Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA)

[ckessel]

I doubt TSLA will need any funds for the giga factory. They'll sign a contract to agree to buy some quantity of batteries that's enough guaranteed money for someone like Panasonic to build it. And then Panasonic (or whoever) will scale the production out over a few years to meet rising Tesla (and/or others) production.

 

[Mario Kadastik]

I can only speak for myself but I do not mind alterative views on open forums as long as they people are respectful of each other and there is good moderation of the threads. If there is a particular person who just seems to 'rub me wrong' I just ignore that person's posts.

I think we have good moderation here, especially compared to the official TM site where there is lots of bashing, hostility and troll hunting.

Just my 2 cents

I agree, debate is always the best form of enlightenment because truth is usually somewhere in between and we get closer to it by weighing the various viewpoints. A decent community with educated people will have contrarian views aplenty and being able to voice them and discuss and debate them is a valuable resource. This path however is always prone to rub some people the wrong way and fuses have different length for different people and that's what we have moderators for. As long as people provide their viewpoints with good arguments and remain respectful I would love to hear proper comments from both the long and short side as that gives insight into how people think and does help me understand better why the stock is doing what it's doing. And long term is anyway a theoretical estimation until it actually happens therefore there are various paths that the company might take and hence we need various viewpoints to map out the paths.

 

[tftf]

He's definitely either a paid troll or heavily short himself and spends his day trolling this site, seeking alpha, and who knows where else.

I was both long and short TSLA in the past, but since I'm not Carl Icahn I doubt this is relevant.

I am trying to have a discussion in this thread what the "giga factory" (TSLA needs it for the Gen III car. CEO Musk is saying this himself, not my daydream...) is going to cost.

I have provided many links and have spent quite some time looking at the investment numbers and IR reports from Nissan-NEC (large cell-size example) and Panasonic-Sanyo (18650-cell size example).

To my knowledge these two plus LG and Samsung SDI (I have not found enough LG and Samsung numbers in English and do not speak Korean) are the only four companies supplying EV batteries on a global scale in significant levels at the moment.

I have also provided links to two peer-reviewed PDFs about battery and battery plant costs.

Why is this "giga factory" so important imho for the longer-term fundamentals of TSLA?

- Battery supply volumes represent the critical supply path for Gen III (no one is going to argue TSLA can't procure enough wheels and touch screens for Gen III or KUKA plant robots).
Most other supplied parts are the same or similar to ICE cars or not in short demand on the global market with enough lead time.

- TSLA batteries are currently tied to a single supplier. While TSLA may add Samsung or LG to the mix one day, short-term TSLA is dependent on Panasonic. If Godzilla stomps the Panasonic factory, there is a lot of disruption.

- The costs are meaningful. Based on my sources, I assume total costs of 5 to 10 billion USD for 250-500k Gen III cars/year. TSLA may opt for joint-ventures with battery suppliers or other partners (e.g. Daimler would opt for a portion of the supply from the same factory), but the impact on its balance sheet or its debt structure is probably still very significant.

- - - Updated - - -

Let's play with some more numbers. Currently Tesla is using 3.4ah cells in the S. There are 4ah cells in the pipeline, lets assume they are available 3 years from now. I think Tesla can do the base G3 with 45kWh pack, using 4 ah cell x 3.6 V nominal = 14.4Wh/cell, divided into 45kWh = 3,125 cells. a 50kWh pack = 3,472 cells.

Ok, thanks. In your estimate, are the 4 ah cell costs roughly comparable to current 3.4 ah cells in a few years, for example about the same same raw material input and production costs?

In the PDF I linked, the current cell raw material costs are (table 2, page 297) pegged at about $ 1.3:

http://americanmanufacturing.org/files/1-s2.0-S0378775312018940-main (4).pdf

But since TSLA is (according to Musk himself, see middle section of this older video: GTM TV: Elon Musk on the Model X SUV and Teslas New Batteries - YouTube ) using a separate/tweaked chemistry it will be hard to compare raw material costs with standard cells in detail.

I therefore focused more on the plant investment ($4 per cell-year upfront for smaller battery plants according to the same PDF), not the detailed battery cell costs per unit.

