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

[uujjj2]

If Tesla is cell constrained, and if they can max out utilization of the S/X production line with only the smaller battery, then it makes sense not to build a super-long-range version of the S.

 

[mongo]

Do we know if all battery form factors have been changed to tabless? It seems much of the performance benefit described on battery day is from tabless design change rather than form factor. If this is the case, perhaps we shouldn't obsess over not having the 4680s in the S Plaid.

Here's the breakdown slide:
Cell design is 14% range increase, 14% $/kwh, 7% capEx/GWh. Can size is a portion of that.

 

[generalenthu]

Not sure how troy can explain his ~31k estimate. Got my popcorn ready.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1401942800158105603

 

[uujjj2]

Lucid's in a different boat. For them a 500+mi model makes sense because they are unit assembly constrained not cell constrained. Their newly built factory with an inexperienced workforce can only put together a few hundred cars this year, so might as well max out revenue per car by putting a max range battery in there.

 

[woodisgood]

Lucid's in a different boat. For them a 500+mi model makes sense because they are unit assembly constrained not cell constrained. Their newly built factory with an inexperienced workforce can only put together a few hundred cars this year, so might as well max out revenue per car by putting a max range battery in there.

Would also take that a step further to say that a fledgling company is dependent upon those expensive vehicles to fund development and volume production of cheaper vehicles, just as S/X did for Tesla. This is practically essential to the EV circle of life. If Lucid cannot sell those cars (say, because Tesla has a comparable or better option), Lucid dies.

Since Tesla has proven the path, new EV companies may get slightly more latitude with shareholders, but at the same time I think those shareholders are likely to be more impatient.

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

Not sure how troy can explain his ~31k estimate. Got my popcorn ready.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1401942800158105603

Troy's entire theory banks on Tesla Shanghai not exporting MIC Y at all. He seems to think that just because Tesla has said that the Y will not come to Europe until Berlin is operational, that Tesla will not export ANY MIC Y to other regions. Again he's making assumptions. Tesla WILL start exporting MIC Y to other regions....they could have possibly already started doing it. Point is we won't know that....and Troy certainly won't know when they do start to do that.

We'll have to wait to find out if this is the month that Troy's wrong but rest assured, in one of the coming months Troy will be severely wrong on his China numbers because of this simple fact. I doubt Tesla will openly state when they start actually exporting MIC Y.

 

[ninpb]

Old but brings a big grin to my face every time the thought of it pops in my head:

GM Spends an Embarrassing Amount of Money on Advertising

In 2018, companies in the United States increased the amount of money they spent on ads. The 2019 Ad Age Leading National Advertisers Report found that

www.motorbiscuit.com

"The General Motors Corp. spent $3.14 billion on U.S. advertising in 2018.
...
While they didn’t spend quite as much money, other car companies had big budgets for U.S. advertising in 2018. Ford Motor Co. ($2.3 billion) came in 13th on the list of leading national advertisers. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles ($2.1 billion), Toyota Motor Corp. ($1.4 billion), and Honda Motor Co. ($1.4 billion) rounded out the rest of the top five auto spenders."

These guys could be making one gigafactory a year!

 

[Curt Renz]

Regarding the Plaid+ cancellation:

Tesla has a large Supercharger network. Considering the need for meal and restroom stops, 500-mile range seems to be superfluous for most Tesla drivers. However, competitors without a comparable charging network might feel that such range is necessary to entice buyers. Meanwhile, more consumers may be coming to the realization that overnight home garage charging is for the most part sufficient.

 

[-=buzz=-]

Wow, what a lot of work ($) for not a lot of impact to majority of buyers, nor financial savings. Cheaper to implement 4680 in new platforms. Elon said this in an interview last year (the German one?) "it costs a lot to interrupt a working production line for an 'operational' improvement" (I'm paraphrasing). As I recall he'd been asked if they would convert the Model 3 to single casting rear like the Model Y - not gunna do it.

In the Munro interview he said that they would start to plan line upgrades when their balance sheet can handle to intentionally drop a billion of revenues. Basically when Berlin, Shanghai & Texas are at steady volume for their current construction phases.

In the same interview Elon also said that frond & rear casting save >50% of the bodyshop! So they could get back some rare real estate in Fremont which could make it worthwhile sooner. And if the robot models are sufficiently common, they might even get a 'free' body line out of it. Ready to deploy somewhere without any order wait-times...

 

[EVortex]

Old but brings a big grin to my face every time the thought of it pops in my head:

GM Spends an Embarrassing Amount of Money on Advertising

In 2018, companies in the United States increased the amount of money they spent on ads. The 2019 Ad Age Leading National Advertisers Report found that

www.motorbiscuit.com

"The General Motors Corp. spent $3.14 billion on U.S. advertising in 2018.
...
While they didn’t spend quite as much money, other car companies had big budgets for U.S. advertising in 2018. Ford Motor Co. ($2.3 billion) came in 13th on the list of leading national advertisers. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles ($2.1 billion), Toyota Motor Corp. ($1.4 billion), and Honda Motor Co. ($1.4 billion) rounded out the rest of the top five auto spenders."

