-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
The time has come - again - to remind all that this thread is not Twitter, is not Reddit, and is not a platform for showing off jejune barbs.
As loathsome and as ridiculous as some Tesla naysayers are, go high. Do not go low.
Not mentioning anything about any particular analyst or soi-disant analyst or self-styled analyst ===>other than refuting his or her specific Tesla/TSLA projections<=== is all that is appropriate here.
A few posts - far fewer than necessary - have been deleted. Endit.
As loathsome and as ridiculous as some Tesla naysayers are, go high. Do not go low.
Not mentioning anything about any particular analyst or soi-disant analyst or self-styled analyst ===>other than refuting his or her specific Tesla/TSLA projections<=== is all that is appropriate here.
A few posts - far fewer than necessary - have been deleted. Endit.
Pezpunk
Active Member
Inflation and so on don't matter when your investment is in true, actual value and not US dollars. (HODL)
Shanghai being shut down indefinitely is a real issue, though, and so is access to nickel and lithium due to supply chain disruption thank to Putin's desperation. Tesla is in a better situation than most, thanks to forward thinking, but they're also more dependent than almost anyone else on these supply chains, since they are (obviously) more dependent on batteries than the other major carmakers.
My EOY price target is revised downward from $2k to $1.5k.
It's also concerning to me how little people here seem to understand how long it takes to ramp up a factory (and how much impact this will have on short-term margins).
my 5-year outlook is not significantly impacted, but the rest of this year could be painful.
JusRelax
Active Member
If a 50%+ increase by year end is painful, sign me up for painful every year!
Do you think it will take longer or shorter than Shanghai to ramp Berlin and Austin? I could see it being
Shorter: Due to lessons learned and addressed
Longer: Due to supply chain and 4680 ramp in Austin
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Sandy Munro explains how using AGVs will help Tesla easily double production at Giga Texas
Sandy says Tesla can expand Model Y production easily from 500k/yr to 1m/yr at Giga Texas:
Cheers!
#ALIENDREADNOUGHT
Sandy says Tesla can expand Model Y production easily from 500k/yr to 1m/yr at Giga Texas:
"Using Automatic Guided Vehicles (AGVs), I can make changes almost instantly. I never have to worry about the towveyor going down, or the things that are overhead getting jammed or locked up. If one of the AGVs has a problem, it can be pulled off, and you can continue with production. If one of the car builds that's on an AGV has a problem, it can be pulled off, fixed, and dropped back in place.
"Its easy to make things happen with AGVs so that when issues do come about, you can pull'em in, put'em out, you can increase or decrease your line speeds, basically by just over-the-air. I mean everything about that makes me excited.
"When I looked at the floor, and I looked at how much room they had in that area, its easy to double up capability. So if you're looking at half a million to start, its easy to see you you could crank it, maybe make it a little bit wder, because all it is is saw cuts in the floor, no big deal. Its not like I've got to change a conveyance system. Its just saw cuts in a floor and a new program that comes again over-the-air. Its not a big deal."
Cheers!
#ALIENDREADNOUGHT
New Model Y AWD is using 4680 cells.
But what about the chemistry?
If Fremont produced a Model Y SR AWD with 2710 cells by using 72kW cells in the battery pack instead of 82kW in the LR, the weight of the car would be less than Austin made Model Y AWD plus the range would be higher !
My prediction is that 4680s in the new Model Y AWD are using a low cost, low density chemistry based on either an iron cathode or a "manganese" cathode.
But what about the chemistry?
If Fremont produced a Model Y SR AWD with 2710 cells by using 72kW cells in the battery pack instead of 82kW in the LR, the weight of the car would be less than Austin made Model Y AWD plus the range would be higher !
