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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
So Tesla is trying to get to 20m annual volume and you think the sound business decision is to close a profitable, high volume factory.

Brilliant. Maybe you should be the bird CEO.

Agree with you, but it's a bit more nuanced than that and his point has a degree of merit.

If you compare the layout (work flow) of Fremont to Giga Shanghai/Texas/Berlin, then it is horribly inefficient. Elon has directly said as much.

Unfortunately, in the near future, it's impossible to shut down even a single line for an extended period of time to improve efficiency. Basically you would need to raze half the factory to bring things up to the efficiency levels of the new sites.
 
You sir, I believe, are spot on. Conspiracy theories aside, the WEF wants things to transition on THEIR terms, and those terms are designed to benefit the existing powerful group. A new group, headed by someone like Elon, arising to challenge them is an existential threat. Their goals generally align with Climate Change goals, but they want to do it in a way to continues to benefit the "old guard", not in a way that generates an entirely new group of powerful individuals which they have difficult controlling. And Elon . . . yeah, he's not going to be controlled.


I have had a VERY limited interaction with the WEF in the past, directly as a business relationship. That was severed and I don't care to re-engage with them in the future. Anything not on their terms was not acceptable to them.
WEF belongs in ADX. Just my opinion..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul_SF
I'm putting forth an alternate theory about why China has to slow down the last week of Dec:

There is no where to store all the cars because there are no RoRos to pick them up.

Mostly this is in jest, but the port looks PACKED to me and waiting for ships to pick up the cars:
Hope the ro-ros are close and those cars get picked up quick. And I really hope those batteries are reasonably full of charge - charging all of those cars to get them onto, or off of, a ship would be a serious pain in the derriere.
 
Hope the ro-ros are close and those cars get picked up quick. And I really hope those batteries are reasonably full of charge - charging all of those cars to get them onto, or off of, a ship would be a serious pain in the derriere.

Shouldn't be a problem. They cars are generally in a deep sleep state and even after being on a RoRo for >4 weeks going to Europe they arrive with > 50% SoC.
 
Rain won't slow down deliveries for Californians, we'll go get em anyway.

Snow and ice . . . that's another story entirely.

As someone who has lived in CA my whole life, I think you underestimate how soft CA people are. People avoid rain like a cat avoids a bathtub. You've probably seen that in SD.
 
I saw that too, and I think that’s going to be less of a problem than we think.


“Road Trains” have been a common sight on Dutch highways for a couple of years as part of an experiment to allow longer and thus more economical combinations on the road.
These road trains are more than 25 meters long.


The exact dimensions of the Semi are still unknown but my guess is that it’s about 1 metre longer than standard European. There is a new rule that allows for longer cabs because of aerodynamic measures:


I’m trying to make some sense of all the rules and regulations but again, I’m hopeful the Tesla Semi can qualify under these new regulations.
Cab-over increases drag and may limit the cab space. I think Tesla could make a shorter range cab-over truck just for routes around a city.

The issue is getting in and out of tight spaces in cities, not tight spaces on European highways and motorways, as far as I can tell.

The US version would be more of a high speed depot-to-depot motorway cruiser in the EU. I don't know where European depots are located, but I would not put them in city centres with narrow cobbled streets.

Perhaps the transport industry will lobby for rule changes if they are needed.
 
I’m super impressed with how easy it was to set up Apple Music with the new update. Car displays QR code, scan with camera, enter apple password and car is signed in. This is super bullish for me, especially after reading a lot of FUD about Tesla not having a software advantage, etc. I think Tesla’s software lead is actually increasing. A nice surprise after last week.

View attachment 888640

This is too easy that I actually signed up Apple Music by mistake.
 
Even for $7500?

I'm not sure if all deliveries qualify for that or just someone buying an inventory car. If someone ordered a car a month ago and delivery scheduled for this month, would they still get the $7500? If so, then I think they might tough it out. If not, they'd wait so their car isn't dirty the next day from the rain and mud splashing all over it
 
Hi everybody. Here is the latest news:

Saz4yKj.jpg



This was as expected based on my inventory calculations. This actually happened a day before earlier reports by Reuters and Bloomberg that said the shutdown was expected between Dec 25 and Jan 1, However, I was expecting it to happen earlier because otherwise, they would have too much inventory. Here is what I wrote on Patreon on Dec 20. I thought the shutdown would start on Dec 23. It started on Dec 24. Not bad as far as estimates go because you have to spitball how much inventory is too much.


