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

[H Mak]

Im not gonna get into what he should or shouldnt do. I know how you feel. Im just telling you what the situation is from a trader’s perspective. Elon’s not gonna be able to help the stock right now. I’ve made peace with it and adjusted my finance accordingly. I hope you will, too.

I actually just quit my job 2 weeks ago to pursue full time trading. HODLing TSLA & trading while having a full time job took a huge toll on me during the last 3 years. Waited till we got to 160 to quit because I needed to see if I’d still feel good at 160. Turned out 108 isnt that much worse.

I’ve been selling calls non stop and built enough cash to pay off my house or endure 3 years of recession. Although TSLA is still a huge % of my net worth, I need the cash and security to be able to make the best decisions here. Maybe all we need is to take a year off from hoping for any kind of substantial recovery and just let the economic downturn runs its course. At least hes not gonna sell any more stock till 2025. I can live with that.

I found that really interesting, so thanks! (for the avoidance of doubt, for once I'm not being sarcastic )

 

[bkp_duke]

is it competitive though? 11500usd for 13,5kWh?

Price per kWh seems to point towards some insane margins…

Price drops as you add more. The one unit price includes the gateway, permitting, installation (some), and other assorted one time costs.

 

[navguy12]

Well, I was able to buy my 2023 $CAD 6,500 worth of chairs, via my tax free saving account, today.

Picked up 45, was only expecting 38.

The price may now resume its upward trajectory.

 

[chrsk]

Price drops as you add more. The one unit price includes the gateway, permitting, installation (some), and other assorted one time costs.

Still, if you buy 10 the kWh price is about 600$…

Teslas cost is about 100$ per kWh?

 

[Prime_Number]

I haven't posted in almost a year. Not since after a couple of my concerns about Elon were taken down. This was around the time of comparing Trudeau to Hitler and supporting the Canadian 'convoy'.

At the risk of being deleted again, in good conscience I feel the need to share this from the perspective of an Investor, in an Investor's thread.

I would first like to say that our family are owners of 4 Model X's, 1 Y, 1 Model 3, and multiple orders for the Cybertruck. We believe in the products and the future of the company, and will always support the inevitability of the EV industry.

However, the progression of recent events and actions, today being no less, of the company's leadership, make me feel that a significant structural change is required for the benefit of both the company and it main owner.

I would like to encourage more of a dialogue of how the leadership can be restructured to channel the skills of Elon while also breaking the perception that Elon = Tesla, and Tesla = Elon. I believe this would be good for Elon, for Tesla, and society in general.

Anyone that has not seen an continuing escalation in his behavior the last couple of years is fooling themselves. Thank you for listening.

 

[SO16]

Well, NBC nightly news showed the cliff accident. They immediately said it was a Tesla. Of course they said the kids’ lives were saved because….they were in child seats.

 

[X Fan]

Yes, on Space he said demand for all auto is soft, and expect it to be during a recession as big ticket items will be one of the first things people will cut. He also mentions that compounding that with higher interest rate further exacerbate the problem. Last thing he said before the call ended is that it's terrible weather ahead but Tesla will weather the storm will and it'll be sunshine and rainbows again.

Best time to take share is during downturns. Traditional mfgs will be cash starved whereas Tesla will continue to significantly accrue cash.

I view this as a small bump in The road.

 

[GOVA]

I haven't posted in almost a year. Not since after a couple of my concerns about Elon were taken down. This was around the time of comparing Trudeau to Hitler and supporting the Canadian 'convoy'.

At the risk of being deleted again, in good conscience I feel the need to share this from the perspective of an Investor, in an Investor's thread.

I would first like to say that our family are owners of 4 Model X's, 1 Y, 1 Model 3, and multiple orders for the Cybertruck. We believe in the products and the future of the company, and will always support the inevitability of the EV industry.

However, the progression of recent events and actions, today being no less, of the company's leadership, make me feel that a significant structural change is required for the benefit of both the company and it main owner.

I would like to encourage more of a dialogue of how the leadership can be restructured to channel the skills of Elon while also breaking the perception that Elon = Tesla, and Tesla = Elon. I believe this would be good for Elon, for Tesla, and society in general.

