Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Wow, Shanghai is humming. The sheer number of cars being readied for transport is amazing:


The video prior to this one by Wu Wa was during a shift change and we saw little activity in the logistics lot despite a large number of cars present.
We now see in this video what the logistics lot looks like when there is a fully staffed shift - see the 2:50 mark.

With most exports coming from Shanghai this quarter, the Delivery Forecasters will have a difficult time forecasting Q3 deliveries as it is much easier to track shipments from Fremont's SFO port. Tracking export out of Shanghai is virtually impossible; they'll have to rely on the CPCA monthly reports out of China.
I expect forecasters to be cautious for Q3 due to the lack of Shanghai export transparency and the worries over chip shortages.
 
St microelectronics signs contract to provide Tesla with chips.



English story that clarifies these aren't the scarce controller chips- they're just a new production location for the silicon carbide MOSFETs for the inverters that STMicro has already been supplying Tesla since the Model 3 launch in 2017 from their fab in Catania Italy.



This part in particular has been the discussion of more needed capacity as Tesla ramps for years- here's a 2019 story (well before any shortage of the controller chips) discussing STMicros likely plans to add more production of it... so another source opening in 2021 seems right in line with the couple years to get one up and running speculation.







With Etrade and Ameritrade so far, retail investors like myself cannot even review the terms of the offer to convert, so it’s not unreasonable to assume the conversion is as stated on the note.

On the contrary, if I was told "we can't tell you the terms" the most reasonable thing to assume is they have changed from what was on the note.

Otherwise it'd be simple for them to tell you terms- they're right on the note.
 
Tesla said there would be a China designed new model. The design center was announced in January 2020:
I have copy of the concept on my office wall.
Whatever 'trial production' might be, the logical conclusions, I think, is that the entire 'underbody' including suspension components may well be made on a single Gigapress. Bizarrely this may not fit the historical notion of 'unibody' but it will make introducing multiple form factors on the same line a relatively easy process, and the China vehicle is being designed to do that from the outset.There are been numerous hints of inclusions of suspension and even a hint or two that wheels might be included somehow. We have no specifics but plenty of hints. There is also the CATL plant being built next door and they're already building battery packs for Tesla plus doing large amounts of battery R&D.

We also know that Zeng Yuqun (AKA: Robin Zeng) and Elon Musk talk frequently and share technical insights. It is quite reasonable to imagine that CATL battery technology will power the China designed vehicle.

Perhaps unusual is that Tesla has not made any formal announcements about all this since January 2020. My personal guess is that this vehicle will enter volume production sometime toward the end of 2022.

The production technologies already working for Model Y will expand to other lines. Just as soon as the Cybertruck enters production there will have been major technical advances that will enable cheap, durable and resistant bodies. As 4680's mature that too enters the mix.

I believe that the China designed vehicle will incorporate Gigapress and CATL battery advances plus a few surprises. That will enable much cheaper production at high volumes. All of that will be being disclosed during the next six months.

Following Cybertruck production with 4680's the soon to be developed German car will appear. There are few clues, but I'll be surprised if it will not be an SUV/hatch in roughly the Peugeot 208/2008, VW Golf class, but slightly larger. That will have major commonalities with the China design, but will be slightly larger, have more capable running gear and will be tuned for higher speed operation. In short, it will have all the classic capabilities of a "hot hatch" but also have a larger SUV version launched together with in (again think Peugeot 208/2008, VW Golf/Taos).

Each of these will end out being the same price as equivalent ICE, but all of them will have higher range than most people think they will.

FWIW, everything we seem to know now suggests that 2023 will probably have major updates for Model 3 and Y with 4680 structural packs across the board. I believe that because Panasonic and LG both say they're working on 4680's and CATL. has disclosed nothing other than the 80GWh plant going pop,beside Tesla, so they may or Amy not do 4680's but they're certainly preparing to supply structural packs.

There will also be multiple factories to build Superchargers and other TE products. Further, energy storage done cooperatively with large scale renewable installations as well as commercial and residential products cannot be neglected. They need massive storage supply, new battery capacity and technology advance will enable that within the next two years.