These guys could be making one gigafactory a year!

Essentially a demand problem.

 

[Mokuzai]

Thanks. I found out when researching it. And you are right. And to make things worse, you can't even buy a similar security within 30 days, so I guess that rules out moving it to ARKK or LUCID or perhaps any electric car stock for 30 days and moving it back.

Don’t agree with that second part at all. People routinely harvest losses in one S and P ETF and then buy another S and P ETF during downturns. There is no way that selling TSLA and putting in ARKK would trigger wash sale.


Can someone smarter than me confirm?

No. You've applied the dictionary definition of "similar" too liberally. "similar security" means something like selling TSLA for a loss and then buying call options for TSLA within 30 days. ARKK and LUCID are the securities for entirely different companies.

Note that a wash sale does NOT mean your loss didn't exist, only that the loss has to be calculated as a stepped up basis for the follow-up trade [of a "similar security"]. The point of the wash sale rule was to prevent people from gaming the tax system at year end (claim a loss, even though you didn't actually "sell" your shares by buying it back right after selling it).

In my experience "similar" is practically akin to the exact same security (though not sure about selling TSLA and buying a call option scenario). For example end of last year I bought back some June 2022 TSLA calls at a loss and rolled them into Jan 2023 calls with the same strike in the same transaction. Effectively taking a loss in 2020 and deferring potential gains to another year while pocketing a net credit. Asked my tax accountant about it and he did some research and determined it to not be a wash. Just changing the expiration date made it different enough.

 

[henchman24]

I think there will be a 500+mi Model S, and it will likely be by the end of 22, early 23 at the latest. If Tesla is cell constrained for 4680s for a while (pushing + back to late 22 anyway), and people are waiting on Plaid+ to upgrade their S... makes total sense to can it for now. Osborne and all. I'm sure a 500+ model will reappear within 24 months.

 

[Discoducky]

After reading all the *stuff* here's where I stand
0. Healthy conflict and discussion is necessary
1. April China numbers seem low
2. May numbers seem high
3. Thursday's Plaid event will be fun no matter what, even if it is just Plaid deliveries
4. Q2 might end with a 1/4M run-rate, which would be huge
5. SO many more exciting things on the horizon and the future always takes longer than we expect it arrive.

 

[ZeApelido]

For the shareholders meeting, I am inviting all TMC members to come visit the Bay Area and I'll reserve for dinner in a large outdoor setting.

@Pezpunk and @StealthP3D will be footing the bill and buying 4680 bottles of beer. Hope that's enough.

 

[jerry33]

Tesla has a large Supercharger network. Considering the need for meal and restroom stops, 500-mile range seems to be superfluous for most Tesla drivers. However, competitors without a comparable charging network might feel that such range is necessary to entice buyers. Meanwhile, more consumers may be coming to the realization that overnight home charging is for the most part sufficient.

As long as it is a real 500 miles, but 500 miles EPA is more like 350 actual highway speed miles.

 

[scaesare]

Lucid Air suddenly has longest range of any BEV? (at 517 or whatever it is)

What is this vehicle of which you speak in the present tense?

 

[scaesare]

Those being equal, the 2170's could charge at a higher rate, even with the 2170's using traditional tabs and the 4680's using tabless.

Why?

 

[woodisgood]

Plaid+ was always about a pissing match with Rawlinson. But as Elon has said, when you take a step back, anything over 400 miles and the range thing (which was just EV FUD) is pretty much dead and rather pointless to aspire to when you're cell-constrained. And not that they are the measuring stick of anything, but you don't see ICE manufacturers advertising who has the biggest fuel tank.

 

[-=buzz=-]

As I understand it, the 4680 cell would be a detriment to charging speeds (and high power usage) without the tabless technology. The tabless technology is needed to dissipate enough heat from the cell to make it viable.

Someone please correct me if my understanding is incorrect.

Yes, tabless technology is necessary to make the 4680 format possible. But AFAIR they overshot the requirements to equalize the 2170s and achieved better thermal characteristics and lower internal resistance.
But I think they will start very conservative like with the original 18650s and drive them harder over time.

 

[scaesare]

That seems like a problem if they announced something and put it up on the configurator without figuring out how to build it first.

That's not necessarily the reason. They've eliminated products/models before when the take rate vs. complexity/cost wasn't worth it, even though they knew "how" to build it.

Heck they did it practically right out of the gate with the Model S 40KWh ...