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.
I must admit, I don’t road trip, so I haven’t kept up to date on the SC buildout in the “Texaplex”. I took a look today, and I am smacked.

Can you imagine what OEMs would pay for a 24/7 reliable infrastructure like this?



View attachment 898570
I realize this is nothing special compared to Cali, but not bad for the heart of Mordor.

Edit: for context, I would guess that >40% of the state’s population is contained in this area, around 12 million people.

In related news, a local BMW dealership closed. Guess who’s building a new showroom/service center there?
🕺🕺🕺

Hey now. We all know Texas is the future.

This will be cemented when EM finishes pulling out of California completely and leaves NUMMI to the pelicans.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: replicant
FWIW Supercruise is explicitly designed to be hands off, and has much better, dedicated, driver monitoring hardware in the vehicle to support that than Tesla does....

It's a functionally inferior system in terms of driving capabilities that works in far fewer places, and net costs a lot more to own too... but in that one regard it's ahead of Tesla here.

Certainly wouldn't trade systems with them, but I can understand why they focus on that in advertising since it's the biggest thing it has going for it.

I wouldn't say Supercruise driver monitoring hardware is "much better then Tesla's". Nor is it more effective. This is the result of people trying to find any fault with Tesla that they can leverage in an attempt to make them look unsafe. Car and driver found the Supercruise driver monitoring system was easily fooled by a simple pair of gag glasses with eyeballs painted on them. On the other hand, I've had my car warn me simply for staring at the center screen for too long while in FSD mode. Any system can be fooled if the owner wants to fool it, the acid test is if it reminds drivers when they forget to pay attention. And the Tesla is effective at that and a simple pair of gag glasses won't prevent that like it does on Supercruise.

Yes, they can all be fooled, but only stupid people do that. You can't fix stupid.

In Consumer Reports’ scathing criticism of Autopilot, the magazine noted that other systems such as GM’s Super Cruise are safer since they rely on eye-tracking technology to detect if the driver is paying attention to the road. To test Super Cruise, Car and Driver had to take the vehicle into an actual highway since the system only worked on pre-mapped areas. But even Super Cruise’s eye-tracking system proved vulnerable since the eye-tracking system was fooled by a simple pair of gag glasses with eyes painted on them.

The same was true when Car and Driver evaluated if driver-assist systems would operate without a human in the driver’s seat. Every single system from the 17 vehicles tested by the motoring publication fell prey to simple hacks like a hockey stick on the accelerator. These included Super Cruise, which operated when gag glasses were placed at the driver’s seat.

 
Hey now. We all know Texas is the future.

This will be cemented when EM finishes pulling out of California completely and leaves NUMMI to the pelicans.
Well, we haven’t earned it yet. Once again, a bill is in works in the state legislature to allow Tesla to sell in Texas. We’ll see how it goes.
 
Read my book. It explains why technical analysis works.

You published that book 20 years ago, so I take it you are a billionaire by now? Because I have to imagine that you didn't write the book until you had honed the craft of technical analysis, so I imagine you have been putting that knowledge to good use over the last 30 years or more.

Or are you saying it works, but only sometimes and not enough to make a big difference? I studied technical analysis back in the '80's and '90's but never put any faith in it and my returns have beat my wildest expectations. Maybe I screwed up though. Are you saying I could be a multi-billionaire if I had added technical analysis to my investing skill set? The closest I got was to look at a chart to see where it would need to go to "look right", not bothering with any technical analysis or double bottoms, and tea cups.
 
WSJ: After a brutal year for tech stocks, retail investors have lost their appetite for buying the dip, with one notable exception. They’re still scooping up shares of $TSLA; Retail’s spent more money on $TSLA in the past 6 months than in the 5 years prior, Vanda found.

You guys are NOT being subtle.

 
This was good to read…

As one compares, point for point, it’s clear these are two very different vehicles, the products of drastically different industrial timelines. And that the EQB gets its winsome head handed to it.
That was true even before last week, when Tesla cut the price of the Model Y by a jaw-dropping $13,000, to $52,990. The price reduction brings the Model Y, the bestselling EV in the U.S., comfort-ably below eligibility thresholds for federal EV tax credits. For qualifying buyers, the discount plus tax credit on the Model Y could add up to a $16,990 savings over the 2023 EQB 350.

