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.
My point is national governments will step in to prevent the failure of these large corporations, which will inevitably extend the long tail of fossil fuel use.

I agree, but couldn't this also help the transition? A restrucuring process could help them offload outdated plants, debts, etc. The govt could pick up the tab for worker retraining, etc. If a govt wanted to bail out it's legacy ICE industry, it would change emissions/efficiency policies like the US is trying to do, but the EU is definitely not. I don't see a sane govt bailing out a firm with tax dollars (US is the exception) to keep building the same thing that got them in trouble in the first place. The German govt seems to get this.
 
Is Tesla plant open and manufacturing any cars?
Where are those cars going?
The spreadsheet shows a number of orders without VINS: Teslike Model 3 Survey #4

Seriously, I feel for folks that waited years.
But, how can they say cars in about two weeks when they have orders approaching two weeks now without assigned VINs?

Can anyone explain?

There are several possibilities.

1. Demand is increasing. Tesla is very bad about updating the two week number.

2. Its the start of Q3. They are shipping almost everything on ships and individual vehicles (VIN's) will not be assigned until they arrive in country.

3. It's #1 and #2.

Edit: I'm pretty sure it's number 3.
 
There are several possibilities.

1. Demand is increasing. Tesla is very bad about updating the two week number.

2. Its the start of Q3. They are shipping almost everything on ships and individual vehicles (VIN's) will not be assigned until they arrive in country.

3. It's #1 and #2.

Edit: I'm pretty sure it's number 3.

They do seem to be off to a faster start with shipping than in Q1 or Q2. About 3,5k cars just left (mostly RHD M3), with another 2k cars sitting at Pier 80 waiting for the next ship.

Tesla opened up a fairly sizeable can-o-demand when they opened RHD orders, and they've only barely started filling it. Not as big as LHD EU/China, but still big, and it's going to take a lot of vehicle shipments to feed it.
 
Thanks for your response. Yeah, I up-voted your comment as 'Helpful'. ;)

Let's do some quick math. Say Tesla produces 0.4M cars in 2019, and continues to grow production at 50%/yr. We need to displace every other car/truck/ice-burner on the roads, say 100M/yr total.

How many years does that take? Some quick maths says 14 years:

0.4M * 1.5^14 > 100M​

That's around 2033, which might be okay, but here's the problem: Say Tesla's CAGR drops to a paltry 40%/yr. Then it takes 17 years. Slow to 30% CAGR? Then its 21 Yrs.

Climate studies show we likely don't have 20+ yrs to achieve net-zero emissions in terrestrial transport (add 10 yrs to displace the ICE fleet).

Now, is it a safer bet that Tesla can achieve growth of 30% year after year without fail for 2 decades, or that ICEmakers could convert their production to EVs in that same time frame?

I don't know the answer. But I know if they see that Tesla isn't profitable, the ICEmakers won't even try to switch. And that inevitably risks national governments stepping in to artifically prolong the life of these failing ICEmakers, and their pollution continues.

It's a genuine dilemma, one that long-term investors need to reconcile as we struggle to chose the best path forward. IMO, the over-arching goal must be to choose the way forward that reduces fossil fuel use as fast as possible.

Someone once said "If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together." Society's shared problem now is that we need to go far, and fast! But some people don't think they need to change at all, or worse, they think it doesn't matter what they do. :confused:

As always, I say its best to lead by example. Let's show them a better way.

Cheers!
Lodger

I don't believe we are thinking nearly as disruptively as Elon is thinking. Read the RethinkX report to get a sense of what it it would take to replace 95% of ICE miles with EVs in the USA by 2030. Get the Report — RethinkX

A fleet of 26 million EV robo taxis will do it for the USA - according to RethinkX. If Tesla can scale their fleet at 50% p/a then they could have a worldwide fleet of 87 million by 2030.

Tesla will have zero problems raising as much cash as they need in order to scale, the instant it becomes crystal clear that they will be first to market with large-scale TaaS. This could be in the next year or two. Every sensible city on the planet will be begging for the service because it injects so much cash into consumers pockets and prevents so many accidents. Tesla's job is to scale the EV TaaS fleet and gigafactories as rampantly as possible, by any means possible including working with OEMs etc. The planet depends on it.

The chance that Elon is secretly thinking along these lines is not zero. His mission is to accelerate the transition away from ICE, and there will be no faster transition than via TaaS.
 
I doubt I will waste my time watching it. John McElroy is an industry dinosaur who doesn't want to see the "glory days" of the American auto industry be displaced. What he doesn't seem to realize is that Tesla is America's best hope to regain industry leadership (that was lost decades ago)..


