Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

[SOULPEDL]

Not only that... but could reduce service time spent on things like panel gaps and minor misalignment.

Not only that... but maybe the robots can assume more of the human tasks wherever fit was a touchy/feely operation previously hindered by tolerance stackup.

 

[Nocturnal]

You need to stop listening to people on twitter.

Tesla makes the best EVs. Period. No one is even close. Tesla will continue to sell every EV they make at a profit, with or without Biden's help.

People are drastically over estimating the power of unions these days. Even among democrats it's pretty squishy.

 

[StealthP3D]

Definitely not betting against Elon eventually getting there, but betting against Elon's timelines being optimistic is probably a money making play!

I marked this post as "funny" but I'm of the belief that FSD needs to be treated differently than production estimates. I think since the Model 3 ramp Elon has made a conscious effort to under-promise so he can over-deliver if everything goes normally and be on time if things are not ideal. Elon actually has a long history of being quite accurate on some very difficult projections into the future. Like the projection that Tesla would hit 1/2 million cars in 2020 (made back in 2012 or so). FSD is a special case.

On 4680 timelines, Elon has been rather vague. And we haven't heard much. While I know it's an incredibly involved process to bring them into hyper-efficient production, I think the silence might be misleading. If everything was going swimmingly well I would still expect silence (followed by a happy surprise). In any case, I think it's pretty obvious he's not stringing us along an unrealistic timeline when it comes to 4680 cells (even if it turns out there are fundamental delays beyond what he has projected).

 

[redan]

Pierre Ferragu of New Street Research earlier this morning:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1394624077336354821

 

[SOULPEDL]

Wow, just noticed Max Pain is 640. The battle continues...

 

[henchman24]

I think the silence on 4680 is basically because of the Osborne Effect. They don't want to tank Q2 (maybe Q3) Y sales, by going all out on sharing the improvements that are (relatively) just around the corner.

 

[Cherry Wine]

There are a lot of people on twitter suggesting Tesla will be excluded from subsidies for not being unionized. That would be unconstitutional. Tesla has zero control over whether their employees want to be part of a union.

Biden is saying the bill will create union jobs simply because the vast majority of the companies where jobs will be created are unionized.

Unfortunately it would not be unconstitutional -- or at least its constitutionality would have to be litigated; California has plenty of laws on the books that apply only when union labor is involved. However, I don't think the federal proposal will be tied to union labor and I'll explain why.

I pointed out on this thread recently a piece of California legislation (AB 794) opposed by Tesla that ties eligibility for the state's EV incentives to labor practices. In looking at the bill digest I wasn't sure if "specified labor and workforce standards" was code for "union jobs."

Digest (showing amendments to the bill):

"This bill would establish specified labor and workforce standards that a manufacturer of new vehicles or vehicle technology would be required to meet in order for the vehicles or vehicle technology to be eligible under the incentive programs."

After reading the bill text, however, I am confident that this legislation is not tying EV incentives to manufacturers whose workforce is unionized. It does tie many strings related to labor and workforce standards, any one of which Tesla may not currently meet or does not want to meet (which is presumably why they're opposed), but none of those -- as far as I can tell -- specify the use of unionized labor. Below is some of the relevant bill text (the forum software won't let me include it all) for those who want to read it themselves. Given that the wording around the new federal EV incentive proposal is similar, I would not be surprised if it follows the model set by AB 794 in California.

