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

[Krugerrand]

At what share price will Elon have to sell shares that he has pledged to cover his loans?

Really? This is the long ago path you want to walk down and regurgitate? Next you’ll be wanting us to believe you can brick a Tesla by sneezing.

Short it some more. Is advice.

 

[The Accountant]

At what share price will Elon have to sell shares that he has pledged to cover his loans?

Tesla limits the loan value to shares pledged value at 25% to mitigate forced liquidations.
I estimate the shares would need to drop to $80 for there to be an issue and if it did drop to this, Elon has more shares he can put up as collateral to avoid liquidation. My estimates are based on the review of public documents filed with the SEC but I could be missing some additional data.

 

[unk45]

Either Volvo's parent company Geely is getting Polestar cheap, or Polestar isn't a Tesla killer

…

Maybe both. Geely has been very ambitious but both Polestar and Zeeker plus Lynk &Co models are close to badge engineered versions of the Geely platforms:

Vehicle Architecture – Zhejiang Geely Holding Group

Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (ZGH), is a global mobility technology group headquartered in the city of Hangzhou in south-east China’s Zhejiang Province.

zgh.com

Their enthusiasm to establish new brands has thus far not been proven. Volvo retains operational influence in part because of its technical strength.
in the meantime the Daimler JV for Smart, buying into AB Volvo (I.e. Volvo trucks and commercial vehicles), LEVC etc …
has Geely moving at breakneck speed but with huge investment needs and relatively fewer inherent technical skills.

As with several others the jury is out. In the long history of Volvo vehicles the company has moved from crisis to crisis, often continuing high customer satisfaction but never with enough scale to become profitable on a consistent basis.

As with Saab and GM, Volvo with Ford and more…the potential has always seemed obvious, realization another thing.

Right now there is deep Tesla FUD, worsened by direct political attacks causing paranoia among many. Of course, ‘just because you’re paranoid does not mean they’re not out to get you’. It is helpful for us to clearly understand the. Difference between Geely and Tesla.

Then consider Toyota, flitting from hybrids to hydrogen, to BEVs for a few models, now realizing ammonia is a better solution. We all know they are correct on that ammonia solution, so long as the objective is to give lung cancer and other ailments so quickly that they'll not know it was a BAD idea!

From major OEM cases one by one they are proving their inability to comete with well-designed BEV. Bizarrely BMW seems to be doing better than the others and Stellantis is doing well with EU commercial vehicles, for that matter Daimler is doing a little there too, including in the NA truck market. Those point out the occasional bright spot but not really broad success.

Globally it really is Tesla and BYD for vehicles, all others have small pieces, only Tesla has built infrastructure to support sales; by opening their infrastructure they appear to be encouraging other OEM competitors, and they are , but…every single successful competitive charge reminds the user what OEM actually supports the product, Tesla!

When we consider idiotic font size ‘recalls’, bizarre cancellation of Starlink contracts and the Delaware Chsncery Court case and decision…all together those are trying to stop progress in multiple ways all developed and/or led by the same aggressive, flawed immigrant.
It would behoove us all to understand how hard it is to compete with Tesla, with the aforementioned Geely as a case in point .

Success in these arenas does demand highly skilled engineering coupled with determination. There are three stellar examples Tesla, CATL and BYD. (We’d have other names were we to include solar panels, wind power and control infrastructure).
Rather than complain we might want to understand common elements, including not least that the three CEO’s know and admire each other partly because all three are engineers at their core.

 

[CHGolferJim]

Sorry if this is a repost, but just in case it hadn't:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1753106358608736570

It's a petition letter to the board of directors.

While I agree with most of the points made in the letter, at the moment I feel we may have the best of both worlds with the court action enabling the Board to put a plan together that avoids the overhang of Elon having to sell a massive amount of shares to pay taxes (as the old plan entails). I had that on my list of major threats to stock performance over the next few years.

I x’d Merz and Elon that message a few days ago, and so can’t sign the letter. I would also like to see a written proposal to shareholders (vetted by Legal) explaining the pros and cons of moving incorporation to Texas before having an opinion about that.