My prediction is that 4680s in the new Model Y AWD are using a low cost, low density chemistry based on either an iron cathode or a "manganese" cathode.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Ships bound for Zeebrugge aren't going to catch up.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Please don't dream up quotes for Elon. He said that in Apr 2021 about the new bty pack for the Plaid Model S (which use pre-existing 18650s), not about 4680s:
Tesla (TSLA) Q1 2021 Earnings Call Transcript | The Motley Fool
TSLA earnings call for the period ending March 31, 2021.
www.fool.com
"the Palladium program, which is the new version of Model S and X, which has revised interior and new battery pack and new drive units and new internal electronics and has, for example, a PlayStation 5 level infotainment system.
"There's just a lot of issues encountered, ensuring that the new factory was as we're saying this was by far [Inaudible] smaller piece. So it took quite a bit of of development to ensure that the battery of the new S/X is safe."
Memory is unreliable. Worse if you take other's word for it, with just a vague handwave at a reference.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Your question implies that Wall St. puts in a great deal of due diligence and performs frequent (weekly) updates of its annual price targets. They do not.
Here's their model: 2021 SP + 50%
They just rely on brute force to make SPs conform to their whims (news be damned). If you want more from them, you'll have to track them down at the club.
Watch out for confirmation bias. @TheTalkingMule may have mentally swapped "safe" for "reliable" which fits in the context of 4680 testing and development.Please don't dream up quotes for Elon. He said that in Apr 2021 about the new bty pack for the Plaid Model S (which use pre-existing 18650s), not about 4680s:
Tesla (TSLA) Q1 2021 Earnings Call Transcript | The Motley Fool
TSLA earnings call for the period ending March 31, 2021.
"the Palladium program, which is the new version of Model S and X, which has revised interior and new battery pack and new drive units and new internal electronics and has, for example, a PlayStation 5 level infotainment system."There's just a lot of issues encountered, ensuring that the new factory was as we're saying this was by far [Inaudible] smaller piece. So it took quite a bit of of development to ensure that the battery of the new S/X is safe."
Memory is unreliable. Worse if you take other's word for it, with just a vague handwave at a reference.
Q1 2021 (same link you have):
Q2 2021, Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2021 Earnings Call Transcript | The Motley Fool
Q3 2021 Drew talking 4680 pack testing, including safety tests: Tesla (TSLA) Q3 2021 Earnings Call Transcript | The Motley Fool
My modest model always had 1.48 million deliveries predicting a share price of ~$1300 with a PE Ratio of 110 for the EoY 2022. (Net income $13.3B, GAAP EPS of $11.87 TTM)
For a while it really looked like deliveries for 2022 were going to be much higher than that, but now with the Shanghai shutdown (and needing to ramp back up) I feel like my 1.48 million will end up being fairly accurate.
I'd say both Accountant and Dodger have better models than I do, they seem to be more accurate while mine is more "conservative". But I still think given the macro environment plus the Shanghai situation going on we will just barely eek out a new ATH by the end of this year, but not much before then.
That's my two cents!
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
Don't quit your day job. Elon has said multiple times that currently there are NO PLANS for LFP in the 4680 format. All 4680 cells are currently Nickel based.
2170 cells made by panasonic are tradition Li-Ion cells using a WET electrode. 4680 cells are confirmed to be dry electrode.
Go read the battery day slide deck, everything you could possibly want to know about the 4680s is in there.
Ok. Then how do you explain 2170 cells to be more energy dense and lighter than the 4680s without a structural pack?
As I stated, if Tesla produced the same Model Y AWD in Fremont with 2170 cells without structural pack then that vehicle would have more range and would be lighter. The only other explanation other than not having high-nickel chemistry is the EPA document being wrong.
I agree completely. I still watch for the odd nugget but celebrity has outpaced content. Too bad.
We all know about NO PLANS. Plans do change. There are some possibilities. Just to list a few:
1. Once 4680 lines scale, the manufacturing process itself might make multiple chemistries to be more efficacious in that format than the original choices;
2. As the vehicle process matures using Gigacasing and structural packs, use of common format may make total vehicle costs lower that way;
3. Changes in commodity pricing and availability will, not may, but will cause optimal cell chemistry choices to change.
There are more.
