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

[2daMoon]

I think he means somehow if rebate passes to exclude Tesla completely as a manufacturer.

Should probably limit the speculating and doomsaying until then, but

1) what’s to say Tesla can’t “re-negotiate” terms of widening supercharger access?

2) Taken to an extreme, (I think mentioned some time before), similarly with SpaceX and ISS contracts

3) because, you know, 4D chess

3a) Every time a non-Tesla EV uses a Supercharger they accumulate credits toward a Tesla purchase (equal to their extra cost for charging).

This way, when they do buy a Tesla all of their overcosts for charging a non-Tesla vehicle are subtracted from the price of their new Tesla.
The app periodically reminds them of how much they have accrued for application toward their Tesla purchase.

 

[Unpilot]

You left out CGI renderings...those renderings tip the scale for 'fools'...i mean 'buyers'....

Speaking of CGI this animation of the first Starship and super heavy booster is worth a watch!

 

[Pezpunk]

Poll time! I'm curious what others think. When will the entire Tesla auto line up transition fully to 4680?

My 2 cents: As an investor and former vehicle engineer, I'm in the camp that all Tesla vehicles will transition to 4680 in 2022/2023. This allows legacy form factors to be used for grid storage and simplifies vehicle production.

Absolutely guaranteed not happening. Tesla needs every single battery they can get their hands on for the next 5-6 years at least, and that means fully exploiting their 18650 and 2170 supply capabilities.

 

[jbcarioca]

Though otherwise an interesting post and not to rehash the service discussion but now on the energy side, this conclusion is too strong.

Tesla’s numbers do not indicate much if any of a demand constraint on either the auto or energy side from service, customer support, or anything else.

If service or customer support were sufficiently poor as to be or likely to become a demand constraint, Elon and Tesla would move aggressively to redress the issue given their track record.

That they focus so much on expanding capacity and managing supply chain challenges speaks volumes on what their data indicates about how they should set their priorities.

The point is on constraints to future growth, not the present.

 

[Wicket]

His back is really hurting him in this one. You can see him having to stretch his arms and neck as he's walking around.

He needs a higher quality, more supportive, and proper vertebral alignment desk to sleep under.

Absolutely guaranteed not happening. Tesla needs every single battery they can get their hands on for the next 5-6 years at least, and that means fully exploiting their 18650 and 2170 supply capabilities.

Agreed. I don't think they have the luxury to refactoring their battery solutions this quickly. We still have 18650 model S for a reason.

 

[hacer]

Those numbers won't get you to 50% not even 10%. If you want 50% of the fleet to be EV by 2030 then you are talking about 15 million EVS by 2030. Even Ford may blow through the 2024 numbers you reference by 2022. As many others have posted the event was solely about securing support from a group of important backers. As detroit will be gutted a bit by the transition to EVs this was an important meeting and an important statement. The world has decided to move to EVs, Detroit & admin knows that. It also has done the math and figured out that means more than 50% fewer jobs in automotive. That will be a hard hit on Michigan, Ohio, Indiana. EVs have less parts, easier to build, last longer, few wear points, etc. Over 30 years you will gut employment in automotive. So, then the question becomes who is going to build those cars, Toyota? VW? Honda? Nissan? Fiat?, MB?, BMW? , BYD?, Mazda?, Subaru?, Greely?, Landrover/Jag?, or Ford/GM/Chrysler. The admin is clearly trying to help detroit make a painful transition to capture as much of a shrinking pie as possible. Its so clear I don't know why anyone would even try to post something else but lo and behold many posters did.

Tesla is it's own force, needs no help but will benefit from this just as the original tax credits benefited Tesla and were squandered by GM. The real question now is whether or not Ford/GM/Chrysler squander the upcoming subsidy. Ford at least seems serious and in some form or another could survive (Rivian stake could exceed legacy ford valuation though). I could see Chrysler gone. GM..who knows. It was a brilliant meeting with just the right cast, Elon would have grabbed all the attention and it would have been all about Tesla which is not the sale Biden was making nor the sale needed for the American public.

In case it wasn't clear, my (made-up) example of how the legislation could play this trick was per-year target sales of EVs; those below the target each year would be eligible for tax credits the next. The number for 2024 in the geometric sequence (25% CAGR which is likely more than any major OEM can muster) would be 390,625. If you think that Ford will sell 390,625 BEVs in the U.S. next year then you are nuts. I'll be shocked if they sell 150,000.

