RobStark
Well-Known Member
If they make it to production so will Lucid and Bollinger.
All the cool kids in America will use 2070.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
If they make it to production so will Lucid and Bollinger.
All the cool kids in America will use 2070.
Just received my Tesla Christmas present to myself (stainless steel water bottle) and it got me thinking. The product is nice and your typical cylindrical shape (logos need to be darker/bigger though), but what we really need is a Cyber styled octagonal water bottle and a thermos made from the same 30x cold rolled stainless. Maybe build in a LED "light bar" ring on the cap with a small solar cell and you could use the thing as an emergency light and self defense weapon. Bold, laser engraved logo and lettering, meaty black rubberized bottom, maybe a little sealed compartment in the base for water purification tablets. Meeting all your dystopian future water bottle needs!
Yeah, it will be pricey, but what else you gonna buy while waiting on your CT?
Maybe a bit too much coffee and chocolate this evening...
EDIT: Add a matching lunchbox and it can be part of the Cyberdine System!
Funny--I've long thought that the lifestyle section of Tesla's store is a huge missed opportunity. The selection, especially of clothing, is almost impressive in its terribleness.
Tesla has a large contingent of fans and customers, largely well-off, and Tesla squanders it.
For the price of a highly-rated freelance shirt.woot.com contributor, they could pretty easily make a much wider selection of designs, with new ones appearing weekly.
I'd certainly bite. It's not even about the revenue from the store--their prices indicate that they're clearly not interested in volume in this area. But it'd certainly increase sales if the designs were more impressive and frequent.
Construction in Europe seems crazy. You need to clear uninhabitated areas of unexploded bombs before starting construction in many parts of Europe. But then you get to the parts of Europe with ancient history, to build anything in Rome you literally need a team of archaeologists to come and clear the site of buried artifacts before you can start construction.
RFernatt
Solar/EV Owner/Enthusiast
Totally agree. I could see possibilities for fan contests to select designs for new products like the fan made commercials. Lots of engagement opportunities and generating a wider set of designs and product selection.
Clearing bombs is one thing. Are you saying clearing of the archeological history of Rome is the same thing? If so I do not believe that is the place for a factory. Let's pave paradise and put up a parking lot.
Going through your questions, while attempting to keep this Investor related.
TL;dr its about the SPEED of bringing a new class of products to production
1. Deutsche Bank, in a Research Note from Dec 13th, quoted Tesla IR Director Martin Viecha as saying that Cybertruck can be built with the current generation of batteries.
2. "The battery pack sizes for the Cybertruck were not disclosed but Tesla believes that they can achieve the targeted ranges and price points with the current generation of batteries."
There are 2 packs currently in production: Models S/X and 3. Plaid//Tri-motor must be built up from existing generations. It isn't going to get any clearer than that. Of course you are free to believe what you choose, but my point is that Tesla's choices will:
(3) Initial battery cells for $50K AWD Cyber/Raven will most likely come from Japan because its simplest to do so. There is existing idle capacity on GA1 due to the 2019 reduction in Model S/X production, so it minimizes CapEx. As I stated, we'll have to wait for Bty Day to find out Tesla's plans for large scale production (over 1K/wk).
- use the simplest path to Cybertruck production
- utilize existing production capacity resources
- minimize CapEx for the first 3 pickup versions
Perhaps by 2022 when the $40K Cybertruck becomes available, there will be surplus capacity for 2170 cells. That may be why Tesla delayed that version, since right now every $40K 2WD Cybertruck produced would come at the loss of a $45K Model 3 LR not produced due to lack of battery cells.
(4) Both Raven motors DO NOT come from Fremont (but you knew the front SRPM motor is made at GF1 and shipped to Fremont for assembly, right?)
In summary, using the 18650-based 100 KWh Raven AWD powertrain from the current S/X is the simply the fastest path to launch a new class of products for Tesla, while accelerating the Mission. Since everything beyond what Tesla has announced is speculation (especially Plaid/Tri-motor), let's agree to disagree and end this here.
Cheers!
Didn't they also say it would charge at 250kw minimum?
They can with the current generation of batteries, but that doesn't mean they will.And what does "current generation of batteries" actually mean? It implies cells that are already in cars that are shipping, but it could just mean, cells Tesla can make today...
I'm not in a rush to conclude anything definite here, as new cells need to come from somewhere.
it is possible Model 3+Y can be built with the 35GWh produced by GF1, or that GF1 will be expanded.
