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

[Carl Raymond]

I am not really sure what that is supposed to mean.

The image analysis would surely know from which camera each frame arrives and it would only do the object detection once per received frame, i.e. the actual amount of information to analyze is independent from how it is transferred to the analysis system.

My understanding is that no, it is never told about the 8 cameras. It learns what to output through machine learning.

 

[shlokavica22]

Random morning thought:

Q: Why the emphasis on autonomy? The mission is accelerating transition to sustainable transport and energy...

Elon says: demand only constrained by price...

Autonomy addresses 2 aspects of price via ride service for those who don’t want or can’t own (logistics or capital requirements)...

Autonomy addresses capital requirement by providing an income stream and enabling lower lease price by way of higher residual from future use in ride service...

Autonomy allows a family to have fewer vehicles for the same (nearly) utility as more than one...

Autonomy = multiple paths to affordability for all = orders of magnitude higher demand than exists now...

All while solving for X, where, X=accelerating the worlds transition to sustainable energy.

Fire Away!

Elon already answered that- the valuation of the cars TSLA produce jumps 5 to 10 times as a result. How he arrived to those numbers is probably the question.

 

[Drax7]

Goodwill repairs,

And I think this is separate from range anxiety. This is charging anxiety.

Range anxiety is: “will I make it? Will I run out of juice on the road somewhere?”

Charging anxiety is “I will hate having to stop to charge so frequently and for so long”.

Is range anxiety less than financial anxiety, given the lower cost
To power your car. A little cost benefit analysis will relax you

 

[Pras]

I completely agree. We live in very cold climates and drive our Teslas daily. Why would people doubt what we are experiencing, arguing that it's not true? There is a BIG loss of range here in winter. We would love for it to not be true, but it's what we are experiencing. I have never experienced range anxiety in the summer but I've had a few very close calls in the winter. It's not fun.

Assuming tech and design allows it, I think for S 325-350 STD to 400 LR (less for X) makes sense, them being flagship cars and be able differentiate with 3. More so in the US where railways suck in most places.

 

[Dan Detweiler]

Random morning thought:

Q: Why the emphasis on autonomy? The mission is accelerating transition to sustainable transport and energy...

Elon says: demand only constrained by price...

Autonomy addresses 2 aspects of price via ride service for those who don’t want or can’t own (logistics or capital requirements)...

Autonomy addresses capital requirement by providing an income stream and enabling lower lease price by way of higher residual from future use in ride service...

Autonomy allows a family to have fewer vehicles for the same (nearly) utility as more than one...

Autonomy = multiple paths to affordability for all = orders of magnitude higher demand than exists now...

All while solving for X, where, X=accelerating the worlds transition to sustainable energy.

Fire Away!

...and, autonomy opens up the floodgates of potential owners who would never, without autonomy, be able to own ANY vehicle. Elderly, handicapped, blind, those unable to obtain a driver's license for other reasons. This gives these people back their independence.

Dan

 

[KarenRei]

Assuming tech and design allows it, I think for S 325-350 STD to 400 LR (less for X) makes sense, them being flagship cars and be able differentiate with 3. More so in the US where railways suck in most places.

I don't know what pack energy changes they'll make, if any. Tesla isn't exactly awash in cells right now. But the motor change should on its own up the range to 350-355mi combined-cycle, and a bigger improvement in city driving. Should also improve performance - acceleration, top speed, *and* the ability to sustain high-power output for longer periods.

Only downside is that there will be less waste heat for pack heating in the winter. But Tesla's new "preemptive heating before charging" strategy should ameliorate this issue.

 

[Dan Detweiler]

OK, I will be more precise:

1. Barely make it:
Charge to 100% before departure - have to do that in winter.
Range at arrival ~5-10 miles. I never got lower than that, as I adjust the speed down as soon as the estimated range at arrival drops below 10. That gives a total range in winter around 200 miles. I suspect that I could push the car into getting stranded on a bad day (really cold + wind gusts) - but why would I do that?

2. As I said, it is a P3D- - hence 18" wheels with all-season in summer - no aero covers as I hate the look. No, I do not get constant 300 miles in summer with that setup - but on occasion I do, so I took the optimistic range.

Karen, I appreciate all your support for Tesla and your enthusiasm. But denying some shortcomings of the car is not helping - even if best in class, range is still a problem for me. I may not be the only one with this type of problem.

No doubt this is a concern for some people. My question would be, what is the best approach to dealing with it? Spend the money on a bigger, heavier, less efficient, more expensive vehicle...or...spend that money on a denser, faster, charging network that would benefit all owners? The answer for some may very well be the first choice but I don't see it as the best choice for the company. Just my $.02

Dan

 

[svp6]

There's nothing wrong for calling for accurate numbers. Pretending that "winter highway driving halves the range" when in the worst realistic driving case outside of extreme climates (Minnesota in the winter in -20F / -29C) you're actually getting the range 2/3rds (sub-300 vs. around 200) does nobody any favours.

The loss of range in cold weather absolutely should be discussed. It's a very significant factor to owners in places with cold winters. But it shouldn't be discussed with hyperbole. Don't you agree?