Anyone that has not seen an continuing escalation in his behavior the last couple of years is fooling themselves. Thank you for listening.

You're welcome.

 

[H Mak]

To end yet another one of "those" days, on a bit of a light note, I sent my 2 daughters more cash today to buy more shares. I've posted about this before as I've been doing it for about 18 months. Every single one of their buys is red. They think I'm stupid. But hey, it's Dad's money.

However they do like owning Tesla shares, because a) they like my car and b) they like Elon - they think he's "sweet"

Goodnight

 

[MC3OZ]

About a decade ago I/we pulled our business out of being a storage designer/manufacturer. One of the reasons I did so was because I knew we did not have the depth of capital to go head-to-head with Musk/Tesla in the space, and nor could we compensate with low labour costs. So we focussed in other places. I/we were very right to be concerned as Tesla's offering was attractive: they simply had more firepower and it showed.

Collectively the Chinese on the other hand did not step back. They have comparable depth of capital to Tesla/Musk (or far more, depending on how you view things) and they pushed ahead with moving LFP from concept to reality, reaching (now) a price/performance point that is globally relevant to the mass market for storage. (and related stuff) They primarily did that because they were motivated by the vehicle market. The term I have used for 15+ years is that there is a mobility-premium for wrapping a battery in a vehicle shell, and the market simply does not - for many very understandable reasons - want to grant that premium margin to stationary storage. So LFP was aimed at vehicles. But it is also en passant solving the storage problem which is now scaling fast.

The size of that rapidly growing mass market from year-to-year is a closely held secret, if indeed anyone knows all the puzzle pieces. I try to track it through different approaches, but it is nigh-on impossible to quantify. I'm not sure many other people have a much better understanding, however much they sell their research reports for (they used to come to me, trying to blag me to get my data for their report). As you probably know I suss out the vehicle/battery splits each year to try and keep tabs on that, enough to do some basic public domain analysis. Quantifying storage with an equivalent precision was tough. From the limited poor quality signals I could assess, until last year I thought Tesla had overwhelming dominance in the utility segment, but was less obviously dominant in the domestic segment, and there were signs that the commercial segment was a fizzle for everyone.

In the course of the last year it has become clearer from the qualitative public domain info that Tesla is no longer competitive in the domestic market. That is why apart from some special niche markets (such as the USA ..... which is why a lot of US-ians aren't reading the tea leaves well ....) Tesla has largely pulled out of attempts to grow their presence in domestic. Instead Tesla has focussed its efforts on the larger utility-scale products and projects. Now does this mean that Tesla can't sell every (domestic) Powerwall it produces: no. Does this mean the price for Powerwall's is reducing : no. So But go look in the market beyond the USA and the Tesla Powerwall is practically a dead product, swamped under a tidal wave of Chinese clones. Overall the Chinese are growing their absolute market size faster than Tesla is, and hence Tesla's market share is reducing.

Anyone who has ever read Christensen's "Innovators Dilemma" can tell you what is most likely to come next. I've spoilt things by giving my opinion. Tesla will sell every utility scale Megapack they can make for the next few years and will command a premium price for them. None of them will sell into China. Many will sell into USA or to clients in the wider western alliance who are allergic to China. But increasingly the Chinese will move upscale into the utility segment and take what in the longer term will likely become the commanding position. And then Tesla utility-scale storage margins will wither year-by-year with no path back, no matter how many turnaround plans are attempted. The projected scenario in the graphs I gave earlier are very much the high-case; the low-case is far less attractive.

Is this a logical harvesting strategy for Tesla, yes. Is it a sign of weaknesses inside Tesla, also yes. Ultimately we know that pathway is terminal in the hardware space. (Tesla keeps on saying that is has not got a capital problem, but it has been AWOL on deploying it aggressively in this space. So that means Tesla has had a leadership talent problem in this space. I'd have though that much was patently obvious given the history of what we now call Tesla Energy). Does it mean investors should worry, absolutely, because by the time storage sales revenues are that significant then also the stuffing will have been beaten out of margins.

