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

[Artful Dodger]

Well, I know this much, I'll be happy to read his posts if he is unbanned at some future point.

No need to wait. He's active here: (he last posted through DISQUS 9 hrs ago)

Disqus Profile - neroden

 

[RobStark]

Best update you'll get != only update they'll get. (Unless you buy 2 S/X this year)


S, like Roadster, was a means to an end. That end being the 3 (and future more affordable cars). If Tesla will forevermore be defined by the S (or the X which was not in the original plan) then they fail in a way.

Model 3 will be the bread'n butter model like the BMW 3 Series. Where the company makes the most profit.

Like BMW the 7 Series, the Model S is the flagship. What the Model 3 and X3 owners aspire to.


As times are chang'n, the X7 and Model X may become increasingly seen as flagship while X3 and Model Y become the bread'n butter Models.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

Disagree. If there is a legit reason to ban a longstanding member the mods should state their reasons if requested.

Even more importantly, this banning was pure censorship. I think this was draconian and uncalled for; at worst, he should have been placed on a probation or blocked term of only days or weeks.

If the mods don't allow him to return, we all lose--groupthink is a dangerous thing that we should all actively fight against.

And, FWIW, I just purchased another set of TSLA shares at $230; expect a drop tomorrow for those wishing to buy when they're really "On Sale."

 

[Antares Nebula]

Best update you'll get != only update they'll get. (Unless you buy 2 S/X this year)


S, like Roadster, was a means to an end. That end being the 3 (and future more affordable cars). If Tesla will forevermore be defined by the S (or the X which was not in the original plan) then they fail in a way.

I'm not saying that the S completely defines Tesla. But it is not ONLY a means to and end. In that case, why Roadster 2.0? Why rocket packs on Roadster 2.0? Tesla is more than about just making mass market affordable EVs. It is that, but it is also much more.

 

[mongo]

Model 3 will be the bread'n butter model like the BMW 3 Series. Where the company makes the most profit.

Like BMW the 7 Series, the Model S is the flagship. What the Model 3 and X3 owners aspire to.


As times are chang'n, the X7 and Model X may become increasingly seen as flagship while X3 and Model Y become the bread'n butter Models.

Does that paradigm really fit Tesla though? When your bread and butter outperforms the majority of other cars out there, it seems the differentiator is the remaining festure set. So you have S/X being roomier (in some ways... I fit best in the 3 currently) or having increased towing.

I'm not saying that the S completely defines Tesla. But it is not ONLY a means to and end. In that case, why Roadster 2.0? Why rocket packs on Roadster 2.0? No, my friend, Tesla is more than just making mass market affordable EVs. It is that, but it is also much more.

Tesla is removing all reasons to get an ICE which helps in converting daily driver types to the brand also.
Roadster 2.0 pulls in people as a halo car. Semi has nothing to do with the average driver either, but it furthers the transition to sustainable energy. Pickup will be.... interesting. All variants will pull in different parts of the buying public.

Within the next year or so, S will be a larger 3 and X will be a larger Y. They have a liitle more range and power, but beyond that it's hard to see how they can hold a flagship title. Nor do I see a need for them to. So I do not think Tesla is failing by concentrating on other things and not doing a big refresh.

 

[Singer3000]

Having dipped in and out of this thread and its predecessors for 6 years, I've read it daily for about the last two. And that's because of the contributions of a pretty small number of valued posters, most certainly one of them being He Who Shall Not Be Named. If HWSNBN has been blocked from this site never to return, I expect I and many others will be giving a whole lot fewer clicks from now on.

Maybe it's even time to give old Fred another go!

 

[FreqFlyer]

My friend got that email even though they already had FSD. I purchased FSD on the last sale and got the following email which looks like they’re trying to entice current owners to upgrade. And honestly the psychological benefit of the free supercharging is a big factor for me if I ever do want to upgrade.

View attachment 438604

I also have another email address in Tesla’s marketing radar that isn’t associated with a Tesla account and got this email.
View attachment 438605

I got the same email with the white Model S.

Man I would be a little upset at the situation if I just bought an S or X before the free supercharging.

 

[Antares Nebula]

Does that paradigm really fit Tesla though? When your bread and butter outperforms the majority of other cars out there, it seems the differentiator is the remaining festure set. So you have S/X being roomier (in some ways... I fit best in the 3 currently) or having increased towing.



