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

[lafrisbee]

I watch ALOT of Ukraine youtubes. The number of times the Ukrainian forces mention Starlink warms my heart. They don't refer to a hotspot as anything other than a "starlink."
"When we get back to the starlink I will...."
They even have camo stretchable thin fabric that look like they were designed to fit over the starlink antenna.
But elon is getting full recognition now as a war criminal...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1620102791749423104

EDIT: that might explain his heavier than normal security detail...

 

[Sunlight]

It's not a matter of other companies sitting still, no one believes that. When a bear takes after two people, neither of them sits still, but the slower one still loses. Anyone who expects Ford or GM to move quickly enough to keep up to Tesla is probably living in an alternate reality. Tesla is widening the gap and this will become even more obvious with the release of the Cybertruck in just a few months, a new platform to showcase Tesla's latest technologies and price efficiencies.

It sounds like you think Mach-e price cuts can make them competitive with Tesla and save Ford. However, the more Ford cuts prices, the less incentive they have to make a lot of them. They are cutting prices because they know that not cutting prices ends up looking even worse. No matter how much people talk up the desirability of Ford's and GM's EV's, and tell us they are really nice cars, the fact remains that compared to the most comparable Tesla models, these cars are simply not nearly as competitive as the Ford and GM boosters claim. They end up just looking archaic, considering they are supposed to be the pinnacle of EV technology.

People who avoided Tesla and paid just as much for the Mach-e, are coming to realize the Mach-e is simply not all it was cracked up to be. Even though many buyers are still actively defending them, you can tell their defense is sounding more hollow. The Mach-e's biggest advantage for many is that it's not a Tesla. And I totally get that as evidenced by my inability to ever buy a BMW, as much as I like good driving cars and was not afraid to pay the premium price of their less exotic offerings, I simply couldn't buy into what I perceived as "BMW snobbishness". I think this is a similar dynamic at play with people who want any EV but a Tesla.

Thankfully, that anti-Tesla dynamic will weaken slightly with the recent large drops in price and will weaken even further with the impending announcement of a less expensive model. It will never go away entirely which is not a problem because it's a relatively small segment of the overall new car market anyway.

Likewise I've never been able to own a Ford for some (snobbish?) reason and a friend who owned a Cortina had a sign in the window "I couldn't afFORD anything better!"

My Mini had "I'd rather eat worms than drive a FORD!" - taken from an American Hot Rod of the times

Sorry, I'm being silly on an Investor thread - must be the recent share price jump....

 

[Hiline]

I don't actually follow Ford, GM, or any other car company's stock. I'm trying to figure out what will happen with Tesla because Tesla is what I want to buy, but I want a measured and *real* view of what might be coming whether it's good or bad.

These companies will probably eat a loss to move vehicles if they need to, some of them might cut further to put more pressure on Tesla. Tit for tat, back and forth, consumers are the benefactors. My concern is solely what it might mean for Tesla.

I thought about this before I went all in on TSLA after the price cuts. Any arms race on pricing would just drive other automakers out of business because they can never match Tesla's economy of scale and technological superiority. But not cutting prices would mean not selling vehicles. I don't see a way out for legacy automakers short of some government support, which is the only thing I fear.

 

[jerry33]

I thought about this before I went all in on TSLA after the price cuts. Any arms race on pricing would just drive other automakers out of business because they can never match Tesla's economy of scale and technological superiority. But not cutting prices would mean not selling vehicles. I don't see a way out for legacy automakers short of some government support, which is the only thing I fear.

Government support doesn't generally happen until after they go bankrupt. Then the government is on paper loaning money to a new company.

 

[StealthP3D]

Do you guys think opening up the Supercharger network will be a net positive or negative for Tesla? The network is Tesla's biggest advantage, but opening up the network will enable another potential source of revenue, and if Tesla structures the prices right, they may incent even more people to buy their cars since the cost saving will be more obvious.

Opening the Supercharger Network will be a net positive for Tesla and for Tesla owners who are active road-trippers. The network is already the dominant N. American fast DC charging network and nothing will allow the network to expand and grow as quickly as opening it up to more EV's because the rate of network expansion is tied to the rate of utilization. More utilization in more out-of-the-way locations will make it economically justifiable to continue expanding into ever more rural locations allowing the Supercharger Network to expand its lead over all other networks combined.

 

[The Accountant]

2022 BEV/PHEV Sales:
From Mathias Fons - Twitter

 

[AndrewZ]

It won't mean much because legacy auto will only be able to cut price so much, and as time goes on they won't have the funds to support a negative gross margin car. This will reduce legacy's ability to do any R&D for BEVs as well. It can only be a positive for Tesla. Didn't you look at Tesla's gross margins as compared to legacy auto?

