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

[nativewolf]

Ladies and Gentlemen...i have found the biggest bullish signal for $TSLA stock...i present to you

https://twitter.com/x/status/1499072794461540355

TL DW: Cramer says he would take Farley over Elon in 2026.....we all know what happens when Cramer says or predicts something.

He's full of it as always. Nice guy actually but just an entertainer. I've found him very willing to answer questions, staying around for an hour at times and once missed a flight talking with people about Apple in 2004 or 5. Just normal investors. I'm sure it was a story for several bar counters later that night in Chicago.

He's an entertainer though. Makes noise, have fun. Don't be serious or take him too seriously. Grain of truth may be hiding here or there.

Farley is trying to survive and GM and chrysler leftovers may well fail. Trying to survive is what happens when you are 10 years late realizing you have completely shat the bed and have to change direction. At least he's boiling water to change the sheets.

Nothing I say re ford has any impact whatsoever on an investment hypothesis on Tesla. Completely independent. It's more about the rest of the industry and who survives. I own a Ford and want a CT. I'm glad it's Ford moving so quickly and not Toyota or VW. Toyota is a bad actor, VW full of bad actors.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Ladies and Gentlemen...i have found the biggest bullish signal for $TSLA stock...i present to you

https://twitter.com/x/status/1499072794461540355

TL DW: Cramer says he would take Farley over Elon in 2026.....we all know what happens when Cramer says or predicts something.

Cramer:

CNBC on Twitter: ""This is the 'destroy Tesla plan'," says @jimcramer as the @SquawkStreet team reacts to Ford's plan to split its electric vehicle business into its own unit. https://t.co/6gh3du3vSd https://t.co/ipoVXKByoG" / Twitter​

So Ford plans to make 2M EVs by 2026? (got batteries?) Oh yeah, did Cramer mention that Tesla will make 2.1M EVs in 2023? Nope, he does not. But Ford plans to pass Tesla? Riiight...

Ford produced 4M cars total in 2020. Tesla will be at 4.7M cars in 2025 (ie: past Ford). For 2026, Tesla's production target is around 7.1M units. All EVs of course.

Has Ford invented some new physics? (ie: time travel). Or is this just Cramer shilling for his sponsors? You decide.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Is Nevada going to make vehicles?

Tesla Semi is already being made in small number in Sparks, at a new facility near Giga Nevada:

Two new Tesla Semis roll out of Giga Nevada

These include the Pepsi/Fritolay Semi which we recently saw in spy fotos.

Cheers!

 

[TheTalkingMule]

All of QQQ just fully recovered from that dip.....except TSLA, which moved lower. This smells like one of those opportunities for an intraday options trade.

Edit: $900c is $6 right now. Let's see.

$900c dropped further to below $4 in this MMD and has now popped over $9. A fairly easy doubling if you kept buying on the way down a couple times within the dip.

Today's range is showing as $3.10 - $14.20. Wild ride!

A pretty crazy game trying to capture these MMDs, but I do feel like some of them have better than 50/50 odds of paying off like this.

Maybe I'll start a "Intraday Options Shitshow" thread and try to identify these days more clearly.

 

[insaneoctane]

Why isn't Tesla energy more profitable? Specifically for powerwall? I was struggling with the higher margins in auto where the complexity of an automobile is easily 10x greater than the powerwall.

Model 3 LR (80kWh) costs $51K. $51K / 80 kWh = 637.5 $/kWh
Model 3 SR (60kWh) costs $40K. $40K / 60 kWh = 667 $/kWh
Powerwall (13.5kWh) costs $10.5K. $10.5K / 13.5 kWh = 778 $/kWh

So, Tesla is making more per kWh selling something that is at least 10x simpler to design and manufacture....

 

[Dangerous Fish]

The only entertainment value Ross brought was when he asked Gordo if he was willing to bet his life on his price target on $TSLA.

What we have here is the defintion of the term "bunch of clowns".

 

[larmor]

Why isn't Tesla energy more profitable? Specifically for powerwall? I was struggling with the higher margins in auto where the complexity of an automobile is easily 10x greater than the powerwall.

Model 3 LR (80kWh) costs $51K. $51K / 80 kWh = 637.5 $/kWh
Model 3 SR (60kWh) costs $40K. $40K / 60 kWh = 667 $/kWh
Powerwall (13.5kWh) costs $10.5K. $10.5K / 13.5 kWh = 778 $/kWh

So, Tesla is making more per kWh selling something that is at least 10x simpler to design and manufacture....

This is a good question and should be addressed in the next conference call.

 

[Mengy]

Not trivial to reduce the size of the battery. Hint: the cells are STRUCTURAL ie: missing cells compromise the strength of the battery pack. Software limiting cost money, since the pack costs the same even with reduced allowed performance.

I seem to remember Elon saying they can easily adjust the size of the structural battery pack (kW's) by simply dropping "dummy" cells into the honeycomb lattice of the structural pack?