Global car markets have these types of vehicles as the largest volume vehicles in the vast majority of high volume markets. The highest volume exceptions are India, which trends slightly smaller (excluding tuctuc/auto rickshaw) so an adaptation fo the China model will be an India CKD, assuming the Indian government can allow Tesla the terms it needs). Variants of the China and German models will be built (either CKD or manufacture) in other global markets. Further, some of them will also supply raw materials and/or components to other Tesla factories. Much of this will be developing during 2022/2023.

Doing most of this in one form or another will be essential to maintain a 50% vehicle growth rate.
Even a conservative five year forecast requires all of this even if not in this precise form.
Doing this will allow a 5,000,000 annualized vehicle production rate in 2025.
A quick view of the 25 largest vehicle markets in the world will make it clear that BEV adoption in most of the world is necessary to advance the mission.

That is my personal crystal ball. I do not claim prescience.

I freely admit that this ranks as a close analogue to "the Heart of Gold" but I do not think it requires an "infinite improbability Drive".

IT is well to note, however, that the rough 2020 annual unit sales by familiar OEMs went like this:
Toyota. 9.5 million
VAG. 9.3 million
GM. 6.8 million
Stellantis 6.2 million
Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi
4.5 million
Hyundai 4.5 million
Ford. 4.2 million

Can Tesla outsell Renault, Hyundai and Ford? If they do, from whom will they take share?
Will the markets be much higher than the non-very-stellar 2020?
What will the displaced auto dealers do?
What will the oil and gas industry do?
From whence commeth all those charging stations?

If that happens what will be the state of Tesla Energy?
Will Elon Musk still be alive then?

It is easy to forecast, but making it actually happen is another thing entirely.
@jbcarioca, I disagreed with the 2nd last line of your post. Not sure why you would write that.
 
Before learning this, I naively thought Tesla would convert the bonds at the convertible note's rate of 16.1 shares per $1000. Instead, Tesla converted at a rate of ~14 shares / $1000, so I lost 15% of the shares I would have received in 2024, or from just selling the bonds.
I have no knowledge of how bonds work, and maybe I totally misunderstand your predicament, but if Tesla wants to give you 14 shares now, instead of 16 shares in 2024, I think the only way you would lose is if the share price goes up <15% in the next 3 years. Based on yesterday's close, that would be $790. I don't think anyone on here believes Tesla SP will be below $790 in 3 years. If I'm missing something, totally ignore this post. 🤪
 
It's the total cumulative miles. I'm sure all other brands having way more cumulative miles than Tesla since their brand have been around for decades. Even if people drive more miles PER Tesla, there are still not enough Teslas on the road compared to other brands and not enough years to accumulate that many cars.
Numbers for accidents were per 10,000 cars. Many of the Mercs/BMWs will be older, different demographics, less safety tech.

Even so, a 10-1 advantage for Tesla (accident rate) is remarkable. Tesla was above Ferrari (less accidents for Tesla), most of these are owned by enthusiasts, perhaps a few owned by idiots, hard to know but I doubt it.

I think it's as simple as one-pedal driving (braking just by releasing pressure on accelerator) & collision warnings as standard. The fraction of a second advantage might be enough to really cut down on crashes.

edit: I've added another post where I conclude that it's flawed. Put a mention to @Singuy in that post. I think it will be hard to get reliable figures for accidents/model. Tesla growing fast means averages will be skewed unless you have proprietary/insurer/government data
 
Last edited:
IT is well to note, however, that the rough 2020 annual unit sales by familiar OEMs went like this:
Toyota. 9.5 million
VAG. 9.3 million
GM. 6.8 million
Stellantis 6.2 million
Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi
4.5 million
Hyundai 4.5 million
Ford. 4.2 million

Can Tesla outsell Renault, Hyundai and Ford? If they do, from whom will they take share?
Great post!

As a fun little math exercise, if Tesla continues it's c.50% growth rate there is only 2 years between matching Ford's production and matching Toyota's production (even excluding cannibalisation of their volumes). That is a ferociously short time to upend the majors.
 