PS: I was also under the impression TSLA is currently using 3.1 ah cells, not 3.4 ah for Model S (?). Maybe this info is outdated:

The Suminoe factory will start producing 3.1Ah battery cells, the highest energy density cells available in the market. The facility will produce more than 300 million cells per year.

Panasonic Presents First Electric Vehicle Battery to Tesla | Press Releases | Tesla Motors

3.1 vs 3.4 ah was already discussed here in detail:

Tesla Motors CTO talks future batteries and charging protocols - Page 4

 

[Zzzz...]

Let's play with some more numbers. Currently Tesla is using 3.4ah cells in the S. There are 4ah cells in the pipeline, lets assume they are available 3 years from now. I think Tesla can do the base G3 with 45kWh pack, using 4 ah cell x 3.6 V nominal = 14.4Wh/cell, divided into 45kWh = 3,125 cells. a 50kWh pack = 3,472 cells.

Calculating initial investments per kWh instead of per cell is more sensible. The study that claimed $4 upfront cost for one cell yearly plant capacity was doing calculations with not high density cells, like 4ah. The 4ah cells most definitely would require more investments per cell capacity compared to 3ah cells.

Price per kWh on the other hand should not change much. It might be even cheaper with high specific energy chemistry.

I do feel like using current specific energy 18650 cells with $4 is a good estimate. That place gigafactory into ballpark of 10 billion. But even better estimate would be using actual Nissan investments into their Smyrna plant. That would place 8.5 billion $ price tag for whole gigafactory. But first part of it, with enouph capacity to produce 200k battery packs yearly should cost 3.4 billion. Well within the reach of Tesla Motors. Especially in the case of JV.

- - - Updated - - -

To my knowledge these two plus LG and Samsung SDI (I have not found enough LG and Samsung numbers in English and do not speak Korean) are the only four companies supplying EV batteries on a global scale in significant levels at the moment.

If we count just biggest battery producers in the world, I feel like BYD should be added to the list. And they do produce EV batteries too.

But yeah, not that many big players out there.

 

[tftf]

I do feel like using current specific energy 18650 cells with $4 is a good estimate. That place gigafactory into ballpark of 10 billion. But even better estimate would be using actual Nissan investments into their Smyrna plant. That would place 8.5 billion $ price tag for whole gigafactory. But first part of it, with enouph capacity to produce 200k battery packs yearly should cost 3.4 billion. Well within the reach of Tesla Motors. Especially in the case of JV.
(...)
If we count just biggest battery producers in the world, I feel like BYD should be added to the list. And they do produce EV batteries too.

Thank you for your estimates. I included rough tooling costs for the Gen III car and battery integration costs in my estimates (about $1-2 billion for 250-500k cars including costs for battery pack and battery management manufacturing on top of the battery cell production, since obviously TSLA can't use "naked" cells directly) so my total numbers for 50k cars more are probably similar to yours in total:

$5 billion total for 250k Gen III cars and batteries per year as a low-range estimate.

I didn't use cell numbers per car (that was the other calculation method), but I would assume 3500-5500 cells used for low-end to high-end Gen III cars.

In comparison: According to my estimates (earlier posts in this thread), industry sources and Nissan IR, Nissan spent about $4.5 to 5.5 billion (give or take a few % because of moving EURUSD and USDJPY exchange rates) on the LEAF car and battery-related investments.

Yes, BYD should be added, thank you. There may be more down the list. Here's a top 12 list of potential battery partners and competitors for TSLA (not in any particular order):

1. LG Chem
2. Johnson Controls
3. GS Yuasa (new JV with Bosch and Mitsubishi, also JV with Honda)
4. AESC (Nissan-NEC)
5. A123 Systems (now in Chinese control, Wangxiang)
6. Panasonic Group (includes former Sanyo)
7. Samsung, former SB LiMotive (Bosch left, now just Samsung SDI)
8. Hitachi Vehicle Energy
9. BYD
10. Electrovaya
11. Blue Solutions (recent IPO in France, tied to Bollore)
12. Li-Tec and Accumotive (Evonik and Daimler JVs)

Maybe there are many more, especially domestic suppliers in China for e-scooters etc. may be missing on the list. These are the biggest (by revenue or market cap) I found, please add yours.