I did not make the statement of 400 to 200 - hence why I provided my personal experience with 3 Tesla's over 4.5 years - in my experience winter range reduction is to about 2/3rds.

But that is only my experience, and I could see circumstances when others may have experienced even higher range loss. I do not attempt the said 180-190 mile trip when we have very strong wind gusts, let alone when it is snowing. I can totally see a situation when the range may drop to 50% - so I did not attribute malice or hyperbole to the original poster.... And just for the record, the same happens to an ICE car under bad conditions - not only to EVs. My advertised 27 mpg goes all the way down to 14-15 mpg in really bad winter conditions.

 

[shlokavica22]

The German manufacturing sector figures showed a marginal rise to 44.5, still below expectations of 45 and well below the 50 point level which would mark a shift to expansion.

Manufacturing output in France fell for a third straight month from 49.7 to 49.6 and is at a 13-month low. It had been expected to rise to 50.

For the entire bloc, manufacturing rose to a two-month high at 47.8, but remains deep in contraction territory.



Edit:
US Retail sales: 1.6% vs 1% est

 

[bhtooefr]

No doubt this is a concern for some people. My question would be, what is the best approach to dealing with it? Spend the money on a bigger, heavier, less efficient, more expensive vehicle...or...spend that money on a denser, faster, charging network that would benefit all owners? The answer for some may very well be the first choice but I don't see it as the best choice for the company. Just my $.02

Dan

Those things aren't mutually exclusive, and the bigger, heavier, less efficient, more expensive vehicle will be able to sustain a higher charge rate on that charging network, too, while helping to knock down FUD.

 

[KarenRei]

I did not make the statement of 400 to 200 - hence why I provided my personal experience with 3 Tesla's over 4.5 years - in my experience winter range reduction is to about 2/3rds.

Then why did you object to my statement that cutting range in half for winter is not a realistic metric? It was a Texan making a matter-of-fact statement that "The first is trips--particularly trips up north in winter where the 400 mile range declines to a bit over 200." You know that that is not a realistic estimate of winter range loss, even in the coldest-winter places in the continental US.

I fully get why you want to emphasize winter range loss. And I agree! But do you also get why I don't want it overemphasized with unrealistic numbers?

 

[jerry33]

This is a great illustration of what we face in the winters of the upper midwest with Teslas. Unless you actually live in these conditions and drive a Tesla on a daily basis, I think it's very easy to brush off the wish for more range. Current battery sizes allow adequate range in summer, but winter changes everything. We really need 250+ mile worst case range to be able to drive a BEV in almost all scenarios. A 400 mile range battery JUST gets us there in winter conditions. When we buy a 300 mile range car in the upper midwest, we are actually driving a car that has less than 200 miles of range on many days out of the year. That's just not enough for some of us. Certainly, increasing the density of superchargers would be very welcome too.

Agreed. The "we only need 300 miles" thinking is the same kind of thinking that got us window defrosters that wouldn't clean the driver's side of the windshield. Worked fine in San Diego, not so fine elsewhere.

 

[Dan Detweiler]

Those things aren't mutually exclusive, and the bigger, heavier, less efficient, more expensive vehicle will be able to sustain a higher charge rate on that charging network, too, while helping to knock down FUD.

But where are Tesla's limited resources better allocated?

Dan

 

[Buddyroe]

Perhaps 400 to 200 is an overstatement - but not by far. For my P85D it was 250 (summer) down to 150 (winter). For my P3D- it is 300 down to 190. I have a 180-190 mile trip I do frequently - this means with the P85D in winter I had to turn heating down to 65F (from my usual 73) and speed down to 60 mph (from ~70-75 mph - typical traffic speed in the area). With the P3D I keep my usual temp and speed, but I barely make the trip - in fact I had to supercharge once as I had 3 passengers and the range plummeted.

A denser SC network would be nice, but it would not make me exceedingly happy to get out in -20F and hook the charging cable. I would also be confined to the SC, as walking from where the SC is located to the nearest store in that cold is no fun either.

Then you have the airport trip - in their infinite wisdom, Minneapolis airport provides 8 stalls for L2 charging - which are constantly taken. Why in the world would I need to charge in 8 hours to full if I am flying out for at least couple days is beyond me. There is no 110V outlet to plug in for the trickle charge - which would be what is needed to keep the charge / replenish at the slow rate when gone. Range loss is 5-10 miles /24 hours, depending on how cold it is. That means no Tesla when we go for a 1 week trip in winter, as there will be not enough to return home without supercharging - it is only a 20 mile detour to do that .

So yes, cannot wait for the 400+ miles Tesla. And I say this after 5 years and 3 Tesla's. Also this is why for me the competition BEVs are so hopelessly inadequate.