 
This was good to read…

As one compares, point for point, it’s clear these are two very different vehicles, the products of drastically different industrial timelines. And that the EQB gets its winsome head handed to it.
That was true even before last week, when Tesla cut the price of the Model Y by a jaw-dropping $13,000, to $52,990. The price reduction brings the Model Y, the bestselling EV in the U.S., comfort-ably below eligibility thresholds for federal EV tax credits. For qualifying buyers, the discount plus tax credit on the Model Y could add up to a $16,990 savings over the 2023 EQB 350.

Doesn’t that thing get really poor efficiency?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maarten
Terraform Industries is the most credible startup outside SpaceX in my opinion and they are openly pursuing these goals for chemical production for something other than just Starship flights. They released a new white paper today with a lot more numbers and technical detail.

[snip/]
I hope some of you, especially the scientists and engineers, will read it closely and tell me if it’s as technically and economically feasible as it sounds. I have not seen analysis from any other TSLA investors except me on this topic and it’s such a humongous long-term opportunity if it actually is viable. On the other hand, I’m wondering if batteries will be irrelevant to this industry. Terraform’s white paper indicates that they’ll only be operating the hydrolyzers during daylight hours. If steady 24/7 operation is not the goal then this might not mean much for Megapack demand in the coming decades.

Renewables are intermittent and as Tony Seba pointed out, the percentages of solar, wind, batteries and other renewable sources which minimizes cost depends on cost for each component. Any fully renewable grid will see excess electricity generation at times, though. Batteries and hydrolysis are complementary means to make use of the surplus instead of letting it go to waste. Batteries are much more energy and cost efficient than hydrolysis and subsequent methane synthesis. The whitepaper claims 6.5 kcf natural gas production from 6 MWh of electricity. 6.5 kcf of gas carry about 1.8 MWh of thermal energy. This is better than shutting down wind turbines at night but those 6 MWh stored in a battery could prevent about 15 MWh worth of gas burnt in a power plant. Approximately 30% efficiency for the overall methane production process sounds feasible but I am no expert.

Until electricity is generated 100% from renewables, this approach can be a niche at best if and when battery production doesn't scale fast enough to keep up with build out of renewable electricity generation. Subsidies might change the equation but are they guaranteed to be in place and at the assumed level for a decade or longer?

Once electricity is generated 100% carbon free, with enough batteries, it will be cheap, perhaps even still free at times. There will also be much less demand for natural gas as it's no longer burnt in power plants and residential heating will move away from gas, too. How will this affect nat gas prices?

One can hope for a proper CO2 penalty put on any kind of fossil fuels in the future but I won't bet money on it.
 
Subsidies might change the equation but are they guaranteed to be in place and at the assumed level for a decade or longer?
Assuming Tesla has worked though the significant issues and can scale 4680 production the IRA subsides are very well timed.

IMO the IRA means Tesla can ramp 4680 production without being as laser focused on efficiency as they would normally be, yield and run rate improvements can always come later.

As shown in this video the cost of batteries determines how much wind and solar overbuild is needed.


Lower priced batteries mean more storage can be deployed which in turn means less wind and solar are needed, the result is a cheaper solution. Making any part of the solution cheaper lowers the overall cost.

If RethinkX repeated their modelling and allowed Terraform Methane to be part of the mix, it is very likely that some (probably small) amount of Terraform Methane might lower the overall cost.

In addition, the Terraform process can permanently lock up some CO2.

We have also investigated an ethylene reactor which, ingesting the same raw input gasses of CO2 and H2, produces C2H4 instead of CH4. Ethylene is a chemical widely used in industry as an essential precursor to plastics, a fuel, an anesthetic, and fruit ripening agent. Because it can be readily converted to polyethylene, a durable plastic often used in milk bottles and fuel tanks, the ethylene reactor enables durable storage of carbon in solid form. Producing ethylene is technically very achievable, but is not on the critical path at this point.

So the big question on Terraform is the economics, whether they can produce Methane at a lower cost that Fossil Fuel sources.

I accept that any process which starts by absorbing CO2 out of the air is at worst net zero,

But for the part of the problem which solar and batteries can economically solve, Terraform can't complete on price.

