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

[StealthP3D]

GM benchmarking Lutz's unbuildable Model X probably for a new Caddy product. IPace and Etron also included. Somebody will figure out why they got a great deal on that X when they learn they benchmarked 2015 tech instead of 2019 Raven tech....

GM Benchmarking Tesla Model X At Milford Proving Grounds

GM, as a corporation, moves really slowly. I bet it took two months for the request to purchase the Model X to move up the corporate ladder, get approved and move back down to the person who arranged payment/delivery. This is something Tesla would have done in 2-3 days. Except they already have the only EV's worth benchmarking.

 

[NicoV]

Perhaps you should look into it more

Also imagine:
- a 5 MW fusion reactor that fits inside a container and costs about $400,000, enough to power 5,000 houses continuously:
- a couple of these containers are enough to power a ship;
- price per kWh less that 0.5 ¢;
- no radioactive waste;
- enough fuel available to outlast the life of earth;
- only by product Helium

Now also imagine that two of the three requirements to achieve scientific feasibility of fusion with a Dense Plasma Focus have been met end that there are no known reasons why the third (density) could also not be met.
Currently there is company who does the research and hopes to prove the concept works within a couple of months. With enough funds, first reactors can be shipped within three years.

There are enough reasons to be optimistic

Every couple of months over the last few decades there have been such companies.

 

[kengchang]

I disagree. The trunk is made the complicated way it's made to perform optimally in a rear-end crash. There is no way that could be replicated with a single stamped "bathtub" trunk. That does nothing but cheapen the car and make it perhaps 8 lbs. lighter.

I'm willing to pay more for a rear-end that will perform better when an SUV driver on meds/cellphone/alcohol slams into me at 70 mph.

If that complicated hot mess is really superior then why did the body guy got fired by Elon? Also Model Y is going to get 4 pieces and single piece trunk according to Elon.

 

[Carl Raymond]

If that complicated hot mess is really superior then why did the body guy got fired by Elon? Also Model Y is going to get 4 pieces and single piece trunk according to Elon.

Forged, not stamped, I think I recall. All the strength arising from shape complexity, none of the joins. Hence Lathrop forging facility.

 

[StealthP3D]

If that complicated hot mess is really superior then why did the body guy got fired by Elon? Also Model Y is going to get 4 pieces and single piece trunk according to Elon.

There's more than one way to skin a cat and I really doubt the trunk structure will be one stamped "bathtub" style trunk.

As to the "body guy" who was fired, we don't know what his exact role was and why he was fired. Tesla would have had multiple structural engineers collaborating to create the chassis structure. Like any structure, it can be improved, made lighter, less costly to produce, etc. but I really doubt the answer will be to go with a stamped bathtub trunk like a cheaper car. Tesla achieves superior crash results by paying close attention to load paths and how much energy they can absorb.

 

[Dutchie]

Boy, if somebody could make some batteries to use at night, I'd invest in them.

I think a lot of people have to much hope for batteries. You cannot power the grid continuously with batteries.

 

[Dutchie]

Pass the dutchie 'pon the left hand side (I say)

Pass the dutchie 'pon the left hand side.

Strange reaction. I don't get it..

 

[StealthP3D]

I think a lot of people have to much hope for batteries. You cannot power the grid continuously with batteries.

The point of batteries is not to power the grid continuously, obviously, they would run out and need charging. Batteries can be charged during the day and there is excess solar power (for example) and then they can power the grid at night. Batteries are for load smoothing.

I'm surprised I needed to explain this.

 

[Fact Checking]

They claim the tech they use in a hybrid car is going to be the same in fully electric one. Not unreasonable since that car can operate without the stinky part making the stink. Just add a bigger battery and remove the stink and there you go.

As both Tesla, Jaguar and Volkswagen designers/executives explained and demonstrated, having no ICE engine at all (even as an option) and designing a car for BEV only is a massive competitive technological advantage:

• A PHEV ICE engine has to be in the front (or the rear), due to physics (no flat engine possible).
• This means that such a shared PHEV/BEV platform cannot use the "Tesla skateboard design" that the I-Pace and Volkswagen I.D. is using too, which design of having 'bulk' battery packs instead of flat (skateboard) battery packs has numerous disadvantages:
  • Mass of the battery pack is either in the front or the back. If it's 50%/50% then that increases the "polar momentum" of the car significantly, making handling (cornering) worse.
  • Beyond handling, the violence and injury probability of off-center side collisions depends on low polar momentum: the easier the car rotates away from the point of impact, the more time there is for passengers to decelerate safely - fewer injuries.
  • The skateboard design also turns the battery pack into a structural support in side collisions: Teslas are extremely stiff in side collisions when there's very little intrusion distance that can be allowed, even compared to Volvos (!). With a bulk battery pack design there's very little structural role it can play, other than to be in the way.
    
