-
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
Somewhere in the Amazon rain forest, a butterfly flapped its wings
They ran out of FUD stories and figured... why not just short it anyway.
Market makers. If it closes above 174 it will likely rally above 180 by Fridays close. If it closes below 167 it will likely fall to the low 150's. It's all high frequency trading manipulation. Hardly anyone is buying or selling until it breaks above support (174) or below (167).
Many of us are viewing paint shops in traditional context. Those are no longer quite so restrictive as they were. Notwithstanding that, pigment and other ingredients are rapidly evolving. Some of the newest materials can be and are more expensive than the traditional, (primers, pigments , etc that necessitate rework and human processing ). But..labor costs, preparation costs, rework costs, paint usage, water usage all are reduced. Operating flexibility also can permit much simplified batching. Above all, dramatic new colors yielding higher prices are now possible without commensurate cost increases.It won't work like that. The demand for the car will be caused by its $25,000 price. Colours won't be something you choose. (in my suggested situation)
Manufacturing volume will make it OK to support more than the 5 colours they have now.
Doesn't have to be 12 different colours... or more than 12 - they could cycle around 9 paint colours. If you want to keep driving what you've got and wait for a colour you're happy with to get sold, that's up to you (and you can keep paying for gasoline while you wait). I'm suggesting that one of the ways Tesla will keep the price down to $25,000 is by painting only in one colour for an entire month. Then switching to something else. At this price level there will be enough buyers. First colour out of the gate will be white of course. In fact they will probably cycle around colours that are similar to what Tesla currently ships, plus a few more.
And the FUD machine has had plenty of material to feed itself from over the years, but somehow Tesla has gotten to a 2million/yr run rate. FUD machine not creating a lot of fear, uncertainty or doubt IMO
Noe of that means Tesla will stop batching, nor does it suggest they'll offer endless variations, although they could without much extra cost. They probably will not because collision repair will be vastly more difficult with the newest colors because they are developed and executed using technology that cannot easily be deployed to body shops. The result, for perfect results is color matching in the factory for replacement panels. THAT is both expensive and difficult. Due to that unpleasant reality, Tesla will probably never offer the myriad colors they could do. Further, building and stocking many color and equipment variants ends out being costly, and Tesla is dedicated to cost reduction.
In sum, Tesla has the technology to produce a vast variety of colors without much extra cost. The reasons they will not are all about stocking and post-sale repairs.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
Only if having credit is considered as important as they want us to believe it is. There are no debtor's prisons here in the colonies.
Over two decades ago I stopped using credit completely and haven't concerned myself about a credit score since. For all I know, I may not even have a credit score.
Perhaps, the best credit score is no credit score?
Ummm...You know there is a hard pull on your credit when you sign up for TMC right? right??
Today was a tease so enjoy this video of Drew having fun.
If Tesla has 2 paint shops for 1m vehicles in Shanghai, won't they need 5ish for Mexico? Presumably that would almost get rid of batching unless each paint shop has much more throughput than we have seen historically.
larmor
Active Member
Continued production, delivery, and sales of EVs for a profit. Market had temporarily forgot about this but has since remembered.
Nothing really, probably just market makers taking a few minutes to put the stock back where they need it to be for their options.
The stock saw it's own shadow and got scared.
The wind changed direction.
Someone at the controls sneezed.
Just completely normal behavior, nothing to see here....
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
In SDG&E territory, it's up to $126/mo for connectivity, for households with 180k or higher annual income.
Guts solar, instantly.
Wait... did I miss something? : Is there a new color for X and S? I'm waiting to buy another S LR or a Plaid, but need new color. I would gladly have the silver color that I have on my 2018 S. It was discontinued shortly after I bought that car.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
Less paint in MX. The entire "body in white" is not planned on being painted, because the assembly process has changed. Yet another savings (less paint) from the proposed new "quad" assembly process.
(I say quad because it's 4 quadrants that the parts come from, not because that's what Tesla has officially named it).
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
3 paint shops gives you 5 colors per quarter if you have the 2 top colors dedicated to their own booth and rotate one color a month in the other one.
4 paint shops gives you
* 6 colors per quarter if you have the 3 top colors dedicated to their own booth and rotate one color a month in the other 1.
* or 8 colors a quarter if you have the 2 top colors dedicated to their own booth and rotate one color a month in the other 2.
5 paint shops gives you
* 7 colors per quarter if you have the 4 top colors dedicated to their own booth and rotate one color a month in the other 1
* or 9 colors a quarter if you have the 3 top colors dedicated to their own booth and rotate one color a month in the other 2.
Sure seems like a higher output factory could handle more colors than we currently have if they have more than 2 paint shops.
But it doesn't really have anything to do with solar. (You pay the higher income based rate even if you don't have solar.)
They do say the per kWh cost would drop by 30-40% as a result, so it isn't quite as bad as it seems. (I guess that would make solar less attractive.)
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
So in a nutshell . . . the IRA is indirectly funding the next 5-6 Gigafactories.
I can live with that.
Ahaha, no! AJ's (MorganStanley) estimate is about $80B in total benefits by 2030 (when tapering begins). Perhaps $20B will go to N. American Giga CapEx (finish Texas, expand Nevada, 2x new builds in Mexico). The other $60B in IRA benefits will be returned to American taxpayers in the form of MUCH more affordable EV cars at the point of purchase. Like a $40K Model Y, and a $25K Model Dos. Side benefit? Reshoring production of critcial industries.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
It does, just not directly. There have been a lot of discussions and articles on this already, but the TL;DR is that utils are proposing HIGH connectivity fees, based upon income, and then flat-rate per kwh charges. This pushes out the payback on solar for the demographics that adopt it most (medium to high income, and larger homes).
Plus, and here's the "read between the lines" - they have proposed "lower" per kWh costs in the past. That's how they got TOU implemented - saying "oh, this will lower per kWh charges on average". But there is nothing that FORCES them to stick to this, and their modus operandi is that every single year they go to the CPUC and ask to increase rates. So they are using the "lower per kWh" as a sales tactic now to get permanent connectivity charges in place, knowing that they likely can increase the per kWh charges shortly in the future.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