The 18650 cells from Japan are enough for Raven Model S/X,, but Panasonic would need to produce more 18650 cells.... for Cybertruck.
Shipping cells from Japan for production in any kind of volume doesn't make sense.... unless Tesla need Panasonic, and Panasonic will not expand in the US.
We will find out soon enough, but we are missing some pieces of the jigsaw, and I don't think we can guess the answers..
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
Ask him what benchmarks Tesla has to meet for him to consider it a viable company. Pretty much any rational financial benchmark he can mention will probably be met in the next 12 months. I.e. you only have to wait.
As to Elon's credibility and track record, ask him how a "crook" could beat a planetful of rocket scientists and land orbital stages dozens of times, with finances that one of the original SpaceX angel investors called "was like financial porn":
"There is a fellow board member of mine who is a sort of business industrialist. Many of the investments that he makes are in traditional parts of the economy, as well as technology. So he sees a much broader swath of businesses and scale the differences than a typical venture investor. He has a, let's say, banker-like filter. In any case, long story short, he looks at the SpaceX financials and says, oh my God, this is like financial porn."
It's usually the "considering going private, funding secured" tweets that casual observers consider "proof" of dishonesty - ask him whether he knows about this interview where first the usual SEC FUD is presented, which is then torn apart by former SEC senior lawyer Tom Gorman, who, parsing the tweets word by word comes to the conclusion that Elon was fully justified to write those tweets:
Gorman was a lawyer at the SEC who initiated such lawsuits, and in this interview he questions the SEC"s decision to sue Elon. (It's also no surprise that Gorman didn't get any second interview from CNBC.
)Or ask him why a jury of 12 peers found Elon "not guilty" after less than 20 minutes of deliberations, which one of the jurors characterized as a "very clear case" - after a year long smear campaign against Elon?
Are these rocket scientists, business industrials, SEC lawyers and jury members all in on the con?
If your friend isn't even willing to fairly consider such evidence then he's gone "emotional TSLAQ" I'm afraid, like most TSLAQ types on Twitter.
Last edited:
Going through your questions, while attempting to keep this Investor related.
TL;dr its about the SPEED of bringing a new class of products to production
1. Deutsche Bank, in a Research Note from Dec 13th, quoted Tesla IR Director Martin Viecha as saying that Cybertruck can be built with the current generation of batteries.
2. "The battery pack sizes for the Cybertruck were not disclosed but Tesla believes that they can achieve the targeted ranges and price points with the current generation of batteries."
There are 2 packs currently in production: Models S/X and 3. Plaid//Tri-motor must be built up from existing generations. It isn't going to get any clearer than that. Of course you are free to believe what you choose, but my point is that Tesla's choices will:
(3) Initial battery cells for $50K AWD Cyber/Raven will most likely come from Japan because its simplest to do so. There is existing idle capacity on GA1 due to the 2019 reduction in Model S/X production, so it minimizes CapEx. As I stated, we'll have to wait for Bty Day to find out Tesla's plans for large scale production (over 1K/wk).
- use the simplest path to Cybertruck production
- utilize existing production capacity resources
- minimize CapEx for the first 3 pickup versions
Perhaps by 2022 when the $40K Cybertruck becomes available, there will be surplus capacity for 2170 cells. That may be why Tesla delayed that version, since right now every $40K 2WD Cybertruck produced would come at the loss of a $45K Model 3 LR not produced due to lack of battery cells.
(4) Both Raven motors DO NOT come from Fremont (but you knew the front SRPM motor is made at GF1 and shipped to Fremont for assembly, right?)
In summary, using the 18650-based 100 KWh Raven AWD powertrain from the current S/X is the simply the fastest path to launch a new class of products for Tesla, while accelerating the Mission. Since everything beyond what Tesla has announced is speculation (especially Plaid/Tri-motor), let's agree to disagree and end this here.
Cheers!
Now I understand your confusion. You're missing the middle stage in your battery analysis. Both the model S/X pack and the model 3 pack have their cells packaged into modules. The S/X packs are composed of sixteen 444-cell modules (~5kwh each), while the model 3 pack is composed of four 1078-cell & 1150-cell modules. The Grohmann battery pack automated line most likely assembles these modules. So adding capacity to build more modules for cyber truck doesn't require adding significantly more staff. Not to mention that building a new pack out of the model 3 modules will probably be easier than with the smaller model S modules.