PS: That being said, I will refrain from active contributions once again as don't feel the need to defend myself against "trolling" accusations instead of discussing the thread topic (long-term fundamentals for TSLA, I think the "giga factory" and the Gen III car investments will have a major impact on that until 2020).

 

[JRP3]

Ok, thanks. In your estimate, are the 4 ah cell costs roughly comparable to current 3.4 ah cells, for example about the same same raw material input and production costs?

That is my assumption.

In the PDF I linked, the current cell raw material costs are (table 2, page 297) pegged at about $ 1.3:

Elon recently stated materials costs were around 70-80 cents per cell.

PS: I was also under the impression TSLA is currently using 3.1 ah cells, not 3.4 ah for Model S (?). Maybe this info is outdated:



Panasonic Presents First Electric Vehicle Battery to Tesla | Press Releases | Tesla Motors

3.1 vs 3.4 ah was already discussed here in detail:

Tesla Motors CTO talks future batteries and charging protocols - Page 4

We've had a number of discussions, the problem is the figures don't work out with the 3.1ah cell. Tesla has stated the number of cells in the 85kWh pack are close to 7000 cells. 3.1ah x 3.6 nominal voltage = 11.16 wh divided into 85kwh= 7616 cells 3.4ahx 3.6 nominal Voltage = 12.24 wh divided into 85kWh = 6944 cells. Assuming there is a bit more than 85kWh actual capacity in the pack the 3.4 ah cell fits perfectly. It could also be a 3.2ah cell or a 3.3ah cell since it is a custom cell made just for Tesla.

 

[adiggs]

Is there a way to vote tftf off perhaps?
I'd prefer to read him on seeking alpha as he ruins these threads. He's definitely either a paid troll or heavily short himself and spends his day trolling this site, seeking alpha, and who knows where else.

You have an Ignore option TSLAopt for individuals you would prefer not to read. You can vote him off your own island anytime

 

[HiTech]

Okay, just my two cents:

I think there are a number of variables that need to be thought of here, from a long-term perspective. First let's take a look at the recent news and statements (I most likely don't have all latest info, but generalizing comments).

Recently, the TSLA price droped which results from something a bit deeper than what most analysts/"gurus" have concluded. In my opinion, the price went up due to a very strong output expectations 3-4 years from now, with almost no bumps in the road (i.e. no challenge to meet demand). Well, now there is a statement by the CEO stating that there are still supply related issues (i.e. limited supply of batteries), which could impact how many vehicles actually get delivered/sold 3-4 years from now. Add on the "flash in the pan" stories about the fires and some of these law suites... you have a perfect opportunity for the shorts to make back some money and the short-term holders of the stock to panic.

Long-term, I think all of this news actually makes for a really strong future growth! In my opinion, I think the statement about the restricted supply of the batteries is a good strategic plan. It's like playing chess and thinking 8 moves ahead. I've argued for a long time that Tesla is not just a auto company... It's a energy management company, which makes great vehicles! With the plans for the super chargers (US and Europe), and with the statements about a potential "giga-factory" to produce the batteries, I'm starting to feel I was quite right! If this is the case, then all of the "competition" from other auto companies could end up being a huge possitive for Tesla in the long term. For example, Toyota and Mercs already have battery pack deals, and BMW just signed a deal with SolarCity for energy deal to their buyers.

My TSLA stock and company business model predictions:
Short-term: prices could go down a bit more, but will get to over $150 within 3 months. Potentially far higher or sooner, if the highway department finishes their inspection and they find no reason for recalls or safety concerns. Tesla will also announce the need for the "giga-factory" within the next 3 months. This may be part of a joint-venture, but I think it'll be mainly Tesla controlled.

Long-term: Over $300 within 2 years, and $500 within 4 years. Expecting the "giga-facotry" to be completed and operational within the next several years - ready in time for the start of GenIII production (2017?). This will help bring the battery costs down well below the $200/kWh (potentially by half, as middle-men are out of the picture as well). Also, this would help Tesla, the "energy management company", go into other energy intensive industries, like house energy (think solar panels powering backup batteries in each house...). The Model S, X, GenIII and future models are all great to keep the company making money to fund the future growth!

Again, just my 2 cents.

