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.
I am in BC, Canada. It's covered by Crown (own by gov) insurance corporation. I heard from the agents that Tesla rates have been going up due to repair cost. They were surprised by the new quotes I got. I guess it will take more Tesla on the road here to reduce the rates once ICBC realize how safe Tesla are.

Insurance companies here in Norway say the same thing. The extra cost mainly from long waiting times. So people have rentals for a long time. The repairs themselves does not cost more. Shopping around is a good idea since quotes vary a lot!
 
They are not idiots. They have bought a perfectly reasonable car. Not everybody care about top speed. And the Jaguar got style. And it's easier to park than the wide American cars. And you can use a roof rack.

So I'm glad people buy the i-Pace. It's good for the environment. And much nicer to drive behind than the e-Pace or XJ.

Ehh. This is a $70,000+ car, not a $7,000 appliance.

For same price you can have

TWO SR Model 3’s
A maxed out Model 3 Performance with all options and change.
A raven Model S
A raven Model X

Clearly it’s not just about top speed, it’s needing to drive to Jaguar or have your brakes not work properly. :D

Jaguar looks “different” but I consider them cat fishing. Looks better online but wasn’t impressed when I saw one in person. Probably a good reason why I saw only one owned by an actual person (lol) compared to thousands of Tesla’s.

If I have no problem being truthful and calling my own children idiots for dumb decisions, I’m going to be truthful when calling out iPace buyers.

Can’t make excuses for people. Massive money for dubious rationales don’t fly with me.

TSLA has nothing to do with my purchase decisions - an X and two 3’s.

IPace was not considered for even 1 second. IPace is better for the environment than an ICE but why set the bar so low.

Two Model 3’s replaces two ICE cars.

The 90kw iPace battery is woefully inefficient compared to what Tesla can get out of 75KW. That energy has opportunity cost. And not all electricity is clean. (Yet)
 
Has this idea been discussed before?

Sell cars at lower price, buyers pay monthly to rent battery packs. The monthly rental fee is comparable to gasoline cost. This will eliminate the worry about battery life.
I think that's a bad idea.

As a demand lever, you'd want to keep things cheaper than gasoline. Tricky, considering that the electricity is more expensive than some cars' gasoline in some utility regions. And, that kind of desperate demand lever pull is not needed.

As a revenue lever, I see it as hurting demand and creating bad press (Renault got some bad press over the Zoe battery leases, IIRC, and Battery Assurance Plus has AFAIK depressed resale values of Smart ForTwo EDs). And, battery costs have gone down considerably, and longevity is much less of a question with Tesla's batteries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wipster and JRP3
I just watched a clip about E-Pedal. Is it similar to regen braking on the Tesla?
- I never had the luxury of heated steering wheel, I understand though, I wore gloves until the heat is working. I plan to heat up the Tesla before I head out. That's a luxury I can have going forward.
- Tesla should create a storage option to completely shut off the car without vampire drain. That's the beauty of OTA software updates.

I used to drive a 2018 LEAF with the E-Pedal feature. I didn't like it at all. It wasn't a seamless experience, the blending of the friction braking with regenerative braking. I found the braking effect too strong, in general, and also found it made the ride less smooth even when going reasonably fast. Say cruising along at 30mph, there was a certain harshness to the ride that wasn't there with E-Pedal disabled. As if driving through treacle, a low level of (but still noticeable) resistance.

The use of fairly strong regenerative braking as on Teslas (and my I-PACE) is a much better solution in my view.
 
I used to drive a 2018 LEAF with the E-Pedal feature. I didn't like it at all. It wasn't a seamless experience, the blending of the friction braking with regenerative braking. I found the braking effect too strong, in general, and also found it made the ride less smooth even when going reasonably fast. Say cruising along at 30mph, there was a certain harshness to the ride that wasn't there with E-Pedal disabled. As if driving through treacle, a low level of (but still noticeable) resistance.

The use of fairly strong regenerative braking as on Teslas (and my I-PACE) is a much better solution in my view.