It's true that my sequence only reaches 1,490,116 EVs per year per manufacturer in the year 2030 so it does fall short of Biden's 50% "goal". But that "goal" was never intended to be met which is why it is an aspirational goal and not a mandate, and anyway Biden's 50% goal is not directly or indirectly embodied in the legislation presently. The legislation is intended to favor the OEMs, allow them to sell ICE vehicles as long as possible and keep them out of bankruptcy. It is not intended to accelerate the U.S. transition to sustainable energy (or even EVs).

I'm not arguing that this will stop Tesla from selling the most BEVs in the US of any manufacturer or that Tesla needs help, just that (if the legislation becomes law such that it somewhat follows those cost tables) it will prevent Tesla vehicles from being eligible for tax credits while all of the competition would remain eligible. I was working from the cost tables, not the EV event that Biden put on. If the legislation does adopt a threshold or phase-out that excludes Tesla then it will be clear that the intent is to disadvantage Tesla in order to help the big 3. Even if they do that, I don't think it will work all that well but it could certainly hurt the TSLA stock price.

 

[mltv]

Absolutely guaranteed not happening. Tesla needs every single battery they can get their hands on for the next 5-6 years at least, and that means fully exploiting their 18650 and 2170 supply capabilities.

Not only the forms that Tesla currently has. I expect them to adopt other forms, like pouch, if it is cheap, reliable, and widely available. Form should not define the product, form 4680 was chosen because they think it is best for the product (cars & trucks). There will be many more products Tesla will produce in the future, pretty ridiculous to think that 4680 will be a fit to all future products.

 

[EVMeister]

I like the new much clearer "Supporting Member" badges. Should shame a few more of you into supporting this wonderful resource.

 

[mongo]

Yeah, just like all manual transmission cars.
Even on automatics, the parking brake is separate.
OH, now that I think about it, the parking prawl can't be the parking (emergency) brake. So the Mach-E must have additional hw on the brakes already and the prawl is a redundant component.
Yup, checked the forums, manually activated electronic parking brake that is only automatically applied on large slopes. On flats, it relies on the prawl.

Last comment since I realize I was unfair. The prawl is a very solid version method of locking the wheels (to the limit of the grip of the weakest tire). Teslas have a warning that comes up if parked on a steep hill regarding the brake potentially not holding. So in this, the Mach-E approach is redundant, but also potentially more secure. (Though it would be better with auto application of both systems)

 

[rk20]

In case it wasn't clear, my (made-up) example of how the legislation could play this trick was per-year target sales of EVs; those below the target each year would be eligible for tax credits the next. The number for 2024 in the geometric sequence (25% CAGR which is likely more than any major OEM can muster) would be 390,625. If you think that Ford will sell 390,625 BEVs in the U.S. next year then you are nuts. I'll be shocked if they sell 150,000.

It's true that my sequence only reaches 1,490,116 EVs per year per manufacturer in the year 2030 so it does fall short of Biden's 50% "goal". But that "goal" was never intended to be met which is why it is an aspirational goal and not a mandate, and anyway Biden's 50% goal is not directly or indirectly embodied in the legislation presently. The legislation is intended to favor the OEMs, allow them to sell ICE vehicles as long as possible and keep them out of bankruptcy. It is not intended to accelerate the U.S. transition to sustainable energy (or even EVs).

I'm not arguing that this will stop Tesla from selling the most BEVs in the US of any manufacturer or that Tesla needs help, just that (if the legislation becomes law such that it somewhat follows those cost tables) it will prevent Tesla vehicles from being eligible for tax credits while all of the competition would remain eligible. I was working from the cost tables, not the EV event that Biden put on. If the legislation does adopt a threshold or phase-out that excludes Tesla then it will be clear that the intent is to disadvantage Tesla in order to help the big 3. Even if they do that, I don't think it will work all that well but it could certainly hurt the TSLA stock price.

Tesla sales target for 2030 is 20 million EVs. That should be enough to meet Biden's target. The rest don't have to do anything.

 

[ZsoZso]

Tesla sales target for 2030 is 20 million EVs. That should be enough to meet Biden's target. The rest don't have to do anything.

Oh, the rest will help to achieve the 50% goal, by (involuntarily) lowering their ICE car sales numbers
It is easier to reach 50% if you significantly reduce the total

 

[Scuttlebutt]

His back is really hurting him in this one. You can see him having to stretch his arms and neck as he's walking around.

His back and neck are a mess, he's also limping. His body is trying to compensate for the pain he is in.
Not good.
He needs treatment and rest. It looks to me he's about reached his limit for normal function. I would think his doctors are not happy he is pushing so hard. Elon's one tough SOB though, so probably not listening to the professionals.

