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

Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA)

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
No deposit, and a tiny sample size but it's an indication that there might be more demand for Solar Shingles than the M3.
I think distributed solar has a big future and that Tesla made the right decision moving into the solar roof space. The declining costs of PV arrays relative to the soft costs of installation just make it a brutal business, but everyone needs a roof, so why not make it a solar roof?

Besides, does anybody seriously think that this is the future of electricity generation/distribution?
IMG_0573.JPG

Apart from the NIMBY element, this kind of substation is just a security nightmare. For a multitude of reasons it just makes more sense for generation to happen at the edge of the network in a similar way to what happened to compute. Payment systems that allow for true P2P exchanges and 'smart contracts' to regulate them are also being developed. Here's an article on how a distributed grid might work.
 
I think distributed solar has a big future and that Tesla made the right decision moving into the solar roof space. The declining costs of PV arrays relative to the soft costs of installation just make it a brutal business, but everyone needs a roof, so why not make it a solar roof?

Besides, does anybody seriously think that this is the future of electricity generation/distribution?View attachment 220432
Apart from the NIMBY element, this kind of substation is just a security nightmare. For a multitude of reasons it just makes more sense for generation to happen at the edge of the network in a similar way to what happened to compute. Payment systems that allow for true P2P exchanges and 'smart contracts' to regulate them are also being developed. Here's an article on how a distributed grid might work.

There are places where electricity needs to be transmitted. Where population densities are low, most dwellings can have enough solar on the roof to meet their needs, but as population densities get larger, there just isn't enough space exposed to the sky in the city to produce enough electricity. Many industries also need more electricity than they can generate on their rooftops. As you approach the poles the efficiency of solar drops and some parts of the world have too many cloudy days to generate enough power.

However, we can put a pretty deep dent in our power needs with rooftop solar. Large solar systems, tidal power, hydroelectric, and wind can also generate a lot of the offsite power needed.

And substations are vulnerable. On April 16, 2013 a substation near San Jose, CA was shot up by somebody who knew what they were doing. They also cut the fiber optic cables running through the area.
Metcalf sniper attack - Wikipedia

I telecommute for a company in Morgan Hill which was affected by the attack. Their internet was out for a few days and I think they didn't have power for one or two days after the attack. It didn't affect me directly because I'm 300 Km away, but it was a major pain for them.
 
This is my first message here in this forum, although I have been following the investors threads closely for several months. My interest is in fundamentals, so here I am writing :) Although my message is trying to understand the share price forces, so rather short-term/technicals maybe.

It can be seen that the general opinion here is very positive and bullish. While I share the positive view with tesla as company, I am not so positive with the stock as investment. Bears are not well accepted here, but being objective and consider all points of view is just necessary. It is amazing to see so many convinced people about the stock and at the same time large agreement regarding risk in the expected growth. It seems to me just incompatible.

I have a comment considering the many comparisons made here about the stock price peaks. Peaks in 2015/2016 corresponded to a market cap around 35$ B, being now in 46$ B. However these peaks are usually compared in this forum… Is it just ignorance? Or does the technical approach not consider changes in market capitalization? I am pretty new in it, so I would like to know your opinions.

According to my numbers the projected ramp-up is very critical. Not just for M3, but if Tesla is going to have a size comparable to other car producers in a short time it will need more capitalization than that provided by expected cash flows, thus more debt and issued stock is expected. So my question is not how large the revenue is expected after M3 full production (2-3 years?) but the revenue in a larger period (5-10 years). Any help with that would be appreciated :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: jbcarioca
One thing that scares the crap out of me is a sniper taking a shot at a large Powerpack setup. You would think that it would be fairly catastrophic and I dont know exactly how you protect the packs without putting them in a reinforced concrete bunker, though that would be a reasonably cheap solution.

I am more then likely wrong, but I would guess that piercing one of the packs with a bullet would setup a fairly large meltdown of the entire system.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: mickificki
One thing that scares the crap out of me is a sniper taking a shot at a large Powerpack setup. You would think that it would be fairly catastrophic and I dont know exactly how you protect the packs without putting them in a reinforced concrete bunker, though that would be a reasonably cheap solution.

I am more then likely wrong, but I would guess that piercing one of the packs with a bullet would setup a fairly large meltdown of the entire system.

Actually, a failure was tested:

PowerPack Fire Test

The short answer is that an internal failure was contained within the unit and wouldn't likely spread.

You could deliberately induce a conflagration of one unit by subjecting it to sustained external heating (in this case via multiple gas burners aimed specifically at the unit), so that would be more akin to somebody being able to dump napalm on a cabinet... but in the "sniper" scenario it doesn't seem likely that there would be a major spread.
 
Actually, a failure was tested:

PowerPack Fire Test

The short answer is that an internal failure was contained within the unit and wouldn't likely spread.

