General Discussion: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[wnorris]

I'm honestly a bit baffled to get all the sh1t and "disagrees" for simply repeating what EM said two weeks ago.

TMC slowly feels like an Apple fanboy forum in circa 2013 at peak toxicity. Hoped and thought we're better than that: Grown-ups, capable of self-reflection, critical thinking and discussion …

But if it's the sole point of this forum to circle-jerk each other off on the notion of how everything TSLA/EM does is so utterly perfect, why the hell is even called "General discussion"?

This forum is certainly slanted to be pro-Tesla, but it is not void of criticism. My biggest personal gripe is that Elon needs to work on his messaging. I hope we are seeing a little of that in your last quote regarding the Model Y. Past comments regarding the Model 3 , FSD, alien dreadnought, etc...are all coming back to haunt him and the company. I'd personally like to see some hedging in estimates and more of a quiet confidence in statements regarding the future. Whether this is his MO or not, he needs to take a more postured approach to decrease the attack surface.

Taking a longer term focus I would like to see Elon find another key face (or two) for Tesla. A COO or whatever the hell you want to call it. Tesla would do well to shift Elon out to focus on what he does best, think long term, focus on the product, give speeches, essentially to be the visionary. It is easy to see how well this works at SpaceX.

 

[MacRocket]

Well this is interesting, another nail in the coffin of the arguments that $tsla Autopilot is unsafe.


The Tesla Model 3 could be the safest car on the road — and that's bad news for every other automaker

 

[mongo]

1. 
   
2. Design for profit- and manufacturability

With all the production bottlenecks and comments from EM (see above), I think we could rule out approach nr. 2, can't we

This part of we can't.
S/X : top and bottom bus bars
3: top only

S/X: 16 modules worth of interconnects
3: 4 modules in two sizes

S/X: multiple bus bar shapes including a U-turn
3: common/ extendable bus bar (can make arbitrary length modules)

S/X external HVJB/ DCDC converter, no 12V continuous supply
3: integrated HV switching

Issues with equipment suppliers do not necessarily reflect on the validity of the design approach.

Roadster was a low volume/ low CapEx hand build to fit Lotus pack, no relation to a 100k/yr approach.

S/X module approach reduced scrap rate due to cell failures. With greater reliability, they can make larger modules that require less assembly at the pack level.

 

[mongo]

Well this is interesting, another nail in the coffin of the arguments that $tsla Autopilot is unsafe.


The Tesla Model 3 could be the safest car on the road — and that's bad news for every other automaker

Just a note: that article is from March 2017, before the 3 was being produced.

 

[Anstandswauwau]

This part of we can't.

Not saying the M3 pack is a step backward – it's a certainly a huge leap forward.

But with every new paradigm shift, there's risk of outsmarting oneself. Plus, Gen 2, v1 products often (always?) tend to have lower profitability and higher manufacturing complexity than, let's say, Gen 1, v5. That's why pretty much everyone transitioning from Tick-Tock-, to Tick-Tock-Tock-Tock … - product cycles.

Now, with such a complex, very physical product, my question is: With all those expensive, custom production lines now in place, how much product optimization can they actually do without hindering the ongoing production?

 

[MacRocket]

Just a note: that article is from March 2017, before the 3 was being produced.

Whoops, my bad, thought it was recent. I guess they still have a point.

 

[mongo]

Not saying the M3 pack is a step backward – it's a certainly a huge leap forward.

But with every new paradigm shift, there's risk of outsmarting oneself. Plus, Gen 2, v1 products often (always?) tend to have lower profitability and higher manufacturing complexity than, let's say, Gen 1, v5. That's why pretty much everyone transitioning from Tick-Tock-, to Tick-Tock-Tock-Tock … - product cycles.

Now, with such a complex, very physical product, my question is: With all those expensive, custom production lines now in place, how much product optimization can they actually do without hindering the ongoing production?

The better a product is, the harder it is to improve enough to justify the cost/risk of implementing a new version.

