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

[Hiline]

The market seriously should be high right now, what seemed unusual was the big decline while rates are being raised to cool an overheated economy.

We'll hit the pause, hold there for however long while the Fed watches inflation coming down, and bad economic data will start flowing through. Earnings compress, multiples expand, rate cuts begin and are aimed at stoking the economic fire again while the market grinds down to a new bottom. That's how it has happened historically anyways.

We have a long way to go towards 2% inflation. More money needs to be drained from the economy. It's going to be a slow couple of years.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

When you consider the Inflation Reduction Act EV Battery section clearly incentivizes pumping out vehicles with much smaller batteries using the limited supply of domestic components/critical minerals, it could almost be assumed the US Govt agrees with Toyota's assertions there -- at least when it comes to domestic materials.

If it was otherwise, you'd think the IRA credits would be limited to BEVs but manufacturers would scoop up a lot more of the credits by producing PHEVs with smaller batteries spreading those materials across a higher number of vehicles that would still qualify for $3750-7500.


Ie if you had 100 tons of lithium from Quebec, you could produce 2 x BEVs that would win $15,000 in tax credits for consumers or you could use that 100 tons to produce 10 x PHEVs that would win $75,000 for consumers. To use totally made-up numbers for illustration of course.

You could also potentially earn 13 TZEV credits compared to 8 ZEV credits. However, those TZEV are decreasingly valuable because they can only count as 5 of the 17 percent credit requirement credits. The max TZEV rises by 0.5 each year, while the total requirement rises by 2.5%.

 

[loquitur]

"Oh what a feeling... Toy Yoda!"

Chuckles also go to Toyota's "90% of the battery is dead weight" comment,
as if 90% of an ICE engine + gas tank + fuel + extraneous moving parts are not dead weight
when not driven. Oh, we're only talking about fuel weight when actually driving, then?
If so, I'm so glad electrons virtually weigh the same when the battery is full as well as empty.

P.S. a Toyota is still a Toyota backwards, they say palindromically.

 

[AndrewZ]

We have a long way to go towards 2% inflation. More money needs to be drained from the economy. It's going to be a slow couple of years.

Definitely agree. If the Fed even feathered the brake right now, I think inflation would spike up to new highs. There is still way too much money flying around.

 

[M|S|M MYP]

I am guessing Mary is too busy leading to run the numbers:

 

[wipster]

SP over 180 at close? Even though it should have happened Monday, I'll take it! 200 can't be too far away...

 

[AndrewZ]

I am guessing Mary is too busy leading to run the numbers:
View attachment 902142

Could they be including manufacturing credits? Offsetting regulatory credits or maybe selling some regulatory credits themselves?

Don't know if any of that makes sense or would be included, just thinking of possible reasons for the disconnect

 

[Prunesquallor]

VeemoQ

Vancouver-based EV startup Veemo goes bankrupt

Another electric vehicle (EV) startup has run out of cash and entered bankruptcy, although this time you may not have heard of this company before. Vancouver-based VeloMetro Mobility (Veemo) declared bankruptcy last month, ending plans […]

driveteslacanada.ca

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

SP over 180 at close? Even though it should have happened Monday, I'll take it! 200 can't be too far away...

I've seen quite a bit of technical analysis that points to 225-250/share by March

Maybe it's just me but I would have preferred for there to be more a retracement back to 150 and further consolidation before making a new leg higher. I can practically hear it 6 months from now "But TSLA still has to fill the gap at $145!!!!!!"....Someone just go ahead and shoot me now

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

Could they be including manufacturing credits? Offsetting regulatory credits or maybe selling some regulatory credits themselves?

Don't know if any of that makes sense or would be included, just thinking of possible reasons for the disconnect

GM has made many proclamations and "goals" that have increasingly bordered on knowingly defrauding investors. They continually make bolder and bolder forecasts when their actual performance when it comes to EV continues to get worse. Are you really surprised that they put out a new goal that statistically does't make sense?

 

[wipster]

I've seen quite a bit of technical analysis that points to 225-250/share by March

Maybe it's just me but I would have preferred for there to be more a retracement back to 150 and further consolidation before making a new leg higher. I can practically hear it 6 months from now "But TSLA still has to fill the gap at $145!!!!!!"....Someone just go ahead and shoot me now

StarFoxisaDowner!

