Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
There was nothing in that which said when anything would happen. So please don't call me a troll. I'm asking honest questions and would appreciate honest answers, not pointers to profits talking about the great beyond.
Ok, then a different question, but totally relevant and not trolling. When will the robo-taxi be available?
While Musk may be thinking of private ownership with the car working for you, what is much more likely I think is self driving cars will become a common resource which we request when we want transportation, like cab companies or car rentals. Why would we want to have to park and garage and care for a vehicle when we can request a vehicle drive itself to us and take us where we want to go at a fraction of the cost of owning a car that will sit literally 95% of the time? At that point it won't be about the purchase price of the EV. It will be about the operating expense.
Antares Nebula
Active Member
Apple, of course, is uncertain, as Project Titan has vacillated over the years. As a Tesla shareholder, I consider Apple the biggest threat IF/WHEN they deliver an EV smartcar. While I have my doubts about their program, I am not willing to rule them out yet.
Also, IMO, there remains the possibility of some kind of partnership/merger between Apple and Tesla, however unpopular this maybe (not a fan of this, but just pointing out the possibility -- I mean, if I was TIm Cook, I would seriously be considering it. Of course, Musk may have zero interest in this, but who knows; he would likely have to be made CEO). Apple has bid for Tesla in the past I believe, and now, as Tesla appears to be righting its ship and perched for significant growth, it is quite possible that Apple maybe taking a glance in its direction once again.
The other side of the coin is that Apple has almost always developed in house expertise rather than buy from outside, and Tesla would be a very large, almost too difficult, organization to integrate into Apple.
One thing for sure, if Apple did come out with a car, that would be some crazy competition. In the desktop or smartphone space, Apple was always viewed as the cool, slick, and fun products, while Windows and Android was more the nerdy, boring, or 9to5, suit and tie products. And this defined the competitive dynamics of the marketplace. But imagine if you had two Apple like companies competing against each other in desktops and smartphones. What would that be like?
Also, IMO, there remains the possibility of some kind of partnership/merger between Apple and Tesla, however unpopular this maybe (not a fan of this, but just pointing out the possibility -- I mean, if I was TIm Cook, I would seriously be considering it. Of course, Musk may have zero interest in this, but who knows; he would likely have to be made CEO). Apple has bid for Tesla in the past I believe, and now, as Tesla appears to be righting its ship and perched for significant growth, it is quite possible that Apple maybe taking a glance in its direction once again.
The other side of the coin is that Apple has almost always developed in house expertise rather than buy from outside, and Tesla would be a very large, almost too difficult, organization to integrate into Apple.
One thing for sure, if Apple did come out with a car, that would be some crazy competition. In the desktop or smartphone space, Apple was always viewed as the cool, slick, and fun products, while Windows and Android was more the nerdy, boring, or 9to5, suit and tie products. And this defined the competitive dynamics of the marketplace. But imagine if you had two Apple like companies competing against each other in desktops and smartphones. What would that be like?
Last edited:
Mike Smith
Active Member
Note that this is only happening as the vehicles are redesigned starting next year. So who knows when this will actually happen. Ford only does major redesigns every 5 years or so as far as I know.
Antares Nebula
Active Member
I highly doubt Buffett considered purchasing Tesla. Not at all his play. Not at this stage. However, his two lieutenants may have considered it as a trade (they have taken short term trades in the past), but again, I doubt it.
I'm a huge Buffett fan and have followed him closely, but I think he maybe slipping up as of late. Look at IBM and Heinz. Also he has now underperformed the index for the last decade. Perhaps he is getting too old or perhaps he has been affected by all the media limelight. Still, what he has achieved is incredible.
For those that aspire to be great investors here (beyond just their Tesla investment), I highly recommend:
https://www.amazon.com/Warren-Buffett-Way-Investment-Strategies/dp/0471177504
Altruistically, I would like to see them some day (perhaps in a few years, certainly well after FSD upgrades are done) offer free upgrades to non-FSD owners in the name of improved safety (after all, redundant processors and higher resolution NNs and all that must surely improve the safety features not just the self driving ones). Not enabling FSD, just giving them the better computer. Plus, you might snag a few more paid upgrades when the effort goes from pay money and wait to schedule retrofit, to just pay money.
I'd also like to see things like paid MCU upgrades be a thing for those with older screens/computers. They've sort of said they were going to do this for S/X but then AFAIK it hasn't happened yet. Some day there will be a faster / better MCU for 3/Y as well, and then I'll want it... and I'd rather pay cost + margin + labor than buy a new car.
