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

[woodisgood]

No hail Marys needed here. I sold a chunk of TQQQ to make room for a June '23 call.

Juuuuuust missed the low-hanging Mary Barra joke...

 

[Cal1]

Such a serious matter..... you both are going to roast in Hell!!!

 

[Nocturnal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1466456156822552576

Now.....if say you're interested in a Model Y and want to place and an order and are given a chance to get it this month instead of a year from now, would you forego the EV credit?

I certainly think Tesla will be just fine with Dec deliveries. Between Hertz buying up all the Model 3 supply on the open market and new orders getting to jump the line, I think they'll be just fine

I know two people personally that aren't going to hold off. They both need cars (one is driving an old jalopy) so the credit isn't a huge deal. Plus I pointed out that it's likely that Tesla raises prices a little once the credit is active.

 

[insaneoctane]

GM leading in Taiwan...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1466222890907422720

Tesla is so far ahead maybe they are just an "outlier" and therefore GM is the real leader? Even if you actually considered Tesla an outlier, I still don't think GM can claim the leadership role!

 

[SOULPEDL]

Breaking news: Calls pull ahead by 1 horse length on the final turn.

Good job TMC!

 

[2daMoon]

Getting kinda bored with the day and my mind went wandering, which is seldom a good thing as it can lead to random speculation. As such, I will now share.

What if Elon were to take the first Cybertruck to come off the Texas production line, load it into an orbital Starship mission as simulated payload (ala Starman/Roadster), then, recover the Cybertruck after a successful orbital return and put it up for auction?

Proceeds of the auction could be used to fund a Scholarship program for T.I.T.S. or some other worthy cause.

Maybe this idea is just a result of putting too much Curry on my lunch... but, is it really all that far-fetched considering what we know Elon to be capable of?

How much would you bid for an Orbital-Class Cybertruck? A kajillion at least?

 

[Ogre]

How much would you bid for an Orbital-Class Cybertruck? A kajillion at least?

Nothing. Way out of my league.

I wouldn’t be too surprised to see him launch one as a test payload but doubt it’ll get retrieved. That’s the sort of gimmick space companies that can’t make it to orbit need to do for publicity.

 

[woodisgood]

The amount of Cybertruck-related merchandise being released does signal towards, at the very least, a reveal of final design/specs/features. It could signal something more substantial and surprising, such as an earlier start of production or a limited early production run. However, these latter possibilities are difficult to separate from hopes, when Tesla/Elon have publicly pushed back Cybertruck production and expectations due to battery supply. I suspect the only thing that would cause CT production to be pulled forward is a re-evaluation of battery strategy around Model Y. We've assumed Austin Model Ys are going to be, at some point, possibly from the get-go, 4680-based. We've then wondered about the differences between Austin-built and Fremont-built Model Ys - how different will a 4680-based vehicle really be? Could the 2170 and 4680 versions really be sold as equivalent? Then it was speculated that if 4680-based Ys are really going to be that different from the 2170-based vehicles (creating somewhat of an issue for regional order fulfillment - many people will have a preference one way or the other), maybe it will only be Y Performance that will be built in Austin with 4680s.

What if they just decided to keep US-based Model Ys the same across both US factories for the time-being, with the side effect being to free up Kato's 4680 cells for something else? Of course, I'm speculating off the assumption that battery strategy is the primary driver for pushing CT into late 2022, as opposed to any complexities of CT production itself.

EDIT: This is just pure speculation, most likely completely and utterly wrong. I was just thinking about the cascade of effects if Tesla went back and questioned the strategy of putting 4680s into Ys (in the US) first.

 

[2daMoon]

Nothing. Way out of my league.

I wouldn’t be too surprised to see him launch one as a test payload but doubt it’ll get retrieved. That’s the sort of gimmick space companies that can’t make it to orbit need to do for publicity.

To be clear, the CT would never leave the confines of the Starship. They would both orbit and return together. "Retrieval" would happen on Terra Firma.

 

[WattsHappening]

I know two people personally that aren't going to hold off. They both need cars (one is driving an old jalopy) so the credit isn't a huge deal. Plus I pointed out that it's likely that Tesla raises prices a little once the credit is active.