 

[ecarfan]

I've argued for a long time that Tesla is not just a auto company... It's a energy management company, which makes great vehicles! With the plans for the super chargers (US and Europe), and with the statements about a potential "giga-factory" to produce the batteries, I'm starting to feel I was quite right! ...Tesla, the "energy management company", go into other energy intensive industries, like house energy (think solar panels powering backup batteries in each house...)

HiTech, I agree and have said the same thing about Tesla in these Forums. And Tesla already produces just such a battery for solar systems, see Home Energy Storage & Battery Backup System - SolarCity

It is finishing beta testing in California and I have been told it will be for sale next year. I want one!

 

[JRP3]

Tesla will also announce the need for the "giga-factory" within the next 3 months.

They've already announced that need.

 

[tftf]

I doubt TSLA will need any funds for the giga factory. They'll sign a contract to agree to buy some quantity of batteries that's enough guaranteed money for someone like Panasonic to build it. And then Panasonic (or whoever) will scale the production out over a few years to meet rising Tesla (and/or others) production.

I don't think this is possible. Maybe a JV, but TSLA will need to be involved directly given the amount of cells needed. The requested supply of 25 to 40 GhW will require huge investments imho.

Please have a look at the giga-factory thread and the numbers involved (up to 40 GWh in 2019, compare the number to current global battery production *). This info comes from someone who needs to know the numbers (CTO Straubel, minute 22:00+ in the video). Due to the hostility in this thread, I won't comment further here. The people calling me a "troll" should check out Straubel's video and run the numbers again (I looked at it back in September. I doubt many others did, the video just got 400 hits up to now).

_______
* video can be found here: How to solve the battery factory issue - Page 6

 

[hcsharp]

I don't think this is possible. Maybe a JV, but TSLA will need to be involved directly given the amount of cells and the supply will require huge investments imho.

Please have a look at the giga-factory thread and the numbers involved (up to 40 GWh in 2019, compare the number to current global battery production *). This info comes from someone who needs to know the numbers (CTO Straubel, minute 22:00+ in the video). Due to the hostility in this thread, I won't comment further here. The people calling me a "troll" should check out Straubel's video and run the numbers again (I looked at it back in September. I doubt many others did, the video just got 400 hits up to now).

_______
* video can be found here: How to solve the battery factory issue - Page 6

I'm sorry you feel hostility from this thread. I'm long TSLA but I find that there's a little over-exuberance here and I hope you keep posting to provide some balance.

As far as Li-Ion battery factories go, manufacturers have been historically loathe to build them, and for good reason. Conservative companies like LG, Samsung, and Panasonic distrust Tesla's promises of future EV demand. They see this young upstart automaker and think just because Tesla is willing to guarantee sales doesn't mean they will be around to honor those guarantees in a few years. The other problem is nobody wants to build a plant when the technology is so immature. Why spend billions on something that may turn out to be obsolete before your equipment has lived out its expected lifespan. Much of that equipment is chemistry dependent. For these reasons the plant really almost has to be built by Tesla. It's the same reasons that Tesla had to start making cars in the first place. Nobody else has the same vision, or as much at stake as Tesla, so ultimately Tesla will have to build it.

While I'm on the subject of over-exuberance, I have to admit that I think most estimates about Gen III demand that I see tossed around here are low. There's no way to do a legitimate market study about something that doesn't exist and nobody knows anything about. Having said that, we all know how much better the EV experience is. It's only a matter of time before we reach a tipping point where everybody wants one, the major automakers aren't ready, and worldwide cell production is inadequate. Having their own giga-factory up and running will give Tesla a big market advantage.

 

[JRP3]

I'm not sure that much of the equipment is chemistry dependent. Foil extruders, mixers, infusers, winding machines, etc., should be able to handle a variety of different cell chemistries. Even between different chemistries I think the majority of cell components will remain the same.

 

[Zzzz...]

I'm not sure that much of the equipment is chemistry dependent. Foil extruders, mixers, infusers, winding machines, etc., should be able to handle a variety of different cell chemistries. Even between different chemistries I think the majority of cell components will remain the same.

Correct.

