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

[Atomsla]

We do enjoy a modicum of jocularity around here every now and again.

AudubonB, is that you?

 

[CDB_]

Probably doesn't need to be said here but there is a positive aspect to rising electricity prices. Consumers will naturally adapt faster as the financial benefits from changing consumption patterns becomes clearer.

By changing to avail of cheaper off-peak rates, the grid becomes greener. The playback for domestic generation (solar/battery) is clear to an ever increasing number of the population. All of these changes accelerates the transition away from carbon based fuels.

A stark example of this here in Europe is the recent spike in electricity prices resulting from the conflict in Ukraine and the surge in the cost of natural gas. As a result, there is a concerted effort to decarbonise national grids and a push to massively increase the use of renewables.

For me, this means availing of a special overnight 'EV' charging rate of 7c a unit of primarily wind generated electricity and investing in solar panels. Something that wasn't on the radar until I changed to a model Y and now makes financial sense.

As a result, driving a few hundred miles/Kms costs a few dollars/euros! Every cloud as they say.

HODL

 

[Max Plaid]

Lol, Troy is a joke.

You're right, he totally over-estimated! /s

Sorry, I'm 120 pages behind in this thread, just catching up, trying hard not to respond to much, but this one I couldn't help myself

Seems clear to me that a lot of folks here need a big slice of humble-pie and owe @Troy an apology for all the stick he gets

 

[UkNorthampton]

If Tony Seba is right, EVs will reach price parity with ICE, which means they will be cheaper than hybrids, with lower fuel costs, and lower maintenance costs.

Should a hybrid do most of its mileage on a battery, that saves on fuel and maintenance, and I can see owners preferring hybrid to ICE for this reason.

In terms of the Tesla mission, this "almost an EV" hybrid is a step in the right direction. If level 2 charging becomes more readily available, that mode of commuting may become easier to sustain. And the family can also use the pure EV for the road trip.

Should any Boring Company tunnels be built, EVs and travel in them but ICE and hybrids can't.

If Boring tunnels are built they will be a much faster way of commuting into busy city centres.

That is my hunch for the RT unveil on 8/8, Boring Company tunnels may be mentioned.

A friend was thinking of buying a hybrid.

I mentioned that the battery type is different from pure Battery EVs, as a disclaimer to the following:-

Smaller battery > more cycles > less battery life

Buying a secondhand hybrid would be risky without some understanding of hybrid (model) battery trends and a specific test/report on the vehicle in question.

Quick google mentions 8/10/15 years or 100-150,000 miles for a prius battery. I don't know if that is correct. Again, google indicates $2-8000 to replace a prius battery.

 

[Mengy]

??? We pay 14 cents in PA. What area are you in? I'm in Lancaster.

I'm up near Reading, not far from you. I have Met Ed as the carrier and New Wave Energy as the supplier.

 

[jerry33]

A friend was thinking of buying a hybrid.

I mentioned that the battery type is different from pure Battery EVs, as a disclaimer to the following:-

Smaller battery > more cycles > less battery life

Buying a secondhand hybrid would be risky without some understanding of hybrid (model) battery trends and a specific test/report on the vehicle in question.

Quick google mentions 8/10/15 years or 100-150,000 miles for a prius battery. I don't know if that is correct. Again, google indicates $2-8000 to replace a prius battery.

The lifetime number is correct for a Prius, but not necessarily for others. $3000 installed for a Prius battery is what I've experienced. I guess the Plug-in Prius battery is more but no direct experience.

 

[Xd85]

Meanwhile 12.3.4 available for my 2017 S.

