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

[Thekiwi]

It’s not a very big question. It’s not even a tiny question. Answer: Somebody dies and most likely because they didn’t take the necessary caution and attention required to drive with (or without) FSD engaged. In other words, they didn’t value their lives enough nor those around them.

It behooves all people to get out of their fearmongering state. If you can’t, then give into your fear and hedge by selling your TSLA stock. And don’t get irritated because I just gave you the solution to your fear.

v10 does look like a very good advacnement, but in the limited amount of beta test videos I have seen online I have already seen close calls where FSD was trying to turn into fast moving oncoming traffic with only a last second disengagement by the driver avoiding a serious crash.

If you think regulators are going to rely on logical thought and statistics when FSD causes a fatality event that is judged to have been impossible for the human monitor to prevent, then I have a bridge to sell you.

It is a very real possibility that when it occurs that Tesla will have to indeed remove the FSD beta program, and move to an internal testing program where testers are employed by Tesla. I don’t think that would be a big detriment to FSD development, with the result being a small relative rise in R&D costs. I’m not saying it’s a definite, but investors shouldn’t be downplaying this outcome.

Regardless of whether or not regulators end up shutting down the public FSD beta program after a FSD fatality, it is going to be a MASSIVE media event and will be one of the most challenging times for the Tesla brand. It will not be viewed as a Tesla driver killing someone, but instead tesla’s software. For most companies, beta testing a product in public that ends up killing people is a bad thing.

I have no intention of selling my shares and am still in accumulation mode, but I am very prepared for the inevitable poopstorm of negative headlines the rapidly approaching FSD beta program will no doubt produce.

I think many are underestimating the required level cost/benefit ratio for FSD in terms of human lives lost for it to be acceptable to regulators. It’s probably higher than 10:1, and maybe closer to 100:1.

Think of it this way: how many deaths from side effects are judged as acceptable when regulators are evaluating new medications/therapies?

 

[GOVA]

The United States has cancerous systems since as early as this year dating back decades. Indeed, there exists states where Tesla can’t even sell their cars directly to the customer, talk price, heck bring a car to a car show.

Funny, I heard a lot of reasons for why not China too. I’ve heard reasons why not India. Why not Britain, France. Why not Australia. Why not Brazil or Mexico.

Every place is very different than the place before.

I don’t care one way or another where the next factories go, but it being different, hard to navigate, politically hot etc… are for sure not any reasons Tesla won’t or shouldn’t do it.

It is easy to throw icons around.

The US dealer situation is terribly crooked, yes, but daily business in Russia is totally different animal.

The comparison of those brings nothing to the table.

Let me find an icon too. How about ?

 

[Rarity]

If you think regulators are going to rely on logical thought and statistics when FSD causes a fatality event that is judged to have been impossible for the human monitor to prevent, then I have a bridge to sell you.

It is a very real possibility that when it occurs that Tesla will have to indeed remove the FSD beta program, and move to an internal testing program where testers are employed by Tesla. I don’t think that would be a big detriment to FSD development, with the result being a small relative rise in R&D costs. I’m not saying it’s a definite, but investors shouldn’t be downplaying this outcome.

At least in the US, Tesla is regulated by NHTSA, which by and large relies on logical thought and statistics after lengthy consideration. The NTSB is something of a political animal (as you can see from the weekend story), but it doesn't regulate Tesla. It can and will complain and stamp its feet, of course.

 

[Knightshade]

It is a very real possibility that when it occurs that Tesla will have to indeed remove the FSD beta program, and move to an internal testing program where testers are employed by Tesla. I don’t think that would be a big detriment to FSD development, with the result being a small relative rise in R&D costs. I’m not saying it’s a definite, but investors shouldn’t be downplaying this outcome.

FWIW, over 90% of current FSDBeta testers already are Tesla employees.

The # of public folks in the program today is very very small.

Obviously the goal of the button would be to change that- but a reversion to tesla employees only wouldn't be a major change from where we are right now other than the loss of the youtube videos from a handful of public testers.

The biggest practical loss would be geographic diversity--the current system being overfitting to the bay area and Tesla employees being concentrated there too... and presumably Tesla could fix that pretty easily by onboarding some service or sales center folks all over the country into the program if they had to.

At least in the US, Tesla is regulated by NHTSA, which by and large relies on logical thought and statistics after lengthy consideration. The NTSB is something of a political animal (as you can see from the weekend story), but it doesn't regulate Tesla. It can and will complain and stamp its feet, of course.