Also, earlier you mentioned that Tesla favors the quickest solution, and that is NOT true. Tesla rushes to implement their solutions, but their solutions are always what's best when factoring in quality, safety, and cost. Speed is only a factor if it affects cost. Choosing an inferior pack design to minimize cost won't ever pencil out. Especially when another pack design already exists that minimizes costs even further due to lower component costs.
Mike Smith
Active Member
Tesla Considers Cutting Price of China-Built Cars Next Year
Tesla Inc. is considering cutting the price of its China-built Model 3 sedans by 20% or more next year
Please remove your hats and observe a moment of silence for the competition.
Tesla Inc. is considering cutting the price of its China-built Model 3 sedans by 20% or more next year
Please remove your hats and observe a moment of silence for the competition.
McMountain
Member
Clearing unexploded ordinance is really a standard thing you do in Europe. It is an expense, but it has to be done and their are a lot of companies that can do this routinely. Clearing unexploded orinance in a forest somewhere in the countryside is a totally different thing from clearing unexploded ordinance in an inner city environment, like you have to do for any metro construction or deep foundation in a city. You may have to evacuate hundreds of people there for a couple of hours - and it is routinely done.
Honestly sounds like a ploy by the media to try and get buyers to wait by using "sources" as their bases. The MIC 3's haven't even begun deliveries yet. There would be no reason for Tesla to be discussing this at this point in time. Especially after getting that special incentive from the Chinese government
It's also a super convenient way to introduce the "demand" concerns once again
Last edited:
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
Exactly. I don't see a source listed for that comment but my initial thought was "If Tesla is announcing this now, that means they have more demand in China than they know what to do with. That the Model 3 is wildly successful and sought after." But then I thought, "Well, if that's the case, why would they bother announcing this now and not when they are ready to lower prices?".
In other words, it doesn't sound credible.
I can't remember seeing this GF4 drone video posted here:
Lets see how TSLA/Tesla China does damage control. Those bad asses in media really want TESLA to succeed.Honestly sounds like a ploy by the media to try and get buyers to wait by using "sources" as their bases. The MIC 3's haven't even begun deliveries yet. There would be no reason for Tesla to be discussing this at this point in time. Especially after getting that special incentive from the Chinese government
It's also a super convenient way to introduce the "demand" concerns once again
Mars ☰mperor
Member
特拉风T☰SLA mania on Twitter
"20% price drop" fake news by Bloomberg, yet again.
Tesla China has officially responded:
Never heard of such a thing. Please follow the information on our official website.
Tesla China has officially responded:
Never heard of such a thing. Please follow the information on our official website.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
If this is from Bloomberg, then so close to the end of the quarter this is a clear attempt to both manipulate the TSLA share price and to hurt Tesla demand in a critical phase of the sales period. If they knew or should have known that these were false claims then these are potential actionable crimes committed by Bloomberg journalists: securities fraud and also tortious interference with Tesla's business.
This should be considered a serious breach of journalist integrity. I’d love nothing more than for this to be shut down quickly through threat of lawsuit. But it will just be picked up by every news source and they will say “Tesla did not comment on the rumors”
This not only seems like an attempt to ruffle demand, it seems likely an attempt to fabricate dissatisfaction among Chinese consumers, and another round of "look how rude and untrustworthy Elon and Tesla are" in the media.
All that said, I've long wondered why the price of a MIC SR+ to be sold in China is estimated to be the equivalent of ~$50k vs. ~$40k in the US. Anybody know? Does pricing listed in China requires taxes to be included?
fwiw, while I don't know if it's still the case, Tesla's past pricing policy was NOT to do opportunistic pricing in any market as compared to the rest of the world, but, rather price globally, just adjusting for shipping, duties, tariffs, etc. (i.e., offer what's at Tesla's discretion equally to consumers worldwide).
All that said, I've long wondered why the price of a MIC SR+ to be sold in China is estimated to be the equivalent of ~$50k vs. ~$40k in the US. Anybody know? Does pricing listed in China requires taxes to be included?
fwiw, while I don't know if it's still the case, Tesla's past pricing policy was NOT to do opportunistic pricing in any market as compared to the rest of the world, but, rather price globally, just adjusting for shipping, duties, tariffs, etc. (i.e., offer what's at Tesla's discretion equally to consumers worldwide).
Tesla/Elon has had to beef up their legal team over recent years for, well, "defensive" purposes.
If this Bloomberg piece is really not based on anyone from within Tesla, I'd be for putting that extra legal muscle to an "offensive" purpose. At a minimum, the media is long overdue for a 100+ mph brush back pitch.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