I fully expect a lot of long-term positives for Tesla, but I also expect short-term pain for the entire Auto industry. Where the short-term view sufficiently diverges from the long-term reality, that's what I'm working to identify as closely as possible.

I thought about this before I went all in on TSLA after the price cuts. Any arms race on pricing would just drive other automakers out of business because they can never match Tesla's economy of scale and technological superiority. But not cutting prices would mean not selling vehicles. I don't see a way out for legacy automakers short of some government support, which is the only thing I fear.

Companies like Ford and GM going out of business would have such massive negative implications for North America, I can't even picture it. Imagine Ford suddenly being unable to service all the F150s, F250s, and F350s out there making their contribution to GDP.

You want to talk about economic pain.

 

[EVDRVN]

I fully expect a lot of long-term positives for Tesla, but I also expect short-term pain for the entire Auto industry. Where the short-term view sufficiently diverges from the long-term reality, that's what I'm working to identify as closely as possible.

Companies like Ford and GM going out of business would have such massive negative implications for North America, I can't even picture it. Imagine Ford suddenly being unable to service all the F150s, F250s, and F350s out there making their contribution to GDP.

You want to talk about economic pain.

Uncle Sam can step in and by CT's for everyone.

 

[bkp_duke]

Response to the Mustang Mach-E prices cuts are a mixed on the mache forums, but this post pretty much sums it up (disappointment):

Help me understand.

I can now buy an MME Premium AWD for about $55k and qualify for the tax credit. That car has a standard range battery, which gets about 220 miles on a full charge.

A $55k MYLR costs about the same, qualifies for the tax credit, and the range is 330 miles.

Why would someone jump at the MME over the MYLR based on price?

 

[StealthP3D]

I fully expect a lot of long-term positives for Tesla, but I also expect short-term pain for the entire Auto industry. Where the short-term view sufficiently diverges from the long-term reality, that's what I'm working to identify as closely as possible.

Companies like Ford and GM going out of business would have such massive negative implications for North America, I can't even picture it. Imagine Ford suddenly being unable to service all the F150s, F250s, and F350s out there making their contribution to GDP.

You want to talk about economic pain.

I think your analysis is overly dramatic and this is the same kind of thinking legacy auto has used for decades to justify government support for them and special tax considerations. It's the old "too big to fail" defense. Capitalism creates high standards of living and better lives for millions because it is designed to avoid the short-term kind of thinking that encourages anti-competitive government support for failing companies.

It's almost always better to take the short-term pain (that is never as bad as overly dramatic apologists claim) than it is to bail out losing companies. This is how good ideas are advanced and bad ideas are abandoned. How capable people are put in charge of making the cars of the future and how the slow-to-change dinosaurs are retired. Prolonging the past out of fear of near-term disruption is never a good idea. Entire civilizations can slowly collapse from this kind of fear and short-term thinking. Clinging to the past never advanced a civilization before and it won't now.

 

[Bouboule]

I thought about this before I went all in on TSLA after the price cuts. Any arms race on pricing would just drive other automakers out of business because they can never match Tesla's economy of scale and technological superiority. But not cutting prices would mean not selling vehicles. I don't see a way out for legacy automakers short of some government support, which is the only thing I fear.

OEMS will probably lobby like crazy to move up the msrp of eligible cars for incentives so that tesla can increase back their prices and relieve some price pressure on OEMs.

 

[CHGolferJim]

I fully expect a lot of long-term positives for Tesla, but I also expect short-term pain for the entire Auto industry. Where the short-term view sufficiently diverges from the long-term reality, that's what I'm working to identify as closely as possible.

Companies like Ford and GM going out of business would have such massive negative implications for North America, I can't even picture it. Imagine Ford suddenly being unable to service all the F150s, F250s, and F350s out there making their contribution to GDP.

You want to talk about economic pain.

My guess is most truck owners have their trucks serviced somewhere else besides dealers.

 

[Drax7]

I watch ALOT of Ukraine youtubes. The number of times the Ukrainian forces mention Starlink warms my heart. They don't refer to a hotspot as anything other than a "starlink."
"When we get back to the starlink I will...."
They even have camo stretchable thin fabric that look like they were designed to fit over the starlink antenna.
But elon is getting full recognition now as a war criminal...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1620102791749423104

EDIT: that might explain his heavier than normal security detail...

Typical Russian misinformation

 

[AndrewZ]

I think your analysis is overly dramatic and this is the same kind of thinking legacy auto has used for decades to justify government support for them and special tax considerations. It's the old "too big to fail" defense. Capitalism creates high standards of living and better lives for millions because it is designed to avoid the short-term kind of thinking that encourages anti-competitive government support for failing companies.

