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

[unk45]

From what I've read that's overwhelmingly more due to massive consolidation of small banks bought out by large ones and closing redundant/unprofitable locations than due to ATMs existing (not that I doubt that, and much moreso online banking, has had SOME impact)

The reduction in bank branches dates from the 1980's with massive growth of "non-bank-banks" (look them up if you care) and with the 2008 crisis that caused the failures of many Savings and Loans in the US, plus deregulation. and the elimination of the Glass-Steagall Act and McFadden Act ((look those up if you care). Those eliminated more bank branches than did technology changes, but ATM's were a factor at the same time. Beginning around 1995, though, online banking became a thing, and many former non-bank-banks (most recognizably CapitalOne) bought small commercial banks but grew with online banking. Today most banking transactions take place online, many related to e-commerce (does anyone here misunderstand the impact of Amazon, Alibaba. Google etc on use of cash, in-person bank use by consumers?) and all of them via remote payment processing.

Many people (including me, one of the oldest people around this board I suspect) no longer use bank branches at all. I have never been to a physical location of any of my US banks (four of them). Two of my banks, one in Brazil one the US) do not have branches at all. The truly amazing fact is that so many bank branches still exist at all.

This process is quite directly related to Tesla and TSLA. Remote on-line processing is cheaper, more accurate, compatible with long service hours, and is easily software upgradable. Bank branches are analogous with car dealers Both provided necessary services in the pre-internet world. Both are very, very expensive and are labor intensive. Is it any wonder that both are durable, but declining?

Now consider that TSLA is gradually moving towards financial services with car leasing, car insurance, energy sales and more evolving. All of those are ones which pre-Glass-Steagall repeal. pre-internet were more expensive and and less efficiently processed than they are now, with consumer behavior much harder to track and use for risk management. TSLA and FWIW, Twitter, are rapidly heading towards the visions Elon Musk had when X.com morphed into PayPal. Those two were only possible because fo the banking deregulation mentioned above. TSLA is preparing for the expansion of such services globally, several of them likely to reach maturity when RoboTaxi eventually happens, but also be productive long before that eventuality.

I understand that this post goes directly from bank branches to TSLA. That really is because Elon went on the same path beginning even before X-com, when Zip2 became the genesis of hyperlocal remote marketing.

 

[unk45]

Oh wow, you made me go down the rabbit hole of quick re reading some of I Robot. In each short story, Asimov postulates some problem with a particular type of robot and what effect it would have. It is indeed an interesting exploration into the issues we might have with robots once we introduce AI powered ones into general society.

I was born 40 years too early. All my life I’ve fantasized about being a robot psychologist. That may very well end up being a real profession soonish.

Shall we call you Dr. Calvin?

 

[winfield100]

Among my first memories of Elon comments were a few about various Asimov books. The Naked Sun was extreme, but lays a foundation (not a quip) for understanding the possible. Impact of excellent AÍ technology driving fundamental transformations. I recommend “Robbie” and “I, Robot” to understand how Elon views dystopian possibilities. Realistically, we should understand that the factory OS, FSD and Optimus are speeding the transition, most visible right now with the successors of ChatGTP that are incorporating vision.

Some must think this subject is off-topic in this thread. Definitely it needs new thread(s). However, we all should, as TSLA investors, understand we are invested in an AI company that builds and sells physical products (vehicles, solar equipment and energy storage), software, services and electrical energy.

All of that forces us to consider Asimov’s hypotheses, just as Elon has been doing.

corollary: TSLA is not a good investment for those who cannot endure volatility.
Thus I HODL.

@unk45 @Cosmacelf
regarding Optimus, (so TSLA related) and AI and ChatGPT and EssEff of various flavors, (and Asimov, et,al.)
many writers seemed to fail by ignoring that "machine" intellicences and sentiences should get better and better
Jack Williamson's "Humanoids" never evolved
Only a few of Asimov's robots evolved, (I _think_ R Daneel by riding outside a ship in "hyperspace" and getting way "smarter/faster/etc"

I suspect humanity is hanging on by fingertips to the bottom ladder rung of Sentience, reaching down to AI's to pull them up, and above us.

