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.
Ok, another DoE loan (or a joint-venture with a battery supplier) could soften the upfront financial impact for TSLA.

My question about "selling batteries to other customers". I assume you mean other EV makers? While I can see supply scenarios for Daimler and Toyota (TSLA investor "frenemies", however Toyota doesn't seem to be that interested in pure EVs beyond compliance cars at the moment) why should TSLA be supplying other competitors?

If there is money to be made, I expect them to do that. Also, by selling their battery chemistry, they will be able to license and offer the Supercharger network.

Elon's stated goal is to hasten the adoption of EVs, not become the biggest car maker.
 
I assume a lot of you read the latest SA article. One thing I found interesting was his point on the potential impact from the fire on insurance costs. I do not know much about how car insurance premiums are determined, but curious what others think about the impact of fires. Any chance insurers stop offering insurance on the Model S? (from the article "My question is simply how will the car's vulnerability to catastrophic damage to its most important - and most expensive - component affect insurability.") http://seekingalpha.com/article/1830792-tesla-reality-is-beginning-to-set-in
 
Elon's stated goal is to hasten the adoption of EVs, not become the biggest car maker.

GEN III at 500,000/yr would n't make them anywhere near the biggest- that said whatever size it makes them, it's the only way to achieve the 'hasten adoption goal' he has in mind; otherwise he's already achieved it, and I don't believe he would agree with that today
 
I assume a lot of you read the latest SA article. One thing I found interesting was his point on the potential impact from the fire on insurance costs.
It's been pointed out that personal injury is far more costly for insurance companies than vehicle replacement, so unless the cars are being wrecked at a much higher rate than other vehicles I don't think it should be much of an issue.
 
That's certainly his goal, but will his investors be happy with that given the dismal historic returns and low margins associated with battery manufacturers?

I'm a TSLA investor and I am happy with it.

The greatest companies are no longer just focused on the financial bottom line. They are also focused on their environmental and social responsibility bottom line too. Businesses that do not focus on all three bottom lines will have a hard time surviving the next 10-15 years.

His vision makes me want to get behind him more.
 
My first post. Been lurking everyday for the last 5 months. Hi all.

Kinda want to rant a little concerning this recall claim crap and the crazy valuation.

This is the first mass market, vehicle from this company. They have a realistic 10+ year road map for the future. If a problem was evident to them, they would address it.
They have produced 20k or so cars. (figure is unimportant. Only importance is it is lower and earlier then when they hit full stride)
Tesla wants to get this done the correct, and safe way NOW! Not when they are building 100k cars in a few years. Not when their competition has caught up. But now.
We all agree, Tesla included, that positive electric car perception is incredibly important. Much more so then ICE based cars.
If the car was flawed, whatever part it may be. INCLUDING the primary power source, Tesla would take every single action to correct it. Its that simple. A public image hit now may be painful, but is cheaper now, then when 500k cars are out on the road. If Tesla does not think its product is flawed, then I truly don't believe it is.

The major current concern is if the nhtsa might think there is a design flaw. What they might find is unknown to all of us. (This is my concern for the near future. I joined the party late and am paying for that.)
They truly might find nothing, just like TESLA did when they essentially over nite-ed all 3 burnt cars back to Cali to perform their vehicular autopsies. My guess, after they declined to investigate the first 2 fires, is no defect exists. I would buy more tesla now, but am a bit over stretched currently :-( )

While I despise conspiracy theories and all that crap, make no mistake of it. Tesla and its "accelerated" growth and interests are ruffling feathers with many in the petrol industry. Maybe not for current production (next 1-3 decades worth), but after that. It should be a good show. I don't think other automakes are worried just yet. Most develop partnerships and what not anyways. If majority of a vehicles costs are design and development. And now you have they legwork complete so all you have to do is adapt it to your companies current/future platform via licensing agreements. Sounds pretty good to me. (Tesla is already capitalizing on this with a few automakers). Its only going to get more profitable. Get your popcorn ready for the next 20 years.

Also, while I have gotten killed in the last week or so with the drop in stock price, I am not too worried about it. This stock is a lock long term.
This company/business (autos) is much more complex and difficult then say ipods. Why analysts cant grasp this concept is beyond me. Elon explained/reiterated this to all the noobs out their during the earnings report. Minimum time frame for design to in customers hands is for 2-4 years. There is a reason automakers only do major redesigns every four or more years. Its difficult and takes time/money!

