General Discussion: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[JRP3]

None of this has much to do with TSLA. I think we need a thread for the pros and cons of various modes of urban transport. I'll never live in a city so it doesn't directly affect me anyway.

 

[bhtooefr]

I realize that you are likely comparing autonomous taxis with mass transit when you state that autonomy “can be incredibly expensive.” Although there are likely sources claiming autonomy is more expensive than personal ownership, here are two sources who claim that autonomy is cheaper. These analyses include: lifetime of vehicle, maintenance, fuel, insurance, etc.

ARK Invest: “Driving a personal car costs roughly 70 cents per mile today. According to ARK’s research, autonomous taxis could charge roughly half that cost, saving on average $4,700 per driver per year.6” Autonomous Cars Could Add $7 Trillion to the US Economy

RethinkX: “All together, these changes will deliver transport by TaaS or TaaS Pool at a cost per mile that is four-to-10 times cheaper than purchasing a new car AND two-to-four times cheaper than operating (maintenance, fuel, and insurance) an existing vehicle.” Full Summary

How do self-driving costs compare to conventional mass transit (including infrastructure for both - self-driving needs roadways, although some forms of conventional mass transit use them as well), though? How do they compare to cycling and other lower-speed methods of personal transport (which are crowded out by high-speed personal transport in many cases)?

Ultimately, though, the only way that this is actually related to TSLA itself is through Tesla Network and through any demand that Boring Company makes for Tesla products.

 

[AWDtsla]

How do self-driving costs compare to conventional mass transit (including infrastructure for both - self-driving needs roadways, although some forms of conventional mass transit use them as well), though? How do they compare to cycling and other lower-speed methods of personal transport (which are crowded out by high-speed personal transport in many cases)?

I know that's one the slides in the anti-car slidedeck. There are things more important than shoving as many humans into as little space as possible.

World population is only going to grow another ~30% barring any catastrophes, climate or other. Population will decrease in most areas with 1st world economies who have readily available education for people, especially women.

 

[JRP3]

Don't know how much weight to give this since it's from SA but:

Axios says it has talked to several SpaceX (SPACE) shareholders about reports that the company could be involved in helping to finance a go-private Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) plan.

"They will go nuts if SpaceX itself tries to finance the Tesla buyout, at least in any meaningful way," reports back Dan Primack.

"They have the Musk company with profits and a deep management bench, and see no reason to marry it with the opposite. Particularly given all the conflicts of interest and possible regulatory headaches," he adds.

Of course, Musk as a very large SpaceX shareholder could pledge his own shares as part of a Tesla privatization bid.

SpaceX shareholders weigh in on Tesla - SpaceX (Private:SPACE) | Seeking Alpha

 

[Rarity]

They might go nuts, but they could do nuts about it. Musk has a supermajority voting power at SpaceX.

But this idea is all just from a stray reference in a Musk hit piece. Musk could probably get several billion dollars by putting up some of his SpaceX stock for collateral.

 

[EarlyAdopter]

They might go nuts, but they could do nuts about it. Musk has a supermajority voting power at SpaceX.

But this idea is all just from a stray reference in a Musk hit piece. Musk could probably get several billion dollars by putting up some of his SpaceX stock for collateral.

Yeah. Given that all we got of an hour long interview is 6 measly quotes, clearly selected for their negative slant and without context, we have no idea what was really said.

For example, Elon could have said "If nothing else, if we couldn't find anyone else interested in financing the buy out, which I believe is exceedingly unlikely at this point, I could always just leverage my SpaceX holdings to take Tesla private. But it is not my intention to do so."

And what the NYT printed is just the middle part without the important qualifying context around it.

This is why it's so important to be able to hear the whole story. We should be demanding to hear the entire interview from the NYT. Tesla PR should have demanded to review the piece before print to make sure any qualifiers were accurately included in the article.

 

[bhzmark]

Sandy Munro "being sued over his study" at 13:16

lame insideev article: BREAKING: Munro Sued For Tesla Model 3 Teardown [oddly they don't link to the youtube video that is the primary source of the news ]

I suspect shorts want to keep Sandy Munro quiet -- and they have successfully kept him off his latest Autoline installment to say how great Model 3 is.

 

[BrianZ]

Great video of a tour of the Tesla Factory

 

[elasalle]

Last quarter we saw lots of deliveries to Canada. Anyone know if there are any deliveries happening in current quarter?

