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

[Knightshade]

Where does NHTSA call that out?

I can't find "1,000" anywhere on NHTSA.
From the report I pulled:

Data likely shows Teslas on Autopilot crash more than rivals

The government plans soon to release data on collisions involving vehicles with autonomous or partially automated driving system that will likely single out Teslas for a disproportionately high number of such crashes

abcnews.go.com

Tesla’s figure and its crash rate per 1,000 vehicles was substantially higher than the corresponding numbers for other automakers that provided such data to The Associated Press

Not EVERYONE provided such data as you note though.

GM, Ford, Stellanis, and Nissan are among those called out as having so reported- and Toyota and Honda called out for not doing so.

I know HOW they measured it. My point was that any REASONABLE measurement should involve accidents per mile driven, and that makes Tesla's far safer than any other auto.

It's weird you insist a measure for which we literally have no data proves one system far safer than another.

Can you show your math?

 

[M|S|M MYP]

I know HOW they measured it. My point was that any REASONABLE measurement should involve accidents per mile driven, and that makes Tesla's far safer than any other auto. Unfortunately, Tesla is probably the only company that has that data.

I don't need you to walk me through the simple math, it was an "argh this is stupidity on the part of NHTSA" post, that's all it was.

Do not worry....your statement above will garner LOL's sometime after Q3

 

[MP3Mike]

Data likely shows Teslas on Autopilot crash more than rivals

The government plans soon to release data on collisions involving vehicles with autonomous or partially automated driving system that will likely single out Teslas for a disproportionately high number of such crashes

abcnews.go.com

Not EVERYONE provided such data as you note though.

GM, Ford, Stellanis, and Nissan are among those called out as having so reported- and Toyota and Honda called out for not doing so.

That isn't the data/report from NHTSA. That is entirely separate, and is data that OEMs reported directly to AP, so not really what is being discussed.

 

[Singuy]

Right, which is why in what you quote, I said "we lack the data to be sure"

And why your suggestion this could lead to recalls of legacy systems made no sense- since even NHTSA said there wasn't enough data to draw any useful conclusions.







Naah. It's not that they didn't ask for the right data. it's that the data does not exist

You can't mandate providing non-existent data.


You COULD mandate "All cars made after X date must collect Y data"

that's how we got mandated EDRs in cars in the first place.

But such mandates take years to create, develop, test, and then years more to actually be required in new vehicles- and never in old ones.

NHTSA began study of EDRs in 1998, but did not issue POSSIBLE mandated rules till 2004-2006 era, and did not get around to requiring them in new vehicles until 2012 model year.

14 years from start to actual new cars required to support it.

Heck it took longer than that to mandate ABS, a system that clearly made cars safer from the get-go.


No current legacy vehicle on the road- nor any current ADAS system from them on the road- will still be shipping by the time they'd be REQUIRED to collect and provide the type of data we're talking about.


It's certainly possible this is NHTSA starting to move that direction.... but this isn't any sort of "tesla trap" because the date by which legacy cars would need to actually do anything is beyond the 2035 date a lot of folks here think those companies won't even be in business anymore.

Industry-wide vehicle safety mandates move at glacial pace.

NHTSA thinks collecting adas data will prove something -->Tesla trap card because they are wasting their time

NHTSA possible wants to collect new data to prove something -->>another trap card, those legacy companies are not capable so let's eat popcorn and watch how they navigate through this

Essentially you drop this or you open a pandoras box as Tesla watch the drama unfold. A lot of people thought nhtsa got Tesla now with this investigation! In reality all they got is a big fat nothing as predicted while possibility mandating proper data collection from legacy auto and then issuing real recalls.

 

[growler23]

For those who have been following government actions and how they affect Tesla (more in energy storage and solar but it's all connected), I am surprised we haven't discussed this oldie much,

biden-invokes-defense-production-act-to-accelerate-clean-energy-for-america/

or this new one:

eu-parliaments-lead-committees-vote-against-gas-nuclear-in-the-green-taxonomy

It sure seems to me these are both bullish for Tesla and renewable transition in the long run. Particularly interested in what folks think about the Defense Production Act, as well as the referenced solar tariff 2-year moratorium, on solar in general and on Tesla's solar sales and material constraints.

