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

[Nocturnal]

Roger McNamee: Tesla's 'fantastic' delivery numbers buy time but they're not a long-term fix

“But McNamee warned the company needs to become better at the basics, such as manufacturing and forecasting, if it wants to "survive" as an auto company.”


All these investors waiting for Tesla to become this super clear bet, by the time it does, it will be too late.

To be fair that is exactly what some investors want. A safe/boring bet.

 

[neroden]

The DMCA pretty much eliminated most "fair use".

Fair use is a First Amendment constitutional protection, and can't be eliminated by law.

 

[Tslynk67]

So regarding the new default simple white paint, it's not happening yet.
We seem to have forgotten about this.

"Starting next month, Tesla will charge $1000 for color black (same price as silver)"
Elon Musk on Twitter

Just checked, black is still included with no extra charge.
Punctuality still needs improving.
View attachment 426010

Well that's Q3 margins down the drain then...

 

[sparcs]

So, not doing as well, but I'm sure Tesla would love to be selling as many.

Let's say Tesla can eventually sell 50k a year between the Model 3 and Y in Japan.

Assuming an even split, that would be about 500 per week output from a factory for each model. Not a trivial amount.

I imagine they use taxis in Japan, so the robotaxi aspect could help drive some of that volume in the long term. Might be worth Tesla investing in a robotaxi fleet there.

 

[tschmidty]

made worse imo by bull guy agreeing like 'oh ya i agree it's a concern but the cars are selling at least'.
-wish someone just spoke up here and there like 'sometimes people can't hack it at tesla, we all hope they'll thrive elsewhere.'

I thought Gene (bull guy...) had some good points, and basically said something similar (high pressure, should be easier going forward), and there has been a few fairly important people that have left in the last year. I personally don't see it as that big of a deal but it is a valid point.

 

[Tslynk67]

Finally caught up - sorry for the delayed responses, had a bit of a issue today and couldn't post until resolved.

So what's the new bear/short narrative, I suppose profit, right? I mean they really can go on about demand any more - many territories still aren't selling Tesla and some of the largest, Norway being the obvious, don't even have any SR's delivered yet, and probably China is still fairly low compared to what we will see come the end of the year onwards.

Other than SP500 inclusion, do profits matter? I personally think not, I'm more interested at sustaining growth and bringing the MY, MP, R2 and semi to production.

And year, if we could see a Model 2, or whatever, small city car, not only Japan would be interested, but these small vehicles are insanely popular in European cities.

 

[Green Pete]

Let's say Tesla can eventually sell 50k a year between the Model 3 and Y in Japan.

Assuming an even split, that would be about 500 per week output from a factory for each model. Not a trivial amount.

I imagine they use taxis in Japan, so the robotaxi aspect could help drive some of that volume in the long term. Might be worth Tesla investing in a robotaxi fleet there.

Based on what I’ve seen European NoA comments it will probably REQUIRE many customers in various countries to purchase prior to robo taxis working. Just to better handle road marketing’s right hand drive and signage.

 

[bhtooefr]

It'll be a lotharder for tsla to penetrate Japan than iphone.

Japanese are notorious for country loyalty. And even the model 3 is too long of a car in Japan. The majority of cars there looks squished in the front to save space.

And let's face it. Public transport is cheaper and gets to your destination faster.

They do respect good tech though and are less likely to be swayed by false advertising being more techsavvy.

Honestly, I suspect the Tesla bicycle that Musk teased in an interview has more of a chance of going mainstream in Japan than any car that Tesla or Musk has discussed publicly, especially as it seems that the $25k Tesla will be a Model 3 variant set up solely as a robotaxi.

...except the Japanese market already has plenty of domestic market e-bikes. (All links in Japanese, but Google Translate worked well enough for me to find those pages, and the gist of what's going on likely doesn't require translation either.)

And Japanese e-bike law is similar to European e-bike law, but with an additional restriction limiting power output to 2x what the rider puts in up to 10 km/h, ramping down from there to zero output at 24 km/h. Basically meaning that a Tesla e-bike can't compete on performance (whereas in Europe, despite the 25 km/h speed limit and "250 W" continuous output limit, intermittent power is effectively unlimited during pedal assist, so performance off the line can still be considered), leaving efficiency/range, cost, and features as things that Tesla would be able to compete on.