 

[Usain]

You're drifting off into the weeds here. Geofencing doesn't solve all of the edge cases which will come up. Things like missing manhole covers, or semi trailers falling off a bridge above you aren't inside that fence.

I think you're conflating v12's new abilities with the Waymo/LIDAR approach, which depends upon hi-def mapping (hence the need to geofence to keep the dataset managable). We already know this didn't work: just ask the woman who was hit by another car, and thrown underneath a Waymo car. No LIDAR in the undercarriage though... didn't think of that, did they?

That's an edge case, and not one which can be fixed by geofencing. Indeed, with the Tesla approach to data gathering, the smaller the domain the less data will be collected. So geofencing would make FSD worse. The issue is when Tesla take legal responsibility for unforseen events. That's more than just a technical issue, it involved insurance, liability, local laws and appetite for risk (clearly, SFO moved early with Waymo, now are shying away).

I disagree.

Of course Geofencing doesn't solve all of the edge cases. But you don't have to solve them all to have a robotaxi that is safer than human-driven Uber.

To have a robotaxi in a geofenced area, you need to be able to navigate the streets in that area really well. And oversampling to that area would accomplish it. It would not make FSD worse. It would be the same FSD as everywhere else, but it would be better in that area because of extra training that concentrates on that area. We are all better drivers in our home town because we drive there all the time and we have picked up on all the subtleties of the roads and traffic there. This is the same idea.

Waymo has actually proven that geofenced robotaxi works with a pretty good overall safety record. They just haven't proven they can do it profitably. But geofenced Tesla robotaxi will be profitable very quickly as their costs would be much lower and FSD would eventually perform better.

 

[2daMoon]

To have a robotaxi in a geofenced area, you need to be able to navigate the streets in that area really well. And oversampling to that area would accomplish it. It would not make FSD worse. It would be the same FSD as everywhere else, but it would be better in that area because of extra training that concentrates on that area. We are all better drivers in our home town because we drive there all the time and we have picked up on all the subtleties of the roads and traffic there. This is the same idea.

Waymo has actually proven that geofenced robotaxi works with a pretty good overall safety record. They just haven't proven they can do it profitably. But geofenced Tesla robotaxi will be profitable very quickly as their costs would be much lower and FSD would eventually perform better.

The flip-side of the underlined statement is how the majority of collisions occur close to home (50-70 percent within 5-10 miles). Though an autonomous platform should not find itself falling into the trap of "familiarity breeds contempt" the way humans can and do.

An issue with geofencing is the possibility of some aspect of the software reaching a point where it assumes something to always be true. As long as that can be carefully avoided, opening one geographic area at a time could provide a proving-ground for autonomy to expand from a regulatory perspective.

In the long run, the aim should remain to have the AI deal with the world in an unrestricted manner in order to better duplicate and improve upon human capabilities.

 

[Snerruc]

I thought we were betting on interest rates coming down.

With the current strength of the economy, it is unlikely that there will be a fate decrease. Ironically for the zero rate people, higher rates seem to have made for a stronger economy.

 

[Krugerrand]

I disagree.

Of course Geofencing doesn't solve all of the edge cases. But you don't have to solve them all to have a robotaxi that is safer than human-driven Uber.

To have a robotaxi in a geofenced area, you need to be able to navigate the streets in that area really well. And oversampling to that area would accomplish it. It would not make FSD worse. It would be the same FSD as everywhere else, but it would be better in that area because of extra training that concentrates on that area. We are all better drivers in our home town because we drive there all the time and we have picked up on all the subtleties of the roads and traffic there. This is the same idea.

Waymo has actually proven that geofenced robotaxi works with a pretty good overall safety record. They just haven't proven they can do it profitably. But geofenced Tesla robotaxi will be profitable very quickly as their costs would be much lower and FSD would eventually perform better.

I object to shortcuts. Geofencing seems to me to be a shortcut with obvious limitations that don’t solve the problems that need to be solved. It’s akin to using an ICE platform to make an EV - yeah, works but has limitations that keeps it from being compelling enough to solve the larger problem - making it compelling on enough metrics, including pricing, to get everyone to buy one.