 

[StealthP3D]

You get a very rare disagree from me because your post is unfair, unkind, and untrue for our kids. Do you think you could have gotten into the same university today as back in the day when you went? I doubt I would have been accepted to mine.

It was intended as a humorous look celebrating the astounding achievements of the Giga Shanghai workers who apparently average only 26 years old - it was not meant to apply to your kids or any other persons kids in particular. It was humor.

I'm not understanding your point about getting into the same college I went to. I had no money to go to college except what I could earn working my butt off at low wage jobs, many of them dirty, nasty and/or dangerous affairs. I had no college fund set up, my father was a teacher and my mother was a home-maker and part-time pre-school teacher so there was no money set aside for me. So I went to the local college, whenever I had saved enough money for tuition and books and could afford living expenses on the reduced work hours a full credit load entailed. Those high-falutin schools that were difficult to get into cost too much money to even consider. After going to college over a 6 year period and only getting half-way to a four year degree I figured out that the whole system was rather political and biased, people were generally stupid and inefficient and everything I needed to know I had already learned in kindergarten. So I quit going to college. I'm pretty sure I could still re-enroll in the same school. But why would I want to?

The college I went to had a large percentage of MBA's. I considered those students, who I found very distasteful as a group, as well as their professors, a central part of what was wrong with the world. Because they measured the worth of everything in money (and were very shallow and stupid in general). Elon is my friend because he doesn't like them either! ;-) But, rather than become bitter and disillusioned, I decided to live my own life, to not buy in to the BS I saw playing out around me. So, rather than struggle to save money for college expenses while trying to take classes, I started saving and investing the money and focused on running my own life in a manner that required me to rely on me, and coordinate with others, as little as possible (and when possible, only with people who were generally competent). And I'm glad I did.

What Elon has done required an amazing amount of tolerance and patience and working with others. I'm humbled and amazed at the idiocy he had to work through to get where he is today!

 

[insaneoctane]

His back and neck are a mess, he's also limping. His body is trying to compensate for the pain he is in.
Not good.
He needs treatment and rest. It looks to me he's about reached his limit for normal function. I would think his doctors are not happy he is pushing so hard. Elon's one tough SOB though, so probably not listening to the professionals.

Yeah, I was alarmed at his obvious discomfort. People with Elon’s drive to accomplish all things yesterday while feeling the weight of the world is on them generally don’t listen to their bodies because it would slow them down. I hope he realizes his health is a critical aspect of meeting his objectives long term…

 

[kanweg]

3a) Every time a non-Tesla EV uses a Supercharger they accumulate credits toward a Tesla purchase (equal to their extra cost for charging).

I love this idea! It is great! Or non-transferable supercharger kWh. Available in rented Tesla’s too (makes sure they at least have a low barrier to try one).

 

[goinfraftw]

It was intended as a humorous look celebrating the astounding achievements of the Giga Shanghai workers who apparently average only 26 years old - it was not meant to apply to your kids or any other persons kids in particular. It was humor.

I'm not understanding your point about getting into the same college I went to. I had no money to go to college except what I could earn working my butt off at low wage jobs, many of them dirty, nasty and/or dangerous affairs. I had no college fund set up, my father was a teacher and my mother was a home-maker and part-time pre-school teacher so there was no money set aside for me. So I went to the local college, whenever I had saved enough money for tuition and books and could afford living expenses on the reduced work hours a full credit load entailed. Those high-falutin schools that were difficult to get into cost too much money to even consider. After going to college over a 6 year period and only getting half-way to a four year degree I figured out that the whole system was rather political and biased, people were generally stupid and inefficient and everything I needed to know I had already learned in kindergarten. So I quit going to college. I'm pretty sure I could still re-enroll in the same school. But why would I want to?

The college I went to had a large percentage of MBA's. I considered those students, who I found very distasteful as a group, as well as their professors, a central part of what was wrong with the world. Because they measured the worth of everything in money (and were very shallow and stupid in general). Elon is my friend because he doesn't like them either! ;-) But, rather than become bitter and disillusioned, I decided to live my own life, to not buy in to the BS I saw playing out around me. So, rather than struggle to save money for college expenses while trying to take classes, I started saving and investing the money and focused on running my own life in a manner that required me to rely on me, and coordinate with others, as little as possible (and when possible, only with people who were generally competent). And I'm glad I did.

