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

[oldTAVguy]

Elon 186K likes
Joe 30K likes

Elon 25K retweets
Joe 3K retweets

One of these in unlike the other...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1498858611241635843

edited numbers (added K)

 

[JRP3]

As Supercharger distribution get denser

And faster. And range less affected by cold. I think plenty of people would give up some performance for another 100+ miles of range.

 

[15Peter20]

CEO of trillion cap company is straight on it.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Between then and now, Rivian spent the entire summer of 2021 promoting the hell out of those unsustainable prices. Collected a huge pre-order roll. Then they launched their IPO using those same numbers paired with equally unattainable production numbers and completely impossible profit margins.

The difference is their IPO is over. Now they can move on to the next phase in their corporate lifecycle. The underwhelming results followed by the shareholder litigation phase.

Well said! You put the "OG" back in Ogre...

Rivian - Summer 2021 promoted unsustainable prices, collected pre-orders. Launched IPO on those pre-order numbers + unattainable production + impossible profit margins. Next is litigation

Tesla on the other hand ONLY sells profitable vehicles: When the time is right, and the Market is ready, Tesla will launch Cybertruck. And the World will spin a little bit faster.

Cheers!

 

[SOULPEDL]

Yep. It's exactly what Harley Davidson did recently by spinning their electric bike products out into the new and separate Livewire company. I think we'll see a lot of the old ICE companies doing similar separations over the next few years. VW will probably just convert some of their brands to pure EV while the ICE brands carry the company financially, I think they are large and diverse enough to be able to pull that off.

Tesla has made the near impossible look comparatively easy, and the companies which see the truth and react accordingly (Ford, VW) have a far better chance to survive than those who do not see reality (GM).

I'm curious how this can work. If someone owns Ford stock who is investing in EVs as a separate division, they still have the neg cash flow problem for quite some time. So won't investors still complain as if a single entity? And if separated, do Ford shareholders also share in the losses and gains down the road? And who gets the good talent currently in Ford - do they move some people over... managers too.... oopsy. What would Ford shareholders think when prize talent is leaving for EVs?

I didn't see this discussed in the short version of "Innovator's Dilemma." Not having read the book, but does it shed some light on this?
Is there any evidence that a split structure has worked in the past during other transitions.

Some tidbits grabbed off google and by definition, Tesla has all for disruptors in play.

"It is important to understand the types of disruptive innovation that exist. There are four: a new product, a new technology to produce a product, a new way to distribute a product and a new way to provide services. The entrant can introduce a disruptive innovation along one or more of these dimensions."

I don't know if any existing auto company will survive this, but curious if there's room for a new Corporate Entity crafted specific for this situation? Different Operating Agreement etc...

I wish Ford all the best.

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

Those same "ford" executives still made a better first EV than Tesla. The door design on the mache is still better than the MY. Hubris is a dangerous path, it was not the only thing on the mache better than the MY.

The same "ford" executives have the brains to split the company and they are doing so without pissing off the unions and a major political party.

Why would SA do anything to facilitate a move away from oil? So what that it is the perfect place. They cant export it. There is no commonalty between Ford's actions and SA actions. IF there was you'd see SA building massive solar farms and trying to sell Aramco to China. Selling Aramaco to China today would be brilliant

There was an electric Ford Ranger and an electric Ford Focus. First from the ground-up EV is what you mean?

 

[Baumisch]

As Supercharger distribution get denser, I agree with Elon. Today, I could still contend another 30% of range can be meaningful. Now if you’re trying to beat a McLaren 765LT in the ¼ mile, sure, optimize out to a lighter battery.

Well - now order the trailer hitch and tow something - back to 200miles pretty quickly - I say let’s get on-par with major ICE platforms and agree around the 500-600 mile mark

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Max pain has drifted up to 850 from 845 yesterday. Could probably head higher to 860 or so by Friday close. Something's gotta give here.

Seems to me a pretty good time to go back into selling BPS. 20% out obviously.

 

[Phobi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1499008961743405063

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Well - now order the trailer hitch and tow something - back to 200miles pretty quickly - I say let’s get on-par with major ICE platforms and agree around the 500-600 mile mark

I say put the extra range pack in the trailer!

Edit: * or on the trailer

 

[Nocturnal]

Farley's comments reiterate those he has said in the past. They aren't all in on EVs because he still thinks people need ICE vehicles in their driveways as well.

Those same "ford" executives still made a better first EV than Tesla. The door design on the mache is still better than the MY. Hubris is a dangerous path, it was not the only thing on the mache better than the MY.

The same "ford" executives have the brains to split the company and they are doing so without pissing off the unions and a major political party.

By dumping off their debt laden, failing business on the US taxpayer. Yup.

The door design is fine. I'll take a flush door handle on my car if it means the car can be at full throttle for more than 5 seconds. I think I know which shows me who can engineer better.

 

[AKAlex]

I'm curious how this can work. If someone owns Ford stock who is investing in EVs as a separate division, they still have the neg cash flow problem for quite some time. So won't investors still complain as if a single entity? And if separated, do Ford shareholders also share in the losses and gains down the road? And who gets the good talent currently in Ford - do they move some people over... managers too.... oopsy. What would Ford shareholders think when prize talent is leaving for EVs?

