Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

Ogre

On The Clown Car
Sep 6, 2021
3,917
28,768
Oregon
Now that's an interesting idea I don't remember hearing from anyone else. Why do you predict this? Also, do you think Europe or other East Asian nations will have a similar surprising demand for CTs?
I think the other big market for Cybertruck will be Australia. They love their trucks. It could be the first product Giga Australia produces. They can export them to China if China wants some. Then Tesla gets rid of the deadhead from Shanghai to Australia.
 


But again, one of the main reasons Q4 will be pivotal is that it's on track to be first quarter of smooth production/deliveries since Q1 + Berlin/Austin will be at volume levels where they aren't dragging on gross margin/operation margins
Isn’t q4 also where Tesla will show itself as most profitable automaker for 2022 (& beyond)?
May be confused though..seems Toyota profits are in trillions based on yahoo garbage
1669162062305.png

84C62B9A-3785-49FB-A06B-70DAD47DDE51.png

1669162546886.png

Seems suspect to me. TM shows 2022, TSLA does not?
& they already are on top of TM I think,oops…
GM is this years potential beat. Definitely going forward after this year it’s almost a given
1669163013802.png
 

Attachments

  • 1669162413127.png
    1669162413127.png
    105.5 KB · Views: 22
Last edited:

Sancho

Member
Supporting Member
Feb 18, 2016
787
11,476
Illinois
Not sure how hard you looked, but you really dont have to go far to find an example, just look at the largest company on the planet:

Apple Annual Net income 2009-2012:

2009: $8.24 Billion
2010: $14.01 Billion (70% growth)
2011: $25.92 Billion (85% growth)
2012: $41.73 Billion (59% growth)

Apple PE Ratio 2009-2012: average below 20x on a trailing basis, and much lower on a forward basis.

Trailing PE ratio chart:
View attachment 877314
I made my first nest egg during that Apple run, and it was just as lucrative and just as frustrating as making my second nest egg with TSLA.

Back in 2009 I was so surprised that Apple’s PE was around 15 after launching the greatest consumer product of all time, but back then a lot of analysts thought RIM and the other phone manufacturers would quickly catch up and overtake Apple.

Sound familiar?

Today Apple is a mature business with modest profit growth, and the PE is around 25! I would have made a killing back then with a 25 PE.

The lesson learned is that the market discounts disruption and rewards stability.

But the big money is made on the disruption, as long as you can ignore the FUD and be very patient.
 
I would have been margin called if I didn’t inject an insane amount of money lately into my account. Every week that goes buy I am selling more and more covered calls and working more and more to pay my margin. It is not a great feeling.

You have to manage margin instead of buying super happy to buy more and more shares at a super discount.

Yesterday was probably the best day in history to buy TSLA shares. The chance of the decade. Black Friday TSLA deal. However I deployed the last amount of dry powder I had at $185 and have nothing left but energy funds to cover margin if we drop to $150.

My deep respect to all the investors here who have been able to buy with no stress at the les crazy low prices.

Perhaps a margin tips and tricks thread would be helpful. Have you considered buying OTM Puts, eg weekly 150 or 140 Puts? This has a dramatic impact in terms of freeing up margin. Also allows you to preserve $TSLA shares rather than sell them to meet margin calls. At the cost of the Put premium.
 
I think the other big market for Cybertruck will be Australia. They love their trucks. It could be the first product Giga Australia produces. They can export them to China if China wants some. Then Tesla gets rid of the deadhead from Shanghai to Australia.
Australia traditionally had smaller trucks, but there is a recent trend towards larger trucks here.
A smaller version of the Cybertruck would also do well here.

The standout product for Giga Australia would be energy storage batteries, we would have all of the raw materials here, cheap green energy for manufacturing, and a large domestic market.

Vehicle wise, I find it hard to see car making happen here here, but a "Cyber-Beach-Buggy" would be interesting.

There are plenty of empty/nearly empty RORO ships returning from here. A compact Beach Buggy may sell well in Asia.

Australian science and engineering could also contribute to battery and vehicle R&D.

The compact "Robotaxi and others" platform may have lower capex and easier to spin up production lines, but manufacture in Indonesia is more likely than Australia.

