Green eggs and IPOHam?
Elon seems not to be into SPACs....but I’m loading up. lol
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
Green eggs and IPOHam?
Elon seems not to be into SPACs....but I’m loading up. lol
Mo City
Active Member
Over a 6 year period, a 42% premium for subscribing at $200/mo vs. buying up front strikes me as quite reasonable. The whole point is just buy FSD if you plan to own the car a long time. IMO, a breakeven at ~4 years makes sense.
The risk of subscriptions cannibalizing $10K up front vs. generating incremental revenue from additional FSD users is something Tesla is weighing. Methinks the initial monthly fee may be adjusted once the initial response is in.
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
G/H/I don't appear to be available yet, but there were rumblings a couple weeks ago they were coming.
Oh, dude. I can relate. Felt guilty about the NG generator, but 3 days out of the last five years...
Mo City
Active Member
If there is a way to do this that still makes paying $10K up front the "better long-term deal" (per Elon), sure enough.
Last edited:
I'm selling both Puts and Calls. That is why I picked a strike that is pretty high, and only two weeks away. I can roll it up and out easily if I have to, and then just pocket the money from the Puts that will expire worthless. In this way, I make the most money if the stock goes nowhere, but I'm guaranteed some income regardless of the SP direction.
Krugerrand
Meow
Maybe on your part of the planet but the hardcore truck guys I know are in two camps; the ones with a size issue that trick out their trucks are ‘sign me up!’ and the ones who use their trucks for their jobs are ‘I’d buy it if it looked a bit more traditional’.
Here’s the thing, though, I’ll take everyone in that latter group for a ride and sell it to at least half of them in 60 seconds or less. They’ll get over the look real quick.
Krugerrand
Meow
Just like not everyone is supposed to get Tesla, not everyone is supposed to get that it’s all a simulation.
I owned some of his stuff right before the dip last week. Had to sell it all to get more TSLA. Wish that wasn’t the case but curious which of these you like? I’m pretty clueless in the SPAC world. Blank check funds, if starlink did a SPAC would they create their own or join one that’s already created?
ByeByeJohnny
Active Member
Working FSD will save hundreds of thousands of lives. Every year. I refuse to believe that getting this into as many cars as possible as quickly as possible would not be a factor for Elon.
So while Elon (and I) agree that if you buy FSD upfront it should be cheaper than paying per month I really don't agree with the reasoning from many here that this cost should be better already at six, four or even three years. Yes, I've seen posts about buying for a leased car should be cheaper than paying per month.
Absolutely not. With a car life of 20 years that would mean buying upfront is less than a third of the cost. That is way to much of a difference. It should be at least in the neighborhood of 10 years.
In the end though I think the goal for Tesla is to get rid of FSD upfront sales. They want it all to be subscriptions. They just need to have enough cars out there so they don't miss out on to much revenue during the period when upfront money stops.
There are very few (if any) companies that have subscriptions that also lets you buy a full version that updates including additional futures more or less forever which would be necessary for FSD.
Having what FSD has cost in the past as some measurement for what it should cost in the future is also contra productive. If Tesla can get 15% of Tesla owners to pay $400 or 30% to pay $200 or 60% to pay $100, they should go for the last option. It brings in the same revue and saves more lives because a higher percentage of miles driven will be with FSD. It will also get better faster because of more real life usage. In the end it would also sell more cars the cheaper FSD is.
20 million cars at 60% take rate at $100 is $14.4 billion a year. From each years production. Every year.
It's not the high price that brings in the revenue. It's the take rate.
I predict that in three years you won't be able to buy a full FSD with no limitations upfront at all. And three years from when subscription starts you will be able to get FSD for $100/month including miles close to the average driving distance in a country. If you drive more there could be a surcharge for every 100 miles or something.
So while Elon (and I) agree that if you buy FSD upfront it should be cheaper than paying per month I really don't agree with the reasoning from many here that this cost should be better already at six, four or even three years. Yes, I've seen posts about buying for a leased car should be cheaper than paying per month.
