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.
The Bot Will Drive Future Valuation of Tesla

I've been pondering over this for a few months. We all likely came to Tesla years ago to route for the acceleration of a path to a sustainble energy future via electrified vehicles and energy products. That path is well on it's way now. We then looked excitedly at adjacent ventures, mostly robotaxis, as an exciting path to grow the company's value while aligned with greenfiying the economy.

But the path toward a software stack that is at a high enough level of fidelity to "turn on" for robotaxis nationwide may still years away. While FSD progress has been good and should improve with iterations of V12, we can't ignore the rigorous statistical nature that is required to be true robotaxi. While the FSD Beta Tracker estimates of about 100 miles / critical disengagement may be biased, we know it's not near the 10,000 miles / critical disengagement we need to get to to allow the car to work as a robotaxi. My best estimate is that the software needs to reduce interventions / disengagements by a factor of 10x at minimum, if not 100x to reach that utility.

I do believe that is achievable, but on what timeframe is less clear. I do know that I will rely more on quantitative metrics too the progress than simply listening to Youtubers alone. No bias in entries can mask a 10x improvement in rates. I am excited to see this happen over the next year or two. This can add a trillion dollars in valuation.

But what I've realized is that Tesla can deliver a subset of the eventual utility of the Bot in a much shorter time frame than we may be expecting. As I did my graduate work in modeling humanoid robotics, I am explicity attentive to how well it will learn a robust dynamic balancing policy to handle diverse environments. This is essential for allow the Bot to be used at a wide volume and scale of tasks.

But, does that even need to be achieved for a company to use the bot in a profitable manner?

Let me attempt to "skate where the puck is going".

Tesla has already illustrated a highly competent hardware package, even in the video shared yesterday.


We know even outside of Tesla, that there is an acceleration of progress on deep neural nets for learning and executing a range of manipulation tasks. These bots will be able to watch a human perform a task a series of times, then be able to generally replicate it.

When I look at the hardware and software stack, and integrate it with what Tesla's AI team will be able to execute in a year or two from now, I see the Bot being able to perform a decent variety of tasks, even if limited in locomotive capabilities.

Imagine, for instance, if the Bot was only trained to perform a set of tasks in a fast food restaurant. Identifying the types of pieces of chicken, combining the various sides as per what was ordered, and putting it into the bag and giving to the customer. The perception and dexterity capabilities are already there. The bot may not be able to perform all tasks in the restaurant, but I bet it could handle 1 out of 4 employees.

Employees are expensive. In California, minimum wage is $15 / hour, so for 12 hours a day, you will spend almost $70k per year for that work.

A company would easily pay $35k / year for a Bot to replace that human work.

There are 200,000 fast food restaurants in the U.S. alone. If they are purchased for $50k with 50% gross margins, that's 5 billion dollars in gross profit. We haven't even talked about any other works in the restaurant, let alone other jobs.

The potential profit of the Bot is simply orders of magnitude higher than robotaxis, and the threshold performance is lower for many jobs. You can have a Bot that ruins 5% of the food and still be massively profitable. A 5% hiccup in a car is unacceptable.

Given all this, it seems to be the Bot might be able to start generating revenues and profits before any robotaxi services. In fact I predict it. I believe Tesla Bot will generate a billion dollars in profits before robotaxis, and never look back.

And when this happens - maybe 2-3 years from now - the market will being valuing the future growth of that market and the numbers could be staggering - adding multiple trillions to the market cap.
I'm curious. So take a look at the intro to Anthony Bourdain's "A Cook's Tour." A bot slowing folding a shirt to me looks to be many more years away from actually working in a functioning kitchen than the current FSD is from driving without a human.

Working in a kitchen not only requires the same visual to computer to action processing that the FSD computer does, but on a much more delicate level. Dicing an onion at the level of a graduate of a culinary academy is a matter of fractions of an inch. A car does not need to be controlled to that degree of specificity.

Not only that, but unlike the FSD computer, the bot will have to have auditory processing which may be easier than the visual processing but nevertheless has to be added to the mix.

Yet you think the bot is closer? There are already industrial robots which can, when fixed, handle millimeter like physical processes, I would imagine on the Tesla line the spot welding does this already. But a bot has to first orient itself in space via sensors before it can do the same thing. Right now after years of work the FSD suite is having trouble orienting itself within feet and yards.

Isn't the spatial orientation of a commercial kitchen some orders of magnitude more difficult that merely driving a car and not hitting objects?