I would have to agree. I’m not sure I will enable on the highway at all. I kinda liked it around town but it takes some getting used to. Wife loves it though.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: wipster
Yah that’s one annoying thing about some on this board. We put a deposit on a 2020 Nissan Leaf EPlus SL a couple weeks ago. The model 3 is an amazing car and drives better than the Eplus not to mention some pretty cool tech. But there is more to the decision than just “the drive”.

This doesn't make sense - you've been on this board for over two years, nearly 1,000 messages, but you went and dropped a downpayment on a new 2020 Leaf? So I read some of your posts and you do seems challenged by the lack of a hatchback, steering wheel heater, and charging access to Chadmo. It would take more than that for me.

On the other hand, you were concerned about the safety of the Leaf (with another Leaf owner here) and you seem to support Tesla and love it's vehicles. This is hard to square for me, so maybe I don't understand completely.

When we bought our Model 3, I was hesitant on the single monitor and no dash gauges. I even thought from front view it looks a little like a bubble and 2-dimensional. And the price, about double we've ever paid for a vehicle. But we couldn't ignore the facts and fun/cool factor. I'm sure you've read them too. And hopefully you saw the comment regarding FSD with any other car being a "horse" purchase (maybe not next year, but plan on it for sure).

Then I saw this...

It’s not over till it’s over. The Leaf doesn’t arrive till next year.

My advice as one Canadian to another - hold off on that Leaf purchase. If you can't get your current 7 yr leaf to go another year (with it's new battery as you say, and probably because of the Leaf battery defect), then maybe that's a hint. With the Leaf, consider the rapid depreciation on your 2nd purchase of a very complicated car with many more failure points. I just see money flowing from your wallet into the Leaf.. and again? I guess if you have all the money then go for convenience until the Model Y as you say. But why would your charging concern be any different with the Model Y? Just sayin'. Maybe take a spreadsheet approach, (Feature * Importance = Value). What do the numbers tell you? And keep this handy... JOHN48043 for some free power.
 
They are not idiots. They have bought a perfectly reasonable car. Not everybody care about top speed.

Nobody mentioned top speed.

And the Jaguar got style.

And Tesla doesn't?

And it's easier to park than the wide American cars.

Not if you compare it to a car of the same size.

And you can use a roof rack.

And you might need one considering how little interior volume there is. Of course, you know what that does to your already dismal range on the highway. The huge Model X is the only Tesla that can't use a roof rack but the interior space makes it unnecessary vs. iPace. Both Model S and Model 3 can use roof racks.

So I'm glad people buy the i-Pace. It's good for the environment. And much nicer to drive behind than the e-Pace or XJ.

Agreed. But that doesn't mean they are not stupid when there are much more advanced options available for the same money. The iPace is small, overly heavy, inefficient, crippled for freeway range and handles much worse than any of the three Teslas. But yeah, better than a fossil car if you don't need longer range. Because fast charging is almost non-existent.
 
Clearly it’s not just about top speed, it’s needing to drive to Jaguar or have your brakes not work properly. :D

I would never buy the i-Pace. But I much prefer people lusting for the Jaguar brand to buy the i-Pace and not any of the others. It's the best Jaguar. But still only half of my TMX. :cool:
 
Indeed, meant to write 'push Q2 beyond $251m' - typo.



Yes, so in Q1 Tesla increased (short term) deferred revenue by about $132m:

Q1'2019 Q4'2018 QoQ change

Current assets:
Deferred revenue 762,810 630,292 +132,518
Resale value guarantees 480,225 502,840 -22,615

Total assets:
Deferred revenue 1,157,343 990,873 +166,470
Resale value guarantees 211,390 328,926 -117,536

And they characterized it thusly in the Q1'19 10-Q:

Deferred revenue activity related to the access to our Supercharger network, internet connectivity, Autopilot, full self-driving and over-the-air software updates on automotive sales with and without resale value guarantee amounted to $1.04 billion and $882.8 million as of March 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively.

