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

[FastEddieB]

I think it would have to be below that, as you could get a model 3 at 35k once upon a time

They start at $38,990 now, which adjusted for inflation would be very close to that original $35k goal.

I wonder if the path to a $25k Tesla might not be via a trimmed-down Model 3. With more efficient production and economies of scale, a smaller battery and combined with government point-of-sale credits, it doesn’t seem like a pipe dream.

 

[NicoV]

A

For people worried that subscription FSD is too low. There is a long, long, long term plan here perhaps.
For people who regularly drive themselves to work and back, and at weekends, the $99 sounds reasonable, as its making something they perhaps find boring much less tiring and easier.
Fast forward two years
Now all those people are so used to using FSD in their daily commute, that they can't imagine not having it. They wouldnt buy a car without it, and would not unsubscribe unless desperate to save money. The price doubles, but people are so used to it, they grumble and pay
Fast forward five years
Kids are not bothering the expense and cost of learning t drive, because FSD is a thing, so why bother? Meanwhile everyone over 60 has already got used to a world where its not safe for anyone over 60 to manually control a car. FSD is so reliable you wouldn't waste money on a car with a steering wheel except for retro reasons. Price quadruples, but what are you seriously going to do?

As I said before, the while idea is to create FSD junkies. Addiction to FSD!

 

[2daMoon]

A big difference though in that a razor without a blade is useless whereas a car with at least a 50% higher risk of a collision is what 99.99% are currently driving. Tesla's bet is not just to get FSD working but also that enough people want it. This is concerning to me, but if they see great take rate of the 99 usd subscription with potential for lower insurance rates and greater personal safety, they may feel confident.

Touched that up a little for ya.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Only the Supervised version of FSD will be $99. Higher versions will be much more $299 is my guess.

I really don't see it going that way. I think that Elon wants to maximize penetration of FSD, so that utilization approaches 100% of the fleet. You can't do that with high prices. It's a safety issue, which Elon places the highest priority upon.

I think the higher prices will come in when it comes to the Tesla Network TN. Fleet operators and pay for hire owners can expect to pay a much higher price for FSD.

Even in this case, I think there will still be a low cost option for retail Tesla car owners. They will just agree to a higher revenue sharing proportion being retained by Tesla when they add their car to the network. I think the Tesla would make even more money by allowing people to add their cars to the network without FSD.

Yes that's right, only have FSD enabled on the car while it's participating as a robotaxi on TN. Tesla gets a 80% of the cut from the fare, instead of the usual, say, 30% or some such numbers to be determined by supply and demand, maximizing profit.

Again, the goal is maximum penetration of the fleet, maximum utilization, and maximum safety. Eventually, it will become hard to purchase a car from Tesla without FSD, and even more so on the used market, since these will be money printing machines. Even more so if Tesla stops selling the FSD package outright, and grandfather's in existing FSD owners. That way used car prices for Tesla's that have an FSD license enabled will go through the roof!

Cheers!

 

[Usain]

For those of you kvetching about a 'no' vote from Uncle Leo, his 26.7 million shares represent 1% of Tesla's outstanding shares after removing Elon's 400 million shares from the voting pool.

That takes the 'yes' majority from a lofty 73% all the way down to a mere 72%.

I haven't seen anyone do an actual breakdown of how we get to a majority vote. While I don't think the board would have put this on the ballot if they didn't think they would win, I'd like to be reassured with some actual numbers showing how many shares are a definite "yes".

Has anyone here seen such a breakdown?

 

[nativewolf]

Changing the subject, the UAW just won at VW Chattanooga. Several more elections are in process. The tide may have turned in the south, and Tesla is their big target. It will be interesting to see how this progresses. For those who don’t know, VW has wanted the union, and the workers fought it.

Now that is interesting.

 

[Xd85]

I haven't seen anyone do an actual breakdown of how we get to a majority vote. While I don't think the board would have put this on the ballot if they didn't think they would win, I'd like to be reassured with some actual numbers showing how many shares are a definite "yes".

Has anyone here seen such a breakdown?

*IF* there has been institutional dumping of late on *real* shares, does that move the needle on how the voting shares will end up?

 

[Artful Dodger]

I haven't seen anyone do an actual breakdown of how we get to a majority vote. While I don't think the board would have put this on the ballot if they didn't think they would win, I'd like to be reassured with some actual numbers showing how many shares are a definite "yes".

Has anyone here seen such a breakdown?

Dillon Loomis discusses it in his daily vlog today available now on youtube. However, all of this is speculation since none of us retail investors will ever get the inside details of how large institutions intend to vote. This is the due diligence I expect that Tesla will have done before sending out this proxy.

Dillon is rightfully warey about the possible vote outcome, however I am more sanguine. IMO, there's no version of this where Elon comes out with less patrol of TSLA, and of Tesla.

 

[Usain]

I really don't see it going that way. I think that Elon wants to maximize penetration of FSD, so that utilization approaches 100% of the fleet. You can't do that with high prices. It's a safety issue, which Elon places the highest priority upon.

That sounds great, but I don't think Tesla can cover all the liability of unsupervised FSD at only $99/month unless they get a huge take rate. I expect that it will take awhile get the take rate high enough. In the mean time, Tesla would be liable for everything from curb rash to fatalities.

 

[2daMoon]

As a shareholder since 2014 and a regular reader of these pages, I too am slightly discombobulated by the current state of play.

