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

Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2015

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The tire and wheel upgrade is no longer included when upgrading from the 60 to the 85. However, it is strange that you don't account for Tesla's profit margin. After subtracting $2000 for the supercharger package and dividing the remaining price of $8000 by 25 kWh difference, you get a battery price of $320. However, the implication of this is that Tesla's gross margin is lower for the base 85 kWh Tesla than the base 60 kWh Tesla. This makes absolutely no sense, and is highly unlikely. If we assume a profit margin of 25%, the battery price works out to be $240/kWh, which is a much more believable number.

You don't have to account for the profit margin. It is built into that price. That price is the retail price. We were not talking about Tesla's cost on the battery. No matter what we figure to be the price per kwh, the profit is built in - since we were talking retail price. So, if there are NO other differences in the 60 and 85 except the SuperCharger fee, you are right, that is $320 per kWh that Tesla is charging (retail) to upgrade from a 60 to an 85 kWh battery pack. That INCLUDES profit (or it may not, but of course it does). No matter what it includes, $320 is the price Tesla charged for the difference between the 60 and 85 (assuming no other differences than the SuperCharger access fee of $2k). So, if they can sell the customer a kwh, including profit for $320 per kWh, why wouldn't they be able to on the Model 3? And if you're right, that would be a price difference of only $4800 between the 40, 55, and 70. And theoretically, Tesla COULD pass on the battery savings from the GF (and still have their profit built in) and that would reduce the retail cost from $320 to $224 per kWh, which would only be a price difference of $3360 at each step (just to account for the battery pack increase, not any other changes).
 
.
On the other hand the Roadster has a worse cd than the S, and presumably the 3, and aerodynamics are a factor of cd and area.
.

Worse cd but extremely small area. And low weight. It's not really a matter of technological capability as jhm has suggested, just a matter of physics.

Jhm, I would not count on the Model 3 getting rated at 200wh/mi. This is very unlikely. Even the i3, at 2800lbs and with super skinny low rolling resistance tires is rated at 270wh/mi (though I think that includes charging inefficiencies so the real mileage is 10-20% better). It may be shaped a bit like a brick but it's also the most efficient car ever rated by the current EPA ratings system, so I wouldn't count on the Model 3 to smash it so heavily, particularly given that the Model 3 will be a larger car. Now, people will definitely be able to drive in a manner that gets 200wh/mi, if you're careful, just don't count on that being the rating.
 
Last edited:

I don't think people are really appreciating the gravity of this situation. And it really sucks because from what I understand most of the shipping companies are based overseas and of course all the port workers are US based. So I am torn on which side I should be taking on this fight... The anti-union in me thinks that they are just griping over nothing and the American in me says that I should side with my fellow countrymen... yes, my bias is showing strong here.
 
I don't think people are really appreciating the gravity of this situation. And it really sucks because from what I understand most of the shipping companies are based overseas and of course all the port workers are US based. So I am torn on which side I should be taking on this fight... The anti-union in me thinks that they are just griping over nothing and the American in me says that I should side with my fellow countrymen... yes, my bias is showing strong here.

They make what? $130k per year?
 
One of the tragedies of the situation, as it affects us (i.e. TSLA investors) is that Tesla Motors is one of the few American companies manufacturing things on U.S. soil and putting them into the many empty containers left here after foreign goods are imported - and sending those containers back out in boats to other countries, helping to balance our enormous trade deficit. Too bad the process is being stalled by dock workers. (IF it is being stalled... we don't know this for sure yet)
 
Chickensevil said:
So I am torn on which side I should be taking on this fight... The anti-union in me thinks that they are just griping over nothing and the American in me says that I should side with my fellow countrymen... yes, my bias is showing strong here.


Easy for me, the pro-union in me says I'm on their side and the American in me says I'm on their side :)

Or not allow a small group of overpaid workers the power to cripple our economy everytime their contract is up for renewal.

Right, we shouldn't. Management should not allow it to get to the point where the strike happens in the first place.

But this is all off topic. Let's focus on the effects on Tesla rather than political/labor discussions. I wouldn't mind if the last several comments about this (including mine) got sequestered somewhere, because I can see this spinning out of control if we let it.
 
Agreed, FANGO, let's check our politics at the door. Regardless of where responsibility lies, this isn't good for Tesla. First order effects are inability to import components from Asia and export cars to Asia. Second order effects are a reduction in US economic activity, lower US incomes, and reduced demand for consumer goods like automobiles.
 
I haven't seen immediate negative effects on Telsa yet. There is no obvious complaints about delivery delay in delivery/production threads. We should worry about this when large batch of productions was pushed out without specific reasons.

Agreed, FANGO, let's check our politics at the door. Regardless of where responsibility lies, this isn't good for Tesla. First order effects are inability to import components from Asia and export cars to Asia. Second order effects are a reduction in US economic activity, lower US incomes, and reduced demand for consumer goods like automobiles.
 
Fresh Adam Jonas note this morning, premarket reacting positively.

Snapshot found on Twitter: Hidden Gem Trader on Twitter:

2f3533699500f69841e0fece9977df2d.jpg
 
Cannot say I understand the price action in tesla this morning. Jonas report is not bullish and the port issue is disruptive.
The best I can say is that the negativies are a non issue. The port situation will pass, and the Jonas report is a fantasy based on guess estimates .
 
Cannot say I understand the price action in tesla this morning. Jonas report is not bullish and the port issue is disruptive.
The best I can say is that the negativies are a non issue. The port situation will pass, and the Jonas report is a fantasy based on guess estimates .

I'm not sure what fantasy you are talking about. Jonas still isn't even accepting the 500k by 2020 number in their estimates (which is probably why they still haven't changed their PT) and is just saying that they were surprised by the CapEx spending and that it bodes well for the future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.