Elon apparently has read some Iain M Banks "Culture" novels, by his naming conventions of the "drone ships"
(Thank bog one is _not_ named "Skaffen Amtiskaw")

I would point out the culture MINDS "think" Billions of times faster, (like 3,200 years per human second)

here is a condensed "few notes on the Culture"

A Few Notes on the Culture, by Iain M Banks

and a salient quote from "Look to Windward" describing the MINDS
"....they are as Gods, and on the far side..."

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheCulture/comments/uoi2hw

The future redshifted past me 10-15 years ago

Once Optimus, or its offspring become maternal, humans and biologicals will become irrelvalent

(EssEff has speculated on this theme a lot, like this clip from Babylon 5)

babylon 5 sigma 957 - Google Search

 

[winfield100]

Shall we call you Dr. Calvin?

@unk45
Dr. Susan Calvin had no bio offspring i'm aware of

 

[Tony73]

I haven't seen any physical banks close down locally and new ones are still being built.

You are looking at the wrong measure. Physical bank branches have increased since the advent of online banking. Banks used the reduced needed headcount per branch to open more branches. Overall bank employment did not decrease by much. That is the whole point: economies adapt to labor saving innovations in ways that create new jobs and tend to replace the jobs lost by said innovation.

 

[unk45]

@unk45
Dr. Susan Calvin had no bio offspring i'm aware of

You are looking at the wrong measure. Physical bank branches have increased since the advent of online banking. Banks used the reduced needed headcount per branch to open more branches. Overall bank employment did not decrease by much. That is the whole point: economies adapt to labor saving innovations in ways that create new jobs and tend to replace the jobs lost by said innovation.

Keep in mind that many of the so-called branches are not staffed at all or have no person to person actual transactions, being essentially advisory services. One of the examples is CapitalOne, which locates ATM banks with an advisory services function that they sometimes call a Cafe. Actual functioning traditional bank branches have been steadily declining for decades. This chart from the St Louis Fed tells the story:

Number of Bank Branches for United States

Graph and download economic data for Number of Bank Branches for United States (DDAI02USA643NWDB) from 2004 to 2019 about banks, depository institutions, and USA.

fred.stlouisfed.org

 

[Nrkl]

If technological innovation keeps accelerating, the only outcome will be instability of the system. Many consequences take time to manifest, and if we pile innovation and intervention on top of each other faster and wider, instability will follow.

Interesting how much of the new secular intellect that habits also this forum believes wholeheartedly in mans intelligent design and ability to manipulate reality. Reakity is much much bigger and more unknown than we think. Big tragedies lie ahead. Systemic oscillation and eventual crash. Act accordingly.

 

[oldTAVguy]

Don't forget manned SpaceX flight today ...

 

[enslaved robot]

If Tesla had skipped DBE, 4680 would have ramped faster with lower costs, and Tesla profits and share prices would be higher right now. Instead they chose to bet the company on ability to pulverize powder well.

Pulverize powder well? I'm not sure you understand 4680 technology, which is a huge red flag on your opinions.

As a guy who works in nanotechnology, I can tell you that regular battery processes are basically stone age tech. The witches brew approach of empirical design that characterizes "wet" battery technology is a dead end. Dry electrode processing enables much more design choices and eliminates a ton of hidden variables that limit yields. Devoting effort to making a pencil sharper instead of inventing a ball point pen is never a good idea. If you like the idea of investing in companies that bet on pencils in a ball point pen world I suggest Berkshire Hathaway.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Oh man, what a fun Sunday read. One of the original automobile manufacturers in the US (actually, THE first), gives a retrospective of what it was like in the early years from the vantage point of 1930. A LOT of echos to the burgeoning world of the early days of EVs.

Get A Horse! America’s Skepticism Toward the First Automobiles | The Saturday Evening Post

The inventor who claimed the first U.S. car ever sold recalls the birth of the industry and the general public skepticism about automobiles.

www.saturdayeveningpost.com

 

[insaneoctane]

....garbage collection, police, military, social services are all automated, including most of medicine.

