2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
Just got another of those ID-10-T errors.
Anyone heard back from support on this issue?
-
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
Just got another of those ID-10-T errors.
Anyone heard back from support on this issue?
Apparently the head of the cathode factory project has been let go too.
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
OK, I've sat through a day of drama on here. Jesus. So many people making assumptions about this or that without any facts. Typical.
I'll summarize the facts we learned from the nonsense today:
1. Any executive that spends less than 50 years in a high profile executive position under a famously demanding CEO and making many tens of millions of dollars is a sissy, and is certainly leaving because the CEO did something in the last week that pissed him off, or sees the company as headed for certain doom. There's no other possible explanation.
2. We know both Drew and Rohan are headed to Lucid because Lucid's prospects are very bright.
3. Every time an executive leaves a large company that company collapses.
Do I have that all right? Did I miss anything?
Today is cause for one of the biggest forehead slaps ever.
I'll summarize the facts we learned from the nonsense today:
1. Any executive that spends less than 50 years in a high profile executive position under a famously demanding CEO and making many tens of millions of dollars is a sissy, and is certainly leaving because the CEO did something in the last week that pissed him off, or sees the company as headed for certain doom. There's no other possible explanation.
2. We know both Drew and Rohan are headed to Lucid because Lucid's prospects are very bright.
3. Every time an executive leaves a large company that company collapses.
Do I have that all right? Did I miss anything?
Today is cause for one of the biggest forehead slaps ever.
Last edited:
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
You left out any mention of Elon's X-factor, and how "the competition is coming" from the list.
But, fortunately, so did everyone else today.
Otherwise, you nailed it!
Honestly, I wouldn't expect Car and Driver to be a reliable source on relating what Elon and others from Tesla said about battery developments and timelines. I am not assuming bias...just that these aren't authors who would be familiar with this type of material, and are also likely to throw in their own interpretations and present them as facts to excite/entertain/etc. their readers. What they wrote just isn't "proof" of Tesla's work being behind schedule.
I'd suggest perhaps searching that article for the author's stated timelines, and then comparing it to what Elon/Tesla actually said. Based on a few things I checked, the authors misrepresented a lot of what Elon said and stated commitments that Elon just didn't make.
A transcript of the event:
Tesla 2020 Battery Day Transcript September 22 | Rev Blog
Tesla held its 2020 annual Sahreholder Meeting and Battery Day on September 22. Read the transcript of the event here, with updates from Tesla CEO Elon Musk and SVP Drew Baglino.
www.rev.com
See my Spoiler below for an example of the sloppy/misleading reporting...
I'll give you an example, on a topic that I have mentioned a few times -- because this article hit my pet peeve use of the word "promise" quite precisely. I've pointed out before how the media's use of the word "promise" is disingenous at best. They always use it incorrectly and with the intent of creating an emotional response. In this case, just reading the title of this article alone tells me exactly how (not) dedicated to honest facts this article is.
The author/editor of that article chose to declare a promise from Tesla right in the title:
I wonder why they declared the same "promise" from Tesla three times, but the only actual quote from Tesla/Elon is the word "compelling."
To find the answer to that, I found a transcript of the actual battery day:
www.rev.com
As it would turn out, what looks to be timestamped over 2 hours into the event, Elon first said he was "confident" in a $25,000 Tesla in the "long-term." After rambling a bit, he settled on "probably...about three years". Nothing about "probably" and "about" should be taken as a hard deadline or even a predicted schedule, and of course it's not a promise. Elon was projecting a potential or likely timeframe for a future *capability*, not a target date for mass production.
This talk was in late September of 2020, so...we're at about 3.5 years at this point. We do know that Tesla is on at least their second generation of PRODUCTION 4680 cells -- they made a version that was used in many Model Y's, and they've got a new version in the Cybertruck. And we have reason to believe more improvements are in the works at Kato, and that the current production line(s) for the cells are being copy-pasted.
