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

[nativewolf]

As a mathematician and engineer I spent a lot of time looking at the numbers before we committed to any solar/storage options. I can tell you for certain that energy prices from a grid operator will not be steady over those 20 years. They rise quite regularly and at a staggering rate. That has a significant impact on the pay off period for the investment.

I ran numbers on my system for our house many times. Assuming we replace every component the day warranty expires up to the max warranty item of the solar panels at 30 years, our system pays for itself and saves us about $86k dollars through that 30 years. that's replacing 3 string inverters and 2 LG chem batteries multiple times during that time. We use a lot of electricity and even more now given that we have a Tesla MS and our plug in hybrid van, but financially I don't see how you don't save money (we're in a very cheap area for electricity too) plus the fact that you're contributing to a cleaner future for all of mankind. I know this is OT but I really want anyone talking about numbers for renewable to really look at it carefully instead of just taking things at face value as the value of each day delayed in transitioning to renewable has so much impact for the future of our children.

We use $200 a month, Tesla wanted 104 after credits to do a Solar Roof and I just checked this morning and they want $37 for solar panels. There is just no way that makes sense. Ground mounts it will be more production, more backup capacity. Less expensive. That will be done before our first EV. In the meantime it will just be a metal roof.

 

[hobbes]

For whatever it is worth, here is a 11,xxx VIN from Berlin - highest I saw from teslastats.no was 74xx...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1545671067460591617

@Troy

 

[nativewolf]

May I ask if anyone has reviewed the stance(s) of the main Twitter shareholders, and the exent to which they might be motivated against Musk as an individual, or against Tesla (etc) as companies, i.e. they may have motivations beyond the obvious financial ones. If so could anyone point a link to such an analysis as Twiiter really is not my thing.

Vanguard, state street, blackrock morgan stanley. All in all I'd say the usual suspects. They will want top dollar.

 

[UCF3]

How Elon's bizarre Twitter takeover saga could have just been a cover for him to sell $8.5 billion in Tesla stock

"Honestly think he can 'land rockets' but can't fix 'bots'?" one influencer asked rhetorically.

fortune.com

"Entire thing was a clever ruse to SELL + LIQUIDATE $8.5 BILLION of TESLA STOCK (w/plausible excuse for doing it)," Josh Wolfe, co-founder of Lux Capital, tweeted Friday after the announcement. The tweet included math that suggested Musk would walk away with more than $7 billion in liquidated stock—even after paying the $1 billion breakup fee.

"Honestly think he can 'land rockets' but can't fix 'bots'?" Wolfe asked rhetorically.

 

[MC3OZ]

You're confusing/ conflating or being obtuse.
100GWh is the run rate (manufacturing capacity) for 4680 cell production.
Vehicle mix, including 2170, is a separate thing.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2021 Earnings Call Transcript | The Motley Fool

Also raw materials for a 100 GWh production rate don't just turn up uninvited.

The cathode plant at Austin is being constructed to process Lithium concentrate that will turn up around the end of the year.

That plant was relocated and delayed, possibly due to a delay in sourcing raw materials, possibly caused by a issue with a mine permit beyond Tesla's control.

Tesla is doing difficult and complex things there are lots of cats to herd.

 

[ZeApelido]

How Elon's bizarre Twitter takeover saga could have just been a cover for him to sell $8.5 billion in Tesla stock

"Honestly think he can 'land rockets' but can't fix 'bots'?" one influencer asked rhetorically.

fortune.com

"Entire thing was a clever ruse to SELL + LIQUIDATE $8.5 BILLION of TESLA STOCK (w/plausible excuse for doing it)," Josh Wolfe, co-founder of Lux Capital, tweeted Friday after the announcement. The tweet included math that suggested Musk would walk away with more than $7 billion in liquidated stock—even after paying the $1 billion breakup fee.

"Honestly think he can 'land rockets' but can't fix 'bots'?" Wolfe asked rhetorically.

OMG this guy has been bashing Musk for years. He was short TSLA via long dated puts in 2019, and he is a VC.

What especially triggers me is he also went to Cornell and is one of these stereotypical rich kid d-bags I went to school with whose daddy handed them a wad of cash to become a VC

https://twitter.com/x/status/1545893276649082881

 

[Drezil]

Why only early quarter?

