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 - 2016

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
What Elon is saying is that a cheaper car is not necessary because revenue from shared mobility rides may cover 50%-100% of the monthly car payment.

I know many people don't want to rent out their car when they are not using it. But it is an option to make the car affordable to a large section of the global middle class. I don't think Tesla is aiming for 100% market share so If you reject that option and can't afford the full ~$40k over 7 years then you buy another brand.

I totally agree with this. Another way to put it is that using shared mobility as a way to reduce car payment does not have any practical meaning to people who own Tesla MS or already put reservation for Model 3. It is aimed at people who concluded that they can't afford Model 3 and therefore owning Tesla is just out of the question for them. Now, with shared mobility promise the bulb is over a sudden going off: wait a second, I can afford a Tesla after all! So this strategy is not about offering shared mobility as a service to the current Model S owner, it is about expanding (as in multiples) addressable market share. A Tesla for everybody.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VanE
Talk is cheap. At some point investors will require a return.

GM raises full-year forecast after strong second-quarter result
That's true. They could stop planning growth, simply have sales move up or down 10% each year dependent on the world economy, make or lose a couple bucks per share each year dependent on the world economy, rest on their laurels and spit out minor variants of the same product each year. Or an investor could buy GM stock if that's what interests them.
 
Siemens has been developing a smart solution for electric trucks, and is currently testing the design: eHighway - Electromobility - Siemens

Basically, the majority of trucking is done on a minority of roads. Electrifying these minority roadways and sharing this infrastructure between all trucks is much more cost effective than building all trucks with huge batteries. A smaller battery powers the truck for the off highway portions at the beginning and end of the journey. This also removes charge time / battery swap from the equation. Of course, this tech requires investment from government, which presents a lot of challenges that in the short term may be overcome by the self sufficiency of a large battery which requires no public infrastructure. Perhaps a large battery truck has a place in the mean time before roads become electrified like this, but long term I think it makes more sense to follow the siemens philosophy.

Thoughts?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: mmd
This morning is the first litmus test. As much as most of us believe in Tesla and Mr. Musk personally, the challenge in the next few days is to hold strong. SMP2, by its nature does not include any financial results. The street has been discounting Mr. Musk's pronouncements of the future since the Model X launch difficulties. Many will choose to ignore this one too. But if we hold, we know now many more specifics of the vision we are participating in for the next decade or so. Therefore, the test this morning is of us bulls to hold strong.
 
When it comes to the SMP2, I like it.

I've been a big fan of electric cargo transportation, and I think Tesla has every opportunity to succeed. One of the big challenges is sufficient battery capacity, and charging. An electric semi needs a battery with something like 1000-2000 kWh, or about 5 metric tons of batteries. This isn't hugely problematic, as long as cargo transportation is usually limited by max volume and not max weight. As long as the vehicle they provide can haul standard shipping containers, and an equivalent number of pallets to a gas/diesel semi, the battery mass likely isn't a huge challenge.

Charging is a bit more problematic. You can either go for battery swapping, super-duper-charging, or some form of electrified road. I think Tesla will go for option one or two. Battery swapping is the least time-demanding way to refuel, but charging is simpler and likely cheaper. In an autonomous semi, the argument can be made that charging is better, because you won't have a driver sitting idle, waiting for the charge to finish. But at the same time, battery swapping means the cargo will arrive sooner, even with an autonomous semi. I'm really not sure what Tesla will go for. It may be that like the Model S, Tesla will offer both, and then just see what's most popular.
I agree that battery swapping is the way to go for semis, at least for long distance trucking. There are benefits to the grid here. An inventory of swappable uncharged batteries can be used to soak up surplus power during the day. Most of this surplus will be solar power. On the flip side an inventory of charged batteries can provide peak power to grid whenever it is needed, even after sundown. Thus, the swappable inventory serves as a massive grid energy storage service. Meanwhile semis draw from this inventory as needed to power their route.

So I envision that ESemis are a part of an integrated ecosystem that harvests utility scale solar and wind energy while balancing the grid. It is both stationary and mobile storage.