 

[Artful Dodger]

I seem to remember Elon saying they can easily adjust the size of the structural battery pack (kW's) by simply dropping "dummy" cells into the honeycomb lattice of the structural pack?

That's what Tesla did with the "Lemur" medium-range Model 3 back when they had spare GA capacity at Fremont but not enough 2170 cells from Panasonic.

The Lemur carries all its cells as cargo (sack of potatos, per Elon). There's a big difference with a structural pack.

If you add dummy cells with similar strength, you've added back most of the weight and a good deal of the cost (cleans sheet design you would not add structure this way). Then where do they get these 'dummy' cells? Shirley Tesla has been setting up for that (plan to fail?)

No, that's not on. They make as many full-sized packs as current cell production allows, while focusing on ramping cell production. What that mostly takes is patience. Not by Tesla, by TSLA investors.

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

Well that was rather unexpected turnaround in trading for TSLA for today. Based on the first 3 hours of trading, seemed like MM's were clearly stepping in to hold it to 850 which is coincidentally, max pain for Friday.

Even if the real goal is to keep it under 900 by Friday, I figured once they got it down to 850, that it would be relatively easy to keep it there and considering we might get Berlin approval news before markets open on either tomorrow or Friday, 880/share seems to be flying way too close to the sun ( 900). Who knows though, maybe the announcement of the actual approval won't cause a buying influx.

 

[mongo]

That's what Tesla did with the "Lemur" medium-range Model 3 back when they had spare GA capacity at Fremont but not enough 2170 cells from Panasonic.

There's a big difference with a structural pack.

The Lemur carries all its cells as cargo (sack of potatos, per Elon). If you put in dummy cells with similar strength, you've added back most of the weight and a good deal of the cost. Where do they get these 'dummy' cells? Shirley not set up for that (plan to fail?)

No, that's not on. They make as many full-sized packs as current cell production allows, and the focus on ramping cell production. What that mostly takes is patience. Not by Tesla, by TSLA investors.

Assuming for the moment Tesla will need to make smaller packs; if there is a limit to cell availability, it will be the jelly roll, not the cans; and the can is the structure, not the insides.

Dummy cans are easy to make, they take the existing can and put the lid on with the machinery they have without putting in a jelly roll. The rest of the build process proceeds as normal other than interleaving the empty cells with the full ones. They can even connect to the empty can's terminals so no change to the busbars.
Without any redesign, pack capacity granularity is 10% (assuming the 96s10p report was accurate).

 

[Ocelot]

Cramer:

CNBC on Twitter: ""This is the 'destroy Tesla plan'," says @jimcramer as the @SquawkStreet team reacts to Ford's plan to split its electric vehicle business into its own unit. https://t.co/6gh3du3vSd https://t.co/ipoVXKByoG" / Twitter​

So Ford plans to make 2M EVs by 2026? (got batteries?) Oh yeah, did Cramer mention that Tesla will make 2.1M EVs in 2023? Nope, he does not. But Ford plans to pass Tesla? Riiight...

Ford produced 4M cars total in 2020. Tesla will be at 4.7M cars in 2025 (ie: past Ford). For 2026, Tesla's production target is around 7.1M units. All EVs of course.

Has Ford invented some new physics? (ie: time travel). Or is this just Cramer shilling for his sponsors? You decide.

Got batteries? Seems like yes.

SK Innovation currently has plans to supply most of Ford's batteries. Depending on their other commitments, and average size of pack, they should have capacity to provide for 2 million vehicles in 2025 as current capacity is 40GWh, and planned is 200GWh by 2025. Just like Ford they are looking to spin-off from their petrochemical business.

Got batteries-Yes.

Not sure if Ford will pass Tesla. But I do find we are quick to dismiss any compettion with FUD.

I do get it. Competiton has 'been comin' for years, and none has come to fruition. But if done right Ford can make their spin-off lean and mean, and able to pivot. There is a reason they are doing this. As another poster mentioned they are shedding their access to become more focused. It's a smart business plan and VW's CEO has basically said how encumbered VW feels by the system they have created, so would not be surprised to see other's do this as well.

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

Cramer:

CNBC on Twitter: ""This is the 'destroy Tesla plan'," says @jimcramer as the @SquawkStreet team reacts to Ford's plan to split its electric vehicle business into its own unit. https://t.co/6gh3du3vSd https://t.co/ipoVXKByoG" / Twitter​

So Ford plans to make 2M EVs by 2026? (got batteries?) Oh yeah, did Cramer mention that Tesla will make 2.1M EVs in 2023? Nope, he does not. But Ford plans to pass Tesla? Riiight...

Ford produced 4M cars total in 2020. Tesla will be at 4.7M cars in 2025 (ie: past Ford). For 2026, Tesla's production target is around 7.1M units. All EVs of course.

Has Ford invented some new physics? (ie: time travel). Or is this just Cramer shilling for his sponsors? You decide.