As I said, I am more then likely wrong. Good, I can stop worrying about that. It is also good to know that Tesla battery packs are safer then a Samsung galaxy smart phone.
 
Apple, Wal-Mart Stick With Climate Pledges Despite Trump’s Pivot

"...many of the group’s members and other corporate titans supported Obama’s Clean Power Plan, or have set their own goals. Anheuser-Busch InBev, the world’s largest beer-maker, also announced Tuesday that it would get 100 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2025. Nearly 90 companies have made similar pledges, according to the Sierra Club.

"We believe climate change is real and the science is well accepted," General Electric Co.’s Chief Executive Officer Jeffrey Immelt, wrote in an internal blog post shared by the company. "We hope that the United States continues to play a constructive role in furthering solutions to these challenges, and at GE, we will continue to lead with our technology and actions."

Mars Inc., the maker of M&M’s, committed to eliminating its emissions entirely by 2040. Andy Pharoah, vice president of corporate affairs, said that Mars is “disappointed the administration has decided to roll back climate regulations.”

‘American competitiveness’
Technology companies including Apple, Amazon.com Inc, Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Microsoft Corp. also expressed their support for Obama’s policies.

“We believe that strong clean energy and climate policies, like the Clean Power Plan, can make renewable energy supplies more robust and address the serious threat of climate change while also supporting American competitiveness, innovation, and job growth,” the companies said in a joint statement after Trump’s order was signed.

Other companies, while stopping short of criticizing the Trump administration, said they would keep pursuing lower emissions in their own operations. Procter & Gamble, Nestle Inc., Ikea, Levi Strauss & Co. and Best Buy Co., which all signed the 2015 pledge organized by the Obama administration, said they still intended to honor their commitments."
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: MitchJi and neroden
Ken's post #4170, above, suggested to me that all publicly-owned companies should receive Shareholder Initiative-style queries at their Annual Meetings, demanding a formal response from their Boards detailing the company's specific stance.

Note this is NOT an attempt to engender what I just wrote - I strongly feel that most such shareholder questions are in fact an unreasonable, expensive distraction that burdens other shareholders. HOWEVER - a successful drive toward that effort should prompt all firms to anticipate just such, and that they would do proactively exactly what GE, WMT and the other eight dozen companies have done.

A CALPERS, NYCERS, NYSTERS, etc., demonstration that their investments will be limited only to those companies who have so formalized their goals would have a similar effect.
 
Ken's post #4170, above, suggested to me that all publicly-owned companies should receive Shareholder Initiative-style queries at their Annual Meetings, demanding a formal response from their Boards detailing the company's specific stance.

Note this is NOT an attempt to engender what I just wrote - I strongly feel that most such shareholder questions are in fact an unreasonable, expensive distraction that burdens other shareholders. HOWEVER - a successful drive toward that effort should prompt all firms to anticipate just such, and that they would do proactively exactly what GE, WMT and the other eight dozen companies have done.

A CALPERS, NYCERS, NYSTERS, etc., demonstration that their investments will be limited only to those companies who have so formalized their goals would have a similar effect.
Contact TD Ameritrade and tell them that they (td bank) should divest from the Dakota access pipeline and the keystone xl pipeline.

Rising Tide Seattle, South Sound Rising Tide, and the Seattle Pledge of Resistance to the Keystone XL pipeline, held a joint action on October 30th occupying the Seattle offices of TD Ameritrade (owned by TD Bank) with a 35’ pipeline and demanding they divest their $1.7 billion from Transcanada (the company building the Keystone pipelines). Statement read at the TD Ameritrade office: “We are here today to urge TD Bank to immediately divest from funding dirty tar sands energy projects. Tar sands extraction is the most destructive industrial project on earth. In Alberta, the tar sands industry has destroyed huge swathes of boreal forest and created toxic waste pits so large they can be seen from space. First Nations communities near the tar sands have skyrocketing rates of cancer. And producing tar sands emits three times more carbon than conventional oil. TD Bank has strongly advocated the building of new tar sands pipelines. In a recent report TD BANK stated that Canada should make their pipeline network a “national priority.” TD Bank is one of the largest investors in TransCanada, owning $1.7 billion in the company proposing to build the Keystone XL Pipeline. TransCanada’s Keystone 1 pipeline has spilled toxic tar sands oil more than 30 times since the summer of 2010. These dangerous spills result in serious health problems for residents and poison local water and soil. The Keystone XL has drawn opposition from First Nations communities, landowners, and others. The building of new tar sands pipelines shows blatant disregard for the well-being of those living on the front-lines of extraction, on the fence-lines of the oil refineries, and along pipelines and railways in between. These projects increase the devastating effects of climate change, poison and displace human and non-human populations, and hinder the development a socially just, clean energy future. TD Bank, stop funding TransCanada and start supporting community-based energy solutions. Our future depends on your actions. Stop advocating for tar sands development and pipelines and start advocating for local solutions to the energy crisis. If TD Bank truly believes it is okay to ignore the people's will and build these pipelines through our homelands, then TD Bank should be okay with the people building a pipeline through their offices.”
 
