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.
So much talk of a Ludicrous Model 3 coming very soon

Model 3 Ludicrous upgraded bucketed seats SPOTTED

Rumored improvements:
- More bolstering for side support
- Logo in seat back
- Different head rest for extra support

1705466653569.png



1705466583213.png
 
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

Exactly this.

Sad to see Rob go. I recall fondly the early days when Rob and Dave Lee were the only YouTube channels I watched regularly for Tesla/TSLA content. And listened to Ryan McCaffrey's Ride the Lightning weekly podcast on Sundays. Back then, I couldn't get enough Tesla content.

Now, as Rob mentioned, there are dozens of YouTube channels regurgitating the same news daily (and in some cases multiple times per day). Some are excellent (I really like Electrifed, Now You Know and Best In Tesla for both content and production value). And some 'newer' contributors provide good content and analyses. Herbert Ong, SMR and Farzad stand out for me, but I don't find myself watching these daily.

Thanks Rob for your years of steady contributions and best wishes for huge success with your new investment fund!!!
 
To me Rob was the best resource outside this thread for daily Tesla and TSLA updates for years. I remember finding his podcast before he started YouTube and loved listening in the car, and then later in the Tesla. Personally I never was able to let go of reading this thread, but if I had, his daily updates would have been absolutely essential.

I love Rob's calm balanced approach. Emotions run so high with Tesla and Elon and frankly I see it as a matter of perspective. Forest for trees and all that. Rob is a great voice of reason in that sense.

I believe he reads this thread based on his content over the years, so ...

Thank you Rob! I enjoyed your work and perspective so much during these most incredible years of Tesla growth. It was an amazing time and you were a big part of it for me.

The beautiful thing is that now it really feels like we are starting a new era of Tesla history. So many products and technologies will be coming in the next 5 or so years, and the scale of growth will be massive. Tesla in 10 years will be an absolute juggernaut in many areas as the transport/robotics/energy cornerstone of Elon's family of global enterprises. It's going to be absolutely ridiculous.

What a time to be alive. Thanks to all here for your contributions over the years and thanks to Rob! Cheers to the bulls!
 
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.
An additional consideration is that you don’t need a humanoid robot for a lot of tasks, and thus can get a better return on investment with a simpler robot.
E.g. I’ve been in restaurants where a robot took part of the workload of the waiter: It was basically an autonomous cart that could bring the dirty dishes back to the kitchen, the waiter just needed to place the dirty plates on the autonomous cart.
 
An additional consideration is that you don’t need a humanoid robot for a lot of tasks, and thus can get a better return on investment with a simpler robot.
E.g. I’ve been in restaurants where a robot took part of the workload of the waiter: It was basically an autonomous cart that could bring the dirty dishes back to the kitchen, the waiter just needed to place the dirty plates on the autonomous cart.
I bet that robot was as costly as Optimus will be when scaled, though?

The clue is really the generality of the humanoid robot - paving the way for close-to-infinite scale!
 
Germany is what, some uber tiny fraction of Tesla sales? Will just be a blip on margins.
Just a sample from the website just now:

cheapest Model Y:
Belgium: €43.970
Netherlands: €43.993
Germany: €42.990
France: €42.990

I'm gonna go with all EU seeing the price cut.

Also interesting is that this makes the cheapest model 3 the same price as the Y in the EU, at least in Germany and Netherlands as far as I've checked.
 
Warning: this is long.

12 years ago, I was a very early Tesla investor. That same year, I received Tesla's email entitled "Infinite Mile Warranty for Model S Drive Units" - I'm going to quote it because it was the critical point to me doubling down on Elon. This is a cut/paste from the email sent to me. Re-read what Elon said back then and the 'why' behind what he said:

"Infinite Mile Warranty
The Tesla Model S drive unit warranty has been increased to match that of the battery pack. That means the 85 kWh Model S, our most popular model by far, now has an 8 year, infinite mile warranty on both the battery pack and drive unit. There is also no limit on the number of owners during the warranty period.​
Moreover, the warranty extension will apply retroactively to all Model S vehicles ever produced. In hindsight, this should have been our policy from the beginning of the Model S program. If we truly believe that electric motors are fundamentally more reliable than gasoline engines, with far fewer moving parts and no oily residue or combustion byproducts to gum up the works, then our warranty policy should reflect that.
To investors in Tesla, I must acknowledge that this will have a moderately negative effect on Tesla earnings in the short term, as our warranty reserves will necessarily have to increase above current levels. This is amplified by the fact that we are doing so retroactively, not just for new customers. However, by doing the right thing for Tesla vehicle owners at this early stage of our company, I am confident that it will work out well in the long term.