Ford needs to pass around some of that good stuff they're smoking that makes them think they'll go from 25,000 EV production in 2021 to 2 million in 2026, especially when of those 2 million, most will be trucks which need bigger batteries, which of course they don't have many of......right now their trend rate on production of their EV's (just the Mach-E since that's the only thing they have) is going down, not up.

 

[advocate8]

That's what Tesla did with the "Lemur" medium-range Model 3 back when they had spare GA capacity at Fremont but not enough 2170 cells from Panasonic.

The Lemur carries all its cells as cargo (sack of potatos, per Elon). There's a big difference with a structural pack.

If you add dummy cells with similar strength, you've added back most of the weight and a good deal of the cost (cleans sheet design you would not add structure this way). Then where do they get these 'dummy' cells? Shirley Tesla has been setting up for that (plan to fail?)

No, that's not on. They make as many full-sized packs as current cell production allows, while focusing on ramping cell production. What that mostly takes is patience. Not by Tesla, by TSLA investors.

The structure of the pack doesn’t need every battery slot filled with something heavy or even filled at all to get essentially the full benefits in torsion. Even 50-60 percent of the cells it would take to fill one, properly spaced and bonded to the top and bottom skins, would probably bring the required structural properties. That’s how honeycomb structures work (or, similarly, foam-cored high-tech composites). If such structures are properly engineered, filling in the gaps does little but add weight and cost. Tesla can absolutely leave room for additional cells in later packs without boosting range (and cost to Tesla) now for holders of current orders who didn’t pay for more range and aren’t expecting it.
More profit.

 

[Tyler34]

And so it begins:

 

[davidlittle]

This is a good question and should be addressed in the next conference call.

Scale

 

[M|S|M MYP]

He must have not been loved growing up as a kid for an adult to keep posting *sugar* like this:

 

[Ogre]

Got batteries? Seems like yes.

SK Innovation currently has plans to supply most of Ford's batteries. Depending on their other commitments, and average size of pack, they should have capacity to provide for 2 million vehicles in 2025 as current capacity is 40GWh, and planned is 200GWh by 2025. Just like Ford they are looking to spin-off from their petrochemical business.

Ford is not going to be able to monopolize SK Innovations entire production. They might get 30% of it. VW has been a customer of SK’s for some time and has a much broader portfolio of EVs they want to service right now.

Ford might get 68GWh our of SK in 2025. That’s likely on the generous side. They aren’t getting anywhere near 40GWh right now.

If Ford is going to crank out 2m vehicles they need a lot more than that. Particularly if the Lightning is going to be part of the mix.

Not sure if Ford will pass Tesla. But I do find we are quick to dismiss any compettion with FUD.

I do get it. Competiton has 'been comin' for years, and none has come to fruition. But if done right Ford can make their spin-off lean and mean, and able to pivot. There is a reason they are doing this. As another poster mentioned they are shedding their access to become more focused. It's a smart business plan and VW's CEO has basically said how encumbered VW feels by the system they have created, so would not be surprised to see other's do this as well.

I mostly agree and I think Ford’s approach here is about as good as they could be expected to do.

Ford‘s problem is they started down this path 5+ years too late.

(GMs problem is they are incompetent)

 

[Krugerrand]

Got batteries? Seems like yes.

SK Innovation currently has plans to supply most of Ford's batteries. Depending on their other commitments, and average size of pack, they should have capacity to provide for 2 million vehicles in 2025 as current capacity is 40GWh, and planned is 200GWh by 2025. Just like Ford they are looking to spin-off from their petrochemical business.

Got batteries-Yes.

Not sure if Ford will pass Tesla. But I do find we are quick to dismiss any compettion with FUD.

I do get it. Competiton has 'been comin' for years, and none has come to fruition. But if done right Ford can make their spin-off lean and mean, and able to pivot. There is a reason they are doing this. As another poster mentioned they are shedding their access to become more focused. It's a smart business plan and VW's CEO has basically said how encumbered VW feels by the system they have created, so would not be surprised to see other's do this as well.

I’ll take that bet - against Ford. All day long, every day.

We’ve every right to dismiss their propaganda, PR, tongue wagging bs UNTIL they actually stop talking and start doing in earnest.

Additionally, they don’t have anyone of salt that I can identify to actually run that division. A couple of ex-Tesla peeps, isn’t going to inspire any confidence on this side of my screen. I need only reflect on Faraday, Lucid and Rivian to know, nobody that left Tesla has been close to good enough to do what Elon has done. While I’ll give a little wiggle room for this who left to go to a pure EV start up, anyone who’d leave Tesla to go to an OEM, is dead to me.

Yeah, I’m expecting Ford to fail as spectacularly as GM at this EV thing.

 

[insaneoctane]

With Mary leading, I'm surprised that Ford chose such a different approach than GM...

Is it leading if no one is behind you?