Where Terra from can potentially complete includes:-
  • Contingency
  • Seasonal variation
  • Other very long duration storage. (including hedging contracts)
  • Energy export.
 
I find these types of analysis trying to unearth some future trends and direction based on past trends just by looking at the graph, pretty silly and useless. I can conjure up any kind of future just playing with my finger on wiggly lines on a magic touch screen .
FWIW, Carter Worth has simply nailed TSLA's movement over the last 12 months .... he's been spot on and anyone who has listened to him has done well. Unfortunately, I'm NOT in the group that listened and have paid the price ... I'm hoping his analysis for the near term is correct and we see some upside in the SP.

As to why this technical analysis works? I'm not sure either as I'm not a "squiggly line" guy .. but I will say that enough people are, so you could say it's simply a self-fulfilling prophecy. Who knows??

Cheers to the longs .... let's hope Wed brings some much needed good news.
 
Interesting topic though: TA vs fundamentals
Fundamentals supersede technicals over the long term
Technicals are pretty good in short term
Will I ever buy a fundamentally weak company stock just because Technicals look great? No
Will I ever buy a fundamentally strong company stock like Tesla in face of horrible technicals? All the time
Rest is conversation
 
I first invested in TSLA during late summer of 2013. The amount was only about $10k, but as a high school teacher who hadn't yet stacked my final two degrees yet, this amount was a pretty big deal. I wasn't new to investing, but TSLA was my first investment in a non-blue chip company whose earnings reports had been mostly negative. I teach AP Micro and Macro, and used to listen to NPR's Marketplace Morning Report on my morning commute, and in April (I think?) they had a little blurb about a company called Tesla that had surprisingly shown a profit, albeit mostly due to the selling of carbon credits to other automakers. For the next few months, I dove into researching the company and Elon. This led to discovering TMC, but almost as valuable was the discovery of TSLAQ on Twitter. TMC was (and still can be) prone to some irrational (or maybe just mis-timed to the early side) exuberance but TSLAQ ran the spectrum from logical to absolute looney tunes. Anyway, this led to my initial investment decision: the #1 ranked investing decision of my life.

Then for five years or so, nothing happened. To be sure, a lot happened with Tesla (Model X, various unveilings, increased volumes, Nevada Giga, Model 3 ramp). Just not much, zooming out, had happened with the stock. By this point, I had probably doubled my investment amounts. My investment in TSLA was doing fine, but from 2013-2018, TSLA was far from my biggest gainer. Everything was up during this time period. My initial thought was "I'll invest in TSLA and use the gains to purchase a Tesla". That hadn't happened yet but I was still confident it would happen eventually because Tesla the company appeared to be doing great. I felt confident enough in letting my oldest kid attend college out-of-state because TSLA and the market overall looked so promising. Go Hoosiers!

Then came a dark period between 2018-2019. The beginning of this dark period was the $420 tweet. We were on the road to Bloomington when it happened and the stock price was (I might be off a little) in the low $300's. Well I was pretty disappointed, but still saw the opportunity for a $120/share gain so I sold some other stock and invested another $5k or so in TSLA. This ended up being the #3 smartest investing decision of my life. I didn't realize this back then, however. In fact, within a few months I thought this might have been one of my worst investing decisions. This was due to the Great Model 3 Ramp Debacle of 2019. I remember the low point because it came at the very end of the 2018-19 school year. I went to the gym thinking "Well, I invested $25k and I'm about to sell for $17k. $17K is still a lot of money." By the time I got home, I not only didn't sell, but cleaned out the cash in my account buying 6 more shares at $180. This is my 2nd best decision ever. HODLing ain't as easy as it looks. Again, thankful for the existence of this forum, various podcast, YouTubers, TSLAQ, and even the financial media.

By the end of the late 2019-2021 explosion, we had bought a 2021 M3 Long Range, quit borrowing for my eldest's college, and sent my middle child off to college in-state (Go Dawgs!) and my youngest to his dream school (Go Griz!) on the other side of the country. We sold a few shares between splits, but surprisingly few because I knew TSLA was going to end up even higher within the next decade.

