If Tesla emerges un-excluded and as a major - if not the major - recipient of IRA benefits, do you think you'll reconsider your insistence that the current administration has it out for Tesla?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
I don't trust any of them as far as I can throw them but it would be very hard for them to do this legally.
I struggle to ever provide an answer to the question about charging that I think makes the point clear that charging at home is so much better in every way over having to go to a gas station. People often pry to get me to admit that doing a full charge at home would take like 10 hours and then want to cling to that "aha, I got you" point with all their power. After 7 years of driving my S, I've never once had to wait for car to charge before leaving my house, but that won't ever set in until people experience it for themself.
I like that question too. I just say 10 seconds a day, to plug it at night and then to unplug it whenever I'm ready to leave the next morning.
I normally say 20 seconds, but I have a Kona with an inconveniently-located front port that opens manually.
It also allows for the occasional "pizza problem".
chiller
Member
My approach has been to answer:
"If you could have the new iPhone with a battery that lasted a week and charged in 3 minutes, but you had to go into the Apple Store to charge it, would that be better than how it works today where you just plug your phone into the charger when you go to bed?"
That usually gets the point across.
Takes me just about as long as it takes to charge my phone.
Though in fairness, I spent about 18 months exclusively using a 120v because I didn't have a wall connector. Then charging was occasionally a bit of an issue. Get the wall connector, worth it for the lack of headaches.
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
This isn't difficult. The Judge cannot decide both parties are in agreement simply based on the papers filed by Musk with the SEC.
In fact, those papers show Elon is still committed to buying Twitter under the terms already agreed upon. It's those terms, and the parties compliance with them, that the court is being asked to rule on. They cannot stop without the involved parties requesting they stop.
Whoever said that a drop in TSLA might precipitate upgrades get's a cookie.
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
They just wanted to make sure to they raked retail options traders over the coals first. Mission accomplished.
If I didn't know any better, I'd say these guys are all in it together. I know that's not possible since the SEC is constantly on patrol. Steadfast. Reliable.
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
Still too low a rating, but two questions:
1. This allows many of those funds to invest in TSLA now, right? Or is their bar higher?
2. Is this the signal to funds/hedgies/MMs that the retail investors have been sufficiently screwed over and it's time to start pushing in the other direction?
S&P's reasoning is nonsense. This upgrade came out and really Tesla hasn't "met" or changed with regard to any of their self-stated criteria.
Nevertheless, it's nice to finally see some good news to help pull us out of these doldrums.
Lol you have got to be kidding me. S&P waits until the stock has been dismantled to do it to make sure their upgrade has the least amount of impact. Can't even get a green day on this news
Last edited:
petit_bateau
Active Member
I understand and agree with your points. Reducing price is also reducing GM% unless BoM magic happens. Let me put some big simplifications and some big ifs on the table to try and get a grasp of the problem/opportunity here. Before I try and run a scenario in my 10-year model lets first try to agree what it might look like. Here is a first sketch as I would appreciate comment.
HISTORY
1. The relevant BEV market is split 1/3 : 1/3 : 1/3 between USA, China, and Europe. (sorry about the little'uns, but I need to simplify)
2. It was only a few years ago that Tesla really had no competition in China, and only a couple of years ago that Tesla opened the Shanghai factory.
3. During the last 2-3 years Tesla has been raising prices by $10k-$15k and in the process has gone from maybe 20% GM to maybe 30% GM.
4. During those few years Tesla BEV competition in China have gone from only being viable in non-Tesla segments to becoming viable and competitve at lower prices in Tesla-segments. So it takes 2-3 years for China to build capacity faster than Tesla does, and to play sufficient catch-up in product terms, for 1/3 of the relevant market.
5. US and European competition really aren't making a difference and so are not directly interesting to this analysis.
PROJECTION
- The Chinese continue to build capacity faster than Tesla and they progressively push harder at exports to Europe and USA. Within 2-years they either fully into Europe (or USA) or halfway into both. Within 4-years they are fully into both (i.e. they can overbuild at the rate of 1/3 in two years). Ignore incentve programs as they will come and go.
6. Competition starts to bite into Tesla margins and so Tesla cuts prices as the excess demand is run off - the GM of 30% declines to 20% over the next 5-years, and that includes income from NoA and FSD in automotive.
7. But Tesla are then able to hold BoM costs stable and to maintain a prestige brand position with GM% then steady at 20%. (so still unusually good)
8. But this also has a numerical effect on Tesla caacity build in the later years, with the max capacity build rate becoming capped at 2m/yr due to competition effects. This would mean Tesla reaches max 16m/yr in 2030, not 20m/yr, i.e. this effect starts to cut in as the GM% stabilises, likely due to internal Tesla discipline.
- One point to notice is that I assume the Chinese also in effect practice price discipline. There is however nothing to prevent them continuing to overbuild capacity and wiping out the entire market. But my guess is China would back off, likely holding about 30-40m/yr of the global market in 2030. This would leave 16m/yr for Tesla and 24m-34m/yr for everybody else (assuming constant market of 80m/yr).
- Ignore RoboTaxi completely for this examination.
Any comments on this as I might run it at the weekend to explore the share price implications. ?
Last edited:
Sorry it wont. Nature of Twitter and Elon wont make it go away once he has ownership. Could make it worse.
Wasn't that Moody's that had the stated requirements of more models etc.? Anyone remember if S&P has stated any specific requirements for upgrades?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
