Personally I've always advocated for Tesla to exit automotive once certain hurdles are surpassed.
IMO the 2 interesting aspects are:-
- What is necessary to achieve the mission?
- What is possible beyond the mission?
In terms of achieving the mission, the publicly stated/implied goals are all that i think is needed:-
- 20 Million EVs per year by 2030 expanding into all major vehicle categories.
- 3 TWh of cell production by 2030.
- Implied - working approved Robotaxis by 2020.
If Tesla hits the EV/Robotaxi targets, 100% of all new cars are EVs by 2030, Oil consumption should drop by 90%.
3 TWh of cell production by 2030 has tesla making at least 1.5-2 TWh of energy storage batteries by 2030, that is the one area where Tesla may further scale up ambition.
Regardless say 2 TWh of energy storage cells from Tesla implies a global supply of 5 TWh of energy storage cells by 2030.
Considering that energy storage is a crowded field, it is fairly likely this is enough to close most coal by 2030 and also start to reduce gas usage.
So I am calling a likely "Mission Accomplished" on transport by 2030 and possible "Mission Accomplished" on energy by 2030.
if more is needed to accelerate "Mission Accomplished" on energy that is possible by expansion into areas like:-
- Home/office HVAC
- White good, refrigerators, washing machines, clothes dryers
- Solar production - new technology/process
- Wave Energy - help a promising start up get to scale.
For Starlink if it is floated, Elon can buy shares and Tesla can buy shares. I see a possible Tesla investment in Starlink as similar to the Bitcoin purchase.
Some modest passive investment in any other Musk venture as an inflation hedge is reasonable IMO.
Once the mission is complete or well on track to complete, I don't think it is wise to draw a box around any area and say Tesla must not diversify into that area. Equally it isn't wise to mark an areas as a mandatory investment regardless.
The broader criteria are:-
- Tesla has a compelling product or technology or can acquire or develop that product.
- Tesla can make money on the product or service.
- Customers benefit including Tesla as a customer if it's own products and services.
- It further assists the mission in some tangible, but perhaps minor way.
- It solves some problem, or benefits humanity in someway.
I would not even say all of the boxes above need to be ticked, being profitable and competitive is a mandatory requirement.
IMO Tesla could remain in automotive and still do a lot of other interesting stuff, as the business diversifies the focus on automotive would be diluted.
My list of possible targets includes:-
- Mining
- Banking
- Consumer electronics, phones, laptops, tablets, etc - once the device recognises your face, all of your apps and data are available.
I'm saying possible targets, rather than definite targets, or even probable targets.
driving.ca
What if instead of going public on it's own, Tesla were to buy majority stake in Starlink? Adam Jonas would probably give us a $5k TSLA PT. Jokes aside, there could be some synergies there. Elon could retain effective control, while spinning off cash for SpaceX. Plus he has said in the past that he likes the idea of a holding company for all of his businesses.