It's almost always better to take the short-term pain (that is never as bad as overly dramatic apologists claim) than it is to bail out losing companies. This is how good ideas are advanced and bad ideas are abandoned. How capable people are put in charge of making the cars of the future and how the slow-to-change dinosaurs are retired. Prolonging the past out of fear of near-term disruption is never a good idea. Entire civilizations can slowly collapse from this kind of fear and short-term thinking. Clinging to the past never advanced a civilization before and it won't now.

Do you think it's likely Uncle Sam will allow EVs to put one of the Legacy OEMs out of business? I can already see the angle being put together here.

Make the EVs cheaper for consumers, commit to increasing production output, there will be all the reasons for Uncle Sam to distribute support beyond what already exists (IRA consumer tax credits, manufacturing credits, etc). PCE inflation comes down, EV adoption increases, Uncle Sam will likely support it.

My guess is most truck owners have their trucks serviced somewhere else besides dealers.

Sure but where do the parts originate?

 

[MP3Mike]

Do you guys think opening up the Supercharger network will be a net positive or negative for Tesla?

I think initially it will be a negative, but it might change to be positive after times passes.

• There are a number of people who will only buy/recommend a Tesla right now because of the poor state of the CCS charging network. (Out of Spec Motoring on YouTube is one that currently tells everyone to either buy a Tesla or an ICE, don't buy any other EVs. And their main personal vehicles are a Rivian R1T and an Audi eTron.)
  • Opening the network would take people that are only buying a Tesla now because of the network and let them buy other brands.
  • Of course, it might not matter, as Tesla probably won't open the entire network, they will only open sites with excess capacity.
• Overtime more people will subscribe to the monthly Supercharger pass to get the cheaper rates, which could drive some reoccurring income.
• More utilization will allow for more expansion.
• It gives people more exposure to Tesla.
  • Tesla could even put little blurbs in the app, like if you had a Tesla you would have been done charging x minutes ago.
  • Tap here to order a Model Y. (They would already have a Tesla account with a linked credit card, so ordering would be very simple.)

 

[Nocturnal]

Tesla wants more Tesla trade ins. It's not rare to see a loyalty type discount, but I don't recall one being tied to a trade in before.

bird link

Spoiler

https://twitter.com/x/status/1620116374994706433

 

[CHGolferJim]

Do you think it's likely Uncle Sam will allow EVs to put one of the Legacy OEMs out of business? I can already see the angle being put together here.

Make the EVs cheaper for consumers, commit to increasing production output, there will be all the reasons for Uncle Sam to distribute support beyond what already exists (IRA consumer tax credits, manufacturing credits, etc). PCE inflation comes down, EV adoption increases, Uncle Sam will likely support it.


Sure but where do the parts originate?

Same third parties as make them now?

 

[Nolimits]

The intraday low SP just kissed the Lower-BB by 10:46 ET, which of course has been the wedgies' goal for these past few days of extremely high short-selling volume. Let's see what happens next: (JPower?)

View attachment 901321

Looks like Upper BB & bounced at the Nov 21, 2022 low. I am sure the pressure is on for fed meeting this week. Anything can happen

 

[StealthP3D]

Do you think it's likely Uncle Sam will allow EVs to put one of the Legacy OEMs out of business? I can already see the angle being put together here.

I hope so!

I have a Ford F-150 and I'm not worried. Even if I wanted to keep it after I get a Cybertruck I would not worry about parts. There are so many of them on the road someone would meet the market needs. That's how capitalism works (if you are willing to let it work).

People have such short memories and are so short-sighted when they start thinking it would be bad for a company to go bankrupt. The legacy auto industry has needed a shake-up for as long as I had a driver's license. The Japanese invasion of the 1970's/1980's improved the trajectory but it did not solve the core problems with an industry that has been stagnant for too long.

Tesla can solve the auto industry rot and new, more vigorous, more innovative competitors will have to work just as hard to compete. Consumers win when we let competitors slug it out, not when we keep calling time-outs and giving life support to the old, slow and non-competitive world champion before the fight is finished. Artificial life support removes the will to compete and harms consumers. That won't stop people with ties to legacy auto from defending legacy interests, but we don't have to succumb to their FUD predictions of disaster if we don't reach out and save the losers.

 

[shrspeedblade]

Opening the Supercharger Network will be a net positive for Tesla and for Tesla owners who are active road-trippers. The network is already the dominant N. American fast DC charging network and nothing will allow the network to expand and grow as quickly as opening it up to more EV's because the rate of network expansion is tied to the rate of utilization. More utilization in more out-of-the-way locations will make it economically justifiable to continue expanding into ever more rural locations allowing the Supercharger Network to expand its lead over all other networks combined.

When they do open up the network to other EVs, Tesla should just give all Tesla owners $300 credit for supercharging (doesn't roll over) every year.
In a sense, non-Teslas would be paying for the cars charging right next to them. That would be delightfully diabolical!