  • Skateboard design also lowers the center of gravity to ridiculously low, race car levels: this helps cornering, but also safety, low center of gravity means lower risk of the car to roll over.
  • Frontal collisions safety: empty frunk space is a very good crunch zone, while PHEV engines and battery packs are not.
• Safety features like Cabin Overheat Protection or Dog Mode are not possible with PHEVs that have small, easy to deplete batteries. Preheating of the car becomes harder.
• "Always on" security features like Sentry Mode depend on a generously sized battery. I also expect some FSD features, like watching surroundings, to eventually be active while parked too. All this requires a generous electricity supply.
• Trunk+trunk is popular - but if the battery pack is in the front there's no frunk space.
• Luxury/premium cars are incredibly integrated designs where most components have an effect on other parts of the car. There are hundreds of other small optimizations you can do if there's only a single platform. In automotive dual platforms tend to unify the worst of both worlds.

I believe BMW is fundamentally mistaken in thinking that BEV and PHEV premium cars can share a dual platform.

It might have worked 5 years ago, as a stop-gap measure that might have given time to divorce ICE engines. It might also work for mass market cars in the $20k price range.

But it's inadequate today that customers and competitors can see the advantages of BEV-only premium car designs, and certainly not in 2021-2023 when BMWs new designs will enter volume production.

 

[Dutchie]

The point of batteries is not to power the grid continuously, obviously, they would run out and need charging. Batteries can be charged during the day and there is excess solar power (for example) and then they can power the grid at night. Batteries are for load smoothing.

I'm surprised I needed to explain this.

Load smoothing yes, but always as an addition too. You need something more substantial to power the grid, even at night.

 

[sixela]

They claim the tech they use in a hybrid car is going to be the same in fully electric one.

Anyone can slap a 6-10kWh battery in a car. The last time I was a passenger in one of those hybrids the range on the (fully loaded) battery was 25km; it’s fairly obvious these are only fiscal and regulatory electric vehicles.

it's quite another thing to design a pure BEV and yet another one to manufacture lots of them.

I also wonder how i3 customers should feel now they've been officially declared non-existing.

 

[Fact Checking]

Load smoothing yes, but always as an addition too. You need something more substantial to power the grid, even at night.

Actually, it's entirely feasible to power the grid from batteries only, at night: night power consumption is about ~60-70% of the daily peak, so on most latitudes if there's enough battery capacity to cover 1-2 days of power consumption, and there's enough solar (and wind) capacity to recharge the batteries even during the winter, then the grid could be powered by renewables and batteries indefinitely, and have power even during a winter night with no wind.

The resulting grid would also be massively more resilient against power outages and would be far easier to bring up again after a fault, compared to today's highly centralized and vulnerable power grids.

(Possibly in a few decades the term "grid power outage" won't even exist: while power consumers will be interconnected, there will be so much uninterruptible battery backup available in almost every household and almost every factory that network-wide outages probably won't be a thing anymore.)

IIRC @KarenRei cited a study a couple of months ago that outlines the technological and logistical pathway to how battery backed, renewable-generation-only power grids are going to become reality for the whole of the U.S. - it highly depends on the geography and other details, and requires TWhs of battery capacity to be installed, of course.

 

[RobStark]

 

[Right_Said_Fred]

All posts about the Democratic debate have been vaporized. Don't say you were not warned.

 

[Antares Nebula]

As both Tesla, Jaguar and Volkswagen designers/executives explained and demonstrated, having no ICE engine at all (even as an option) and designing a car for BEV only is a massive competitive technological advantage:

• A PHEV ICE engine has to be in the front (or the rear), due to physics (no flat engine possible).
• This means that such a shared PHEV/BEV platform cannot use the "Tesla skateboard design" that the I-Pace and Volkswagen I.D. is using too, which design has numerous disadvantages:
  • Mass of the battery pack is either in the front or the back. If it's 50%/50% then that increases the "polar momentum" of the car significantly, making handling (cornering) worse.
  • Beyond handling, the violence and injury probability of off-center side collisions depends on low polar momentum: the easier the car rotates away from the point of impact, the more time there is for passengers to decelerate safely - fewer injuries.
  • The skateboard design also turns the battery pack into a structural support in side collisions: Teslas are extremely stiff in side collisions when there's very little intrusion distance that can be allowed, even compared to Volvos (!).
  • Skateboard design also lowers the center of gravity to ridiculously low, race car levels: this helps cornering, but also safety, low center of gravity means lower risk of the car to roll over.
  • Frontal collisions safety: empty frunk space is a very good crunch zone, while PHEV engines and battery packs are not.
• Safety features like Cabin Overheat Protection or Dog Mode are not possible with PHEVs that have small, easy to deplete batteries. Preheating of the car becomes harder.
• "Always on" security features like Sentry Mode depend on a generously sized battery. I also expect some FSD features, like watching surroundings, to eventually be active while parked too. All this requires a generous electricity supply.
• Trunk+trunk is popular - but if the battery pack is in the front there's no frunk space.
• Luxury/premium cars are incredibly integrated designs where most components have an effect on other parts of the car. There are hundreds of other small optimizations you can do if there's only a single platform. In automotive dual platforms tend to unify the worst of both worlds.