Who, in their right mind, applies a retroactive, infinite mile warranty, to cars they have already sold because "...doing the right thing..." will "...work out well in the long term".

I bought more Elon. He just happened to be driving Tesla which means I bought more TSLA.


I was one of the first Model 3 reservation holders on April 1st of 2016. I canceled it due to quality concerns. 10 years later, I finally bought a Model YP, my first Tesla. In the same year that it was the best-selling car in the world. It also happened to be Electric. Let that sink in for a second.

If you want to get to know Elon, read the court transcript from his compensation trial. Observations:
  • Only amazingly brilliant and CONFIDENT people can respond to Plaintiff questions, under oath, with such certainty.
  • He brilliantly navigates Plaintiff's attorneys maneuverings.
  • He doesn't take the easy way out and 'plead the 5th'
This Transcript is an amazing look into Elon's brilliant mind. He wraps the attorneys around his finger. (and this actually has nothing to do whether the outcome is that he wins or loses). It is very long. The more I read, the more I respect. Here's one exerpt:

"Plaintiffs’ lawyer, Attorney Greg Varallo: Mr. Musk, welcome back to Delaware. Nice to see you again. I hope your travels weren’t too difficult, and I appreciate your giving us this time today. I know you’re occupied in many different directions.
Elon Musk: Yes, I might be a little slower than otherwise since I flew in overnight on a red-eye, so...
Q. I appreciate it. You are the Technoking of Tesla; is that right, sir?
A. Among other things.
Q. And you came up with that title yourself; correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And, for the record, you were stone-cold sober when you came up with the record — with the title; right?
A. Yes.
It’s always nice to see lawyers have fun at work. Like when they get to ask one of the world’s wealthiest men under oath if he was “stone cold sober” when appointing himself “Technoking”, a real thing that Elon Musk did. Imagine writing that SEC filing!
Q. And Tesla filed an 8-K announcing that appointment because you wanted to follow the process required for a title change. Is that also true, sir?
A. Well, it was more of a title increment, but yes.
Q. And you didn’t consult with the board before giving yourself the new title; right?
A. No, I believe we did consult with the board.

Amateurs.

Finally:
As a long term shareholder, I am actually coming around to the view that Tesla should be a bit more like apple, and just not announce anything.
Cliff's absolutely spot-on. I've been doing this for about 10 years now and it works. There are too many turns, too much unexpected, too many pivots, too many high-class problems. If you fall into the trap of announcing before your product is ready, everyone hates you for being 'late' when you're just trying to make sure that your product is great --- and even more importantly, the timing to the market must be accurate. It's the only way to disrupt and to provide world class products that don't 'chase' the market. I got Apple to chase me for several years. That was a hoot :) Tesla, not so much. If you announce too early it takes you years to deliver (uhh, FSD). If you wait until you have the disruptive product, and then announce that it will deliver Friday, you win. (iPhone).

Consider this. Before the pandemic, all of the roadmaps for all of the products, and all of the contracts, said you had to deliver x, y, and z. The the panedmic happened, no one wanted to touch anything, and contactless, plexiglass, and QR codes IMMEDIATELY became the rage. Every company with contracted work failed because they couldn't get out of their contracts fast enough. Every company that maintained control, immediately pivoted and had contactless solutions, multiple drive thrus, support for outdoor seating, etc. and thrived.
 
I bet that robot was as costly as Optimus will be when scaled, though?

The clue is really the generality of the humanoid robot - paving the way for close-to-infinite scale!
I think that robot was an order of magnitude cheaper than Optimus. Optimus will have scale advantages, but so will all other humanoid and non-humanoid robots. Optimus will have to compete on ROI with those other robots.
 
I don’t understand what’s all the fuss about . If Elon wants 25% shares , just ask the shortzees, they are well versed in creating new shares out of thin air and keep them going forever . SEC is perfectly alright with MMs creativity . Elon gets what he wants , stock won’t need dilution and share hodlers are happy . Everyone wins.