If Tesla can develop a "fast build/low capex/compact/fast ramp" factory then putting those factories close to the vehicle markets makes sense.
"Robotaxi and others" is the perfect platform for that kind of factory, and the vehicle program that would derive the most benefit.

The paintshop is probably the biggest challenge in terms of achieving a compact low capex factory, hence some factories may not paint cars.

Hypothetically, it is possible that "Cyber-Beach-Buggy" is an evolution of "Robotaxi and others" rather than Cybertruck.
 
Last edited:

SmokyPeat

Active Member
Oct 27, 2021
1,076
6,855
Maine
Australia traditionally had smaller trucks, but there is a recent trend towards larger trucks here.
A smaller version of the Cybertruck would also do well here.

The standout product for Giga Australia would be energy storage batteries, we would have all of the raw materials here, cheap green energy for manufacturing, and a large domestic market.

Vehicle wise, I find it hard to see car making happen here here, but a "Cyber-Beach-Buggy" would be interesting.

There are plenty of empty/nearly empty RORO ships returning from here. A compact Beach Buggy may sell well in Asia.

Australian science and engineering could also contribute to battery and vehicle R&D.

The compact "Robotaxi and others" platform may have lower capex and easier to spin up production lines, but manufacture in Indonesia is more likely than Australia.

If Tesla can develop a "fast build/low capex/compact/fast ramp" factory then putting those factories close to the vehicle markets makes sense.
"Robotaxi and others" is the perfect platform for that kind of factory, and the vehicle program that would derive the most benefit.

The paintshop is probably the biggest challenge in terms of achieving a compact low capex factory, hence some factories may not paint cars.

It is possible that "Cyber-Beach-Buggy" is an evolution of "Robotaxi and others" rather than Cybertruck.
Cyber Beach buggy is a mouthful. I'd prefer an E Ute, or UteE.
 

Singuy

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
7,642
73,830
US
I made my first nest egg during that Apple run, and it was just as lucrative and just as frustrating as making my second nest egg with TSLA.

Back in 2009 I was so surprised that Apple’s PE was around 15 after launching the greatest consumer product of all time, but back then a lot of analysts thought RIM and the other phone manufacturers would quickly catch up and overtake Apple.

Sound familiar?

Today Apple is a mature business with modest profit growth, and the PE is around 25! I would have made a killing back then with a 25 PE.

The lesson learned is that the market discounts disruption and rewards stability.

But the big money is made on the disruption, as long as you can ignore the FUD and be very patient.
Apple's smart phone and the rim seems kind of similar. They don't see Apple as the leader so they didn't assign any kind of premium to Apple. Tesla however is seen as the leader of EVs hence the premium it gets.

Same story goes with Nvidia which gets a much higher PE due to their leadership in AI compared to their peers, even though their revenue and net income currently is not something to write home about.

Amazon and Netflix are also leaders of their sector, hence the high PE they always got.
 

Ogre

On The Clown Car
Sep 6, 2021
3,917
28,768
Oregon
Australia traditionally had smaller trucks, but there is a recent trend towards larger trucks here.
A smaller version of the Cybertruck would also do well here.

The standout product for Giga Australia would be energy storage batteries, we would have all of the raw materials here, cheap green energy for manufacturing, and a large domestic market.
This is the big thing I was thinking of. Australia has all of the resources to make Teslas. They (you) have decent demand for trucks...

Just spitballing here. Seems like a better place to start the second factory making Cybertrucks than China based on Musk's comment about it making sense to manufacture vehicles on the continent they are manufactured on.
There are plenty of empty/nearly empty RORO ships returning from here. A compact Beach Buggy may sell well in Asia.
Another reason why a Cybertruck production makes sense there.

Australian science and engineering could also contribute to battery and vehicle R&D.

The compact "Robotaxi and others" platform may have lower capex and easier to spin up production lines, but manufacture in Indonesia is more likely than Australia.

If Tesla can develop a "fast build/low capex/compact/fast ramp" factory then putting those factories close to the vehicle markets makes sense.
"Robotaxi and others" is the perfect platform for that kind of factory, and the vehicle program that would derive the most benefit.

The paintshop is probably the biggest challenge in terms of achieving a compact low capex factory, hence some factories may not paint cars.

