I was responding to someone who asked why I think 3/Y growth rates are slowing.
As I said earlier, I think that new S curves are needed to sustain 50% annual growth.
-
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
As I said earlier, I think that new S curves are needed to sustain 50% annual growth.
Bet TSLA
Active Member
I rented an X back in the summer of 2017 when I was trying to decide whether upgrading my 2014 Model S would result in a new Model S or X. After a bit over a week driving the X around Vermont I decided on an S, partly because I didn't see that an X would be as good a vehicle for ski trips, but also because I got tired of explaining the falcon wing doors to everybody I visited.
I still have the 2017 Model S I got then. It's still an excellent vehicle for a ski trip. And the free unlimited supercharging makes it the obvious road trip car (in preference to my 3 or my Y). I'm waiting for them to offer to transfer both free unlimited supercharging and FSD as incentive to upgrade. Might happen.
ChiefRollo
Member
I think the odds of Tesla offering the transfer of both is low. I had to break it up with the FUSC transfer to our newest Tesla vehicle and hope to be able to transfer the FSD to another, perhaps the CT AWD someday.
Tracking battery availability is admittedly getting very difficult these days with the supply chain widening its sources. But cell capacity for an additional 700k vehicles doesn't sound impossible. Some examples:
- CATL shanghai plant coming online with [80]GWh capacity. I think most of this is going to focused on stationary storage but 10% of that capacity could get enough cells for 100k+vehicles
- BYD continuing to expand cell capacity at a breakneck pace. Their introduction of Sodium cells into vehicles may free up some LFP capacity for sale to Tesla.
- Panasonic 4680 production due to start Q2/Q3 2024
- Joe Tegtmyer said 4 Austin lines are ramping now with another 4 coming online by the end of the year. Additionally, cathode material changes are good for another 10% to 20% from existing lines. Each line is apparently good for c.10GWh/yr at full capacity (before energy density improvements)
I wish we had a reliable YouTuber/Twitterer that worked on global battery supply chain / factory capacity reporting the same as we have for vehicle volumes. Jordan and CleanerWatt both do some of this but none that I can find that look at a total market perspective. This leaves us to cobble together sources from multiple articles.
insaneoctane
Well-Known Member
I see a roll cage. What other non-production mods were made?
EVNow
Well-Known Member
OK, I'll bite, please lay out the reason why the massive options expiration on Jan 19 necessitates that TSLA descend to get closer to the number. I'd really like to understand the mechanism for it doing as you suggest without manipulations involved, and I say this with all sincerity.
In theory, the big option sellers (market makers and some hedge funds) have long-ago hedged their bets. If that assumption is correct, then why must the stock price decrease as we near the options expiration date?
Additionally, let's talk about manipulations. Starting with the November 30 cybertruck delivery event, we've seen significantly elevated percent of TSLA selling tagged to shorts, accompanied by unusually large volumes during the 4pm closing cross. I attach a chart. The timing looks like a manipulation to me, like some entities which bet against the cybertruck delivery event are working hard to minimize their losses. Why this timing?
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
10 GWh/yr was the planned capacity for the Fremont Kato Rd. pilot battery line. The lines going into Austin are nominal 25GWh/yr, although I think that is after a 20% improvement in energy density due to chemistry changes.
The 4 bty lines either installed or under progress now at Austin will be joined by 4 more lines, which Drew Baglino told us on the Q3'22 Conf call will be new tech / lower CapEx for the same capacity (these are likely of type as the further 4/5 lines also planned to go in at Sparks, NV in a year).
Overall, that's 8*25=200GWh planned for Texas and at least 4*25=100GWh annual capacity planned over the next ~year. I won't be surprised to hear that Berlin is 2nd next, with 8 lines planned (Model Zwei is coming...) but I don't think Tesla will ever need to build its own battery cells in China (Li they got).
Cheers!
P.S. Battery cell Line1 at Austin likely supports production of about 166K CTs per year (depending on the cell yield of the battery line, using 1344 cells per car). So 2 Lines together support ~333K CTs, which is near the max capacity of the 1st Cybertruck GA line, now installed and ramping. Another 2 4680 lines by mid-year could support ~500K Models Y, each with a 82 KWh pack (896 cells).
P.P.S. What are the other 4 lines for? More Models Y? Perhaps. But how many Models 2 could be built using those 4680 cells? Assuming a 41 KWh pack (448 cells), that'd be 166K*3*4 = enough cells for 2 Million Models 2 per year. (that's $15B in IRA subsidies to consumers, folks. Congress gonna. be surprised.)