Nice sentiment, but exactly what short shares don't have is voting rights:

"Voting rights always remain with the owner of the shares. This is either the original investor that bought them or the investor that buys them in the open market when the shares are sold in the open market during a short sale, which is agreed upon when opening a margin account."​

What Voting Rights Do Shorted Shares Have? - Investopedia › Investing › Stocks
 
I think that robot was an order of magnitude cheaper than Optimus. Optimus will have scale advantages, but so will all other humanoid and non-humanoid robots. Optimus will have to compete on ROI with those other robots.
The autonomous "cart-waiter-bot" is indeed a lot cheaper than Optimus. I've been to a similar restaurant and it was basically a heavy duty Roomba with a cupboard on top of it. We're talking $2k to $5k as opposed to Optimus (aim: $25k, only possible because of mass-manufacturing and only concentrating on one model (for supply chain and scaling reasons)).

However, as a restaurant owner, would you rather:
a) get the cart-bot for returning dishes/bringing meals, get the roomba for cleaning the floor, get the other bot for another task, etc? The total costs of these specific bots adds up and all can break down. Also when not in use, they have to be stored (and possibly charged if untethered).

b) get the Optimus, that can carry plates/dishes, sweep the floor, chop vegetables, etc. (and once accepted by society show new arrivals their tables/seats, take their coats, ...) ? After hours the bot can even drive home with the owner (passenger seat.... at first*) and do some useful tasks there.

Sort of like business people nowadays get an expensive phone, write it off as a business expense, but then use it for private purposes also.

Business owners will not be able to resist getting an Optimus and using it at home too. Once seen in action, Optimus will sell itself (a lot more than Tesla cars IMO, because however nice a Tesla is to drive, a $10k car can still get me from A to B. Optimus has no alternatives.)


TL;DR: there is unlimited demand for Optimus. As an investor speaking I hope Tesla doesn't sell them at too low of a price.

---

*Interesting legal question (in the hypothesis that FSD is not achieved before Optimus is a great human imitator): can my Optimus drive my car if it can pass the current driving license tests? (low bar) If not, that's speciesist. (Legal note: driving rights are currently only allowed to be given to a person of age, which is somebody that is born x amount of years ago (differs per country) and has not died. The bot does not qualify. Will be very interesting to see the legal framework develop around humanoid robots. As an attorney and Asimov-reader my mind tends to wander.)
 
Last edited:
Having sadly read a bunch of random comments on reddit today about Tesla, I have to vent a bit:

I am so sick of the negativity, cynicism, and outright lies and FUD that is out there. As a long term shareholder, I am actually coming around to the view that Tesla should be a bit more like apple, and just not announce anything. I love seeing updates about FSD and optimus, and the potential model 2, but thats we wanting a short-term sugar rush of a slightly higher stock price today or this month or year.

If I was Elon, I would be tempted to keep whatever is next from Tesla massively under wraps. Why play nice with wall st? Why give the media what they want? As long as Tesla can get the personnel they want to work on FSD and Optimus, I think they should just work away under wraps. We know they CAN keep things secret (the roadster was a total shock), so why not double-down on that.

In my dreams, Tesla already has a design of a Tesla Van, a Tesla Bus and a Model 2, and are working round-the-clock on making them super cheap to build, and super awesome products. I am very happy for them to just deny everything until the day they suddenly start taking orders for them. Why give the rest of the world any warning or heads-up on whats under development?

I'm looking forward to Q4 earnings call, and will hang on every word. But if Elon's answer to everything is 'this is not the time for new product announcements' I'll be fine with that. Cybertruck announcement to release was way too long. Happy for it to be 95% shorter. I trust Tesla to design a great product. Hopefully earnings call is just great updates on ramping of megapack, cybertruck and maybe the semi. That will be more than enough to keep long term investors content.
Sure, but it's no different from the last ten years, OK it comes in waves, but has been pretty persistent

Many of us here HODLed through these dark times (for me 2016 - 2021), and had the last laugh

Tesla is in a dramatically better place than November 2021, and yet the stock is 50% of what is was back then

Knowledge is power, or in our case, future wealth...
 