Deferred revenue is equivalent to the total transaction price allocated to the performance obligations that are unsatisfied, or partially unsatisfied, as of the balance sheet date. Revenue recognized from the deferred revenue balance as of December 31, 2018 was $37.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2019.

Of the total deferred revenue on automotive sales with and without resale value guarantees, we expect to recognize $462.3 million of revenue in the next 12 months. The remaining balance will be recognized over the various performance periods of the obligations, which is up to the eight-year life of the vehicle.​

Key takeaways:
  • Note how they only recognized $37.4m in Q1, but guided to have an average of deferred revenue recognition of 462/4 = ~$115m.
  • Some of that will be due to revenue growth, but some of it might be due to bulk recognition of past FSD and EAP deferred revenue they have in their $1.15b deferred revenue piggy bank on the balance sheet.
  • Most of this $1.15b is money already paid by customers, but not yet recognized as GAAP income. When they recognize it then these will I believe increase GAAP income with almost 100% margin: there's no matching "deferred cost of goods" concept I believe. So it's a powerful tool.
  • There's also the expiring resale value guarantees.
In principle Tesla will have internal milestones, which if they are met revenue can be recognized. So for example if someone paid $5k for FSD two years ago and now gets Advanced Summon - they might declare that another 20% of that obligation was met.

There's a fair amount of discretionary leeway there I believe, the only true limit is when customers start asking for money back for not delivered milestones/features actually promised on the order page. (This is I suspect why the TSLAQ eco-terrorists are trying to stir up so much 'I want my money back' discontent among Tesla owners - but owners are not biting.)

Not advice though.

(Maybe @Doggydogworld, @schonelucht or @neroden has a more accurate read on the financial details?)
My only comment is the 462.3m of deferred revenue they expect to recognize in the next 12 months apparently includes the whole RVG mess as well as Supercharger, internet connectivity, EAP, FSD and OTA. I don't think the 37.4m recognized in Q1 includes the RVG stuff, but I could be wrong as the language is ambiguous.

Supercharger and internet connectivity as well as RVG have deferred costs that get recognized along with the deferred revenues. As you note, though, EAP/FSD are almost 100% gross margin.
The "expect to recognize" was 326.7m in the 10-K. That's 82m/quarter. So they were 45m short in Q1 2019 but then bumped the 12 month expectation by 136m? That's weird. Especially considering the Supercharger and internet connectivity parts are extremely steady. I'm not really sure how to quantify it, but I agree they seem to be planning a big jump in EAP/FSD non-cash revenue recognition.
 
Has this idea been discussed before?

Sell cars at lower price, buyers pay monthly to rent battery packs. The monthly rental fee is comparable to gasoline cost. This will eliminate the worry about battery life.
Renault offers this option on the Zoe. Nio offers it on their cars in China. They also offer battery swap, which makes battery leasing kind of necessary (unless you're just gaming California ZEV credits, lol). The defunct Project Better Place in Israel was based on battery swapping with leased batteries.

If you're really worried about battery life, you can lease the whole car including the battery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hobbes
No they’ve disappeared. There were litterally hundres of Model 3s.
They also disappeared from the Belgian site (where I saw them first this morning).
In related news: This morning there were 15 S/X available, half a day later only 12. It seems like the free supercharging incentive finally got some traction.
 
Yeah, and I kinda expect the exact opposite. This is EXACTLY the situation that SHOULD be 'gamed' by autopilot developers (as Elon choose NOT to do for a Coast-2-Coast autonomous drive).

Programmers can hard code shortcuts into the specific tasks of driving onto the car carriers from the well-known, limited-public-access, and security-patrolled assembly area.

It's the low hanging fruit for FSD and a big time/labor saver, we've discussed here before.

Cheers!

I was referring to Enhanced Autopilot in general. I.e. for parking lots. You don’t believe they can game that aspect do you?
 
Over the past week - I pulled all of my accounts with Morgan Stanley. The wealth manager who has been enjoying the nice asset management fee was initially heart broken then become frustrated at Adam Jonas when I told him the reason I left was 100% attributed to the nonsense and games his colleague plays with shareholders of Tesla. Hit em where it counts.