I have only seen a few Autoline shows but I watched this one. It was cool to hear them verbalize some of the ideas that get thrown around here and then also make comments like the above. I agree, I don’t think his view will occur. Maybe for a year or two, not more.

What I thought was interesting was someone pointing out that the top tier auto suppliers are divesting of their ice vehicle component production. Either selling or spinning off.
 
I could not agree more. As a long time Tesla customer that knows the ropes I've become absolutely infuriated. Its an issue compounded on by the fact that I am in Texas. For the smallest issue I literally have to call a national line wait 2 hours (Yes, I literally waited 2 hours plus 3 calls in a row.
I've never had that experience in over six years. It's always been prompt. I think once I might have waited a couple of minutes.
 
It is also the one thing that can cause Tesla to loss it's battle against the dealer associations. That falls back double hard on the thing investors should be worried about. If the dealers can prove through Tesla's own negligence that they are better, Tesla's sales method folds.
We have a Tesla and a Leaf. Tesla service has been first rate. Prompt, and no issues. Leaf service is another matter. Even though an appointed is made, the Leaf technician is typically either not there (didn't work the day of the appointment and no one said anything) or just quit. No difference if another Leaf dealer is tried (have tried several).
 
This is the single most compelling reason for Tesla to temper growth (just a small amount) and strive to include some baseline profits on an ongoing basis, while still growing at an enviable rate.

Other OEMs are NOT going to switch if they see that making only EVs isn't profitable, which is a common opinion in Autoline roundtables (not to mention in Detroit, Stuttgart, Tokyo and Yokohama). And ICEmakers WILL lose money during the switchover (hence the footdragging in ICE boardrooms).

But Telsa's mission is to ACCELERATE the transition. That means getting help making more EVs (and to convice the ICEmakers there's a better way). That means providing leadership on the business case: 'Yes, EVs are profitable once you've sunk in the investments required. Don't be afraid.'

My personal benchmark for leadership success is S&P 500 inclusion. IMHO, when TSLA achieves that, doubters can pound sand while they watch large swaths of institutions buying Tesla common stock. ICEmakers will switch. They'll be joiners, not disruptors. Their stogey old BoDs will like that.

Cheers!

P.S. This is not my newly held opinion. Indeed, it was my first post on joining TMC 11 months ago: (a topic which gets relitigated in this thread about once a month)

S&P500 listing and moderator actions (out of Market Action)
Thanks AD. This is one of the best posts I've read in a while. Missed it the first time. Spot on. Once Tesla shows OEM that EVs are profitable (after ramp up), only then will the OEMs truly embrace EVs, and we need all on board to save our fragile planet. Tesla can't do it alone.
 
This is the single most compelling reason for Tesla to temper growth (just a small amount) and strive to include some baseline profits on an ongoing basis, while still growing at an enviable rate.

Other OEMs are NOT going to switch if they see that making only EVs isn't profitable, which is a common opinion in Autoline roundtables (not to mention in Detroit, Stuttgart, Tokyo and Yokohama). And ICEmakers WILL lose money during the switchover (hence the footdragging in ICE boardrooms).

But Telsa's mission is to ACCELERATE the transition. That means getting help making more EVs (and to convice the ICEmakers there's a better way). That means providing leadership on the business case: 'Yes, EVs are profitable once you've sunk in the investments required. Don't be afraid.'

There's an assumption here that the ICE makers are capable of this and only need to throw money at the problem. There are several obstacles each would have to overcome:

1. Telling shareholders to not expect any profits for a decade.
2. Replacing almost all the personnel in the design and engineering departments.
3. Battery supply. Any manufacturer who doesn't create their own batteries will face a cost issue and supply issue. (Tesla is working through this now).
4. Their existing dealer network who are opposed to electric cars and will likely not survive the transition.
5. Governments' ambivalent or hostile (in the case of U.S.) attitude toward EVs.

Basically each company will have to throw away all, or at least most, of their core competencies and start anew. Because the executives have much of their pay based on profits and stock price, and should the company fail they get their golden parachutes, it's in their best interest to keep the status quo and then cash in on the golden parachute. Company executives (with very few exceptions and most of those are executives who are also the founders of the company) have only their own financial status as a goal (that's how they got to be company executives in the first place), and have little interest in making the company viable long term. Practically, this means that the board would have to oust the current management and put new management in place with all the disruption that would cause.

China will do it because the government is backing EVs as a solution to the horrible air quality. It's possible Japanese corporations could because Japanese corporations historically take a long term approach rather than a short term one. However, Toyota is still going down the hydrogen rabbit hole and it will take a lot to steer them away from that. Toyota's management has been anti-EV for decades.

(Sorry, I couldn't find where roaches would fit in--probably I'm just not imaginative enough).
 