Hypothetically, it is possible that "Cyber-Beach-Buggy" is an evolution of "Robotaxi and others" rather than Cybertruck.
One of the great things about the Cybertruck is no paint. I do think a littler cousin of some sort to the Cybertruck would be popular.

Anyhow... I was just spitballing. You certainly know more than I about Australia Cybertruck demand!
 

jw934

Member
Supporting Member
Jul 23, 2018
595
12,889
Toronto
An analysis of Tesla by @SteadyCompound on Twitter

Snippet:


For our projection, I’m going to assume Tesla falls short of Elon’s lofty goal and deliver 15 million vehicles in 2030 (still an audacious number). With an average price per vehicle of $50,000, revenue will come up to be a whopping $750 billion.

Assuming its operating margins hold at 17%, EBIT will come up to $127.5 billion ($750b x 0.17). If the company trades at a 15x EBIT multiple, its market cap will come up to $1.9 trillion.

Given its current market of $564 billion, a market cap of $1.9 trillion in 2030 represents a CAGR of 16.4%.

This doesn’t accounts for the value that Tesla could bring from:

  • Autonomous driving, which brings an autonomous taxi network
  • Optimus, Tesla’s general purpose robotic humanoid
  • Energy generation and storage business
  • Dojo, Tesla’s custom supercomputer
  • Tesla Semi, its electric truck
  • Insurance


Deep-dive on $TSLA open for all for the next 72 hours. WARNING: Research isn't for people who can't think or reason. I'm neither a Tesla fanboy nor a Tesla hater. I'm simply someone who loves studying business.
 

Gigapress

Everybody gangsta until TSLA goes below $200
Sep 20, 2021
1,466
35,938
Seattle, WA
Not sure how hard you looked, but you really dont have to go far to find an example, just look at the largest company on the planet:

Apple Annual Net income 2009-2012:

2009: $8.24 Billion
2010: $14.01 Billion (70% growth)
2011: $25.92 Billion (85% growth)
2012: $41.73 Billion (59% growth)

Apple PE Ratio 2009-2012: average below 20x on a trailing basis, and much lower on a forward basis.

Trailing PE ratio chart:
View attachment 877314
This is a good example. AAPL was priced extremely irrationally from '09 to '12. Granted, this was during the Great Recession when stocks in general were deep value with low PEs, but even so, a TTM PE around 15 to 22 for a company growing earnings so quickly is nonsense. Well, it could make sense if the company has an unethical business model or if the earnings are not expected to be sustainable, but in Apple's case that expectation was clearly incorrect.

The overall point stands that companies growing revenue and earnings at these levels should--and normally do--have high PEs. Apple in '09-'12 was a very rare exception, making AAPL at the time one of the best investing opportunities of the 21st century.

Far too many investors have lost sight of where PEs come from in the first place. PEs are short, convenient approximations of the output of net present value calculations. For example, if I can buy a stock that will earn me $1/year for 42.0 years, and my cost of capital is 6.9%, then the NPV of that cash flow series is $14. That means I would profit off of arbitrage if the PE ratio is less than $14/$1 = 14.

If the earnings are growing, then the breakeven PE is higher because the NPV is higher. If the prior example is changed to have 50% growth in earnings every year for the first decade followed by 4.20% growth thereafter until the company goes out of business in year 43, then the NPV is $492 and the fair PE at the beginning is therefore 492.

In reality, a PE like 492 is extremely uncommon because:
  • Companies compounding earnings 50% per annum are exceedingly rare
  • That kind of exponential growth doesn't usually last for a decade
  • Sometimes competition actually does come and prevents decades of sustained market dominance by one company
The problem and opportunity in the case of both TSLA and AAPL back in the early iPhone days is that the market sometimes makes egregious errors in estimating future earnings.

How many people selling AAPL at a 15 PE in 2009 anticipated that Apple would 5x net income by 2012? Apple's market cap on 4/20/2009 was $111B. Apple cumulatively piled up more than $111B in profits between then and mid-2013, so it only took a little over 4 years for shareholders to make all of their investment back, and now Apple is earning almost $111B annually. If people had known these facts about future profits with certainty in 2009, there's no chance AAPL would've been trading at a 15 PE. Any fool who has spent at least 15 minutes learning about how investing works could have understood that Apple having a $111B market cap was a massive pricing error.