Very much agree with the 400+ mile range. It's not only going to make traveling much more convenient, it's also a huge psychological barrier of many potential buyers. I took a friend of a friend for a drive in my S last weekend. Like everyone else, he had the Tesla grin. The entire weekend, he kept texting me, asking questions. He was really interested in the cost of ownership over 10 years as he was trying verify my assertion that the Model S was really no more expensive, and probably even cheaper than his 7 Series. I honestly thought he was going to put in an order before the weekend ended. This man was in love. But, the whole range/charging scenario was what ultimately stopped him. He simulated some of the trips he takes very often. What bugged him the most was HAVING to stop where the superchargers were versus stopping when HE was ready to stop (ie, gas station on every corner mentality). He also didn't like the fact that for a couple of his trips, the BMW could make the entire trip without stopping for fuel, and in the S he would have to stop and charge once for 20 minutes - and still arrive at his destination with less than 75 miles of range and not be able to use the car the rest of the day (alternative was to sit at the supercharge for 50 minutes instead which would increase the overall trip time by 1/3rd).

Also met a gentlemen who owns 6 Arby's in Pittsburgh - he showed me a route he has to take around Western Pennsylvania quite often. It was close to 300 miles total that he does in a day. By the time he gets home that night, he is exhausted. While there were no superchargers near his route anyway, he said there was NO WAY he was going to add ANY time to this trip and the only way he would consider a Tesla would be if there was a place to charge where he stops already. At 335 miles of range, range anxiety would be real for him. At 400, it wouldn't be a thought.

Personally, I'm hoping for a massive break-through and Tesla is able to get the range to 500 miles. There is no such thing as too much range. The more the better. Every additional mile of range in an EV is another nail in the coffin of ICE vehicles.

 

[aubreymcfato]

My understanding is that every time they try to build a subway line they run into some 2000 year old relic that needs 6 months of excavation and research. So any construction takes forever

Yes.
An archeologist, friend of mine - she works at Mercati di Traiano - told me that the real problem are the stations: the subway level is under the archeological level. But of course you need entrance and stairs and elevators: basically all of the center of Rome was, well, Rome.
Moreover, Rome has almost 3000 years... and basically has always grown. No urbanistic plan, just organic growth, over and over. Rome is a mess and always will be.
The upside is that could actually lead an electrical revolution, with a *serious* investment by private citizens and the municipality (which has a budget bigger than some regions in Italy, or small countries in Europe).

 

[sparcs]

But where are Tesla's limited resources better allocated?

Dan

Easy answer.... Increase supercharger density, lower charging times (supercharger v3), and increase efficiency of the products they have today (software/motors). All without having to use bigger batteries that "most" customers do not need for their 10 mile commute to work every day.

Chasing after bigger batteries isn't going to gain them massive amount more customers compared to the rest of the items on the list.

 

[mongo]

Also met a gentlemen who owns 6 Arby's in Pittsburgh - he showed me a route he has to take around Western Pennsylvania quite often. It was close to 300 miles total that he does in a day. By the time he gets home that night, he is exhausted. While there were no superchargers near his route anyway, he said there was NO WAY he was going to add ANY time to this trip and the only way he would consider a Tesla would be if there was a place to charge where he stops already. At 335 miles of range, range anxiety would be real for him. At 400, it wouldn't be a thought.

Sounds like his Arby's need destination chargers...

 

[HG Wells]

Yes.
An archeologist, friend of mine - she works at Mercati di Traiano - told me that the real problem are the stations: the subway level is under the archeological level. But of course you need entrance and stairs and elevators: basically all of the center of Rome was, well, Rome.
Moreover, Rome has almost 3000 years... and basically has always grown. No urbanistic plan, just organic growth, over and over. Rome is a mess and always will be.
The upside is that could actually lead an electrical revolution, with a *serious* investment by private citizens and the municipality (which has a budget bigger than some regions in Italy, or small countries in Europe).

Sounds like a job for a monorail.

 

[Unpilot]

Eventually as charging networks become denser and more reliable and people's road-tripping behavior will change to be more relaxed

Well I have to disagree here. People seem to be in more of a hurry and generally more pissed off.
Now maybe the zen like state I am in(coupled with occasional bouts of G-force giddiness) when I drive my MS will change people....but I doubt it.

 

[jerry33]

I did not make the statement of 400 to 200 - hence why I provided my personal experience with 3 Tesla's over 4.5 years - in my experience winter range reduction is to about 2/3rds.

I agree that 2/3 is more common than half, but using half accounts for the worst case scenario. Having driven in rural northern BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba for a couple of decades, when it's -30 if your car dies your life expectancy is about thirty minutes, you put a premium on getting to your destination alive--even if stuff happens (a blanket and a candle increase the time). At night you might not see another car for an hour or more. Now it's fine to have a choice of smaller battery packs, but to compete with ICE vehicles, there needs to be a size that people feel comfortable with.

Now sure, most of my charging stops are 15 minutes, and these days mostly I travel in good weather, but just last year I wasn't able to make a trip with my friends from Lincoln to Sioux City and back because I didn't feel comfortable driving my S85 that close to empty (there were several places where construction was shown along the route). Because most people don't do as well as I do in the Wh/mi department, I believe they will be even more paranoid than I am about range. Driving in Texas where the speed limit is 85 mph (and most go faster) is another situation where a large battery is needed to sell the majority of ICE drivers on EVs.