But there could be a switch from li-ion to lithium sulfur batteries in a few year timeframe(a big unknown). If li-s materializes, it would require new production technics for cathode/anode/separator. And supply chain would have to invest, and have to invest heavily under Tesla's guaranties/contracts. It is a tricky question what battery tech would be most economical and still mature enouph for large scale production in 2018. May be in couple years from now the answer would be more clear

 

[sleepyhead]

I am just as willing to hear "short" case on TSLA myself, but I want to hear it from people who genuinely believe in what they are saying. tftf obviously has an agenda, and that is to distort the truth on TSLA. I haven't read all of his posts, or even more than 20% of his posts, but that is enough to see that he is clearly misleading people on this forum (and elsewhere) in order to scare people away from investing in Tesla. I despise people like this. Remember that tftf seems to have researched Tesla extensively, which is evident in all of his posts that are backed up with links to videos, documents, research, etc. I am somewhat skeptical that one person has enough time on their hands to always have an answer for everything with links to back it up. I wouldn't be surprised if he is a lobbyist for oil companies or has some other similar agenda.

tftf is clearly trying to mislead us, but he does it in such a convincing and creative way that a lot of unsuspecting people will tend to believe him. Think of him as trolling on steroids, i.e. taking trolling to higher level. With all of his extensive knowledge and "proof" to back things up, he always seems to omit facts that are inconvenient to him or don't support his thesis. He always pulls up all of the misleading (or downright incorrect) research reports to prove his points. Compares apples to oranges to support his thesis.

Here are some of the examples of things I have seen him write just over the past day or two (I am paraphrasing but not distorting anything):

1. tftf wrote: raw material costs for a battery cell are $1.30 and provided a .pdf file to back up his claim.

He completely ignored the fact that Elon Musk said that raw materials only cost $0.80. But some random .pdf file suited his agenda better, so he used that. One problem is that he underestimates people on this board and the truth always comes out. JRP3 already corrected him on this.

2. Linked to a McKinsey (top consulting firm) study that shows that batteries cost $600/kWh and might go down to $200 by 2025. He even admitted that McKinsey was wrong on today's price of $600, so he said that he will give Tesla the benefit of the doubt and say that batteries go down to $200 by 2020 instead of 2025.

Once again for someone who knows everything on Tesla, he completely ignored the fact that Tesla is already buying batteries at roughly $250 per kWh. And more importantly he completely omitted the fact the Elon Musk said that batteries will reach $100 kWh very shortly. I can't remember what Elon said, but I think it was definitely less than a decade. Once again, these facts are inconvenient to his agenda, so he would rather spew FUD and make it look legit by showing some crappy consulting firm study. I know how consulting firms do studies and they are garbage.

3. He keeps talking about how Tesla needs to raise $5b-$10b by 2015 in order to have the giga-factory on-line by 2017 so they can produce 500k Model E cars that year.

Once again this is nonsense, because Elon even said in an interview that the first year or two of Gen 3 will be lower volume and they will gradually build up to 500k units. No need to raise all that money at once. Others have pointed out several times that the factory can be built in stages with a smaller initial investment and then expand over time. tftf conveniently ignores all of these posts and goes on with the same story that giga-factory must be built before the first gen 3 car comes off the line (not exactly what he says, but not too far off either).

4. Nissan spent $X so Tesla will need to spend $X.

Completely omitting the fact that Tesla's chemistry and strategy is different, and that Tesla pays probably 50% - 75% less than what Nissan pays for batteries.

I have only read about 3 or 4 of tftf's posts and these are 4 things that I remember off the top of my head from his posts that strike me as complete BS. I can tell right away that he clearly has an agenda, and that agenda is for Elon and Tesla to fail. He also tries to throw in some kind words on Tesla or some good advice for other forum members just to trick people into believing that he has good intentions. His kind words are always followed by qualifiers, such as "Tesla Model S is a nice car, but..." Elon is a great guy, but..."

We don't need people like him on this forum, he is no different than Peterson. His goal is to create doubt in Tesla. He wants to see Tesla fail. The easiest way for a company to fail is to get the stock price to come crashing down. He wants you guys to stop buying TSLA, and for those who hold shares to sell them. He is very sneaky in the way he goes about doing these things, but if you put lipstick on a troll it is still a troll.

I would be all for banning him, because he is not adding to any meaningful discussion. His only agenda is to distort the truth. All he writes about is how this is going to hurt Tesla, how that obstacle is going to be impossible to overcome for Tesla, this is going to take Tesla a lot longer, etc. All negatives on Tesla. Never says anything positive. Always tries to look for the negatives. Andrea James model is crap, while Damodaran's model is the best to value TSLA.