Elon's actual quote:
"What does this mean for our future products? So we’re confident that long-term we can design and manufacturer a compelling $25,000 electric vehicle. This has always been our dream from the beginning of the company. I even wrote a blog piece about it because our first car was an expensive sports car, then it was a slightly less expensive sedan, and then finally sort of a, I don’t know, mass market premium, the Model 3 and Model Y. But it was always our goal to try to make an affordable electric car. And I think probably, like I said, about three years from now, we’re confident we can make a very compelling $25,000 electric vehicle that’s also fully autonomous."
And then a second/simliar quote from later in the event:
"...I mean, that said, maybe on the order of three years, when we can do lower cost, like a $25,000 car, I think that will be basically on par, maybe slightly better than a comparable gasoline car. So I think maybe it’s on the order of three years-ish."
Again, very clearly an estimate and still very non-commital. "On the order" in a scientific setting usually means close within a factor of 10 -- so, in the most literal interpretation, he's saying it's closer to 3 years than 0.3 or 30 years. And again, he's talking about when it might be possible to make such a car based on battery cell costs, not when a factory would be ready to produce it, and not when cell production will be at the scale to make millions of those cars.
*Spoiler section edited to corrected where I accidentally typed "2022" instead of "2020"...but I always said it was 3.5 years ago. And then I also added the second quoted text from Elon.
The author/editor of that article chose to declare a promise from Tesla right in the title:
Tesla Battery Day: Tesla Promises $25,000 EV in Three Years
They repeat the use of that word two more times, both times quoting only a single word from Elon -- "compelling." They did it in the bulleted summary at the top: "Musk promised a "compelling" $25,000 car within three years", and later in the text, they say: "Musk wrapped up his remarks by promising a "compelling" $25,000 passenger EV in three years."I wonder why they declared the same "promise" from Tesla three times, but the only actual quote from Tesla/Elon is the word "compelling."
To find the answer to that, I found a transcript of the actual battery day:
Tesla 2020 Battery Day Transcript September 22 | Rev Blog
Tesla held its 2020 annual Sahreholder Meeting and Battery Day on September 22. Read the transcript of the event here, with updates from Tesla CEO Elon Musk and SVP Drew Baglino.
www.rev.com
As it would turn out, what looks to be timestamped over 2 hours into the event, Elon first said he was "confident" in a $25,000 Tesla in the "long-term." After rambling a bit, he settled on "probably...about three years". Nothing about "probably" and "about" should be taken as a hard deadline or even a predicted schedule, and of course it's not a promise. Elon was projecting a potential or likely timeframe for a future *capability*, not a target date for mass production.
This talk was in late September of 2020, so...we're at about 3.5 years at this point. We do know that Tesla is on at least their second generation of PRODUCTION 4680 cells -- they made a version that was used in many Model Y's, and they've got a new version in the Cybertruck. And we have reason to believe more improvements are in the works at Kato, and that the current production line(s) for the cells are being copy-pasted.
Elon's actual quote:
"What does this mean for our future products? So we’re confident that long-term we can design and manufacturer a compelling $25,000 electric vehicle. This has always been our dream from the beginning of the company. I even wrote a blog piece about it because our first car was an expensive sports car, then it was a slightly less expensive sedan, and then finally sort of a, I don’t know, mass market premium, the Model 3 and Model Y. But it was always our goal to try to make an affordable electric car. And I think probably, like I said, about three years from now, we’re confident we can make a very compelling $25,000 electric vehicle that’s also fully autonomous."
And then a second/simliar quote from later in the event:
"...I mean, that said, maybe on the order of three years, when we can do lower cost, like a $25,000 car, I think that will be basically on par, maybe slightly better than a comparable gasoline car. So I think maybe it’s on the order of three years-ish."
