You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It should kill the sat phone and sat messenger industry. Garmin, Delorme (sp?) and whoever makes the Spot messengers have to be feeling a major kick in the 'nads.
My wife and I are ultra runners and are often in the middle of nowhere high on a mountain with limited kit. We use the Garmin InReach but it kind of sucks for anything besides tracking. We currently have AT&T but will absolutely switch us to Tmobile once this is up and running.
I realize the SpaceX/T-Mobile announcement has very little to do with Tesla (currently at least), but do we think it will affect the SP tomorrow? Will definitely be watching T-Mobile stock price.
I’ve done consulting in the commercial satellite industry for the past 20+ years, and they’ve been collectively trying to pretend SpaceX doesn’t exist (not unlike OEMs burying their head in the sand about Tesla). The industry’s cheapest launch service provider is also a direct competitor in satellite services. It’s been very…uncomfortable.
With Starlink, and then especially when the mobile versions came out (Marine & Aviation), it’s reached a point where they have to be acknowledged as a competitor in PowerPoint presentations and whatnot. But this announcement…this is pretty crazy stuff, mostly technically, but definitely also commercially. There are now cell towers in the sky. That can connect to existing phones. Did you get that part? - that’s just silly.
Generally the cell companies and satellite companies are partners, and don’t overlap services (satellite providing backhaul for cell, for example). But now T-Mobile blurred the lines with apparent ability to connect directly to satellites(!). This move is up there with AT&T being the exclusive iPhone provider for the first couple years. That was sticky enough that I still have that same AT&T account (and still have that original iPhone, in a box). I may switch to T-Mobile in the not too distant future.
The fact that they are getting this to work with existing phone antennas is pretty amazing. The satellite industry does not innovate quickly. They tend to stick to the same tried-and-true platforms (things in space are hard to fix if you don’t get it right). We know that’s not the case with SpaceX, but good for T-Mobile to be the one on board.
And sooo much sandbagging on connecting Teslas to Starlink. Nice to see that on the list now. We knew it was technically possible. If your Tesla has some ability to connect to the network from anywhere on the globe, is that not a pretty important advantage? And one that can’t easily be matched by other “car” companies.
One place we may need to pump the brakes on this is with the FCC. Repurposing spectrum that you “own” is not always looked highly upon (see the 5G C-Band spectrum auction for more on that). So let’s see if they have anything to say. But otherwise, this is a pretty exciting “side” announcement that probably has some implications for Tesla down the road.
My read-between-the-lines interpretation of what was said is that there will be a year of text-only (asynchronous) beta testing, EMS access, and then general rollout. The second year will fill the shells with enough V2s to enable voice calling and get to that 2-4 Mbps per cell number. This is not going to be 5G, but if you’re an Alaskan bush pilot, I bet it would be interesting.
And maybe Elon should have just gone for T-Mobile (mkt cap < $200B) instead of Twitter.
I realize the SpaceX/T-Mobile announcement has very little to do with Tesla (currently at least), but do we think it will affect the SP tomorrow? Will definitely be watching T-Mobile stock price.
And sooo much sandbagging on connecting Teslas to Starlink. Nice to see that on the list now. We knew it was technically possible. If your Tesla has some ability to connect to the network from anywhere on the globe, is that not a pretty important advantage? And one that can’t easily be matched by other “car” companies.
Elon's previous comments have been regarding the current multi megabit Internet service. (Which technically does fit).
The Tesla connection he is referring to is the cell serivce to v2 sats with new 25 square meter antennas and a few Mbit of data for the entire cell.
Any car with T-Mobile service (or roaming privileges) would be able to do the same.
I realize the SpaceX/T-Mobile announcement has very little to do with Tesla (currently at least), but do we think it will affect the SP tomorrow? Will definitely be watching T-Mobile stock price.
Thank you for providing a solid statistical proof that there is no correlation between TSLA and macros (SP500).
An R^2=0.269 with a shotgun scattershot, LOL!
Even better on the second graph limited to major drop days on the S&P, an R^2 LESS THAN 0.1, that means literally no correlation whatsoever.
R-squared is a statistical measure that represents the proportion of the variance for a dependent variable that’s explained by an independent variable.
www.investopedia.com
"In investing, a high R-squared, between 85% and 100%, indicates the stock or fund's performance moves relatively in line with the index. A fund with a low R-squared, at 70% or less, indicates the security does not generally follow the movements of the index."
A few technical wows in the cell phone to satellite announcement. Will have to do the math on the received power at a satellite 500km up from a cell phone, but will be so tiny. And the transmitter needs to continuously adjust the frequency of the phased array (which is fancy way to do beam steering) based on sat location. The 'cell' size of the satellite will be very big so really for low pop areas as they said. Amazing technology.
So… Tesla’s connectivity is paid to T-Mobile which sends checks to SpaceX. In fact, it’s very likely the currency T-Mobile is paying with is spectrum.
Your car has much more space for a better antenna than a cell phone. It also has much more power and can make their antenna semi-directional. In more dense, urban areas they will talk to cell towers and when they get into more rural areas with less contention for limited bandwidth, they can fall back to the Starlink network.
