Stretch2727
Engineer and Car Nut
Good to hear this. Shows full commitment to AI at Tesla.
-
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
Pardon me if this was already posted but...
@Artful Dodger replied via PM to a few of us who expressed concern. Artful is fine but busy with a family health issue. Hoping to check in this weekend. No surprise- hasn't sold any TSLA shares.
@Artful Dodger replied via PM to a few of us who expressed concern. Artful is fine but busy with a family health issue. Hoping to check in this weekend. No surprise- hasn't sold any TSLA shares.
Elon about AI engineer retention
And if you think FSD licensing might be possible , your not the only one
And if you think FSD licensing might be possible , your not the only one
Last edited:
Nope. Cathie is too bearish.We got bears saying its going to $14 or $0 or whatever and then we got auntie Cathie's PT at $2k. Good chance $TSLA lands somewhere in between.
NFA, do you own research
GhostSkater
Member
How does the deferred cost of the production factors in the earnings?
There might be around 3k Cybertruck delivered, at this stage of the ramp I don’t see them costing even close to $80 k to make
Assuming 2/3 Dual Motor and the rest Beast, that’s is at least 80M in profit, not much but also not insignificant in a quarter that we are expecting to be weak
That and Energy
Just some food for thought here:
$TSLA closed at $175.22 on April 1, after the so called disastrous Q1 P&D, it went down 4.9% to close at $166.63 on April 2nd.
Today, it was up 1.05% and AH up another 0.6%. For all the doom and gloom Wall St and the bears were spewing, we are only sitting at -3.25%.
$TSLA has gone down more than 3.25% when $BTC was tanking and a multitude of other nothing burger events, why? just because.
I think we'll be just fine.
$TSLA closed at $175.22 on April 1, after the so called disastrous Q1 P&D, it went down 4.9% to close at $166.63 on April 2nd.
Today, it was up 1.05% and AH up another 0.6%. For all the doom and gloom Wall St and the bears were spewing, we are only sitting at -3.25%.
$TSLA has gone down more than 3.25% when $BTC was tanking and a multitude of other nothing burger events, why? just because.
I think we'll be just fine.
I'm sure there are tricks into making a fail safe(where the car just pulls over and contacts a field service person to retrieve the customer) and not have a full redundant system. They can reroute some processing to the infotainment computer if needed for such a simple task if FSD computer goes out. Many things they can do and I'm sure they have extensive meetings on what is in place vs all the people quarterbacking their progress. I remember back in 2020 FSD V1, everyone predicted that Tesla would run out of processing power for any kind of intervention free drive as it was not powerful enough. Then Green entered the chat screaming that they ran out of resources on a single chip so they must use both...even with both being used, FSD v4 or 5 was still terrible. Lots of self-congratulatory comments back then by those folks and now they are just moving the goal post to something else that Tesla Engineers didn't think of but they did.
I know we have a loooong way to go but I do love seeing that float up after hours.
Stretch2727
Engineer and Car Nut
Assets that go to inventory. They will go to cost of good sold (COGS) when they are sold and the profit( or loss) realized then.
So the current effect will be on the balance sheet and cash flows. If they were sold they would help earnings (assuming a profit), but not a negative on profit currently as the costs are not realized in the income statement until they are sold.
Last edited:
Didn't I just say earlier today that licensing FSD would be better than the auto business?
Omar has been stealing my ideas and sending them to Elon. I'm gonna sue!
But seriously, I'm glad to see Elon thinks this might be possible. It means that he has licensing terms in mind and he wants major coin. (maybe even BitCoin?)
Honest question:
How can licensing FSD to other OEMs bring in more money than the auto business (selling cars)? I can certainly see how RT revenues from rides many years from now could bring in more money as the math to show that is pretty straightforward, but the actual licensing costs (while lucrative) can't be prohibitively expensive or none of the OEMs would be able to afford to license it?
Or maybe Elon simply means he'll drop auto margins so incredibly low that anything would beat the Tesla auto business revenue wise?
jschwefel
Tesla fan/TSLA, Model Y and Cybertruck owner.
I’m sure the quality of Tesla Customer Service varies by location, but I have to give a shout out to the Tesla team in Indianapolis. I’ve had four Teslas over the last eight years and the service in Indy has been exceptional, far and away better than any other car company I’ve dealt with. This, for me, combined with the utility of the Tesla app and convenience of mobile service stands head and shoulders above the service I’ve received from legacy automakers.
Stretch2727
Engineer and Car Nut
Likely these are the last people you want to have an EV. I am assuming someone with no ability to charge at home/work. Maybe it will come back to bite the dealers that auctioned them and increase EV adoption once consumers figure out the low cost to operate.
Last edited:
Someone always knows something
Krugerrand
Meow
If only we knew who that someone was - we could stalk them.Someone always knows something
Margin * volumeHonest question:
How can licensing FSD to other OEMs bring in more money than the auto business (selling cars)? I can certainly see how RT revenues from rides many years from now could bring in more money as the math to show that is pretty straightforward, but the actual licensing costs (while lucrative) can't be prohibitively expensive or none of the OEMs would be able to afford to license it?
Or maybe Elon simply means he'll drop auto margins so incredibly low that anything would beat the Tesla auto business revenue wise?