Again, very clearly an estimate and still very non-commital. "On the order" in a scientific setting usually means close within a factor of 10 -- so, in the most literal interpretation, he's saying it's closer to 3 years than 0.3 or 30 years. And again, he's talking about when it might be possible to make such a car based on battery cell costs, not when a factory would be ready to produce it, and not when cell production will be at the scale to make millions of those cars.
*Spoiler section edited to corrected where I accidentally typed "2022" instead of "2020"...but I always said it was 3.5 years ago. And then I also added the second quoted text from Elon.
*Edited a bit for clarity.
Last edited:
Appreciate the effort...this may mean it was an odd batch that has this problem...but don't try so hard to break your car!
I'd be way too paranoid to even try that. Beyond just breaking the pedal, I just "know" a random neutrino would flip a few bits in the software code somewhere, over-riding both the "park" and the "plugged in" status, and the car would start accelerating...
The other thing that occurred to me is two senior staff leaving may allow up to 10 junior staff to stay.Personally, I think Drew didn't want to spend family time commuting to Mumbai.
Not the only reason, but perhaps one of the reasons.
We will find out more on the earnings call, and on the Robotaxi reveal 8/8.
When a company is doing layoffs like this it isn't surprising that staff are nervous and rumours fly around.
Another report on more senior staff being fired (sorry, “leaving to spend time with family”)
“Another story: more heads are rolling at Tesla amid the layoffs. While the narrative Tesla, and Elon, are pushing is that the layoffs are due to "rapid growth resulting in hiring inefficiencies", there's a lot more to it.
On top of Baglino and Patel leaving, we are told that Anthony Thurston, head of the cathode factory project, and reporting to Baglino, has been let go, as well as Amir Mirshahi, Director of Infrastructure.
Elon is apparently unhappy with the 4680 and cathode programs.
It looks like Elon is using the layoffs to clean house - whether it's warranted or not – and focus resources on the one thing he seems to care about right now: self-driving.”
“Another story: more heads are rolling at Tesla amid the layoffs. While the narrative Tesla, and Elon, are pushing is that the layoffs are due to "rapid growth resulting in hiring inefficiencies", there's a lot more to it.
On top of Baglino and Patel leaving, we are told that Anthony Thurston, head of the cathode factory project, and reporting to Baglino, has been let go, as well as Amir Mirshahi, Director of Infrastructure.
Elon is apparently unhappy with the 4680 and cathode programs.
It looks like Elon is using the layoffs to clean house - whether it's warranted or not – and focus resources on the one thing he seems to care about right now: self-driving.”
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
At least the battery production and cathode production facilities are close enough together that Elon won't have to keep a couch in both to sleep on.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Many people asked why Commander Ryker chose to stay as number one for so many years, when it was clearly overdue for a captain's chair of his own. While Admiral Ryker was responsible for many innovations, most notably the three engine Enterprise - E, his best work will always be remembered as the time when he was "number one".
Let's not talk about Ryker's runin with the Q, and don't even start about Thomas Ryker. "All Good Things...". I hope this helps.
If this is about robotaxis how do you explain your key policy guy Rohan leaving the company?
Or its possible Rohan had a disagreement with Elon about the timing of Robotaxi deployment and was let go, of course only to spend time with family!
I think a few things are going on right now:
1. I am not sure why the US, other than of course FUD driven anti-EV propaganda, picked this quarter to sort of back off the EV adaption trend. One driver of TSLA price is a belief in the inevitability of EV adoption, and oddly in the US at the moment that belief has taken a quarter off.
2. Despite a ride with FSD V12 available to pretty much anyone who asks, for some reason FSD is not priced in, even though in the relatively short term its worth will be pretty much absolutely proven. I mean, I would be that in some areas where V12 is operable, it is behaving just as well as Waymo. I don's see how it cannot come to full functionality. Yet, its not priced in.