 

[schonelucht]

I mean they really can go on about demand any more - many territories still aren't selling Tesla and some of the largest, Norway being the obvious, don't even have any SR's delivered yet, and probably China is still fairly low compared to what we will see come the end of the year onwards.

Demand will continue to be front and center. Give it a week or so and we'll get the first comparisons between April and July.

 

[Steve m]

Honestly, I suspect the Tesla bicycle that Musk teased in an interview has more of a chance of going mainstream in Japan than any car that Tesla or Musk has discussed publicly, especially as it seems that the $25k Tesla will be a Model 3 variant set up solely as a robotaxi.

...except the Japanese market already has plenty of domestic market e-bikes. (All links in Japanese, but Google Translate worked well enough for me to find those pages, and the gist of what's going on likely doesn't require translation either.)

And Japanese e-bike law is similar to European e-bike law, but with an additional restriction limiting power output to 2x what the rider puts in up to 10 km/h, ramping down from there to zero output at 24 km/h. Basically meaning that a Tesla e-bike can't compete on performance (whereas in Europe, despite the 25 km/h speed limit and "250 W" continuous output limit, intermittent power is effectively unlimited during pedal assist, so performance off the line can still be considered), leaving efficiency/range, cost, and features as things that Tesla would be able to compete on.

I was thinking a pedal assisted full self driving bike so that you could eat your soba noodles and read your news as you ride between the train station and work.

 

[M. Thompson]

First time a financial journalist has acknowledged that Tesla is trouncing the competition? And from Dana Hull, no less.



Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Since Michael Bloomberg announced his BeyondCarbon on Twitter, ( Beyond Carbon (@BeyondCarbon) | Twitter )

he would be a hypocrite to have his reporters continue beating up on Tesla. Maybe he told Dana Hull to change her tone or quit.

I called him out on twitter BTW, so you can thank me!

 

[Bet TSLA]

that Dana Hull is genuine, and that the conflict between Elon and her and her pivoting to TSLAQ arguments is unfortunate and possibly reversible

Once it is clear to me that an alleged journalist is just reporting imaginary garbage, why would I care what side that person is on? I don't care at this point whether Dana Hull writes positive or negative Tesla pieces. She has no credibility and won't be getting my clicks.

 

[Nocturnal]

It's crazy that even with a tax credit of $7500 compared to what is now $1875 that the "tesla killers" still can't make a dent. That's with all the money in the world, dealerships, and better access to markets.

Finally caught up - sorry for the delayed responses, had a bit of a issue today and couldn't post until resolved.

So what's the new bear/short narrative, I suppose profit, right? I mean they really can go on about demand any more - many territories still aren't selling Tesla and some of the largest, Norway being the obvious, don't even have any SR's delivered yet, and probably China is still fairly low compared to what we will see come the end of the year onwards.

Other than SP500 inclusion, do profits matter? I personally think not, I'm more interested at sustaining growth and bringing the MY, MP, R2 and semi to production.

And year, if we could see a Model 2, or whatever, small city car, not only Japan would be interested, but these small vehicles are insanely popular in European cities.

Profit mostly. Still seeing some claim that the demand cliff is next quarter because of the additional decrease in the EV credit.

 

[Singer3000]

Bear with me here. Model 3 Production totals and average per week:

Q4 18 61,394 (4,722)
Q1 19 62,950 (4,832)
Q2 19 72,531 (5,579)

Leaving out the unknown noise of how many down days per quarter there were, Q1 barely had a superior production rate than Q4, which means we entered Q2 at the same sadface production rate as we left Q4 18.

But for Q2 as a whole, we’re seeing a nice 15% increase in the average production rate. It depends how soon into the quarter the production rate increased of course but this essentially means that the peak production rate is likely substantially greater than 15% above Q1.

Barring unforeseen issues, this means the new guidance that “We believe we are well positioned to continue growing total production and deliveries in Q3” is a bit of a truism.

Need the financial results for ASP of course but looks to me that in Q3 we’re a slam dunk to finally have a quarter of sustained +6,000 per week Model 3 production. Roll on 7,000...

