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.
Unfortunately, most of his followers are in the northern hemisphere, and it's not exactly tree-planting season anymore ;)

Trees can be planted in any month with an ‘r’ in it. As long as you can get a hole in the ground and refilled, you can plant a tree. You actually water the tree enough to freeze the roots with it. Have done this several times, the trees do great. They’re dormant and when the water around their roots thaw they have the water they need right off to get a good start.
 
It’s a pity it takes another two years before GF4 starts producing Model 3 and Y in Europe. With the lower pricing (no import tax, lower transport costs) they could have sold a lot more and earned more credits from FCA (and PSA).

@Right_Said_Fred why do you say another two years? All they have said is that production in GF4 is to start in 2021. That could be in as little as 14 months or as many as 26 months. If you use GF3 as an example if they announce in December and break ground in January they could start making cars in January, 2021. (Just slightly slower than "China speed".)
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Artful Dodger
I really hate this over-used expression. The big car companies aren't "sleeping giants". IMO, they are fat, lazy, over-confident morons, who are too top heavy with management that can't won't change unless forced to, and saddled with the burdens of unions who don't want EV's, and huge investments in factories and equipment to only build ICE vehicles.

Everything you say is true... but... They ARE forced to change so they will. At this point the wind is in their sails and they are making headway.

Your concern about their capital is very overstated. A large percentage of the car is still a car be it an ICE or an EV. Only the motor and battery are different in reality. People convert literally any car made to an EV by replacing the motor and adding the battery. Done. Do you really think the major car makers can't figure out how to do that?

Electric cars made by the majors might get 5% less range, or have half the horsepower, but these things are not essential. They do know how to design cars people want to buy. Don't you think Toyota will know how to sell EVs? They presently sell some 10 million (ballpark) cars a year. In a few years every size and shape of vehicle they sell will be an EV.

This isn't just going to hit Tesla. I expect some present brands of cars to go away or be assimilated by the Borg.
 
When a passenger asks how to open the door, I actually tell them it's a mechanical aptitude test (I used to actually call it an intelligence test). I've found once you say that they figure it out real fast! ;)

I just pretend I don’t notice or hear them fumbling about and then once seated inside I rate them on a scale of 1-10 on how they did. If they score less than a 7, they don’t get to be my friend anymore. I got standards.
 
He completely lost me with the conclusion that competition would come from tech giants. A car is now is a blend of three fields of expertise, automotive/mechanical engineering, batteries/electronics, software. The tech giants have only the last.

Apple tried it with project Titan. How’s that going for them?

They all seem to forget that Tesla has been iterating and scaling since 2003 to get to here. No way in hell anybody can catch them, even with unlimited cash. Growth rate is not simply a function of spend rate. You can’t bribe a tree to grow faster.

There are three major components to the modern car:

1. EV Powertrain

2. Autonomous / Semi-Autonomous

3. Smart car / CarOS (for car control features, OTA, and consumer media consumption, games, apps, ads, etc., like iOS or Anrdoid)

Although current OEMs are not yet experts in EV powertrains, they do understand large scale auto manufacturing and can transition to this role (if committed).

But 2 and 3 are out of their wheelhouse. Current OEMs do have various driver assist systems, but autonomous software is really on another level. And their various car software platforms are merely comparable to feature phones (and not smartphone platforms), and not at all comparable to Tesla's carOS.

For this reason, I do believe that it will be Software/Tech players that will deliver 2 and 3, and not the traditional OEMs. So you have of course Tesla. Then Waymo may partner with OEMs, where Waymo brings 2 and 3 and OEMs bring 1 (similar to Android and Samsung). Apple, my guess, is trying to do all three like Tesla. So, a good guess for the future players would be Tesla, Apple, and Waymo (with partnerships).
 
Your reply shows you didn't read it, or didn't comprehend it, or are just trolling with no interest in educating yourself.

There was nothing in that which said when anything would happen. So please don't call me a troll. I'm asking honest questions and would appreciate honest answers, not pointers to profits talking about the great beyond.

Summary for non-trolls: Tesla has no need to make less-expensive vehicles (although Elon said they will eventually) because anyone will be able to afford a Tesla that pays for itself as a part-time robotaxi. That's Tesla's plan, in addition to driving down costs via technology advances and massive scale.

Ok, then a different question, but totally relevant and not trolling. When will the robo-taxi be available?

While Musk may be thinking of private ownership with the car working for you, what is much more likely I think is self driving cars will become a common resource which we request when we want transportation, like cab companies or car rentals. Why would we want to have to park and garage and care for a vehicle when we can request a vehicle drive itself to us and take us where we want to go at a fraction of the cost of owning a car that will sit literally 95% of the time? At that point it won't be about the purchase price of the EV. It will be about the operating expense.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: SpaceCash
Apple, of course, is uncertain, as Project Titan has vacillated over the years. As a Tesla shareholder, I consider Apple the biggest threat IF/WHEN they deliver an EV smartcar. While I have my doubts about their program, I am not willing to rule them out yet.

