Yeah, energy too. But Elon keeps saying, "AI and robotics".
I think of Megapacks as a side hustle that will just run on cruise control and generate a lot of cash. It's important to the mission. And it's important to 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
I think of Megapacks as a side hustle that will just run on cruise control and generate a lot of cash. It's important to the mission. And it's important to Tesla.
Good question, it feels like 12.x is more weighted to use map data and is tuned to be comfortable by anticipating turns. IOWs they've opted to train with these hints.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
Been meaning to share this. Farzad has a discussion with Brandon from "Car questions answered". His channel mostly covers the ICE market. He says that he is seeing a lot of channel stuffing from the legacy OEMs. Legacy is boosting its numbers by sending cars to the dealership. But dealers are not selling cars.
So while a slowdown in auto sales shows up in Tesla's numbers immediately, it can take a quarter or two for this to show up in legacy auto.
Brandon also has tremendous insights into why so many in the US are reluctant to get an EV. Really good stuff. I don't know how this video got that title because it's mostly not about robotaxi.
So while a slowdown in auto sales shows up in Tesla's numbers immediately, it can take a quarter or two for this to show up in legacy auto.
Brandon also has tremendous insights into why so many in the US are reluctant to get an EV. Really good stuff. I don't know how this video got that title because it's mostly not about robotaxi.
Captkerosene
Member
I'm pretty sure they won't announce the Not-the-Model-2 on 8/8.
RT beats NTM2 in every way:
- pent up demand for 100 million RT units
- RT replaces 5X the number of ice cars
- RT 10X more profitable for Tesla
- important to be first to market with RT for competitive reasons - suck the oxygen out of the room
I completely understand why people don't think RT is real ... I have trouble believing it myself sometimes. But everything Elon is saying (shiny in May, progress accelerating, no longer compute constrained etc.) leads me to believe a fully functioning RT is much closer than people think. They're hiring drivers now to test 'em out. Won't be long before we see them on the streets.
Edit: Also, Elon never wanted to build the NTM2. It was an insurance policy in case RT didn't work. Suspending NTM2 now is another indication RT is going to work.
I’m also at an age and life situation, retired, where I’m sure I’d be advised to diversify, yet I’m all in on TSLA but for my house. Though I do sell shares at times to live off of and to buy the occasional Cybertruck
.However, my investment in Tesla isn’t just about me or mine.
Tesla isn’t out of the woods yet, as a judge in Delaware recently reminded us.
Tesla still needs right thinking individuals to hold their stock come hell or high water for as long as those individuals can and to vote those shares to support the mission.
I place no value on Robotaxi as I think that is at least 4-5 years away. The software is getting better, but not even close to being L5. I can see FSD revenue being significant as it is much better than the built in autopilot. I was skeptical about it, but the free trial has changed my mind.
I also place no value on Optimus. I have no idea what the demand would be for that.
I place a lot of value on energy storage - I think energy is being lost in the noise of Robotaxi and Optimus. That is a HUGE market that is growing very quickly and Tesla has a great product today, not in N years.
I also place a lot of value on services (FSD, premium connectivity, supercharging, etc). A fleet of 10M cars paying an average of, say, $25/mo in services and supercharging is $250M/mo in high margin revenue.
I also place no value on Optimus. I have no idea what the demand would be for that.
I place a lot of value on energy storage - I think energy is being lost in the noise of Robotaxi and Optimus. That is a HUGE market that is growing very quickly and Tesla has a great product today, not in N years.
I also place a lot of value on services (FSD, premium connectivity, supercharging, etc). A fleet of 10M cars paying an average of, say, $25/mo in services and supercharging is $250M/mo in high margin revenue.
cliff harris
Member
I think this is a dangerous mindset. AI is progressing on a classic exponential curve. People type that word a lot, and people think they know hwat that means, but its REALLY hard for humans to appreciate how fast progress happens towards the end. And I think we see that now in FSD V12. Here is a handy representation:
I think Tesla's FSD progress will seem fast, then very quickly extremely fast, then seem almost instantaneous. Bonus points for long term investors if the final run-up happens over a weekend.