I realise it is not popular to say this, but a corresponding story is so far playing out in the BEV market. The data shows that Tesla is year-on-year losing market share by volume, by GWh, and by revenue. I last posted this graph about 11-months ago. Clearly Tesla has put its first team into bat in the vehicle market, and the seconds are playing in the storage market (and crikey knows who are in the solar market). The first team are playing an excellent game. The second team may be about to get a second wind for a while. And the third team are playing in some 0.1% league.

The analysts who are asking questions on the quarterly call are about as dangerous as a newborn baby deer. The better-armed hunters in the market have shot off a lot of ammunition recently, and some of it has hit home - that was because they can detect a valid scent, even if they don't yet fully understand it. Tesla needs to decide whether it is predator or prey, rather than distractedly fiddling with blue feathery baubles in another room.

View attachment 891986

The next 24 months will settle the issue.

Tesla should be aiming to keep growing earnings at 50% compound, that requires some success in vehicles and energy storage.

Some amount of pivot to cheaper products, including LFP, is required.

Powerwall itself needs to become more affordable and available in higher volumes.

I don't see Tesla siting on their hands, or having no ideas about how to improve things.

I do see any battery strategy Tesla may have as intimately tied to 4680 progress.

4680 wasn't bet the company, but it is the main hope for 50% compound earnings growth.

 

[Usain]

yeah. why isn't the website updated to reflect this? what reason is there for not doing that?

Elon hasn't decided how he wants to handle Model Y wrt the IRA. It seems that the choices are:
1. Lower prices under 55K.
2. Add removable weights and hope for SUV classification.
3. Lobby the Treasury Dept. to come to their senses.

As long as Model 3 orders are strong, there is no reason to advertise the $7500 tax credit and invite even more speculation about what he will do for Model Y. No need to show your cards before they all are dealt.

 

[elasalle]

Elon hasn't decided how he wants to handle Model Y wrt the IRA. It seems that the choices are:
1. Lower prices under 55K.
2. Add removable weights and hope for SUV classification.
3. Lobby the Treasury Dept. to come to their senses.

As long as Model 3 orders are strong, there is no reason to advertise the $7500 tax credit and invite even more speculation about what he will do for Model Y. No need to show your cards before they all are dealt.

#2 would be best PR stunt

 

[TSLA_Hopeful]

Elon hasn't decided how he wants to handle Model Y wrt the IRA. It seems that the choices are:
1. Lower prices under 55K.
2. Add removable weights and hope for SUV classification.
3. Lobby the Treasury Dept. to come to their senses.

As long as Model 3 orders are strong, there is no reason to advertise the $7500 tax credit and invite even more speculation about what he will do for Model Y. No need to show your cards before they all are dealt.

Do a software limited Model Y at 55K to 70 miles total, with a software unlock at 10K, also just add the fuggin seats if we have to

 

[Singuy]

We see cars stuck at shanghai for AUS
Here are a few thousand cars stuck at GigaBerlin destined for Taiwan.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1610361266219917312

 

[verystandard]

#2 would be best PR stunt

I would say add $7500 and Tesla will includes some "OFFROAD edition" package that includes backup power station to adding weight? (Something that detechable from the car) I'm pretty sure lots of people will be interested to have one of these if $7500 incentive are available?

 

[Chunky Jr.]

I may be dumb in investing but it is baffling to me that 40% yoy growth is considered bad by wall street.

When you tell Wall St you're going to grow 30% and grow 40% it is amazing
When you tell Wall St you're going to grow 40% and grow 40% it is good
When you tell Wall St you're going to grow 50% and grow 40% it is bad

 

[MABMAB]

About a decade ago I/we pulled our business out of being a storage designer/manufacturer. One of the reasons I did so was because I knew we did not have the depth of capital to go head-to-head with Musk/Tesla in the space, and nor could we compensate with low labour costs. So we focussed in other places. I/we were very right to be concerned as Tesla's offering was attractive: they simply had more firepower and it showed.

Collectively the Chinese on the other hand did not step back. They have comparable depth of capital to Tesla/Musk (or far more, depending on how you view things) and they pushed ahead with moving LFP from concept to reality, reaching (now) a price/performance point that is globally relevant to the mass market for storage. (and related stuff) They primarily did that because they were motivated by the vehicle market. The term I have used for 15+ years is that there is a mobility-premium for wrapping a battery in a vehicle shell, and the market simply does not - for many very understandable reasons - want to grant that premium margin to stationary storage. So LFP was aimed at vehicles. But it is also en passant solving the storage problem which is now scaling fast.