Isaac Asimov speculated such worlds. Elon has read Asimov. Is that not the postulated eventual outcome of Elon’s thoughts? In that sort of world will our TSLA exist?

Obviously, this intelligent robotic future is inevitable. Everyone with half a brain must be able to see that as AI's capabilities continue to surprise, right? Optimus looks eerily like terminators IMO. The only real question simply is when. With all the building blocks right in front of us and with a company as capable and visionary as Tesla actually perusing AGI robots, it shouldn't leave a lot to the imagination. I don't know if there'll be a viable product in 5 years or 25 years, but it's certainly exciting! I also don't know if Tesla will be "the company" to ultimately bring this science fiction to the masses. But, I'm comfortable with my Tesla investment in EVs, battery storage, solar roof, FSD, and manufacturing innovations even if Optimus isn't what it might be. My gut tells me that there's a decent chance that Optimus becomes a useful product and I get a huge multiplier on my already great investment. And as for the "when"....well the faster Tesla goes, the more likely it is to be during my lifetime!

 

[Unpilot]

If technological innovation keeps accelerating, the only outcome will be instability of the system. Many consequences take time to manifest, and if we pile innovation and intervention on top of each other faster and wider, instability will follow.

Interesting how much of the new secular intellect that habits also this forum believes wholeheartedly in mans intelligent design and ability to manipulate reality. Reakity is much much bigger and more unknown than we think. Big tragedies lie ahead. Systemic oscillation and eventual crash. Act accordingly.

The system is always unstable....while seeking stability.

"We" don't know what is coming and any discussion on reality is...while entertaining....incomplete.
It is for those inclined an exciting ride.

I only wish I was younger, so I had more time to enjoy....but who knows....maybe I have forever!

 

[Captkerosene]

In the US, once a bot becomes a reality and begins to truly displace actual paid workers, expect the government to notice. In the immediate term, at least to replace the ~15% social security and medicare taxes that is shared by both the employer and employee. For every worker Optimus can displace, the government loses ~15% of their earnings solely for SS/Medicare. That money needs to be replaced, so no doubt they will tax the bots/employer. Look how quickly states are already taxing EVs to recoup lost gasoline taxation. Interesting because these taxes aren't in most analysts calculations....but I think they will be significant.

I doubt it. The govt doesn't tax typewriters, computers or industrial robots as workers now. No tractor tax to pay for unemployed farm workers. EV tax on cars makes sense if the money is used to maintain roads.

 

[FastEddieB]

looks like they're using Siri

driver : "I'd like a hamburger, fries, and a shake"
bot : "here's some information about bow ties"

Reminds me of this:

 

[JRP3]

Look, maybe you like the idea of a completely egalitarian society where the value of human output is completely ignored. The hard work of person X is worth no more than the laziness of person Y. I just happen to think that would be a horrible time and place to live in.

I simply don't believe in the false narrative of "meritocracy". Most hard working people are never rewarded fairly for their labor, and it's always been that way.

 

[SPadival]

Saying some sort of Universal Basic Income will come about once tens of millions of people lose their livelihood to self driving trucks, cars and bots is whistling past the graveyard. Uncharacteristically Ron Baron either hasn't a clue or just doesn't want to admit publicly where things are headed over the next twenty years. As Ray Kurzweil laid out in great detail two decades ago, the pace of technological change is accelerating each year. Until recently it was possible for many to adapt and escape to different, new and often better jobs. Citing the Industrial revolution as an example of how the AI revolution is going to play out ignores that revolution took place incrementally over a few hundred years. I don't know how or if this ever faster disruption of the majority of people employment options can be slowed and eased into a new economic model of sharing the wealth so people can survive and follow their bliss. But IMO those who know what's coming should be honest about what's coming and devote a portion of their attention and resources to thinking about how it might be eased somewhat.

To be fair to Elon, he recanted what he said in the earlier interview in the Faber interview - when Faber asked him about career advice for his kids. Elon went dark instantly

 

[Tommy O]

I simply don't believe in the false narrative of "meritocracy". Most hard working people are never rewarded fairly for their labor, and it's always been that way.

