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.
All this talk about the MX Plaid being a screaming deal has me majorly “FOMOing.” Now look what you made me do:

View attachment 692123
Weekend OT. It took about 13 months, but we have a new addition to our Tesla family! Our contribution to Q3 gross margins:

IMG_2596.jpg
IMG_2616.jpg
 
Good point. Aluminum and copper do not get along well with chlorides, especially when electricity is involved. More troubling is all the talk of one mega-solar farm to rule them all. Centralized power generation is not what the future has in store for many very good reasons. Mega-solar farms do have a role, but not ones covering even half of 525 sq. miles of toxic shoreline.

A key attribute of solar farms is the time of day of production. To make the grid as close to 100% green at the lowest cost, and with the fewest batteries, requires hundreds of sites to buffer the effects of intermittent cloud cover (no matter how rare in the desert) and, more importantly, to protect against natural or manmade disasters. Distributing the solar assets widely provides more hours of active production and protects the nation's power supply against being wiped out by two or three well-placed attacks. Power grids are important and need to be resilient to attacks of various kinds.

Solar farms in the far north will not generate as much electricity per square foot but will probably be worth it to reduce transmission losses and for the extended evening power to cool more southerly homes after the sun has set. Solar farms in the far south (from East to West) will maximize winter generation and hours of production.

Currently, fixed solar panels are orientated for maximum annual generation. As solar becomes a larger component of grid power, we will need more panels aimed westerly to deal with peak evening loads more efficiently. What this all leads to is more, smaller farms, not one massive "crown jewel" that would cripple the system if it suddenly went off-line for any reason.

Modelling the optimum strategy for placement of generation and storage capacity over time is a very complex problem with many solutions depending upon what the specific sub-goals are and will certainly involve installing and paying for panels that are only needed 10% of the time. That's how much cheaper generation is vs. long-term storage. The easiest and most productive way to solve for optimal solutions in a practical manner will be by using AI and Tesla is already getting their feet wet with their auto-bidder software. I suspect this effort will grow into ever larger modelling efforts used for the completely different purpose of grid planning.

The world is changing more rapidly than it may appear to the casual observer and there are heaps of money to made by those with a desire to understand these changes more fully and apply that knowledge appropriately as an investor. Tesla is probably the largest and most secure beneficiary of these changes but perhaps not the one with the highest returns. But remember, risk/reward is key in investing and not investing in non-productive companies is a big part of that. The future is difficult to see so probable growth is valued much more highly than more speculative growth.

Agree about distribution of solar.

There are about 8 billion m^2 of roofs suitable for solar in the USA and a similar size of parking lots (the size of parking lots is difficult to find). Together they could make up 80% or so of current electricity demand.

Wind tends to be strongest at night and in the winter (at least in Europe) and on a continent scale the wind is always blowing somewhere.

Continent scale grids, a combination of solar and wind together with batteries to smooth out peaks of supply and demand will enable robust electricity supplies for Europe and North America, probably China and India as well. Some hydro can also be used intermittently to smooth out differences between supply and demand.

Smaller regions, islands, etc. will need a larger amount of storage or go for nuclear.

Nuclear has three main disadvantages:
- firstly it costs more than a combination of solar, wind and storage and the cost difference is only likely to get larger over time,
- secondly common mode failures risk shutting down a large proportion at the same time (as in France),
- thirdly they are targets of war (as in Ukraine) and require a large trained staff at all times, the lifetime of a nuclear power plant is 70-100 years (including decommissioning). Many countries have been invaded, bombed, had civil wars or severe unrest over a similar time.

There are also demand side solutions, either reducing demand when it is high (e.g. temporarily turning off heating or cooling systems) or finding uses for excess supply (e.g. hydrogen, methane or amonia production).
 
"Tesla will build a 164-stall Supercharger station in California, the largest known to date. The project will include stalls that will offer charging for electric vehicles of all brands.

Tesla continues to expand its Supercharger network to keep up with ever-increasing demand. In addition, later this year, the manufacturer is likely to open its charging stations for non-Tesla vehicles in the US to further promote EVs. As EV adoption has grown, new legislation and funding has been proposed, and one such funding program is the California Energy Commission's Clean Transportation Program Rural Electric Vehicle Charging. Its main goal is to improve access to charging in underserved rural communities in California. One of the conditions for successful receipt of the grant was the presence of at least 50% of the connectors that meet the CCS standard."

These areas offer acres of solar. This is an excellent outcome.

 
NIMBYism is a problem, without a doubt. If you take wind out of the equation, California produces about 3x as much solar generated electricity as Texas, though.

Additionally, Californian homes use electricity more than twice as efficiently as their Texas counterparts. Texas is moving toward a greener grid at a very impressive rate. I'm sure the regulatory environment is a big part of that.


at a casual glance looks like Texas consumed 2x amount energy than California, california imported 8x the amount of electricity, but Texas used 4x amount energy in industrial, at a casual glance tho
1662931136092.png

1662931192460.png
 
They are hiring technicians at the moment. Here is snippet from a job posting:

View attachment 851381

I believe this has been posted here but posting it in case it was not:

View attachment 851380
Hiring techs that work in final production a bit as well as a bit of QA is a solid plan. It can be (not always) that field positions pay a bit more and pull applicants out of production. Tesla will figure it out.