4Qm4929.png



Some people likened my estimates to art to make fun of it.



Some people kept saying things people wanted to hear:



Some people were too sure because Tesla refused something twice:



Some people decided to attack.



Yet, here we are. The production slowdown started on Dec 12. It happened based on reports that I quoted in my post on Dec 20. The production shutdown was denied by Tesla but it happened today on Dec 24.

I think 2023 will be a better year for Tesla. My delivery growth estimate is 45-50%.
The dock at Shanghai was empty some days ago, it now appears to be full. These are export cars.

In the videos I have seen the factory looks relatively busy, the factory lot that was also empty a few days ago is now full. Even if only running at 3/4 pace Shanghai can make a lot of cars fast.

Covid is a major issue in China at present, a lot of factory workers, and I presume truck drivers are off sick.

By the new year covid should be less of an issue they can make cars for export if they can sort out the logistics.

We will see what Chinese deliveries are for this quarter, I am still expecting a good number.

I hope a drone flys over the factory between Chistmas and New Year so we can see if it is actually shut. As far as I know Tesla China haven't officially confirmed a shutdown.

The latest Jason Yang video is the one to watch, he doesn't mention a shutdown and the factory appears fairly normal, before December 25th.
 
What would you beleive .. a Reuters report weeks ago saying there is a planned shutdown or a "rumor" that 50% of workers have Covid ?

Problem is the Roto-Reuters "report" was a moving target. Wasn't it first 2 weeks, or 3 weeks? Then 30% of Model Y?

Roto-Reuters has no credibility. It's always a moving target with their FUD. Literally the Twitter account posting the info has higher credibility.


Meanwhile, we literally are seeing millions of new COVID cases per week in China. It's not nearly as deadly as 2 years ago, but it's certainly "bad flu" level.
 
Roto-Reuters has no credibility. It's always a moving target with their FUD. Literally the Twitter account posting the info has higher credibility.
I think basically all these people (including Reuters) - reply on some insiders / informers. Their reports are only as good/bad as the informers (who themselves may not have 1st hand info).

I'm less interested in name calling than figuring out what the truth is. Probably equally important is understanding the news being reported by the media and what impact that might have on SP. I think we should be more cognizant of this fact ... in this forum (esp. this thread), we are too prone to calling everything we don't like FUD and misread how the market will react, resulting in major losses.
 
I think basically all these people (including Reuters) - reply on some insiders / informers. Their reports are only as good/bad as the informers (who themselves may not have 1st hand info).

I'm less interested in name calling than figuring out what the truth is. Probably equally important is understanding the news being reported by the media and what impact that might have on SP. I think we should be more cognizant of this fact ... in this forum (esp. this thread), we are too prone to calling everything we don't like FUD and misread how the market will react, resulting in major losses.
And therein lies the problem. Traditional, honest journalists in the past would work hard to confirm data before publishing.

But in the era of clicks=$$$ they don't do that anymore.
 
Cab-over increases drag and may limit the cab space. I think Tesla could make a shorter range cab-over truck just for routes around a city.

The issue is getting in and out of tight spaces in cities, not tight spaces on European highways and motorways, as far as I can tell.

The US version would be more of a high speed depot-to-depot motorway cruiser in the EU. I don't know where European depots are located, but I would not put them in city centres with narrow cobbled streets.

Perhaps the transport industry will lobby for rule changes if they are needed.
European road infrastructure since WW2 has been built to either common or aligned standards. Increasingly just one standard. That is what determines the truck (HGV) length and weight and axle weight and turning radius, and heights, etc.