Likewise with TSLA, it's clear that most market participants do not believe Tesla will be earning $100B+ annually in the near future, because otherwise a $600B market cap would appear to be obviously absurd. I think Tesla will earn $600B cumulatively by 2030 at the latest, so what cause do I have for concern? Everyone else will figure it out eventually. My call options would very much appreciate it if this happens sooner than later, but if it takes longer than anticipated then I can work more and use the income to buy more stock and options and patiently wait until the big payoff. The bigger the base, the bigger and more violent the breakout, right?
 
Last edited:

heltok

Active Member
Aug 12, 2014
1,966
19,934
Sweden
Now that's an interesting idea I don't remember hearing from anyone else. Why do you predict this? Also, do you think Europe or other East Asian nations will have a similar surprising demand for CTs?
Europe would need a slighly smaller Cybertruck to get high demand. Many of the densely populated areas have roads that can be pretty narrow. Still countryside and in some countries with better roads, it would do okay.

Many places in Asia loves big cars, it's a status symbol for the wealthy and the Chinese market is big. Thailand would be great for the Cybertruck. In Indonesia Cybertruck would be decent for Java, but horrible for Bali, don't think the the rest of the country would be a huge market for Tesla. A $25k smaller car would sell like butter in Indonesia.

Australia I think would be a nice market also, but the population is not a lot more than some of the cities in Asia, so the market cannot be that big... Charging infrastructure is far behind US/EU/China, but will hopefully catch up somewhat in the next few years.

Imo once covid overhang in China goes away, it makes sense for Tesla to do a Cybertruck factory in China along with a $25k car factory. Indonesia and Australia are just not that great at manufacturing and Berlin will be busy with a smaller car.
 
Now that's an interesting idea I don't remember hearing from anyone else. Why do you predict this? Also, do you think Europe or other East Asian nations will have a similar surprising demand for CTs?

China has more countryside and wide-open places where the benefits of the Cybertruck don't come with a lot of downside. It will never be a mainstream vehicle in China, but China is such a big place and with low operational costs and high durability Cybertruck could find many economical applications in smaller and more rural commerce (and probably some uptake from affluent families) I don't expect it have the same success in most other Eastern nations.

As @Ogre mentioned, the Aussies love their utes, but I think it has a harder go there, in part due to stereotypes and mainly because it's a much smaller market that will have a hard time covering the rural areas with fast chargers. Compare the current SC maps:

1669165744191.png

1669165698580.png


It's more about the culture and the size of the respective markets, I think, than the Supercharger availability, but I do think these maps provide another hint that Cybertruck might not be received Down Under in a manner commensurate with their love of utes.
 

Gigapress

Everybody gangsta until TSLA goes below $200
Sep 20, 2021
1,466
35,938
Seattle, WA
Charlie Munger gave a couple speeches in the 90s entitled "The Psychology of Human Misjudgment" and "A Lesson on Elemental, Worldly Wisdom" that deeply influenced how I think about value and fundamental investing. I highly recommend reading the transcripts. Here's an excerpt that I think should be mandatory reading before opening a brokerage account:

The model I like—to sort of simplify the notion of what goes on in a market for common stocks—is the pari-mutuel system at the racetrack. If you stop to think about it, a pari-mutuel system is a market. Everybody goes there and bets and the odds change based on what's bet. That's what happens in the stock market.

Any damn fool can see that a horse carrying a light weight with a wonderful win rate and a good post position etc., etc. is way more likely to win than a horse with a terrible record and extra weight and so on and so on. But if you look at the odds, the bad horse pays 100 to 1, whereas the good horse pays 3 to 2. Then it's not clear which is statistically the best bet using the mathematics of Fermat and Pascal. The prices have changed in such a way that it's very hard to beat the system.

And then the track is taking 17% off the top. So not only do you have to outwit all the other betters, but you've got to outwit them by such a big margin that on average, you can afford to take 17% of your gross bets off the top and give it to the house before the rest of your money can be put to work.

Given those mathematics, is it possible to beat the horses only using one's intelligence? Intelligence should give some edge, because lots of people who don't know anything go out and bet lucky numbers and so forth. Therefore, somebody who really thinks about nothing but horse performance and is shrewd and mathematical could have a very considerable edge, in the absence of the frictional cost caused by the house take.