Ships from china usually show up 6 weeks into the quarter and statistics won't tell you if it is LR from china or P from Berlin.

 

[RubberToe]

Why only early quarter?

The Norway numbers break out vehicle source. The eu-evs I don't believe they do. Basically, just trying to gauge the Berlin ramp as early and accurate as possible.

RT

 

[nativewolf]

Just to second the point that discovery demands will be on Elon, he has to prove that Twitter is in acting in bad faith but Twitter says EM can't prove that, they've already preemptively stated this and that's usually bad news for the opposing side. It means that negotiations have fallen through and that Twitter knows EM was just negotiating and that they feel they can force the deal. The interesting discovery war that might occur if it was discovered that Jack had given EM any info would be...spectacular for litigators. I mean then Twitter would have grounds to sue Jack. I seriously doubt Jack is going around bad mouthing the company he was running as it would open himself open to all sorts of lawsuits, it could ruin him.

The issues are really simple:

1. when he made the deal he cowboy'd it and waived the right to perform due diligence. Mistake #1 and that is what I think comes back to haunt him.
2. he spent the last few weeks trying to position a discussion around Twitter bot numbers not being honest. Since he had waived his right to data that would corroborate this statement he was a bit hosed- he could not substantiate this argument, Twitter was under no obligation to provide the data and Twitter stood pat.
3. he actually shifted his argument, and this is subtle but important, from the veracity of the bot numbers to a complaint that they did not provide data. Its' a better argument since EM has no idea if Twitters numbers are correct (thus he'd lose that quickly) but the fact that he waived his right to do due diligence means it's weak. I had to read Skaddens statement to realize he was no longer questioning Twitters numbers but the lack of Twitter data.

Still all in all it's a bad argument and I expect this is just negotiating and we see a deal very very close to the original number maybe less half a billion as a face saving gesture to EM. Another likely outcome is that he pays several billion in damages and walks away.

 

[MC3OZ]

Overall battery costs are still too high for something like that, and we are talking US labor rates (not say . . . Vietnam). I would put total "cost" if I had to pull an "out of the air" guess for the TX 4680 MY in the ballpark of $35-40k currently (not counting amortized costs of the factories, etc - just materials, labor, and other direct inputs).

Here is some rough maths on that relying in part on my sometimes suspect memory. And a lot of wild guesses.

A Fremont made 50 kWh Model 3/Y costs about $30,000 to make? (I seem to remember $29,000 for some reason) - We can partially deduce this from gross margins, but China is a complicating factor.

Labor on a Model 3/Y at Fremont $9,000?

Battery pack I'll assume $8,000, cells $6,000?

If my numbers are off, we can try to source better numbers.

We need to talk about when Austin is fully ramped no earlier than the end of 2023. The cost of cells probably halves to $3,000 but we may need to add back $1,000 for depreciation on the 4680 production equipment. Overall saving $2,000 on a 50 kWh pack.

A Chinese 50 kWh LFP pack might be $4,000 in China? But by the time it is landed in the US we can add some additional costs perhaps now $5,000?

So if Tesla could make the Austin Model Y with a Chinese LFP pack, they might save another $1,000.

For the rest of the car, I think the improvements with front and rear castings, workflow and ergonomics possibly save another $2,000.

So an Austin made Model Y might be $4,000 cheaper than a Fremont made Model Y (by the end of 2023), possibly costing around $26,000 to make.

The $30,000 number (if remembered correctly), was from a long time ago, and many parts components and raw materials might have been cheaper then,

Partial justification for my numbers is the Munro teardowns and the lavish praise of the Model Y design from Munro staff on many aspects. Munro don't just like good design, they like good design which saves money.

 

[MC3OZ]

when he made the deal he cowboy'd it and waived the right to perform due diligence.

That isn't what Elon and his lawyers are claiming.

The Twitter acquisition is of very, very, very minor concern to long term buy and hold Tesla investors. I was go as far as to say it in terms of the big picture, it is totally irrelevant, Surely it is time to discuss it in a separate thread, that I can ignore,

 

[nativewolf]

Also raw materials for a 100 GWh production rate don't just turn up uninvited.

