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.
They likely get 1/2 the credit pretty easy if they use the 2170 cells from Giga Nevada. The cells and pack are made in the US.

The other 1/2 will likely take time to develop the raw material sources, but I think Tesla is further along on the this than the legacy manufacturers.

This is why I think the mid-range might be a good idea. Drops the price below $55K to get the credit, but keeps the margin.
Just have J.B and Redwood recycle everything first...
Definitions are going to be so critical.
 
If you or anyone else can demonstrate merely at the crudest level how an extant platform, unequivocally terribly flawed in its ability even to achieve its single goal as a “blurt” site, can be and can be considered to be an effective (read: most efficient) base upon which to create a global pan-financial site (as you write, insurance, investment banking, payments and more), THEN I would be willing to change my attitude of and beliefs about Twitter, and more importantly, my otherwise implacable disappointment toward Mr Musk for having proceeded as he has done.

I do not enjoy disagreeing with him. But never, ever, will I be one who is of the mindset “Well, Mr Musk controls more shares of Tesla than do I so I have to agree with him.”
I remember thinking similar things when I heard the "computer nerd" that started Paypal was going to start building cars. Then space ships. One thing I have learned over the last decade or so-don't bet against Elon Musk.
 
New megapack products are live with 50% more energy. Some people are speculating these are LFP celled megapacks.

Dimensions are bigger:

  • Longer by 6 foot (27%)
  • Wider by 2 inches (3%)
  • Taller by 1 foot (17%)
  • Weighs 33,000 lb more (64% increase)
64% heavier for 50% more energy = lower energy density cells in the new version
Price per MWh of storage went down by 16% compared to previous version.

(these thoughts and specs were copied from reddit)
 
Last edited:
@Cobbler I think that news on Soros buying a bit of Tesla might be driving up the stock price after hours. I bought at $900 after seeing your post. Thanks. Of course, the rise could be the end of recognition of option expiry closing price, as StealthP3D described. Either way, happy I bought. Have a great weekend, all !



7EE8531A-19F8-4999-AFA4-408E27D53524.jpeg


The end of the regular trading session used to be the end of the week. But the market makers realized if they could get the after-hours trading to be recognized by the options contracts, they would have a lower volume market to fix their imbalances and further boost their profitability. So, if you want to mess with the ultimate manipulators, buy shares in aftermarket trading for under $900 before the session closes. ;)

If the macro outlook remains largely unchanged over the weekend, I think Monday morning is good for at least a $10-$20 pop (if not a lot more).
 
Last edited:
New megapack products are live with 50% more energy. Some people are speculating these are LFP celled megapacks.

Dimensions are bigger:

  • Longer by 6 foot (27%)
  • Wider by 2 inches (3%)
  • Taller by 1 foot (17%)
  • Weighs 33,000 lb more (64% increase)
64% heavier for 50% more energy = lower energy density cells in the new version
Price per MWh of storage went down by 16% compared to previous version.

(these thoughts and specs were copied from reddit)
They can probably last 20 years with minimum degradation As well. And of course Tesla can probably fill more demand while making slightly higher margins. In 2023 Tesla energy should be a much bigger profit line.
 
I don't think it's yet clear whether Tesla can meet the battery material and component requirements... especially with LFP or whatever the newer version of that is, which as far as I know is basically 100% from China (and thus not eligible for the rebate anyway).

Maybe their Nickel batteries qualify (I'm not sure about the supply chain for Giga Nevada or Giga Texas battery materials)... which would be more consistent with trying to get the LR under the budget. WRT the suggestion above, it would be a bummer to need to consume Nickel batteries for a medium-range car instead of using LFP designs to get there. I hope they plan to squeak an actual LR under the budget, and just don't want to lower prices before they work through the current backlog.

It would be nice if it was a shutdown for casting upgrades... yet I'm not sure I believe that either. They have a big backlog to fill, and a shutdown should just change the delivery timing instead of putting a hold on the entire ordering process. Unless there's a redesign significant enough to change the performance characteristics? But in that case why would the P model still be for sale?

Altogether curious.
If it was important, I'm sure Tesla can make a car which qualifies for the rebate by controlling all aspects of the supply chain including having cells made just for those vehicles that would be sold in the US and using a different battery for those cars.

But if we assume hypothetically that the Semi using 2170 cells and the Semi easily qualifies for the rebate, Tesla might decide that is the highest priority use of 2170 cells.

If lower range Model 3s can be made with Chinese battery packs as an interim solution at good margins and can possibly be sold for a lower price that might be good option. Using 2170s for Performance Models might still make sense.

My hunch is one 500 Mile Semi would consume the amount of 2170 cells that would go into 12 LR Model 3s. If I am wrong, the number is probably somewhere in the 10-14 range. Making more Semis might be a big advantage from making fewer LR Model 3s in the US.

For most of the rest of the world. LR Model 3 comes from China.

Another more simple explanation is the LR Model 3 orderbook is full.
 
If it was important, I'm sure Tesla can make a car which qualifies for the rebate by controlling all aspects of the supply chain including having cells made just for those vehicles that would be sold in the US and using a different battery for those cars.

But if we assume hypothetically that the Semi using 2170 cells and the Semi easily qualifies for the rebate, Tesla might decide that is the highest priority use of 2170 cells.

If lower range Model 3s can be made with Chinese battery packs as an interim solution at good margins and can possibly be sold for a lower price that might be good option. Using 2170s for Performance Models might still make sense.

My hunch is one 500 Mile Semi would consume the amount of 2170 cells that would go into 12 LR Model 3s. If I am wrong, the number is probably somewhere in the 10-14 range. Making more Semis might be a big advantage from making fewer LR Model 3s in the US.

For most of the rest of the world. LR Model 3 comes from China.