I am not saying that 4680, 46120 or any other from blade, prismatic, pouch and 'not-invested-yet' may be more desirable within just a year or two.
Even though the statements of a year ago might be valid, Tesla moves rather more quickly that we can imagine. I will not presume to say a given thing from Battery Day or any other day, necessarily remains true.
FWIW, if CATL technologies (e.g. Kirin) develop as claimed, Tesla could adopt quite different cell-to-pack structure and CATL might well built to order to be installed exactly as Tesla structural pack already does, the the structural pack itself might end with multiple versions.
and so on.
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
I thought I heard the words "safe enough" and it was more recent, but I'll do some googling and see what I find.
Either way my point is more the side cooling speaks to safety, obviously heat dissipation. That wasn't planned for and now it seems standard. I don't think this is a big stretch assumption that safety(or reliability due to safety concerns) was the delay, even without any direct quotes.
The Accountant
Active Member
My original share price prediction:
I posted my revised 5 Year Forecast in January and calculated a Share Price of $1,930 by year end.
It was computed as follows:
GAAP EPS $12.87 X 150 multiple = $1,930
This was based on deliveries of 1,555k.
5 Year Forecast - Published in January
Current Thoughts:
I have not updated my 5 year model; but here is my current back of the envelope thinking:
Prior to the Shanghai shutdown, my GAAP EPS had risen to $13.30 from my original $12.87 (based on strong Q4 financial metrics).
If Shanghai returns to production by May 1, I only expect a Full Year EPS reduction by about $1.00 taking my GAAP EPS from $13.30 to $12.30.
GAAP EPS $12.30 X 150 multiple = $1,845 per share.
Why only a $1.00 EPS impact from a 1 month Shanghai Shutdown?
If Shanghai comes on line May 1, I still expect deliveries of 1,555k for the year. The lost April production in Shanghai of 70k units can be recouped over the 8 months of May-Dec across all 4 sites. It would require a 6% increase in the balance of year production versus my original production numbers.
The 6% increase is achievable . . .remember, Tesla is chip constrained in 2022 and not production constrained. If they have chips for 1,555k cars they will build 1,555k cars assuming Shanghai is back online by May 1. The reason for the $1.00 decline in EPS despite deliveries staying at 1,555k is because of inefficiencies incurred with a one month shutdown (particularly with labor costs).
A price of $1,845/shr by year end may seem aggressive considering we are at about $1,000/shr in April especially in-light of covid, Ukraine, Inflation, Fed Res rates increases . . . but Tesla will keep marching forward putting up huge profits and cash flow numbers . . . . there is the likely share split arriving too.
Tesla often turns on a dime . . .if Q1 financials are strong and Shanghai reopens by May 1 . . .we can move to new highs quickly.
Investing in Tesla will be a flight to safety.
Last edited:
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
Just like Russian crude, I'm confident Shanghai production will find it's way to market.
Company's that are growing fast and have a high confidence of success/profits (rare combo) are valued more on future years outcomes discounted backward more than present success. I've thought about it a lot and it's basically mathematically / game theory guaranteed.
If the market has high confidence that Tesla in 2023 or 2024 will produce massive profits, they value Tesla today based on those earnings (discounted). So even bad earnings for one quarter don't have to ding share price if it doesn't affect outlook future year profits.
Tesla could have a big drop in earnings but if Austin / Berlin show a positive ramp to improve confidence of higher earnings next year, stock could easily go up.
If the market has high confidence that Tesla in 2023 or 2024 will produce massive profits, they value Tesla today based on those earnings (discounted). So even bad earnings for one quarter don't have to ding share price if it doesn't affect outlook future year profits.
Tesla could have a big drop in earnings but if Austin / Berlin show a positive ramp to improve confidence of higher earnings next year, stock could easily go up.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