@jbcarioca, I disagreed with the 2nd last line of your post. Not sure why you would write that.
Probably I was too flippant to what I intended to be a serious issue. Some time ago we used to mention from time to time that' key man insurance' would be wise in this case. I mentioned it in this post precisely because we do not know if the Tesla growth rate could survive the demise of Elon. The company; sure, most don't doubt that. The growth objectives and the pace of innovation would possibly suffer a major blow. That is what I meant. Rarely for me, perhaps, I tried to economize on words. please accept my apologies.
 
Tesla said there would be a China designed new model. The design center was announced in January 2020:
I have copy of the concept on my office wall.
Whatever 'trial production' might be, the logical conclusions, I think, is that the entire 'underbody' including suspension components may well be made on a single Gigapress. Bizarrely this may not fit the historical notion of 'unibody' but it will make introducing multiple form factors on the same line a relatively easy process, and the China vehicle is being designed to do that from the outset.There are been numerous hints of inclusions of suspension and even a hint or two that wheels might be included somehow. We have no specifics but plenty of hints. There is also the CATL plant being built next door and they're already building battery packs for Tesla plus doing large amounts of battery R&D.

We also know that Zeng Yuqun (AKA: Robin Zeng) and Elon Musk talk frequently and share technical insights. It is quite reasonable to imagine that CATL battery technology will power the China designed vehicle.

Perhaps unusual is that Tesla has not made any formal announcements about all this since January 2020. My personal guess is that this vehicle will enter volume production sometime toward the end of 2022.

The production technologies already working for Model Y will expand to other lines. Just as soon as the Cybertruck enters production there will have been major technical advances that will enable cheap, durable and resistant bodies. As 4680's mature that too enters the mix.

I believe that the China designed vehicle will incorporate Gigapress and CATL battery advances plus a few surprises. That will enable much cheaper production at high volumes. All of that will be being disclosed during the next six months.

Following Cybertruck production with 4680's the soon to be developed German car will appear. There are few clues, but I'll be surprised if it will not be an SUV/hatch in roughly the Peugeot 208/2008, VW Golf class, but slightly larger. That will have major commonalities with the China design, but will be slightly larger, have more capable running gear and will be tuned for higher speed operation. In short, it will have all the classic capabilities of a "hot hatch" but also have a larger SUV version launched together with in (again think Peugeot 208/2008, VW Golf/Taos).

Each of these will end out being the same price as equivalent ICE, but all of them will have higher range than most people think they will.

FWIW, everything we seem to know now suggests that 2023 will probably have major updates for Model 3 and Y with 4680 structural packs across the board. I believe that because Panasonic and LG both say they're working on 4680's and CATL. has disclosed nothing other than the 80GWh plant going pop,beside Tesla, so they may or Amy not do 4680's but they're certainly preparing to supply structural packs.

There will also be multiple factories to build Superchargers and other TE products. Further, energy storage done cooperatively with large scale renewable installations as well as commercial and residential products cannot be neglected. They need massive storage supply, new battery capacity and technology advance will enable that within the next two years.

Global car markets have these types of vehicles as the largest volume vehicles in the vast majority of high volume markets. The highest volume exceptions are India, which trends slightly smaller (excluding tuctuc/auto rickshaw) so an adaptation fo the China model will be an India CKD, assuming the Indian government can allow Tesla the terms it needs). Variants of the China and German models will be built (either CKD or manufacture) in other global markets. Further, some of them will also supply raw materials and/or components to other Tesla factories. Much of this will be developing during 2022/2023.

Doing most of this in one form or another will be essential to maintain a 50% vehicle growth rate.
Even a conservative five year forecast requires all of this even if not in this precise form.
Doing this will allow a 5,000,000 annualized vehicle production rate in 2025.
A quick view of the 25 largest vehicle markets in the world will make it clear that BEV adoption in most of the world is necessary to advance the mission.

That is my personal crystal ball. I do not claim prescience.

I freely admit that this ranks as a close analogue to "the Heart of Gold" but I do not think it requires an "infinite improbability Drive".