 

[ThisStockGood]

Diess dreaming

https://twitter.com/x/status/1537102807400165385

 

[henchman24]

NHTSA thinks collecting adas data will prove something -->Tesla trap card because they are wasting their time

NHTSA possible wants to collect new data to prove something -->>another trap card, those legacy companies are not capable so let's eat popcorn and watch how they navigate through this

Essentially you drop this or you open a pandoras box as Tesla watch the drama unfold. A lot of people thought nhtsa got Tesla now with this investigation! In reality all they got is a big fat nothing as predicted while possibility mandating proper data collection from legacy auto and then issuing real recalls.

Yes! Yes! Yes!

This really has just exposed legacy for having really poor data, and if anything is going to come out of this, I think we get a data collection mandate that will take legacy a long time to implement.

 

[Knightshade]

NHTSA thinks collecting adas data will prove something -->Tesla trap card because they are wasting their time

NHTSA possible wants to collect new data to prove something -->>another trap card, those legacy companies are not capable so let's eat popcorn and watch how they navigate through this

Essentially you drop this or you open a pandoras box as Tesla watch the drama unfold. A lot of people thought nhtsa got Tesla now with this investigation! In reality all they got is a big fat nothing as predicted while possibility mandating proper data collection from legacy auto and then issuing real recalls.

Still not seeing this 4d chess trap you're describing.

Starting a process that will take ~15 years before car companies need to actually change anything benefits Tesla how? 15 years from now many of these companies might be out of business. The ones left will exist in an environment where FSD is already solved and everyone left has been doing OTA for years- so "how well does your 2022 L2 system work in 2035" will be a moot question.

And there is no basis for recalls here, nor can there be - you need evidence something is unsafe to force a recall and there's no such evidence in what data is available until many many years in the future by which time nobody'll be on these systems anyway... so unsure why that keeps being brought up.

This really has just exposed legacy for having really poor data, and if anything is going to come out of this, I think we get a data collection mandate that will take legacy a long time to implement.

As above- this might well be the start of NHTSA wanting such a mandate. Likely even.

But such mandates happen on decade-plus long timeframes-- so nothing that'll have any real impact to... anything... not for many years, and likely irrelevant to everyone by the time it happens.

As I mentioned- 14 years from start to effective mandate for EDRs in new cars.

ABS they began the effort in 1995 and the mandate didn't kick in until 2012... 17 years to mandate ABS


You think anybody in 2035+ was otherwise selling a car that can't report data back to the car maker? How did they stay in business long enough to do that?

 

[M|S|M MYP]

Diess dreaming

https://twitter.com/x/status/1537102807400165385

TL: DR ... this is all you need to know that this is not going to happen, when you see these 2 words together "Bloomberg + Intelligence"

 

[Singuy]

Still not seeing this 4d chess trap you're describing.

Starting a process that will take ~15 years before car companies need to actually change anything benefits Tesla how? 15 years from now many of these companies might be out of business. The ones left will exist in an environment where FSD is already solved and everyone left has been doing OTA for years- so "how well does your 2022 L2 system work in 2035" will be a moot question.

And there is no basis for recalls here, nor can there be - you need evidence something is unsafe to force a recall and there's no such evidence in what data is available until many many years in the future by which time nobody'll be on these systems anyway... so unsure why that keeps being brought up.






As above- this might well be the start of NHTSA wanting such a mandate. Likely even.

But such mandates happen on decade-plus long timeframes-- so nothing that'll have any real impact to... anything... not for many years, and likely irrelevant to everyone by the time it happens.

As I mentioned- 14 years from start to effective mandate for EDRs in new cars.

ABS they began the effort in 1995 and the mandate didn't kick in until 2012... 17 years to mandate ABS


You think anybody in 2035+ was otherwise selling a car that can't report data back to the car maker? How did they stay in business long enough to do that?