 

[2Pearls]

View attachment 1037567
TSLA chart above

View attachment 1037570
QQQ chart above

Both QQQ and TSLA were green until 8:30am when the CPI numbers came in 0.1% higher than expected. Mr. Market was disappointed and the immediate pre-market dip receded slightly as the day went on and Nasdaq closed down 0.84%. Meanwhile, TSLA also dipped at 8:30pm, but instead of the stock price rising as the day progressed, it fell further. At the end of market trading, Nasdaq's 0.84% dip multiplied by TSLA's current beta of 2.41 meant that TSLA should have seen about a 2.02% dip. The problem with a 2.02% dip, however, is that it didn't pull TSLA down far enough to bring it below the tall 172.50 call wall. A little help with shorting (percent of TSLA selling tagged to shorts was 50% on Wednesday, with 3.8M shares trading at 4pm), and TSLA ended the day comfortably between the tall put wall at 170 and the tall call wall at 172.50. Perhaps this is just coincidence, but these coincidences happen so regularly, I don't think so.

View attachment 1037572
Yields on 10 year treasury bonds jumped above 4.5% on Wednesday after the increase in CPI inflation.

View attachment 1037577
Meanwhile, truflation.com's inflation gauge showed an addition dip of 0.03% on Wednesday. I think what's going on is that the CPI was measuring March inflation, and that was the month when oil prices rose to above $83/barrel. Truflation, OTOH, is showing current inflation and it's 1.74% is half of the CPI's 3.5% March inflation. I'm guessing there's room for a CPI improvement in inflation in May as April inflation comes into focus. We'll have to see how the rest of April plays out, but so far so good.

So, Mr. Market's knickers are in a knot over a warm CPI number. Take a look at the truflation number above, though, and it is less than half the CPI inflation number, as of today. Who do you believe? If you haven't already, view Sasha's youtube video on U.S. inflation. For a contrary viewpoint, consider this post by TMC's @unk45 . I'm not prepared to accept all of Sasha's conclusions without a deeper dive into the numbers, but there's one part of his presentation that resonates with me. Sasha points out how fuel, shelter, and transportation services are the three areas where we see the most upward pressure on inflation in the CPI model. I've already spoken out about shelter and how rent is under control but the cost of buying a house is elevated because of higher interest rates. Thus, cutting interest rates actually improves the shelter number. Then there's transportation services, with a major component being insurance, which is up heavily. If you accept @unk45 's statement that reinsurance costs are up because of major losses recently (think Lahaina fire, the bridge in Baltimore, etc.) then keeping interest rates high will have no reasonably positive effect on bringing insurance rates back down. Finally, there's fuel, and once again, when you look at the recent causes of oil price rises, those causes don't go away by raising interest rates. It's only when people drive less because of less money to spend do interest rates impact the cost of fuel. Consider these three top inflation causers, keeping rates high is not going to bring them down, and the rest of the inflation index is already under control. This is the reason why I include the truflation.com inflation rate because I think it's likely a more honest measure of actual inflation in the U.S. at this time. The good news? The truflation chart shows that the March inflation numbers jumped with the rise in oil prices. Now we see in April the truflation index well below March's numbers. Looking forward to the next CPI reveal because I think the truflation data suggests we could see a decline in CPI inflation just when the markets are thinking inflation is starting to run away again. Bottom line: don't fear next month's CPI report and don't count out rate cuts this year.

News:
* Sawyer Merritt Tweets that FSD v12.3.4 is now being distributed to both employees and non-employees. The pace of these updates is encouraging.
* In this TMC post by @Musskiah , we see that short interest rose another 5 million shares at the end of March. Like I said before, shorts tend to do a lot of emotional trading (selling low, only to be forced to buy high to cover) and that growing short interest will be useful to us longs when the next mega-rally takes place.
* Elon Musk announced he will be meeting with the Prime Minister of India soon. Another gigafactory is coming if all goes well.

View attachment 1037568
Maximum pain Wednesday morning was 172.50. More importantly, the market makers would like to stay above the big 170 put wall and below the nearly as tall 172.50 call wall. Surprise, surprise, TSLA ended the day at 171.76, comfortably between the two. Coincidence? That's always a possibility but not likely.

