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

[Artful Dodger]

Basically you would need to raze half the factory to bring things up to the efficiency levels of the new sites.

If project "Highland" does turn out to be an updated Model 3 w. megacasting(s) produced at Fremont, they'll likely do about half of that (the Model Y line can soldier on for a bit longer as is).

Cheers!

 

[Ogre]

I’m super impressed with how easy it was to set up Apple Music with the new update. Car displays QR code, scan with camera, enter apple password and car is signed in. This is super bullish for me, especially after reading a lot of FUD about Tesla not having a software advantage, etc. I think Tesla’s software lead is actually increasing. A nice surprise after last week.

View attachment 888640

Also, the fact that the Apple ID goes along with the profile so my playlists follow me when I drive and my wife's when she drives. So nice.

It was almost shockingly simple to set up. Apple deserves some props for this as well.

 

[SN_8]

 

[thesmokingman]

Happy Holidays TMC’ers

https://twitter.com/x/status/1606763859120984066

A thought just came to me that one day kids won't know that there was a time when front trunks were where an ICE engine used to reside... just imagine that.

 

[Opus BC fan]

Wishing you all peace and joy this holiday season.
Merry Christmas (or whatever your holidays might be).

 

[EVNow]

And therein lies the problem. Traditional, honest journalists in the past would work hard to confirm data before publishing.

But in the era of clicks=$$$ they don't do that anymore.

You mean like the headline in NYT that helped launch the Iraq war

Seriously though - won’t be surprised if Reuters had more than one source saying the same thing.

But that’s not the point I was making - by labeling everything FUD and discounting any and all negative news, we become an echo chamber that can’t see a 70% drop coming.

 

[wipster]

As the Tesla & Elon FUD escalated throughout 2022 to Biblical levels we have not seen before, I have entertained the idea of a post with the hope of opening up dialog on TMC regarding the concept of ‘Elon vs a very specific Goliath hiding behind a cloak of Good’. But there was never a catalyst to suggest the source wasn’t simply the same-old, same-old – despite the Goliath in this fight appearing to have been growing in both scope and size. And perhaps more troubling has been that Elon’s actions through 2022 seem to convey that he has recognized this as well, and that he was in need of more ammunition if he and Tesla were to come out on top.

Since I began following TMC in 2013 there has always been the very understandable finger-pointing at the Fossil Fuel Industries, Legacy Auto Mfg’s, Grid Operators, and of course Wall Street as the sources of Tesla & Elon FUD. And I have not seen a compelling argument on TMC that it was otherwise. However, during one of the very brief moments in the last couple years where the entire US did not seem to be held captive under a mass campaign of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt through every mainstream media source simultaneously, we were introduced to yet another strange and unexpected nuance. That was the moment when we listened closely to the dialog from Washington DC surrounding the inevitable US and Global transition to EV’s and Renewable Energy, and we learned that this Administration was refusing to acknowledge Tesla’s World-leading contributions in this arena………and that they were literally struggling to not even mention the word ‘Tesla’ publicly in every single speech and interview from every leadership position on their flow chart – even while crowning Mary Barra and GM as the Golden Goose. Thus it could have only been a strategy that had been discussed internally to be so coordinated. But why?

This was perhaps too easy to shake off at first, with the plausible connections of the Administration and the UAW. Maybe they were trying to support a small segment of their voters…? That was a good explanation for a single data point. In hindsight the Administration actually seemed a bit relieved that the ‘news’ sources from the other side of the aisle helped push that UAW connection argument (assuming there really still are two sides of the aisle in the US). But it felt like there was a growing pile of data points suggesting that Elon & Tesla were fighting a battle that had become more and more coordinated against them. And here was the part I am still struggling with: if the Administration had made solving the Climate Crisis their Absolute Highest Priority during their campaign, wouldn’t they be willing to buck the UAW to save the world? Doesn’t make sense, does it? But if the highest power in the land, and arguably the highest power in the World was now ready to throw the most efficient and most effective sustainable energy and transportation company in the World under the bus while claiming their greatest ambition was to make the world’s energy and transportation more sustainable through a transition to renewable energy, then we were either living in an alternate reality to be witnessing any of this, or perhaps there was another influencer on these policies.