Tesla is removing all reasons to get an ICE which helps in converting daily driver types to the brand also.
Roadster 2.0 pulls in people as a halo car. Semi has nothing to do with the average driver either, but it furthers the transition to sustainable energy. Pickup will be.... interesting. All variants will pull in different parts of the buying public.

Within the next year or so, S will be a larger 3 and X will be a larger Y. They have a liitle more range and power, but beyond that it's hard to see how they can hold a flagship title. Nor do I see a need for them to. So I do not think Tesla is failing by concentrating on other things and not doing a big refresh.

This kind of talk buy bulls strikes me as rationalizing. Trying to make excuses for what is otherwise a clear mistake.

 

[dc_h]

When I get e-mails with content like this I usually delete them as frontrunning spam

All-Time Top 5 (until June 2019)
1. Nissan Leaf (422.708)

2. Tesla Model S (277.176)

3. Tesla Model 3 (276.193)

4. Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV (215.385)

5. BYD Qin / Qin Pro (PHEV+BEV) (184.692)

EV Sales: All-Time Top 5 (until June 2019)

Model 3 overtook Model S in all-time sales in July 2019.

It will take roughly a year for Model 3 to overtake LEAF.

March I say!

340k Q3
395 Q4
412 January 2020
430 February
455 March vs 435k for the Leaf


Great data, thanks.

 

[GaryW]

Even more importantly, this banning was pure censorship. I think this was draconian and uncalled for; at worst, he should have been placed on a probation or blocked term of only days or weeks.

If the mods don't allow him to return, we all lose--groupthink is a dangerous thing that we should all actively fight against.

And, FWIW, I just purchased another set of TSLA shares at $230; expect a drop tomorrow for those wishing to buy when they're really "On Sale."

My concern is when any member attempts to shut down or bully another member. I remember too many “stop, just stop” sorts of posts.

I would like to hear all thoughtful points of view (no birds for me).

I would like to read views backed by data, rather than passion.

There are so many thoughtful posts on this forum.

Thank you all for taking the time to share your insights.

And I’m also OK if a few jokes and puns sneak through.

My two cents.

 

[Buckminster]

No need to wait. He's active here: (he last posted through DISQUS 9 hrs ago)

Disqus Profile - neroden

If you thought neroden was tough on folk here, check him out on Disqus!
He is wasted talking about Nuclear stuff - old hat. I think he should stay here and be more focussed (or narrow if you prefer).

 

[Mike Smith]

This is great advertising for Tesla.

Tesla Scrutinized by U.S. Agency Over Model 3 Safety Claims

 

[Alphacrux]

I got the same email with the white Model S.

Man I would be a little upset at the situation if I just bought an S or X before the free supercharging.

Like me. I sent an email to Tesla but don’t expect any kind of positive response.

 

[Artful Dodger]

This is great advertising for Tesla.

Tesla Scrutinized by U.S. Agency Over Model 3 Safety Claims

"To contact the reporters on this story: Dana Hull in San Francisco at ..."​

 

[mickificki]

"To contact the reporters on this story: Dana Hull in San Francisco at ..."​

Dana Hull is such a precious gift to human kind.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Did they happen to mention the energy density before the 20% hit? Cause I mean, if the design gives a 30% increase then it was still ahead at that point...

The paper states:

• Replacing the conventional graphite anode with lithium metal is one of the most popular approaches, as this can increase the cell energy density by 40–50% (refs. 1,2)
• Since there is no excess lithium built into the cell, volume is minimized (Fig. 1a) and energy density is maximized (1,3,4), but performance may be very poor since there is no reservoir of fresh lithium to replenish the cell during cycling

Here is Fig. 1 referred to in the 2nd bullet point above:

Fig. 1 | Electrochemical behaviour of single- and dual-salt electrolytes

a, Schematic of the fully charged anode-free configuration with about 40% reduced thickness compared with an equivalent lithium-ion cell.

b, Capacity retention versus cycle number for anode-free pouch cells using electrolytes with different lithium salts.

c,d, Capacity retention versus cycle number as a function of upper cut-off voltage for two electrolytes with different salts: 1.2 M LiDFOB

(c) versus 0.6 M LiDFOB + 0.6 M LiBF4
(d). All electrolytes use an FECEC (1:2 vol.) solvent mix.