You’re lucky the car would not drive. Otherwise, the automated menu prompts would’ve just put you straight to a voicemail.
I've yet to call when the car wouldn't drive (the car has always been able to drive), and never had an issue getting through to a person.
 
John McElroy doesn't seem to get it. In response to more knowledgable industry analysts who insisted all the big OEMs are scrambling to get on the electrification bandwagon, he kept saying, look, they make money at making gas vehicles, no one is making money with this electrification thing, so he doesn't think they will switch. He didn't seem to understand that demand for old school vehicles will decline so quickly, in the face of more desirable EV's with lower total cost of ownership and better performance, that they won't be able to sell enough gas cars to stay profitable anyway.

He acted like it's their choice to make: Profitable gas cars or unprofitable EV's. He made this point forcibly at least three or four times. Totally insane. He thinks like a dinosaur.

McElroy is a hack. He goes in blind with no instruction driving a Tesla and then complains how AP doesn’t work. Of course it won’t when it’s not on. He’s often got that sniveling smirk when talking about Tesla.
 
33ED2903-5BD4-4BB1-8C21-1248FEF44530.png
McElroy is a hack. He goes in blind with no instruction driving a Tesla and then complains how AP doesn’t work. Of course it won’t when it’s not on. He’s often got that sniveling smirk when talking about Tesla.
 
But Telsa's mission is to ACCELERATE the transition. That means getting help making more EVs (and to convice the ICEmakers there's a better way). That means providing leadership on the business case: 'Yes, EVs are profitable once you've sunk in the investments required. Don't be afraid.'

If the fastest way to accelerate is to put them out of business and only have Tesla, Rivian and some other new EV manufacturers take the lead while no longer producing gas vehicles. Then the other companies can pick up the old facilities on the cheap. Tesla has proven enough to those fossils. I say put them back in the ground where they belong.
 
This is the single most compelling reason for Tesla to temper growth (just a small amount) and strive to include some baseline profits on an ongoing basis, while still growing at an enviable rate.

Other OEMs are NOT going to switch if they see that making only EVs isn't profitable, which is a common opinion in Autoline roundtables (not to mention in Detroit, Stuttgart, Tokyo and Yokohama). And ICEmakers WILL lose money during the switchover (hence the footdragging in ICE boardrooms).

But Telsa's mission is to ACCELERATE the transition. That means getting help making more EVs (and to convice the ICEmakers there's a better way). That means providing leadership on the business case: 'Yes, EVs are profitable once you've sunk in the investments required. Don't be afraid.'

My personal benchmark for leadership success is S&P 500 inclusion. IMHO, when TSLA achieves that, doubters can pound sand while they watch large swaths of institutions buying Tesla common stock. ICEmakers will switch. They'll be joiners, not disruptors. Their stogey old BoDs will like that.

Cheers!

P.S. This is not my newly held opinion. Indeed, it was my first post on joining TMC 11 months ago: (a topic which gets relitigated in this thread about once a month)

S&P500 listing and moderator actions (out of Market Action)

Assuming a modicum of intelligence on executive teams at big auto (a big stretch I know:).

1) They must by now understand that the market and the gross margins for Tesla vehicles ($40k+ vehicles) is extremely desirable. E.g. Lexus should really desire Tesla’s product portfolio.

2) They should be able to extrapolate that Tesla could easily create net profits by dialing back growth a bit. These are not the idiotic shorts that can only look at balance sheets (one would hope).

3) We know at SpaceX they optimized every single aspect of the rocket so far that no aerospace giant nor any country comes close to being able to compete. I would submit that Tesla is doing the same with vehicles.

4) None of their EV’s are even close to the value of Teslas.

Ergo,

1) There must be tons of conversations in boardrooms to the effect of “If Tesla can build this vehicle for X$, why are you telling me we can’t?”.
OR
2) They just simply can’t afford to cannibalize their existing vehicles.
OR
Both

So i submit Tesla net profit demonstration would not change their minds.

AND Roach milk: BLECH!
 
My equation above is a strict exponential growth curve. An S-curve would in fact be slower to terminal production of 100M units/yr.

Of course you're right. In my pre-coffee confusion, I was thinking the first part of an S-curve looks nearly horizontal, and the middle part can look nearly vertical, but those two parts are an exponential growth curve.

Tesla doesn't need help... Tesla is preparing to replace the dinosaurs caught in the Innovator's Dilemma, not lead them.

Telsa IS getting billions of dollars worth of help right now from the government of China...

I meant Tesla doesn't need help from the dinosaurs, which is the help you said Tesla needs to save the climate, so you said Tesla should slow down and show profits to entice the poor blind dinosaurs to change. That claim is contradicted by your own observation that Tesla is rapidly expanding with the help of one government so far.