I have to wonder if Elon’s post from early this morning was intended to cast a larger net on the discussion of the Force(s) that could be trying to put the brakes on Tesla’s explosive growth and ownership of the overall Sustainability marketplace – a source we haven’t looked at too deeply on TMC before. It seems odd that he chose to respond to that particular tweet. And his response is unusually non-descriptive:

View attachment 888647

I do personally find this interesting, particularly from the longer view. For instance, the NUMMI plant was purchased in 2010 by Tesla with funding support from the Administration elected in 2008. So here we learn that at the time that Elon and Tesla received their loan for the creation of the Tesla factory at NUMMI that Elon had already been courted as a person capable of helping move the World closer to the goals of the World Economic Forum. But it appears Elon had other priorities on his mind, such as SpaceX and Tesla. But why wouldn’t the WEF have been a good association at that time to help advance those interests?

I remember viewing many of the short videos released by the WEF around the 2008-2010 timeframe with interest. At that time, I was very focused on finding ways to reduce energy consumption and transition towards more sustainable energy sources on a large number of State and Federal projects across the Columbia River Basin. And I found those videos interesting and occasionally helpful. In fact, that original WEF media campaign probably helped influence my first purchase of TSLA shares in 2013, whether I knew it or not. Like the WEF and many here on TMC, I too saw the potential for Elon & Tesla to help create a more sustainable future, and I invested accordingly. So if Elon & Tesla were moving in the desired direction of the WEF’s publicly stated goals at a time when the fossil fuel industry and Legacy Auto seemed so deeply entrenched in path towards a much Warmer future, why wouldn’t Elon jump at the chance?

But perhaps here is where I can see a potential for the ‘rub’ between Elon & the WEF that prevented a partnership. Tesla has moved at the rate that only a First Principles approach could have allowed it. And that approach required Tesla to abandon everything from the Old Paradigm that was not supportive of Elon/Tesla’s vision of the MOST rapid transition towards Sustainability possible. And this transition by Tesla happened SO quickly that they may very well have disrupted the WEF’s Strategic Master Plan – a plan which surely would have utilized as much of the existing Paradigm wherever possible to help transition towards the New Paradigm. While that path might take longer, it ‘could’ have been viewed by early planners as using less resources to accomplish stated goals. And it would allow much of the Old Paradigm to be the New Paradigm to minimize Political disruptions along the way. Fair enough. And that is why I mentioned 'putting the brakes on Tesla' instead of perhaps 'destroying Tesla', as the end game is still somewhat aligned - at least from the perspective of Sustainable Energy and Transport anyways.

And if we continue to explore this theory that a divergence of interest could have resulted from Elon and Tesla’s ability to move quicker than everyone else, and move in a more Sustainable direction than everyone else with fewer moves because they were coming from a First Principles approach, wouldn’t we end up in a similar place as we are now, where many of the 2008-2010 timeline tools available to the WEF to help a planned transition are at risk of being little more than stranded assets if the WEF’s strategic master plan allowed for a methodical transition to sustainability. I would expect so, since Tesla and Elon have left a path of disrupted and stranded assets in their wake. Could it be a possibility that the WEF looked to Elon to help them with their Sustainability mission and Elon found that mission was too overly-pragmatic? And that Elon simply saw the path to Sustainability could happen sooner? And that he felt that the Ultimate Priority was ensuring that transition happened as quickly as possible, since he considered the current modes of transportation and of energy creation to be “running the most dangerous experiment in history right now, which is to see how much carbon dioxide the atmosphere... can handle before there is an environmental catastrophe.”

