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.
hahaha, woooooow. ok, then Elon. So what is the point of the acceleration then? Just mind your business and let it slowly develop...

It's always been about us...the planet will be fine, but it's us humans that will suffer....F*CK.

The CEO just said this. THE CEO of Tesla.


Tesla's mission statement:

Elon is pro-human. In his mind sustainable energy usage is important to the continuation of humanity and there are ways we can live harmoneously with the planet. Without promoting the lack of continuation of the human race. I don't see how this is so difficult to understand.
 
No they did not scrap it. Reuters lied.

Oh, sorry. For the pedantic people. Reuters sources lied and Reuters didn’t bother to verify the information before going to print with it. 🙄

You don't know this unless you work high up for Tesla.

You probably shouldn't take the CEO - who has a tenuous (at best) relationship with the truth - at his word.

Anyway, the story appears correct - Tesla is prioritizing RT. If they weren't, we would have gotten a Model 2 unveiling announcement.
 
Would a robotaxi need human intervention to re-charge, or would automatic charging of some sort be part of the plan as well? I assume the latter, but is that problem fully solved yet?

They've allegedly been working on an autonomous snake charger for nearly a decade. Remember the coast to coast fully autonomous trip that was totally going to happen in 2017? Errr, 2018? Wait, was it 2019?

Then again, Elon says a lot of things 🤣
 
Would a robotaxi need human intervention to re-charge, or would automatic charging of some sort be part of the plan as well? I assume the latter, but is that problem fully solved yet?

Inductive charging exists, and Tesla bought a company that does it, and we've seen some evidence of it coming for CT.

THAT said- 99.9% of the fleet lacks the HW to do it, and 100% of supercharger stations lack the HW to do it....so it's not fully solved if they still plan to make existing cars RTs.

The dark horse option will be by the time RTs are actually in service, Optimus will be good enough to plug/unplug cars at superchargers (and also handle tasks like cleaning the cars--- which RTs will also need and inductive does not solve)
 
  • Like
Reactions: JusRelax and GSP
hahaha, woooooow. ok, then Elon. So what is the point of the acceleration then? Just mind your business and let it slowly develop...

It's always been about us...the planet will be fine, but it's us humans that will suffer....F*CK.

The CEO just said this. THE CEO of Tesla.


Tesla's mission statement:

There are two competing visions of a sustainable future.

The first is built on the idea that the only way to survive as a species is to limit growth, cut consumption, and live austerely.

The second is built on the idea that technological innovation can enable both sustainability and growth.

Tesla stands for the second one.
 
OT way OT
@Xepa777
great googly moogly!!!
we are doomed. It is time
(pauses for a nosh of some sweet's for breakfast, maybe another
'urp, thats good'

"when in danger
"or in doubt
"run in circles
"scream & shout
Weekend OT

Indeed. The Philosopher Cells are in a tizzy these last 24 hours. (I figure if anyone gets that, it is @winfield100 . Best approximation of this forum I've seen...)

FWIW drinking coffee right now in a shop where my Y drove me with no interventions. She even parked herself (although that was painfully slow, if precise). HODL
 
Last edited:
Why would we have? It would Osborne the Model 3 and Y.


People keep saying this-- but every other car company on earth sells different sized cars at different price points. Why can't Tesla?

The Corolla does not Osborne the Camry. The Camry does not Osborne the Avalon.

The 3 series BMW does not Obsorne the 5 series. The 5 series does not Obsorne the 7 series.

The 3/Y exist but they still sell S/X. Sure they sell MORE of the smaller/cheaper one. Just as you'd expect they'll sell more of the NEXT smaller/cheaper one than the 3/Y, while still selling a similar-to-now number of 3/Y.
 
Last edited:
People keep saying this-- but every other car company on earth sells different sized cars at different price points. Why can't Tesla?

The Corolla does not Osborne the Camry. The Camry does not Osborne the Avalon.

The 3/Y exist but they still sell S/X. Sure they sell MORE of the smaller/cheaper one. Just as you'd expect they'll sell more of the NEXT smaller/cheaper one than the 3/Y.

But they aren't ready to produce the cheaper model, are they? What is the advantage to them announcing it many months before the start of production? I know there are people who would hold off on purchasing the Model 3 and Y (a stretch for them) if they thought the compact model was on the way "soon". I guess it would also make people who would only consider the compact model wait instead of buying a car from another manufacturer, though.
 
Last edited:
To summarize this far, we have these unknowns for RT:

1) door closing (probably an easy solve);
2) automated charging (more difficult);
3) liability and regulatory issues

I’m sure more items are out there, so my suspicion is that whatever we see on 8/8 will be quite a ways off from deployment.

If it’s a 2 seater that is going to limit its use case… ie, going to the airport with family and luggage.
 
But they aren't ready to produce the cheaper model, are they? What is the advantage to them announcing it many months before the start of production? I know there are people who would hold off on purchasing the Model 3 and Y (a stretch for them) if they thought the compact model was on the way "soon". I guess it would also make people who would only consider the compact model wait instead of buying a car from another manufacturer, though.


Yup...and I bet there's a LOT more people in that second group than the first. Limp that corolla on a bit longer to wait for the 25k vehicle to replace it instead of a new corolla.

Plus 8/8, given what Elon said on the last call about target for making the next gen car, is a year-ish away from actual production, not a massive amount of time...nearer the time for 3/Y to production unveils than for the CT/Roadster/Semi.
 