 

[M|S|M MYP]

Meta up double digit % AH after beat, should bode will for the tech sector. Oh wait, Tesla is an automotive company

 

[M|S|M MYP]

GM has made many proclamations and "goals" that have increasingly bordered on knowingly defrauding investors. They continually make bolder and bolder forecasts when their actual performance when it comes to EV continues to get worse. Are you really surprised that they put out a new goal that statistically does't make sense?

Maybe the 60 new EV models by 2025 has something to do with this goal.

 

[wipster]

I am guessing Mary is too busy leading to run the numbers:
View attachment 902142

Honestly, I find it hard to believe they'll make 400,000 BEV's in a year and a half based on their current track record...

 

[AndrewZ]

GM has made many proclamations and "goals" that have increasingly bordered on knowingly defrauding investors. They continually make bolder and bolder forecasts when their actual performance when it comes to EV continues to get worse. Are you really surprised that they put out a new goal that statistically does't make sense?

Well I'm personally not just assuming it doesn't make sense, trying to have a measured approach to all of this

Looking at the lineup, most of GM's EVs planned right now would be very expensive. Celestiq is supposed to be $300k+, Silverado won't be cheap, Hummer is really pricey, Denali and Lyriq. Moving so many of those at assumed prices seems unlikely.

 

[heltok]

Guy's we are wrong! and apparently Toyota has got the "science" to prove it...

Toyota Calls On Science To Tell EV-Only Extremists That They’re Wrong

After critics said it's dragging its feet on the matter of wider EV-only adoption, Toyota says science will prove its strategy is safe and sound.

insideevs.com

The full text can be found here:

https://www.textise.net/showText.aspx?strURL=https%253A//www.autonews.com/mobility-report/toyota-ev-only-extremists-science-says-youre-wrong#main-content

Some quotes:

Coming crunch
Pratt, a lanky MIT-educated robotics and artificial intelligence whiz, is also the CEO of the Toyota Research Institute, the carmaker's U.S.-based skunkworks for futuristic technologies. Crunching the numbers on various paths to carbon neutrality was one of his latest brain teasers.
What Pratt's team unveiled was a looming supply shortage for lithium, the critical ingredient in the lithium ion batteries needed for pure EVs, plug-in hybrids and standard hybrids.
This shortage will make it very difficult to supply all the EVs the industry envisions.
Toyota's conclusion is that, to make the biggest dent in carbon emissions, it makes more sense to spread this limited supply of lithium among as many cars as possible to electrify as many cars as possible.
Pratt's reasoning is that each car would have only enough lithium for a small hybrid battery, not the big, powerful batteries of a full electric. But because so many cars would be hybridized, their overall impact in reducing carbon dioxide emissions would be bigger than a smaller fleet of pure EVs.
Pratt likened today's enthusiasm for EVs to yesterday's confidence in autonomous driving: It's overly optimistic, he said, citing Amara's Law, a maxim claiming humans "overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run."
Lithium shortages and a lack of recharging infrastructure will create an inevitable bottleneck that will kneecap big-volume rollouts of pure-electric vehicles over the next decade, he said.
"There is a crunch that's going to come," Pratt said. "Time is on our side. These shortages — not only of battery materials, but of charging infrastructure — will make it abundantly clear that one size does not fit all, and that the best answer is actually a mix of different vehicle types."

...

Reality check
Pratt criticized such waffling ambitions as happy talk.
"What has to change is that we have to mature a little bit, and we have to stop doing wishful thinking," he said. "A real discussion is that these are the constraints in the development of resources in the world, both material resources and charging infrastructure and renewable power… If that is true, how do we reduce the total amount of carbon dioxide that will accumulate?
"That is a mature discussion, not a kind of dream discussion."
Toyota draws from several forecasts that show battery demand for lithium continuing to outstrip supply of lithium as far into the future as 2040. One scenario shows supply covering as little as one-third of total global demand in that time frame.
The reason is that it takes only two or three years to open a new battery factory, but up to 16 years to dig a new mine. "There's going to be a delay in getting all the mining set up," Pratt said.
The pinch isn't limited to lithium.
Industry research shows a host of other metals needed for batteries are also falling into short supply, including nickel and manganese, Pratt said. Aside from crimping the supply of EVs, these material shortages will also likely push up battery costs. And higher sticker prices, in turn, will likely tamp down consumer demand for EVs, he predicted.
"We somehow have to lower carbon dioxide emissions as much as possible, as soon as possible, even though there is a tremendous shortage," Pratt said, "and we'll continue to have a tremendous shortage in battery materials. As you can imagine, it's a big challenge."