People wanting/expecting rapid changes in vehicle/battery design are delusional and clearly out of touch with the auto business. The current drive train tech in Tesla cars will be the norm for the next generation or two. Hell, it may even go past the gen3. Decreasing production/manufacturing costs of said parts should help the model x/gen 3 meet the expectations of what they will cost the end user. Cost of materials as well as production efficiency and vehicle output should drive the prices down. Mass production is vs one off = lower overhead = more profits! Teslas goals with the gen3 are completely attainable with their current road map. Its that simple. The tech/demand will not stop Tesla.

The big question question mark was how would Tesla fair when a significant road block presented itself. I fortunately sold right before the first fire and watched from the side when it dipped. After watching it run past my sell point going back up, I reinvested...at a higher entrance point. I expected and assumed Tesla had met its major obstacle for being a $200 stock and would continue rise. I didn't want to miss the boat. I was wrong. Institutional and algo investors didn't see the positive guidance most of us saw and tanked the stock. This is a comon theme it seems.

I found it funny listening to analysts get all giddy about this "gigafactory" concept. Elon eluded to it by mistake in my opinion. Once the cat was out of the bag, that's all they and us as investors, whom were taking a beating wanted to hear. We wanted good news. Sorry guys. This is years away from happening. If by going off the literately hours earlier announcement of the Panasonic deal/extension. It should be assumed that this will possibly become a reality during or after gen3 production. And how many years away is that...? This gigafactory should only help the long term investor. Not the obvious quarter to quarter traders/analysts. Maybe I am getting this wrong as I am a noob myself, but this seems pretty straight forward to me. Its comical when a company exceeds expectations, yet suffers due to not meeting the "revised and over the top" expectations from an analyst who changed his predictions/valuations multiple times. I wish I could make guesses and have no consequences when I am wrong. Where do I send my resume!?!? But as I am learning, that's the stock market. Take it or leave it.

I bought in knowing the valuation was over the top. I just hoped it would continue to climb as people bought in hoping to grab some stake for the future when production meets demand. Where demand will finally max, was/is positively unknown. But no, the stock market does not like the waiting game. The drop over the last week or so is neither good, nor bad for the Tesla in my opinion. It hurts many of us individual investors, but also allows us to increase are stake. I've seen it before and read it again on these forums recently. Warren Buffets quote...
I think it goes something like, buy when others are fearful, sell when they are greedy...
I didn't get the greed part right, but am working on the fear part now. The time is now.

Also, the media sucks. I heard that there was a time when only "factual news" was reported, not made up/embellished. Must of been before me.

I have referenced a few quite a few things here, and am generally all over the place. I assume most of you can get the gist of what I am saying. Its from you as whole I have learned/researched these things. If I got something wrong, please let me know. I can use the help now...$ :rolleyes:

I just had to rant.
 
It's been pointed out that personal injury is far more costly for insurance companies than vehicle replacement, so unless the cars are being wrecked at a much higher rate than other vehicles I don't think it should be much of an issue.

You are correct. There is a reason that in my state, ambulance chaser billboards make up more the 70% in my opinion of all out door advertising. Human injury is the number one cost determining insurance. My sub 3 year old, sub 10k used car with standard airbags costs more to insure then a triple the price caddy with airbags everywhere. Tap someones bumper, they somehow have lifetime debilitating injuries. That is an easy 30-100k+ payout if they are victorious in court. Most often the insurance companies will settle before it even gets to that point. Hell, look at what legitimate claims can cost. Broken leg, ok. A couple thousand.
Head/neck/back pain. BOOM. 100k+! Give me the Tesla any day if I am an insurance company.

It was explained to me that the legal precedent for injury or something along those lines had changed a few years back in my state and now its a field day for ambulance chasers. Insurance companies didn't lobby hard enough she said.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If the giga factory is to be up and running for high volume G3 production in 2018 or so they probably have to start building it by 2016 at the latest.

I think Gen III will certainly be a long ramp up to full production rate, at least 2 or 3 years from the time the first production model rolls out. So, giga factory investment can be staggered as well. 2016 through 2019 would be my best guess as of today, maybe adding additional capacity each year for an additional 100K cars per year.

As the GenIIIBuyer, I've been thinking about when I should start putting aside cash to have at the ready for Sig #1 :p

I assume they won't start taking reservations until after they've started delivering Model X's, so I have some time. However, with the X wait-list approaching 10K one year before the first delivery. I think the GenIII queue could be 100K* long when it's one year out from first deliveries. 100K x $5K per reservation on average = $500M. Gigafactory year 1 crowd-funded! BOOM!

