-
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
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
I, for one, do not agree. You can't put words into my mouth that easily.
Long-term, TSLA is the lowest risk investment I can think of in the stock market right now. It's the only investment I have that I'm confident will perform well through all the disruption caused as the economy transitions from the industrial age to the age of technology and has the growth rate to outperform potential black swan economic events that might bring economies of the world to their knees. Because economically, the way Tesla is doing electric cars and renewable energy makes too much sense to not be of great utility in a future world, almost no matter which way the future unfolds.
I cannot think of a single stock out there I can say the same thing about. And that is why TSLA is a screaming buy. It all comes down to risk/reward and TSLA has relatively little of the former and copious amounts of the latter from a long-term perspective.
Last edited:
damonbrodie
Member
Tesla currently recycles the material out of their cells that don't pass initial inspection, but I think it is several years away before any significant number of packs come back to them from retired vehicles. I don't see it affecting the markets much at this point.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Ford copying Tesla again 
www.autoblog.com
Ford eliminates end-of-lease purchase option for EVs - Autoblog
Ford appears to have designated June as the month for realigning customer rights. A few days ago came word that dealers would be able to insert language int
www.autoblog.com
jkirkwood001
Active Member
Small addition: I have EAP running on 2.5 hardware, so not Tesla Vision. My EAP uses vision + radar. New cars do not have radar, only Tesla Vision, so EAP circa 2022 has to support dual input and vector processing, no? An extra code base permutation is necessary.FWIW back in 2016 when EAP first went on sale it was 5k, and lots of folks bought it.
6k is cheap with inflation
(in fairness, new EAP also has less features, as 2 of the major ones are now standard on all models)
The one bit of weirdness here is where this leaves EAP owners regarding the eventual single-stack code.
There's some # of owners who are still on HW2.x, with "just" EAP.
And still running the old 2.x code.
Most folks expected the EAP code base would just be frozen in time once single stack replaces it for HW3 owners on the highway-- much like the AP1 code was basically frozen in time when it no longer made sense to do any work on it with AP2 out there and working.
But if they're now about to add a ton more new EAP cars... some of which will have HW2.x and some HW3...that gets much weirder.
Do they still do as above for the HW2.x cars, but the HW3 folks just get a reduced-feature version of the single-stack highway code when it's ready?
That'd mean there's really two different versions out there...one that would perform better than the other...being sold as the same thing.
The other alternative would be they go back and re-write all the HW2.x code to work like single stack code... which has a lot of issues, including it's unclear if the HW is even capable of that (very likely not)-- and even if it were it means ongoing dual-code development for years which is pretty awful from a resource perspective.
The "easiest" and cleanest solution is you just go ahead and give free HW3 upgrades to all the remaining folks who both are on HW2.x and on EAP, so they can all run the "new" code. There's costs there of course- but they'd be far more than outweighed by the income on the EAP sale.
I suggest this is a tactical offering purely for reasons of profit. I don't see this as a hedge on FSD being the target for the majority of new Tesla's by 202x(5?).
By the way, I am very glad I bought EAP in 2018. I've used 100% of its promised features for 4 years now. And, besides, I prefer driving myself quickly in the city! So it's a perfect fit for me.
Did Tesla sending out the notification for the new EAP upgrade to the owners? Most of people won’t follow Tesla news everyday.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Basic AP comes on all new cars, including the vast majority of em without radar- so they already have the code for distance ahead without radar that's running on HW3-- adding EAP doesn't change that it just unlocks some features (that no radar FSD cars already had anyway)-- that's still almost entirely "old" stack stuff though.
The question is, once non-city driving code goes to the single stack stuff FSDBeta is using- do they continue any future development on the "old" stack?
They didn't with AP1. (though some of that was lack of cooperation from Mobileye of course)
I've seen two entirely different schools of thought on this so far in comments on the news stories about it:
Theory 1: This is an admission by Tesla that FSD isn't going to be a worthwhile thing anytime soon-- and they cite the super low take rate on it anymore as evidence- and thus Tesla wants to get back to significantly higher take rates for half the $ but most of the functionality.
Theory 2: This is proof that FSD IS going to be a worthwhile thing REAL SOON NOW-- because how else could they justify charging an extra 6k "just" for FSD on top of EAP?
I've been thinking about this.
With the fast-charging capability, all Teslas have the contactors and control/logic circuitry necessary to connect the DC pack voltage directly to the chargeport.
Rather than needing to incur the cost/space/weight of upgraded inverters in each car, Tesla could market a hybrid Wall-connector/V2G unit with the required inverters housed there instead. They might even include the transfer switch, etc... in a package.
Of course that doesn't address the additional cycling of the battery, but a moderate discharge of even 50% of a pack would provide 2-3 PowerWalls worth of capacity... and if for occasional/emergency use might not be that big of a deal.
Krugerrand
Meow
Yes, okay. But how exactly does that matter to your investment in Tesla? Or for most *here* (in this thread)?
I contend, it doesn’t. It might matter over in the wheel thread, if WallStreet is over estimating or under estimating Tesla’s bottom line and IF, IF, IF, any of that even matters to WallStreet and their fancy schmancy options market.
Point being, if it’s not a business crushing issue, then it’s not an issue for investors, if and until Tesla proves they’ve stopped trying to innovate and move faster than possible and no longer place any significance on increased efficiencies and Elon stops laying redundant workers off and margins plummet and basically Tesla just becomes a bloated beached whale like Rivian or like Faraday was. Has any of that happened?