Imo he is not wrong. Unless something is done, we will have a big crunch. That's why Elon has been taking action on Battery Day 1, with contracts, with refining and soon with Masterplan Part 3. Elon has a clear goal, 20M vehicles/year in 2030. And he sees what can go wrong, what are the limitations and he has the funds and the talent to work on solving anything standing in his way of getting to his goal. Meanwhile the competition see the limitations and thinks it's too much to overcome so they will just stand still, wait for the supply to catch up and see what happens. One company taking charge of its own destiny , the other companies ignoring the ice berg that is about to hit them.

 

[Nocturnal]

Meanwhile the competition seems the limitations and thinks it's too much to overcome so they will just stand still, wait for the supply to catch up and see what happens. One company taking charge of its own destiny , the other companies ignoring the ice berg that is about to hit them.

They would love that. "Sorry investors and regulators, we really tried to make a lot of EVs but the battery minerals and whatnot just aren't there. Gee shucks we are sorry. Can we get an extension to keep selling these gas guzzlers now?"

 

[Prunesquallor]

Lotus to go public via SPAC.

What could possibly go wrong?

Lotus will go public via SPAC with $5.4 billion valuation

Lotus Tech will merge with a SPAC whose sponsor combined with the private equity operations of Arnault’s luxury-goods powerhouse LVMH in 2016.

www.autoblog.com

 

[Thekiwi]

Boring Company Loop infrastructure in combination with autonomous electric vehicles (AEVs) is the best thing to happen--in the last century--to urban planning possibilities and biking and other types of muscle-powered transportation. I’ve spent most of the last ten years not owning a car while living in the US and was trying to solve the biking problem long before I ever got into Tesla.

I’ve analyzed this pretty deeply and I do not see a viable long term path for busses and trains. They are important for now but are on the way to obsolescence in most cases. Loop can offer personal rapid transit that beats traditional mass transit on every level. I’m working on a thesis to present to the community hopefully in the coming months. Here is the overview of the train and bus comparison.

I bring this up here in the investor thread because I believe Tesla and Boring are disrupting more than just ICEVs and fossil fuels, and the economic and social ramifications are staggering and overwhelmingly positive, as far as I can tell.

Advantages vs. trains (most of which also applies to busses)

* Higher average speed. No stoppages. Shorter trip time. AEVs in a Loop is more like a train in continuous high speed circulation with individual vehicles entering and leaving dynamically. Like current highway system except no intersections, much more frequent on ramps and off ramps, and computer control.

* More energy-efficient and more materials-efficient.

* Mainly due to continuous motion and higher percentage of seats in moving vehicle actually being occupied.​

* Model Y with at least two passengers uses less energy per passenger-mile than any train service averages, and Ys aren’t even optimized for this use case.​

* Ex: 240 Wh/mile with 4 passengers --> 60 Wh/pax-mi . Leads transit industry already.​

* Higher passengers per hour capacity in most cases.

* Trains and busses have lots of passengers per vehicle but long, empty gaps between vehicles. Loop AEVs could have gaps as low as 1 second —> 3600 vehicles per hour per lane. Multiply by average number of passengers per vehicle. For very crowded routes, maybe 10 per veh —> 36k passengers per hr for just one tunnel.​

* Many Loop tunnels can be built for price of one subway tunnel, or even aboveground train right-of-way or dedicated bus lane.​

* Costs MUCH less

* I'm seeing some estimates that just the tracks, electrical equipment and signalling equipment alone cost about $9 million per mile for trains, which is more than the cost of a tunnel bored by Prufrock​

* Even in countries with cheapest train lines, it's usually at least $200 million per mile for urban passenger train lines. In USA it's far worse.​

* Loop has much lower ongoing operational costs too, especially after switching to AEVs instead of using human drivers.​

* Vehicles are perfectly compatible with existing surface road system, solving last mile problem during early stage of scaling network. With aboveground autonomy, could do full point-to-point service.

* Allows private personal transport for people willing to pay extra

* e.g. people who: don't want to ride in sketchy subway car at midnight, have kids who won't behave appropriately for a train, want to listen to loud music, want quiet and privacy to sleep/work/read/watch/game etc.)​

* Riders never need to switch vehicles en route to destination

* Quieter, more comfortable ride. No bumps and no stoppages better for people with back pain, nausea and similar medical issues. No noisy bus engine. No screeching wheels and brakes on train. No potholes on Loop pavement.

* Less waiting time for passengers prior to boarding

* Greater station density in a neighborhood resulting in shorter first and last mile legs of a given journey. Small-footprint aboveground stations or just holes in the ground.

* Faster planning and construction

* No gigantic expensive underground stations. Aboveground access points can be in parking lots and parking garages​

* Tunnel can be narrower (yes, London Underground and some other older networks are just as narrow, but these are legacy systems that are not required to meet modern safety and accessibility standards).​

* No need to build and maintain train tracks.​

* Politics less of a threat to construction.

* NIMBYs have less to complain about.​

* No more endless debates about public and private transit.​

* Cyclists and pedestrians happier too.​

* Can be accomplished more easily in a democracy bc projects can be completed and benefitting voters within an elected leader's term​

* Safer

* No hazardous high voltage live power lines​

* No danger of people being hit by train/bus arriving at the station​

* Minimal epidemic & pandemic risk, especially for diseases communicable by air, bodily fluids, or personal contact​

* No chance of catastrophic derailing accidents​

* More precisely scalable to demand for a particular route while retaining benefits of standardization and economies of scale from mass production. Also scalable even throughout day such that vehicle payload fraction is always high.

* System can be expanded incrementally without huge upfront costs, nor need for accurate long term ridership projections spanning decades into the future. Costs approximately linearly proportional to tunnel length.

* Rubber wheels can handle much steeper slopes and can stop harder in emergencies.

*(note: this is a tradeoff for energy efficiency. Rubber wheels have higher rolling resistance. However, aero drag is main source of energy use at high speeds, and also the main energy efficiency advantage for small vehicles comes from only stopping once. Only bicycles are more energy efficient than this, and just barely so).​

* Stations can be located on surface in existing parking lots or in existing underground parking garages. Saves on construction cost and stair/escalator/elevator trip deep underground

* No need for users to memorize routes or use a somewhat complicated app. As simple to use as Uber or Lyft. Especially good for people visiting an area who aren't familiar with the local metro system.

* No extended waiting times at sketchy below ground stations, especially at night.

* Can accommodate passengers carrying lots of cargo. More room. Can take as much time as needed to load and unload vehicle without holding up other Loop users, thanks to parallel passenger boarding/unboarding, whereas on train and bus, everyone waits until everyone is ready to leave the station.

* Less noise pollution

* If a vehicle has an issue (repair needed, bodily fluid cleanup, mental health episode, etc) it can be conveniently removed from the stream in real time and parked on surface road. Cars ahead of it will be totally unaffected and cars behind will return to service as soon as they can all reverse out to the nearest exit or alternative tunnel, thus resulting in a temporary traffic holdup but not a major delay or loss of capacity.

* People with and without disabilities can board and exit vehicles at their own pace independently of each other. More accessibility and more convenience--everyone wins

* Vehicle fleet can be dynamically routed to where needed instead of fixed schedule. Helps with, for example, big events.

* Uses batteries instead of live grid connection, helping reduce the late afternoon and early evening electricity demand surge and save money on electricity costs and accelerate the viability of sustainable energy

* Increased resilience to natural disasters and war

* No ugly bridges

* Uses mass-produced vehicles that are cheap, easily replaceable on short notice, and leverage large workforce of mechanics who can work on cars instead of more specialized train/bus mechanics

Well said.

I think Boring company+Autonomous vehicles is a similar sort of disruption to public transport as IP packet switching was for data/media delivery (on demand & point to point anywhere vs the old inflexible mass delivery systems).

Still hoping Tesla buys them.

 

[Christine69420]

A Form SC 13G/A has been filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000130655023006381/us88160r1014_020123.txt

Edit: Removed the wall of text since this news that BlackRock now own 5.7% of Tesla is not a big jump up from the 5.3% they previously own.

Thanks to @StapleGun for pointing this out.