What Elon has done required an amazing amount of tolerance and patience and working with others. I'm humbled and amazed at the idiocy he had to work through to get where he is today!

is it possible to DM this conversation?

 

[StealthP3D]

Excluding the crazy number for next year, this looks semi-realistic as long as Tesla is excluded. To me this looks like solid evidence that Tesla will be excluded from eligibility for the tax credits in the final legislation. Despite what some have said, this could easily be accomplished by excluding manufacturers who had sales exceeding targets the previous year. E.g. Credit available to any manufacturer selling less than 200,000 electric vehicles in 2021, less than 250,000 in 2022, less than 312,500 in 2023, etc. That would allow all of the present automakers to (1) continue on the compliance-only train and (2) Enjoy a large price advantage for a long time enabling them to perhaps eventually reach near-competitiveness with Tesla.

I'm somewhat confident Tesla won't be excluded. I believe those are the numbers prepared back in April or May for the bill as it stood at that time. I imagine the terms have changed since then.

If the bill excludes Tesla, it will slow down EV adoption in the US, both overall and Tesla sales (because legacy OEM's won't make enough to fulfill demand and some people consoidering EV's for the first time won't want to buy an unsubsidized EV). Of course it will speed up EV adoption and Tesla sales in the rest of the developed world because Tesla has the most EV production capacity.

 

[insaneoctane]

I think that this is just the beginning of many many more of these type of articles saying how Telsa ought to pay for beta software damage....

Tesla Model 3 Crashes Into Pole While Using 'Smart Summon' Feature - Vehiclesuggest

David Alford from Fresno, California witnessed his Tesla crash into a pole while using the Smart Summon feature. He was showing this feature to this son. As the car was parked into a parking spot, it was supposed to pull forward on its own and turn to the right. But surprisingly it went to the […]

www.vehiclesuggest.com

 

[MC3OZ]

There seem to be some disagreement on your post. One could argue for a slight bit of moderation, but your overall point is unquestionably correct. Fluence, BYD, Samsung SDI, LG Chem and traditional names such as GE, Parker Hannifin, Siemens and AES are larger than is Tesla in stationary energy storage. There is indeed massive opportunity for Tesla too, not least because of Autobidder.

We must all be honest enough to realize that when giants such as GE become the producers for the world's largest wind turbines, however briefly they hold that position, they recognize that those turbines will count for little without massive storage to support it, and extremely adaptable grid services to support them both.

Tesla accomplished great things with Hornsdale and they['ve begun to do more. They are famously 'battery short' so TE products have Samsung SDI, LG and other suppliers for the cells. As Tesla states, vehicles come first. That opens the field more for all those utility industry traditional suppliers.

Two years ago I was convinced that Tesla has a huge competitive advantage for stationary storage. They still do, because the world is constrained. Neither utilities or homeowners will be thrilled to wait two years or so when fast deployment is one huge potential advantage for batteries. That means Tesla will probably be a major player for powering new residential developments, for which solar roof is a really major advantage, as is Powerwall. That does not make Tesla a major utility player.

Nothing in this suggests that TE cannot be a major business. However, Tesla support is inadequate even in the primary auto business. Powerwall support seems to be fairly similar.

Tesla now have two huge challenges in customer service. Every single thing in Vehicles including sales, delivery, parts and service. The vehicles themselves are quite wonderful. The second one is in Tesla Energy. In that one excellent customer service is a standard expectation and Tesla does not provide that.

Sadly, this is such an impediment that I believe the Tesla growth constraint is now customer service, possibly even more than batteries and factory capacity.

There is some hope that Tesla customer service might improve with scale and experience.

• More delivery centres, unwinding the wave.
• More service centres and mobile service, improved quality, more experience.
• Similar on the energy side, improved products, more staff, more experience.
• As the business gets bigger, growth slows.
• More recurring revenue means less pressure to be lean and mean in all areas.

The other part of the equation is priorities, motivation and culture, that can't change less customer service is made a priority.

Overall I expect slow gradual improvement and it will remain a problem until it becomes a priority.

 

[2daMoon]

I love this idea! It is great! Or non-transferable supercharger kWh. Available in rented Tesla’s too (makes sure they at least have a low barrier to try one).

After further thought, the credit could be applied to the Merch Store too.

Welcome the non-Tesla SuperCharger user to the Tesla Eco-system with open arms.

Put some items in the Store like stickers, T-shirts, and mugs with "Future Tesla Owners Club" or "I'm just driving this until I get my Tesla" and similar phrases.
Perhaps even offer a $1 bumper sticker for their BEV.