P.3.S. Anybody elsa wanna estimate the annual IRA manufacturer's credits earned for building 2 million 41 KWh packs with both the pack and cells made in USA?
Last edited:
I'm surprised that Joe thinks that the M in NMC stands for Lithium.
I have been thinking about this...if Tesla stopped making S & X.
What would my next car be? I love my Model Y - but for long trips I prefer a larger car like the Model X or S.
There are a few large EVs from other makers - the Taycan is probably not bad - but I won't touch anything VW after dieselgate.
The Mercedes EQS is a piece of junk.
The BMW i7 I have not tried. Do not like the looks. Inside or outside.
The Hongqi HS9 is large but man...
I would probably end up with an S-class Mercedes with a petrol engine. Sigh. Praying that their ADAS got better with time.
If I am the only person thinking like this then it does not matter. But I don't think I am that weird?
Probably not THAT weird, but I can't say I feel the same. I've had a growing dislike of driving petrol cars ever since I have my model S. We own a second smaller petrol car which I avoid driving as much as possible. It feels like a step back in every way and its worth a lot to me never to have to drive a gas car again.
Also, I really hope for just one more big model S refresh before they cancel it if such is the plan. It needs to happen right after the stock has risen back to the meteoric heights it deserves to be at.
Yes I get that. Petrol cars are not fun. But I have done a lot of long distance driving. And in a smaller car I get more tired. A Merc S with ADAS do a decent job of following the other cars on a motorway. It's not a Model X/S. But then neither is a Model Y.
But then I don't think Tesla will stop making the S and X. That would be to slow the transition to sustainable energy. To get everybody to drive EVs we need good large cars. And so far only Tesla is making those.
The new Mercedes EQS seem to be made to get customers to run screamimg back to fossil cars. Except for a few who don't care how it drives but only bought it for the pretty star symbol. The Taycan looks OK. But all other large cars I have seen here in Norway - and most EVs are tested in our market - are fugly.
My previous post was a bit tounge in cheek. But if Tesla opt to only make small cars I would be left with sad choices.
So you would consider an S-class ICE but not the Taycan… because of dieselgate? Fraud isn't cool but nor is climate change.
UkNorthampton
TSLA - 12+ startups in 1
UK, from one of my investment platforms (might be similar across Rest Of Europe). Platform is big in UK.
It's a ratio, not volume, so probably just compare the larger stocks such as Nvidea, AMD, Amazon & Microsoft as others may be coming from a low base of previous ownership.
It's a ratio, not volume, so probably just compare the larger stocks such as Nvidea, AMD, Amazon & Microsoft as others may be coming from a low base of previous ownership.
Eh?
Worldwide car sales are around 70m per annum. Let's be generous and say 10% are already electric. That still leaves an addressable ICE market of, well, I think you can work it out for yourself. Model 3 and Y are smashing it, and benefitting from the shift to electric and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. How on earth can those two Tesla cars be "running out of steam"?
Market making is not a public service. They have a right like every other market participant to maximize their profits.
Otherwise, no one would do it.
Likewise, entities who bet against cybertruck delivery have a right to “work hard to minimize their losses”.
So yes, manipulation by big players does happen and over short periods, the options tail can wag the dog but fundamentals are really what count in the end. At the end of the day, over a long enough time scale, it’s all noise.
Last edited:
Market Makers have abilities open to them which are supposed to be prohibited by the SEC yet go unchecked only for them, NOT everyone else. How is that NOT rigging the market?
Your position on this does not make sense.
I’ve expanded on my perspective multiple times, i suggest reading those comments.
Basically I was making a narrow point about the growth rate of 3/Y sales in the medium term.
It is in the context of long term 50% compound growth.
Minor point to avoid confusion if people relisten to Drew:
Line 1 at Austin was Gen 1 4680s. It is being upgraded to produce Cybertruck cells which were/ are being produced on Line 2. Lines 3&4 will also be Cybertruck cells.
Other info from Q3:
June 16 to Oct 11 was 10 million cells off the old Line 1. Triple for annualized and we're at 30 million per year of the old generation at start of Q4. If they are 100Wh/cell that's 3 GWh. At 1344 a pack, that's 22k Cybertrucks.
However, those were only going to test vehicles and Model Y AWD, and they had 40% QoQ improvement, so we can't derive anything meaningful about target rate.
$35 for cells per kWh and $10 for battery packs, $45*41*2million = $3.7 Billion.
Or $1,845 per car.
It was most likely a typo. Regardless, he definately doesn't think that now seeing as he clarified it is Manganese multiple times six hours before your post.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