The job market is inefficient, that’s for sure.

But to go 180 degrees in the opposite direction because of this is the wrong answer.

My controls theory text opened with the obvious point that communism fails because of poor feedback about supply and demand in such a system. Eliminate meritocracy or deemphasize it and you end up with communism.

You wouldn’t survive a day under such a regime and neither would most of us, no matter our MERITS.

 

[Cosmacelf]

I simply don't believe in the false narrative of "meritocracy". Most hard working people are never rewarded fairly for their labor, and it's always been that way.

All hard work is not equally valuable. I can sing you a song but I doubt you’d pay me for it, but you will for a naturally talented person. Likewise you’d pay a lot of money for a car made by Tesla but not one by a guy who works 7 days a week making one in his garage.

It’s a complete fallacy that hard work should be compensated equally. That’s the whole point of the pricing system and capitalism, it determines what something is worth, completely fairly and equitably.

 

[bkp_duke]

The job market is inefficient, that’s for sure.

But to go 180 degrees in the opposite direction because of this is the wrong answer.

My controls theory text opened with the obvious point that communism fails because of poor feedback about supply and demand in such a system. Eliminate meritocracy or deemphasize it and you end up with communism.

You wouldn’t survive a day under such a regime and neither would most of us, no matter our MERITS.

Agreed.

Simple example - one that should ring home to the users on this forum - if the USA had been in communism or socialism for the past 100 years you would have an agrarian society, and the following things you enjoy and take for granted today would never have existed:
1) EVs
2) cell phones (or even phones for that matter)
3) Air Conditioning

The list goes on and on, but without incentive (financial) and a competitive landscape, entrepreneurs would not have found a reason or means to invent things. I'm not saying the current system is perfect, it's not, but there are ZERO alternatives that are as good as it.


The market system works (even the labor market), albeit inefficiently in the short term, but in the long term does balance itself out. The greatest threat to the market system are monopolies and corruption - keeping these at bay is arguably the single greatest purpose of government.

Imagine how unsuccessful Tesla (non-existent) would be if they could not bring to market a product that objectively is better than ICE? Faster, more efficient, cheaper to build. Same with labor markets - if someone wants higher pay, they can change jobs, improve their skillset for additional pay, etc. In the company I run, we set both productivity AND education goals for the employees. Bonuses and raises are dependent upon both of those. Having a pulse only gets you a COL adjustment, nothing more.

 

[nativewolf]

I disagree the 4680 has been a "complete flop".

This is a new battery technology, a new way to manufacture batteries, and that is why development has hit hiccups along the way and is very much behind schedule. The delayed progress does not diminish the ultimate goal however, which is to have a very economical battery production line capable of very high output. That is important.

When Tesla stated its goals to manufacture 500,000 EV's per year by 2020 most experts laughed at them and thought Tesla was crazy setting impossible goals like that. Ambitious goals are why Tesla is so far ahead of everyone else today. Sure Tesla often hits the mark behind their own deadlines, but Tesla has a solid track record of still hitting those goals in time.

The 4680 is behind schedule and people are now claiming it's a "huge flop", but what if they still solve the issues in the near future and the 4680 then becomes the (delayed) success Tesla wants it to be? Will the current naysayers then admit they were wrong? Will it still be a "complete flop" even if the 4680 takes off a few years behind schedule?

I hope the 4680 problems are resolved ever so soon. For tesla investors or investors in anything hoping a new technology comes along smoothly is not a recipe for profits.

I posted about it over a year ago and go lambasted. A year later it turns out I was right, sadly. I don't see any evidence that they've solved the DBE situation yet so if someone is counting on DBE CT sales to goose profits this year, or next, I'd suggest caution. I feel much more strongly that the Semi should ramp smoothly and add immediate profits that are synergistic with profitable energy megapack solutions. Further, the semi is going to make a meaningful contribution to fighting climate change whereas I am not sure if the CT will turn out to be just a suburban homeowner 3rd vehicle toy. In which case the net impact may actually be negative for the environment.

I'll get lambasted again, I'm sure. I did a year ago.