Yup, I've mentioned it before, routinely NTSB screams about a Tesla situation, NHTSA looks at the actual data and concludes Tesla didn't do anything wrong so no action needed.... Hence why I expect their having asked all the other car makers for their own L2 accident data was to show the same conclusion once again (the main problem there being most likely don't have much of the needed data)

 

[PeterJA]

v10 does look like a very good advacnement, but in the limited amount of beta test videos I have seen online I have already seen close calls where FSD was trying to turn into fast moving oncoming traffic with only a last second disengagement by the driver avoiding a serious crash.

If you think regulators are going to rely on logical thought and statistics when FSD causes a fatality event that is judged to have been impossible for the human monitor to prevent, then I have a bridge to sell you.

It is a very real possibility that when it occurs that Tesla will have to indeed remove the FSD beta program, and move to an internal testing program where testers are employed by Tesla. I don’t think that would be a big detriment to FSD development, with the result being a small relative rise in R&D costs. I’m not saying it’s a definite, but investors shouldn’t be downplaying this outcome.

Regardless of whether or not regulators end up shutting down the public FSD beta program after a FSD fatality, it is going to be a MASSIVE media event and will be one of the most challenging times for the Tesla brand. It will not be viewed as a Tesla driver killing someone, but instead tesla’s software. For most companies, beta testing a product in public that ends up killing people is a bad thing.

I have no intention of selling my shares and am still in accumulation mode, but I am very prepared for the inevitable poopstorm of negative headlines the rapidly approaching FSD beta program will no doubt produce.

I think many are underestimating the required level cost/benefit ratio for FSD in terms of human lives lost for it to be acceptable to regulators. It’s probably higher than 10:1, and maybe closer to 100:1.

Think of it this way: how many deaths from side effects are judged as acceptable when regulators are evaluating new medications/therapies?

I think you are underestimating the amount of care Tesla is taking when choosing beta testers. You saw a video with "a last second disengagement by the driver avoiding a serious crash." But the driver did avoid it. There have likely been many such disengagements, but zero accidents so far.

Tesla will continue to choose their testers carefully, and monitor them after they are chosen.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1439042334155497474

If the Inspiration4 mission had exploded like the Challenger disaster, it would've been very bad for SpaceX. But it didn't. SpaceX is not NASA, and Tesla is not Ford or GM.

 

[nativewolf]

v10 does look like a very good advacnement, but in the limited amount of beta test videos I have seen online I have already seen close calls where FSD was trying to turn into fast moving oncoming traffic with only a last second disengagement by the driver avoiding a serious crash.

If you think regulators are going to rely on logical thought and statistics when FSD causes a fatality event that is judged to have been impossible for the human monitor to prevent, then I have a bridge to sell you.

It is a very real possibility that when it occurs that Tesla will have to indeed remove the FSD beta program, and move to an internal testing program where testers are employed by Tesla. I don’t think that would be a big detriment to FSD development, with the result being a small relative rise in R&D costs. I’m not saying it’s a definite, but investors shouldn’t be downplaying this outcome.

Regardless of whether or not regulators end up shutting down the public FSD beta program after a FSD fatality, it is going to be a MASSIVE media event and will be one of the most challenging times for the Tesla brand. It will not be viewed as a Tesla driver killing someone, but instead tesla’s software. For most companies, beta testing a product in public that ends up killing people is a bad thing.

I have no intention of selling my shares and am still in accumulation mode, but I am very prepared for the inevitable poopstorm of negative headlines the rapidly approaching FSD beta program will no doubt produce.

I think many are underestimating the required level cost/benefit ratio for FSD in terms of human lives lost for it to be acceptable to regulators. It’s probably higher than 10:1, and maybe closer to 100:1.

Think of it this way: how many deaths from side effects are judged as acceptable when regulators are evaluating new medications/therapies?

In the event of most drugs it just needs to show better than the placebo, which is our current state. Tesla should be able to easily prove that.

Our current driving state, placebo, 1.2 deaths per 100 million miles driven (thanks google and wikipedia). It just needs to show better. 10000 drivers in the new beta (estimate) driving 10000 miles per year should get you to the 100mln and if less than a person dies than it showed improvement. In fact, if just 1 person dies it would be quite a bit better. So all you testers...be darned careful.

 

[SOULPEDL]

Seems NHTSA would ultimately conclude that a fatality on FSD is an acceptable risk after some basic math. If all is equal, why wouldn't 2x be encouraging enough? Or is this purely a moral question for the public to process and decide with their wallets and self confidence?

