe that when the GF production hits 35 GWh (2018 or 2019) Tesla's car pack costs will be less than half of $190 per kWh (~50%-55%) or under $95 per kWh. Probably under $85 per kWh. I'm sure some of you are thinking that 50% reduction in costs is crazy, but the second generation TE products have about a 50% reduction in price and they include the invertors!
I've already pointed out two things which are major advantages for Tesla which were due to Elon Musk. I don't understand the criticism he receives on this forum. IMO he should be regarded in a similar fashion as Lebron James is regarded by the Cleveland fans. IMO he is clearly Tesla's main moat.
Charlie Anderson Q4-2016 about 62 minutes said:You talked about Gigafactories, 3, 4 and possibly 5. It sounds like you're pretty covered with Gigafactory 1 in terms of the 1 million vehicles, but I wonder if you could just speak to the strategy and thinking and timing there. And then also Panasonic would be your partner on those as well. Thanks
What I believe would be quite exciting is not a cap raise that involves either selling stock or a loan tied to a stock hedge. What's exciting about those options, other than the prospect of a SCTY type dip (two or three more GF's before the first one is complete). I think that they will do something like one of the suggestions here:Elon Musk Q4-2016 about 63 minutes said:I think we'll reserve some dry powder for announcements later this year. This is surely more than enough news for today. But I think those announcements will be really quite exciting later this year.
Suggestion for Tesla to accelerate their trajectory for reducing carbon emissions
Model 3 Production
Tesla First Quarter 2016 Update
• Volume Model 3 production and deliveries to start in late 2017
Elon Musk - First Quarter 2016 said:The date, I'm sure this will leak, it's hard to keep a secret really, the date we are setting with suppliers to get to volume production capability with the Model 3 is July 1 next year.
Now, will we actually be able to achieve volume production on July 1 next year? Of course not. The reason is that even if 99% of the internally produced items and supplier items are available on July 1, we still cannot produce the car because you cannot produce a car that is missing 1% of its components.
Tesla Fourth Quarter & Full Year 2016 Update
• Model 3 on track for initial production in July, Volume production by September
Elon Musk Fourth Quarter 2016-about 34 minutes said:Well, I feel pretty confident that we should get there by the end of this year, to 5,000 a week.
So, when we place parts orders with our suppliers, we've told them 1,000 a week in July, 2,000 a week in August, and 4,000 a week in September.
<snip>
And no matter what date we set the exam paper for, when the term paper was due, there's always like some number of people that are late. It's just the way it goes. People sometimes – well, and I'm guilty of this too. Like too optimistic about the timing or they get unlucky or something like that.
So, we have to set these really strict dates, then some number of people are late, but it only has to be 1%...
The "A team at the A supplier" means that Tesla's business is important to the suppliers. I believe this is a major reason that both the Letters, and Elon sound more confident about starting production in July.Elon Musk Q4-2016 about 10 minutes said:So, I think it's going to be a very compelling car, but it's just a simpler design and we also understand manufacturing a lot better than we did in the past, and we're also able to get usually the A team at the A supplier for Model 3. It's rare that we're not able to get that, whereas, particularly for Model S and to some degree for Model X, when we were trying to get suppliers for Model S, a lot of the top tier suppliers wouldn't even work with us. They thought we'd go bankrupt.
<snip>
Now, in fact, we are building something on the order of 50,000 Model S's per year. And so, having shown the results of the Model S and the Model X, the interest from suppliers went from basically getting like the worst team on second tier suppliers to getting the best team on first tier suppliers. Really a big difference.
Model 3 Production Line and CapEx
Elon Musk Q4-2016 about 64 minutes said:Yes, I mean, there's obviously going to be a fair bit of incremental investment to go from 5,000 cars a week to 10,000 cars a week, but it's going to be a lot less than getting to 5,000 cars a week in the first place. We don't know exactly what that's going to be except I'm confident it'll be less. Because the first thing we'll try to increase output is going back to rocket equation is to increase exit velocity of the line. And we don't know exactly where the trouble points are going to be. We tried to model it out as carefully as possible, but there'll be things that aren't captured in the model.
But I think in a lot of cases, we'll simply be able to run the lines faster as opposed to duplicate the line. That's by far the best CapEx maneuver is just to make it go faster. But I would say it's going from 5,000 to 10,000 is probably – this is a total wild-ass guess, so right way to think about, but it's like somewhere between 50% to 70% of the cost of the 5,000 line. Something like that.
If you're lucky and smart, 50% is only half the game, which obviously is pretty awesome from a CapEx standpoint. I can't imagine it being more than about 70% as much as there is. So, JB, what do you think?