Please stop responding to tftf. I recommend that we all ignore him, because his goal is to create chaos on this board and it is working. As soon as you prove him wrong on one thing, he completely ignores it and starts spewing FUD on another topic. There is no benefit to having people like this on this board. He clearly has an agenda, just like John Peterson does.

I don't know why so many people want Tesla to fail. If Tesla fails then so will our planet (eventually, and a lot sooner than you expect) and so will mankind. We should all be cheering for Tesla to succeed. I am all for pointing out obstacles to Tesla's path to achieving success, but I don't appreciate it when people purposely mislead others just to fulfill their own agenda. Don't fall victim to tftf's FUD tactics.

 

[mershaw2001]

Sadly, a month ago I was starting to think that we had confirmation bias and that some alternative views would be appreciated. Since then, I've seen a lot of people posting negative things about tesla as the stock slides and some of those things have been misleading, and I've decided I completely agree with what sleepyhead said above.

I stopped reading the Peterson articles because that guy would never write a positive word about Tesla in a million years, so I know from the beginning of his articles that the article will be biased and will be written in a manner that says that tesla will fail. I have had a little more difficulty commenting on TFTF, because I gave up reading the threads in which he comments. I gave up because I saw his comments on seeking alpha and picked up that he was trying to distort facts. Sadly, when I give up reading Tesla, those leading the war against tesla win. When TFTF moved over to the Tesla forum I assumed he was just going to do the same thing here and post in the same manner as he was posting on seeking alpha, and that makes this forum less useful to me. Curt challenged Tftf to post more information in another thread. Perhaps we should combine these two discussions into one?

 

[tftf]

Ok, as I pointed out in the other thread, all I have tried to provide is information and my (often critical) point of view.

Why was I even posting here? I was mocked in an OT thread when I was a mere passive reader, that's why I even joined this forum in the first place. Check the thread: tftf on SA. Tired of him yet? for details if you don't believe me. Thank the posters in that thread that I even wrote one post in this forum

In case some of you have losing positions in TSLA (?) and are now looking for a scapegoat (at least that's how the posts of mershaw2001 and sleepyhead partly sounded imho) I won't be the punching bag nor engage in personal fights. That's a waste of time for me, like I wrote in my first post in the very first sentence.

It's also not in my interest to disturb an active and otherwise interesting forum. I will therefore refrain from actively posting on this forum (not just this thread) so it can find its inner peace again.

tftf


PS: As for the usefulness of my links and estimates, we will only find out in a few months or years. Just a few last corrections in sleepyhead's post as I don't like to be misquoted:

- The PDF quoting battery cell material pricing at 1.3$ was posted as a sidenote ( I used an alternate method for my estimates), I even pointed out TSLA is using a special cell chemistry so figures/costs from standard 18650 cells can't be used directly. The upfront $4 per-cell-year investments was from the same paper and for smaller plants, this PDF was posted by other people on this forum months before I linked to it once again to compare numbers (I used another calculation method). Based on this PDF, these other posters came up with estimates at "10+ billion" for 500k cars (higher than mine, and their estimates were without the car investments, just for the battery plant part...).

- My $5-10 billion estimate includes 1. all the tooling etc. for the Gen III car factory at 250-500k/year, not "just" the batteries and the battery plant part (and the battery part includes cell assembly and BMS, not just the cells) 2. the entire investment for both the cell and car plant running at full capacity, not just an estimate for a first cap ex wave with the plant still running below capacity. Again, some other forum members also came up with similar estimates for the plant independent of me.
Being called an "oil sock puppet" is quite funny since I have been interested and invested in alt energy since well before TSLA even existed. Maybe that's why I remember how long alternative energy ROI takes and I experienced a boom and bust cycle in solar a few years ago with few remaining survivors.

- In case other readers are more interested in cell pricing (this is too complex for me) I posted another PDF paper from Argonne Labs and later a summary from insideevs.com discussing it (because that PDF paper is long and hard to digest):

http://www.cse.anl.gov/batpac/files/BatPaC ANL-12_55.pdf - 140 pages long, take your time

If you know of better recent sources than Argonne Labs please let me know and post them. I know of only a few, if any - and these PDFs are not in English or not available to share publicly, so I didn't post them here (btw, sorry for any spelling mistakes I made, English is my third language only).