Teslas will have much better connectivity than people with cell phones. When you are camping, your Tesla might just be the best hotspot around. This is also very big for Tesla semi where having reliable communication is likely to be very important.
Whether this is reflected in Teslas share price tomorrow or not, this is significant. Not huge, but I think more interesting then what it appears on the surface.
In more dense, urban areas they will talk to cell towers and when they get into more rural areas with less contention for limited bandwidth, they can fall back to the Starlink network.
No, the Starlink network is separate. It would connect to the T-Mobile network using Starlink satellites. But there would be no streaming music or videos over it. Maybe some traffic or navigation data. The car doesn't really need much connectivity.
Thank you for providing a solid statistical proof that there is no correlation between TSLA and macros (SP500).
An R^2=0.269 with a shotgun scattershot, LOL!
R^2 (coefficient of determination) reflects the strength of the apparent correlation, but it is a crude way to measure whether a real correlation exists in the first place. R^2 of 0.269 means that 26.9% of the variation in the dependent variable (TSLA daily price fluctuation, in this case) is accounted for by variation in the independent variable (S&P 500 daily price fluctuation).
To test the linear model properly, we need the complete output of the linear regression including the t-tests on each parameter that tell us whether the apparent correlation could be indistinguishable from random variation. In this case, as shown from the R output below, the p-value for the t-test for both the slope parameter is less than 2*10^-16 and so is the p-value for the F-test of the validity of the overall model, so this model definitely has legitimate predictive power.
Investopedia is a great website overall but it's not a very good source for statistics. The article says "A fund with a low R-squared, at 70% or less, indicates the security does not generally follow the movements of the index." This is incorrect. A 70% R^2 would mean that 70% of the price movement for the security is explained by the movements of the index, which is actually a pretty strong correlation. Further down in the article this context is given:
Limitations of R-Squared
R-squared will give you an estimate of the relationship between movements of a dependent variable based on an independent variable's movements. It doesn't tell you whether your chosen model is good or bad, nor will it tell you whether the data and predictions are biased. A high or low R-square isn't necessarily good or bad, as it doesn't convey the reliability of the model, nor whether you've chosen the right regression. You can get a low R-squared for a good model, or a high R-square for a poorly fitted model, and vice versa.
Also, I had showed yesterday that this daily price movement relationship is much stronger on days where the macro market makes a big move (R^2 = 52%), whereas there is no evidence of a relationship on normal days. Results on proper regressions prove this and can be seen in the spoiler below.
Daily Change Regression for Days where S&P Moved More Than 1.5%
Model is extremely valid
R^2 = 52% --> Decent explanatory power
Slope parameter of 2.0 roughly corresponds to beta of 2
Daily Change Regression for Days where S&P Moved Less Than 1.5%
Model is not valid
R^2 = ~0
The relationship between TSLA and the S&P 500 is stronger and more obvious when we zoom out and look at absolute prices instead of daily fluctuations. This chart shows the opening TSLA and S&P prices each day in 2022 thus far. R^2 is 80% and the effect is strong too: this year a 500-point swing in the S&P 500 corresponds to an approximately $270 swing in the TSLA price ($90 post-split).
Here is the chart and the regression results, which once again show a very strong model.
That second graph was limited specifically to 2-2.5% S&P 500 drops to show the normal range of variation on days like that to provide context for evaluating your hypothesis that a 10% TSLA move on April 26th was due to Elon selling. In this case, we couldn't reject the null hypothesis that it was just regular variation
In summary, I maintain that the historical prices overwhelmingly favor the view that TSLA mostly follows the S&P 500 but majorly amplifies the gains and losses, and I maintain that the giant movements in TSLA over the last year have been primarily caused by the major stock market crash and recovery that happened. The market movements have had more effect than every other factor combined, and it's not even close.
No I got € 2500 government credit back in 2019 when I purchased a Model 3, but that was the last year we had incentives for electric vehicles.
We still have some advantages:
- No car registration to pay => when you compare the power of an electric vehicle to an ice that saves you between € 1000-5000
- No yearly road taxes => yearly savings of € 500-1000 when you do the same comparison
Company cars are 100% fiscally deductible (used to be 125%)
OT: surprised no-one asked it at the presentation, and no-one here has brought it up yet: does the satellite-to-phone connection mean that texting and talking can continue while you're on a jet cruising at 40,000feet? (FAA be damned)
If so, yet more companies and their revenues will get disrupted
OT: surprised no-one asked it at the presentation, and no-one here has brought it up yet: does the satellite-to-phone connection mean that texting and talking can continue while you're on a jet cruising at 40,000feet? (FAA be damned)
If so, yet more companies and their revenues will get disrupted
If you would allow this then all passengers of all airliners would be using bandwith, and the technology they announced cannot cover this. (Texting yes, calling no) For example all airliners crossing the Atlantic Ocean at the same time would consist of many many airplanes per "connectivity zone" which only has 2-4 Mbps each. Therefore too many users for those large zones to provide service.
It's much more efficient for every airplane to have a Starlink mobile terminal and provide wifi/connection to the airplane passengers. Much higher bandwith for all, and the cellular antenna's of the Starlink sattelites remain unused/available for those few who truly need it.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/R-Squared-final-cc82c183ea7743538fdeed1986bd00c3.png)