Keeps fsd program alive as lots of people see regulatory over reach being the biggest risk to this program. I am pretty you agree that getting the government involved has been the best vector of attack to Teslas autonomous program.

 

[wtlloyd]

AP coverage - final sentence of article

"In 108 of the crashes involving fully autonomous vehicles, no injuries were reported, and there was only one serious injury. In most of the crashes, vehicles were struck from the rear."

Now why don't we discuss how many Angels can dance on the head of a pin?

 

[Opus BC fan]

I can't help but think the positive trends this morning are a head fake for this afternoon's scheduled Kabuki theatre...

 

[Knightshade]

Keeps fsd program alive as lots of people see regulatory over reach being the biggest risk to this program.

Seems a false boogeyman to me at least in the US.... NHTSA has been exceedingly hands off on even ADAS systems, let alone ADS ones which FSD aspires to be.

All regulation- 100% of it so far- has been at the state level not federal. And as I note if this ask for data is the start of NHTSA wanting to do some rule-making, you're looking at a roughly 15 year process if history is any guide, and can you image the landscape in 15 years looking anything like it does today?


Today though- If Tesla had an L5 system working they could release it legally to the public in half a dozen US states today with no "regulator" approval needed whatsoever....and assuming they did and it worked well other states would be tripping over each other to pass similar laws.



Contrast this to the EU where even some basic AP features are crippled by overbearing regulations and FSD L3 or above has a very heavy lift to make it into customer cars anytime soon.

 

[thesmokingman]

Diess dreaming

https://twitter.com/x/status/1537102807400165385

Context to that pic, those two are bromance.

 

[Singuy]

Seems a false boogeyman to me at least in the US.... NHTSA has been exceedingly hands off on even ADAS systems, let alone ADS ones which FSD aspires to be.

All regulation- 100% of it so far- has been at the state level not federal. And as I note if this ask for data is the start of NHTSA wanting to do some rule-making, you're looking at a roughly 15 year process if history is any guide, and can you image the landscape in 15 years looking anything like it does today?


Today though- If Tesla had an L5 system working they could release it legally to the public in half a dozen US states today with no "regulator" approval needed whatsoever....and assuming they did and it worked well other states would be tripping over each other to pass similar laws.



Contrast this to the EU where even some basic AP features are crippled by overbearing regulations and FSD L3 or above has a very heavy lift to make it into customer cars anytime soon.

Has been exceedingly hands off until now. They now realized Tesla has iron clad armor through data while the rest of the auto industry doesn't even know how to put on their undergarments.

The pandoras box that opened is this

"Do you know if this driver assist system that claims to lane keep and hands off driving works and is safe?".

Everyone except Tesla "we have no idea".

 

[The Accountant]

Diess dreaming

https://twitter.com/x/status/1537102807400165385

Poorly written article as it provides no actual production numbers in the written piece; you have to gauge what the numbers are from a vague graph.

Anyhow, the Tesla production number of about 2.2m cars in 2024 is a joke. . . right? I expect that number in 2023.

 

[damonbrodie]

TL: DR ... this is all you need to know that this is not going to happen, when you see these 2 words together "Bloomberg + Intelligence"

View attachment 816921

Un-popular opinion:

If anybody is going to build more BEVs than Tesla it is going to be the VW Group. They are ramping very very quickly with close to half million BEVs last year - about half of Tesla's output. I think its entirely possible they grow faster and pass Tesla in 2024 or 2025.

But I don't care if they do - I don't think that will be a negative for the TSLA stock I own. TSLA has great vertical integration, massive investment in AI, potentially a big advantage in the batteries with the 4680, the Energy business just starting to grow, and significantly better margins per vehicle.

If VW (or anybody else) starts innovate on any of those, or in other significant areas that will increase the amount of money they earn for their shareholders then I might start to take notice.