Actual logistics networks are not so dissimilar in EU vs USA. For example veg/fruit from Florida to New York is 1150-miles. The roughly equivalent Seville to Amsterdam run for veg/fruit is 1390-miles. Yes, the European run is longer. On both sets of roads you will see endless streams of trucks carrying veg & fruit, all year round, and tough luck if you want to get into the slow lane(s). Ditto for industrial products. So the functional purpose of the truck is basically the same, and so too are the route layouts and operating patterns and vehicle mixes. However the European roads and vehicles standards were formulated in such a way as to make them more compact than the corresponding US interstate standards, for more than one reason (it is/was not just a matter of space). But the underlying need - to get products to market in a cost-effective manner - was the same.

(One can argue the toss as to what that reveals regarding inner societal norms.)

The Swedish/Finnish trials that were linked earlier, regarding extended length vehicles, were for a subset of the general European road network. I think that a Euro-standard long distance 500-km Tesla Semi will become widely available in Europe before those extended length vehicles are allowed for within the general European road legislation. The cab might not look exactly the same as the North American version, but it will be competitive in the European market. I'm sure that Tesla have already got outline plans for a whole family of designs off the one basic product architecture, and that this was an essential part of the original design problem statement.
 
And therein lies the problem. Traditional, honest journalists in the past would work hard to confirm data before publishing.

But in the era of clicks=$$$ they don't do that anymore.
Clicks on fake gnus count just as much as clicks on real news?

Retractions get buried. No ones clicking on that.
 
As the Tesla & Elon FUD escalated throughout 2022 to Biblical levels we have not seen before, I have entertained the idea of a post with the hope of opening up dialog on TMC regarding the concept of ‘Elon vs a very specific Goliath hiding behind a cloak of Good’. But there was never a catalyst to suggest the source wasn’t simply the same-old, same-old – despite the Goliath in this fight appearing to have been growing in both scope and size. And perhaps more troubling has been that Elon’s actions through 2022 seem to convey that he has recognized this as well, and that he was in need of more ammunition if he and Tesla were to come out on top.

Since I began following TMC in 2013 there has always been the very understandable finger-pointing at the Fossil Fuel Industries, Legacy Auto Mfg’s, Grid Operators, and of course Wall Street as the sources of Tesla & Elon FUD. And I have not seen a compelling argument on TMC that it was otherwise. However, during one of the very brief moments in the last couple years where the entire US did not seem to be held captive under a mass campaign of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt through every mainstream media source simultaneously, we were introduced to yet another strange and unexpected nuance. That was the moment when we listened closely to the dialog from Washington DC surrounding the inevitable US and Global transition to EV’s and Renewable Energy, and we learned that this Administration was refusing to acknowledge Tesla’s World-leading contributions in this arena………and that they were literally struggling to not even mention the word ‘Tesla’ publicly in every single speech and interview from every leadership position on their flow chart – even while crowning Mary Barra and GM as the Golden Goose. Thus it could have only been a strategy that had been discussed internally to be so coordinated. But why?

This was perhaps too easy to shake off at first, with the plausible connections of the Administration and the UAW. Maybe they were trying to support a small segment of their voters…? That was a good explanation for a single data point. In hindsight the Administration actually seemed a bit relieved that the ‘news’ sources from the other side of the aisle helped push that UAW connection argument (assuming there really still are two sides of the aisle in the US). But it felt like there was a growing pile of data points suggesting that Elon & Tesla were fighting a battle that had become more and more coordinated against them. And here was the part I am still struggling with: if the Administration had made solving the Climate Crisis their Absolute Highest Priority during their campaign, wouldn’t they be willing to buck the UAW to save the world? Doesn’t make sense, does it? But if the highest power in the land, and arguably the highest power in the World was now ready to throw the most efficient and most effective sustainable energy and transportation company in the World under the bus while claiming their greatest ambition was to make the world’s energy and transportation more sustainable through a transition to renewable energy, then we were either living in an alternate reality to be witnessing any of this, or perhaps there was another influencer on these policies.

I have to wonder if Elon’s post from early this morning was intended to cast a larger net on the discussion of the Force(s) that could be trying to put the brakes on Tesla’s explosive growth and ownership of the overall Sustainability marketplace – a source we haven’t looked at too deeply on TMC before. It seems odd that he chose to respond to that particular tweet. And his response is unusually non-descriptive:

View attachment 888647

I do personally find this interesting, particularly from the longer view. For instance, the NUMMI plant was purchased in 2010 by Tesla with funding support from the Administration elected in 2008. So here we learn that at the time that Elon and Tesla received their loan for the creation of the Tesla factory at NUMMI that Elon had already been courted as a person capable of helping move the World closer to the goals of the World Economic Forum. But it appears Elon had other priorities on his mind, such as SpaceX and Tesla. But why wouldn’t the WEF have been a good association at that time to help advance those interests?