Attachments
I thought a lot about the Reuters drama over the weekend. The idea that Tesla could decide to NOT make the consumer Gen3 with manual controls really bothered me, because my gut reaction is this would be a massive mistake for the company.
However, after a period of calming down and really thinking about this possible scenario, coupled with all the many miles I drove around on FSD v12.3.3 this weekend, would it really be a bad decision?
Let's suppose FSD gets to L5 by the time Gen3 goes into production, which is likely EoY 2025. That makes RT's a real possibility, and anyone who has done rough math on TaaS (Transportation as a Service, or Robotaxis) knows how profitable a fleet of EV RT's can be.
Tesla launching the RT fleet and foregoing the consumer Gen3 entirely has some interesting concepts around it:
1) Completely avoids Osbourning the M3 and MY with the Gen3 consumer car.
2) Focuses Gen3 production completely on RT's, which would greatly speed up deploying the RT fleet.
3) No one else would be able to compete with Tesla in the new RT market by 2025. Sure Waymo, Mobileye, and Cruise would have some market share but its likely to be in the single digits combined compared to Tesla's scalability with FSD.
4) Avoids the razor thin competitive margins of the car selling market. Let all the other OEMs fight for tiny margins on compact affordable EVs, while the majority of Teslas production focuses on the unchallenged new market of RT's.
5) We all know TaaS will over time eat away at auto market sales. People will stop buying cars as TaaS becomes more widespread due to TaaS being more economically affordable than car ownership.
A decision to go all in on RT production and forego the consumer Gen3 completely would basically be Tesla giving up on the traditional (dying) auto market to focus completely on the new burgeoning RT market instead. From a pure looking forward point of view, this kind of makes some sense honestly.
I still don't know what is actually going on, will Tesla make a consumer manual control Gen3 or not? We'll find out in time, but if they decide NOT to then maybe it isn't the huge mistake so many of us initially thought it would be.
Tesla is building new plants in Mexico and possibly India because RT is going to take off those cheap markets? The China govenment is going let FSD operate in their country?
This matches my current thinking precisely with one exception. I think we will see Optimi(?) on the Tesla factory floor this year doing some basic repetitive tasks. If Tesla can get my MY to drive point to point without disengagement on half of my drives, I see no reason the same AI couldn’t enable a robot to operate in a confined area with a flat surface in perfect conditions and lighting to perform a simple repetitive task. Replacing one line worker probably equates to a $100k/yr profit for Tesla when you consider a human needs to sleep, gets injured/sick, takes vacations, requires health insurance, 401k match, and demands higher insurance premiums for the workplace. We will see Optimus deployed and turning a profit long before we see a robotaxi IMO.
Funny, I use "like" for linked posts as I feel sharing something someone else posted is a low effort action on the part of the reposter. This assumes the poster added at least some summary info. A bare link gets no response.
I also use "like" if I agree with the post.
I use "informative" or "helpful" if the poster is contributing something new of their own.
I’ll also use "helpful" or "informative" when a post is contributing to the conversation, but I don’t agree with the sentiment expressed or want to withhold judgement.
Last edited:
This is cryptic.
What does EPAS stand for please? Presumably something to do with steer-by-wire.
Which spatial needs are less substantial than what?
Has the critical safety code to do with some electronic control unit (ECU), the neural net driving, or something in between?
Yah, and I’ve lost track. Remind me again how much of the net profits are from AI and robotics?
I disagreed only because I do not think such a development will remain exclusive for very long. There are many other sources that could develop competitive offering quickly. Would they be just the same as 'FSD eventually? no, almost certainly not. However they could have very well organized geo-fenced versions and those could handle nearly all the potential market. For this, I think we overestimate the absence fo competition.I thought a lot about the Reuters drama over the weekend. The idea that Tesla could decide to NOT make the consumer Gen3 with manual controls really bothered me, because my gut reaction is this would be a massive mistake for the company.
However, after a period of calming down and really thinking about this possible scenario, coupled with all the many miles I drove around on FSD v12.3.3 this weekend, would it really be a bad decision?