View attachment 1037569
TSLA's Wednesday options volumes

View attachment 1037571
TSLA is once again comfortably within the high sixties, low seventies trading range where it's been pretty much stuck for over 5 weeks.

Conditions:
* Dow down 422 (1.09%)
* NASDAQ down 136 (0.84%)
* SPY down 5 (1.00%)
* TSLA 171.76, down 5.12 (2.89%)
* TSLA volume 83.9M shares
* Oil 86.21
* IV 55.0, 85%
* Max Pain 172.50
* Percent of TSLA selling tagged to shorts: 50%
* Volume at 4pm closing cross: 3.8M shares

Would like to give an opposing view of Sasha as not every person on the internet is correct, proceed and caution at your own risk. I have listened to Meet Kevin for the last 3 years, and whether you like or dislike him, I do think he keeps it real and brings understanding to complicated issues. Please view this to give you more perspective.

Thanks.

 

[winfield100]

One main reason demand (price adjusted) for EVs is down across the board in the U.S.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1778080141199147314

View attachment 1037448

The problem is that the current rapid inflation in electricity prices isn't going to correct itself anytime soon. At best, the inflation will slow to zero, and allow wages to catch up but that would take a decade.

While there is some arbitrage opportunity for solar + cheap batteries, the majority of potential EV buyers won't be considering this and so demand is now somewhat chronically impaired relative to a few years ago.

I imagine the main possible event that could rapidly change this phenomena is spiking oil prices.

The CPI for bulk, UTILITY based electricity is increasing <<===
As a _single_ data point, although I expect there are numerous others

My local utility says my excess renewable generated electricity, _ZERO_ fuel costs is worth $0.0268/kwh (2.68 cents a kwh ! )
If I buy it back, multiply that by a factor of 4x (fuel + fees + misc fees + T&D + etc)

my costs, now and the forsee able future
6,600 miles charged at home, under $50, sunshine generated home power, local trips under 150 mile radius (Tampa Florida, US & back, CapeCanaveral Space Coast, 1 small supercharge) ,
(34,000 miles (supercharger trips, $3,200) (2,500 - 4,000 miles)

As the cheapest forms of electricity come online, Renewables, Wind, Solar, buffered by batteries, you may change your premise

 

[unk45]

I enjoy Sasha's style

Video summary:
Inflation data is being manipulated. If there was any intention of bringing inflation data down, the government would crack down on the energy and insurance company cartels.

Energy is up not because the cost of nuclear, natural gas, or coal is up...but because ENERGY COMPANIES are profiteering

Transportation services are up because of AUTO INSURANCE insane company profits

Powerwall, Megapacks AND Tesla Insurance are coming for their butts.

Shelter inflation is coming down slowly. It is 36% of all inflation data and is a lagging indicator.

Maybe the style, I did not watch it, but your summary points indicate he’s simplistic, a trifle histrionic and wrong on the facts. It is perhaps trendy to blame companies for ‘insane profits’ rather than examine the fundamentals in each case.
Blaming ‘profiteering’ and ‘insane profits’ is an excuse for superficial generalizations. Not useful!

 

[winfield100]

The lifetime number is correct for a Prius, but not necessarily for others. $3000 installed for a Prius battery is what I've experienced. I guess the Plug-in Prius battery is more but no direct experience.

@jerry33
OT,
I had a plug in Prius for a few years (Model 3 was not yet available)
I suspect the PIP has 6 modules in it's battery, as I suddenly had a 16% step function decrease in range that never resolved, as if 1 module went "offline"
8.8kwh total so tiny tiny battery

 

[GhostSkater]

A bit of your topic here, but is it possible, conceivable, desirable (?) to use 2 different types of batteries in a vehicle, say 4680's and 2170's? One type that charges quicker but perhaps with less range and the other that charges slower but with longer range? And with the battery extender for the CyberTruck isn't that what they're doing? I'm quite uninformed and naive even on the subject, so any learned enlightenment will be appreciated!