And yet here we are today, with much of the disruption of the Old Paradigm by Tesla already behind us, and with all the Kings horses and all the Kings men trying to hold those Humpty Dumpty’s in power long enough to survive the transition that even Tony Seba told us has been well underway for many years. And we are at this moment experiencing almost ALL of the mainstream media sources absolutely, completely ‘hush’ regarding Tesla’s Lathrop plant and their Monumental opportunity to disrupt the entire Grid through the deployment of their Megapacks, Powerwalls, Solar Roofs, and the VPP with a disruption that will ultimately create a MUCH more secure Distributed Grid.

This transition point in time is fricking Yuuge, and it seems so closely aligned with some of those very early videos produced by the WEF that it is mind-blowing that Sustainability Leaders aren’t dancing in the streets at this watershed moment. And yet they aren’t. Instead we are still getting Bill Gates Hydrogen plans shoved down our throats by mainstream media instead. You know, Hydrogen – the ‘next’ bridge-fuel. Just like Natural Gas was to be. And perhaps up to 95% of our Hydrogen will initially come from that Natural Gas ‘boom’ (pun intended) that began under the Bush-Cheney administration and has continued until the Levelized Cost of Energy very fittingly ‘Levelized’ Natural Gas. And what organization is Mr. Gates closely associated with?

Recall that there was a lot of discussion on TMC regarding Tesla’s decision for its first overseas plant to be in China – and not all of it favorable. But ultimately – and perhaps by design – the China Gigafactory might have been just out of reach of too many other influences. And it was built fast. And it came on line fast. And it started contributing to Tesla’s bottom line WAY faster than anyone in the mainstream media ever expected. A record 168 working days from permits to a finished plant. And for that very reason Tesla and TSLA are still here to talk about. Was the China decision made in-part for reasons none of us were aware of? There were many folks here and analysts on TV calling for Tesla to choose Germany first. In hindsight wouldn’t that have been a complete failure given all the efforts to slow, and to even stop that project along the way? We can still only speculate who was behind those efforts to slow the plant. But with hindsight maybe its worth wondering if there a reason that Elon prioritized China over Germany? Had Elon chosen Germany over China for the first overseas plant, today’s TSLA share price - a share price that has fallen >60% - might be considered an all-time high - IF the company was even still alive. Many here on TMC speculated that German Legacy Auto could have potentially contributed to those construction delays. We do know Elon is not one to be bullied, and he took the fight to Germany with the next Gigafactory location. And from the examination of Elon’s tweet today, Germany is also the backyard of the WEF. And he did so with a war chest of Capital from the China plant, and he did so while eventually being able to sell Chinese-made Tesla’s in Germany as perhaps the final attack that smoothed the transition to Tesla’s ramping of production in Germany. And ‘IF’ Elon is tweeting today about a divergence in Mission direction with the WEF, then perhaps we should not be surprised that Tesla has probably picked Mexico over Canada for the next Gigafactory, given that many political leaders of Canada - including Trudeau himself have been specifically mentioned by the WEF as being closely aligned with their goals. And it wasn't that long ago that Elon and Trudeau were at odds on Twitter IIRC. No, Elon will not be bullied. And the success of the German Gigafactory in the backyard of the WEF and of VW/BMW/and Mercedes would be the ultimate ‘Up Yours’ if ever such an award were to be given in such a hypothetical fight. But even though Elon & Tesla ultimately won that battle, why on earth would they ever want to repeat it if their goal is to rapidly advance Sustainability. Go to Mexico and just ‘get ‘er done’.

In light of Elon’s tweet it would be helpful to hear the WEF speak out in support of Tesla and all they have accomplished towards the original WEF mission of Sustainability. And for similar reasons it would be very helpful to hear this Administration acknowledge Tesla for having done so as well. It would ultimately help to accelerate that Mission of Sustainability that both the WEF and this Administration appear to share. And it would help bring an end to the running of that ‘most dangerous experiment’ much sooner. That would also eliminate any need to consider broader reasons why Elon has had to take the fight to a larger stage through Twitter and through the ownership of Twitter. Such a motivation would certainly help explain Elon’s actions, and perhaps even his decisions to justify the otherwise unworldly expenses necessary to support those actions…..if it were in the name of continuing the absolute fastest path to Sustainability possible, regardless of however large the Goliath was in his path. All speculation & opinion of a long-time observer that is mystified at seeing such parallel Sustainability Universes appear to collide.