Let's suppose FSD gets to L5 by the time Gen3 goes into production, which is likely EoY 2025. That makes RT's a real possibility, and anyone who has done rough math on TaaS (Transportation as a Service, or Robotaxis) knows how profitable a fleet of EV RT's can be.
Tesla launching the RT fleet and foregoing the consumer Gen3 entirely has some interesting concepts around it:
1) Completely avoids Osbourning the M3 and MY with the Gen3 consumer car.
2) Focuses Gen3 production completely on RT's, which would greatly speed up deploying the RT fleet.
3) No one else would be able to compete with Tesla in the new RT market by 2025. Sure Waymo, Mobileye, and Cruise would have some market share but its likely to be in the single digits combined compared to Tesla's scalability with FSD.
4) Avoids the razor thin competitive margins of the car selling market. Let all the other OEMs fight for tiny margins on compact affordable EVs, while the majority of Teslas production focuses on the unchallenged new market of RT's.
5) We all know TaaS will over time eat away at auto market sales. People will stop buying cars as TaaS becomes more widespread due to TaaS being more economically affordable than car ownership.
A decision to go all in on RT production and forego the consumer Gen3 completely would basically be Tesla giving up on the traditional (dying) auto market to focus completely on the new burgeoning RT market instead. From a pure looking forward point of view, this kind of makes some sense honestly.
I still don't know what is actually going on, will Tesla make a consumer manual control Gen3 or not? We'll find out in time, but if they decide NOT to then maybe it isn't the huge mistake so many of us initially thought it would be.
Further,although you did not explicitly say this, I'm confident they'll have non-Robotaxi versions, van versions for both options and probably more.
I am convinced 2025 will have numerous positive developments. I am also confident that I should not be confident about such prognostications from me...for that matter from anybody.
The significant variables right now that cannot be forecast with confidence are more numerous than the ones we thing we know. That is uncertainty defined.
I'm betting that HODL is the safest choice. It's easy, however, to take that view when the capital gains right now would generate far too much tax revenue were they to be realized.
Risks: yes. Risks of bankruptcy: very small. Probability of significant share price rise within the next year: high enough to continue HODL.
Still, as previously stated I am maintaining a close watch on my major risk factors. That si nothing new,
I have done that for all my investments since I lost on a stupid one in 1973, when I made out more than I lost on another at the same time. I learned then that if I had been as diligent with the first one as I was with the second I would never have made the bad investment.
That, coupled with studying past and present masters made me eschew obfuscation!
The same year, working on what became DTC I learned that the new world would be more volatile and uncontrollable for non-market makers and other direct participants.
That may seem unconnected to FSD. It really is not. The advent of commercially viable Generative AI is transforming field from medicine to self driving, and is doing so faster than any of us understand.
The link to 1973 was that only a handful of people understood what would happen when securities stopped being physical and switched to book entry. Very few understood that the very definitions of money would change quickly. Very few understood that direct market makers could invent shares that did not exist.
Now we have FSD and Optimus and imagine nobody can copy of even surpass them. They can..and will.
So if that last phrase is true why in the world do I still HODL? Good question. Factually, Tesla manufacturing and logistics are the best in the world. All the AI advances really cannot deliver the total manufacturing process nor the logistic one because both require master of physics (in several arenas), Chemistry and materials and processes that require those skills in combinations that are exceedingly difficult to replicate.
Just remember, please, what Tesla core advantages really are. Even though Elon talks about AI and devotes huge resources to advances, he also knows manufacturing is hard than AI and harder to replicate. We will see all that evolve during the next two years.
In conclusion, this about 2024, but also know that we're setting off on a 1973-like revolution. In that one 'everyone' was doom and gloom with OPEC, recessions and more.
2024 has much of that disarray.
Should the downsides happen we'll have more serious problems than losing money on TSLA.
Should Tesla be successful we'll be among the few to have understood.
Obviously, these are my opinions, nothing more. Obviously, I'd like to be wrong on some of them.
Most of it in the future. If you don't believe Elon when he says Tesla is an AI & Robotics company then you should not own the stock.
Please don’t offer me “investing" advice. Not interested.
Krugerrand
Meow
I place no value on burritos et al… until the next day when my buttocks combust. Just sayin’.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