Why did Uber stop Autopilot after their accident - by choice or a mandated somehow? They had a safety driver (not paying attention clearly). I wonder what happened to the driver, Uber, the law suit? Maybe something is telling there for Tesla.

 

[nativewolf]

FWIW, over 90% of current FSDBeta testers already are Tesla employees.

The # of public folks in the program today is very very small.

Obviously the goal of the button would be to change that- but a reversion to tesla employees only wouldn't be a major change from where we are right now other than the loss of the youtube videos from a handful of public testers.

The biggest practical loss would be geographic diversity--the current system being overfitting to the bay area and Tesla employees being concentrated there too... and presumably Tesla could fix that pretty easily by onboarding some service or sales center folks all over the country into the program if they had to.






Yup, I've mentioned it before, routinely NTSB screams about a Tesla situation, NHTSA looks at the actual data and concludes Tesla didn't do anything wrong so no action needed.... Hence why I expect their having asked all the other car makers for their own L2 accident data was to show the same conclusion once again (the main problem there being most likely don't have much of the needed data)

I hear the ford autopilot is quite nice on the machE on highways. All I've heard. The GM product in cadillac is supposed to be nice from what I hear. Again, I have never seen it. I hope they all show that these systems beat the heck out of cars with no systems.

 

[Singuy]

I hear the ford autopilot is quite nice on the machE on highways. All I've heard. The GM product in cadillac is supposed to be nice from what I hear. Again, I have never seen it. I hope they all show that these systems beat the heck out of cars with no systems.

Ford's blue cruise is nice in a can't take slightly curved turns and result in killing you kind of way without auditory warning when it turns itself off. Ford's system is literally worst than no system.

 

[RobDickinson]

I hear the ford autopilot is quite nice on the machE on highways. All I've heard. The GM product in cadillac is supposed to be nice from what I hear. Again, I have never seen it. I hope they all show that these systems beat the heck out of cars with no systems.

Bluecruise is just rolling out, the 'hands free' highway cruise system, it looks a pile of garbage, as shown by Sandy Munroe.

Their standard hands on adaptive lane keeping system is ok.

Neither is a patch on Autopilot.

 

[winfield100]

View attachment 712022

different view, 20 day SMA, of close,
plus, since 8/9, ~100,000,000 shares have changed hands at slightly higher cumulative prices......

 

[Krugerrand]

It is easy to throw icons around.

The US dealer situation is terribly crooked, yes, but daily business in Russia is totally different animal.

The comparison of those brings nothing to the table.

Let me find an icon too. How about ?

 

[2daMoon]

I hear the ford autopilot is quite nice on the machE on highways. All I've heard. The GM product in cadillac is supposed to be nice from what I hear. Again, I have never seen it. I hope they all show that these systems beat the heck out of cars with no systems.

So, you haven't clicked on any of the several links in this thread to Sandy Munro with the Ford rep in the passenger seat as a slight bend in the highway turns off the Blue Snooze autopilot while they were chatting?

Ford rep then says something like, "It is designed to disengage on sharp turns" or some such nonsense. It was the slightest of bends on a busy multi-lane highway. No prior warning, it just disengages and the car starts heading toward the adjacent lane and Sandy caught it in time.

It seems to me that "using no system" would perform better than any driver assist that resorts to a "pure physics" pilot mode when confronted with anything beyond a straight road ahead, potentially sending an inattentive driver across occupied lanes without warning.

 

[traxila]

Everyone in the financial MM seems to be glad that the correction has arrived, that we were warned, that we should have known better and that it is going to get much worse before it improves. A little taken aback as to how uniform that whole message is. Think they were handed talking points last week.

 

[RobDickinson]

Usually there are 300 different views from 200 different analysts and always some doom merchants, I'm sure these people can point out where they warned us and their perfect track record?

 

[Ratanpara]

v10 does look like a very good advacnement, but in the limited amount of beta test videos I have seen online I have already seen close calls where FSD was trying to turn into fast moving oncoming traffic with only a last second disengagement by the driver avoiding a serious crash.

If you think regulators are going to rely on logical thought and statistics when FSD causes a fatality event that is judged to have been impossible for the human monitor to prevent, then I have a bridge to sell you.

It is a very real possibility that when it occurs that Tesla will have to indeed remove the FSD beta program, and move to an internal testing program where testers are employed by Tesla. I don’t think that would be a big detriment to FSD development, with the result being a small relative rise in R&D costs. I’m not saying it’s a definite, but investors shouldn’t be downplaying this outcome.