The cathode plant at Austin is being constructed to process Lithium concentrate that will turn up around the end of the year.

That plant was relocated and delayed, possibly due to a delay in sourcing raw materials, possibly caused by a issue with a mine permit beyond Tesla's control.

Tesla is doing difficult and complex things there are lots of cats to herd.

All well and good: 7 months ago Drew said it would be at 8GWh by the end of the this year. Kato alone should be running at over 2GWh per month already. Kato is permitted and running. They had plans for it to be

Tesla's agile ..amazing agile. They've moved to bring that 2170 capability into Austin so quickly. The castings and battery pack that are being discussed on Sandy Munro's youtube channel show so much promise that I'm sure Austin will print money. Just continuous change ongoing from 1 year to the next. Maybe we look back and think Tesla's biggest short term mistake was not buying IDRA. Anyway, I'm thinking Austin will be just fine. I'm not thinking the 4680 is fine and it has nothing to do with lithium (everyone else can get it, even Ford), it has nothing to do with permits (Kato is running at a fraction of Katos capacity). Cathode, material supply, permits are all facile excuses. The reality is, sadly, the ramp is slow. I hope they quickly regroup and find alternatives to supply battery capacity at scale to energy side of things.

Just a reality check: it does mean that Ford is going to have a year of run before CT gets to market. They were announced not so far apart. Ford has it out and with enough $ you can buy one. I think this is the first time Tesla has been beaten to market by a serious competitor and the lead time on the Lightening is up to a year now. Tesla has made the market for Ford, the good and bad of it. I care much more about a sustainable planet than Tesla per se but still I want a CT so I am miffed.

 

[wipster]

Well, the SP is up, so the FUD (possible) is up too. Running into the back of a Walmart trailer in a 2015 S:
NHTSA opens THIRTY-SEVENTH probe into Tesla after Californians killed NHTSA opens THIRTY-SEVENTH probe into Tesla after Californians killed via Home | Daily Mail Online

And since most folks (I assert at least) only read the headline and the first paragraph, might as make them as gaudy as possible, the better to catch those paying eyes...

 

[Tim S]

You're right, investing in stocks cannot really be modelled in the way blackjack can. But, neither can poker since the human element plays into it so much. And modern casino blackjack is still profitable for those few who can count cards, play every hand perfectly and avoid getting banned from all casinos. It's perfectly legal to count cards and it's perfectly legal for the casino to ban you because you are too good of a player!

But I would suggest it's not the optimal strategy to sell 25% every time a stock doubles. Had I done that through my entire investing career, I can guarantee you I would not have been able to retire at 37 and my brokerage account would be a small fraction of its worth today. Yet the advice you give is common, almost as if it's common sense. But selling 25% simply because your investment doubled is a terrible thing to do. Worse than you can imagine, especially if your style of investing is long-term in nature and your goal is to select companies that will be long-term winners. There are other styles of investing, but this is what most individual investors should probably be doing.

The reason it's so bad to sell 25% simply because it doubled is because winners tend to keep winning. A better rule would be to buy more if it doubles and sell all of a stock that drops 25% over a multi-year period. But I wouldn't do that either because the idea with investing is to put your capital into companies that have the best chances for growth, looking far forward, no matter what the share price is. Don't base whether you want to buy or sell a company on the share price, that is mostly noise. Sure, avoid buying wildly over-valued companies at what seems like a local maximum and buy those same companies when the excess has been wrung out, but don't sell because they doubled from your purchase! Base it on the long-term prospects and constantly re-appraise as you go. If you are already retired, and you know you will need money in a couple of years, then it makes sense to take some out of the market early if prices are good. But don't sell some simply because it doubles in price - pretty soon you would have almost no shares at all (even if they are still worth considerably more than you paid for them).

The number one mistake individual stock investors make is to sell their winners too soon. That's the difference between becoming fabulously wealthy and still wondering where your next $50K is going to come from. That is why dead investors outperform living investors, because they never sell. However, the financial media constantly misleads and misdirects small investors by writing their stories as if it's just common sense that you should sell when the price seems high and buy when the price seems low. It's a false narrative. But we need bad investors, we can't all make millions in the market, there would be no one left to do the hard work. So do it however it seems most reasonable to you! Anyone who wants to become more profitable has to take lessons on not selling any of a great company unless you need the money, regardless of price.