Absolutely not. With a car life of 20 years that would mean buying upfront is less than a third of the cost. That is way to much of a difference. It should be at least in the neighborhood of 10 years.
In the end though I think the goal for Tesla is to get rid of FSD upfront sales. They want it all to be subscriptions. They just need to have enough cars out there so they don't miss out on to much revenue during the period when upfront money stops.
There are very few (if any) companies that have subscriptions that also lets you buy a full version that updates including additional futures more or less forever which would be necessary for FSD.
Having what FSD has cost in the past as some measurement for what it should cost in the future is also contra productive. If Tesla can get 15% of Tesla owners to pay $400 or 30% to pay $200 or 60% to pay $100, they should go for the last option. It brings in the same revue and saves more lives because a higher percentage of miles driven will be with FSD. It will also get better faster because of more real life usage. In the end it would also sell more cars the cheaper FSD is.
20 million cars at 60% take rate at $100 is $14.4 billion a year. From each years production. Every year.
It's not the high price that brings in the revenue. It's the take rate.
I predict that in three years you won't be able to buy a full FSD with no limitations upfront at all. And three years from when subscription starts you will be able to get FSD for $100/month including miles close to the average driving distance in a country. If you drive more there could be a surcharge for every 100 miles or something.
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
These aren't assigned to(merged with) any company, they just exist as a pile of money waiting for Chamath to match them up with a private company looking to go public to one degree or another. Watching them fluctuate in price is a great illustration of our monkey brains in action. They're literally nothing yet!
My hope is that Chamath Palihapitiya's relationship with Elon means one of these funds will end up merged with anything to do with SpaceX. Folks here seem to think Starlink will be looking for a SPAC merger soon.
JusRelax
Active Member
Just so everyone knows before moving all their money into IPO_ (Whatever letter of the day people decide on), know that Chamath is the Chairman and a huge investor into SPCE already. I could be wrong, but I believe it is highly unlikely that he would SPAC a new competitor to one of his major investment holdings.
ByeByeJohnny
Active Member
A SPAC merger is much more costly for the company looking to get a listing than what an IPO is. It's also costly for retail investors.
The main advantage is you really don't need any revenue or even likely projections for revenue. This is not a problem for Space X though. If they need any extra money quickly their last funding round at a $74 billion valuation was oversubscribed something like six times. They can get another $5 billion almost instantly.
Also Elon promised Tesla owners to get priority at investing.
The only way I can see Elon using a SPAC for Starlink is if he's got one of his own.
The main advantage is you really don't need any revenue or even likely projections for revenue. This is not a problem for Space X though. If they need any extra money quickly their last funding round at a $74 billion valuation was oversubscribed something like six times. They can get another $5 billion almost instantly.
Also Elon promised Tesla owners to get priority at investing.
The only way I can see Elon using a SPAC for Starlink is if he's got one of his own.
If only someone artistic could put the CT in this illustration and Elon’s face in place of Peter Weller’s!
Buckaroos...Banzai!
That is possible, but I still see them selling FSD up front for a while, for the same reason that they are selling cars.
it is good to get a big chunk of cash up front, and mix that in with some longer term subscription revenue.
In terms of take-rate, customers have a choice, the conditions around subscription may cause some to buy outright.
The subscription and Robo-taxi revenue will grow slowly, and increasingly become a bigger chunk of the business,
Another trend is Tesla Energy becoming more important including some possible subscription revenue\e from Autobidder.
While they are growing fast they want to maximize revenues where possible, because that money can be invested in expansion.
Up front sales bring the dollars in the door.
Really? Tesla drivers, that would pay for FSD, are killing hundreds of thousands of people every year? Wow, I had no idea.
Sure if you could flip a switch and enable FSD on every existing car in the world you might be able to save that many lives, but having it just on Teslas isn't going to do that. (And it isn't like you can just share the software with other cars/companies.)
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