Nominated for Posts of Particular Merit

 

[OrthoSurg]

He already commented months ago about his fears about the macro economy as did many other CEOs like J. Dimon. Nothing new on that end. I feel much better about Tesla as a whole after hearing him speak tonight.

And yet, he purchased a 44B software at the same time he had fears about the macro economy. He can’t really say he told people the SP is too high and that people kept buying like he said on Ron Barron interview because he cashed out 20B in sales to fund partially his Twitter deal. I bet there are plenty of older investors here who bought a lot of TSLA believing in the mission of the company and expected to retire living of that money. Probably a lot of investors will be hesitant to invest in an extremely volatile stock again after panic selling.

Anyway, wishing all TMCers a Merry Christmas and happy stock rally!

 

[Discoducky]

V11 would be a nice present tomorrow...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1606888236605112320

 

[StealthP3D]

I hope a drone flys over the factory between Chistmas and New Year so we can see if it is actually shut. As far as I know Tesla China haven't officially confirmed a shutdown.

The latest Jason Yang video is the one to watch, he doesn't mention a shutdown and the factory appears fairly normal, before December 25th.

I've never doubted GigaShanghai might be shut for the last week. I took issue with the stated reason: lack of demand. That's just not how Tesla rolls as the $7500 discounts in the US have demonstrated (as if we needed more evidence). Tesla would lower prices or ship cars to other markets before they would shutter a factory simply due to lack of demand.

We hear a lot of noise about lack of demand and how "the competition is coming" but Tesla's competition is not other EV makers, it is themselves as they continuously ramp production higher. Continually rising production is what will drive the price of Tesla's lower and into increasingly larger segments of new car buyers. Competition with themselves will drive the prices lower just as surely as competition from other makers will. The difference between Tesla competing with themselves vs. other makers is that when Tesla competes with themselves, they can continue to rapidly grow sales volumes, so, even as their margins are impacted, they get the benefit of higher sales instead of their competitors.

This is terrifying for those who are the presumed competition to Tesla because they have no room to lower prices and have to be content with the remaining sales.

 

[insaneoctane]

Not FSD ?

Yep. If Tesla is forced to change the name of FSD, I'm 99% sure they just go with "Not FSD"

 

[ToTheStars]

I was surfing on the web when I encountered this article (with clickbaity headline). At first I started reading fearfully, but when I saw the bottom(!) of the chart, I realised why I'm in this thread again.

The cold, hard truth about EVs in winter

Most electric vehicles lose driving range in cold weather, but there are things you can do

www.axios.com

 

[Matias]

It appears that consensus is now 424k.

View attachment 888605

IF long term growth estimate is now 23%, then forward P/E 22,6 is OK. So it is clear that Mr. Market doesn’t believe in 50% YoY growth.

 

[NicoV]

The Hoegh Shanghai also docked yesterday evening in Zeebrugge.
I’ve been reading the last few pages of the Benelux delivery thread: Leveringen Model Y RWD Europa

Some observations from that thread:
- Belgians reporting that they get their cars delivered in Zeebrugge
- Dutch people feeling sorry that they have to wait and are not allowed to get their car in Zeebrugge
- Dutch people get delivery notices on short notice because Tesla wants to be sure the transport for their car is guaranteed.
- One person who bought an ‘inventory’ car states that his car is still on the Hoegh Shanghai
- The Dutch like to have their car in 2022 because of changes in taxation
- Belgians and Dutch reporting that they get their cars delivered in the normal delivery centers before end-of-year. Tesla must have booked enough transporters to get the cars there.