I didn't see this discussed in the short version of "Innovator's Dilemma." Not having read the book, but does it shed some light on this?
Is there any evidence that a split structure has worked in the past during other transitions.

Some tidbits grabbed off google and by definition, Tesla has all for disruptors in play.

"It is important to understand the types of disruptive innovation that exist. There are four: a new product, a new technology to produce a product, a new way to distribute a product and a new way to provide services. The entrant can introduce a disruptive innovation along one or more of these dimensions."

I don't know if any existing auto company will survive this, but curious if there's room for a new Corporate Entity crafted specific for this situation? Different Operating Agreement etc...

I wish Ford all the best.

Perhaps the idea is to allow for the transfer of talent before the big split. Do it in a few stages so it is less disruptive? This does seem like Ford is positioning themselves for the next century. Good on them.

 

[lafrisbee]

That he was getting paid crazy money for almost driving Intel into oblivion and getting tax breaks like no tomorrow to build a factory complex?

Are you talking about the right guy? Intel's leadership changed about a year ago.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Batteries will be a huge part of grid reliability and load balancing as we make the transition to ever higher amounts of wind and solar and those battery factories will need unimaginable amounts of raw materials.

The amount of raw materials required for Tesla to reach 3TWh/yr annual battery output is QUITE imaginable: it's the equivalent of 1 Great Pyramid of Cheops weight in finished battery cells per month. Here's the math: (Aug 12, 2021)

Tesla Valuation Based on 5 Year Outlook

Thanks for the insights. What are your thoughts on Energy Generation and Storage as the second disruptive business? . . . basically turning the Utility industry upside down. My 5 year plan does not have Tesla disrupting the Utility industry (my growth here is modest). This is due to my...

teslamotorsclub.com

Btw, the 2020 world-wide steel industry produced the equivalent of 24 Great Pyramids of Giza per month. So Telsa's battery requirements are clearly within the scale that industry can product. This is especially true given Tesla's focus on sourcing inexpensive and abundant raw materials.

Equally important will be RECYCLING. Once the world's inventory of batteries in service catches up to the demand, then mostly RECYCLED materials will go into replacement battery cells. That's why J.B. and Redwood Materials are so important for the future. And, they are building their new plant (you guessed it) right next to Giga Texas.

Cheers!

 

[SOULPEDL]

I say put the extra range pack in the trailer!

Edit: * or on the trailer

OT - We need 4680 type 1-hr packs rotated in for the e-Boat while at the lake. Can't tow a trailer and a boat. Oh wait... new trailer design? I was planning on a large Cybertruck battery, but that's just extra mass.

Charging at the lake, won't that be fun! (Oops, dropped the cable in the water *ZAP*, but smoking at the pump is OK). What do we call an e-boat called, a EB, or BEB?

 

[MP3Mike]

Can't tow a trailer and a boat.

You can in parts of Canada.

 

[Nocturnal]

That was a quick drop. Looks market wide but not seeing any news.

 

[JRP3]

I say put the extra range pack in the trailer!

So if you want longer range you have to tow a trailer, hurting your efficiency, and having an unused expensive battery pack sitting around doing nothing most of the time. Maybe if it could be used for V2G as well it would make sense. At least one guy built a camper on top of a trailer with a used S 85Kwh pack and does exactly that. Most people don't tow and just want similar range to their ICE vehicle all the time.

 

[ThisStockGood]

That was a quick drop. Looks market wide but not seeing any news.

MM stepping in? Just playing around with retails I guess

 

[Zero CO2]

Ford is doing extraordinarily well with it all. I also would not say Rivian has dropped out. Rivian has an immature corp team (inexperienced) but are actually increasing production. Ford started from nowhere in EVs. 20 years ago they had some plans that were torpedoed by 2008, then focused on profits which are hard to come by. Then just released very first car and it was probably the best "first" EV of any manufacturer- the mache was a real car and has done very well (i follow Sandy's tear downs, thanks in advance - when you actually watch all of them you will see that despite the issues with the mache that some things were better than the MY). Yes the mache is better than the roadster- 15 years later but better. Ford recognizes the value is splitting. The Ford Lightening is going to be released at production levels before the CT. They invested in Rivian instead of Nikola (GM) or a sandbox deep enough for their heads (Toyota Honda). They don't have the pro ICE factions threatening to dismiss the CEO (VW) when he talks about change.

Ford is doing everything needed to survive and we need that, the mission needs that. Sustainable transport will not happen if only Tesla succeeds. Good on the Ford team for being willing to tear it all apart to survive. GM is trying to survive via some Porter(wealth of nations strategy fame) like strategy of milking the cow to feed the stars (using ICE to fund EVs). Ford says ICE are holding EVs back and thus EV will grow faster without the leash. For an OEM this is brilliant and fast. By 2025- just 1-2 years after Tesla emerges from battery constraint mentioned on the last earnings call Ford will actually have their battery production facilities required to meet the current goals. They are building those, not outsourcing. Now then the question emerges as to sourcing or the supply chain. Ford has even started thinking about that. In summary, Ford seems to be a threat.

Ford seems to be a threat.

they are only a threat to themselves ... they are still stuck in the innovators dilemma regardless of how they manipulate the organization chart ...