That does not square with Q1/Q2 experience when they cut Model 3 prices and were production constrained (and had a significant reservoir of reservations too).
-
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
That does not square with Q1/Q2 experience when they cut Model 3 prices and were production constrained (and had a significant reservoir of reservations too).
Lora's really starting to struggle with her Tesla hit pieces. This is a whole article about how some fired ex-employees were not doing their job properly. She is also trying to write about how terrible it is to work in the tent assembly line but all her sources told her "These people said that while work in GA4 is physically demanding, many people like working there because the atmosphere is good and camaraderie is strong."
- They would require an expensive dongle to connect from their proprietary interface to an industry standard.I was going to give this post a "thumbs up" until I read the second half. I hope Apple doesn't get a stake in Tesla because then:
- Apple would demand a larger radius on the corners of the center screen of the Model 3. For the next two years, all we would hear about was how beautifully curved the corners of the center screen were.
- We would never get the ability to create a route on the GPS using multiple waypoints. Too complicated.
- Apple would insist on removing the software limitation on charging the battery cells to 100%. We would need to go in for battery replacements every 2-4 years depending upon usage habits. More profit and a shorter upgrade cycle.
- The base Model 3 would be raised to $55,000 and the Performance Model 3 would be $110,000.
- Apple would insist on hiring a Chinese contract manufacturer to make all Teslas because this would increase profit margins.
- Apple would require other EV makers to sign royalty-bearing patent licenses under threat of a lawsuit.
- Apple would try to avoid as much US tax as possible using elaborate schemes involving the Cayman Islands, etc. They would cite this as a good example of innovation when investors asked them why they were not innovating anymore.
-If Consumer Reports identified a braking anomaly that caused longer than ideal stopping distances, rather than fix the issue in one week by releasing an Over-the-Air Software Update, Apple would blame the driver for "pressing on the brake pedal wrong".
- The voice recognition would be migrated to Siri.
- A Tesla HPWC would cost $2000 and the UMC would be $899.
-Apple would insist a Tesla could only be plugged into a Tesla charger. Bye bye J1772 adapter compatibility.
- Apple would equip all Teslas with special wheels that required special Tesla branded tires. No more Michelin or Continental tires, no Pirelli or Nokian tires, they represent lost profit potential and don't create a powerful "ecosystem".
- Only a Tesla baby seat would work properly with the seat anchors. It would cost $1500.
- They would crow about the valuable "Tesla" ecosystem they had created.
No thank you!
Oh, wait...
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Success measured in profits.
Not unit output or moral victories.
Also Fremont and GF1 can chip in too.
Last edited:
Antares Nebula
Active Member
Anybody wanna go down a rabbit hole? Here ya go:
Elon Musk on Twitter
Graham's number is insanely crazy. So large in fact that all its digits cannot be even expressed using all the available resources in the observable universe.
But lordy, lordly, let's not even talk about all the different infinite numbers (Aleph 0, Aleph 1, Aleph 2 ...). Yes, Aleph 1 is larger than Aleph 0.
But is it of any practical or at least scientific use? Well, Graham's number may not fit in our finite universe (assuming ours is in fact finite). But what if there are an infinite number of universes, as quantum mechanics suggest? Maybe then. And then also, what size infinity are we talking about? Aleph 0, Aleph 1, etc.? Lordy, lordy... all these damn rabbit holes! Why couldn't I just be a rock and sit in peace...
Elon Musk on Twitter
Graham's number is insanely crazy. So large in fact that all its digits cannot be even expressed using all the available resources in the observable universe.
But lordy, lordly, let's not even talk about all the different infinite numbers (Aleph 0, Aleph 1, Aleph 2 ...). Yes, Aleph 1 is larger than Aleph 0.
But is it of any practical or at least scientific use? Well, Graham's number may not fit in our finite universe (assuming ours is in fact finite). But what if there are an infinite number of universes, as quantum mechanics suggest? Maybe then. And then also, what size infinity are we talking about? Aleph 0, Aleph 1, etc.? Lordy, lordy... all these damn rabbit holes! Why couldn't I just be a rock and sit in peace...
Last edited:
Mars ☰mperor
Member
From CNBC:
"To make purchasing our vehicles even simpler, we are standardizing our global vehicle lineup and streamlining the number of trim packages offered for Model S, Model X and Model 3," Tesla said in a statement.