​

39692.​

For a new vehicle or vehicle technology to be eligible for the amount under subdivision (b) of Section 39693 or Section 39694, an incentive amount, a manufacturer shall do all of the following:
(a) Demonstrate to the agency administering the incentive program and the state board its commitment to hiring disadvantaged workers by doing both of the following:
(1) Demonstrate that it has commitments through a community partnership to recruit, hire, and train all of the following:
(A) Individuals with employment barriers that limit their ability to gain employment, including, but not limited to, unemployment, lack of work experience, lack of English language skills, technical skills or educational attainment, criminal justice history, disability status, foster care history, vulnerability to discrimination, or other barriers. The state board may further define the scope of employment barriers with reference to eligibility factors for unemployment insurance in California or other states.
(B) Workers who have been displaced, on and after January 1, 2020, from the fossil fuel industry for nondisciplinary reasons after more than six months of service.
(2) Disclose to the agency administering the incentive program and the state board both of the following:
(A) A community benefit or workforce agreement that commits to hiring and training workers, to the extent it is available.
(B) Data showing that the manufacturer has hired disadvantaged workers, including those recruited through a community partnership.
(b) Demonstrate to the agency administering the incentive program and the state board participation in job training programs by doing both of the following:
(1) Produce vehicle or vehicle technology new vehicles using apprentices who are certified by a state or federal program, in conjunction with a contractually mandated training program or a plan provided to the state to train production workers, in the skills and technical knowledge needed to manufacture the vehicle and related technologies.
(2) Certify or disclose data to the agency administering the incentive program and the state board that demonstrates its use of certified apprentices, contractually mandated training, or a plan to train production workers.
(c) (1) Demonstrate to the agency administering the incentive program and the state board that it pays workers in a facility where the new vehicle or vehicle technology is assembled the following:
(A) For all workers, at least 120 percent of the California minimum wage.
(B) For production workers, the prevailing wage for specific occupational titles. The state board may provide guidance on the prevailing wage based on data for average wages reported for production employees in the motor vehicle industry by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Employment Statistics.
(2) The manufacturer shall disclose to the agency administering the incentive program and the state board the wage average and range that it pays for specific occupational titles in facilities that assemble vehicles or vehicle technologies.
(d) (1) Preserve employee access to dispute settlement options available under the laws of the state where the vehicle or vehicle technology is assembled.
(2) The manufacturer shall disclose to the agency administering the incentive program and the state board the incentive program policies or contract terms that preserve dispute options, including access to public agencies and courts, and availability of judicial remedies.
(e) Demonstrate to the agency administering the incentive program and the state board its commitment to using full-time employees by disclosing both of the following:
(1) A community benefit or workforce agreement that sets full-time employment as a goal.
(2) The number and percentage of its employees who are full time and part time, permanent and temporary, and direct hire and contractor employees.

 

[viridi]

CNBC touting the Burry story, and, of course, wrongly calling it a "$530 million short."

 

[TheTalkingMule]

You called this one well. Lots of FUD lately and I'm seeing people around me succumbing and selling their tsla stakes. Feels like a better and better opportunity to buy. For people dipping into margin I like straddles especially at these prices (straddles being the purchase of equal numbers of calls and puts at the same strike, preferably at the current price).

I don't even think there's a ton of real buying, it's just a macro tech rebound day and the MM's need to cover a bit.

They try to keep things pushed down premarket and capped at the open, but the momentum eventually flips their algo and they end up modestly covering all the naked shorting they did this morning.

Those $4.20 calls are now $8.40 and you could've doubled down at 9:33am when it dipped to $3.30. That's a fair amount of profit for 90 minutes of work. Of course you gotta be right more often than wrong.....but I feel like we generally are.

 

[ZeApelido]

I think it should routinely check your temperature via rectal thermometer too. Can't be too safe.

Concept:

You go first.

 

[elasalle]

Model Y 4680 cells , Astin and Berlin , Elon tweet

https://twitter.com/x/status/1394593654614937603

https://twitter.com/x/status/1394594859990741000

Does this imply that the yield issues for 4680 production in Kato Rd, mentioned in Q2 conf call are on track to be resolved?
it's HUGE, if so.

 

[Knightshade]

There are a lot of people on twitter suggesting Tesla will be excluded from subsidies for not being unionized. That would be unconstitutional.

I'm not sure it would be.

I assume they're suggesting some kind of equal protection argument?