Pairs of cells for each electrolyte type are shown as matching symbols.​

The paper states in the test cells "the areal capacity was about 2.4 mAh cm−2 and total pouch cell capacity was about 250 mAh." There should be more details in the publicly accessible "Supplementary Materials" as a PDF download from the publishing Journal, Nature.

Finally, here are the first 4 references from the paper as used above:

1. Albertus, P., Babinec, S., Litzelman, S. & Newman, A. Status and challenges in enabling the lithium metal electrode for high-energy and low-cost rechargeable batteries. Nat. Energy 3, 16–21 (2018).
2. Betz, J. et al. Theoretical versus practical energy: a plea for more transparency in the energy calculation of different rechargeable battery systems. Adv. Energy Mater. 9, 1803170 (2019).
3. Genovese, M., Louli, A. J., Weber, R., Hames, S. & Dahn, J. R. Measuring the coulombic efficiency of lithium metal cycling in anode-free lithium metal batteries. J. Electrochem. Soc. 165, A3321–A3325 (2018).
4. Liu, J. et al. Pathways for practical high-energy long-cycling lithium metal batteries. Nat. Energy 4, 180 (2019).

P.S. I think you'll find more useful material on energy density in the Liu et.al (2019) (PDF) at Ref.4 above. Here's part of the Abstract from that paper: (reduced to 'bullet' points for readability)

• Li metal is considered an ultimate anode material for future high-energy rechargeable batteries when combined with existing or emerging high-capacity cathode materials.
• Here we discuss crucial conditions needed to achieve a specific energy higher than 350 Wh kg-1, up to 500 Wh kg-1, for rechargeable Li metal batteries using high-nickel-content lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxides as cathode materials.
• We also provide an analysis of key factors such as cathode loading, electrolyte amount and Li foil thickness that impact the cell-level cycle life.
• Furthermore, we identify several important strategies to reduce electrolyte-Li reaction, protect Li surfaces and stabilize anode architectures for long-cycling high-specific-energy cells.

 

[StealthP3D]

Model 3 overtook Model S in all-time sales in July 2019.

It will take roughly a year for Model 3 to overtake LEAF.

That's odd because I see about 4 Model 3's on the road for every Leaf. Are the Leafs already going to the crusher?

 

[CorneliusXX]

Join the club.

I should start selling violins

 

[dc_h]

Looks like that Koch brothers lobbying against renewable energy is getting some help from the WSJ. It is not surprisingly not paywalled. Any WSJ people who want to hit the comments, I'm sure they will be toxic. They make a lot of unsubstantiated claims about vast sums of energy and resources required to make wind, solar and batteries relative to resource requirements for oil. The tone of the article was very John Peterson, perhaps he has a pupil.
A google of Mark P Mills, shows he is a physicist with the Manhattan Institute. Manhattan Institute is a free market dedicated group, but seem focused on large corporate freedom, not competitive freedom. Saying you are dedicated to Oligopoly is not a compelling a mission statement though. Any science and stats people want to follow them on twitter, they could use some counterfacts.

Opinion | If You Want ‘Renewable Energy,’ Get Ready to Dig

 

[bhtooefr]

That's odd because I see about 4 Model 3's on the road for every Leaf. Are the Leafs already going to the crusher?

There's a few things I can think of:

• A bit over 1/3 of the LEAFs produced have been delivered to the US, whereas a bit under 1/3 have been delivered to Japan and Europe each. Have Model 3 deliveries even begun in Japan yet (I know orders have)? And various factors have caused the majority of Model 3 deliveries to AFAIK go to the US (and Canada).
• There's 9 year old LEAFs, so yes, attrition is much more of a factor. (Especially with the well-documented LEAF battery degradation problems.)
• I know the LEAF was one of the least compliancey of the legacy automaker modern BEVs (in that it was a serious attempt even with the major issues with it, and it was always sold in 50 states AFAIK), but deliveries may have been prioritized to ZEV states (Washington not being one), whereas Tesla delivery prioritization within the US seems to (after the initial cars, anyway) purely be based on logistics within a quarter (so everyone gets them based on demand, not based on credits).