There is no technical limitations as long as voltage limits match and you do the proper engineering for it, but you always end up worse unless in some very specific cases

The reason we all know the "do not mix batteries of different types" is because just randomly doing that will end up badly

There is two ways to go about it, you can have two independent packs completely split and only one is used at a time, or two packs permanently connected in parallel

For simplicity our pack will have just two cells, and two cell models, A and B, the proportions of the values are in line with high energy density and high power density 2170 cells available today

Cell A- 1 W of discharge and energy of 1.25 Wh

Cell B - 2 W of discharge and energy 1 Wh

For the case were you have two independent packs and can only use one at a time it's always worse. A "pack" of a single cell B can discharge, but a pack made of a pair of cell B can also discharge 2 W. Also, the total energy of cell A + B is 2.25 Wh, while a pack of two cell A will have the same discharge power of 2 W and 2.5 Wh, meaning it's the same power wise, and better energy wise

Now, if you have the cells always connected together you arrive at this:

A + A = 2 W and 2.5 Wh
A + B = 3 W of discharge and 2.25 Wh
B + B = 6 W of discharge and 2 Wh

Now, in practical terms, current EV pack sizes and modern cells allows for more than enough discharge, where the tradeoff of more power, but having to give up a significant amount of energy isn't worth it, and this is ignoring supply chain, assembly, pack modeling and BMS calibration, which becomes finicky with two cells, you might get the additional power advantage only at the upper SoC range, and for a short while since the higher energy cell likely will heat up way faster

Degradation is another problem, if cells with particular internal resistance curves aren't used, one model of cell will be more abused than another, meaning that is a short while you will have all the disadvantages of mixing cells while reaping none of the benefits

I remember quite a while ago I did a spreadsheet during the great cell shortage to see if we could mix cells to not lose performance in your products by using a inferior one alone, and the answer was no, specially with the crude BMS we used

TDLR: Can be done, hardly worthy and requires a lot of engineering effort to make sure it's safe and will have benefits, to little advantages

 

[winfield100]

Mine too, my electricity costs have been going down over the past year here in PA. Currently locked at $0.058/kWh for the next half year or so. Makes driving the Model Y super affordable!

OT
@Mengy
perhaps there needs to be a thread where folks who generate electricity with renewables can post data points 'n such
me $0.0268/kWh (as valued by utility what they pay for excess)
Mods or whomever......

 

[nativewolf]

There is no technical limitations as long as voltage limits match and you do the proper engineering for it, but you always end up worse unless in some very specific cases

The reason we all know the "do not mix batteries of different types" is because just randomly doing that will end up badly

There is two ways to go about it, you can have two independent packs completely split and only one is used at a time, or two packs permanently connected in parallel

For simplicity our pack will have just two cells, and two cell models, A and B, the proportions of the values are in line with high energy density and high power density 2170 cells available today

Cell A- 1 W of discharge and energy of 1.25 Wh

Cell B - 2 W of discharge and energy 1 Wh

For the case were you have two independent packs and can only use one at a time it's always worse. A "pack" of a single cell B can discharge, but a pack made of a pair of cell B can also discharge 2 W. Also, the total energy of cell A + B is 2.25 Wh, while a pack of two cell A will have the same discharge power of 2 W and 2.5 Wh, meaning it's the same power wise, and better energy wise

Now, if you have the cells always connected together you arrive at this:

A + A = 2 W and 2.5 Wh
A + B = 3 W of discharge and 2.25 Wh
B + B = 6 W of discharge and 2 Wh

Now, in practical terms, current EV pack sizes and modern cells allows for more than enough discharge, where the tradeoff of more power, but having to give up a significant amount of energy isn't worth it, and this is ignoring supply chain, assembly, pack modeling and BMS calibration, which becomes finicky with two cells, you might get the additional power advantage only at the upper SoC range, and for a short while since the higher energy cell likely will heat up way faster

Degradation is another problem, if cells with particular internal resistance curves aren't used, one model of cell will be more abused than another, meaning that is a short while you will have all the disadvantages of mixing cells while reaping none of the benefits

I remember quite a while ago I did a spreadsheet during the great cell shortage to see if we could mix cells to not lose performance in your products by using a inferior one alone, and the answer was no, specially with the crude BMS we used

TDLR: Can be done, hardly worthy and requires a lot of engineering effort to make sure it's safe and will have benefits, to little advantages

I guess the summary here is that surely this is what GM and Toyota plan to do?

