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

[Artful Dodger]

Either the energy of the cells is about 4.5x (10% under target) the 2170 or they are software limiting until they get more experience with the new cells.

...or the weight is less than listed by the EPA. The weight, range, and efficiency claims don't jibe. Something doesn't match.

I highly doubt Tesla is giving away unused battery capacity when they can sell all they can make (it's not software limited).

Again, simpliest explaination is often correct: this is a STANDARD AWD, with 16% more range than a 2170-based Model 3 SR+ from Sept 2020.

 

[Phobi]

All bets…

Are on.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1513882733822595074

 

[Mengy]

All bets…

Are on.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1513882733822595074

Wow, if true that is terrible news for Q2.

 

[Usain]

Either the energy of the cells is about 4.5x (10% under target) the 2170 or they are software limiting until they get more experience with the new cells.

If 4680 is only 10% under the energy target right now, I'm pretty happy.

When Tesla starts accepting orders for this car, I'll be really, really happy. That will mean they must have hit a decent 4680 production rate.

If we have a long period where the Austin MY is only available from inventory, that will mean they are probably having trouble scaling 4680.

 

[henchman24]

So let's assume the 4680 is actually 10% under target... Then the standard range Y's are long term targeted to 300 mi of range (my guess late 23/early 24). Probably means long range are targeted to 400mi around the same time. If that can be done at scale with improving margins over Fremont, that is incredibly bullish.

On the overall production side, a mid-May re-opening would basically bake in a 'bad' (notice quotation marks) that will be used heavily as FUD against the stock. It won't work long-term as production rates pick back up through the summer.

 

[Singuy]

Wow, if true that is terrible news for Q2.

The production out of Shanghai doesn't matter for the stock price. What matters is what the governments long term plan is. We know that covid will be with us for years with new variants yearly. Is China going to keep shutting down everytime this happens or will there be some sort of long term plan to deal with the thought of living with the virus?

Shareholders are looking for some kind of certainty out of China and its not even Tesla specific as what they decide determines how supply chain will work in the future. So this is macro related and Tesla will flow with macro for now as everyone is in the same basket.

 

[Doit]

All bets…

Are on.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1513882733822595074

Just want to point out that ANYBODY who claims to know when the shutdown will end and further when Giga Shanghai will reopen is a fraud, for the near term (but yes, it will become more definitive soon or later, but right now, nobody knows).

Go ahead to ask the Shanghai mayor and party leader if they know. Any firm date given by those in position to say so carries non-negligible risk of "involuntary vacation" (i.e. relegated or fired). The rumor is that there is power struggle between Shanghai leadership and the central government (Xi) about how to tackle the current dilemma.

 

[Electroman]

But they should really adjust all the vehicles and not have to sell this one for less. Let's see how they price it.

It looks to me that they are about 10% off from the energy target of 5x versus the 2170 cell assuming the vehicles (4680 versus 2170) weigh the same. I don't think this is a big deal as we have routinely seen this type of improvement over time on the prior 2170 and 18650 cells. They probably decided to move forward and do a later iteration on cell chemistry rather than continue to delay all the other manufacturing improvements that come with the structural pack.

What exactly is the concern here? Is the range of Texas 4170 SR & LR less than expected? less than a Model Y with 2170 cells ? Sorry I missed the key point here.

 

[MD70]

All bets…

Are on.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1513882733822595074

Where has he got this date from? I doubt even the Chinese government knows at this point.

 

[Tyler34]

Where has he got this date from? I doubt even the Chinese government knows at this point.

The moose head on the wall in his apartment has inside sources.

 

[Stretch2727]

...or the weight is less than listed by the EPA. The weight, range, and efficiency claims don't jibe. Something doesn't match.

I highly doubt Tesla is giving away unused battery capacity when they can sell all they can make (it's not software limited).

Again, simpliest explaination is often correct: this is a STANDARD AWD, with 16% more range than a 2170-based Model 3 SR+ from Sept 2020.

I have seen many quotes saying the weights are the same but could not find the official EPA documentation. Agree, it does not make sense as a lower range car should weigh less if the battery energy densities are similar and I don't think the front casting and structural pack is adding the weight.

This is why my theory they did not quite hit the 5x target and decided to go forward due to all the other manufacturing efficiencies they have achieved. I don't think this is a big deal given the history of ongoing chemistry battery improvements. I am sure there will be some future improvements that get the range back to the level of the current LR or a lower weight short range car.

 

[ZachF]

...or the weight is less than listed by the EPA. The weight, range, and efficiency claims don't jibe. Something doesn't match.

I highly doubt Tesla is giving away unused battery capacity when they can sell all they can make (it's not software limited).

Again, simpliest explaination is often correct: this is a STANDARD AWD, with 16% more range than a 2170-based Model 3 SR+ from Sept 2020.

My guess is that they are holding some range in reserve until they can gather more real world data. 2170 and 18650 is a known quantity and the 4680 isn’t yet.

Also I expect the 4680 LRs to get a range bump when they come out.

 

[Electroman]

Given the severe lockdown in Shanghai now, it should not be a big surprise if the factory can't reopen for a month. And none of that matters in the long run.

 

[ZachF]

Given the severe lockdown in Shanghai now, it should not be a big surprise if the factory can't reopen for a month. And none of that matters in the long run.

Q2 2021 Tesla produced 206k cars, so if Fremont makes 130k and Berlin and Austin 10k each, Shanghai needs to produce 66k (~36% capacity) for the TTM production to be up.

Tesla will possibly post a loss though this quarter…

 

[Ocelot]

One criticism of Tesla has been that they get less than rated range in the real world compared to other EV's. Tesla may be adjusting their ratings to better reflect real world results.

This thought crossed my head as well, and I hope this to be the case.

 

[MABMAB]

 

[Mengy]

The production out of Shanghai doesn't matter for the stock price.

Long term I agree. Short term, say for Q2 2022, I disagree. If Tesla posts a loss for the quarter Wall Street will not react kindly, no matter the circumstances. Sure we all know Q3 will likely be a huge new record and the stock will bounce back huge, but I could see Q2 being something TSLAQ uses to the fullest.

 

[wipster]

The moose head on the wall in his apartment has inside sources.

I wonder where he bought it...

 

[mongo]

Q2 2021 Tesla produced 206k cars, so if Fremont makes 130k and Berlin and Austin 10k each, Shanghai needs to produce 66k (~36% capacity) for the TTM production to be up.

Tesla will possibly post a loss though this quarter…

Did you mean a financial loss or a production decline?

 

[kbM3]

What exactly is the concern here? Is the range of Texas 4170 SR & LR less than expected? less than a Model Y with 2170 cells ? Sorry I missed the key point here.

The concern is that a 4680 Model Y, should be more efficient because the structural pack and front casting and higher energy density and lower range (less energy capacity) should all be contributing to a significantly lighter weight, and the EPA efficiency rating indicates no improvement.