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

[Tim S]

Oh OK it's the 19" wheels which push it to November. Seems like a long wait just to have 19's instead of 20's? In the UK it says "early 2022" regardless of which wheels you choose.

I can get July estimated delivery for a Model Y LR by adding anything that costs extra (except FSD)... paint, wheels, tow hitch, white interior, or 7 seat layout.

November delivery is only if you take all the free options.

 

[SO16]

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.

This video does a good job explaining the discrepancies.

 

[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.”

I emailed the following to those who represent me in Congress and to the White House:

Please end tariffs on graphite imported from China. It is needed to lower the costs of batteries and make them more available, especially for electric vehicles. Do this either by law or insisting that the president makes it an executive order.

For that matter, end all tariffs to fight inflation and promote the economic boost from free trade by this supposedly free country.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

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 its 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 calls.

It's certainly starting to smell this way and unfortunate timing for me. I need to sell a few shares soon AND I'm perfectly content doing so around $1200, even though my strong conviction is we're $1300+ after 4Q earnings. This has let me sell weekly CC's very close to SP and I was hoping to continue doing so for all the weeks up to earnings. If a contract or two executes, no big deal.

But selling $1150c's for peanuts is not in my gameplan when I'm so confident $1300+ is near. Hopefully all the positive triggers on the horizon are so obvious that we regain momentum quickly. Anyone paying attention knows our forward PE is about to hit 100-130, and that Elon will reiterate at least 50% growth. Likely 70%+.

I guess the move if we creep down toward $1000 or god forbid the 50d MA, is to get a bit more aggressive with weekly BPS. I'll be keeping an eye out in the other thread for any leverage plans you come up with for medium term should shenanigans unfold. After all.....max pain for Jan 21 is technically $640. Lord knows what that does to the algos if macros turn dep red.

 

[Krugerrand]

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.

I mean, that just looks like a lopsided smile to me.

 

[Boomer19]

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.

i initially thought 12/9 (in austin) to be final cybertruck specs reveal, and stretched a bit further to wonder if prod would be pulled forward due to the 4680 tidbits we’ve heard

- “de-risking” of 4680 we heard about in Q3 call from zach,
- machines being delivered on tractor to GF5 (can i use GF5 as the preferred nomenclature for austin?)
- rumblings about Kato Rd increasing production rate

….yes theres a Y backlog, but sooner or later you need to start knocking off rhe 100s of thousands in line for theCT
__________

however, my friend threw cold water on this right away, citing elons comments and supply chain issues on the CT.

but…it’s still my best guess (and hope) for 12/9, as that inherently means that
- 4680s will be on track to be industry standard in a few years as ferragu mentioned on maurer
- tesla will be doubling (at least) battery prod and 3rd party supply YoY in 2022
- many more products on roads/grid

 

[JRP3]

4680 LFP

I don't expect 4680 LFP for a long time if ever.

 

[Boomer19]

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.”

what odds do we give to tesla getting what they asked for ?

 

[Krugerrand]

what odds do we give to tesla getting what they asked for ?

- numbers we’re not allowed to post

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

It's certainly starting to smell this way and unfortunate timing for me. I need to sell a few shares soon AND I'm perfectly content doing so around $1200, even though my strong conviction is we're $1300+ after 4Q earnings. This has let me sell weekly CC's very close to SP and I was hoping to continue doing so for all the weeks up to earnings. If a contract or two executes, no big deal.

But selling $1150c's for peanuts is not in my gameplan when I'm so confident $1300+ is near. Hopefully all the positive triggers on the horizon are so obvious that we regain momentum quickly. Anyone paying attention knows our forward PE is about to hit 100-130, and that Elon will reiterate at least 50% growth. Likely 70%+.

I guess the move if we creep down toward $1000 or god forbid the 50d MA, is to get a bit more aggressive with weekly BPS. I'll be keeping an eye out in the other thread for any leverage plans you come up with for medium term should shenanigans unfold. After all.....max pain for Jan 21 is technically $640. Lord knows what that does to the algos if macros turn dep red.

This feels much more like technical trading action verses MM's at play, otherwise there would have been a much bigger effort to keep the stock above 1,100 this week.

The stock touching it's moving average, the 50 day in this instance, especially on a macro downtrend would actually be bullish/healthy for the stock. If it bounces off of that in a hard way, especially with news/data giving the bounce support, then the stock is set up for moving much higher. Considering the 50 moving average is moving up and will continue to do so, at a pretty rapid pace, it would offer continual support

 

[lafrisbee]

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?

