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.
What you described is exactly the reason companies like Waymo/Uber,etc. have their current valuation. Future estimations for that market are in the trillions.
TSLA is purposefully stripped from such valuation.

Yeah.

As a recap, here's all the Elon quotes I could find where he talks about Tesla's role in the 'shared economy':

2017/Q4 ER call:

Elon Musk:

"There's also as I mentioned prior things that we expect operate at kind of a shared autonomy fleet where Tesla's kind of like a combination of Uber or Lyft and Airbnb, I guess, like where you can opt to have your car enter a shared fleet or not, and then Tesla can also operate its own fleet in places where there's not enough people sharing their vehicles. So that's a pretty significant opportunity."


2018/Q1 ER call:

Elon Musk:

"Sure. Thank you for an interesting question. The way things are obviously rolling towards is a shared electrical autonomy model. So, in order for the whole sort of system to work, you need all the pieces in place. You need to have full autonomy, level four or five, whatever you want to call it and, obviously, a lot of cars on the road, and then build the software infrastructure behind that to enable shared autonomy, to enable people to share their cars and be able to offer their cars as effectively kind of a robo-Lyft or robo-Uber, sort of like a combination of like, I guess, Uber, Lyft and Airbnb type of thing, where you can own your car and have 100% usage of an autonomous electric car."

"You can say it's available generally to anyone who wants to use it. When you're not using it, you can recall it, at will. You can restrict usage to only friends and family, or only users who are five-star. This is like the obvious thing that's going to happen."

"In order for that to be in place, we have to obviously sell full autonomy and we're making really good progress on that front. I believe that the current production of – vehicles that we are currently producing are capable of full autonomy with the only thing that would really be, like, might be needed – maybe is probably needed is a computer upgrade to have more processing power for the vision neural net. But that's a plug-in replacement, a thing that can be done quite easily."

"So, I think we're really well-positioned and are building the right – the foundation for having millions, ultimately tens of millions of shared autonomous electric vehicles I think we're shooting like I said decide not to share if you don't want to."


2018/Q3 ER call:

Elon Musk:

"Great, thank you. Again - actually I've said this before, what I think - just talking a bit about the kind of long-term future, we absolutely see the future as kind of - as sort of a shared electric autonomy. So that you'll be able to do ride-hailing or share your car anyway, sort of long-term model that's some combination of like Uber, Lyft and Airbnb. There will be Tesla dedicated cars for ride-hailing and there will be - and any customer will be able to share their car at will, just like you share your house in Airbnb. So it's a combination of those two models. I think, it's pretty obviously where things are headed long-term."

"The advantage that Tesla will have is that we will have millions of cars in the field with full autonomy capability, and no one else will have that. So I think that puts us - that will end up putting us in the strongest competitive position long-term."

Maynard Um:

"Great. And when you think about Tesla having its own ride-sharing fleet or giving people the ability to loan out their car like an Airbnb model, I'm curious if your long-term plan is to build a platform that's going to enable companies to write applications to turn the car directly into an application. And then can you also maybe just talk about that business model? Is that - should we be thinking more about like a revenue-sharing model sort of like how Apple takes a piece of revenue generated for applications from iPhones? Thanks."

Elon Musk:

"I don't know turning the car into an application exactly. But I mean, maybe trying to do things that maximizes usefulness, and so if there's a way to think, where third-parties can do something and that could make sense. But I do know, for sure that Tesla will operate its own ride-hailing service will compete directly with Uber and Lyft obviously."

"And - but then also have the ability for customers to offer their car and add or subtract their car to the fleet at will. It will be a company owned fleet - and the company-owned fleet with just be aware that aren't enough customer cars to be life out. So if we find like a particular metro, there aren't enough customers who are going to add their car to the shared fleet. And then, that's where we'll start rum them with a Tesla fleet. So that's why it's a certain combination of Uber, Lyft and Airbnb. And then we charge something probably comparable to, yeah, you have to say ... or I don't know we tried 30% or something, in order for somebody to add the car to the fleet."
But it's not included in most Wall Street analysts' Tesla valuation, because that would mess up all the bankwuptcy, equity raise, $250 price target narratives, right? :D
 