"We are also adjusting our pricing in order to continue to improve affordability for customers."
"To make purchasing our vehicles even simpler, we are standardizing our global vehicle lineup and streamlining the number of trim packages offered for Model S, Model X and Model 3," Tesla said in a statement.
"We are also adjusting our pricing in order to continue to improve affordability for customers."
They will. On 24 July.
Prices are still up from when he said that. Remember that SR+ was at that time $37,5k. Then they bundled in EAP for $2000 and then added $400 to the cost.
"In other news, seismographs today recorded simultaneous spikes around the world today at the headquarters of prospective "Tesla Killer" manufacturers as managers repeatedly banged their heads into their desks...."
Fun fact: Lora accidentally revealed something super bullish: GA4 has increased in production volume 300% in just a year
Yun Lin on Twitter
Ok, if they entered Q3 with a backlog, and they had removed the LRRWD to save on cells, and demand was not a problem, and they are ramping production, where are all these new cells coming from? If they just wanted to increase production a bit they could have brought the LRRWD back, but they lowered the price a lot, to a price that looks like infinite demand (people may buy cars the did not need yet, not just those that were shopping). At this price, how do you not buy a Tesla? Where are all the batteries coming from if they were so cell constrained in Q2 that they removed the LRRWD? Has DBE started? Did Panny finishes out all their production lines in Q2? Wouldn't that be the email, “We have a ton more batteries now, super excited about these improvements in the line we are implementing.”?
LN1_Casey
Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus
I think it'd also be successful in the fact that it shows the whole working factory from start to finish plan, for the purposes of loans. GF3 is the first GF that is meant to both produce vehicles, and batteries, which undoubtedly is going to have to become the standard for follow on GFs.
Sean Wagner
Member
Inertia is a strange but powerful resistance to change that is observed by applying force to an object.
The price drop is big news, and I too think it points towards increased efficiency.
Plus much enhanced bargaining power, which is one of the many advantages legacy manufacturers enjoy.
Just for the purpose of illustration:
What are the 40+ Color Options of the 2019 VW Golf R Spektrum Program?
The Model 3 is already the 4th best selling vehicle in Switzerland as per 2019H1, and ahead of all the upscale competition.
The Performance model at 59'900 CHF should sell like hotcakes here, and people at BMW will not be happy.
Here's the official BMW Switzerland price list of July 2019 [USD and CHF are almost at parity]:
The cheapest 330e goes for 62'800.
https://www.bmw.ch/content/dam/bmw/.../preis-lists/BMW_3er_Limousine_Preisliste.pdf
Tesla does not wait - always pushing ahead and compressing time is the only way to grow and stay afloat.
As I've previously said, the improved visibility of Tesla with the Model 3 should positively impact S & X sales.
Even in Europe where the cars are really on the wide side, hence obvious cannibalisation by the 3 and the potential for a luxe version if manufacturing efficiency ever allows it.
Point taken, and a vital one it is. However, I presume a lot less people in the market for Models S & X are reached that way, and making more of them aware of the latest improved ranges while reiterating supercharger integration would be really useful.
One of the most interesting books I've read - the faith so many exiled scientists had in the US, and the absolutely immense means put at their disposal, not to mention the tenacity and ingenuity applied, hail form another time and speak of another country.
Sample downloaded, and my first paper book in aeons ordered. One's going for close to 1'000 USD.
Volkswagen's strategy is workable - they know that very many people will insist on staying with ye olde guard, while not wanting to be left behind. As has been said, they just have to stay ahead of the traditional companies.
It's important to realize that [unlike Russia... and the US...] the EU has worked hard and long at achieving reasonably well-managed free trade with ever more countries. The MERCOSUR block of South America has just been added to existing agreements with Japan, South Korea, Australia, Chile, Canada, Mexico, etc..
A Jaguar e-Pace built in Austria can now be sold in Japan with no tariffs added, if I remember correctly.
Amazing. While matt black costs more now.
And boy oh boy, will the Model Y sell well.
See above, Tesla doesn't wait. That need not preclude better communications, though.
The price drop is big news, and I too think it points towards increased efficiency.
Plus much enhanced bargaining power, which is one of the many advantages legacy manufacturers enjoy.
