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.
If the report doesnt utilize miles driven in the calculations then this information will be worthless.

Nope, not per mile, per vehicle.


The news link provided said:
Tesla’s figure and its crash rate per 1,000 vehicles was substantially higher than the corresponding numbers for other automakers that provided such data to The Associated Press ahead of NHTSA’s release


The fact most other makers heavily geo-restrict their features, while Tesla lets you turn them on nearly anywhere including places they explicitly tell you not to use it, is showing up in this data more than anything else.

Supercruise has a SUPER tiny number of crashes because you can only use it on specific pre-lidar-mapped highways for example.
 
NHTSA report coming soon. Data likely shows Teslas on Autopilot crash more than rivals obviously Tesla gathers data immediately, while other automakers wait for field reports. Tesla is penalized for being a smartphone on wheels.
How to compare auto pilot that exist since 2014 with blue cruise or cruise that exist since a couples of months
I NTSHA need to compare for example 2018-2022 data not all or they add on the result the millions of miles drived with it
 
Nope, not per mile, per vehicle.





The fact most other makers heavily geo-restrict their features, while Tesla lets you turn them on nearly anywhere including places they explicitly tell you not to use it, is showing up in this data more than anything else.

Supercruise has a SUPER tiny number of crashes because you can only use it on specific pre-lidar-mapped highways for example.
Super Cruise exit since only a couples of months
 
Super Cruise exit since only a couples of months



No, since 2017.

Review from June 2017 for example:



Among the 2 major differences it notes from that system to Teslas is the fact you can only activate the GM one on a specific, limited, set of roads.
(the other is the presence of a driver monitoring camera system- which Tesla has since kludged into existence on the 3/Y and post-refresh S/X)
 
Nope, not per mile, per vehicle.





The fact most other makers heavily geo-restrict their features, while Tesla lets you turn them on nearly anywhere including places they explicitly tell you not to use it, is showing up in this data more than anything else.

Supercruise has a SUPER tiny number of crashes because you can only use it on specific pre-lidar-mapped highways for example.
And super tiny amount of people who has supercruise because it's not available on most models except their higher end cars plus the upsell to get it is more than FSD while Tesla gives you AP for free.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AZRI11
100% and the same with Q2 numbers. Doesnt matter that we all know Shanghai was closed for a month. FUD will spread that Tesla demand is slipping and Tesla cant ramp production.
We're so used to TSLA being attacked to the downside, we forget hedge funds don't care about Tesla. They just wanna make money manipulating valuations.

Where does TSLA dump from here if 2Q is spun negatively? From $660 to maybe $560? With a LOT of effort....and risk if the okay doesn't work.

I think it's more likely we're in the negative spin right now. The TSLA options world is feeling super comfortable that we're out crossing 900 this summer. That's easier prey if you ask me.

After 2Q earnings we'll have $9+ in TTM EPS. It'll be hard to compress our PE south from 70 once 2Q is out. Then really hard once 3Q is a known quantity.

I think TSLA is gonna move big in the opposite direction of sentiment from here on out. That's how MM's and huge hedge funds maximize returns. Sentiment today is 💩.
 
The real benchmark:Is Tesla FSD + driver better than the average driver?
5 million crashes annually (may be up to 7 million) across a population of 300 million cars in the US is 17 crashes per 1,000 cars.

Article says it was maybe 207 crashes, so if Tesla has more than 12k cars on the road, they're better.
Going the other way, at 830k cars per article, if Tesla has less than 14k crashes, they're better.
(Also, crash doesn't necessarily equate to at-fault)

2022 Driving Statistics: The Ultimate List of Driving Stats
 
We discussed a new robot deliverd to Giga Berlin that is used in Austin for structural battery pack Ys above - if the insider info driveteslacanada got is correct, it is quite likely that Berlin is actually already moving in this direction (which I initially thought was unlikely):

Also very interesting with regard to Austin adding a 2170 line - in Q1 earnings call it was said that Berlin would start with 2170 and add 4680 later and Austin vice versa. If only Austin was adding 2170 that might be taken as a hint that there is a problem with 4680, but if Berlin is adding 4680 line around the same time that becomes less likely.
 

CEO of Tesla assigns a value of "basically zero" to Tesla's core business of selling EVs (and solar and battery, for that matter). Apparently FSD is the only reason Tesla is worth more than zero.
Dear lord… this is so damning and Tesla is going to zero because industry leading margins and profits won’t be enough. I mean just look at Apple.
 
CEO of Tesla assigns a value of "basically zero" to Tesla's core business of selling EVs (and solar and battery, for that matter). Apparently FSD is the only reason Tesla is worth more than zero.

Rephrased for clarity: "Tesla with solved FSD, an operational robotaxi network, a humanoid robot business which replaces much of human labor, and has solved for artificial general intelligence will be worth at least 100x the automotive business. This makes the EV business a rounding error in the valuation. If we solve FSD, we will have solved the hardest remaining problem to becoming the largest company in the history of humanity."
 

CEO of Tesla assigns a value of "basically zero" to Tesla's core business of selling EVs (and solar and battery, for that matter). Apparently FSD is the only reason Tesla is worth more than zero.
You can't find anyone else more conservative assigning a valuation to their own company other than the CEO of Tesla.

So next time you think Elon is pumping his own stock, remember what he said here.
 
This has interested me and I did some research. I know a big chunk of corn produced in the US is used for ethanol to supplement fuel. I've seen more and more fields in Kansas being planted in corn than I ever remembered before.

According to the USDA here: US Acreage Usage by Crop the US as a whole planted 92,692,000 acres in corn for 2021. That's a 2% increase over last year according to the research.

Then you look at how much of that was used for fuel supplement. That can be found here: US Corn Portion used for Fuel Ethanol. It has dropped just a little bit in the last year but it's up to 5.05% of all corn produced.

Put those two things together and you get about 4,639,000 acres used for ethanol generation only. Take that into sq miles if you'd like to compare to some of the estimates for solar needs and you get 7,248 sq miles. That's a huge area. That's a lot of resources going into a very nitrogen heavy crop which then has an energy intensive as well to produce this, almost 2.5 MWH per acre of corn including cultivating the crop and refining it into ethanol (Energy use to produce Ethanol). The kicker is that per the report ethanol market value is more for the ethanol usage than all other market values combined (corn oil, gluten feed, gluten meal...). If we just shifted corn production away from this to making it areas for solar we'd be way ahead in the energy game, use less water from things like the aquifers that keep getting pumped down to irrigate these crops and so forth. It's crazy how people don't see this.

Edit: Total energy usage per year to produce that Ethanol is 11,598,086 MWh, that's 11.5 TWh. Think about that for a moment.
And it's about to get worse. The admin has mandated higher ethanol usage for 2022 and the future.