I will guess the expansion could happen more quickly in metropolitan areas that have existing Tesla stores. But elsewhere the expansion could happen more slowly.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
I will guess the expansion could happen more quickly in metropolitan areas that have existing Tesla stores. But elsewhere the expansion could happen more slowly.
I personally have held off on solar because I don't trust local installers to stand by their products over a 20 - 30 year time frame. I don't see a large scale solar installation as a DYI project and if you saw my house you'd understand why. I've contacted SC in the past because they handle everything including maintenance but they didn't cover my area in Pennsylvania. If SC becomes part of Tesla Energy then that makes it even more of a draw for me. I'm not interested in a PPA but outright purchase, but I need to know that whoever I buy a roof top system from will stand behind their installation and products over the lifetime of the product. As a Tesla owner that is a no-brainer.
Skotty
2014 S P85 | 2023 F-150L
I'd like to see Tesla panel/inverter/powerwall hardware packages that I could buy to be installed by local installers. Could that be possible with a Tesla buyout of SolarCity?
That's one way in which rollout to additional states could be accelerated. I've already found some local installers I'd be willing to use. If I could buy Tesla hardware, then it would just be a matter of convincing my favored local company to install it.
That's one way in which rollout to additional states could be accelerated. I've already found some local installers I'd be willing to use. If I could buy Tesla hardware, then it would just be a matter of convincing my favored local company to install it.
This has likely been in the works for awhile, maybe they would be less pissed if he disclosed this before the IP.
Moving a commodity like solar takes a far more aggressive approach than selling a Tesla. "Culture clash"?
You keep saying "commodity" in every post you make, but clearly that is only true as long as they buy and distribute Chinese panels. Elon has clearly stated that they are banking on the technological superiority of the new panels they'll produce themselves. It is not in Elon`s nature to enter a market with an average product anyone can do - be it rockets, cars, or batteries. The new panels they`ll build in that new factory will have 30% higher efficiency on the same surface area.
That is a differentiator, a premium segment, Tesla City will compete in.
I am surprised that even analysts don't get it. SolarCity is not really a bad deal at the offer price. If they simply stop all business development, they will still have recurring revenue stream of over $350m/year increasing at around 3% per year out of existing PPA.
Agree, Solar City panels are one of the more efficient. This sales advantage is not working with the "hard sell" Solar City tactics. Things will not change suddenly when branded as a Tesla in a price sensitive, commodity driven market for solar.
Perhaps dual brands for awhile. Solarcity continues as-is in profitable market segments with chinese panels. Tesla Energy starts new with Musk's Silveo wonder panels.
I don't see Tesla cutting off successful commissioned sales immediately. The purchase will be painful enough without killing the aspects of Solarcity that are financially working.
I don't see Tesla cutting off successful commissioned sales immediately. The purchase will be painful enough without killing the aspects of Solarcity that are financially working.
All Your Bases
Member
I must admit, I see, and have always seen TM and TE as 2 separate businesses, just under same brand.
To increase and strengthen the only now beginning TE with a Solar panel leg, makes perfectly sense to me.
At this point I see 3 big manufacturing entities in the start block, ready to churn out cars from Fremont, battery packs from Nevada and Solar panels from New York. All Tesla branded.
Synergy, oh yes.
To increase and strengthen the only now beginning TE with a Solar panel leg, makes perfectly sense to me.
At this point I see 3 big manufacturing entities in the start block, ready to churn out cars from Fremont, battery packs from Nevada and Solar panels from New York. All Tesla branded.
Synergy, oh yes.
You're right they are not getting it, with Solar City bonds yielding 20%.
Gerardf
Active Member
What is your point ?
If all was shiny at SolarCity, with no debts, no risks, lots of profit etc, etc.. the price for Tesla to buy it would be MUCH higher.. Maybe 5 times as high ?? Maybe even more ??
So, real issue is, is the offer a fair & good price. The market clearly values SolarCity at at least 22 / share (share price before the offer). That included taking into account risks.
(This is treading into politics -- so sorry)
Gundlach also this week said that Trump would win the presidency and that a Trump presidency would bump GDP growth by 2.5%. Gundlach: Donald Trump will be president, things will get 'scary'
Gundlach is now officially a contra-indicator to me. If he doesn't like something (outside of his core expertise of structured products), it probably means it is a good thing.
I understand that. Why don't you do your own math, instead of trusting the Lazard's "levelised" assumptions? Many "levelize" for environmental consequences which aren't priced into the market. Problem there, as the market unfortunately doesn't care. I have no idea what they do.
It takes a bit more than 3 X $2.50 mmbtu, to make a MWh of electricity. So $8-10 bucks is the "fuel-intensive" cost ($.008/kwh). Add your peaker cost, amortized by MWh into your rate. @$1/watt build costs, a billion dollar 1GW gas plant, amortized over 20 years, run half the time, will still output ~87TWh, which divided into that cost would result in another ~$11/MWh. So, we're at ~$19/MWh, not >$150 "LCOE". Maybe with Lazard's assumptions, we can compare.
Guys, its in these headlights before everything which is not subsidized is deer. Solar City, among other things, has the phase down of the ITC, over the next 5 years, to deal with. Coal bankrupt. Nuclear, which Exelon has demonstrated needs only $19-23/MWh to stay open, is closing. It's just ducky that renewables have achieved PPA rates of $30-60/MWh, without batteries and before the ITC/PTC are added back. Fail to understand how cheap natural gas is, at your peril.
Last edited:
MartinAustin
Active Member
I too, expect them to be close on Q2 deliveries. But with sentiment so bad, (check out the negative articles on Yahoo), I wouldn't count on a bump.
We could really use the perspectives of Jesse and Julian right about now. This board has not been the same without them. And that is a shame.
Couldn't TSLA just have outsourced Energy installation activities to SCTY?
Waiting for news about 2Q numbers, GF launch and Model 3 pencils down and the Hawaii battery/utility launch ..
TSLA has been in downward state of churn in terms of short term investing ever since the delayed X production ..
I think I am now gonna jump to just LONG term investing thread
Waiting for news about 2Q numbers, GF launch and Model 3 pencils down and the Hawaii battery/utility launch ..
TSLA has been in downward state of churn in terms of short term investing ever since the delayed X production ..
I think I am now gonna jump to just LONG term investing thread
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