Also working on field repair docs and procedures will accent areas that can benefit from improvements early which amplifies continuous improvement wins. Launching a new product line is heavy lifting but who is better at it😀

Great info!
 
at a casual glance looks like Texas consumed 2x amount energy than California, california imported 8x the amount of electricity, but Texas used 4x amount energy in industrial, at a casual glance tho
View attachment 851493
View attachment 851494

These diagrams are slightly missleading. They show net imports of electricity, but not net imports of natural gas, coal, biomass or petroleum.

It would be better if the electricity imports were broken down into their source (solar, wind, etc.)
 
USD 265 per hour?? Didn't know you need a top university education to replace parts in a Volt.

#siliconvalleywages

I traded in a MB for my Model 3 four years ago. The MB dealership was at ~$200/hr way before then. (Nice lounge area at the MB dealership though.)

I now have 61k miles on my Model 3. Total Tesla service has been the two Service Ranger visits to diagnose, then replace, the rodent chewed harness, and once for the FSD computer upgrade. Have rotated/replaced the tires, but used a regular tire shop for that. I can touch up air pressure and add windshield washer fluid myself.
 
In FSD Beta news, I think this caution is in preparation for a wider release. It may be too cautious for some, but that's preferable to reckless:

10.69.2 looks to be worst in everyway vs 10.69.1.1. Kim's same route were full of mistakes that didn't happen with .1.1. Most seems to be logic issues and Tesla being aggressive in some areas and very cautious in other areas.

 
Weekend OT. It took about 13 months, but we have a new addition to our Tesla family! Our contribution to Q3 gross margins:

View attachment 851482

I like a good deal as much as the next guy, but I wouldn't exactly call it a "contribution to Q3 gross margins" when you are paying the low price from 13 months ago and there is a waiting list for the same car composed of current buyers at much higher margins.

That said, congrats on the screamin' deal!
 
10.69.2 updating now, not expecting much.

I've got a beef with FSD not improving on some things as fast as it could. What FSD improvements are needed?

Having complained about that though we just completed >20 hours driving over a week or so, it performed exceptionally well on many road types and surfaces, including some exhilarating mountain climbs and descents with aggressive turns. I can't recall any disengagements for cause. NOTE: My SO thinks the car is handling all of this much smoother now.

I've asked Chuck Cook to feature some of my complaints, though perhaps I need to start my own video uploads and get a gopro.
 
(How come the audio leaked ...spies everywhere ...)
Which makes me wonder, are their no journalists ethics or standards or even a law, that gives the right to privacy for a company for a closed door meeting between the management and its employees? The same privacy we all expect for our bedrooms?

Of course even if such standards exists, expecting that from bottom feeders like Lora or Russ is just too much.
 
I like a good deal as much as the next guy, but I wouldn't exactly call it a "contribution to Q3 gross margins" when you are paying the low price from 13 months ago and there is a waiting list for the same car composed of current buyers at much higher margins.

That said, congrats on the screamin' deal!
I call BS on that. He's contributing every bit as much as anyone else who got their Tesla this quarter. The people who are on the waiting list will contribute to the gross margins in the quarter in which they receive their vehicles as well.
 
I call BS on that. He's contributing every bit as much as anyone else who got their Tesla this quarter. The people who are on the waiting list will contribute to the gross margins in the quarter in which they receive their vehicles as well.

No need to take it as anything but a factual correction. Likewise, not to diminish or disrespect anyone's support of Tesla, but gross margin is a specific financial metric and the claim was the delivery increased that metric. Those who pay a higher price for the same product, in the same quarter contribute more to that metric. Tesla is production constrained, not demand constrained, so a sale at the lower prices of 13 months ago actually does reduce gross margins slightly vs. the same car going to a more recent order at a higher price. Simple math. Will the margins be higher with that particular sale or without it? The answer is, without it.

That would not be true if there was not a buyer for the same car at a higher price, but we know there is.
 
Last edited:
No need to take it as anything but a factual correction. Likewise, not to diminish or disrespect anyone's support of Tesla, but gross margin is a specific financial metric and the claim was the delivery increased that metric. Those who pay a higher price for the same product, in the same quarter contribute more to that metric. Tesla is production constrained, not demand constrained, so a sale at the lower prices of 13 months ago actually does reduce gross margins slightly vs. the same car going to a more recent order at a higher price. Simple math. Will the margins be higher with that particular sale or without it? The answer is, without it.

That would not be true if there was not a buyer for the same car at a higher price, but we know there is.
Poor form man...
 
No need to take it as anything but a factual correction. Likewise, not to diminish or disrespect anyone's support of Tesla, but gross margin is a specific financial metric and the claim was the delivery increased that metric. Those who pay a higher price for the same product, in the same quarter contribute more to that metric. Tesla is production constrained, not demand constrained, so a sale at the lower prices of 13 months ago actually does reduce gross margins slightly vs. the same car going to a more recent order at a higher price. Simple math.
That would be true if the people who have recently ordered their vehicles were taking delivery this quarter, but with very few exceptions they'll be taking delivery in future quarters. Most of the folks taking delivery this quarter paid lower prices, so were they not contributing to gross margins either?

May be simple math, but without taking time into consideration.