There's three other forces as well I believe:
  • Leading battery pack producers like LG Chem are pushing prismatic/pouch cells because it creates a kind of vendor lock-in: the cells typically have much higher capacity, so any module designed to them will unlikely to be able to make use of competing vendor's cells. Cylindrical cells on the other hand allow more interchangeability, for example Tesla's Australia battery project was using Samsung cells.
  • Leading car OEMs are buying whatever is available in volume - and that's basically just LG Chem. Everything else takes years to build: a cylindrical cell factory takes 2-3 years to build, from scratch. So once they have started with prismatic cells, it's more probable that their next generation of EVs is using similar cells.
  • Car OEMs also prefer their outsourced suppliers to be tied to their EV architecture, so that they cannot go and sell to other carmakers overly easily.
Not even Volkswagen appears to have broken this kind of lock-in: even the ID is going to use prismatic cells I believe.

Jaguar has figured it out, as they are going to the 2170.

18650 and 2170 cells are the only reasonable sized non-locked in places I know of in the battery market, and who would even consider building a car using 18650s?
 
I also agree with @KarenRei about moving to 2170 being the last thing Tesla would choose to do. In addition to possible reasons she mentioned, a few more reasons I can think of.

- 18650 is not fundamentally worse than 2170; changing cells of a battery pack for such an incremental improvement doesn't make sense.
- 18650 is made in Japan at separate factories, totaling 8GWh. Why concentrate and invest more money into GF1 to do the same thing?
- if Panasonic planned to move to 2170 in Japan, that would mean they have to amortize the equipment completely and invest in a whole new set of assets. Would they do that?
- if Panasonic decided to move production of 2170 to Nevada, what do they do with employees in Japan? Remember they can't fire a single employee in Japanese law.

I don’t remember the source, but I have read that one factor driving Tesla’s choice of 21700 for their new cell format was that existing manufacturing lines for the 18650 format could be modified to produce 21700, and this was about as far as the existing lines could be stretched to make larger cells.

GSP
 
Jaguar has figured it out, as they are going to the 2170.

18650 and 2170 cells are the only reasonable sized non-locked in places I know of in the battery market, and who would even consider building a car using 18650s?
I think Jaguar have ordered 5Gwh/year 2170s from Samsung for 2020+. Not clear who is making the battery pack though or whether the design is finished.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: shootformoon
Not even Volkswagen appears to have broken this kind of lock-in: even the ID is going to use prismatic cells I believe.
It seems Tesla is the only one using NCA chemistry for the cell, and might therefore need better protection for the cells, with NCA being less stable. The result being a superior package.
 
Last edited:
Yeah.

As a recap, here's all the Elon quotes I could find where he talks about Tesla's role in the 'shared economy':

2017/Q4 ER call:

Elon Musk:

"There's also as I mentioned prior things that we expect operate at kind of a shared autonomy fleet where Tesla's kind of like a combination of Uber or Lyft and Airbnb, I guess, like where you can opt to have your car enter a shared fleet or not, and then Tesla can also operate its own fleet in places where there's not enough people sharing their vehicles. So that's a pretty significant opportunity."
But it's not included in most Wall Street analysts' Tesla valuation, because that would mess up all the bankwuptcy, equity raise, $250 price target narratives, right? :D

One thing I don't often see discussed on self driving cars is the enormous value of a 1-2 year first mover advantage.

The first 1-3 million self driving cars on the road are still going to be massively outnumbered by the 30 million+ global taxi fleet. This means there is no incentive to charge less than Uber/Lyft per mile until the global taxi fleet is saturated with self driving cars and competition begins to drive the cost of cars down. In fact many customers would be willing to pay a premium over Uber/Lyft for the novelty, increased safety, and premium Tesla passenger experience.
If Tesla switches on 1 million self driving cars and is first to market, each of those cars could potentially generate over $200k cash flow per year (after electricity, service, cleaning costs etc) until the market starts to get saturated with 3 million+ self driving cars. Even when other companies deliver self driving technology, it is going to take a long time to get a global fleet of enough numbers to put the entire global taxi industry out of business. Almost all Tesla owners will be persuaded to send their $40-60k cars to work for Tesla's fleet for $30-50k annual profit. It doesn't make business sense for Tesla to give its customers a larger share of the profit than it needs to to persuade everyone to send their cars to work. So I can see Tesla keeping $150k cash flow per car and its 1 million self driving car fleet making Tesla $150bn cash flow in year one.
 