I just had a several hour debate with my father, who is getting to an age where he’s concerned driving will become unavailable to him for many age related reasons. Geofencing isn’t going to be enough for him for many reasons that may or may not apply to everyone his age.

Tesla is trying to solve for everyone, not just a specific group of people. The mission is for the world, not for people in select cities.

 

[Ellec]

Either Volvo's parent company Geely is getting Polestar cheap, or Polestar isn't a Tesla killer

Volvo prepares to call it quits on Polestar

Volvo said it is ready to call it quits on Polestar and is prepared to stop funding the company altogether while simultaneously handing over responsibility to Geely, the Chinese company that is the parent company of the Swedish automaker.

www.teslarati.com

There has been a Polestar sitting inside my local shopping centre (mall) for years on display, never seen anyone look at it, not sure why it's sitting there inside the actual centre. I've seen about 3 on the road in the last year say, whereas I see 4-5 Tesla's every day at least. It's starting to remind me of smart phones, if you are going electric you choose Tesla (iPhone) or for something cheap a Chinese one (Android phones). Every one else is an also ran.

 

[Singuy]

Either Volvo's parent company Geely is getting Polestar cheap, or Polestar isn't a Tesla killer

Volvo prepares to call it quits on Polestar

Volvo said it is ready to call it quits on Polestar and is prepared to stop funding the company altogether while simultaneously handing over responsibility to Geely, the Chinese company that is the parent company of the Swedish automaker.

www.teslarati.com

We should have an inverse Ross Gerber etf.

 

[philw1776]

Maybe both. Geely has been very ambitious but both Polestar and Zeeker plus Lynk &Co models are close to badge engineered versions of the Geely platforms:

Vehicle Architecture – Zhejiang Geely Holding Group

Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (ZGH), is a global mobility technology group headquartered in the city of Hangzhou in south-east China’s Zhejiang Province.

zgh.com

Their enthusiasm to establish new brands has thus far not been proven. Volvo retains operational influence in part because of its technical strength.
in the meantime the Daimler JV for Smart, buying into AB Volvo (I.e. Volvo trucks and commercial vehicles), LEVC etc …
has Geely moving at breakneck speed but with huge investment needs and relatively fewer inherent technical skills.

As with several others the jury is out. In the long history of Volvo vehicles the company has moved from crisis to crisis, often continuing high customer satisfaction but never with enough scale to become profitable on a consistent basis.

As with Saab and GM, Volvo with Ford and more…the potential has always seemed obvious, realization another thing.

Right now there is deep Tesla FUD, worsened by direct political attacks causing paranoia among many. Of course, ‘just because you’re paranoid does not mean they’re not out to get you’. It is helpful for us to clearly understand the. Difference between Geely and Tesla.

Then consider Toyota, flitting from hybrids to hydrogen, to BEVs for a few models, now realizing methane is a better solution. We all know they are correct on that methane solution, so long as the objective is to blow up the vehicles before they kill users./s

From major OEM cases one by one they are proving their inability to comete with well-designed BEV. Bizarrely BMW seems to be doing better than the others and Stellantis is doing well with EU commercial vehicles, for that matter Daimler is doing a little there too, including in the NA truck market. Those point out the occasional bright spot but not really broad success.

Globally it really is Tesla and BYD for vehicles, all others have small pieces, only Tesla has built infrastructure to support sales; by opening their infrastructure they appear to be encouraging other OEM competitors, and they are , but…every single successful competitive charge reminds the user what OEM actually supports the product, Tesla!

When we consider idiotic font size ‘recalls’, bizarre cancellation of Starlink contracts and the Delaware Chsncery Court case and decision…all together those are trying to stop progress in multiple ways all developed and/or led by the same aggressive, flawed immigrant.
It would behoove us all to understand how hard it is to compete with Tesla, with the aforementioned Geely as a case in point .

Success in these arenas does demand highly skilled engineering coupled with determination. There are three stellar examples Tesla, CaTL and BYD. (We’d have other names were we to include solar panels, wind power and control infrastructure).
Rather than complain we might want to understand common elements, including not least that the three CEO’s know and admire each other partly because all three are engineers at their core.