Both of these of course would really need to wait on much greater service capacity to be built out...
Artful Dodger
"Ducimus, lit"
The world-wide grid is a practical alternative to SEASONAL storage. Where I live, on the Winter solstice we get about 7 hrs per day of sunlight, and the solar zenith at noon is about 10 degrees. Guess how much battery storage I need to power my home through 5 months of hard Winter? Guess again after allowing for energy used by a ground source heat pump:
1,500 KWh per person per home. 2x if powering a heat pump. That's over 200x the capacity of a v2 Powerwall. Northerners need grid power in Winter.
When its cold and dark here in the Great White North, its sunny with long days in the Atacama desert. Running UHVDC cables from Tierra del Feugo to Fairbanks connects the backbone of the Americas with seasonally invariant solar power.
Now, let's solve the politcs because this tech is a no-brainer (therefore challenging for narrow-minded Pols)
Cheers!
Last edited by a moderator:
Krugerrand
Is Cat
You've done this in some location that doesn't end in "-ifornia"?
Yes. Like with the ground almost completely frozen to a depth of three feet. With several kinds of maple, birch, poplar, willow, spruce, pine and cedar.
You soak the soil, fertilizer (prefer to use horse manure) and roots. The roots freeze solid and in the spring everything the tree needs to get a good start is there when it comes out of its dormant stage.
The months of May-August tend to be too hot/too dry in the Northern Hemisphere - well, before climate change really took off. Now it can be a crap shoot. But in the ‘old’ days that was the rule of thumb; months with an ‘r’ is when you plant trees for best results.
I didn't mean NY specifically.
What I'm questioning for the 100% renewable energy future is
1) There are states with more pronounced seasons where solar production is less in winter.
Therefore, you can either install more solar that covers your need in winter and produces excess in summer or import solar electricity from another state, which has a more balanced production of electricity during all seasons and which costs less due to more sun.
2) if you have a multi day storm that prevents solar generation completely, do we start burning fossils(and maintain full capacity for this capability) or import solar energy from another state like TX with no winter storms
3) What losses of electricity occur via long distances (like across half the continent) and does it make sense to do this.
4) Does it make sense for state like TX to maintain solar capacity to only supply you during your blackouts or reduced production and having that capacity sitting idle the rest of the year. I think no.
It seems to me if we are to scale cheap solar to cover 100% of demand for the entire U.S., it would make sense to concentrate this capacity in states with a lot of sun and no winter. It would make solar cheaper for everyone. Compared to you having to install 2x panels to account for winter and still have a risk of blackout.
Assume we can't burn fossils anymore. Then where does this power come from?
UncaNed
Supporting Member
Not true. Fall can be a great time for planting dormant tree seedlings anywhere South of Virginia here on the right coast. I've planted thousands of Christmas tree seedlings over the years in the fall right into November that did quite well. A good tree planter can hand-plant 1,000 2 year bare root seedlings in a day with a hoedad or tree bar; my personal best was 800 in a day with the latter implement. Rainfall is the random factor, with a survival rate of 10% - 90% typical in the industry. Forestry-grade seedlings costing around $.10 USD per tree in bundles of 1,000 trees wholesale for unimpressive little 12"-14" top to root tip bare root 2-year seedlings, so count on likely filling in a year, replanting missing trees.Unfortunately, most of his followers are in the northern hemisphere, and it's not exactly tree-planting season anymore
Happy to see there's interest in local planting! FYI many states have state forestry departments that sell seedlings to residents for very reasonable prices.
Edit- I planted thousands of Christmas trees, I didn't plant any on Christmas.
Last edited:
I think Tesla will try to maintain GAAP profit to be minimal.
I agree with this. Not very popular here, but I haven’t heard any rational arguments against it. We know it’s true, Apple even offered to buy Tesla at $240 a few years ago. Imo it would be good for both Tesla and Apple, see my post here:
Apple Confirms 190 Layoffs From Self-Driving Car Project
Imo the biggest threats to Tesla are the following:
-Us being wrong and VW/Toyota/etc will eat Tesla’s lunch. Given that nothing has happened in 7years and Tesla scaling rapidly it seems unlikely.
-Alphabet/Deepmind/Waymo solving FSD and Tesla being unable to do so for some reason. Seems unlikely to me as Tesla has demoed FSD many times over the years and seems to be making steady progress and Waymo not accelerating their development.
-Apple doing something secret and one day releases a complete great product and scales up manufacturing through Magma Steyr/Foxconn. Never underestimate Apple. But if they do I think it would take years from reveal to mass production. Imo still open.