1. Tesla is modeling the line to get to 10k per month, but they are saying that the chances of being able actually dial up to that speed are initially are low. It will be really interesting to see the rate they get from doing that.JB Straubel Q4-2016 about 48 minutes said:Yes, I think that's right. And it's maybe helpful to realize, but a lot of the infrastructure investments to get all the way to 10,000 are already completed, Gigafactory in particular.
<snip>
...great efficiencies in the way to layout of facility, for instance, as there were at Gigafactory. So, we don't anticipate needing to build much new square footage, for instance, to go all the way to 10,000, even though we would be expanding the internal production lines while we speed them up and add new instances of production, but the Tesla CapEx would not be a one-to-one scaling, not even close.
2. The concerns that Elon was crazy to suggest the possibility of 100k to 200k by the end of 2017 are exaggerated.
3. They are not building one line and then replacing the entire line.
Model 3 Cash Flow and CapEx
Rod Lache Q4-2016 about 70 minutes said:- Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.
I guess, just still trying to calibrate to this cash flow and cash needs, maybe a different way to ask this, is it reasonable to expect that you would hit for the Motors company free cash flow breakeven at the 250,000-unit a year level for Model 3, assuming what we know today?
Elon Musk Q4-2016 about 71 minutes said:It depends on how quickly we want to ramp production to go from 5,000 a week to 10,000 a week for Model 3. There could be an argument that you don't want to go to cash flow breakeven or positive because you're losing a lot of sales and when you calculate the present value, huge cash flows, then it's like actually not smart to be in that case free cash flow positive. Or maybe you want to be a little negative at least and not give up a huge number of sales, because we would be talking – the numbers get just so crazy, it's 0.25 million units a year, roughly $1 billion a month revenue.
And so then you double that and it's $2 billion a month. So, maybe spending an incremental $0.5 billion on CapEx would be pretty smart move if it advances things by two months or three months.
Elon Musk Q4-2016 about 32 minutes said:If the capacity of the production system is X, until you are at least like half X, your gross margin is going to be weak, and it's going to be terrible when you're like an order of magnitude below, or if you're 10% of X, or less. It's going to be terrible. But then it'll get really good as you start to approach 100% capacity. Like, then it gets great. And then, as we get to the initial phase of capacity of 5,000 a week, I would expect to see gross margins comparable to that of the Model S and Model X.
Final version. I think that has nothing to do with the part 3 (probably HUD or something else that is also on the MS-MX) reveal. They are obviously trying to do everything that they can to not cannibalize MS-MX sales. "Model 3 won't have self presenting door handles" (who cares!).Elon Musk Q4-2016 about 47 minutes said:Yes, I'm not sure if it's going to make sense for us to show the final version before start of production or after.
So, I think in terms of showing the final version, it's probably at least a few months away, maybe as far as July itself.
Elon Musk Down-Sells Model 3 On Twitter In Favor Of Model S
Starting at $35,000 before the tax credit, customers were eager to get into a Tesla for half the price of a Model S.
But with production scheduled to begin in just a few months, Musk took to Twitter on Friday and seemed to be encouraging customers to opt-in for the more expensive Model S — or lower their expectations.
But that's a little hard to do since Elon is committed to making compelling cars. I believe that the reasons that they are going to delay the full reveal and the opening of the Design Studio as long as they can because the Model 3 will be compelling, especially the prices. For example Elon tweeted that pack upgrades will cost less on the M3. I also believe that they are planning to make some upgrades to the MS-MX, and reduce the prices of some of the options at the same time. They are in an awkward position until they start making profits on the M3.
No Planned Obsolescence - Ludicrous Mode is a SW upgrade
Three Dog DayElon Musk Q4-2016 about 68 minutes said:...like we increased the design lifetime of the powertrain from roughly 0.25 million miles to aspirationally 1 million miles. So, that should really help with service.
These is no planned obsolescence designed into the driveline, unless you consider a million mile design life planned obsolescence .Elon Musk blog post said:Ludicrous Mode
While working on our goal of making the power train last a million miles, we came up with the idea for an advanced smart fuse for the battery. Instead of a standard fuse that just melts past a certain amperage, requiring a big gap between the normal operating current and max current, we developed a fuse with its own electronics and a tiny lithium-ion battery.
That was combined with upgrading the main pack contactor to use inconel (a high temperature space-grade superalloy) instead of steel, so that it remains springy under the heat of heavy current. The net result is that we can safely increase the max pack output from 1300 to 1500 Amps.
The million mile driveline, built into every Tesla, is the hardware required for Ludicrous Mode. In other words Elon just confirmed my belief that Ludicrous Mode is a software upgrade.