Also, IMO, there remains the possibility of some kind of partnership/merger between Apple and Tesla, however unpopular this maybe (not a fan of this, but just pointing out the possibility -- I mean, if I was TIm Cook, I would seriously be considering it. Of course, Musk may have zero interest in this, but who knows; he would likely have to be made CEO). Apple has bid for Tesla in the past I believe, and now, as Tesla appears to be righting its ship and perched for significant growth, it is quite possible that Apple maybe taking a glance in its direction once again.

The other side of the coin is that Apple has almost always developed in house expertise rather than buy from outside, and Tesla would be a very large, almost too difficult, organization to integrate into Apple.

One thing for sure, if Apple did come out with a car, that would be some crazy competition. In the desktop or smartphone space, Apple was always viewed as the cool, slick, and fun products, while Windows and Android was more the nerdy, boring, or 9to5, suit and tie products. And this defined the competitive dynamics of the marketplace. But imagine if you had two Apple like companies competing against each other in desktops and smartphones. What would that be like?
 
Last edited:
Trees can be planted in any month with an ‘r’ in it. As long as you can get a hole in the ground and refilled, you can plant a tree. You actually water the tree enough to freeze the roots with it. Have done this several times, the trees do great. They’re dormant and when the water around their roots thaw they have the water they need right off to get a good start.

You've done this in some location that doesn't end in "-ifornia"? ;)
 
I'd have expected Buffett to invest into Tesla in Q1 or Q2 - I'm sure Berkshire Hathaway considered it seriously, and he was a fool for not doing it. I'd guess he didn't do it due to cultural bias - Elon is likely too much of a nerd for Buffett who is a businessman. Also because Tesla has perhaps the most complex integrated business plan in existence of all major firms, and Buffett prefers simple monopolies.

I highly doubt Buffett considered purchasing Tesla. Not at all his play. Not at this stage. However, his two lieutenants may have considered it as a trade (they have taken short term trades in the past), but again, I doubt it.

I'm a huge Buffett fan and have followed him closely, but I think he maybe slipping up as of late. Look at IBM and Heinz. Also he has now underperformed the index for the last decade. Perhaps he is getting too old or perhaps he has been affected by all the media limelight. Still, what he has achieved is incredible.

For those that aspire to be great investors here (beyond just their Tesla investment), I highly recommend:

https://www.amazon.com/Warren-Buffett-Way-Investment-Strategies/dp/0471177504
 
I believe the only way to get the upgraded computer is if you purchased FSD. They would be fulfilling their obligation.
Altruistically, I would like to see them some day (perhaps in a few years, certainly well after FSD upgrades are done) offer free upgrades to non-FSD owners in the name of improved safety (after all, redundant processors and higher resolution NNs and all that must surely improve the safety features not just the self driving ones). Not enabling FSD, just giving them the better computer. Plus, you might snag a few more paid upgrades when the effort goes from pay money and wait to schedule retrofit, to just pay money.

I'd also like to see things like paid MCU upgrades be a thing for those with older screens/computers. They've sort of said they were going to do this for S/X but then AFAIK it hasn't happened yet. Some day there will be a faster / better MCU for 3/Y as well, and then I'll want it... and I'd rather pay cost + margin + labor than buy a new car.

Both of these of course would really need to wait on much greater service capacity to be built out...
 
I would assume that with batteries you can keep 2 day buffer, so worldwide grid is not necessary,
The world-wide grid is a practical alternative to SEASONAL storage. Where I live, on the Winter solstice we get about 7 hrs per day of sunlight, and the solar zenith at noon is about 10 degrees. Guess how much battery storage I need to power my home through 5 months of hard Winter? Guess again after allowing for energy used by a ground source heat pump:

1,500 KWh per person per home. 2x if powering a heat pump. That's over 200x the capacity of a v2 Powerwall. Northerners need grid power in Winter.

gwn.jpg


When its cold and dark here in the Great White North, its sunny with long days in the Atacama desert. Running UHVDC cables from Tierra del Feugo to Fairbanks connects the backbone of the Americas with seasonally invariant solar power.

Now, let's solve the politcs because this tech is a no-brainer (therefore challenging for narrow-minded Pols)

Cheers!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You've done this in some location that doesn't end in "-ifornia"? ;)

Yes. Like with the ground almost completely frozen to a depth of three feet. With several kinds of maple, birch, poplar, willow, spruce, pine and cedar.

You soak the soil, fertilizer (prefer to use horse manure) and roots. The roots freeze solid and in the spring everything the tree needs to get a good start is there when it comes out of its dormant stage.

The months of May-August tend to be too hot/too dry in the Northern Hemisphere - well, before climate change really took off. Now it can be a crap shoot. But in the ‘old’ days that was the rule of thumb; months with an ‘r’ is when you plant trees for best results.
 