For those of you who think that Elon's plan leaves out or is even hostle to utilities, I think that powering fleets is the future for utilities. It's not enough just to keep the lights on; they need to keep transport systems powered up.
 
Talk is cheap. At some point investors will require a return.

Technically, most investors have already seen a return or had an opportunity to realize a return if they chose to take one. Even the vast majority of shorts have had the same.

Becoming a trillion dollar company takes a certain amount of time. I think even you know and understand that. The road map to that valuation just got blogged. Feel free to poo-poo it with vigor despite the last decade of track laying being done. Not everyone is suppose to get it and profit from it.
 
This morning is the first litmus test. As much as most of us believe in Tesla and Mr. Musk personally, the challenge in the next few days is to hold strong. SMP2, by its nature does not include any financial results. The street has been discounting Mr. Musk's pronouncements of the future since the Model X launch difficulties. Many will choose to ignore this one too. But if we hold, we know now many more specifics of the vision we are participating in for the next decade or so. Therefore, the test this morning is of us bulls to hold strong.
You can either sell and play into the hands of those who don't want us above 227.50 or hold. Your choice. I will play for a breakout.
 
Siemens has been developing a smart solution for electric trucks, and is currently testing the design: eHighway - Electromobility - Siemens

Basically, the majority of trucking is done on a minority of roads. Electrifying these minority roadways and sharing this infrastructure between all trucks is much more cost effective than building all trucks with huge batteries. A smaller battery powers the truck for the off highway portions at the beginning and end of the journey. This also removes charge time / battery swap from the equation. Of course, this tech requires investment from government, which presents a lot of challenges that in the short term may be overcome by the self sufficiency of a large battery which requires no public infrastructure. Perhaps a large battery truck has a place in the mean time before roads become electrified like this, but long term I think it makes more sense to follow the siemens philosophy.

Thoughts?
Well I personally think it's a rather stupid concept. Our city has trolley buses like that and it is rather inflexibly when you have construction going on or when a bus breaks down, not to mention it is also frikkin ugly on the skyline and over a highway could be expensive to build out and maintain.

On the other hand, trucks would be the perfect candidates for battery swaps. Imagine if the trucking companies didn't own any battery packs (much less capital needed to replace the trucks) instead leased them or rented them from Tesla via a bank and Tesla had solar chargers and automated swapping stations along the highway. Pack keeps charging all day long, truck pulls in, automated pit stop in 90 seconds, gets a new pack, drives on.

Could be a very lucrative business for Tesla and a very good deal for trucking companies - especially when paired with autonomous trucks that can drive 24/7, safely, silently, cleanly, cheaply.
 
I hope not. France is a nightmare to work with due to their insane labour laws, unions that can shut down the country, language laws, data privacy laws and high salaries.
This, France can try their hardest but they are a country of comfort, not world changing effort. Those laws already hold them back and they will generally cause them to miss the boat on this new era.
 
Siemens has been developing a smart solution for electric trucks, and is currently testing the design: eHighway - Electromobility - Siemens

Basically, the majority of trucking is done on a minority of roads. Electrifying these minority roadways and sharing this infrastructure between all trucks is much more cost effective than building all trucks with huge batteries. A smaller battery powers the truck for the off highway portions at the beginning and end of the journey. This also removes charge time / battery swap from the equation. Of course, this tech requires investment from government, which presents a lot of challenges that in the short term may be overcome by the self sufficiency of a large battery which requires no public infrastructure. Perhaps a large battery truck has a place in the mean time before roads become electrified like this, but long term I think it makes more sense to follow the siemens philosophy.

Thoughts?
The problem here is that powering semis en route presumes that the utilities will still be in the business of balancing the grid with dispatable generation. As battery storage enters the grid at scale, this implies that somewhere stationary batteries are being used to power semis on route. So the question is whether this fixed investment in electrifying highways is simply duplicative to the necessary battery infrastructure. Why not just put the "stationary" batteries on the trucks as needed and uses these same batteries to stabilize the grid when not in transit on trucks? Distributed batteries overcome the need for massive and duplicate energy infrastructures.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.