- As for Andrea James' vs Prof. Damodaran's valuation models and price targets: I only stated which model I personally judge as superior based on my experience. Others came to totally different conclusions, including a poster (Julian Cox) who thinks TSLA can be self-funded and its capital costs are "zero" (?!). He thinks Damodaran is completely wrong (despite Damodaran offering just a DCF model where everyone can fill in different inputs).
We will see who got it right when the battery plant and other investments are due. I highly doubt TSLA can finance these and other investments using operative cash flows. My bet is on Damodaran's, yours may be on Julian Cox (I will probably never get his capital costs=zero claim ?) and/or Andrea James' model.

- Again, most pro sell-side analysts are bullish on TSLA with PTs (still) above $200, so why worry about my obscure posts online? Andrea James has 1000 times (at least) the audience and online klout to make a bullish case for TSLA.

- As a value investor I would be thrilled with TSLA stock falling if its intrinsic value is indeed above $200 or $300. If you think Andrea James and other bullish analysts are correct, load up on the stock and make a lot of money if TSLA becomes as big as Toyota or VW and as profitable as Porsche in the future. I even remember another bull (Sal Demir) making the case for TSLA shares to be trading above $1000 in a few years (his Tesla Full Analysis 2.0 article on SeekingAlpha). I see it quite differently.

- Finally, estimating future battery prices is very hard imho. I am always interested in estimates. But please include a link or source for such claims:

...omitted the fact the Elon Musk said that batteries will reach $100 kWh very shortly.

$100/kWh very shortly? I really never heard of this, neither from Elon Musk or other EV battery makers. I always tried to include as many links as possible to numbers and sources I used - so readers can do their own due diligence.

Edit: Thank you for providing a link to the claim (@sleepyhead later in this thread). 2023 looks possible if one is optimistic, I didn't think of that source because it said "very shortly". Also fixed a few typos in this last post.

PPS: And yes, I post a lot and work a lot, I'm one person.

 

[JRP3]

I too appreciate a well argued contrarian point of view but many of tftf's posts seem redundant, as well as relying on seemingly authoritative yet known to be inaccurate or irrelevant data.

 

[sleepyhead]

In case some of you have losing positions in TSLA (?) and are now looking for a scapegoat (at least that's how the posts of mershaw2001 and sleepyhead partly sounded) I won't be the punching bag nor engage in personal fights.

Wrong again. I have written time and time again on this forum that I have exited virtually all of my TSLA positions in late September/early October. I have disclosed this several times in different threads, and I am sure that all active members are aware of this. The problem with trolls is that they post a lot, but never read what other people have to say.

It's also not in my interest to disturb an active and otherwise interesting forum. I will therefore refrain from actively posting on this forum (not just this thread) so it can find its inner peace again.

I have already seen you write this exact same thing about a month or two ago, and yet you are still posting here.

- As a value investor I would be thrilled with TSLA stock falling if its intrinsic value is indeed above $200 or 300.

I actually am thrilled. If you had read any of my posts you would know that I started buying TSLA again in the 130s and a lot more at around 120. I also wrote several times that i hope that the stock goes down even further, so that I can dollar cost average on the way down. If there are no new material events affecting TSLA, then the lower the stock price goes the happier I will be, because I will be able to buy a lot more TSLA.

As far as your links go, they are all bogus. You only post links that support your agenda, and always ask if someone has any better links. When no one responds, you continue pushing those false links. But as soon as someone corrects you, you completely change the subject and ignore the more accurate information.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

Remember that tftf seems to have researched Tesla extensively, which is evident in all of his posts that are backed up with links to videos, documents, research, etc. I am somewhat skeptical that one person has enough time on their hands to always have an answer for everything with links to back it up. I wouldn't be surprised if he is a lobbyist for oil companies or has some other similar agenda.

I asked tftf directly in the short-term thread if tftf was being paid to post, and tftf said no.

Based on what I've read, I believe that tftf is not just anti-Tesla. Tftf is against automobiles in general. If tftf is a troll, I don't think oil companies are the intended beneficiaries of the trolling.