I get the math on the market. I am not sure I see the ease of development from here.
 
If that's the case, then a major share buyback would accomplish that. Works for me. I'm actually fine with a new compensation package and share buybacks. I just don't buy the voting control story.
A buyback would cost vastly more money (More than order of magnitude more than what Tesla has currently - you are talking about hundreds of billions of dollars in actual cash) than a direct share/option grant to lift Elons stake to 25% (Which can be done via new issuance instead of using cash reserves)
 
Isn't the spatial orientation of a commercial kitchen some orders of magnitude more difficult that merely driving a car and not hitting objects?
There are fewer moving objects piloted by people who occasionally make bad decisions in a kitchen ..... hopefully....

Boring, repetitive and dangerous tasks are where Optimus will initially clock on...

Washing the dishes, peeling potatoes, telling the Gangster that the kitchen has run out of steak..

I can see a lot of Optimus Robots working in controlled environments in Tesla factories, and deciding not to join a union.....

Once Tesla has run out of jobs for Optimus to do, then they may start leasing them, or selling them.
 
Last edited:
Right. Once they are replaced with robots who is going to feed the economy with no income…. Smh…

You’ll have a bunch of robots ready to provide services with no one in line to purchase except the Rich….

Indeed, many social and ethical concerns are connected to machines doing work humans normally do/did... But the progress isn't going to stop, and we know that too.

Society continually evolves and jobs change and a new (temporary) balance is found. This has always been the case with automation and "progress"...and it doesn't actually require AI or humanoid bots.

Wheels and domestication of animals (beasts of burden, etc.) were probably some of the first examples. One guy with a wheel barrow and an ox can do the work of many men on a farm, and "put them out of work"...but then new work and specialties were found.

In the long run, nobody knows how it will turn out...it's not necessarily bad for people, but it could be. It can't be stopped on a global scale, so it's something that should be thought about and prepared for to prevent the problem you note, as well as worse potential outcomes. It's not like the whole world will ever agree to stop this ever-turning wheel of progress, so the best we can hope for is to carefully plan for and manage it.

Of course, humanity doesn't exactly have a good track record for planning for much more than "tomorrow", so we might be doomed anyway...
 
Has there been any discussion somewhere about the biggest flaw in this whole debacle?

If Elon owned 100% of Tesla and fully controlled whatever AI and robots Tesla built, exactly how would that save the world from whatever bad would happen if he didn't?

How would that protect us from the Chinese, North Koreans or for that matter any owners of companies that are in this sector?

Even assuming that Tesla gets there first. Is Elon, and so many others it seems, really thinking that no one else will ever solve this? Be it one year, three years or a decade later.

How would Elon controlling Teslas AI save the world from whatever bad Elon thinks others will do with AI?
Don’t fret. We can’t be saved by anyone.
 
I watched some vids and it seemed to be a bunch who did not (or were unable to) charge at home, overnight, and just expected to be able to supercharge in whatever range they had left. Well, they got caught off-guard, for sure, but I'm sure there were some traveling, but expecting to "just" make it.

Humans are terrible at estimating some things. Many just take too many chances.

No news articles about how many ran out of gas.
I was at a hotel the other night, in some dinky town, in the middle of nowhere, during record cold weather, and there were three Teslas in the parking lot. Color me pleasantly surprised. None plugged in. There are two sets of superchargers about 20 miles in different directions from that hotel. Yeah, in the middle if nowhere, two different sets if superchargers less than 50 miles from each other and a number of other choices too.

I left before dawn, so maybe they got stuck there but I’d bet money those three got where they needed to go. By the look of the cars, these car owners knew how to move around the planet and not get stranded.
 
I am honestly surprised that people are expecting, or wanting, a traditional company & CEO after all this time...

For a "car comapny" Elon has thought differently about:

- What makes an electric car desirable (style performance)
- How to design, build, and market that electric car (pack design, motor/inverter/compute)
- What autonomous driving brings to the table (not needed for a car, but first mover $advantage$ to perfecting is huge)
- The value of massive vertical integration (controls costs, reduces risk, controls capability)
- Radical new approaches to manufacturing (gigacasting. steel bending, etc..)
- The value of agile process and continual improvement (not stuck in model yrs)
- The best way to part ways from traditional auto-driving companies and forge new ground (bye bye mobile eye and NVIDIA)
- The value fully instrumented computer-integrated vehicles brings to the table (massive data collection for improvement/training)
- The value of fully connected and remotely updatable vehicles (no need for dealers visits for fixes/recalls... regular new features)
- The value of integrated software platforms (you control it all, not beholden to OEMs that don't interoperate well)
- The vaule of software expertise (can update/fix in hours, seamless operations)
- The value of energy storage (commercial/utility scale, home, superchargers)
- The value of utility platforms (auto bidder, provide utility scale value)
- How to build next gen cells (form factor, volumetric efficiency, tabless for heat reduction)
- The value of next-gen cell manufaturing (dry electrode reduces footprint, energy usage)
- The value of solar generation (signifacnt player in growing industry, radical new residential approach)
- The value of in-house metallurgy expertise (allows megacasting)
- The value of rapidly building out a massive charging network (they own it, ease of use, best-in class, generates income)
- The value of allowing open/free access to intellectual property (NACS being a standard cements them as primary mover)
- The value of rapid development pace (a non-moat differantiator)
- The value of AGI (applicable to far beyond car: optimus, AI)
- Unique approaches to accomplishing AGI (training sets, neural networks)
-The value of a humanoid robot (potentially massive for commercial use, valuable even if used primarily internally)
- The need for custom actuator design expertise (robotic capability/integration not otherwise possible)
- The need/value for custom silicon/ASICs (compact, power efficient, major compute power)
- The value of massive compute for training (large traditional AI cluster, DOJO)
- The value of design your own custom compute hardware (DOJO compute customHW design)
- ...
Yeah, but what else has he really done for us, huh?

(insert Life of Bryan sketch here*)
/s.
*(please don't really.)
/Ni
 
Last edited:
The Bot Will Drive Future Valuation of Tesla

I've been pondering over this for a few months. We all likely came to Tesla years ago to route for the acceleration of a path to a sustainble energy future via electrified vehicles and energy products. That path is well on it's way now. We then looked excitedly at adjacent ventures, mostly robotaxis, as an exciting path to grow the company's value while aligned with greenfiying the economy.

But the path toward a software stack that is at a high enough level of fidelity to "turn on" for robotaxis nationwide may still years away. While FSD progress has been good and should improve with iterations of V12, we can't ignore the rigorous statistical nature that is required to be true robotaxi. While the FSD Beta Tracker estimates of about 100 miles / critical disengagement may be biased, we know it's not near the 10,000 miles / critical disengagement we need to get to to allow the car to work as a robotaxi. My best estimate is that the software needs to reduce interventions / disengagements by a factor of 10x at minimum, if not 100x to reach that utility.

I do believe that is achievable, but on what timeframe is less clear. I do know that I will rely more on quantitative metrics too the progress than simply listening to Youtubers alone. No bias in entries can mask a 10x improvement in rates. I am excited to see this happen over the next year or two. This can add a trillion dollars in valuation.

But what I've realized is that Tesla can deliver a subset of the eventual utility of the Bot in a much shorter time frame than we may be expecting. As I did my graduate work in modeling humanoid robotics, I am explicity attentive to how well it will learn a robust dynamic balancing policy to handle diverse environments. This is essential for allow the Bot to be used at a wide volume and scale of tasks.

But, does that even need to be achieved for a company to use the bot in a profitable manner?


Let me attempt to "skate where the puck is going".

Tesla has already illustrated a highly competent hardware package, even in the video shared yesterday.


We know even outside of Tesla, that there is an acceleration of progress on deep neural nets for learning and executing a range of manipulation tasks. These bots will be able to watch a human perform a task a series of times, then be able to generally replicate it.

When I look at the hardware and software stack, and integrate it with what Tesla's AI team will be able to execute in a year or two from now, I see the Bot being able to perform a decent variety of tasks, even if limited in locomotive capabilities.

Imagine, for instance, if the Bot was only trained to perform a set of tasks in a fast food restaurant. Identifying the types of pieces of chicken, combining the various sides as per what was ordered, and putting it into the bag and giving to the customer. The perception and dexterity capabilities are already there. The bot may not be able to perform all tasks in the restaurant, but I bet it could handle 1 out of 4 employees.

Employees are expensive. In California, minimum wage is $15 / hour, so for 12 hours a day, you will spend almost $70k per year for that work.


A company would easily pay $35k / year for a Bot to replace that human work.

There are 200,000 fast food restaurants in the U.S. alone. If they are purchased for $50k with 50% gross margins, that's 5 billion dollars in gross profit. We haven't even talked about any other works in the restaurant, let alone other jobs.

