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

[Causalien]

not disagreeing with that

I agree with everyone though. Taking private talk from Elon in the near future will not be taken kindly. Adam Jona's dig was one of those "I told you so to Elon." I think some other conversation might've happened in private between them where Jonas insisted that Elon should forget about small retail investors and just go ahead and take it private while Elon resisted, leading to the loss of credibility today.

 

[Remus]

Q folks seem to be screaming that it is impossible for Tesla to provide insurance? What are they so afraid?

 

[MarcusMaximus]

If I understand correctly M3 ASP of $50k w/20% = $10k profit on $40k cost. Assuming the same values but cutting cost by 50% would translate to 60% GM. That would be incredible.
Interestingly, at this point, the SR+ must be very close to breakeven? I suppose playing the long game to get FSD feature complete by accumulating autonomous miles is worth it...

Keep in mind the SR+ also costs less to build than higher specs. Only one motor and 2/3 the cells

 

[Electrifying]

If I understand correctly M3 ASP of $50k w/20% = $10k profit on $40k cost. Assuming the same values but cutting cost by 50% would translate to 60% GM. That would be incredible.
Interestingly, at this point, the SR+ must be very close to breakeven? I suppose playing the long game to get FSD feature complete by accumulating autonomous miles is worth it...

The Model 3's made in China will cheaper variants though so ASP lower.

 

[Causalien]

Q folks seem to be screaming that it is impossible for Tesla to provide insurance? What are they so afraid?

They are not wrong. It is impossible for TSLA to have the capital to provide insurance. Someone better versed in this chime in. 2.2bil in cash... how do you do insurance with this?

 

[Mike Smith]

It would have cost Tesla nothing to guide low for H1 19 back when they gave their initial guidance in Q3 18. When you give initial guidance there's no frame of reference, so you should always aim low. Even if it had moved the share price a little lower it wouldn't have mattered, since they weren't raising money at the time. Nobody would have blinked an eye anyway since nobody even believed they'd be profitable in Q3 and Q4 18. Now what could have just as easily been a 'make' is in fact a 'miss' and they have their own stupidity to blame for it. Now they're going to do a capital raise that's going to cost way more than it should have.

 

[scaesare]

Who's exaggerating now? ;-)

It's fascinating to me how charging during the day was defended until very recently but when I point out that a charge during a day of 3+ hours of driving is not the end of the world, suddenly BEV ownership is all about convenience, barely about price or the environment.

Your wording is slightly disingenuous. It's a charge after every 60-90mins of driving for your Ioniq.

 

[Pras]

From ir letter. We should now stop worrying about when we see inventory cars in our area.

“
every vehicle that leaves the factory initially becomes inventory.
While in inventory, those vehicles are then matched to a specific order made by each customer.

 

[carterm2]

Apparently the reason M3 production was limited to 51,000 units was battery production. Estimates for 90-100,000 units For Q2 and no profit...no explanation where the batteries are going to come from...

 

[EVNow]

They are not wrong. It is impossible for TSLA to have the capital to provide insurance. Someone better versed in this chime in. 2.2bil in cash... how do you do insurance with this?

You insure your insurance with someone else.

 

[EVNow]

I am not understanding the Model S SR:

View attachment 400031

BMW 3 series vs 7 series.

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

Does anyone else here feel that the reason Tesla dropped the SR S/X is because they knew they were would be production constrained by introducing the new drivetrain and thus wanted to get as much revenue and margin as possible with the limited production? And now that they're getting production back up to normal rates, they re-introduce the SR S/X.

Edit: If doing an significant update/refresh does take the production line down by that much during a quarter, I'm actually dreading the interior refresh in Q3 lol.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Apparently the reason M3 production was limited to 51,000 units was battery production. Estimates for 90-100,000 units For Q2 and no profit...no explanation where the batteries are going to come from...

M3 production was 63,000... and there was an explanation: the cell supply issue has improved and they’re delivering more SR+, which use fewer cells.

 

[madodel]

They charge $1/gal for full service?!?!?!?!?!

Do they at least wipe the windshield for that extra $1? Or give Green stamps?

 

[EVNow]

Now they're going to do a capital raise that's going to cost way more than it should have.

They will not do a cap raise until the SP improves - which a decent quarter and when the market starts actually putting decent value for their FSD.

 

[EVNow]

Tomorrow the SP should go up because our long friends will buy back after selling their positions. I stayed as is so at least I saved the trading commission.

Won't be surprised if there is a strong MMD and an effort to push below 350. If not now, when ?

 

[ZsoZso]

Yes, plus it would allow maximizing Fremont capacity by sharing final assembly with the Model 3. Any demand fluctuations in the 3 could be absorbed by the Y and vice versa.

IMHO, the trade-off between building Model Y in Fremont vs Reno/Sparks comes down to:

A) Model Y production @ GF1 (Reno/Sparks) comes at higher capital investment costs (only battery packs are shared with 3 production, every other component of production has to be replicated).

B) Model Y production @ Fremont comes at the cost of lost production of S/3/X (mostly 3) during the build-up phase as they have to make re-arrangements in the factory, so non-trivial shutdown times are unavoidable for existing production.

Solution A may result in faster release time-line of Model Y, but at the cost of lower S/3/X production and sales in the meantime. Their decision will come down to cost-affordability and demand (3 vs Y) considerations.

 

[EVNow]

Assuming the same values but cutting cost by 50% would translate to 60% GM. That would be incredible.

ASP would be lower - also, I'm not sure 50% should be taken literally. May be some parts of the process would be 50% cheaper. Not everything.

 

[DaveT]

What a disgusting quarter. I feel sick in my stomach.

 

[kengchang]

IMHO, the trade-off between building Model Y in Fremont vs Reno/Sparks comes down to:

A) Model Y production @ GF1 (Reno/Sparks) comes at higher capital investment costs (only battery packs are shared with 3 production, every other component of production has to be replicated).

B) Model Y production @ Fremont comes at the cost of lost production of S/3/X (mostly 3) during the build-up phase as they have to make re-arrangements in the factory, so non-trivial shutdown times are unavoidable for existing production.

Solution A may result in faster release time-line of Model Y, but at the cost of lower S/3/X production and sales in the meantime. Their decision will come down to cost-affordability and demand (3 vs Y) considerations.

A. You are missing motors and finding people to do general assembly in Reno will be much harder than Fremont