Unfortunately, what a shrewd horseplayer's edge does in most cases is to reduce his average loss over a season of betting from the 17% that he would lose if he got the average result to maybe 10%. However, there are actually a few people who can beat the game after paying the full 17%.

I used to play poker when I was young with a guy who made a substantial living doing nothing but bet harness races…. Now, harness racing is a relatively inefficient market. You don't have the depth of intelligence betting on harness races that you do on regular races. What my poker pal would do was to think about harness races as his main profession. And he would bet only occasionally when he saw some mispriced bet available. And by doing that, after paying the full handle to the house—which I presume was around 17%—he made a substantial living.

You have to say that's rare. However, the market was not perfectly efficient. And if it weren't for that big 17% handle, lots of people would regularly be beating lots of other people at the horse races. It's efficient, yes. But it's not perfectly efficient. And with enough shrewdness and fanaticism, some people will get better results than others.

The stock market is the same way—except that the house handle is so much lower. If you take transaction costs—the spread between the bid and the ask plus the commissions—and if you don't trade too actively, you're talking about fairly low transaction costs. So that with enough fanaticism and enough discipline, some of the shrewd people are going to get way better results than average in the nature of things.

It is not a bit easy. And, of course, 50% will end up in the bottom half and 70% will end up in the bottom 70%. But some people will have an advantage. And in a fairly low transaction cost operation, they will get better than average results in stock picking.

How do you get to be one of those who is a winner—in a relative sense—instead of a loser?

Here again, look at the pari-mutuel system. I had dinner last night by absolute accident with the president of Santa Anita. He says that there are two or three betters who have a credit arrangement with them, now that they have off-track betting, who are actually beating the house. They're sending money out net after the full handle—a lot of it to Las Vegas, by the way—to people who are actually winning slightly, net, after paying the full handle. They're that shrewd about something with as much unpredictability as horse racing.

And the one thing that all those winning betters in the whole history of people who've beaten the pari-mutuel system have is quite simple. They bet very seldom.

It's not given to human beings to have such talent that they can just know everything about everything all the time. But it is given to human beings who work hard at it—who look and sift the world for a mispriced bet—that they can occasionally find one.

And the wise ones bet heavily when the world offers them that opportunity. They bet big when they have the odds. And the rest of the time, they don't. It's just that simple.


That is a very simple concept. And to me it's obviously right—based on experience not only from the pari-mutuel system, but everywhere else.

And yet, in investment management, practically nobody operates that way. We operate that way—I'm talking about Buffett and Munger. And we're not alone in the world. But a huge majority of people have some other crazy construct in their heads. And instead of waiting for a near cinch and loading up, they apparently ascribe to the theory that if they work a little harder or hire more business school students, they'll come to know everything about everything all the time.

To me, that's totally insane. The way to win is to work, work, work, work and hope to have a few insights.

How many insights do you need? Well, I'd argue: that you don't need many in a lifetime. If you look at Berkshire Hathaway and all of its accumulated billions, the top ten insights account for most of it. And that's with a very brilliant man—Warren's a lot more able than I am and very disciplined—devoting his lifetime to it. I don't mean to say that he's only had ten insights. I'm just saying, that most of the money came from ten insights.

So you can get very remarkable investment results if you think more like a winning pari-mutuel player. Just think of it as a heavy odds against game full of craziness with an occasional mispriced something or other. And you're probably not going to be smart enough to find thousands in a lifetime. And when you get a few, you really load up. It's just that simple.

What Charlie is saying here is that to win big in investing, one must have an insight that is deeply contrarian and actually correct. That's the only way to get a bet with extremely favorable odds. By definition, this means you're buying something based on everyone else profoundly misunderstanding something, and there's nothing stopping the crowd from misunderstanding it even more over some short time period.

If you place a bet at a horse track that's stacked in your favor, and then the crowd of other bettors gets more pessimistic about your chosen horse, thus driving up the odds to be even more favorable after you already paid for your bet, then the rational response is to consider betting even more if you have funds available and if not, just wait until the race happens. Predicting the race result is drastically easier than predicting the crowd's behavior.