The potential profit of the Bot is simply orders of magnitude higher than robotaxis, and the threshold performance is lower for many jobs. You can have a Bot that ruins 5% of the food and still be massively profitable. A 5% hiccup in a car is unacceptable.

Given all this, it seems to be the Bot might be able to start generating revenues and profits before any robotaxi services. In fact I predict it. I believe Tesla Bot will generate a billion dollars in profits before robotaxis, and never look back.

And when this happens - maybe 2-3 years from now - the market will being valuing the future growth of that market and the numbers could be staggering - adding multiple trillions to the market cap.
The following absolutely is not directed toward any one poster, not even the creator of the above. Over the years in this thread I have read many similar words, and doubtless they will continue to flourish. It was the combination of such a prognostication with The Great Gretzky's maxim that forced my hand here.

Rather, then, this is a plea. Do not skate to where the puck is going - rather, skate to where it is going to be going. A second derivative of an action's consequence, as it were.
That 200,000 number presumably includes McDonalds and Wendy's and Burger King and KFC and......===> ∞. What do you think another outfit's...all the other outfits'... responses will be when a competitor demonstrates 50% margins? How long do you think it will take until 50% become 40%...30...10...market clearing margin? A: As quickly as a cockroach goes Pop! in the oil vat.

The industry never is going to see that $5bn of excess profits. Never. BUT: the consuming public will see it. The societal problem to address is whether that $5bn boost is greater or less than the societal loss from the diminished units of labor no longer employed flipping the burgers. And scooping out the roaches.

Microeconomics count.
 
Indeed, many social and ethical concerns are connected to machines doing work humans normally do/did... But the progress isn't going to stop, and we know that too.

Society continually evolves and jobs change and a new (temporary) balance is found. This has always been the case with automation and "progress"...and it doesn't actually require AI or humanoid bots.

Wheels and domestication of animals (beasts of burden, etc.) were probably some of the first examples. One guy with a wheel barrow and an ox can do the work of many men on a farm, and "put them out of work"...but then new work and specialties were found.

In the long run, nobody knows how it will turn out...it's not necessarily bad for people, but it could be. It can't be stopped on a global scale, so it's something that should be thought about and prepared for to prevent the problem you note, as well as worse potential outcomes. It's not like the whole world will ever agree to stop this ever-turning wheel of progress, so the best we can hope for is to carefully plan for and manage it.

Of course, humanity doesn't exactly have a good track record for planning for much more than "tomorrow", so we might be doomed anyway...

Lets just hope there is a NEO amongst us....
 
  • Like
Reactions: EQC_
Right. Once they are replaced with robots who is going to feed the economy with no income…. Smh…

You’ll have a bunch of robots ready to provide services with no one in line to purchase except the Rich….

Perhaps you could take a minute or two and go read through the past few years worth of posts in this thread to see if your question might have already been answered. There is a Search option, if you have any talent for using that sort of thing to find answers. Graze through the sub-threads as well. Some of them might be spot on that very topic.

Alternatively, you could go through everything Elon has said in interviews on the topic, or has written about the matter over the same time period and maybe you will find the answer to your query, and more information that could avoid more questions like this.

Or, just blunder in, clueless, and see if you might get those who have done to take on the task of bringing you up to speed, because you can't be bothered to do any homework on your own.

Edit: To add, Search for Tony Seba on youtube as well. A few hours of his presentations will bring you up to speed on Abundance, Disruption, and the transformation we are entering into.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps you could take a minute or two and go read through the past few years worth of posts in this thread to see if your question might have already been answered. There is a Search option, if you have any talent for using that sort of thing to find answers. Graze through the sub-threads as well. Some of them might be spot on that very topic.

Alternatively, you could go through everything Elon has said in interviews on the topic, or has written about the matter over the same time period and maybe you will find the answer to your query, and more information that could avoid more questions like this.

Or, just blunder in, clueless, and see if you might get those who have done to take on the task of bringing you up to speed, because you can't be bothered to do any homework on your own.

I'll just carry on clueless. Thanks.
 
Damn man, Elon Xeets even made Rob to quit

Jokes aside, good luck on your next endeavors Rob, you have been a wonderful resource and the time before bed will get sadder without hearing your voice almost everyday

He said he’ll be back when there’s big news, so there’s that to look forward to. (And for those that didn’t pick up on Skater’s sarcasm, Rob says he is still long and his views on Tesla and TSLA have not changed).

Rob’s been a really level head and helped keep me from getting overly emotional about the stock swings. Fortunately I think I’m numb to them now…