I believe BMW is fundamentally mistaken in thinking that BEV and PHEV premium cars can share a dual platform.

It might have worked 5 years ago, as a stop-gap measure that might have given time to divorce ICE engines. It might also work for mass market cars in the $20k price range.

But it's inadequate today that customers and competitors can see the advantages of BEV-only premium car designs, and certainly not in 2021-2023 when BMWs new designs will enter volume production.

Not to mention that the skateboard design simplifies manufacturing considerably.

 

[LN1_Casey]

Welp. Placed another order for TSLA stocks. Lets see if I can catch a MMD with it.

 

[Azam]

Tesla going into lithium mining and cell production is absolutely necessary IMO but presents multiple challenges:

• According to my calculations, Tesla will very soon need all 35GW. Tesla vehicles would require 55GW in 2020 and 100GW in 2021.
• Most probably, the Panasonic agreement is being renegotiated. I believe they are working on an outright purchase of the business wiping off the obligations.
• Cell manufacturing is a high CAPEX low return according to Maxwell and Panasonic financial statements.
• Going further down the supply chain increases the CAPEX per vehicle while probably reducing the cost per vehicle, will significantly increase inventory of unfinished products (Working capital). It will also reduce Accounts Payable because Tesla is its own supplier.
• Tesla plan to replace Panasonic seems to add multiple steps: Lithium feedstock mining and shipping, processing it to battery grade lithium, source all other cell components, create the cathode, and finally create the cells. The cashflow cycle will ultimately depend on shipping and manufacturing lead times.
• Tesla might need to access the capital markets again feeding the shorts narrative.
• TESLA most probably had a full-scale plan prior to the decision to acquire Maxwell (Dec 2018). As I mentioned the 35GW will be reached by year end, and I expect the Battery Investor Day to be very soon.
• I would be surprised if Tesla did not already provide Tesla Grohmann with an R&D budget to create a much faster cell production line.
• There is a slight probability that the Boring Company might disrupt the traditional cost structure of rock mining.
• Unlike battery manufacturing, it seems from public filings that lithium mining has good ROI.

 

[Fact Checking]

@ZachShahan just published this article on CleanTechnica:

Why Do The NYTimes & Other Large Media Outlets Get Tesla & EVs So Wrong? | CleanTechnica​

A lot of topics covered, and I wholeheartedly agree with his overall assessment: 90% of the Tesla FUD is a diverse mix of plain old affinity fraud propagated by two disrupted industries (automotive and old energy), overworked journalists with way too many topics to cover and way too short of an attention span, tribal affiliations, PR mistakes by Elon and Tesla, helpfully egged on by the financial sector through the most shorted major stock on global financial markets, combined with the physically most complex business plan Elon Musk could think of which is absolutely not conductive to make things easier to understand and explain.

So yes, I absolutely concur with @ZachShahan and @tinm that there's no "conspiracy" and except a few well known FUDster the mainstream media is at worst confused about and harboring tribal prejudice against Tesla. There's many, mostly disorganized entities acting against Tesla out of confusion, due to being disrupted, and, in some cases out of financially motivated malice and fraudulent intent as well (short sellers).

As to solutions? @ZachSachan mentioned that he considers #PravDuh a mistake timed poorly in light of the existential threat Trump and Republican messaging is posing to independent journalism, and I think there might actually be two channels of honey to improve Tesla's media coverage:

• Tesla is one of the most exciting companies on earth, and in the journalistic world where the scoop is currency, Tesla is a central bank: factory visits, face time with executives, unveils, comments on current evens, etc. Tesla and Elon has tried this and got burned a couple of times, but it's not organized, strategic and frequent enough I think.
• I suggested before a more direct method to save journalism: Elon could start a foundation that promotes independent journalism. If the Kochs, Merceds and Bezos are buying media influence unashamed, why couldn't Elon do something to improve investigative and objective journalism? Money does help.

This situation is not going to self-correct easily, but once it does, it will be a massive event affecting stock valuation as well.

 

[Dan Detweiler]

I think a lot of people have to much hope for batteries. You cannot power the grid continuously with batteries.

Maybe not but I can power my own private grid with them.

Dan

 

[Fact Checking]

Not to mention that the skateboard design simplifies manufacturing considerably.

I'm not sure that's true: having a pack in the 'front' (in place of the engine) or the 'rear' (in place of the fuel tank) allows the reuse of old designs and also frees up some leg space (but extra leg space is not really needed on SUVs though, which seems to be the most popular format everyone seems to be gravitating to).

The skateboard design on the other hand affects everything - you have to design a completely new car for it in essence. It also requires shielding from below, while the 'bulk' battery packs are more compact and require less metal to protect. They are probably also easier to install and service than a big flat battery pack.

All the other advantages of the skateboard design are overwhelming though, and I think BMW is making a serious mistake by not adapting it. In fact they made a big mistake ~5 years ago by not adapting it, and today might be too late already.