If Tesla is 25% of the market and half of the rest licenses FSD, it only needs to be 66% of the margin of a vehicle sale over its lifetime to have equal return (ignoring Tesla FSD sales). 10 year life on a subscription basis = 6.6% of 20% of vehicle cost = $660 a year vs a $50k vehicle.
$100 a month = $6k over 5 years, equivalent to 20% GM on a $30k car.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
... literally none of that makes any sense my man. You can't "reroute processing" to the infotainment-- that's some Star Trek technobabble.
First- they're entirely different chip architectures running entirely different code.
Second, to my knowledge the infotainment computer by design for safety reasons can not give commands to the driving components of the vehicle like the brakes, accelerator, or steering wheel. (Note: this, among the 3 reasons I list, IS a software one and COULD be changed- but wouldn't help you even if you did because of reasons 1 and 3)
Third-even if it could both run some simple "pull over safely" code AND command the car controls to do it- guess where all the camera data that ANY computer would need to be able to pull over safely goes via direct plug in? The driving computer. Which loses networking if node A dies. So it can't provide any data to the MCU to "drive" with even if the other reasons didn't exist (which- they do).
What you're suggesting would require additional HW that does not exist (at least up through HW3 cars--- HW4 appears to add a second actual network interface into the other node).
You haven't actually described any that are physically possible though so I'm not sure there's "many"... or any.
Nobody's moving anything. The 2020 issue of using both nodes for a single instance of the software is still true today.
But in addition to that there's HW limitations that make true redundancy impossible even if that software problem was magically gone.
I agree they have meetings about this. Which is probably why HW4 has dual network connections to solve the exact hardware limitation I'm describing.
If there was some easy software fix Tesla would've just done THAT instead of adding hardware- instead they added hardware. Because it's a hardware limitation you can only fix in hardware.
But that does not help the majority of the fleet on HW3 and older- esp. when Elon already told us those cars won't be upgraded to HW4.
FWIW, every actual service tech I've ever dealt with from Tesla has been excellent.
The people who do all their service communication are terrible.
A couple weeks ago I finally was able to schedule the trunk harness recall a few years after it was issued... I set up an appointment that the app then told me was BOTH:
A mobile service appointment
and
Scheduled to take place at the Tesla service center in Raleigh
Now, it was 10 days away, I figured this should be quick/easy to resolve... the only communication method is the app of course--- I messaged them pointing out the concern- and can they clarify if it's really a service center appointment-- or if it's a mobile one, and if it's a mobile one, can they please correct the address to my actual home. Which I also gave them even though I know they have it on file.
3 days go by and nothing. I message again- they reply a day later saying yes, it is a mobile appointment.
And say nothing about the address issue- and it still lists the SC in Raleigh as the location.
I message again asking them to fix this to correct the address for the service location.
3 days go by and nothing. I message again. They tell me THEY can't actually change it- but they've sent a request to the mobile team who can.
3 more days and nothing has changed... my appointment is now tomorrow and I still don't know where it's happening... I message once again, and finally they get back to me saying ok , we updated it. (so I guess magically they can now?).
Next day- Tech shows up bright and early-- he's polite, professional, friendly, does a quick and great job-- had him change my cabin filter while he was there as I've got an older 3 where it's a PITA.
Great service- terrible communication as always.
Last edited:
It's both.Honest question:
How can licensing FSD to other OEMs bring in more money than the auto business (selling cars)? I can certainly see how RT revenues from rides many years from now could bring in more money as the math to show that is pretty straightforward, but the actual licensing costs (while lucrative) can't be prohibitively expensive or none of the OEMs would be able to afford to license it?
Or maybe Elon simply means he'll drop auto margins so incredibly low that anything would beat the Tesla auto business revenue wise?
Auto margins are rather small. Software margins are huge.
Anybody can make a car, but the overhead is massive. It's a very tough business.
If only Tesla has the software for Ford's robotaxis, then Tesla gets most of the profits. Only Tesla can make Ford's robotaxi viable.
Even if robotaxi never happens and Tesla is just licensing FSD to Ford, Tesla will still get most of the profit from every car Ford sells. Even if the license cost is only, say, $8K, that's a lot more than Ford makes per car and it's almost 100% profit for Tesla.
Will customers pay an extra $8K for a car that drives itself? I think they will. The cost of an EV is going to come down by more than that in the next few years. And nobody will want a car that you have to drive manually.
Like I said earlier today, this is why selling Windows was a much more profitable business than selling the PCs that Windows runs on. The value is in the software, not the hardware.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Dude - none of us have including you. But we get to comment and criticize. Thats what this board is for. If you can't tolerate mild criticism of your hero, get your own board.
The way you talk - no one should criticize a president (except for ex-presidents) and senators (except ex-senators) ?!
Just for some added clarity....
I see "between two growth waves' as "sharpening the axe", the components are:-
- Developing Robotaxi ready FSD, and getting sufficient regulatory approval,
- Build the Gen3 Robotaxi at the first factory...
- Establishing the income streams to fund the next phase... (Licensing FSD is included here)
- Building factories to build Gen3 cars including Robotaxis in all necessary locations.
- Progressively building the Robotaxi fleet to the required size in each operating location.
The income streams to fund the next wave are:-
- Sales of existing models Model S/X, 3/Y, Cybertruck
- Sales of new Gen3 models, initially perhaps 80% of production.
- Tesla energy
- FSD, including licencing to other carmakers.
- Supercharging, insurance, service
- Robotaxis once these are operating...
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