 

[willow_hiller]

Found the NHSTA's dedicated web page for the reporting, if anyone is interested in downloading the data themselves: Standing General Order on Crash Reporting | NHTSA

If I had more time, I would be interested in de-duplicating the data, disaggregating it by state, and then comparing to vehicle registrations for vehicles equipped with the ADAS systems for states where we have that information...

But honestly, any media outlet reporting any conclusions on this data should be ashamed. There are so many caveats as to render it unusable in its raw form.

Like incomplete reports for manufacturers with limited telemetry:

Many Level 2 ADAS-equipped vehicles may be limited in their capabilities to record data related to driving automation system engagement and crash circumstances. The vehicle’s ability to remotely transmit this data to the manufacturer for notification purposes can also widely vary. Furthermore, Level 2 ADAS-equipped vehicles are generally privately owned; as a result, when a reportable crash does occur, manufacturers may not know of it unless contacted by the vehicle owner. These limitations are important to keep in mind when reviewing the summary incident report data.

Manufacturers of Level 2 ADAS-equipped vehicles with limited data recording and telemetry capabilities may only receive consumer reports of driving automation system involvement in a crash outcome, and there may be a time delay before the manufacturer is notified, if the manufacturer is notified at all.

Duplicate reports:

The Same Crash May Have Multiple Reports

For crashes that meet the reporting requirements of the General Order, the reporting entity may be required to submit multiple reports for a single crash (an initial report, a 10-day followup and any subsequent updates). In addition, more than one entity may be responsible for reporting the same crash. For example, the vehicle manufacturer, system developer/supplier and operator of the vehicle may all be named in the General Order. This means that a single crash may have multiple reports from multiple entities. Consequently, the overall number of reports submitted does not equate to the total number of incidents and is not a meaningful safety metric.

And lack of normalization (as we've already pointed out):

Summary Incident Report Data Are Not Normalized

Reporting entities are not required to submit information regarding the number of vehicles they have manufactured, the number of vehicles they are operating, or the distances traveled by those vehicles. Data required to contextualize the incident rates are limited. Data regarding the number of crashes reported for any given manufacturer or operator have not, therefore, been normalized or adjusted by any measure of exposure, including operational design domains or vehicle miles traveled. For example, a reporting entity could report an absolute number of crashes that is higher than another reporting entity but operate a higher number of vehicles for many more miles.

 

[Knightshade]

Has been exceedingly hands off until now. They now realized Tesla has iron clad armor through data while the rest of the auto industry doesn't even know how to put on their undergarments.

The pandoras box that opened is this

"Do you know if this driver assist system that claims to lane keep and hands off driving works and is safe?".

Everyone except Tesla "we have no idea".

But again you misunderstand how US regulation works.

They aren't required to "prove it's safe" to "allow" it- since by default it's already allowed under existing rules and law.


Instead- they are required to prove "it is NOT safe" before they can issue a recall.



if there's almost no data, and what little there is shows no problem, regulators will not touch it


This might start a 15 year process to eventually, some day, GET more data-- but that would come many years after those systems aren't even being installed on cars anymore.

But that's unlikely to have any significant benefit to Tesla here. This fight will be long over by then.

Heck NHTSA isn't even at the point of asking for additional data that does exist-- Like requiring each company to report total # of ADAS equipped vehicles they've sold.



At this point the only thing the data does is provide fodder for FUD stories that misrepresent or overplay how useful or relevant this data is in light of its vast limitations.

 

[BrownOuttaSpec]

A report from the real world: I went on a road trip to Charlotte NC this past weekend and 2 interesting tidbits about demand/perception.

1. Stopped at the South Charlotte Supercharger, 2 cars had paper tags and 1 with a metal temp tag: New deliveries keep coming!
2. I was in the Charlotte Coliseum/Area for an event and there was a Kia Ev6 GT on display. No one was looking at it so I walked over just to look at the interior and see what the competition had to offer. Someone comes up behind me and starts looking at it too and his friend keeps walking and heckles him and says "C'mon man, that aint no Tesla!"