 

[mongo]

It's crazy that even with a tax credit of $7500 compared to what is now $1875 that the "tesla killers" still can't make a dent. That's with all the money in the world, dealerships, and better access to markets.

The credit is not big help long term.
A car maker gets a $5,625 head start on Tesla, until they sell 200k cars at which point their advantage goes away over 5 quarters or so. At which point they have no benefit against Tesla. Meanwhile, Tesla keeps improving their cars while the typical OEM is locked into model years.

 

[Nocturnal]

The credit is not big help long term.
A car maker gets a $5,625 head start on Tesla, until they sell 200k cars at which point their advantage goes away over 5 quarters or so. At which point they have no benefit against Tesla. Meanwhile, Tesla keeps improving their cars while the typical OEM is locked into model years.

Long term sure, but right now it's huge. If a leaf for example, was really that decent they would be flying out the door compared to a model 3. Just shows how lackluster the other options are.

 

[capster]

Yale Investments Office

Here's their historical 30 year Asset Allocation chart as of 2018:

View attachment 425730

Looks like the biggest change is getting out of "Domestic Equity" (I presume that means NYSE stocks). There's also a move to venture capital and natural resources. Read the section of the webpage titled "Asset Allocation":

"The heavy allocation to non-traditional asset classes stems from their return potential and diversifying power. Today's actual and target portfolios have significantly higher expected returns and lower volatility than the 1985 portfolio. Alternative assets, by their very nature, tend to be less efficiently priced than traditional marketable securities, providing an opportunity to exploit market inefficiencies through active management.

"The Endowment's long time horizon is well suited to exploiting illiquid, less efficient markets such as venture capital, leveraged buyouts, oil and gas, timber, and real estate."​

So yeah, there's oil and gas in the mix.

If I had to guess, Yale’s involvement with oil predates petroleum. New Haven, CT was a whaling town after all (albeit as a smaller player).

I wonder, are Yale’s endowment managers involved in the shorting as well as invested in fossil fuels? If so, that may deliver a black eye to the school’s reputation; I mean beyond the repercussions of a massive loss. (Again, no offense intended to Yalies: There are of course people affiliated with Yale who are on the right side with respect to climate. James Woolsey comes to mind.)

Isn’t it interesting how the various oils used for energy in history are connected to political power and its concomitant corruption?

Olive oil powered the mediterranean economy for thousands of years.

Investigators were combating olive oil fraud in Ebla five millennia ago according to cuneiform tablets.

The Romans stamped amphorae with information about the olive oil inside to try to keep a handle on things.

Also, certainly it isn't new that folks have leveraged oil to gain and retain power, that's been around since ancient times. Weren’t Marcus Aurelius and Hadrian scions of olive oil clans?

Didn't Septimus Severus smooth his way to power and his rule with his family’s oil wealth as well the “voluntary” contributions of oil from the citizens of Leptis? Too bad his two sons couldn’t follow his deathbed admonition to cut each other some slack, grease the soldiers, and forget everybody else (I paraphrase).

Alas, once established corruption is hard to stamp out: Olive oil remains at the top for food fraud in the EU today. Of course, olive oil remains a miraculous substance even if it isn’t lighting many homes in this day.

 

[Speedr117]

It appears Tesla lowered the Model S & X price by $2k. No change on the Model 3 though.

 

[phigment]

It appears Tesla lowered the Model S & X price by $2k. No change on the Model 3 though.

Refresh coming?

 

[Tslynk67]

Wisconsin at it once again:https://www.bizjournals.com/milwauk...get-includes-tax-cut-and-funding-for-zoo.html

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers revealed his version of the state budget Wednesday that includes funds to complete the Zoo Interchange freeway project and cuts to income taxes for “Wisconsin’s working families.”

Evers used his veto power to make it easier for the Medical College of Wisconsin to proceed with its proposed $100 million cancer research center and to block Republicans’ plan to allow Tesla to sell vehicles directly to consumers.

.
.
.

The Tesla legislation was controversial after some news coverage said Republicans added it to the budget to win a crucial vote from a Republican state senator.

Evers said he objected to the proposal because it would cause significant changes in the state’s existing motor vehicle dealership law and the consumer protections it provides. He also said the provision was included in the budget without “adequate public input and debate.”