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
That seems more like hitting the expectations spot on.
/s