 

[neroden]

Bringing this up in regards to Tesla serves absolutely no purpose other than to try and kill demand for Tesla. How convenient that now multiple low-post-count users are piling on this bandwagon.

If you really hate cars, go after Uber/Lyft, because they've done more to shift urban dwellers from awful public transport into cars around urban areas than anyone else. EVERYONE hates public transport, especially daily users, except for a handful of idealogues who want to dictate what everyone should do.

This is of course false. Most people love riding subways and streetcars, as long as they aren't overcrowded -- this is proven by polling, studies, and ridership. Only the most antisocial idiots dislike subways.

What everyone dislikes is diesel buses (which are thankfully being replaced with electric buses, thank you BYD, Proterra, New Flyer, et al).

That said, Uber and Lyft are the worst. Well, OK, Uber is the worst.

And yes, we still need (electric) cars for areas which aren't dense enough to justify trains.

 

[neroden]

I’m a little confused. I’ve seen exactly two Boring Company projects actually moving anywhere: one that’s fully funded by... the Boring Company, and another that’s explicitly just for getting to a stadium. That aside, Boring Company essentially just makes(cheaper/faster) subways. How is that inferior vs other forms of public transportation?

Because they're making *low-capacity* subways. Musk has a very serious blind spot about trains. The Boring Company stadium proposal is just *way too low capacity*, and he's admitted the low capacity himself. All he has to do to fix the dang thing is to run long trains in it; he'll multiply the number of people moved per hour by *10*. And cost about the same amount! It's really that simple, but Musk has some sort of insane blind spot about simply hooking a bunch of cars together and putting them on rails.

 

[neroden]

From what I’ve seen of their plans, Volume on a single bus thingy is worse than a subway, but there’s FAR more of them in parallel tunnels and they travel at higher speeds, resulting in much higher volume across the whole system.

Yeah, but no. In fact, volume of throughput of the entire system is worse than a subway using the same tunnels and they travel at lower speeds. But nice try!

Basically every problem with Musk's Loop and Hyperloop schemes could be fixed by just using actual trains -- long, articulated vehicles with high capacity. He seems to have an extreme blind spot about this. It's weird because there's nothing particularly complicated about putting longer, articulated vehicles in the same system; it doesn't even cost more.

I want to sit him down for half an hour and explain this, because it seems to be an unusual and stupid blind spot.

 

[K_Dizzle]

Last quarter we saw lots of deliveries to Canada. Anyone know if there are any deliveries happening in current quarter?

From my own due dillegence from visiting a service center the sales guys said things haven’t slowed down. I saw two trucks being unloaded so there was some evidence to what was said. Also, it looks like Tesla is hiring temp delivery people to do burst deliveries at the international center in Toronto again at the end of September.

 

[RobStark]

Only the most antisocial idiots dislike subways.

What everyone dislikes is diesel buses (which are thankfully being replaced with electric buses, thank you BYD, Proterra, New Flyer, et al).

Sane people also dislike being assaulted on public transportation.

 

[RobStark]

Tesla Gigafactory 1 now employs over 3,000 workers as it becomes biggest battery factory in the world

"Based on the report, which was for the period up to December 2017, the Governor’s Office of Economic Development has determined that all requirements have been met and therefore, they plan to issue Tesla transferable tax credits totaling $35,795,647.

In the report, we learn that Gigafactory 1 was employing 3,249 people as of the end of last year. The number is likely to be much higher at this time."

 

[mongo]

Because they're making *low-capacity* subways. Musk has a very serious blind spot about trains. The Boring Company stadium proposal is just *way too low capacity*, and he's admitted the low capacity himself.

The Dugout loop is low capacity for one specific reason, it is only one tunnel, there is no return loop for the pods. So the options are either a 4 minute + x number of pods empty return run to reload, or having 1,500 people worth of pod capacity (100 pods). It's a limited use test and advertisement site, not a high volume transportation corridor (yet).

Yeah, but no. In fact, volume of throughput of the entire system is worse than a subway
using the same tunnels and they travel at lower speeds. But nice try!

Basically every problem with Musk's Loop and Hyperloop schemes could be fixed by just using actual trains -- long, articulated vehicles with high capacity.