Just for the purpose of illustration:
What are the 40+ Color Options of the 2019 VW Golf R Spektrum Program?
The Model 3 is already the 4th best selling vehicle in Switzerland as per 2019H1, and ahead of all the upscale competition.
The Performance model at 59'900 CHF should sell like hotcakes here, and people at BMW will not be happy.
Here's the official BMW Switzerland price list of July 2019 [USD and CHF are almost at parity]:
The cheapest 330e goes for 62'800.
https://www.bmw.ch/content/dam/bmw/.../preis-lists/BMW_3er_Limousine_Preisliste.pdf
Tesla does not wait - always pushing ahead and compressing time is the only way to grow and stay afloat.
As I've previously said, the improved visibility of Tesla with the Model 3 should positively impact S & X sales.
Even in Europe where the cars are really on the wide side, hence obvious cannibalisation by the 3 and the potential for a luxe version if manufacturing efficiency ever allows it.
Point taken, and a vital one it is. However, I presume a lot less people in the market for Models S & X are reached that way, and making more of them aware of the latest improved ranges while reiterating supercharger integration would be really useful.
One of the most interesting books I've read - the faith so many exiled scientists had in the US, and the absolutely immense means put at their disposal, not to mention the tenacity and ingenuity applied, hail form another time and speak of another country.
Sample downloaded, and my first paper book in aeons ordered. One's going for close to 1'000 USD.
Volkswagen's strategy is workable - they know that very many people will insist on staying with ye olde guard, while not wanting to be left behind. As has been said, they just have to stay ahead of the traditional companies.
It's important to realize that [unlike Russia... and the US...] the EU has worked hard and long at achieving reasonably well-managed free trade with ever more countries. The MERCOSUR block of South America has just been added to existing agreements with Japan, South Korea, Australia, Chile, Canada, Mexico, etc..
A Jaguar e-Pace built in Austria can now be sold in Japan with no tariffs added, if I remember correctly.
Amazing. While matt black costs more now.
And boy oh boy, will the Model Y sell well.
See above, Tesla doesn't wait. That need not preclude better communications, though.
Last edited:
As I recall, the Q1 price cuts led to about a $90 million write-off. Given they’re still working on the Q2 financials, it will be interesting to see whether they take the hit for this one in Q2 or Q3.
LN1_Casey
Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus
It’s Time to Wait for Lower Prices on Tesla Stock
BLUF: It's FUD. No hard facts to back up claims.
Specifically though it narks on the Motortrend vehicle of the year, and how supposedly that Telsa is by no means the leading edge of EVs.
Ok, which Ford/GM/Nio vehicle are you talking about? The Chevy Bolt that stopped production? The Nio who had a recall on most of the very few vehicles they have produced due to a severe fire hazard? The Ford... uh, does Ford even have an EV out?
BLUF: It's FUD. No hard facts to back up claims.
Specifically though it narks on the Motortrend vehicle of the year, and how supposedly that Telsa is by no means the leading edge of EVs.
Ok, which Ford/GM/Nio vehicle are you talking about? The Chevy Bolt that stopped production? The Nio who had a recall on most of the very few vehicles they have produced due to a severe fire hazard? The Ford... uh, does Ford even have an EV out?
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
I think production efficiencies and new cell availability from the Grohmann machines are the reason for the pricing change, and agree Tesla would rather have higher market share and slow ICE sales vs. lower unit sales and a higher per car profit.
Also agree that since price/demand curves aren’t linear, decreasing prices like this can do anything from reduce, not impact, or even increase profits overall. Likely Tesla chose a price that has minimal impact on profits, but none of us has the insight to make that determination.
I read this chapter in my economics textbook. I think it was called “Going For The Jugular and Dominating an Industry”.
Another possibility is price reductions before switching to Maxwell Tech, so that buyers of the current technology don’t feel shortchanged when the newer, higher-priced battery tech comes out.
Either way, I see this as bullish. Whether Wall Street gets spooked again, I don’t know. But that’s just noise in the longer term.
Also agree that since price/demand curves aren’t linear, decreasing prices like this can do anything from reduce, not impact, or even increase profits overall. Likely Tesla chose a price that has minimal impact on profits, but none of us has the insight to make that determination.