Here is the Replay if you missed it and want to watch this weekend;
especially thru first 30 minutes (Elon's statement on camera)

Thanks for posting that!

I enjoyed seeing Elon. I don't think I've ever seen him look so happy, except possibly in the crowds reserving M3's.

We're mostly competent and intelligent people here. How many of us would even consider if someone gave you two or three times the amount of money that Elon spent on spacex, and if you were 100% sure it was possible, starting a company to achieve those goals, and then actually pulling it off?


It's an incredible achievement!
 
  • Love
Reactions: JRP3 and kenliles
US nuclear developer Westinghouse Electric to file Tuesday for bankruptcy: Sources

"Pittsburgh-based Westinghouse, crippled by cost overruns at two U.S. projects in Georgia and South Carolina, will file for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the people told Reuters on Tuesday."
Here's one of those unforeseeable but tangible effects of energy market disruption. As it happens on this scale, it's important to watch all corners of the market to help evaluate both other opportunities and whether it's taking hold.
Toshiba (owner of bankrupting Westinghouse Nuclear - see above article), will now have to raise cash to pay for that holding.
The result is Apple (or Google or Amazon) will be buying the NAND business from Toshiba. That's going to modify those industries in turn and perhaps in a big way-- stay tuned and pay attention to all corners

Apple, Amazon, Google join bidding for Toshiba chip unit: media

"
Apple Inc (AAPL.O), Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O) and Google have joined bidding for Toshiba's (6502.T) NAND flash memory unit, vying with others for the Japanese firm's prized semiconductor operation, the Yomiuri Shimbun daily reported on Saturday.
Toshiba shareholders on Thursday agreed to split off its NAND flash memory business, paving the way for a sale to raise at least $9 billion to cover U.S. nuclear unit charges that threaten the conglomerate's future.
"
 
Related to Elon's Neuralink - which should be getting some press this week

A Swedish start-up has started implanting microchips into its employees

"
What could pass for a dystopian vision of the workplace is almost routine at the Swedish startup hub Epicenter. The company offers to implant its workers and startup members with microchips the size of grains of rice that function as swipe cards: to open doors, operate printers, or buy smoothies with a wave of the hand.

The injections have become so popular that workers at Epicenter hold parties for those willing to get implanted.

"The biggest benefit I think is convenience," said Patrick Mesterton, co-founder and CEO of Epicenter. As a demonstration, he unlocks a door by merely waving near it. "It basically replaces a lot of things you have, other communication devices, whether it be credit cards or keys."
"
 
This is my first message here in this forum, although I have been following the investors threads closely for several months. My interest is in fundamentals, so here I am writing :) Although my message is trying to understand the share price forces, so rather short-term/technicals maybe.

It can be seen that the general opinion here is very positive and bullish. While I share the positive view with tesla as company, I am not so positive with the stock as investment. Bears are not well accepted here, but being objective and consider all points of view is just necessary. It is amazing to see so many convinced people about the stock and at the same time large agreement regarding risk in the expected growth. It seems to me just incompatible.

I have a comment considering the many comparisons made here about the stock price peaks. Peaks in 2015/2016 corresponded to a market cap around 35$ B, being now in 46$ B. However these peaks are usually compared in this forum… Is it just ignorance? Or does the technical approach not consider changes in market capitalization? I am pretty new in it, so I would like to know your opinions.

According to my numbers the projected ramp-up is very critical. Not just for M3, but if Tesla is going to have a size comparable to other car producers in a short time it will need more capitalization than that provided by expected cash flows, thus more debt and issued stock is expected. So my question is not how large the revenue is expected after M3 full production (2-3 years?) but the revenue in a larger period (5-10 years). Any help with that would be appreciated :)
The problem with evaluating your thesis is that there is no precedent to use as a responsible analogue. Such transformational firms as Xerox, Kodak, Wang and Bowmor all seemed invincible because of technological leads, and they are now gone. For that matter, so is Westinghouse. Tesla has several valid parallels with such companies, so I fully understand the bears.

I am bullish primarily because I think Tesla will probably be acquired by somebody deep-pocketed and savvy if there is a significant slip. The large questions is my mind are Model 3 third year sales, upcoming Model Y, pickup, Model S and X replacement and, probably more serious, Tesla ability to compete well with other energy storage and photovoltaic suppliers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neroden
The large questions is my mind are Model 3 third year sales, upcoming Model Y, pickup, Model S and X replacement and, probably more serious, Tesla ability to compete well with other energy storage and photovoltaic suppliers.
Agreed. Since "model 3 third year sales" isn't an issue until *2019*, I'm quite comfortable with my position now, but I'll reevaluate in late 2018/early 2019.