A while back, I was slightly concerned short-term about folks pushing out their deliveries to take advantage of the upcoming tax credit. But given how long the waiting list is, I imagine there are going to be more than enough buyers willing to skip the line to take delivery this month.

And there is another benefit to this; higher ASPs!

 

[EnzoXYZ]

Juuuuuust missed the low-hanging Mary Barra joke...

Hail Mary
noun

1. a prayer to the Virgin Mary used chiefly by Roman Catholics, beginning with part of Luke 1:28.



2. AMERICAN FOOTBALL

a long, typically unsuccessful pass made in a desperate attempt to score late in the game.

"they beat the 49ers on a Hail Mary pass in the final seconds"



3. AMERICAN CAR MANUFACTURE

A statement, typically unsuccessful lie made in a desperate attempt to pretend to be sector leader.

"Well, we have said, just like we’re the leader today, if you set aside you know with the distortion that’s happening with the semi shortage, we have been the leader in the United States."

 

[Beltsbear]

The amount of Cybertruck-related merchandise being released does signal towards, at the very least, a reveal of final design/specs/features. It could signal something more substantial and surprising, such as an earlier start of production or a limited early production run. However, these latter possibilities are difficult to separate from hopes, when Tesla/Elon have publicly pushed back Cybertruck production and expectations due to battery supply. I suspect the only thing that would cause CT production to be pulled forward is a re-evaluation of battery strategy around Model Y. We've assumed Austin Model Ys are going to be, at some point, possibly from the get-go, 4680-based. We've then wondered about the differences between Austin-built and Fremont-built Model Ys - how different will a 4680-based vehicle really be? Could the 2170 and 4680 versions really be sold as equivalent? Then it was speculated that if 4680-based Ys are really going to be that different from the 2170-based vehicles (creating somewhat of an issue for regional order fulfillment - many people will have a preference one way or the other), maybe it will only be Y Performance that will be built in Austin with 4680s.

What if they just decided to keep US-based Model Ys the same across both US factories for the time-being, with the side effect being to free up Kato's 4680 cells for something else? Of course, I'm speculating off the assumption that battery strategy is the primary driver for pushing CT into late 2022, as opposed to any complexities of CT production itself.

2170 and 4680 versions will either be priced differently or made nearly identical via software. Meaning a LR 4680 model Y will have less battery when it has less weight so the range is the same. The handling will be slightly better on the 4680 but very few people would be able to tell. Or a 4680 will be priced higher with additional range or performance. Or if Tesla wants to be sure demand is there for the 2170, they will INITIALLY give the 2170 model MORE range at the same price point than a 4680. Once things are transitioned over, the 4680 will magically get better.

The point is, there are a lot of levers Tesla has to control demand.

 

[Crowded Mind]

I said the range discrepancy is exaggerated. Who might exaggerate the range discrepancy?

You can start with those who depend upon illustrious brand names like Porsche for their funding. This is not a whacko conspiracy theory; it is well-established that companies who owe their existence to brands like Porsche are heavily biased in their favor. I can easily get better than EPA range in either of our Model 3's depending upon how I operate them also. My wife's nearly 4-year lifetime average consumption is below the EPA rated consumption and she is not even a hyper-miler and uses the heat all winter, every day. People just love to dis Tesla anyway they can get away with it.

It's a fallacy that Tesla's EPA range is inflated compared to other brands when talking about "real-world range". This is an area that is easy to cheat and difficult to disprove because the testing parameters are so subjective, and the tests are often done on days with wildly different temperatures. The EPA test, on the other hand, is a well-defined drive cycle and cheating comes with the risk that you will be caught and exposed. The rest is just anecdotal, informal 'testing' that they are calling "real world".

We know they don't give Tesla a fair shake in the editorial comments, why would you believe they suddenly become objective when doing 'real-world' range tests? And why would Porsche hobble their own results by not driving the car below 20% state-of-charge for the purposes of EPA range tests? It's a theory that makes zero sense. I shouldn't even have to take the time to explain this, and it amazes me how easily people believe garbage 'data' even when repeatedly shown how unfairly these organizations treat Tesla.