I'm not sure what further optimization they need to do. However, given the future vehicle lines, they can create different assembly lines for those with the improved design. Or a different version of equipment to create the same moduoe/pack. It's a different situation than replacing the existing equipment for a product with a constant volume.

Case in point: new cell lines were needed for the 3/ TE, so they came up with an optimized cell size. S/X continued using the existing production infrastructure.

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

Not saying the M3 pack is a step backward – it's a certainly a huge leap forward.

But with every new paradigm shift, there's risk of outsmarting oneself. Plus, Gen 2, v1 products often (always?) tend to have lower profitability and higher manufacturing complexity than, let's say, Gen 1, v5. That's why pretty much everyone transitioning from Tick-Tock-, to Tick-Tock-Tock-Tock … - product cycles.

Now, with such a complex, very physical product, my question is: With all those expensive, custom production lines now in place, how much product optimization can they actually do without hindering the ongoing production?

You're second-guessing Tesla and fretting for the sake of fretting. Do you think the battery pack is ahead of everyone else (Sandy Munro and Jack Rickard seems to think so)? If so, then what got traded off? Because they're ahead of everyone else with the densest pack at the lowest cost.

If not, then they that's what they've traded for cost, which goes counter to what you're alluding to.

 

[JRP3]

I'm honestly a bit baffled to get all the sh1t and "disagrees" for simply repeating what EM said two weeks ago.

TMC slowly feels like an Apple fanboy forum in circa 2013 at peak toxicity. Hoped and thought we're better than that: Grown-ups, capable of self-reflection, critical thinking and discussion …

But if it's the sole point of this forum to circle-jerk each other off on the notion of how everything TSLA/EM does is so utterly perfect, why the hell is even called "General discussion"?

We've been hearing about this place being a fan boy forum from day one. Nothing has changed, except you feeling more negativity than most of us agree with. Apparently you want to be part of a bear circle jerk now...

 

[JRP3]

The energy density is not the point here – the cells themselves are basically all "chemistry" R&D effort and the production of cells is already highly, highly optimised (to the point of rivaling aluminium can production rates). The cells are not the problem. Hell, you could make the next "most energy dense" battery pack out of maybe 20-100 components (excluding cells) if you really wanted to. But again, that's not the point.

The hard part is to wrap those 3k cells into groups, then modules and finally into a package that can act as a base for your chassis. That's where mechanical complexity, (software) engineering, custom PCBs etc. come into play.

That's why I said battery pack, not cells. Further, your claim that the Model3 pack design did not come about from optimizing designs from the S is plain ridiculous.

 

[ValueAnalyst]

I'm honestly a bit baffled to get all the sh1t and "disagrees" for simply...

I haven't been following the back-and-forth, so I don't know if I agree or disagree with you, but I'd like to address the part quoted.

I understand that getting disagrees can be emotionally tolling; it's human nature. Most humans need affirmation in their lives, and positive affirmation is literally used in cognitive behavioral therapy in healing process. Unfortunately, some employ negative affirmation to do the opposite, including some members here, even though it is blatant and pathetic. Beware of this.

Having said that, if you want to think different, you will have to learn to rise above it. Would you rather get a slew of (sometimes motivated) disagrees but remain true to yourself and original thought, or move along with the herd and live a comfortable life full of agrees and loves? The answer to this question will be different for each person. What is it for you?

Benjamin Franklin was wrong. There are three things certain in life: death, taxes, and disagrees if you criticize Elon at TMC. Live with it.

 

[Ovulation]

Benjamin Franklin was wrong. There are three things certain in life: death, taxes, and disagrees if you criticize Elon at TMC. Live with it.

Well Franklin was the first cryonics visionary, so I'm not sure about the death part of your quote

 

[anticitizen13.7]

If you want to know what real bleeding looks like, ask around people who were here in Feb 2016 when it went down to below $150. If you want to be in TSLA for long term you have to be able to handle that kind of volatility.