Hear me out here - this is just a suggestion for your thoughts

It seems the major concern for all EV companies now is demand as all the low-hanging fruit may have been plucked - the next conquest sales will be far more difficult....We may not follow the traditional S-Curve here

There are a lot of markets that haven't been tapped by Tesla, yet.

All my reading and chatting to potential owners, it seems the main concern (besides price - fading away and range/charging - work in progress) is the longevity and cost of the batteries. This also impacts second hand values as the battery warranties terminate.

This isn't based in fact, so, as people realize this hasn't been a genuine concern for a while they will choose accordingly.

What would be the effect if Tesla increased the battery warranty to, say, 12 (or 15) years and the motor warranty to, say, 250k kms? All other manufacturers would be forced to follow along and the transition to EVs would be given a major boost.

There are probably several levers they can pull before doing that, though if the statistics support it that would work. Kinda like when Hyundai/Kia came to market with 100,000 mile warranties and gained share quickly.

This would cost Tesla nothing initially (well not for anther 8 years) and massively increase the sense of security for new owners and second hand buyers so holding up prices. IF Tesla believe that the vast majority of batteries will not fail in this time, then this should be a smallish cost long term to Tesla. If they don't have this sense of longevity, then the public has a right to be worried about older EVs.

Tesla would also have to believe the battery replacement concern is actually something a significant number of people believe to be a deterrent to purchase. What if it only appears that way due to FUD being something we investors notice more than the average car buyer?

If Tesla was a first mover they'd get plenty of publicity and advertising would be a simple message.

By the time any batteries required replacing, the cost should have dropped substantially in any event. Recycling should be common place by then and Tesla could merely recycle the failed batteries.

Is my logic flawed??!

There are factors to take into account. If these concerns can be determined to be significant deterrents, rather than simply some nothing-burger the media picks up on, only to amplify their getting clicks from TSLAQ followers, then it might be worth pursuing.

It could be that Tesla has done the work to determine where to put this on their list of priorities, and the battery warranty concern is not at the top.

 

[Usain]

Dillon Loomis discusses it in his daily vlog today available now on youtube. However, all of this is speculation since none of us retail investors will ever get the inside details of how large institutions intend to vote. This is the due diligence I expect that Tesla will have done before sending out this proxy.

Dillon is rightfully warey about the possible vote outcome, however I am more sanguine. IMO, there's no version of this where Elon comes out with less patrol of TSLA, and of Tesla.

Yeah, I saw Dillon talk about this last night. He presented a good case as to why we should be worried. So I'd really like to see a breakdown of who controls or influences the voting for large blocks of shares and how they are likely to vote.

 

[Usain]

*IF* there has been institutional dumping of late on *real* shares, does that move the needle on how the voting shares will end up?

Good point. It might.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Good point - Lithium is down 60% over the last 12 months after spiking in 2021
View attachment 1040145
Nickel is seeing a bit of a run but still down on 2023 prices
View attachment 1040146

Not to mention any technical innovation Tesla has implemented they brings down the idiot index.

I'm not hopeful for strong margins this quarter but at least there are some mitigants of price reductions.

Opinion also approved by @The Accountant :

https://twitter.com/x/status/1781656347416613245

Smart move by #Tesla . Price cuts appear to be neutral to Operating Margin and positive to Operating Profit.
Labor savings from recent workforce reduction and decreases in EV material costs will offset the this price cut (cost savings given to the consumer). Increase in demand increases Operating Profit even if Operating Margins are neutral. $TSLA @truflation

 

[Artful Dodger]

Good point. It might.

Presumably, the ones that don't like Elon are the ones that sold, and the ones that do like Elon are the ones that held.

 

[Usain]

Not sure if this is good news or bad news.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1781541775183610310

 

[alexxs88]

Tesla would also have to believe the battery replacement is actually something a significant number of people believe. What if it only appears that way due to FUD being something we investors notice more than the average car buyer?

Anecdotally, but everyone I speak with that isn't very EV-experienced, has the following complaints:
1. Range - for some reason they believe they need 1000km range for no reason
2. Battery replacement cost which they take as a given after a certain number of years (6-8-10)

I think offering some way to alleviate concern #2 would go a long way for a lot of potential customers. Even if it is something like a guaranteed replacement price of 5000$ that can be spread over a number of years. This would remove all the fear mongering that the media loves to promote.

 

[Usain]

Presumably, the ones that don't like Elon are the ones that sold, and the ones that do like Elon are the ones that held.

Or it's the opposite.

Would it be possible for Elon haters to buy up shares, vote their shares, and then sell off before the vote?

I guess this wouldn't be enough to actually influence the final vote unless it's really close.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Not sure if this is good news or bad news.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1781541775183610310

Oh good, I'm glad that's settled. I thought for a while there that Elon might be attending the conference call via starlink from his G650ER somewhere over the Indian Ocean.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Or it's the opposite.

Would it be possible for Elon haters to buy up shares, vote their shares, and then sell off before the vote?

I guess this wouldn't be enough to actually influence the final vote unless it's really close.

So, buy high sell low to make a point? That sounds typical for short sellers. Luckily it doesn't have a hair brain's chance in hell of sinking the boat.

 

[CHGolferJim]

Yeah, I got my wish like an hour later! So glad Cybertruck is back on track.

Now if we could get a good handle on the run rate. Something tells me I'll have to wait a bit longer for that one.

Do you now of a reliable way to find your place in the queue for CT delivery? Like “I’m #200,000” or something.