Regardless of whether or not regulators end up shutting down the public FSD beta program after a FSD fatality, it is going to be a MASSIVE media event and will be one of the most challenging times for the Tesla brand. It will not be viewed as a Tesla driver killing someone, but instead tesla’s software. For most companies, beta testing a product in public that ends up killing people is a bad thing.

I have no intention of selling my shares and am still in accumulation mode, but I am very prepared for the inevitable poopstorm of negative headlines the rapidly approaching FSD beta program will no doubt produce.

I think many are underestimating the required level cost/benefit ratio for FSD in terms of human lives lost for it to be acceptable to regulators. It’s probably higher than 10:1, and maybe closer to 100:1.

Think of it this way: how many deaths from side effects are judged as acceptable when regulators are evaluating new medications/therapies?

So far Tesla has handled FSD rollout perfectly, they won’t go wide release until data suggests it’s ready.

 

[Words of HABIT]

Tesla's TSLA faired better than most auto stocks.

GM -3.82%
TSLA -3.88%
VW -4.14%
F -5.39%
NIO -6.24%
XPEV -6.30%
LI - 7.49%

Evergrande looks to withdraw from EV businesses | electrive.com

www.electrive.com

Summary of Aug 21 (updated Aug 27), 2021 article by electrive.com:

"The Chinese real estate group Evergrande looks like it is on the verge of withdrawing from the automobile business. Evergrande owns or has stakes in numerous EV companies (NOT Tesla). Now Evergrande is struggling to pay its debts after Beijing stepped up curbs on the real estate sector to contain the risks of a bubble.

With its first foray into the EV business, Evergrande initially invested in Faraday Future through its health division Evergrande Health.
Evergrande has mainly purchased know-how either by means of by partial entry as in the case of Koenigsegg,
by means of joint ventures as in the case of Hofer or
by cooperation as in the case of FEV Group, EDAG, IAV Group, AVL and Magna, or
by means of a takeover as in the case of Swedish-based carmaker NEVS.
It also pursued its own plans and the first six electric cars were announced a year ago through the Hengchi brand.

As the ChinaStarMarket now reports, Evergrande could sell off its car business in the course of the debt crisis and the group is already in talks with several companies, including Nio, Xpeng and Xaiomi.

Evergrande debt crisis will affect the Swedish company NEVS, formerly called Saab. Evergrande increased its stake to 82.4 per cent in November 2019 and bought up the final shares in June 2020. (complete takeover by Evergrande). It remains to be seen whether the restructuring at NEVS will also affect the production of Sono Motors’ Sion."


China Evergrande Group (3333.HK) has been on a slippery slope since topping out at $30.05/share on October 2017 to its present day $2.28/share. Five year chart shown below.

With months waiting list for Tesla vehicles and growing exponentially, doubling of manufacturing and products expected within the next twelve months, I don't see any reason why Tesla would sell off along with the greater market over the Evergrande collapse. There was a lot of panic selling today which unfairly spilled over into TSLA for short term gamblers. IMHO September 2022 TSLA will seem like a steal at today's prices. Those who are patient and not leveraged will reap the rewards and be able to sleep easier.

The Shanghai Stock Exchange was closed today for holiday so they will need to catch up on the down side of today's sell off which may spur more pressure for Tuesday trading.

EDIT, misread the article. Looks like Nio and XPeng could be beneficiaries should Evergrande be able to sell their EV businesses to them.

 

[goinfraftw]

Wow, Boring Company was founded in December 17th, 2016. We're cropping up on the 5 year milestone for the company.

In terms of its relationship to Tesla, the Tesla Hawthorne test tunnel was completed 2 years later with the Model X going through it on December 18th, 2018.

5 months passed and Las Vegas purchased the contract for Boring Company to build a loop for the convention center there. It's amazing how much progress they've made in only, almost, 5 years...even though they haven't really crossed the chasm as a startup yet, IMO.

The loop in Las Vegas needs to be completed and shown working for an entire city before we see real scale, right? or am I thinking too simplistically?

 

[henchman24]

The 2nd 5+% correction of the year for SPX has happened. Typically 2-3 happen per year... last years with 3 were 2014 and 2015. Last year with none was 2017. This is normal and healthy for a market to correct. When this correction ends, and as long as China eases fears of their issues, SPX will be in good shape to climb for a while again. Tesla will likely be a strong part of the with a blowout Q3.

 

[Silent Ludicrosy]

Found that interesting

China’s Evergrande’s shares pummelled on fear of debt default

Doesn't look to me like a Lehman Brothers event, more like an effort for affordable flats in China, started by Xi Jinping.

Is the Evergrande seriously stuck in the Suez again? Did we learn nothing from last time?