3. Although I doubt it is a direct impact on sales, the third thing that can cause a stock to rise is a belief that the CEO has that magical insight and touch. Elon is just as brilliant as ever if you look at what he actually does with this companies, but most people do not do the research we do here. He's not viewed as stable. The twitter shitposting has that effect.
So without 1, 2, and 3, its like the buying opportunity of this century. The company that makes, far and away the best produce in an emerging market, and with a revolutionary product in the pipeline, and plenty of cash to implement, is treated as if its in trouble.
Talk about the market behaving irrationally!
1. I am not sure why the US, other than of course FUD driven anti-EV propaganda, picked this quarter to sort of back off the EV adaption trend. One driver of TSLA price is a belief in the inevitability of EV adoption, and oddly in the US at the moment that belief has taken a quarter off.
2. Despite a ride with FSD V12 available to pretty much anyone who asks, for some reason FSD is not priced in, even though in the relatively short term its worth will be pretty much absolutely proven. I mean, I would be that in some areas where V12 is operable, it is behaving just as well as Waymo. I don's see how it cannot come to full functionality. Yet, its not priced in.
3. Although I doubt it is a direct impact on sales, the third thing that can cause a stock to rise is a belief that the CEO has that magical insight and touch. Elon is just as brilliant as ever if you look at what he actually does with this companies, but most people do not do the research we do here. He's not viewed as stable. The twitter shitposting has that effect.
So without 1, 2, and 3, its like the buying opportunity of this century. The company that makes, far and away the best produce in an emerging market, and with a revolutionary product in the pipeline, and plenty of cash to implement, is treated as if its in trouble.
Talk about the market behaving irrationally!
Ahh yes. Elon once again going for broke and throwing the entire company into "FSD or perish!" and you're with him or you're out.
What could go wrong? Shame absolutely no-one could have possibly seen this coming from past patterns. /s
Really "sad". The Cybertruck shows me the true incredible ability of Tesla and has reignited my excitement on the company.
Am I to assume the Roadster is also kicked out another few years? #thanxElon
What could go wrong? Shame absolutely no-one could have possibly seen this coming from past patterns. /s
Really "sad". The Cybertruck shows me the true incredible ability of Tesla and has reignited my excitement on the company.
Am I to assume the Roadster is also kicked out another few years? #thanxElon
Elon Musk changed his profile picture to one with the word "auto" underneath. And intentionally:
Auto = automobiles?
Auto = autonomous?
Auto = autoeroticism?
Auto = automobiles?
Auto = autonomous?
Auto = autoeroticism?
I’m not sure why you think FSD isnt priced in. Tesla current financial fundamentals in no way support the current market cap of half a trillion dollars. Based on current earnings and projected earnings growth of its current businesses (Auto, Energy & services) it would conservatively be worth $100-$200 Billion. Currently the market is assigning the vast majority of the market cap (60%-80%) to future products, including FSD.
I mean, at the current price the market does not even seem to believe that Tesla will be the Apple of cars, when with our own eyes everyone that drives any model of a Tesla (a) it is just as distinctive as any Apple model of anything, and (b) unlike Apple, which at least has smart phone competitors, no other automobile company even makes one model, just one, which is completely wired to be controllable via its computer remotely.
That's my take. Of course, smartphones cost less than cars. But I think the comparison is right on.
Apple has about five times the market cap on about four times the sales. Unless my basic math is off. Which it may well be.
And as for, say, Ford, the problem with Ford is that it has zero chance, absolutely zero, of they type of growth Tesla has, as Ford's own EV division first has to completely eliminate Ford's own ICE division before Ford gets anywhere. So that's why comparisons to other car companies, even as to cars, are not appropriate.
Last edited:
jschwefel
Tesla fan/TSLA, Model Y and Cybertruck owner.
I won’t pretend to know what Elon is thinking, and speculating about what’s going on behind the scenes with the layoffs or executive departures is mostly for entertainment. We simply don’t know.