*Know that seems high, but don't underestimate the price elasticity of demand.
 
If the giga factory is to be up and running for high volume G3 production in 2018 or so they probably have to start building it by 2016 at the latest.

This is why I brought up the subject, I don't think this giga factory is far away (unless TSLA postpones or cancels the Gen III).

To sum up:

- Current (Panasonic) and likely suppliers (Samsung, LG...there are not so many worldwide) can only cover Model S and X cars with their battery capacity.

- Beyond these cars, TSLA has an absolute need for this "giga factory". If you don't believe me on this, listen to Musk's CNBC interview earlier this year (factory tour, video clip:Musk: - CNBC ) and the November 5, 2013 conference call.

- In my guesstimates, this factory will cost 5-10 billion USD for 250-500k Gen III cars/year and related tooling.

This giant investment has to be in place in about 2 years to get permits and start construction (and TSLA has to bet on the "correct" battery technology, otherwise there will be expensive changes later to adapt and additional Gen III delays).

This is the most important strategic decision and challenge facing TSLA until 2020 in my opinion - along with the decision to produce a mass-market car at all.

PS: If you think my estimates about 5-10 billion are off the mark, please add yours. Also, most people on this site might have seen the video clip already, but it's worth re-watching. This will influence TSLA stock far more than guessing 500 less or more vehicles per quarter in 2013.
 
Last edited:
This is why I brought up the subject, I don't think this giga factory is far away (unless TSLA postpones or cancels the Gen III).

To sum up:

- Current (Panasonic) and likely suppliers (Samsung, LG...there are not so many worldwide) can only cover Model S and X cars with their battery capacity.

- Beyond these cars, TSLA has an absolute need for this "giga factory". If you don't believe me on this, listen to Musk's CNBC interview earlier this year (factory tour, video clip:Musk: - CNBC ) and the November 5, 2013 conference call.

- In my guesstimates, this factory will cost 5-10 billion USD for 250-500k Gen III cars/year and related tooling.

This giant investment has to be in place in about 2 years to get permits and start construction (and TSLA has to bet on the "correct" battery technology, otherwise there will be expensive changes later to adapt and additional Gen III delays).

This is the most important strategic decision and challenge facing TSLA until 2020 in my opinion - along with the decision to produce a mass-market car at all.

PS: If you think my estimates about 5-10 billion are off the mark, please add yours. Also, most people on this site might have seen the video clip already, but it's worth re-watching. This will influence TSLA stock far more than guessing 500 less or more vehicles per quarter in 2013.

the ultimate size they willeventually want may cost a total of 5-10bn but they can purchase in pieces and build it out as demand grows. Maybe 2-3bn to start for initial Gen III demand. Elon said in the q3 conference call last week that they are looking into this with partners....this means that TSLA will likely not finance most of the factory which means no dilution of TSLA shares to build the factory.
That is the best indication we have now of how the giga factory plays out.

On a side note, last night on CNBC, Capital IQ analyst who's one of the few analysts with a SELL rating on the stock did not deny that they may change their rating to a BUY soon when asked. Sentiment is going to reverse again to drive the stock price higher, just a matter of when. If/when Bear analysts (Capital IQ, Barron's, GS) start flipping their rating from SELL to BUY or HOLD then watch out, the momo roller coaster will begin again...perhaps up to 250 before correcting back down to 180-190.
 
TSLA has to bet on the "correct" battery technology, otherwise there will be expensive changes later to adapt and additional Gen III delays
Many of the line components have built in flexibility, they can operate perfectly well with chemistry changes, and any format changes are up to Tesla, which the machines can also accommodate within reason. With improving energy density Tesla will need fewer cells per vehicle so they can stick to the 18650 format or something similar if they think it makes sense.
 
Yes, I expect your numbers are way off the mark. First I'd like to know what data you used to come up with that number.

My simple assumptions and market comparables are:

- How much Nissan spent on their three battery plants (and earlier JV investments with NEC since 2007, see details below *) used to supply the Nissan LEAF and future EVs from Nissan-Renault. Current LEAF battery is smaller than the one needed for the Gen III.

- How much Panasonic invested to expand (or restart existing idle factory capacity) battery supply for Model S and X.