IT is well to note, however, that the rough 2020 annual unit sales by familiar OEMs went like this:
Toyota. 9.5 million
VAG. 9.3 million
GM. 6.8 million
Stellantis 6.2 million
Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi
4.5 million
Hyundai 4.5 million
Ford. 4.2 million

Can Tesla outsell Renault, Hyundai and Ford? If they do, from whom will they take share?
Will the markets be much higher than the non-very-stellar 2020?
What will the displaced auto dealers do?
What will the oil and gas industry do?
From whence commeth all those charging stations?

If that happens what will be the state of Tesla Energy?
Will Elon Musk still be alive then?

It is easy to forecast, but making it actually happen is another thing entirely.
Am I the only one who looks at all the gas cars on the road and thinks these will mostly be Teslas in a few years? With increased volume Tesla's prices will plummet and the dinosaurs will not be able to compete. And who will want their compliance cars? Unless some of the manufacturers you list actually put some work into EVs Tesla will be eating their breakfast, lunch and dinner.
 
IIRC your accident stats were "accidents per-vehicle for the trailing 5 years". Tesla's sales are extremely skewed to the end of that time period so the average Tesla on the road in the UK is probably only about 1 year old. That is why the statistic is misleading, not because of the average miles a new Tesla is driven.

The statistic that would be meaningful is accidents per mile, not accidents per vehicle.
Fair point. I'll post their methodology, which probably supports your and @Singuy posts. It depends if they divide accidents by number of Teslas on road per year (or if detailed, month) ie at the time or total number of Teslas on the road in UK in 2019 (volume Model 3 probably started September 2019, lots in December IIRC). Even so, I think S/X outnumbered 3 by 2019, again though many S/X might have been fairly new. Multiplying the 28/10,000 of Tesla by 5 still results in a relatively low figure of 140/10,000 vehicles (BMW 224, Merc 259) - I think this would be an overestimate.

I'll admit defeat on this as I couldn't find useful info on UK Gov website (ONS) & it's not super-supportive of my conjecture. I'll leave this post here as a conclusion/explanation.

I'll keep an eye open for updated info, but with a rapidly growing brand, it's going to be difficult unless you're a big insurer or do detailed requests to Gov under Freedom Of Info Act

1627749639612.png



1627748672318.png
 
Tesla will need to offer a conversion at 16.1 per $1000 at some point before expiration, but on their timing. They're offering less than that now afaik.

The main disadvantages to holding the convertible bonds are that they don't count towards margin and cannot be used for loans.

I could sell the bonds on the open market for close to TSLA SP at the 16.1 conversion rate, but I would need to pay capital gains.

I still don't see the problem other than you have a broker who refuses to provide you with the most basic services. Change your broker. And the people who make the market in these bonds don't see the problem either or the market price wouldn't be but a fraction of what you think it should be..

It sounds like much ado about nothing.
 
Great post!

As a fun little math exercise, if Tesla continues it's c.50% growth rate there is only 2 years between matching Ford's production and matching Toyota's production (even excluding cannibalisation of their volumes). That is a ferociously short time to upend the majors.
Math like this can quickly become unrealistic. You can soon show Tesla production exceeding vehicle production in the whole world, when the reality is they will never have more than some portion.
 
Following Cybertruck production with 4680's the soon to be developed German car will appear. There are few clues, but I'll be surprised if it will not be an SUV/hatch in roughly the Peugeot 208/2008, VW Golf class, but slightly larger.
This is a small matter, but I'm wondering why you anticipate the future small MIG Tesla will be larger than the Golf?
 
  • Like
  • Helpful
Reactions: capster and Nakata
Probably I was too flippant to what I intended to be a serious issue. Some time ago we used to mention from time to time that' key man insurance' would be wise in this case. I mentioned it in this post precisely because we do not know if the Tesla growth rate could survive the demise of Elon. The company; sure, most don't doubt that. The growth objectives and the pace of innovation would possibly suffer a major blow. That is what I meant. Rarely for me, perhaps, I tried to economize on words. please accept my apologies.
[OT} It's weekend time, indulging in next level considerations

I try not to think too much in that direction either, BUT the fact remains there *is* a risk. JFK was the last president with decent morals/ intentions and he was disappeared, as well as his brother and son for opposing powerful interests. So were a lot of decent leaders (Dag Hammarskjold, .. etc etc ..see John Perkins' "Confessions of an economic hitman I & II") when it doesn't align with the interests of "the US" or "democracy" .

