Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2015

[30seconds]

I think that a well received X launch will set the stage for the market to believe in substantial 2016/2017 revenue growth. The questions of demand and production change to that of production only. It will also show that there is wider demand for Model 3 and be another example of Tesla's ability to execute on the secret master plan.

I'm in for $300 by April if X is well received as tesla will be able to break out Q1 S and X deliveries

 

[AlMc]

Short interest as of August 31st: up about 600,000 shares to 25,274,287.

Option expiring today...max pain: $247.50

 

[Hogfighter]

I'm not sure if that's correct (or even completely consistent). Don't you think that it's more accurate to say something like: what's baked into the Tesla SP is the market-public's level of expectations for the MX, and unless the actual car either fails to meet those expectations or exceeds them by a substantial margin the MX introduction will not have a much of an impact on the SP?

It appears to me that, at least at TMC, that there is an excessive amount of skepticism baked into people's minds about the quality of the MX. If the general public and the market feel the same way do you think that's having a dampening effect on the SP.

There are three other things, where I think the baked in price is too low. Tesla's ability to ramp production, the M3 launch date, and Tesla Energy. Most people and most analysts don't understand the potential of their Powerpacks v

We're all kind of saying the same things. The Model X is already known. Mr. Market also has factored in that there is demand for the product, although the lingering question of whether the demand is niche or not dances in some people's minds (not mine). The delivery of a few X's won't move the needle much....we need a quick, smooth ramp-up to 800 per week, and the market isn't convinced that it will happen. As for the Model 3, it's too far off for most investors to commit funds today, and a lot can happen in 2-3 years.

Tesla Energy, it's a big unknown. Sure, they have orders on the books, but again the market is saying 'show it to me'. They want to see thousands of Powerpacks leaving the gigafactory before they commit to purchasing the stock.

It's for these reasons that the price is where it is today. Way undervalued for the future, correctly priced today.

 

[jhm]

It's for these reasons that the price is where it is today. Way undervalued for the future, correctly priced today.

And this is really an excellent situation for long-term investors. Accumulate while the future is heavily discounted. If the future were not heavily discounted, then there would be little upside and a whole lot of downside. But at current prices there is enormous upside potential with only moderate downside risk.

 

[MitchJi]

We're all kind of saying the same things. The Model X is already known. Mr. Market also has factored in that there is demand for the product, although the lingering question of whether the demand is niche or not dances in some people's minds (not mine). The delivery of a few X's won't move the needle....

Thanks! I agree with most of what you said. But I think that the lingering demand questions are linked to doubts about the quality of the MX. Don't you think that if (I believe when) the market realizes that the MX is a home run that will move the SP, and that this should happen much faster with the MX, than it did with the MS?

Relevant Powerpack related quote:

"Also, that same battery cost decrease is going to drive batteries in the grid. There’s going to be much faster growth of grid energy storage than I think most people expected. You suddenly get to have energy that’s 100% firm and buffered from photovoltaics that’s cheaper than fossil energy. And we’re within sort of grasping distance of that goal, which is very, very exciting.

 

[jhm]

SolarEdge Announces Leap in Solar Inverters With HD-Wave Technology - NASDAQ.com

It good to follow what other companies within the Tesla ecosystem are up to. I'm keeping my eye on SolarEdge. They will be unveiling a new inverter architecture they call HD-Wave later this month. This new approach should make possible inverters that are lighter, smaller and more efficient. They believe they can deliver 99% or better efficiency. They are the first to develop inverters specifically designed to optimize Powerwalls. So I would expect them to continue to partner with Tesla using HD-Wave. The wild card here is whether this new technology can be exploited within Tesla vehicles. Efficiency of inverters is really important as current passes through the inverter about 3 to 5 times before it powers the car. But also smaller and lighter inverters for the same power, that is, higher power density inverters, could improve EV design, performance and range. Advancing inverters is an important part of advancing EV drivetrain efficiency, density and performance.

To be sure, Tesla and SolarEdge do work closely together. So I expect Tesla to be well aware of the opportunities this technology may create both in the stationary storage and automotive spaces. Once SolarEdge unveils this technology, Tesla may be in clear to unveil Tesla specific applications as well. Fingers crossed.

 

[JRP3]

I think there are only single digit percentage points improvements possible in EV inverters at this point so the impact would be minimal, unless cost reduction is also a result.

 

[vgrinshpun]

Reuters reporting on quite a few interesting observations from Bosch board member.

The increased availability of electric powertrains in the market is definitely advantageous and makes it easier for new players to enter the market," Bulander said.
"For us, new market entrants are customers just like established carmakers. Two examples, we supply Tesla with driver assistance systems and provided Google with important components for its vehicles such as the electric powertrain, steering and sensors."
In 2025, Bosch expects 125 million cars to be produced, of which 8 million will be electric cars, 8.3 million plug-in hybrids and more than 5 million hybrid vehicles.

"Battery technology is critical for the breakthrough. We expect battery costs to halve by 2020 and for the energy density to double. That would be double the range at half the price," Bulander said.

"If this technological breakthrough is achieved, we will think about manufacturing battery cells," he said, adding it would take two or three years before a decision was reached.

- - - Updated - - -

I think there are only single digit percentage points improvements possible in EV inverters at this point so the impact would be minimal, unless cost reduction is also a result.

Change in efficiency from 94% to 98%, given multiple passes of energy through PEM will yield overall efficiency improvement from (assuming 4 passes through PEM) 0.94^4=0.78 to 0.98^4=0.92, a huge improvement

 

[drinkerofkoolaid]

Intesting video about a carbon tax in Mass. Anyone know what happened with this bill?