Point being, the contrarian, negative or otherwise for the mere sake of ‘got to be balanced information input’ is a crock of pooh. Context matters. And despite what people think, you don’t have to keep looking for the downside or for the other shoe to fall off. Plenty of times it is exactly as good as it appears to be and plenty of times the other shoe stays firmly attached to your other foot. Look for disaster long enough and it’ll find you.
We’re aware the new battery tech and all that entails has been troublesome and behind the impossible schedule Elon laid out. I’d suggest to those people that are concerned, that they adjust Elon’s timeframes more aggressively, like I did. Everything is ahead of the timetable I have in my head.
Last edited:
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
Redwood materials has stated that the gold mine are phone batteries. Apparently there is a LOT more nickel and cobalt in those than in auto batteries, so about 166 iPhone batteries can provide the cobalt for an entire Tesla battery pack:
More On Tesla Co-Founder Straubel's Redwood Battery Supply Chain
Former Tesla CTO JB Straubel has been busy since he left Tesla. His battery recycling venture, Redwood Materials, came out of stealth mode last year.
insideevs.com
By contrast, I would also expect Meta to drop given slippage in the R1000, but not the case.
Then there's GM and F outpacing TSLA today. Illusions abound.
(Edit: Added snapshot just now from the original post and today's prices.)
Last edited:
I have never received a single offer. Does Tesla really think that not communicating these things is good business? Even new items in the store are not pushed to customers. Is there a supply chain issue with software updates?
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I have never received a single offer. Does Tesla really think that not communicating these things is good business? Even new items in the store are not pushed to customers. Is there a supply chain issue with software updates?
I mentioned this just a couple days ago about insurance....
The only emails I ever get from Tesla are about solar, which I can't even get here. In fact I got one yesterday. They know I can't order it becuase they know my address, but I've gotten multiple sales emails from em pushing it.
I even double checked, today, and still get "We don't serve this area currently."
Whatever intern runs Teslas email marketing program should be among the 10% laid off.
In one of his videos, Ingineerix claimed that V2G ain't happening based off deliberate designs of the components. Later, Phil commented that this is on purpose as Tesla wants to sell Power Walls.
I've given this some thought as well.
I'd consider a more likely first step would be for Tesla to incorporate this type of approach into Powerwall V3. The Powerwall already has the inverters so the main thing required is a DC-DC connection from the car to the Powerwall battery (assumed LFP in PWv3). This would effectively see the car providing a massive capacity boost to the Powerwall with the inbuilt electronics controlling the car charge state and power flow to the house or grid.
Other cars that have provided V2G have generally required an expensive wall box (~$10k) to provide the connection. There are also wall chargers on the market that can do V2G for slightly lower cost (eg. Wallbox Quaser). If Tesla were to incorporate this into Powerwall it should be a cheaper option. Plus the battery cycling issue would be less of a concern with the standard range LFP cars that are now being delivered in some markets.
Last edited:
jkirkwood001
Active Member
Sorry, going to have to call you on that, @StealthP3D. Mathematically impossible.
If
= poor, and 
= 
and
= 
= then
≠ which we know is FALSE*
In actuality,
= = , and = therefore
≠ therefore
≠ TRUE
* If grumpy people (Shorts) are poor, and happy TSLA investors are rich
and @Krugerrand has a mountain (is a happy TSLA investor)
then @Krugerrand is not grumpy (FALSE)
/S
Mine still has the radar hardware, but I couldn't imagine them still supporting that input (if that's what you meant). Pretty sure I have the same build as newer ones. My processor was also upgraded after purchase for free, he-he-he! And the cameras are good enough.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
AFAIK radar is still supported on all cars that physically have it, except for cars in the FSDBeta program (and @verygreen has confirmed this pretty recently in the code)
The easy check on this is what is the max speed you can set while on AP on the freeway?
if it's 90, you're still using radar.
if it's 80 or 85 you're not.
Gigapress
Trying to be less wrong
Elon did say in the interview from three weeks ago that Giga Austin had been limited by 4680 ramp and lack of 2170 tooling:
“We should be outputting a lot more cars from this factory versus a very puny amount of cars, but we had challenges with the 4680 ramp and the structural pack ramp and then ironically the tooling—because we’re able to do 2170 cells—but the tooling necessary for making the 2170 variant cars was stuck in China…which then basically caused this factory’s production ramp to be very tiny. But now, this is all gonna get fixed real fast.”
It does therefore sound like 4680 ramp is going worse than hoped and the lack of 2170 tooling has slowed down the production ramp at Giga Austin. However, he described the problems using past tense, said that it won’t take long to fix the situation, and in the broader context the guidance is for supply of chips and other components is the limiting factor until Q1 2023 and for now maximizing 4680 yield and manufacturing optimization is taking priority over maximizing quantity produced. If this is so and they still have a stockpile of 2170 cells ready, then it shouldn’t even make a difference that Giga Austin was delayed by a month or whatever due to these problems, because they can make up for lost time later in the year with the extra chip supply not used in May, or those chips could have fed the other factories in May. Even Fremont and Shanghai haven’t been running at full capacity due to supply constraints and those plants only use 2170 cells.
willow_hiller
Well-Known Member
The components in that video are referring to the AC/DC rectifier built into the car. That's definitely uni-directional. But the DC/DC connection that's used for Supercharging is capable of operating bidirectionally. It just means that you couldn't plug your Tesla straight into an AC socket and get V2G; you would need to install an external inverter capable of turning the battery pack's DC into AC for the grid.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