I'm sure Car and Driver's advertising customer (Porsche) felt they were getting good bang for their advertising money when they read C&D gave them a 'real world' range almost 20% better than their EPA rating. That was music to their ears. It helps to have friends in places like C&D, especially ones not bound by the strict parameters of EPA range tests! Anyone who still thinks C&D can be trusted to provide unbiased info is living in a delusion.

This is FUD... Obviously the points you make are valid to consider but it's extremely clear to anyone that has actually spent some time looking at the real-world range of the Taycan that it significantly outperforms the EPA ratings. Spreading uninformed accusations like this is a disservice to this forum and the Tesla/EV community, and it's concerning to see such positive feedback from this forum on a post like this.

Check Bjorn Nyland's range tests (formerly Tesla Bjorn, I think we can agree Porsche isn't paying him off...)

Table at 16:46.

Porsche Taycan 4S PBP - 227 mile EPA range, 264 mile Bjorn test at 75 mph (+16%)
Model 3 Performance - 299 mile EPA range at the time, 243 mile Bjorn test at 75 mph (-18%)
Tested at similar temperatures (2 degree Celsius, 3.5 degree Fahrenheit difference)

If you prefer to compare to the Model S, same test for Bjorn got 294 miles at 75 mph for the LR Raven, EPA range of 391 or 402 miles depending on when, so -25%, but this was at 59 degrees Fahrenheit which is why I think the Model 3 better illustrates the point. Certainly 9 degrees does not explain the 40% swing in EPA range vs. Bjorn test though. Yes, this is just one highway speed test but it should fully illustrate the point, and IMO, highway range is all that really matters anyway. I also think it's likely that Tesla underperforms EPA in some of these tests due to a larger buffer after hitting 0 displayed range and I'm not sure Bjorn's tests account for that, but that has been discussed in other areas and is not relevant to whether or not the Taycan outperforms the EPA range.

The two reasons I have most commonly seen which could explain the poor EPA range rating is that 1.) the Taycan has two gears which may be less optimal in testing than in real-world conditions and 2.) I don't believe they used the same EPA test methodology that Tesla does, because automakers are given a choice between two options IIRC. I'm as big a Tesla fan as anyone here, but stuff like this makes us all look bad.

Edit: I see @hacer made a similar point but I will leave this as it offers a bit more detail.

 

[Curt Renz]

Electrek - 13:28 EST: Tesla (TSLA) asks US Government to waive tariffs on graphite from China, says it can’t get it elsewhere

Excerpt:

“Tesla supports the renewal of the exclusion of artificial graphite from the Section 301 tariffs. Tesla has demonstrated with the information presented in this request that artificial graphite is currently not available in the specifications nor capacity outside of its current suppliers and China that is required for Tesla’s manufacture of EV batteries in the United States.”

 

[Bet TSLA]

A fair review of Tesla's FSD beta from Larry Magid at the Mercury News. From actual experience! Ain't that refreshing? (a Google search then following that link will let you read it). TL;DR impressive but scary and nowhere near ready for robotaxi.

Larry Magid: Tesla’s full self-driving is promising but far from ready

The potential is there, but so far, it can be scary navigating some of the quirks.

www.mercurynews.com

I've been driving FSD beta in my S for just over a week now. I'm very much looking forward to fast improvements with new releases. But my expectations are low.

 

[phoggy123]

2170 and 4680 versions will either be priced differently or made nearly identical via software. Meaning a LR 4680 model Y will have less battery when it has less weight so the range is the same. The handling will be slightly better on the 4680 but very few people would be able to tell. Or a 4680 will be priced higher with additional range or performance. Or if Tesla wants to be sure demand is there for the 2170, they will INITIALLY give the 2170 model MORE range at the same price point than a 4680. Once things are transitioned over, the 4680 will magically get better.

The point is, there are a lot of levers Tesla has to control demand.

If I were Tesla I would start making the performance model Y out of Texas that way there is clear delineation between 4680 and 2170. Then I would bring online a standard range model Y based on 4680 LFP. Once these are available you leave the long range for last that way you dont overlap and then create a situation where some "new" model y's get better anything than another. At some point they will be able to retrofit all the Model Y lines in Fremont to have 4680 and structural pack, at this point you end up with another demand lever of extended range model Y or a reduced cost to the customer.