Sure, but it's no different from the last ten years, OK it comes in waves, but has been pretty persistent

Many of us here HODLed through these dark times (for me 2016 - 2021), and had the last laugh

Tesla is in a dramatically better place than November 2021, and yet the stock is 50% of what is was back then

Knowledge is power, or in our case, future wealth...

It sooo easy to HODL TSLA. As long as Tesla is growing fast profitably, it’s difficult to imagine a situation where Tesla would be worth less in a couple of years than it is now.
Just the automotive part alone will sustain that profitable growth until 2030. And then there’s those other profitable multi-billion dollar segments that are coming online.
Playing with options is just a way to kill the time between now and then.
 
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


Oh no :(. This almost feels like losing a friend. Noone as balanced, intelligent, well-researched, and non-clickbaity out there. Good luck and hoping he does an episode once in a while.
 
Oh no :(. This almost feels like losing a friend. Noone as balanced, intelligent, well-researched, and non-clickbaity out there. Good luck and hoping he does an episode once in a while.

I agree. The balanced non-clickbaity part was excellent!

But there are other with regular news episodes - would it be OK to share your best ones when markets are closed?

Brighter with Herbert - interesting guests - and regular roundtable with other Hyper Bulls:


Electrified - news summary:


Randy Kirk - interesting guests and regular news summary:


Regular co-hosts with much knowledge such as Bradford Ferguson and Larry Goldberg are appreciated by me.
 
Last edited:
there goes the margin....

I'm getting more and more confident Elon was not joking and we are going under 12% margin this year.

ICE dies in 2024!

🍿


edit: some context, Tesla dropped prices in Germany, again.
Do you think that 12% is for all products? How about MegaPacks? What about Supercharger sales and usage revenue? Remember that Tesla is more than just a car company, and some of those other products are becoming material.
 
A few pages back we were discussing training Optimus using people who had expertise in the task being trained (an “expert shirt folder” was the example there).

It just occurred to me that I don’t think this is necessary.

Just as AlphaZero (AlphaGo? Can’t remember which) was set up to digitally play against itself for neural net training, which made it vastly better, you could also do this with tasks.

As long as you have a way of scoring each attempt with some sort of penalty function (using metrics such as time taken to fold the shirt, minimizing limb movement, number of creases, etc) you could set the bot up to train itself by doing tasks over and over again, and scoring the result of each.

So you start by getting the NN good enough to perform the task, then let it do the task autonomously over and over and over again. Because each attempt will be slightly different, it could evaluate the metrics of each attempt when finished (maybe a human is needed to score how good the resulting folded shirt looks), and save the “playthrough” for attempts that happened to “fold the shirt” better than its current capabilities.

Then, after 100 or 1000 saved runs, take the data and retrain the net. And boom: now the bot is better at the task.

Such a thing could be done nearly fully autonomously. Not an AI expert but based on my knowledge of it, I think this would work.

It’s analogous to how we get better: we do something a lot of times, and our brains pick up on small details that make the attempt better. We then use those little tricks the next time and get better at a task over time.

Yes it helps to be taught initially by an expert in some field, but the other way to get better is to practice something over and over again, evaluate each attempt, and use the tiny pieces of each attempt that were better than your best.
 
Last edited:
An additional consideration is that you don’t need a humanoid robot for a lot of tasks, and thus can get a better return on investment with a simpler robot.
E.g. I’ve been in restaurants where a robot took part of the workload of the waiter: It was basically an autonomous cart that could bring the dirty dishes back to the kitchen, the waiter just needed to place the dirty plates on the autonomous cart.
KLM, among others, uses those autonomous carts in their airport lounge at AMS. I was told by a staffer FWIW that this expedient allowed a 25% reduction of roving cleaning staff, mostly because customers searched for those carts. The occasion for that report was that I carried some plates to one of those carts, together with a couple of young adolescents, a category heretofore rarely observed voluntarily cleaning tables.

Without question numerous varieties of automated execution of routine tasks has been growing rapidly. Medicine, most dramatically surgery, has been transformed almost globally.

While we speculate about Optimus we should specifically examine the potential for generalized humanoid robots, especially when specific applications might typically be more efficiently and cheaply executed by purpose-specific robotic solutions, already ubiquitous.

Until there is competitive advantage to humanoid solutions what use is Optimus?
That is a serious question, not rhetorical. when we can answer that question we can seriously estimate total potential markets.