Hopefully he's getting top level security from our agencies, after all the US industrial/ tech power is key to its global power - IMHO he's worth 1,000 US presidents (our current breed of).

Seriously, think of just the military/ economic implications of SpaceX/ Tesla - they are of huge strategic importance*: deployment of a battalion incl some light tanks within an hour anywhere on earth, GPS/ internet comms everywhere on earth (probably eyes in the sky in LEO soon too from military satellites), Vision AI enabled robots/ weapons/ vehicles/ drones, resilient global communications in case of "glacial" aka full blown electronic warfare.. next gen electric tanks that don;t need vulnerable and expensive diesel convoy supplies..

In the financial sector, having a SWIFT 2.0 covering all countries regardless of political boundaries/ firewalls, and possibly millions of mining aka decentralized ledgers in all Tesla equipment, esp when used for heating.

And also Space force aka war/ fighting capability in beyond orbit space areas.

(*) Side note: historical: Desert Storm was such a quick success because the Iraqi never expected the US Army tanks being able to maneuver the large desert areas which the US was able to navigate because of the then newly available GPS tech.

Side note 2: to some it may seem like fantasy mentations - do remember Libya when Gaddafi and his regime were pulverized out of existence. One key factor may have been his attempt to create a pan African monetary union, and he had the gold reserves to get this started. Or Iraq's invasion re the fabricated weapons of mass destruction propaganda. Where's the truth?
 
Last edited:
Math like this can quickly become unrealistic. You can soon show Tesla production exceeding vehicle production in the whole world, when the reality is they will never have more than some portion.
Clearly. However, when production volume forecasts for Tesla are c.20m units per year by 2030 it is not some "four dozen husbands next month" pie in the sky volume either.
1627752892428.png
 
Last edited:
Elon himself tweeted making fun of that too. I don't know if Tesla wants to go beyond maybe 4-5 million cars production a year, at some point it's completely unrealistic to think Tesla is supposed to replace the entire world's ICE production. The reason VW, Toyota, Ford, etc. will survive isn't because of any other external reason other than it is necessary that they survive because one company cannot produce all the world's cars on it's own.
 
I appreciate your explanation on the disagree. It’s always helpful to know why and the caveat was helpful.

I stand by my warning to those who purchased these though. With Etrade and Ameritrade so far, retail investors like myself cannot even review the terms of the offer to convert, so it’s not unreasonable to assume the conversion is as stated on the note. Plus, the note says conversion can occur earlier.

However, your last paragraph about my wanting TSLA to barely survive implies you misunderstand how these convertibles work. The number of shares that can be received in 2024 is the same regardless of whether TSLA is at $500 or $5000. They’re essentially OTM call options added to the note so Tesla pays a low 2% interest rate for the loan.

Convertible bondholders want TSLA shares to be worth as much as possible prior to expiration. The bonds can be sold anytime at a price proportional to TSLA share price. If the SP is low at expiration, bond holders won’t get shares and all they get is 2% a year and their money back.

Anyone who purchased these notes supported Tesla as much as someone buying stock for a capital raise, possibly more because Tesla needed the money the most. Why should they be grateful to receive 15% less than the conversion rate on the note?
I understand your point. It is not the owners of convertibles whose motivations matter, but the structure fo the convertibles. Every issuer which has the means will liquidate convertibles early. That is invariably disadvantageous to the holders because the holders want to keep the high yield and nice conversion profits. The only way that will happen is if the issuer si doing OK but not extremely well. It simply will never happen that a convertible with a really high conversion value at maturity will be allowed to do so. Companies in that situation liquidate.

Believe me, please, I know convertibles fairly well. The key to understanding them is to view buyers motivations at issuance and issuers thereafter.
TANSTAAFL is the operative acronym. I have helped a few issuers decide when to redeem convertibles, 'fast growing cash poor' all of them at issuance. The calculus is always basic, but not necessarily simple. If resistance would cost less than continuing, the convertible almost always is redeemed. After all the alternative si to accept unnecessary dilution. That is why owning convertibles is a fairly high risk proposition, especially because almost no financially solid company issues them.