Which leads us to inflation/bad macros/Elon selling/Twitter purchase/disagreeable (to some) Elon behavior. We'll see if this dark period winds up being my 4th best decision or not, but I've been buying in dribs and drabs steadily from about $250 down to near $100. I am still way, way up but I've been a net loser on almost all lots bought during 2022. Most recent events, in my opinion are simply noise. I could be wrong, but I'm betting that negative opinion of Elon among liberals is an effect far more than a cause of the flagging stock price. In other words, once the stock price starts rising (and it might take a minute), we'll see those opinions of Elon improve or, more likely, they'll just stop being reported on.

More than any other factor, Elon's presence is what keeps me on board. His vision and the way he thinks is the only moat that matters. It brought us all the other moats that people hang their hats on now: superior engineering talent, big leads in autonomy and battery innovations, supercharging network, gigafactories. Elon's vision and way of thinking are the only things Tesla has that other companies cannot eventually attain. Do I wish he'd shut up at times? Absolutely. It's been a slight negative for sure. But I've known for a long time that the good comes along with the bad and the positive outweighs any negative by orders of magnitude. It's a free country and Elon is as free as anybody else. More power to those who use their freedoms to be critical or sell their shares if they see fit. Elon has done the same thing. But the only thing that would get me to sell my shares is Elon being forced out at Tesla.

Anyway, sorry for the text wall but getting contemplative today. Cheers to the longs!

Many thanks for this post and your story. I’ve done the back calculations to see how poor of a decision it was to buy the car instead of the stock in May 2019! It’s great to see results from someone who did the opposite.

Hopefully I’ve learned my lesson and get firmly onboard for the next launch, even if its only for 23 - 5 percent gains LOL.
 
Has anyone seen any in-depth analysis on the likelihood that Panasonic 2170 or Tesla 4680 Models of Y and 3 will still be eligible for the full tax credit after the battery materials requirements rules come out in March? I haven’t, and it seems like a really big opportunity if they will, since in all likelihood, basically, no other vehicles would qualify for $7500 which will give Tesla at least another $3750 price advantage vs other EVs.

From what I have seen, most people assume Tesla will lose $3750 of the credit in March. I either have a huge blindspot or this doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I think the most likely outcome is that they keep the $7500 credit. Let me explain.

The delayed Treasury guidance details requirements that make $3,750 contingent on at least 40% of the value of the critical minerals in the battery having been extracted or processed in the United States or a country with a U.S. free-trade agreement, or recycled in North America.

The other $3,750 requires that at least 50% of battery components were manufactured or assembled in North America. Both percentages rise annually. Many countries are pressing Washington for a broad definition of a free-trade deal and other foreign automakers and countries want other interpretations.

GM says they can meet the 40% but not the battery components requirements so they would only be eligible for $3750.

The battery component requirement should be in the bag for Tesla given the batteries and packs are made in the US.

As a starting point on the 40% requirement, Elon said they expect to be fully compliant with the IRA Tax credit.

Here’s a transcript from the Q3 2022 earnings call.

“Thank you very much. And let's go first to the shareholder questions. The first shareholder question is given the stringent battery content and assembly requirements for consumer tax credit eligibility under the Inflation Reduction Act, can you speak to Tesla's ability to meet those thresholds in each of 2023, 2024, and 2025 through your existing and planned supply chain?”

Elon Musk -- Chief Executive Officer and Product Architect Well, yeah, I mean I think just at a high level, I'd say, we do expect to fully meet the IRA's requirements. Do you want to add?

Zachary Kirkhorn -- Chief Financial Officer Yeah. We view the passing of the Inflation Reduction Act, there's a significant boost toward accelerating automation, while also scaling the battery supply chain at large in the United States. We expect Treasury to publish detailed guidance by the end of the year. Until such time, it's difficult to fully determine the eligibility criteria, but we believe Tesla is very well-positioned to capture a significant share of that for solar storage and also electric vehicles.

Tesla has more insight into their supply chain than random internet articles. They would have interpreted it narrowly to play things safe. Also, if anything, a delay of 3 months in the rules going into effect allows for some Elon time breathing room for Tesla to get compliant with even their strictest interpretation of the law.

The batteries in the Model Y and 3 have very little cobalt in them relative to most other EV batteries. They can get the nickel from Australia and Canada which would make up most of the battery. Lithium is a very small percentage of the battery but could also probably be from a source that qualifies under the credit rules. I believe other companies like VW get a lot of Nickel from Indonesia.