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

My personal opinion on what's about to happen with the stock -

50 moving average is 970, moving up $8-9/trading day. It will be at 1,000 by Monday. Coincidently, we'll get China Nov data on Tuesday or Wednesday of next week. Possible that we get some factory news/announcements on next Thursday. If the macro's continue selling off for the next 3 trading days, I see the stock selling down to 1,000 to meet that 50-day moving average and then we get takeoff.

Reason I think take off (chart reading is voodoo so I 100% understand it's what I'm seeing in the chart).......Giant, one year long cup n handle that's been formed over the past 1 year and we're just about at the end of the handle.....meaning liftoff.

If we do end up dropping back into the low 1,000's over the next 3 trading days, I'll be heavily swapping stock for LEAPS.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

A fair review of Tesla's FSD beta from Larry Magid at the Mercury News. From actual experience! Ain't that refreshing? (a Google search then following that link will let you read it). TL;DR impressive but scary and nowhere near ready for robotaxi.

This should probably be prefaced with who the author is and their likely perspective. From wikipedia:

In 1994 he wrote the first popular publication on Internet safety called Child Safety on the Information Highway for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. That was followed in 1998 with Teen Safety on the Information Highway. Both publications have been revised and reprinted many times. He serves on the advisory boards of PBS Kids, the Family Online Safety Institute and the Congressional Internet Caucus, The Hub (children's TV network) and the Facebook Safety Advisory Board.

Magid is also the founder of SafeKids.com and SafeTeens.com, and co-founder and CEO of ConnectSafely.org. His technology website is LarrysWorld.com. All three websites provide information about Internet safety.

So he's literally a lifetime professional safety advocate. Certainly a "fair" review, but there's no scenario where such a person reviews a beta and say "All set!".

 

[Ogre]

If I were Tesla I would start making the performance model Y out of Texas that way there is clear delineation between 4680 and 2170. Then I would bring online a standard range model Y based on 4680 LFP. Once these are available you leave the long range for last that way you dont overlap and then create a situation where some "new" model y's get better anything than another. At some point they will be able to retrofit all the Model Y lines in Fremont to have 4680 and structural pack, at this point you end up with another demand lever of extended range model Y or a reduced cost to the customer.

This works so long as Texas early production will be able to supply *all* of the Model Y Performance shipping. Otherwise you have the same problem.

If it’s even close, it probably makes sense.

 

[woodisgood]

2170 and 4680 versions will either be priced differently or made nearly identical via software. Meaning a LR 4680 model Y will have less battery when it has less weight so the range is the same. The handling will be slightly better on the 4680 but very few people would be able to tell. Or a 4680 will be priced higher with additional range or performance. Or if Tesla wants to be sure demand is there for the 2170, they will INITIALLY give the 2170 model MORE range at the same price point than a 4680. Once things are transitioned over, the 4680 will magically get better.

The point is, there are a lot of levers Tesla has to control demand.

Of course, I get that. You're absolutely right there.

But let's just pretend that the pros and cons of launching Austin Model Y with 4680s were re-debated. 2170-based Model Y demand is through-the-roof, as we know, with no problems selling at higher prices for the foreseeable few years especially with a re-upped EV credit. Sure, it would great if Model Y could be manufactured even more cheaply (or whatever additional benefits brought by 4680s), but I would bet 2170-based Y would ramp faster than 4680 in Austin. We assume Tesla could just plop 4680s into Y, and maybe they can. But maybe it's a little more complicated than that. Maybe it slows down the Austin ramp that much more, either from a production standpoint, or simply making the vehicle too different to be able to sold as equivalent (with software changes) from a regulatory standpoint. The goal is to produce as many Ys as possible as fast as possible. If you can secure enough 2170 cells to do that, why do you NEED to put 4680s into Y immediately?

And what if the primary cost of deciding to put 4680s into Y is delaying the CT. What do you gain by putting those 4680s into Ys vs what are you losing by putting off CT production? Does the Y really need to be made that much better, right now? I'm not suggesting this is happening or should happen. Just saying that Tesla is nimble enough to back up and drastically re-evaluate - on a dime - the battery strategy that seemed like it might be set in stone, and something like this might even warrant someone wishing to update the product roadmap on a future earnings call.