Tesla has substantially grown its headcount over the years and as the business evolves, the organization should evolve as well. I think change is good, and I’m happy to watch this play out. I have no reason to believe Tesla has lost its edge. In fact, driving the Cybertruck makes me think Tesla is better than ever.
So while we’re speculating, does anyone know why the first Cybertrucks are called Foundation Series? What are they the “foundation” of? Is stainless steel, no paint, all-wheel steering, steer-by-wire, 48v architecture,… the tip of the iceberg of a new product/manufacturing approach? Does this replace the “unboxed” method?
IDK, but I thought this would be more interesting than continued discussion on the layoffs.
Gigapress
Trying to be less wrong
Losing Drew is definitely bad for the company. He had deeper experience than anyone remaining, including Elon himself, who has less experience at Tesla than Drew due to competing demands on his time from SpaceX and other ventures. I don't think it's the end of the world, but certainly it is a significant loss.
I am inclined to believe he left voluntarily. He has stayed far longer than any other early employee except Elon and, as far as I know, he was the longest-tenured. If he was very annoyed with his boss, he could have walked away years ago like every other Roadster-era employee already has. He certainly had the wealth and clout to do so, and has had more experience and done more work and accomplished more in 18 years than almost anyone does in a career of 40+ years.
Why would Drew be fired because of something like the 4680 ramp going less well than planned? That makes no sense. Drew could instead just be reassigned to focus on Tesla Energy or something. Also, Elon has said that Tesla's performance management policy is based around high rewards for successful innovation, minimal punishment for failed innovation attempts, and punishment only for not trying new things. He has said this is a fundamental aspect of how Tesla operates and why they have such a rapid pace of innovation. Firing the VP of powertrain and energy engineering for such a "failure" would send a terrible message to the rest of the workforce. Additionally, there has been no sign that Elon is upset about the 4680 ramp in the first place. During the last earnings call, he and Drew appeared to have cordial relations and Elon let Drew answer the question about the 4680 ramp. Normally, Elon makes sure to get his comments in if he has an opinion on a topic.
Also, Elon has a history of being clear in public about when executives have been fired. If he has a problem with somebody, he is generally not shy about sharing it. In my opinion, one of his flaws is being too aggressive and having almost zero concept of polity and diplomacy in his public communications. It is not in character for him to kick someone out but then play the normal corporate politics game of helping the person save face.
I am inclined to believe he left voluntarily. He has stayed far longer than any other early employee except Elon and, as far as I know, he was the longest-tenured. If he was very annoyed with his boss, he could have walked away years ago like every other Roadster-era employee already has. He certainly had the wealth and clout to do so, and has had more experience and done more work and accomplished more in 18 years than almost anyone does in a career of 40+ years.
Why would Drew be fired because of something like the 4680 ramp going less well than planned? That makes no sense. Drew could instead just be reassigned to focus on Tesla Energy or something. Also, Elon has said that Tesla's performance management policy is based around high rewards for successful innovation, minimal punishment for failed innovation attempts, and punishment only for not trying new things. He has said this is a fundamental aspect of how Tesla operates and why they have such a rapid pace of innovation. Firing the VP of powertrain and energy engineering for such a "failure" would send a terrible message to the rest of the workforce. Additionally, there has been no sign that Elon is upset about the 4680 ramp in the first place. During the last earnings call, he and Drew appeared to have cordial relations and Elon let Drew answer the question about the 4680 ramp. Normally, Elon makes sure to get his comments in if he has an opinion on a topic.
Also, Elon has a history of being clear in public about when executives have been fired. If he has a problem with somebody, he is generally not shy about sharing it. In my opinion, one of his flaws is being too aggressive and having almost zero concept of polity and diplomacy in his public communications. It is not in character for him to kick someone out but then play the normal corporate politics game of helping the person save face.
It's called "Foundation Series" because with what they are charging you could start your own foundation.
But seriously, I always took it to just mean "starting point". The first ones off the line.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