I wouldn't bid one red cent. But it is a brilliant idea.

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.

something cooler for the masses could be to crate up a "million" card keys made with a commerative cover/color send them around the world in space and then "give" one to every Roadster buyer, offer the rest at a premium.

 

[phoggy123]

I don't expect 4680 LFP for a long time if ever.

I think it more depends on the suppliers. If CATL sells them what they need and it works I agree. Just reiterating I dont think they will mix a US long range or performance 4680/2170 model Y it will be all or nothing in terms of what they sell.

I actually think Dec 9th could be the 4680 model Y and if its the performance model, they could show 400 miles, 0-60 in 3 seconds and blow the doors off everything in its class. The backlog on performance is not very much so it wouldn't be too hard.

 

[StealthP3D]

I've said nothing at all about Tesla's EPA ratings and I'm certainly no cheerleader for Porsche . Bjorn Nyland tested the Taycan 4S 93 kWh (EPA rated 227 mile range) and found that at an average speed of 90 km/hr (56 MPH) speed he was able to drive 579 km (360 miles) and that at an average speed of 120 km/hr (74.5 MPH) he was able to drive 425 km (264 miles). Members of TMC who own both brands have similar experiences too. You are welcome to believe that Bjorn and other Tesla owners have an agenda and can't be trusted.

No, I trust Bjorn's results, it's just that they only reflect the conditions of the day he was testing, they are not scientific. My claim is not that a Porsche cannot better the EPA range ratings, it's that the 'real-world' testing is non-scientific. The day Bjorn got 360 miles it was over 80 degrees outside and a steady state speed of 56 mph for over 6 hours straight is not "real world", it's hypermiling. My claim is that the difference between the Porsche's EPA efficiency and real-world efficiency is often over-stated. And I stand by that claim. Also, the supposed inability of Tesla's to ever get their EPA rating in the real world is also often over-stated. I can double the Model 3's EPA range rating when hypermiling (but that is not what the EPA rating is designed to represent). I have no problem with Bjorn's results other than they are not scientific (and he doesn't represent them as scientific, he specifically points out they are not intended to be scientific).

When Bjorn tested it on a 68-degree day at more realistic speeds he only bested the EPA HWY rating by 16%. And the EPA HWY rating is not intended to represent a steady-state speed either.

It's kind of like Ford claiming the F-150 Lightning's EPA HWY rating is with a 1000 lb. load in the bed. What? Yes, that's what Ford told a popular YouTube reviewer who then relayed it to his audience, who then claimed the HWY range will actually be more without 1000 lbs. in the bed. This has now been repeated 100's of times as if it's a fact. But it's false for reasons I won't go into.

 

[lafrisbee]

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.”

So this is why my novonix(NVNXF) stock has outperfromed Tesla since that Jeff Dahn guy went there?

 

[2daMoon]

I wouldn't bid one red cent. But it is a brilliant idea.

something cooler for the masses could be to crate up a "million" card keys made with a commerative cover/color send them around the world in space and then "give" one to every Roadster buyer, offer the rest at a premium.

Good idea! Those would easily fit inside the CT. Along with Ts, Hats, Whistles, Socks, Decanters, ...

 

[M|S|M MYP]

what odds do we give to tesla getting what they asked for ?

> 0%..... Better odds @POTUS makes a Freudian slip and says "Tesla"...

 

[Ogre]

I wouldn't bid one red cent. But it is a brilliant idea.

something cooler for the masses could be to crate up a "million" card keys made with a commerative cover/color send them around the world in space and then "give" one to every Roadster buyer, offer the rest at a premium.

I just don’t see Tesla doing this kind of thing. It’s the kind of gimmickry we see from Blue Origin.

Now… launching the Cybertruck to orbit around the sun for millions of years? I can totally see him doing that.

 

[StealthP3D]

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.

To be clear, I didn't claim it can't outperform the ratings. I said the difference by which it does is often exaggerated.

The Tesla Model 3 Performance was tested at 5 degrees. Air density matters a lot at 75 mph. It's not even close to be comparable.

 

[Buckminster]

I don't expect 4680 LFP for a long time if ever.

Can you expand. I am expecting more than half of Tesla's batteries to be outsourced 4680 LFPs in just a few years.

 

[henchman24]

The EPA comparisons are not even fully like for like with the Taycan vs Model S. Porsche utilized the 2 cycle test, and Tesla utilizes the 5 cycle test. IMO the EPA should get rid of the 2 cycle test all together and make all automakers run the 5 cycle test.