I don't think that makes sense. We have lots of hydro from Quebec here in NY, and lots of potential for more solar and wind. Our solar panels on our roof cover most of our electricity use.
I didn't mean NY specifically.
What I'm questioning for the 100% renewable energy future is
1) There are states with more pronounced seasons where solar production is less in winter.
Therefore, you can either install more solar that covers your need in winter and produces excess in summer or import solar electricity from another state, which has a more balanced production of electricity during all seasons and which costs less due to more sun.
2) if you have a multi day storm that prevents solar generation completely, do we start burning fossils(and maintain full capacity for this capability) or import solar energy from another state like TX with no winter storms
3) What losses of electricity occur via long distances (like across half the continent) and does it make sense to do this.
4) Does it make sense for state like TX to maintain solar capacity to only supply you during your blackouts or reduced production and having that capacity sitting idle the rest of the year. I think no.

It seems to me if we are to scale cheap solar to cover 100% of demand for the entire U.S., it would make sense to concentrate this capacity in states with a lot of sun and no winter. It would make solar cheaper for everyone. Compared to you having to install 2x panels to account for winter and still have a risk of blackout.

Assume we can't burn fossils anymore. Then where does this power come from?
 
Couldn't resist!

Treelon: "Tree? I am no tree... I am an Ent! Come now my friends; the Ents are going to WAR!"

Some one with the skills; please add Greta's photo to this group of warriors! And while you're at it; make Treebeard look like Elon!

View attachment 471485


Now, how's that SP doing?

I obviously have too much time on my hands...

MuskThunEnt.jpg
 
Unfortunately, most of his followers are in the northern hemisphere, and it's not exactly tree-planting season anymore ;)
Not true. Fall can be a great time for planting dormant tree seedlings anywhere South of Virginia here on the right coast. I've planted thousands of Christmas tree seedlings over the years in the fall right into November that did quite well. A good tree planter can hand-plant 1,000 2 year bare root seedlings in a day with a hoedad or tree bar; my personal best was 800 in a day with the latter implement. Rainfall is the random factor, with a survival rate of 10% - 90% typical in the industry. Forestry-grade seedlings costing around $.10 USD per tree in bundles of 1,000 trees wholesale for unimpressive little 12"-14" top to root tip bare root 2-year seedlings, so count on likely filling in a year, replanting missing trees.

Happy to see there's interest in local planting! FYI many states have state forestry departments that sell seedlings to residents for very reasonable prices.

Edit- I planted thousands of Christmas trees, I didn't plant any on Christmas.
 
Last edited:
Fortunately GF3 is here - which means Tesla can redirect US manufactured cars to EU.

EU sales are probably incentive driven to an extent. They can always do some judicious deals to increase sales if needed.

Without knowing how much they get per car and how easy it is to sell the car in US instead, it's difficult to figure out what the strategy should be.

BTW, I expect $1B gaap profit by Q4 '20. Tesla may not be that interested in increasing sales in EU by reducing ASP. Esp if FSD has made good progress.

I think Tesla will try to maintain GAAP profit to be minimal.
 
Apple, of course, is uncertain, as Project Titan has vacillated over the years. As a Tesla shareholder, I consider Apple the biggest threat IF/WHEN they deliver an EV smartcar. While I have my doubts about their program, I am not willing to rule them out yet.

Also, IMO, there remains the possibility of some kind of partnership/merger between Apple and Tesla, however unpopular this maybe (not a fan of this, but just pointing out the possibility -- I mean, if I was TIm Cook, I would seriously be considering it. Of course, Musk may have zero interest in this, but who knows; he would likely have to be made CEO). Apple has bid for Tesla in the past I believe, and now, as Tesla appears to be righting its ship and perched for significant growth, it is quite possible that Apple maybe taking a glance in its direction once again.

The other side of the coin is that Apple has almost always developed in house expertise rather than buy from outside, and Tesla would be a very large, almost too difficult, organization to integrate into Apple.

One thing for sure, if Apple did come out with a car, that would be some crazy competition. In the desktop or smartphone space, Apple was always viewed as the cool, slick, and fun products, while Windows and Android was more the nerdy, boring, or 9to5, suit and tie products. And this defined the competitive dynamics of the marketplace. But imagine if you had two Apple like companies competing against each other in desktops and smartphones. What would that be like?
I agree with this. Not very popular here, but I haven’t heard any rational arguments against it. We know it’s true, Apple even offered to buy Tesla at $240 a few years ago. Imo it would be good for both Tesla and Apple, see my post here:
Apple Confirms 190 Layoffs From Self-Driving Car Project

Imo the biggest threats to Tesla are the following:
-Us being wrong and VW/Toyota/etc will eat Tesla’s lunch. Given that nothing has happened in 7years and Tesla scaling rapidly it seems unlikely.
-Alphabet/Deepmind/Waymo solving FSD and Tesla being unable to do so for some reason. Seems unlikely to me as Tesla has demoed FSD many times over the years and seems to be making steady progress and Waymo not accelerating their development.
-Apple doing something secret and one day releases a complete great product and scales up manufacturing through Magma Steyr/Foxconn. Never underestimate Apple. But if they do I think it would take years from reveal to mass production. Imo still open.
-Samsung or some other large IT company joining the race