Nit
Toyota has not switched to methane CH4 but possibly to ammonia NH3. Methane burning emits carbon while ammonia does not. In reality ammonia might emit nitrous oxides which is not good AND ammonia is highly toxic. Toyota is on a Bataan Death March.
Love the kill users snark!
Continue..

 

[totoro722]

I object to shortcuts. Geofencing seems to me to be a shortcut with obvious limitations that don’t solve the problems that need to be solved. It’s akin to using an ICE platform to make an EV - yeah, works but has limitations that keeps it from being compelling enough to solve the larger problem - making it compelling on enough metrics, including pricing, to get everyone to buy one.

I just had a several hour debate with my father, who is getting to an age where he’s concerned driving will become unavailable to him for many age related reasons. Geofencing isn’t going to be enough for him for many reasons that may or may not apply to everyone his age.

Tesla is trying to solve for everyone, not just a specific group of people. The mission is for the world, not for people in select cities.

Usually you have to walk before you can run. Getting to robotaxi will require intermediate steps, as the big step is Tesla taking legal responsibility for the driving. Geofencing might give them a chance to sharpen some skills before taking responsibility for driving in all conditions. Developing an advanced ADAS system (Level 3) that would be a boon to the elderly (like me) is another path toward the same goal with the emphasis on getting enough function in all conditions. Both paths would converge. These are steps on the path to FSD, not shortcuts.

 

[unk45]

Nit
Toyota has not switched to methane CH4 but possibly to ammonia NH3. Methane burning emits carbon while ammonia does not. In reality ammonia might emit nitrous oxides which is not good AND ammonia is highly toxic. Toyota is on a Bataan Death March.
Love the kill users snark!
Continue..

Please accept my apologies. I knew better. This AM I was reading about LNG markets and pipelines/ships/stprage so I had methane on my mind.
Better than ammonia I suppose, I have just altered the post.

 

[Zaddy Daddy]

IMO FSD V12 determines a lot of Tesla's valuation regardless of earnings this year. Everything prior to V12 people are either in the camp of it'll never work to it'll never leave L2. V12 is the final foundational iteration of FSD. Hopefully it turns people from never to most likely...and with each update goes from 10 years away to 5 years away to 1 year away. It could also hit some kind of AI training maxima that proofs certain things cannot be trained into working. Either way this is it...no more rewrites, there's nowhere to go after end to end.

We can tell the "controls" part is much smoother in V12 - the part that was heuristics previously. That's a great sign. Right now disengagements in V12 are higher than V11, but I'd guess that will match V11 the first half of this year. Look at how long its been since Elon's V12 demo till now - 5 to 6 6 months. Good progress, but not like it's mindblowing. So I'd expect the 2nd half of this year for V12 iterations to show disengagements at maybe 1/2 to 1/4 of V11.

Combined with the increased smoothness is probably enough to have a L2 product that is quality enough many people would pay some money for. The equivalent of autopilot for city streets.

But Tesla may have to lower subscription prices to engage more people - I would think this could increase overall FSD revenue and think it's an obivous move to boost margins a bit. Maybe they are waiting until it's good enough to do this?

The thing is, great L2 will boost margins a bit, but doesn't make life altering changes to the company valuation. That only happens if people think robotaxis are imminent. Realistically, there is a long road between great L2 and robotaxis. The disengagement rate has to be really, really low to be software capable for robotaxis. Like 1 critical disengagement every 10,000 - 100,000 miles. Not every 100-500 miles like currently.

So I'd rate there almost 0 chance Tesla gets close to that level (which the market would definitely respond to).

The real question is: can Tesla get to a point that the pace of change is so rapid that the market prices in future expectations years early? This is possible, but the rate of change would have to be much faster than it is currently. Part of that depends on how much compute do they have coming online. Last we heard it seemed like they 2x their compute (only). Way below the 10x-100x they are planning for. I was disappointed Elon did not respond to the question about compute limits on the earnings call. This insight is needed for any institutional investor to get more bullish.