Cliff Mass Weather Blog: Carbon Tax Initiative in Washington State

Economics Of MA Carbon Tax Bill 130717 Presentation - YouTube

 

[JRP3]

I'm not sure I'm following, where are you getting 4 passes through the motor inverter?

 

[vgrinshpun]

I'm not sure I'm following, where are you getting 4 passes through the motor inverter?

1. charge the on-board battery (AC-->DC)
2. power Ac motor from the battery
3. regen AC motor/generator into a battery
4. Power AC motor from the battery with energy obtained through regen in #3

JB was addressing this in several of his presentations

 

[JRP3]

1. charge the on-board battery (AC-->DC)
2. power Ac motor from the battery
3. regen AC motor/generator into a battery
4. Power AC motor from the battery with energy obtained through regen in #3

That's not correct. The motor inverter doesn't charge the batteries from the mains, that's why there is a separate AC charger, or two of them, and of course it's not used in DC charging from the superchargers either. The inverter does handle regen into the battery, but that is such a small percentage of energy used that efficiency gains would have minimal effect.

 

[Hogfighter]

Thanks! I agree with most of what you said. But I think that the lingering demand questions are linked to doubts about the quality of the MX. Don't you think that if (I believe when) the market realizes that the MX is a home run that will move the SP, and that this should happen much faster with the MX, than it did with the MS?

Absolutely. There are many (myself included) who are concerned about the complexities of the X and how it relates to high volume production. If those concerns prove to be pointless, then that will move the needle. Hopefully that will be the case.

 

[jhm]

That's not correct. The motor inverter doesn't charge the batteries from the mains, that's why there is a separate AC charger, or two of them, and of course it's not used in DC charging from the superchargers either. The inverter does handle regen into the battery, but that is such a small percentage of energy used that efficiency gains would have minimal effect.

SolarEdge's DC optimizer inverter architecture offers much more than just efficiency gains and price reductions, including module level monitoring and optimization, leading to greater energy harvest and longevity. I think their framework is important for the potential to develop a million mile drivetrain. I will not detail this here in the short term thread, but would encourage interested people to familiarize themselves with the technology at their website.

 

[JRP3]

Agree that it's interesting technology, and I'm invested in them, just pointing out that inverter efficiency gains are minimal at this point, and I don't know how applicable the SolarEdge inverter might be to the current levels and power swings seen in an EV.

 

[drinkerofkoolaid]

If Oil hits $20 a barrel, as GS says it could, it will stay there for about 5 seconds. China is stock piling oil. If we stop, or significantly reduce drilling to address climate change, the cost for oil will increase significantly.

 

[jhm]

Agree that it's interesting technology, and I'm invested in them, just pointing out that inverter efficiency gains are minimal at this point, and I don't know how applicable the SolarEdge inverter might be to the current levels and power swings seen in an EV.

That's right. It is an open question how to translate their distributed module level DC optimizer architecture into an array of battery modules instead of an array of PV modules. For PV arrays they are able to optimize over modules that are all producing power at different levels. In a battery pack, particularly as it ages, you can be faced with differences in power and energy across the pack. As one module fails, you may even want to be able to replace just that module instead of the whole pack. So the ability to monitor and control power draw and charging at the module level would seem to give engineers and programmers alot of degrees of freedom to optimize in real time and over the life of the drivetrain. So improving thermal management, reliability and longevity are all potential gains. I don't know if this architecture do better than Tesla's current architecture, but it seems worth R&D money to explore it.

One little point, if Tesla had a better inverter technology, they might not need to load the car down with extra chargers. So we've got several specialized components instead of one equally efficient bi-directional inverter. Being able to control charging at the module level may be quite advantageous. But more to the point of SolarEdge's latest announcement, perhaps this digital processing approach can lead to an inverter that is highly efficient in both directions. This would be excellent for stationary storage for sure, but if it could allow Tesla to ditch separate chargers in vehicles, that could knock a grand off the selling price of the Model 3. (I paid an extra $1500 IIRC for dual chargers on my car.)

So we'll have to wait and see what SolarEdge unveils. I'm just glad that they are working closely with Tesla. These are the kind of innovators we need in the ecosystem.

 

[vgrinshpun]

That's not correct. The motor inverter doesn't charge the batteries from the mains, that's why there is a separate AC charger, or two of them, and of course it's not used in DC charging from the superchargers either. The inverter does handle regen into the battery, but that is such a small percentage of energy used that efficiency gains would have minimal effect.

Not sure why are you saying it is not correct. How does it matter for overall efficient utilization of energy whether energy is lost in one device (charger) or another (motor inverter)? The overall effect on efficiency is pronounced. I also do not agree with regen being "such a small percentage". If you are traveling at highway speeds, with cruise control on through the rolling hills terrain improved efficiency will yield substantial savings in energy.

 

[JRP3]

How much time would you spend using the brakes in an ICE at highway speeds and rolling hills vs using the motor? Unless you are driving very inefficiently the answer should be very little, which means actual time spent using regen would be very little in an EV. Regen also has efficiency losses in the motor which no inverter can address. I'd also add that in a rolling hills scenario you'd be better off not using cruise and anticipating the elevation changes, allowing the car to speed up a bit more on the downhills and carry that energy to the uphills, within reason of course. In average highway driving the potential for regen, and therefore range extension, is minimal. As for charger losses vs inverter losses, how does a potential improvement in the motor inverter affect the separate charger efficiency? Or do you mean applying similar improvements to the charger? In that case it would make charging more efficient, except when supercharging, but would not improve range, obviously.

 

[ibcs]

Nice little run from 246 to 249 without any news.