-Samsung or some other large IT company joining the race
- Mar 24, 2013
- 7,966
- 25,782
RED IS BACK......
And, the gods of the internet willing, will be so in full force quite shortly.
~~~Caveat Scriptor!~~~~~
To begin with:
ZERO more tree nonsense posts. Just because Mr Musk blows his nose doesn’t provide a reason to start discussing boogers.
AnENT this post, anyone is, as always, welcome to start a tree thread. But no more here.
~Vetinari~
And, the gods of the internet willing, will be so in full force quite shortly.
~~~Caveat Scriptor!~~~~~
To begin with:
ZERO more tree nonsense posts. Just because Mr Musk blows his nose doesn’t provide a reason to start discussing boogers.
AnENT this post, anyone is, as always, welcome to start a tree thread. But no more here.
~Vetinari~
EVNow
Well-Known Member
I don't subscribe to the popular view here that Musk will reduce the price - just because the cost is reduced or Tesla can make a profit even with reducing price. Musk is acutely aware of the need to make Tesla financially strong and healthy. He won't try to maximize profits - instead he wants to drive unit growth - but he is not averse to $1B profit. He even said Q4 '20 will be "incredible" (IIRC).
Tesla will change the prices to sell 100% of production, while doing their best to increase production and reduce cost.
bhtooefr
Active Member
So naming Samsung is an interesting one.
Most technology/gadget companies don't have enough manufacturing expertise to do a car well. Contract manufacturers are the norm for most of them, and while they may know software, they don't know the rest of the car. In some ways not knowing the rest of the car means that parts that need reinvention can be reinvented, but also, there's some things you have to learn the hard way.
Samsung has in-house manufacturing, including of batteries that are used in EVs... and they also produce cars, including an EV. ...of course, the problem there is that Samsung's entire automotive lineup is variations on Renault-Nissan Alliance products, a result of their partnering with Renault. (The EV is a licensed clone of the Renault Fluence Z.E.) Which means they're not going to do anything interesting.
(If I had to bet on a consumer electronics manufacturer getting into EVs, I'd actually guess LG, based on some of the moves they're trying to make to protect their market, and the amount of engineering they did on the Bolt. Basically, do the HTC strategy, of moving out of the shadows of building everyone else's stuff, and sell under their own brand.)
EVNow
Well-Known Member
I think the whole market makers as manipulators idea is fairly exaggerated. Oh yes, Hedge funds and even some big individual investors would try to manipulate stocks.
For eg., the price action we are seeing now can simply be attributed to call option buyers cashing out. A market maker would hedge the sale of a call by buying equivalent number of shares (1 call contract = 100 long shares, 1 put contract = 100 short shares). So, when that call is closed, the equivalent action is to sell the shares bought earlier to hedge the call writing.
When someone buys a 100 put contracts the MM (or counterparty) could short 10,000 shares. They have to do it fairly immediately to hedge properly. I'll try to look up some option volumes to see how much of the stock volume is driven by the option volume.
ps : Ofcourse this is simplistic. I guess hedging that MMs do is much more sophisticated.
The future of transportation is a puzzle with many pieces. At this point only Tesla is tackling all the piece in the right way. Namely: AI FSD, both HW and SW, reliable battery, long life battery, fast charging, large scale battery supply starts from mining supply to production, local production in each continent, extensive charging network which is reliable and high speed, insurance, vehicles designed beautifully, make it simple so it's easier to mass produce, cover high volume vehicles but don't create too many variations, high efficiency, design vehicles that can last million miles, low maintenance, low cost, direct sales, no sales commission, Tesla owned bodyshop, FSD ride sharing. And this is not the full list.
At this time I'm not 100% sure Tesla will win FSD race. I think Tesla has the right strategy, they are leading in the race. I think there is a good chance full featured FSD will come next year. I'm pretty happy shorts are still treating this company as a niche losing vehicle company. They think this company is super over valued and there is an upper limit for the market cap, which is between 70~80B. I hope they get really aggressive at shorting once Tesla rise to $80B. They would not understand how in the world the market cap could rise to 800B.
Traditional car companies are in big trouble. They know it. I'm not worried about them. My view is nobody else can make a profit, except Tesla can have 30% gross margin. It doesn't matter how other companies will compete. There are 2 billion ICE vehicles waiting to be replaced. Each year Tesla wants to replace 1% of them with great EVs. That goal seems moderate.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
- Locked