I read this chapter in my economics textbook. I think it was called “Going For The Jugular and Dominating an Industry”.
Another possibility is price reductions before switching to Maxwell Tech, so that buyers of the current technology don’t feel shortchanged when the newer, higher-priced battery tech comes out.
Either way, I see this as bullish. Whether Wall Street gets spooked again, I don’t know. But that’s just noise in the longer term.
The Panasonic cell lines were at 24GWh in April and are supposed to continue to ramp to 35GWh by the end of the year. Panasonic was planning major fixes in June, so I assume production is a fair bit above 24GWh by now.
The main fix of the cell bottleneck was introduction of the SR+ battery though.
Tesla can build 4.5k SR+ and 2.5k LR packs per week with just 23GWh cell production. So even if Panasonic made no progress since April, Tesla could get to 7k Model 3 per week just by switching some of the Tesla Energy cell lines to cars and importing storage batteries from Samsung etc again.
I think there is actually a good chance Tesla is trying to ramp Fremont Model 3s to 8k per week
I think removal of LRRWD is mostly to simplify inventory (much easier to match local cars to customers if there are less options), streamline production (less switching of the production line) and to upsell customers to AWD.
Last edited:
Antares Nebula
Active Member
Maybe I missed it in the comments, but isn't a large part of the reason for the price drops to offset the tax credit drop off? Tesla stated as much regarding the January price drops:
"Moving beyond the success of Q4, we are taking steps to partially absorb the reduction of the federal EV tax credit (which, as of January 1st, dropped from $7,500 to $3,750). Starting today, we are reducing the price of Model S, Model X and Model 3 vehicles in the U.S. by $2,000."
Tesla Q4 2018 Vehicle Production & Deliveries, Also Announcing $2,000 Price Reduction in US | Tesla, Inc.
Sure, production (and so efficiency) is being ramped to help offset this also. Multiple factors. It's likely and fortunately coincidental that the pace of tax credit drops is keeping pace with the rate of model 3 production efficiency gains.
"Moving beyond the success of Q4, we are taking steps to partially absorb the reduction of the federal EV tax credit (which, as of January 1st, dropped from $7,500 to $3,750). Starting today, we are reducing the price of Model S, Model X and Model 3 vehicles in the U.S. by $2,000."
Tesla Q4 2018 Vehicle Production & Deliveries, Also Announcing $2,000 Price Reduction in US | Tesla, Inc.
Sure, production (and so efficiency) is being ramped to help offset this also. Multiple factors. It's likely and fortunately coincidental that the pace of tax credit drops is keeping pace with the rate of model 3 production efficiency gains.
Last edited:
Panasonic were the culprit earlier this year with a lot of cell waste. They gave a commitment to Tesla to up their game, taking the usable production from (don't quote me here) 28GWh to the planned 35GWh
So maybe it's a simple as this?
So did you order last night or this am?
Man, I go on vacation and the stock jumps, this thread's volume shoots back up, and Tesla updates pricing.
Think I'll just stay on vacation indefinitely.
Didn't you hear? All the major manufacturers have Tesla-killers available. I mean, will have. Soon. At some point in the future. Surely. Maybe just as a hybrid. But they will kill Tesla dead with their immaculately even panel gaps.
Buy a Clean Diesel now instead!
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
There's key differences between the across the board price cuts in Q1 which were performed with significant levels of pre-Raven inventory, and the current Q3 price adjustments (+$5,000 Model S/X price hike, -$900 Model 3 price cut for the base variants) that were done on lower inventory levels:
- Q1 ended with about ~15k pre-Raven inventory that was affected by the Q1 S/X price cuts.
- Yesterday Tesla effectively raised Model S/X average prices/ASPs by eliminating the "Standard Range" S/X variant which had the highest take rate. To quote Fred: "Model S and Model X base prices are now way up."
- "Ludicrous" (with a take rate of below 10% in every survey I've seen) was most likely a mostly software option with very little to write off: inventory accounting is not ASP based but cost of goods based, and software options have near zero CoGs.
- Model 3 inventory levels were very low at the end of Q2, even in unit counts - there were many reports here on TMC about even showroom models being sold off at the end of Q2. Lower inventory levels mean there's fewer effects of pricing adjustments on existing inventory.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