I was one of those people. Have owned TSLA since 2H 2012.

I remember the Model X situation being far worse than the Model 3 ramp: build quality was much worse, production numbers were appalling, and the shared assembly line with Model S could have had major impact to existing product manufacturing. I was actually very irritated when Elon stayed that Model X was the most complicated car to build.

Despite these misgivings, I held all my shares, and still hold them all today. Elon and his team eventually resolved the X production problems. I think they have good odds of the same with Model 3.

My best advice for handling volatility is to diversify.

Most of my portfolio is in Index funds, and I own shares in a small number of other high risk growth stocks. TSLA’s short term volatility is therefore something I can ride out easily.

 

[Cosmacelf]

I was one of those people. Have owned TSLA since 2H 2012.

I remember the Model X situation being far worse than the Model 3 ramp: build quality was much worse, production numbers were appalling, and the shared assembly line with Model S could have had major impact to existing product manufacturing. I was actually very irritated when Elon stayed that Model X was the most complicated car to build.

Yeah, when Elon said that, I silently cursed him myself. Elon is like this naive genius that goes around doing things that experienced people scoff at. They scoff at it because they are indeed mistakes. Elon is so hands on, though, that he realizes the mistakes and fixes them really quickly. The mistakes were necessary to learn design and production processes at a very deep level so what emerges from the other side is something that no one else can do.

The other thing that people miss about Elon is that he is a very hard ass CEO. He sets literally impossible goals, and pushes people really hard to make them. If you look at the big picture, Tesla and SpaceX have amazingly high employee productivity. It’s because they work so damn hard.

I’m having a similar debate with my 13 year gentle giant son. He’s so sensitive that he really doesn’t like coaches that yell and ride the kids. Yet if we look back at those coaches, there is no denying that those teams he was on were really good. The best coaches, of course, motivate people without having to yell at them like a drill sergeant, but those coaches are rare. The point is that the best teams are the ones that get pushed to their limits, which is what Elon always does.

 

[SarahsDad]

Worth watching in particular the AP comparison he made about Audi and Tesla.

Also good to see someone testing the car who informed himself upfront.

+1
A long video (>1H) but one of the best overall reviews of the 3 I’ve read - a refreshing combination of a well informed but new to Tesla owner who gives a fresh and balanced perspective.

 

[Anstandswauwau]

Case in point: new cell lines were needed for the 3/ TE, so they came up with an optimized cell size. S/X continued using the existing production infrastructure.

True, but I strongly believe S/X will start to use 2170 cell packs, once the production rate is there.

You're second-guessing Tesla and fretting for the sake of fretting. Do you think the battery pack is ahead of everyone else (Sandy Munro and Jack Rickard seems to think so)? If so, then what got traded off? Because they're ahead of everyone else with the densest pack at the lowest cost.

If not, then they that's what they've traded for cost, which goes counter to what you're alluding to.

The battery was designed to a certain spec, which is made out of maybe hundreds of parameters like cost, weight, storage capacity, rigidity, material availability, etc. Getting those absolutely right, for a new component of such complexity is simply impossible – there are just too many levers.

So here's what you usually do for the initial design: You overspec the critical parameters (eg. safety and storage capacity), while giving others (eg. profitability, etc.) a lower priority. After all, your top priority to get it out ASAP,. Everything else is pretty much highly educated guesswork.

If your lucky and did your job as best as you could, you'll still end up with a breakthrough – like in the case of the M3 pack.

BUT here's the kicker:

As I said before, true profitability – not being 15%, but 50% cheaper than your competitors – often kicks in with later revisions, when they know what fat to trim and what parameters to adjust.

To me it is still unclear, how they'd do pack revisions without affecting the much needed 24/7 production. Major revisions could easily result in multiple weeks of downtime for a production line, and they obviously can't just add new lines for every revision. Even updating lines one-by-one would be a logistical nightmare.