These days with TSLA we are experiencing what having a deeply contrarian insight actually feels like. The payoff comes when the insight is no longer contrarian as the results become obvious. I still think 2023 will be when that happens, and potentially the market will get it when Q4 results come out. I'm also considering coming out of retirement to get funds for placing more bets on this horse if this low price persists after January. What is the point of stressing about this?
 
As @Ogre mentioned, the Aussies love their utes, but I think it has a harder go there, in part due to stereotypes and mainly because it's a much smaller market that will have a hard time covering the rural areas with fast chargers. Compare the current SC maps:
While this is true, there is scope for many farms to install solar and battery powered charging.

V2G for off-grid farms is a standout, mostly because diesel generators have a habit of dying during the interesting part of the movie.

Small towns could have some sort of fast charging powered partially by solar and batteries.

But the main Australian users (by head of population) of the Cybertruck or smaller Cybertruck would be construction workers and other trades people in larger regional towns and cities which mostly have adequate charging options.

I do think V2G might get Cybertruck over the line in some Australian farm locations, and smaller more remote towns.

Outside of Tesla there are a number of other charging networks in Australia this is best illustrated by this scheme:-

The successful applicants from this round are Ampol, BP, Evie Networks, Tesla, the NRMA and Zeus Renewables.

Outside of Tesla, Evie is a very good fast charging network, we mostly use a mixture of Tesla and Evie.

Gas stations - Ampol, BP are relatively recent additions filling a slightly different niche,, fewer stalls and slower charging, but more locations eventually.

Demand is hard to gauge - the construction industry guys tend to be a bit conservative, and not politically correct. But when I drove my Model 3 to the plumbing supplies warehouse (Reece), the workers there were Tesla fans, we all agreed that the ramp of the Cybertruck was just what they needed for deliveries. Should a place like Reece ever decide to use a Cybertruck, the whole construction industry will know about it in no time.
 
Last edited:

Ogre

On The Clown Car
Sep 6, 2021
3,917
28,768
Oregon
These days with TSLA we are experiencing what having a deeply contrarian insight actually feels like. The payoff comes when the insight is no longer contrarian as the results become obvious. I still think 2023 will be when that happens, and potentially the market will get it when Q4 results come out. I'm also considering coming out of retirement to get funds for placing more bets on this horse if this low price persists after January. What is the point of stressing about this?
This is what I tell myself lately when I curl up into a ball every night and cry myself to sleep.

I kid of course. I made and lost a lot of money investing and speculating in Apple during some of the more animated periods. You learn over the years that often the best way to manage your portfolio is to not look at it for long periods of time. If you fall in love with a giant balance during market peak, it only bothers you more when the market it's a trough. Likewise, you really don't need to know how many 0s are behind your current losses.

I'm very frustrated with my timing switching from Apple being my biggest holding to Tesla being my biggest holding... it wasn't pretty. But I am comfortable with the choice long term. And few of my investments are short term.

I tend to look at the TSLA recovery the same way I look at the eventual Cybertruck reveal. Both will come eventually and will be awesome. Just don't hold your breath waiting for them in the mean time.
 

Mengy

Active Member
Feb 18, 2020
2,047
18,232
PA
Back in 2009 I was so surprised that Apple’s PE was around 15 after launching the greatest consumer product of all time, but back then a lot of analysts thought RIM and the other phone manufacturers would quickly catch up and overtake Apple.

Sound familiar?

Yep, I remember the early Apple iPhone years, they were strange. It's why I keep saying our PE on TSLA can compress even further, maybe even for a year or two yet. Even if we keep getting record quarter after record quarter. Even if Tesla continues to execute flawless. Even if we keep growing 50%+ YoY.

There are no hard and set rules for PE's, not even for exponential growth companies. Wall Street can set the PE to whatever they want if the trading volume allows them to, and the value can seem very mismatched from what it FEELS like it should be.

We shouldn't assume our PE absolutely must go up again. It's entirely possible we never see a higher PE than we have today at 54. It might sound ludicrous, but it IS a possibility.


After all, this is our PE progression over the last 24 months. Notice the trend, its not going up but continuing down over time:

3SAVvGW.jpg


Might it go up again? Sure, it could. But the trend does not support that assumption.
 
Last edited:

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top