 

[GhostSkater]

I guess the summary here is that surely this is what GM and Toyota plan to do?

I don't know if you are joking but I do remember seeing stuff about Ultium being able to have mixed chemistries, so yeah, what's better than fire? Fire in two different chemistries for added color

 

[Usain]

Not the only contributor to weak EV demand. I am actually curious what people think is the reason for softening of EV demand (vs ICE)? Not interest rates as both are affected. What else? FUD on EV costs, reliabilty, charging?

Let's limit this to the US market. There are probably several reasons for softening of EV demand. Here are three possibilities I can think of:

1. Legacy auto can't make money on EVs. Legacy has been squeezed of late and they lose money on every EV they sell. So they have decided to stop selling so many.
2. Channel stuffing. I think we will soon find out that ICE demand is also very soft. But it doesn't yet look that way because legacy OEMs are still selling lots of cars to dealers. But that will soon end because dealers can't sell them and their lots are too full to take more inventory. So while it looks like EV demand is soft because Tesla sales are soft, it's really the case that all auto sales are soft.
3. Early adopters already have an EV or two. It is harder to sell an EV to those who are afraid of trying something new. So the "easy to reach" customer market is saturated and we need to "cross the chasm" to the next phase of adoption.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

A bit of your topic here, but is it possible, conceivable, desirable (?) to use 2 different types of batteries in a vehicle, say 4680's and 2170's? One type that charges quicker but perhaps with less range and the other that charges slower but with longer range? And with the battery extender for the CyberTruck isn't that what they're doing? I'm quite uninformed and naive even on the subject, so any learned enlightenment will be appreciated!

I'd think it adds cost and complexity, but if you _really_ need the extra range or the high-density cell type has very good density to cost, it could be worth it.

 

[nativewolf]

I don't know if you are joking but I do remember seeing stuff about Ultium being able to have mixed chemistries, so yeah, what's better than fire? Fire in two different chemistries for added color

Wow...I was just joking...I mean leave it to GM to completely F up EVs. but wow...wow...fire in 2 different chemistries. I can't wait.

 

[nativewolf]

Let's limit this to the US market. There are probably several reasons for softening of EV demand. Here are three possibilities I can think of:

1. Legacy auto can't make money on EVs. Legacy has been squeezed of late and they lose money on every EV they sell. So they have decided to stop selling so many.
2. Channel stuffing. I think we will soon find out that ICE demand is also very soft. But it doesn't yet look that way because legacy OEMs are still selling lots of cars to dealers. But that will soon end because dealers can't sell them and their lots are too full to take more inventory. So while it looks like EV demand is soft because Tesla sales are soft, it's really the case that all auto sales are soft.
3. Early adopters already have an EV or two. It is harder to sell an EV to those who are afraid of trying something new. So the "easy to reach" customer market is saturated and we need to "cross the chasm" to the next phase of adoption.

Add 8 months to get an electrician to install a charger at your house. Ridiculous. The price...crazy, it was going to be another 3k. I can fuel my little toyota scion 2 years driving a crap load of miles for 3k. the 8 month wait was a killer

 

[DarkandStormy]

FWIW, the India giga announcement is the largest SP catalyst I can see other than a large interest rate cut.

I'm hoping this happen prior to earnings or at earnings and I'm watching this closely as it will signal a massive shift for Tesla to autonomy