The size of that rapidly growing mass market from year-to-year is a closely held secret, if indeed anyone knows all the puzzle pieces. I try to track it through different approaches, but it is nigh-on impossible to quantify. I'm not sure many other people have a much better understanding, however much they sell their research reports for (they used to come to me, trying to blag me to get my data for their report). As you probably know I suss out the vehicle/battery splits each year to try and keep tabs on that, enough to do some basic public domain analysis. Quantifying storage with an equivalent precision was tough. From the limited poor quality signals I could assess, until last year I thought Tesla had overwhelming dominance in the utility segment, but was less obviously dominant in the domestic segment, and there were signs that the commercial segment was a fizzle for everyone.

In the course of the last year it has become clearer from the qualitative public domain info that Tesla is no longer competitive in the domestic market. That is why apart from some special niche markets (such as the USA ..... which is why a lot of US-ians aren't reading the tea leaves well ....) Tesla has largely pulled out of attempts to grow their presence in domestic. Instead Tesla has focussed its efforts on the larger utility-scale products and projects. Now does this mean that Tesla can't sell every (domestic) Powerwall it produces: no. Does this mean the price for Powerwall's is reducing : no. So But go look in the market beyond the USA and the Tesla Powerwall is practically a dead product, swamped under a tidal wave of Chinese clones. Overall the Chinese are growing their absolute market size faster than Tesla is, and hence Tesla's market share is reducing.

Anyone who has ever read Christensen's "Innovators Dilemma" can tell you what is most likely to come next. I've spoilt things by giving my opinion. Tesla will sell every utility scale Megapack they can make for the next few years and will command a premium price for them. None of them will sell into China. Many will sell into USA or to clients in the wider western alliance who are allergic to China. But increasingly the Chinese will move upscale into the utility segment and take what in the longer term will likely become the commanding position. And then Tesla utility-scale storage margins will wither year-by-year with no path back, no matter how many turnaround plans are attempted. The projected scenario in the graphs I gave earlier are very much the high-case; the low-case is far less attractive.

Is this a logical harvesting strategy for Tesla, yes. Is it a sign of weaknesses inside Tesla, also yes. Ultimately we know that pathway is terminal in the hardware space. (Tesla keeps on saying that is has not got a capital problem, but it has been AWOL on deploying it aggressively in this space. So that means Tesla has had a leadership talent problem in this space. I'd have though that much was patently obvious given the history of what we now call Tesla Energy). Does it mean investors should worry, absolutely, because by the time storage sales revenues are that significant then also the stuffing will have been beaten out of margins.

I realise it is not popular to say this, but a corresponding story is so far playing out in the BEV market. The data shows that Tesla is year-on-year losing market share by volume, by GWh, and by revenue. I last posted this graph about 11-months ago. Clearly Tesla has put its first team into bat in the vehicle market, and the seconds are playing in the storage market (and crikey knows who are in the solar market). The first team are playing an excellent game. The second team may be about to get a second wind for a while. And the third team are playing in some 0.1% league.

The analysts who are asking questions on the quarterly call are about as dangerous as a newborn baby deer. The better-armed hunters in the market have shot off a lot of ammunition recently, and some of it has hit home - that was because they can detect a valid scent, even if they don't yet fully understand it. Tesla needs to decide whether it is predator or prey, rather than distractedly fiddling with blue feathery baubles in another room.

View attachment 891986

Well written, pseudo insightful hogwash, pure malarkey.

GJ, you here?

 

[Chunky Jr.]

Interesting thread about Tesla M3 pricing and how it closely followed the average US selling price for all new cars

https://twitter.com/x/status/1610348088836722691

 

[Ogre]

If adding weight to the car is indeed one of the solutions (I’m skeptical) a spare tire and jack would be a good start.

 

[2101Guy]

Well, NBC nightly news showed the cliff accident. They immediately said it was a Tesla. Of course they said the kids’ lives were saved because….they were in child seats.

Based on automotive experts, I think it’s fair to say that the child seats definitely were a major factor. Problem?