- Raw material input costs of cylindrical cells (18650 or slightly larger) now and later this decade, see Argonne PDF from December 2012 linked in the giga factory thread (or here: http://www.cse.anl.gov/batpac/files/BatPaC ANL-12_55.pdf )

- Tooling costs for a Gen III (proposed range of 200+ miles) production of 250-500k cars and batteries/year -> hence the wide range of 5-10 billion USD


I'm also assuming that:

- the plant is running on clean energy and includes recycling options for batteries (this based on Musk's remarks in the latest TSLA conference call on November 5, 2013).

- Supply for Model S and X batteries continues to be produced by external suppliers as is (supplier Panasonic, maybe Samsung or LG added down the road).


I would like to hear additional numbers from readers - or numbers pro analysts covering TSLA came up with. So far, I have not seen analysts producing public numbers or asking specific questions. This includes the latest conference call, there were no questions about the investments needed for the "giga factory".

I doubt that even need for this plant was on the agenda of most analysts before Musk himself discussed its need, first in summer 2013 (CNBC interview linked above) and then again in the latest conference call.

________

* TSLA is certainly not the first or only car company thinking about vertically integrating the battery production for EVs. Nissan now has three global battery plants in place; below is a 2013 tour of the one located in Tennessee (the other two plants are in Japan and Europe):

Nissans New US Battery Plant Shows Major Dedication To EVs - HybridCars.com

Roughly: 2 to 2.5 billion USD in Japan, 1.7 billion USD for the US plant and 420 million GBP in Europe for batteries and the Nissan LEAF. These three numbers do not include some earlier JV (Nissan-NEC) investments, but do include tooling updates for the LEAF car itself.

Note that while the Tennessee plant can eventually be expanded to 200k batteries/year (it's running/built-out well below capacity at the moment!) the current LEAF batteries are much smaller (24 kWh) than the ones needed for the upcoming Tesla Gen III car (at the promised 200+ miles of range).
 
Last edited:
If there is demand for more cars, there will be demand for more batteries, and this has been known for roughly the 10 years that Tesla has been operating -- it's not news. If there is a need for more batteries, then more will be made, either by Tesla, a joint venture, or an existing battery supplier. Unlike building a Tesla, making batteries is a century-old proposition that is not complicated, and can be scaled with much less complication. Finally, when there is money to be made making batteries, then someone will step up to the plate and do it, regardless of cost.

Unless there isn't demand for the products Tesla makes or there aren't enough raw materials to make enough batteries for the whole world (there is, and there are), these problems are all solvable. In fact, these "problems" are completely wonderful. Most companies would kill to have Tesla's current and projected demand curves, power over the supply chain, and completely known supply constraints.

Move along, nothing to see here.
 
Move along, nothing to see here.

So doubling the total global Li-Ion battery production is trivial in your opinion?

Did you have a look at the three Nissan plant numbers I provided above? About $4.5 billion when added up.

The TSLA "giga factory" also has a deadline attached, around 2016. (Otherwise the Gen III car can't be built in volume by 2017, mixing battery suppliers for one car model is probably not a good idea)

But first, TSLA has to come up with the money (either alone or in a JV with a battery supplier with loans from the private debt markets or from the DoE).

I'm just estimating the numbers needed to be raised. With a market cap around $20 billion and $0.8 billion cash at hand, raising $5-10 billion and servicing the debt is also not trivial imho.

I believe most analysts tracking TSLA are underestimating the funds needed for this factory in their models.

Most didn't even acknowledge the need for such a factory until recently.


My estimates may be completely wrong. That's why I would like to see other investment estimates and timeframes for this "giga factory". "Move along" doesn't help there.
 
Last edited:
My estimates may be completely wrong. That's why I would like to see other investment estimates and timeframes for this "giga factory". "Move along" doesn't help there.

Your estimates may indeed be completely wrong. It has not yet been established what kind of battery volume will be required three to four years from now to support demand. But if the need (read:demand) for battery production your "guesstimates" imply comes to fruition, we are already living in a world in which Tesla Motors has succeeded in obsoleting the combustion engine industry, and to imply that a $20billion market cap is realistic at that point is absurd. TSLA would be at $500 or more by then and the world will be begging to throw money at anything Elon Musk desires or needs to accelerate their ability to own his products. Which would be, as I said, an enviable problem to have. That's why I don't really care how much battery production costs. It's just not relevant in a hypothetical world dominated by Tesla Motors anyway, which your assumptions imply.