Now, having a breakthrough product at hand doesn't mean it's future proof. As we speak right now, there are hundreds of people around the world reverse-engineering the M3 pack. Let's say, they find some fat to trim and combined with their own expertise, they somehow manage to come up with a pack that's 20% "better" (read: lighter at same rigidity, cheaper, etc.) than what Tesla has now. So when they start to build those reverse-engineered M3 v2 packs in eg. 2021, it's in Teslas best interest to counter those with an even better battery.

R&D wise, TSLA can do it, no doubt. But how do they plan to actually pull those revision-cycles off in the factories is not clear to me. I'm happy to hear everyones thought on this.

That's why I said battery pack, not cells. Further, your claim that the Model3 pack design did not come about from optimizing designs from the S is plain ridiculous.

The M3 pack is as much a MS pack, as the iPhone 4 was an iPhone 3GS.

 

[sub]

True, but I strongly believe S/X will start to use 2170 cell packs, once the production rate is there.



The battery was designed to a certain spec, which is made out of maybe hundreds of parameters like cost, weight, storage capacity, rigidity, material availability, etc. Getting those absolutely right, for a new component of such complexity is simply impossible – there are just too many levers.

So here's what you usually do for the initial design: You overspec the critical parameters (eg. safety and storage capacity), while giving others (eg. profitability, etc.) a lower priority. After all, your top priority to get it out ASAP,. Everything else is pretty much highly educated guesswork.

If your lucky and did your job as best as you could, you'll still end up with a breakthrough – like in the case of the M3 pack.

BUT here's the kicker:

As I said before, true profitability – not being 15%, but 50% cheaper than your competitors – often kicks in with later revisions, when they know what fat to trim and what parameters to adjust.

To me it is still unclear, how they'd do pack revisions without affecting the much needed 24/7 production. Major revisions could easily result in multiple weeks of downtime for a production line, and they obviously can't just add new lines for every revision. Even updating lines one-by-one would be a logistical nightmare.

Now, having a breakthrough product at hand doesn't mean it's future proof. As we speak right now, there are hundreds of people around the world reverse-engineering the M3 pack. Let's say, they find some fat to trim and combined with their own expertise, they somehow manage to come up with a pack that's 20% "better" (read: lighter at same rigidity, cheaper, etc.) than what Tesla has now. So when they start to build those reverse-engineered M3 v2 packs in eg. 2021, it's in Teslas best interest to counter those with an even better battery.

R&D wise, TSLA can do it, no doubt. But how do they plan to actually pull those revision-cycles off in the factories is not clear to me. I'm happy to hear everyones thought on this.



The M3 pack is as much a MS pack, as the iPhone 4 was an iPhone 3GS.

You're claiming to know or wanting to know why Tesla designed the pack the way they did. NOBODY knows why outside of Tesla, including the "expert" that tore the car down. Some of us here have no interest in playing a guessing game or claiming to know stuff we can't possibly know because it leads to know where productive. This apparently makes one a fan boy.

I've noticed some emotionally unstable members posting lately, not going to name names though.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

I've noticed some emotionally unstable members posting lately, not going to name names though.

I predict that TMC will be overrun by crazy people if Model 3 becomes a success and mainstream investors start pouring in.

I may just quit the forum at that point.

 

[Cosmacelf]

I predict that TMC will be overrun by crazy people if Model 3 becomes a success and mainstream investors start pouring in.

That already happened in the Tesla forums (on Tesla's site). The difference here at TMC is that we have very active moderators. Sometimes too active for my taste, but you can't argue with the results. TMC is a lot more sane and useful than the Tesla forums.

 

[DragonWatch]

Sorry but I now I have to red pill you

This guy almost starved himself to death by sungazing

and now he blames the vegans for that lol

I looked like the guy in the bottom frame, on the right as a Chaplain's Assistant (E-5) back in 1971 while standing on the bottom side of the flat earth Amazing how things look from there.