But tax law especially treats folks unequally a lot

Outside of a few explicitly protected groups (race/gender/religion/etc) some degree of discrimination in economic and tax treatment is pretty commonly allowed because the cases are examined with a much lower level of scrutiny the government must meet to justify the unequal treatment than for those protected classes.


Not saying the credits will for-sure have a union requirement- but dismissing the idea there could legally be one does not appear to be the slam dunk you think it is.

(and as others have noted, Tesla doesn't especially need them... but I've said from the start a new EV credit is more glaringly a huge handout to GM- who certainly does)

 

[ZeApelido]

Krugerrand, discovering how great it is to be a dog, rather than a cat, when TSLA turns green.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1393258375291473923

Cat not amused by silly antics

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

Does this imply that the yield issues for 4680 production in Kato Rd, mentioned in Q2 conf call are on track to be resolved?
it's HUGE, if so.

It's so impossible to tell how things are going with 4680 Cells at this point. Even on the Q1 earnings, you had Elon being more cautious while the comments from their Battery lead sounded like they were right on track

But if Elon's saying both Berlin and Austin will only use 4680 cells.........well then it means one of two things - Kato is hitting their targets/goals or Austin/Berlin aren't producing anything until Q1 2022. Given all the evidence pointing to a Q3 for Berlin and Q4 for Austin start of pilot production, I'd have to guess Kato is hitting it's mark

 

[elasalle]

It's so impossible to tell how things are going with 4680 Cells at this point. Even on the Q1 earnings, you had Elon being more cautious while the comments from their Battery lead sounded like they were right on track

But if Elon's saying both Berlin and Austin will only use 4680 cells.........well then it means one of two things - Kato is hitting their targets/goals or Austin/Berlin aren't producing anything until Q1 2022. Given all the evidence pointing to a Q3 for Berlin and Q4 for Austin start of pilot production, I'd have to guess Kato is hitting it's mark

EM send note to all Suppliers in-house included

 

[dww12]

Doesn’t Elon usually stay away from potential Osborning, especially the #1 seller? Sales so good it does not matter?

 

[asburgers]

Doesn’t Elon usually stay away from potential Osborning, especially the #1 seller? Sales so good it does not matter?View attachment 663430

Shouldn't make much of a difference if they are already sold out months in advance. People want their Teslas in time for the summer driving season!

 

[thx1139]

Haha, YES it does. You know what you're missing? Provisions for the 35+ GWh/yr supply of 2170 bty cells currently under contract from Panasonic America to Tesla in Fremont.

You know, the supply for which these two companies just renewed their contract for the next 3 years?

Think about it. If Tesla won't turn off their 10-yr running supply of Panasonic 18650 cells for the refreshed S/X why/how on earth would they turn off the bty cell printing machine at Giga Nevada.

Hint: they will not. It's all about the BATTERIES.

I believe the changing of production lines is more for the change to front and rear castings. Believe those will be rather disruptive events and with Fremont being utilized at such a high level now it isnt feasible to shut down Model 3 lines to introduce the new versions of the Model 3. Also space needed for casting machines for the Model 3. So need to take those Model Y GigaPresses and convert them to Model 3. That means get Model Y production swapped over to Austin so Model 3 can transition.

 

[SOULPEDL]

CNBC touting the Burry story, and, of course, wrongly calling it a "$530 million short."

Let's go with his $530 million short - creates a bigger loss that we can report.
For example, today, Burry lost 530M x $20 = 10.6M.

"Burry is Already Down > $10 Million Dollars in Just ONE day."

 

[UltradoomY]

I believe the changing of production lines is more for the change to front and rear castings. Believe those will be rather disruptive events and with Fremont being utilized at such a high level now it isnt feasible to shut down Model 3 lines to introduce the new versions of the Model 3. Also space needed for casting machines for the Model 3. So need to take those Model Y GigaPresses and convert them to Model 3. That means get Model Y production swapped over to Austin so Model 3 can transition.

That is what I speculate the new tent areas are for in Freemont - not S/X but to add to the 3 and Y lines