This is the advice that made me wealthy in the past 3 years. Thanks Stealth.

 

[insaneoctane]

I'm ready for the stock to run. I'm not excited at the prospect of it possibly trading sideways for a few quarters. I think the stock is stretching it's legs ATM, preparing to make me happy.

 

[MP3Mike]

Kato alone should be running at over 2GWh per month already.

Why do you feel the need to lie? That statement is so easy to disprove. No, it shouldn't be over 2 GWh/month. It is only supposed to be 10 GWh/year, which works out to ~0.8GWh/month. (Which I think they are already really close to, if not at.)

Here is a link to the battery day presentation at the spot where they talk about the Kato road facility :

Drew Baglino: (01:56:56)
Yeah. And I want to stress, this is not just a concept or a rendering. We’re starting to ramp up manufacturing of these cells at our pilot 10 gigawatt hour production facility, just around the corner.

Elon Musk: (01:57:08)
Yeah. So. Yeah. It’s a video of some of what’s going on in the plant. Now. I mean, to be clear, it will take about a year to reach the 10 gigawatt hour capacity. So this is important to appreciate. When you build a factory, there’s a certain capacity that you design to, and then it takes some period of time to actually achieve that capacity. So I would say it’s probably about a year before we get to the 10 gigawatt hour annualized rate with the pilot plant. And this is just a pilot plant. The actual production plants will be more on the order of maybe 200 gigawatt hours, maybe more over time.

And notice that they didn't provide any hard timeline for reaching the 10GWh/year. It was always probably and about a year.

 

[MC3OZ]

Just a reality check: it does mean that Ford is going to have a year of run before CT gets to market.

The Bolt beat the Model 3 to market, and we know how that ended.

Cybertruck is dependent of the 4680 ramp and definitely in the back end of 2023.

But fast forward to 2025 we can compare CT sales to Ford sales, and IMO I already know the outcome.

 

[MP3Mike]

Where are you getting >24GWh from? Kato was planned to be 10GWh intially with future expansion to 20GWh.

I don't recall them ever saying that Kato would get to 20 GWh/year. What they said was that the full production lines would be 20 GWh/year each. Did I miss where they said Kato would be revamped to be a full production line instead of a pilot line?

 

[wipster]

... Just a reality check: it does mean that Ford is going to have a year of run before CT gets to market. They were announced not so far apart. Ford has it out and with enough $ you can buy one. I think this is the first time Tesla has been beaten to market by a serious competitor and the lead time on the Lightening is up to a year now. Tesla has made the market for Ford, the good and bad of it. I care much more about a sustainable planet than Tesla per se but still I want a CT so I am miffed.

But, this can work to Tesla's advantage, due to potential recall(s) that have to be performed at the dealership, taking time and possibly costing money. In the interim, Tesla finds out what customers like and don't like about the Lightning and use that to their advantage in any free marketing or comparisons. And the more vehicles Ford makes, the more issues will be apparent. That's the main reason I never buy the first year of a new model, so the manufacturer can find out about those issues as well.

So even though it's been a loooong wait, I do think it's going to be to Tesla's advantage and customers will end up with a better product because of it.

 

[nativewolf]

Where are you getting >24GWh from? Kato was planned to be 10GWh intially with future expansion to 20GWh. The calendering roller issue slowed things down (go figure, issues on a brand new plant using brand new processes for a brand new cell design)

Ahh..20. I am corrected! Ok, so say 10 is near term plan, .8 a month? Either way and still to the point they are not close to that are they? That would be something over 10000 cars a month? correct? Not sure of exactly how much capacity they really have in each Austin Model Y, look forward to Sandy's take on it.

The roller issue was known by Thanksgiving last year, correct (August articles about it)? Bah, they are slow. I don't even know what there is to discuss. Drew shouldn't have been saying 100GWh by end of this year. They were saying they had identified issues in July but hoped to be at 50-100 by the end of this year (and they knew about the roller issues then) and he said it again in November before thanksgiving. So a year ago they knew they had identified issues, 7 months ago they doubled down on estimates and here we are 5 months from now and Austin is making how many 4680 cars a month?