Conclusion: a material amount of cars on these last 2 ships will still get delivered this year.

 

[nativewolf]

I've never doubted GigaShanghai might be shut for the last week. I took issue with the stated reason: lack of demand. That's just not how Tesla rolls as the $7500 discounts in the US have demonstrated (as if we needed more evidence). Tesla would lower prices or ship cars to other markets before they would shutter a factory simply due to lack of demand.

We hear a lot of noise about lack of demand and how "the competition is coming" but Tesla's competition is not other EV makers, it is themselves as they continuously ramp production higher. Continually rising production is what will drive the price of Tesla's lower and into increasingly larger segments of new car buyers. Competition with themselves will drive the prices lower just as surely as competition from other makers will. The difference between Tesla competing with themselves vs. other makers is that when Tesla competes with themselves, they can continue to rapidly grow sales volumes, so, even as their margins are impacted, they get the benefit of higher sales instead of their competitors.

This is terrifying for those who are the presumed competition to Tesla because they have no room to lower prices and have to be content with the remaining sales.

People keep blathering this “no one else can lower prices” line. Dream on.

So here we are staring a recession in the face and Tesla profits are going to come from govt subsidies and real battery factories come online in 2023. I can see price reduction all the way from my chilly seat.

You think Tesla can withstand a price war in China better than byd? Huh

 

[Unpilot]

Happy conspicuous consumption day.

 

[unk45]

Most legacy auto are extensions of national economic policy and will NEVER be allowed to go bankrupt. Toyota, Stellantis, VW, MB, Hyundai, and dare I say it GM and Ford plus a few more.

That statement is untrue. GM has already been bankrupt in 2009, as did Chrysler. Stellantis China Jeep JV went bankrupt this year. Through history many major brands have failed and been absorbed quietly, Stellantis has a portfolio of those brands.

’too big to fail’ did not apply to Bank of America NT&SA, nor to AIG and many others.

It does nit apply to auto companies, aerospace, railroads or anything else.

Cosmetic solutions are quite common, but shareholders commonly are wiped out. Sometimes even shareholders are partly bailed out.

In short, never say NEVER.

 

[unk45]

Well, to the best of my knowledge “coup de grâce” is French - not English.

It is in all major English language dictionaries. It is indeed English. As is normal in language, the etymology is clear. FWIW, something around a third to a half of English words have French origin (old, middle, modern).

Definition of COUP DE GRÂCE

a death blow or death shot administered to end the suffering of one mortally wounded; a decisive finishing blow, act, or event… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

In English the circumflex is sometimes omitted.

 

[nativewolf]

That statement is untrue. GM has already been bankrupt in 2009, as did Chrysler. Stellantis China Jeep JV went bankrupt this year. Through history many major brands have failed and been absorbed quietly, Stellantis has a portfolio of those brands.

’too big to fail’ did not apply to Bank of America NT&SA, nor to AIG and many others.

It does nit apply to auto companies, aerospace, railroads or anything else.

Cosmetic solutions are quite common, but shareholders commonly are wiped out. Sometimes even shareholders are partly bailed out.

In short, never say NEVER.

Fair enough.. and happy holidays wherever you are. I note they did not let GM fail. Nor did they let Bank of America fail. Bankrupt? Most certainly, buy cease operations? No

The point I was trying to make, badly it seems, is that competition won’t disappear simply due to poor economic performance. Gm is still selling cars, so is Chrysler. For now at least I expect them to be propped up. In 2-3 year I could see Toyota hemorrhaging monies. Then japan inc faces an existential crisis that they will be hard pressed to face so they will try to paper over it, just my guess .

Morose thought on a holiday weekend.

 

[unk45]

No one is arguing those things about Bezos and Jobs. You think they were controversial in a similar fashion and extent that Elon has been?

Ask anyone who ever met Jobs. He was very, very odd. Many of the famously innovative people have had ‘unusual’ personal behavior. If Elon is more notable it is only because social media was not around much for the others during their careers.