A subway car is people dense, but that is not the only figure of merit. Have you looked at the origin to destination efficiency of loop (reduced need for busses/ train changes) as opposed to the peak people bandwidth on a subway section/ single tunnel basis? Loop can be the feeder as well as the trunk.

And what of the time scale needed to implement a new loop vs a new subway with platforms, what is the break even point for people carried if one is repeatedly implemented faster? For random example, half the capacity operational in a third of the time is a better option.

Further, there is no reason the pods could not platoon (virtual articulated train) with each other when heading the same way thus increasing density.

 

[neroden]

Sane people also dislike being assaulted on public transportation.

You're more likely to get assaulted in an Uber car. Or a taxi. Or a restaurant. Or the sidewalk. Or your own home.

 

[neroden]

The Dugout loop is low capacity for one specific reason, it is only one tunnel, there is no return loop for the pods. So the options are either a 4 minute + x number of pods empty return run to reload, or having 1,500 people worth of pod capacity (100 pods). It's a limited use test and advertisement site, not a high volume transportation corridor (yet).

Why not make it practical while they're at it? If you're making a test, why deliberately make it impractical?

A subway car is people dense, but that is not the only figure of merit. Have you looked at the origin to destination efficiency of loop (reduced need for busses/ train changes) as opposed to the peak people bandwidth on a subway section/ single tunnel basis?

Yes I have

And what of the time scale needed to implement a new loop vs a new subway with platforms, what is the break even point for people carried if one is repeatedly implemented faster?

Subway's faster to build. Current iteration of the Loop design contains all the problematic elements of a subway construction, including the elevators, except it has much more expensive and problematic elevators, to carry entire pods.

Further, there is no reason the pods could not platoon (virtual articulated train) with each other when heading the same way thus increasing density.

Safety. A "virtual articulated train" has a bunch of safety problems which an actual coupled train does not have, and ends up requiring substantial distances between pods.

I see no reason not to use physical coupling. Frankly, if Musk uses physical coupling, I withdraw all my objections.

Musk should be able to make a subway at least as fast and cheap as the best international standards (something we do NOT do in the US -- our subways cost several times more than they should and take much longer to build, and it isn't due to labor costs, either). Probably better. But if he insists on ignoring the advantages of coupled trains, he won't.

 

[winfield100]

@neroden

Because they're making *low-capacity* subways. Musk has a very serious blind spot about trains. The Boring Company stadium proposal is just *way too low capacity*, and he's admitted the low capacity himself. All he has to do to fix the dang thing is to run long trains in it; he'll multiply the number of people moved per hour by *10*. And cost about the same amount! It's really that simple, but Musk has some sort of insane blind spot about simply hooking a bunch of cars together and putting them on rails.

here are higher capacity "people movers" Musk may have gotten some ideas from here
(I kinda like the Pneumatic tube systems for singles and doubles, a bit stomach churning tho, and "slidewalks" like in airports)
Transportation in Science Fiction

 

[mongo]

Why not make it practical while they're at it? If you're making a test, why deliberately make it impractical?

If you only have 1 TBM, you can't build two tunnels at the same time.
If you are testing out a system, you might not want to build multiple of the same thing, knowing you are likely going to make changes to it.

Subway's faster to build. Current iteration of the Loop design contains all the problematic elements of a subway construction, including the elevators, except it has much more expensive and problematic elevators, to carry entire pods.

How can a subway (tunnels plus platforms plus escalators) be faster to build that a loop (tunnel plus vertical elevator)? Why are projecting it being more expensive?
What are you basing the loop elevators being more problematic on?

FWIW, the Chicago and Dugout system renderings appear to have a standard platform the ends instead of single space pod pop ups.

Safety. A "virtual articulated train" has a bunch of safety problems which an actual coupled train does not have, and ends up requiring substantial distances between pods.

I see no reason not to use physical coupling. Frankly, if Musk uses physical coupling, I withdraw all my objections.

What distance are you assuming? How does that compare to the Semi platooning spacing?
Agree a mechanical linkage is helpful, but having the last cars doing the pushing with the front cars either idle or on mild regen would keep them tightly coupled. Major fault mode is the sudden lockup of a drive wheel (or object in the track), even trains don't handle that well. Boring with their captive wheels and low CG should fair better.

Speaking of tightly coupled, shall we continue over in
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/boring-company.115536/ ?