I remember viewing many of the short videos released by the WEF around the 2008-2010 timeframe with interest. At that time, I was very focused on finding ways to reduce energy consumption and transition towards more sustainable energy sources on a large number of State and Federal projects across the Columbia River Basin. And I found those videos interesting and occasionally helpful. In fact, that original WEF media campaign probably helped influence my first purchase of TSLA shares in 2013, whether I knew it or not. Like the WEF and many here on TMC, I too saw the potential for Elon & Tesla to help create a more sustainable future, and I invested accordingly. So if Elon & Tesla were moving in the desired direction of the WEF’s publicly stated goals at a time when the fossil fuel industry and Legacy Auto seemed so deeply entrenched in path towards a much Warmer future, why wouldn’t Elon jump at the chance?

But perhaps here is where I can see a potential for the ‘rub’ between Elon & the WEF that prevented a partnership. Tesla has moved at the rate that only a First Principles approach could have allowed it. And that approach required Tesla to abandon everything from the Old Paradigm that was not supportive of Elon/Tesla’s vision of the MOST rapid transition towards Sustainability possible. And this transition by Tesla happened SO quickly that they may very well have disrupted the WEF’s Strategic Master Plan – a plan which surely would have utilized as much of the existing Paradigm wherever possible to help transition towards the New Paradigm. While that path might take longer, it ‘could’ have been viewed by early planners as using less resources to accomplish stated goals. And it would allow much of the Old Paradigm to be the New Paradigm to minimize Political disruptions along the way. Fair enough. And that is why I mentioned 'putting the brakes on Tesla' instead of perhaps 'destroying Tesla', as the end game is still somewhat aligned - at least from the perspective of Sustainable Energy and Transport anyways.

And if we continue to explore this theory that a divergence of interest could have resulted from Elon and Tesla’s ability to move quicker than everyone else, and move in a more Sustainable direction than everyone else with fewer moves because they were coming from a First Principles approach, wouldn’t we end up in a similar place as we are now, where many of the 2008-2010 timeline tools available to the WEF to help a planned transition are at risk of being little more than stranded assets if the WEF’s strategic master plan allowed for a methodical transition to sustainability. I would expect so, since Tesla and Elon have left a path of disrupted and stranded assets in their wake. Could it be a possibility that the WEF looked to Elon to help them with their Sustainability mission and Elon found that mission was too overly-pragmatic? And that Elon simply saw the path to Sustainability could happen sooner? And that he felt that the Ultimate Priority was ensuring that transition happened as quickly as possible, since he considered the current modes of transportation and of energy creation to be “running the most dangerous experiment in history right now, which is to see how much carbon dioxide the atmosphere... can handle before there is an environmental catastrophe.”

And yet here we are today, with much of the disruption of the Old Paradigm by Tesla already behind us, and with all the Kings horses and all the Kings men trying to hold those Humpty Dumpty’s in power long enough to survive the transition that even Tony Seba told us has been well underway for many years. And we are at this moment experiencing almost ALL of the mainstream media sources absolutely, completely ‘hush’ regarding Tesla’s Lathrop plant and their Monumental opportunity to disrupt the entire Grid through the deployment of their Megapacks, Powerwalls, Solar Roofs, and the VPP with a disruption that will ultimately create a MUCH more secure Distributed Grid.

This transition point in time is fricking Yuuge, and it seems so closely aligned with some of those very early videos produced by the WEF that it is mind-blowing that Sustainability Leaders aren’t dancing in the streets at this watershed moment. And yet they aren’t. Instead we are still getting Bill Gates Hydrogen plans shoved down our throats by mainstream media instead. You know, Hydrogen – the ‘next’ bridge-fuel. Just like Natural Gas was to be. And perhaps up to 95% of our Hydrogen will initially come from that Natural Gas ‘boom’ (pun intended) that began under the Bush-Cheney administration and has continued until the Levelized Cost of Energy very fittingly ‘Levelized’ Natural Gas. And what organization is Mr. Gates closely associated with?