  • Like
Reactions: phantasms
Small Robotaxi - 2 seats
Unveil - 8/8/24
First production - May 25 (Austin)
First delivery - Tesla network only Dec 25

Compact Crossover - 4 seats with steering wheel
Unveil - November 24
First production - Aug 25 (Berlin then Shanghai then Mexico)
First delivery - Dec 25

Medium Robotaxi - 4 seats compact crossover without steering wheel
Unveil - November 24
First production - Aug 26 (Austin)
First delivery - Dec 26

What's wrong?
Just add “ 2 weeks “to all the timelines .
 
Considering how much the medium term valuation of this company is becoming dependent on robotaxis, has anyone modeled what the potential losses / profits are dependent on accident rate? This is the main issue right? Critical disengagement rate matters ultimately because of the cost / mile driven it may affect. We should get more insight into this.

I just created a small spreadsheet, simple analysis. Gonna assume certain miles driven, but everything calculation is scaled with miles, not assuming fixed costs.

Let's say a robotaxi drives 60,000 miles per year. 75% of those miles are revenue generating. Revenue at $0.5 per mile. Operating costs of $0.2 per mile.

Accident rate: Let's assume 10,000 miles per "accident" to start.

Accident costs: These is the big variable that people can argue / give input on what is the best assumption. I googled and costs are all over the place. Let's assume $5000 payout cost Tesla would owe per accident.

Based on these inputs, total revenues would be $22,500 per year, and costs would be $42,000. A loss of $20,000 per year. Most of that due to accidents. If Tesla started with 10,000 robotaxi vehicles, they would lose 200 million in a year. 2 billion for 100k. And so on.

Let's now assume accident rate is 100,000 miles per accident. Now operating cash flow turns positive to $7500. So for 100k robotaxis they would earn a bit under 1 billion dollars per year, and so on.

Under this presumed $5,000 cost, at what accident rate would Tesla be breakeven?

I get about 30,000 miles per accident.

If cost per accident is $2000, then breakeven is ~ 12,000 miles per accident.

If cost per accident is $10,000, then breakeven is about 60,000 miles per accident.

Accident rates for human drivers are less frequent then this, so Tesla should be profitable at a lower level of reliability.

So I don't think the problem will be operating costs in ramping up a robotaxi network, it will be human injury rates that people may object to.

If Tesla can prioritize reducing high speed accidents more than fender benders, this could be the biggest benefit.

So Tesla could probably start some robotaxis in urban areas (no highways) when accident rates are around 30,000 miles per accident. With a small fleet, total number of accidents may not be too high or harmful. The costs should be okay.

If we assume a critical disengagement = accident, then the current rate is ~ 300 per mile. So Tesla needs to 100x the miles per disengagement to have a viable product to start a robotaxi network.

TLDR your investment mostly now depends are one metric: miles per critical disengagement. Expect a big improvement this year. But pay attention to if / when the rate of improvement starts slowing down again (as in any model, it will). If it starts slowing down not close to 30,000 / disengagement, that could be problematic.
I think you cost estimates for accidents are way low. A minor curbing on my S cost me and the insurance company over $3,500. Here in Florida the lawyers are having a field day with injuries often costing close to a million dollars. Then we have hurricanes running rates even higher. The trail lawyers are probably drooling at the thought of robotaxi.
Also, I saw someone posting operating costs at .02 per mile. The best I’ve seen for efficiency is 4 miles per Kw .
There aren’t many places with electricity at .08 per Kw. How about other expenses?
 
I think ARK is modeling $1/mile revenue, which seems a bit on the high side. Don't get me wrong, I drink through the Tesla kool-aid bong, but $1/mile seems unsustainable to me.
My simplistic model avoids per mile calcs. Primary robotaxi is replacing 2 full-time drivers so I think in terms of salary:

There is some chatter on the main thread about ARK's latest estimates going into Trillions and how this is not possible. I wanted to offer an alternative view point.

My $125T market cap 50x50x50 target that I have previously posted is made up of:

$50k per annum per fleet vehicle profit. Competition is the cost of 2 or 3 taxi drivers plus ICE depreciation (2 or 3 vehicles). I believe that TE profits will pay for all RT costs including adding to the fleet.

50m vehicles in Tesla's fleet which they own 100%. Folk have been talking about TSLA dividends. This is where the cash will go. You won't be able to buy the cars anymore. Good for the environment and therefore mission. Warren has also stated this.

50 P/E ratio. Amazon is 57 right now. Do I need to say more?

This works out as $125T which some folk believe is more money than the rest of the world combined. It is true that gross world product is only $80T. However I believe that the world wealth figure of $400T is what we should be comparing to as a potential TAM for share holders.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwigncuDr87yAhVTQEEAHfCvAxMQFnoECAUQAQ&url=https://www.credit-suisse.com/media/assets/corporate/docs/about-us/research/publications/global-wealth-report-2020-en.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2uB7smxwX7h1Rgez9bLspG
We are talking market cap here not sales or profits. Profits are 50 times smaller based on P/E ratio and margins are huge (sales will tend towards 3x profit -- maybe less). $400T could easily be $1000T by 2030 (1 quadrillion).
Based on this my profit is 50x50 = $2.5T. This is only 0.25% of total world wealth. They offer transport, energy, robots and likely homes. What else is there?

Don't make me include the Bot - $125T will only increase...
I still like it 3 years on but perhaps note that 2030 is too racy...

Many of you will disagree with Tesla owning 100% of 100% RTs (not SEXY) in the fleet.