Whether governments will bail out the dinosaurs is a separate issue. My dispute was with your argument that Tesla should do something different than they are doing. Tesla has already put the fear of God into somebody at VW. If the other dinosaurs don't see the asteroid coming, then I doubt they will be woken up by Tesla slowing down.
 
Thanks AD. This is one of the best posts I've read in a while. Missed it the first time. Spot on. Once Tesla shows OEM that EVs are profitable (after ramp up), only then will the OEMs truly embrace EVs, and we need all on board to save our fragile planet. Tesla can't do it alone.

The fossils will do what they always do. Move the goalposts. Let them die.
 
Yeah, its these 'corrections' to the trades that keep me up at night analyzing data...

Wanna see some After-hrs highlights? I've seen overnight 'corrections' above 500K shares. They also seems highly correlated to days with a high proportion of 'non-FINRA' short-trading volume. FINRA usually reports only about 60% of total trading volume (chk @ 6PM), but it can vary substantially day-to-day.

But you suspect correctly. This reporting system is about as opaque a data hole as any North of Calcutta. While correlation can not prove inference, it can damn sure make you go 'hmm'.

Cheers!

P.S. In the Artillery Command Post, we had a standard report on the radio whenever we fired a round in error: "CANCEL SHOT. READY OVER". Just ignore that rumbling noise you hear behind you, it's NOTHING I tell you, nothing to see here, move along... umh, you still there?

...paging @DragonWatch he'll tell ya. :D

Humm, I spent my entire career, as an office firing missiles and rockets, therefore missing the up close and more personal cannons. I lived the story of “Rudolph the Red nose reindeer.” During my enlisted career I was asked to not only run the Protestant service as the SP4 (E4) in charge (Chaplains Assistant), but give the Sermon. My chaplain had just come down on orders for Vietnam, and wanted to travel around Germany with his family one last time. That was June of 1970.

Commanding the MLRS battery, my second command, was the hardest job. The position required a Captain with missile command experience, not just the Advanced Course and hoping for a command. That era was filled with “do not volunteer.” Yep, I volunteered.

My military career shaped my call sign; MajorBS49. My philosophy of life:) Also, you now know my retired rank, my initials and the year I was born.

The army today is not the army I served in; not even close. My high school track bud that I shared the pit with died in Vietnam my Senior year. He was a pole vaulter, I was the long jumper. The term long jumping during my day was changing from a derogatory female nickname. When I graduated from high school, I voluntarily enlisted. Most accepted the draft, other’s pee’d on themselves or got a note from their mother to avoid the draft; later they could become President. Art, my fellow track buddy, he is still dead.

@Artful Dodger I luckily missed out on hiding the truth when firing cannons. Command influence is ugly experience for many and sadly rips some souls apart. Lt Calley (sp) was not lacking in education, he acted accordingly as any poor soul would under the influence of the hate and frustration of his senior battlefield commanders. In other words, he compromised himself, again it was not his lack of education as everyone in the press choses to jump on. I, a year old second lieutenant, sat with my battalion commander facing an enraged full bull because I had just flattened a national monument, a white sand dune in New Mexico. That hot summer I felt the sun’s heat melting my newly minted butter bar. I had either entered the wrong guidance data or . . . thank my god, it turned out to be a faulty missile guidance package. I was shortly after that made a battery XO to shape up the platoon leaders, and moved from that position to become a the battalion S-3 (Majors position) as a newly minted first lieutenant. Now, had that not been a training round, well there would have been a lot of crispy critters laid to rest along with my melted butter bar. That was not a high explosive (HE) training round fired that day; it was a training round, just not HE.

Oh, and had I not retired when I did I would have pursued a TACOMS (sp) battalion command. The system that eventually replaced the Lance Missile system. My wife’s career was more important than my military career.

I volunteered to marry her, no shotguns involved:)

So, when it comes to data interpretations, remember my call sign. According to my academically challenged education, my counselors wanted me to look at life without college, and a rocket scientist’s daughter as my wife. I think my junior high class (home room) was the first ever Special Education class ~ you know, before students like me were given a label. During that period JFK was shot and two weeks later my Eagle Rank was pinned on. I am Rudolf the Red nosed reindeer ~ at your service. My (our) daughter is a Special Education teacher and we both have or more accurately my wife, our daughter and I all have Masters degrees. I joke with my daughter that she got her experience dealing with children with special needs with me as her father.

Oh, and please do not refer to me as sir ~ no one calls Rudolf sir:)

PS ~ if you look over and understand my call sign, you will better understand why I am a total fanboy of Tesla. Oh, we put down our 1K deposit on a Tesla Roof last night. Gotta make up for those five hundred trees my father, and I planted in Paradise, CA back in 1967; that were just burned up:-(