 

[Thumper]

From MIT technology Review, a long seeming evenhanded article about nickel mining by Talon in Minnesota and the effects from the IRA on Tesla, the American consumer and the US economy.

How one mine could unlock billions in EV subsidies — MIT Technology Review

January 25, 2024

apple.news

 

[Knightshade]

Usually you have to walk before you can run. Getting to robotaxi will require intermediate steps, as the big step is Tesla taking legal responsibility for the driving. Geofencing might give them a chance to sharpen some skills before taking responsibility for driving in all conditions. Developing an advanced ADAS system (Level 3) that would be a boon to the elderly (like me) is another path toward the same goal with the emphasis on getting enough function in all conditions. Both paths would converge. These are steps on the path to FSD, not shortcuts.

For clarity- L3 is not ADAS, it's ADS. The car, not the human, is driving when an L3 system is engaged- it isn't "assisting" a driver, it IS the driver.

Nobody (except Mercedes, offering L3 in exceedingly limited circumstances, in only 2 US states thus far) has an ADS system available for purchase by consumers.

 

[bpjod]

The flip-side of the underlined statement is how the majority of collisions occur close to home (50-70 percent within 5-10 miles). Though an autonomous platform should not find itself falling into the trap of "familiarity breeds contempt" the way humans can and do.

An issue with geofencing is the possibility of some aspect of the software reaching a point where it assumes something to always be true. As long as that can be carefully avoided, opening one geographic area at a time could provide a proving-ground for autonomy to expand from a regulatory perspective.

In the long run, the aim should remain to have the AI deal with the world in an unrestricted manner in order to better duplicate and improve upon human capabilities.

Yes, but isn't 90%+ of our driving done close to home? Even long trips all start from and eventually end up back at home. A useful stat would be number of collisions per mile driven within a certain radius of home vs. outside that radius. Haven't ever seen that stat.
Secondly, another reason accidents happen close to home is overconfidence (certainly my case when I almost killed myself on my bike coming home from work - I swear no one has ever parked a vehicle there before...). Overconfidence is a human flaw, hopefully not an AI flaw.

 

[insaneoctane]

We don't know the rate of future FSD improvements.....But, isn't there a point where FSD shows enough progress (or merit) where robotaxis are not necessarily imminent yet, but it creates enough buzz to measurably impact demand for existing Tesla vehicles?

 

[2daMoon]

Yes, but isn't 90%+ of our driving done close to home? Even long trips all start from and eventually end up back at home. A useful stat would be number of collisions per mile driven within a certain radius of home vs. outside that radius. Haven't ever seen that stat.
Secondly, another reason accidents happen close to home is overconfidence (certainly my case when I almost killed myself on my bike coming home from work - I swear no one has ever parked a vehicle there before...). Overconfidence is a human flaw, hopefully not an AI flaw.

Yes, absolutely. That was inferred, but I should have spelled it out.

Overconfidence is what I called "familiarity breeds contempt" in the quoted post. This also includes the subconscious filtering that goes on in humans.

Resulting in the phrase, "I didn't see the motorcycle" that is often heard after a car / motorcycle collision. The brain looked both ways for cars. The subconscious included trucks, emergency vehicles, even police motorcycles (which have a lower collision rate), but may not allow for motorcycles, bicycles, and sometimes pedestrians. So, the filter gives an "all clear" and the driver pulls into the path of a road user.

This has happened to me, and I've been a motorcyclist for over half a century and, for a couple of years made my living teaching the motorcycle safety course required to obtain a MC license.


As for geofencing, it seems to me this very behavior where a significant majority of trips being only a few miles establishes a pseudo-geofence based on behavior, negating the need to establish one by regulation.

 

[EQC_]

FYI: Likely to see inventory increase in Q1 due to Houthi's and the Red Sea risk. Ships are now going around the Horn of Africa, adding time to shipping.

I just realized, this probably affects a few different aspects:

1) battery packs shipped from China to Giga Berlin (which go into the Berlin-made cars...thus the factory needing to pause)

2) completed cars going from China to Europe

3) completed cars going from Giga Berlin to a few places in Asia not served by Giga China (Taiwan? Others?)