Recall that there was a lot of discussion on TMC regarding Tesla’s decision for its first overseas plant to be in China – and not all of it favorable. But ultimately – and perhaps by design – the China Gigafactory might have been just out of reach of too many other influences. And it was built fast. And it came on line fast. And it started contributing to Tesla’s bottom line WAY faster than anyone in the mainstream media ever expected. A record 168 working days from permits to a finished plant. And for that very reason Tesla and TSLA are still here to talk about. Was the China decision made in-part for reasons none of us were aware of? There were many folks here and analysts on TV calling for Tesla to choose Germany first. In hindsight wouldn’t that have been a complete failure given all the efforts to slow, and to even stop that project along the way? We can still only speculate who was behind those efforts to slow the plant. But with hindsight maybe its worth wondering if there a reason that Elon prioritized China over Germany? Had Elon chosen Germany over China for the first overseas plant, today’s TSLA share price - a share price that has fallen >60% - might be considered an all-time high - IF the company was even still alive. Many here on TMC speculated that German Legacy Auto could have potentially contributed to those construction delays. We do know Elon is not one to be bullied, and he took the fight to Germany with the next Gigafactory location. And from the examination of Elon’s tweet today, Germany is also the backyard of the WEF. And he did so with a war chest of Capital from the China plant, and he did so while eventually being able to sell Chinese-made Tesla’s in Germany as perhaps the final attack that smoothed the transition to Tesla’s ramping of production in Germany. And ‘IF’ Elon is tweeting today about a divergence in Mission direction with the WEF, then perhaps we should not be surprised that Tesla has probably picked Mexico over Canada for the next Gigafactory, given that many political leaders of Canada - including Trudeau himself have been specifically mentioned by the WEF as being closely aligned with their goals. And it wasn't that long ago that Elon and Trudeau were at odds on Twitter IIRC. No, Elon will not be bullied. And the success of the German Gigafactory in the backyard of the WEF and of VW/BMW/and Mercedes would be the ultimate ‘Up Yours’ if ever such an award were to be given in such a hypothetical fight. But even though Elon & Tesla ultimately won that battle, why on earth would they ever want to repeat it if their goal is to rapidly advance Sustainability. Go to Mexico and just ‘get ‘er done’.

In light of Elon’s tweet it would be helpful to hear the WEF speak out in support of Tesla and all they have accomplished towards the original WEF mission of Sustainability. And for similar reasons it would be very helpful to hear this Administration acknowledge Tesla for having done so as well. It would ultimately help to accelerate that Mission of Sustainability that both the WEF and this Administration appear to share. And it would help bring an end to the running of that ‘most dangerous experiment’ much sooner. That would also eliminate any need to consider broader reasons why Elon has had to take the fight to a larger stage through Twitter and through the ownership of Twitter. Such a motivation would certainly help explain Elon’s actions, and perhaps even his decisions to justify the otherwise unworldly expenses necessary to support those actions…..if it were in the name of continuing the absolute fastest path to Sustainability possible, regardless of however large the Goliath was in his path. All speculation & opinion of a long-time observer that is mystified at seeing such parallel Sustainability Universes appear to collide.
I really wish this didn't sound so reasonable and hang together nearly as well.
 
What I was trying to say (it wasn't clear) was I was wondering if we knew yet the impact IRA will have in Q1 and Q2, since I think Treasury is still releasing guidance? Is Tesla actually going to get IRA subsidies in Q1?

What I have gleaned is that all BEVs will get the 7.5K in the USA until official Treasury guidance is finalized, released and implemented.

The Treasury guidance is the trigger to switch from the current pack size requirement for the $7,500 to the new mineral and component requirements. It was supposed to be released by Dec 31st, but they are now guiding for March, thus the last minute scramble on discounts.

The rest of the criteria are active now and the 200k manufacturer production cap goes away Jan 1. This requalifies Tesla.
Point of sale credit kicks in 2024.

The cell and module credits are a different section (Advanced Manufacturing) and not tied to guidance.