If Tesla does manage to produce and ship 3k 3s to Europe every week and the first ship arrives in 2 weeks thats about 18k 3s will arrive in Q1 which looking at the orders should be completely and easily absorbed.

Well, that's the thing.. I totally want to believe the awesome German demand and all the arguments presented are very convincing. But at 18k deliveries in Q1 and 10k of them going to Germany, how could I still be able to order the car anywhere in Europe and get promised a March delivery? Are we missing some ships?

But it's not included in most Wall Street analysts' Tesla valuation, because that would mess up all the bankwuptcy, equity raise, $250 price target narratives, right? :D

Maybe for the very same reason we all here dismiss other OEM's plans to go all electric? "I'll believe it when I see it".

When Tesla does actually announce solid plans and start date of Tesla Network then we can expect a huge jump in SP. Good thing to plan for :) But until then it's still a dream, not a reality. Same reason why SpaceX valuation doesn't really include Mars base yet.
 
Germany's #1 car influencer - and Tesla sympathizer - "JP" trashed the Model3 on the telly ("GRIP", Germany's wannabe Top Gear):

  • Borrowed a M3 LR (non-P) to drive from LA to Las Vegas.
  • Likes the quality and finish of the interior.
  • Impressed by range, charging speed and acceleration.
  • Didn't dig the look of it ("transport capsule").
  • Indifferent about AP.
  • (Off-commentary) "Volume of the trunk is pathetic".
  • Couldn't manage to open the frunk.
  • Disliked and spread fake-news about the breaking. You know what I'm talking about.
  • "Not revolutionary." / "Failed."
Ugh.

He has quite a following and is a true thought-leader among the young car enthusiasts in Germany. Not good.

Edit: Lots of criticism towards JP and GRIP in the comments.
If GRIP is the German wannabe Top Gear, they probably also have scripted results, so the verdict is no surprise.

The comments to the video make me happy, clearly calling him out for spreading false information.
 
But it's not included in most Wall Street analysts' Tesla valuation, because that would mess up all the bankwuptcy, equity raise, $250 price target narratives, right? :D

Exactly. They cant afford to weaken their case even more. Their house of cards is so weak, adding a brick on the top just will make matters worse :D

The reality is, TSLA (with Elon) is probably the best placed company to succeed in FSD. Not only that, but they are already monetizing on their developments. I really don't understand how short positions sleep well at night (or do they?), when at any given moment TSLA can announce rapid progress and force readjustment in the company's valuation.


Back to market related news- the earning week started on the wrong foot with CAT result (stock down more than 5% already):
  • $2.55 per share, vs $2.99 expected
  • 2019 profit range of $11.75 to $12.75 per share vs $12.73 per share estimate
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Fact Checking
Well, that's the thing.. I totally want to believe the awesome German demand and all the arguments presented are very convincing. But at 18k deliveries in Q1 and 10k of them going to Germany, how could I still be able to order the car anywhere in Europe and get promised a March delivery? Are we missing some ships?

Depends on how full they're filling the ships. At 1 ship per week filled only to 2k cars (like the Glovis Captain), that's 17,4k cars to Europe by the end of March. But if they've started filling closer to the max ~6k per ship, that's 52k by the end of March. Really doubt that, though, that would be almost all of their production. It had earlier been stated that Tesla had been planning on sending 3k per week to Europe, which would be 26,1k by the end of March.

Where did the 18k deliveries for Q1 figure come from, exactly? How would we even know that? Q1 isn't even a third over yet.

BTW: Glovis Cosmos is halfway through the Panama Canal right now. These things are almost starting to seem routine :)
 
Last edited:
Could that be because TESLA is switching to HW3 and won't be paying much to NVDA ?

Unlikely to be related: even with 300,000 units per year the revenue generated by the ~$100 Nvidia chips is at most in the $30m range - and profit is a portion of that. I believe Tesla made most of the computing board themselves and only bought the chips from Nvidia.

HW3 is a big deal to Tesla, because they wanted 10x more performance, and they'd have to pay $1,000 or more per car to Nvidia to get that kind of performance.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: humbaba