Tesla is also the largest customer for battery materials, is the most flexible in terms of making rapid change, and has the ability to pay the highest price. So inevitably tesla will get first pick for their raw materials supply chain.

Tesla could also theoretically shift around what materials are used in what batteries for what vehicles if they needed to. They could put batteries with materials from countries that don’t qualify in their S, X, and Model Y performance vehicles since they are ineligible for the credits anyway. They could also move 2170 cells around to Powerwalls, old Megapack, Semi, vins reserved for leased vehicles etc. They can also ship all modele of 3s and Ys with batteries that have unqualifying materials to other countries besides the US (like Canada).

In the event that they still couldn't qualify on every vehcie, Y is igher margin and higher volume for them than the 3 so it seems most likely they would prioritize making sure it gets the full credits over any other vehicles they make.

So basically, my analysis is that if tesla is not eligible for the battery materials requirement once it goes into effect, then likely literally no vehicles would be eligible by any maker for the full credit.

Is there something I’m missing on this? Has anyone seen anything else to confirm my thoughts? It seems likely that if anything the treasury will save to pressure from other OEMs and make it easier to qualify vs find a way to make Tesla not qualify. Why would they let everyone in the back door with leasing and then create really strange rules that go against the plain language of the bill?
 
FWIW, Carter Worth has simply nailed TSLA's movement over the last 12 months .... he's been spot on and anyone who has listened to him has done well. Unfortunately, I'm NOT in the group that listened and have paid the price ... I'm hoping his analysis for the near term is correct and we see some upside in the SP.

As to why this technical analysis works? I'm not sure either as I'm not a "squiggly line" guy .. but I will say that enough people are, so you could say it's simply a self-fulfilling prophecy. Who knows??

Cheers to the longs .... let's hope Wed brings some much needed good news.
He also nearly nailed the bottom on Tesla in 2019 as well

Maybe @Electroman shouldnt be so dismissive to a group of firms and experts that employ armies of mathematic and computer science PhDs and billions of capital honed over decades because he fails to understand it.

And this is coming from a guy who, if you see my post history, I criticize technical analysis multiple times on the options thread. But being so absolute in one way or another is blind ignorance at best, and intentional bias at worst.
 
He also nearly nailed the bottom on Tesla in 2019 as well

Maybe @Electroman shouldnt be so dismissive to a group of firms and experts that employ armies of mathematic and computer science PhDs and billions of capital honed over decades because he fails to understand it.

And this is coming from a guy who, if you see my post history, I criticize technical analysis multiple times on the options thread. But being so absolute in one way or another is blind ignorance at best, and intentional bias at worst.
FWIW, Carter Worth has simply nailed TSLA's movement over the last 12 months .... he's been spot on and anyone who has listened to him has done well. Unfortunately, I'm NOT in the group that listened and have paid the price ... I'm hoping his analysis for the near term is correct and we see some upside in the SP.

As to why this technical analysis works? I'm not sure either as I'm not a "squiggly line" guy .. but I will say that enough people are, so you could say it's simply a self-fulfilling prophecy. Who knows??

Cheers to the longs .... let's hope Wed brings some much needed good news.
There is no reason why it should because you are right it's just squiggly lines. In a casino it's no more effective than watching the patterns in baccarat and trying to figure out the pattern on the sheet.

From a purely logical point of view. The reason why it works is because enough people believe it works. Unlike the casino example (Where it's just random), if enough traders and algorithms actually trade on these technical signs, then they have the ability to move the stock. Which is probably why technicals work during times of noise (No earnings or news, moves with macro or starts doing it's own thing) and break down when actual news comes out.
 
WSJ: After a brutal year for tech stocks, retail investors have lost their appetite for buying the dip, with one notable exception. They’re still scooping up shares of $TSLA; Retail’s spent more money on $TSLA in the past 6 months than in the 5 years prior, Vanda found.

You guys are NOT being subtle.

This is strange since we have been told in this very thread time after time after time that the SP is pushed down so MMs and funds can scoop up cheap shares. Now we hear that retail is in on it too.

So who's selling? Can't all have been Elon ... :cool: