2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
Fair enough.
It just seems too early to call a new vehicle ramp "slow" when we are only a month into it.
Was asking if there might be comparative analysis to other ramps at a month in that would support the assertion.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
It just seems too early to call a new vehicle ramp "slow" when we are only a month into it.
Was asking if there might be comparative analysis to other ramps at a month in that would support the assertion.
TBH, this list appears to be a mixed bag, IMHO.Look at point #1
1. Stock buyback should definitely be started, but for the next few years at least it should be capped at repurchasing exactly the # of shares each year needed to offset dilution due to employee stock awards, etc. From an investor perspective, it helps drive home showing Tesla's actual cost of labor, including the impact of stock awards.
2. Strongly disagree with.
3. Neutral - there are benefits to stopping the price cuts, there are benefits to continuing them.
4. Neutral - sharing more information is always greatly appreciated, but I don't think it'll affect the course of Tesla or TSLA.
5. Strongly agree with the first half of the sentence, and I *hope* for the second half of the sentence but that is, of course, entirely his decision, not something for the board or us investors, for any existing holdings he has.
6. Strongly disagree with.
7 & 8. Strongly agree with.
9 & 10. Strongly disagree with.
The line started before the November event. I think it was the 2nd week of November.
It's pointed out in here so often, because it's not possible to make 125k CTs this year like some are using in their estimates. They would have had to start week 1 at the full rate, which we are still a ways off from getting to.
Last edited:
That would be higher than the F-150 lightning
EVNow
Well-Known Member
IIRC, ramps for Y were faster. We all know S/X/3 ramps had difficult issues. I hope CT is not as bad as X …
Last edited:
It's not 100 per day. There's sufficient evidence against that from the CT forum. Most are using the VIN registration tracker as Tesla submits VINs as tracking.
F150 is absolutely demand restrained. They've cut the line due to lack of demand.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
I think I was there, now that you mention it. So let's call it being roughly two months in.
Same question. What have previous ramps produced for other Tesla models at the two to three month mark?
Are the "CT ramp is slow" statements ones that are derived by analysis, or merely opinion?
GhostSkater
Member
It's both, higher energy density due to lower non active mass and higher energy due to wider jelly roll
Again, it's Teslas stance on the ramp. It will be a slow growth to full run rate, which may not even be achieved this year. It doesn't get exponentially faster like we see with the MY (Berlin/Austin/China) or even the MY AWD for recent ramps.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Over at CTO forum they are tracking VIN registrations. Doesn’t look like 100 a day. Looks like some 30 or 40 a day. Hit 60s in the last couple.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
CT is the new halo car. Model X gull wings are so last decade …
Tesla needed 3 to ramp quickly because those were the source of income. Once the lines were started, the expenses cranked up and Tesla was losing money. Y ramped quickly due to the learnings and carry over from 3. Shanghai ramped quickly because it was a tweaked copy paste.
Cybertruck isn't a bet the company vehicle. Tesla saying the ramp will be slow is setting expectations for how they are approaching it. Contrast that to some people's implication/ interpretation that 'the ramp is slow[er than Tesla planned]'
They don't need to rush and they aren't.
Funny, but true!
Right. Tesla is planning on this to be slow and always has. Elon has been saying it for 2 years and people say things like he's sandbagging or that they could make 125k this year...which is absolutely impossible. They would have needed to hit full run rate day 1.
This is a far more accurate way to track than Joe counting them from his drone and making assumptions and leaps.
What is important is that they exit q4 at the full rate. That should be doable.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
Opinion then. (even if it is Elon's opinion) Nothing quantifiable by comparison to other ramps. Got it.
Do you know what the output was at two months in for those recent ramps cited above?
Edit: Removed VIN question, as it was answered above.
Vins registered is a trailing indicator. There are probably a lot of trucks in transit. Joe is probably a leading indicator.
...
If Joe records 30 Cybertrucks leaving Austin, I'm going to believe Austin made at least 30 Cybertrucks. Visitor voluntarily sourced data from a single web forum only sets a lower bound.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