Another more simple explanation is the LR Model 3 orderbook is full.
Having a flexible supply chain is one of the competitive advantages Tesla enjoys.

Ford & GM have one battery supplier for each product. Being able to mix and match cells for this purpose is potentially going to make a huge difference here for Tesla customers.
 
New megapack products are live with 50% more energy. Some people are speculating these are LFP celled megapacks.

Dimensions are bigger:

  • Longer by 6 foot (27%)
  • Wider by 2 inches (3%)
  • Taller by 1 foot (17%)
  • Weighs 33,000 lb more (64% increase)
64% heavier for 50% more energy = lower energy density cells in the new version
Price per MWh of storage went down by 16% compared to previous version.

(these thoughts and specs were copied from reddit)

We've known for some time that these were planned from Lathrop: (LFP definately part of the plan)

Tesla set to introduce larger Megapacks this quarter, targeting to grow Megapack production to nearly 50GWh by 2023 | (Jan 7, 2022)

 
A 40-ton truck moving through a city at 30 mph that has to brake to a complete stop and the accelerate back up to 30 mph burns through a theoretical minimum of 1 kWh of energy every time, because that’s the kinetic energy of 40 tons at 30 mph. In reality, the powertrain could not accelerate the truck with 100% efficiency. An efficient battery truck like the Tesla Semi could accelerate with 90% efficiency and regen brake with maybe 85% recovery efficiency. The diesel truck accelerates with 40% efficiency and brakes with 0% recovery.

Tesla: 0.9 * 0.85 = ~76% efficiency
—> 1 kWh * 24% loss = 0.24 kWh of energy used per cycle​

Diesel: 1 kWh / 0.4 = 2.5 kWh of energy used per cycle

Order of magnitude efficiency difference!

A US gallon of diesel has 40.7 kWh of chemical energy and costs $5, which is $0.12/kWh, about the same as typical retail electricity prices.

In a day, a short-haul regional delivery truck might do on the order of 100 such stop-start cycles. The diesel truck would burn $0.12/kWh * 2.5 kWh * 100 = $30/day on energy costs for stopping and starting whereas the Tesla would burn just $3. That’s $10k saved per year just on fuel just for starting and stopping 100 times per day!!!

For a truck with a more extreme urban route with 1000 stops per day (roughly one every minute with about 16 hours of driving), the benefit of a good electric powertrain is $100k per year.

This isn’t even accounting for brake wear and tear expenses either, nor for the externalized environmental and health costs of the brake dust, noise, and toxic smoke being emitted in populated areas.

This is the primary reason why battery-electric passenger busses are currently much more popular than electric trucks.
Bingo! An EV is optimized for cases of lots of starting and stopping, and most limited in applications requiring high-speed (high aerodynamic drag) driving for long periods of times. For all the reasons you mention, Semi makes a lot of sense for local/short haul delivery applications and "city to city" runs (not necessarily cross country). Now, my question-rather than starting with Semi, why not start with smaller delivery vehicles, such as UPS/FEDEX/Amazon/mail trucks? Much more start/stop operation, lots of vehicles and demand, and a lot of exposure to consumers. How much of an impact would a Tesla logo on the BBT or Amazon truck customers see every day have on potential EV purchasers? And fewer miles covered in a given day, meaning more vehicles from a constrained battery supply. I'm curious why Tesla has left this open to Bright Drop and Rivian (and some others) at this point-seems like much less of a technical and production challenge than Semi. Semi does seem like a natural foundation for panel trucks.

Having said that, I'm wondering if Tesla is waiting to "drop the big one" on the delivery market, with a ground-up design, using their expertise in design for manufacturing and "alternate" construction methods, with a platform at a dramatically lower cost than anything currently on the market.
 
Welcome aboard, George S. Good to see you as a shareholder at last.

Dad would be proud of you, young’un!

(Much older Dad and young G Soros were roommates, at times, as they scoured the world for new markets. Famously, that included Brezhnevian USSR in the early-mid 70s).

Quite separately, I rented my condo to the Soros’s for quite a long period when they were having their own unit, upstairs from me, renovated. That sabbatical for me from CPWest was one of my eye openers that got me out of NYC and Wall St and so, indirectly, I have them to thank for having enhanced my life by a few zillion percent.
 
Why the free pass for Rivian? (I know, I know)

CNN Business article title: "Rivian lost $1.7 billion in three months. Here's why that may not be a problem"
"It's a measurement of nothing." James IP Womack, a fellow at the MIT Mobility initiative and author of a widely cited book on auto manufacturing.
"It's kind of amazing anybody can do this at all.""It's best at this stage to evaluate Rivian through its products, and how they make consumers feel."

In F'22 Q2 Rivian lost a whopping $1.7 billion. They reiterated their goal of producing 25,000 vehicles for all of 2022.

The article compares Rivian to Tesla. Tesla lost money during their ramp, sure, but is this a fair comparison? Let's take a closer look.
At Tesla's worst profit performance F'18 Q2 lost $717 million (Rivian's quarterly loss 2.3X higher than that of Tesla). Yet Tesla produced 254,530 vehicles for all of 2018 (10X more than Rivian hopes to achieve this year).

No panic now for Rivian due to their $15.5 billion war chest, however at this rate, when/if Rivian starts producing vehicles in the hundreds of thousands, they will truly be money furnaces and even $15.5 billion will not be enough. Rivian, Lucid and the majors are just beginning to go through the valley of death, the great abyss. This shows we can truly appreciate what Tesla has accomplished with incredible efficiencies. I wish all EV manufacturers the very best. Some will make it. Some will not. But come on James Womack, at least acknowledge that Rivian has a problem here.

The more articles I read, the more I want to invest in Tesla.