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

[Krugerrand]

People without $$ at stake are possibly less bias since they have no actual $$ to gain/lose. If someone has 10000 shares of Tesla, obviously they are bullish and anything they say is through an owner's mindset to practically will it higher because they have been making good $ the last 10 years.

‘Probably less’ - huh?

This whole paragraph tells me you haven’t been here very long in the scheme of things. And upon looking - confirmed.

It's also a concern to most everyone here that bulls here aren't that open to any other opinions or comments.

Opinions are useless for a long term investor. Facts are what matter.

When everyone in a discussion has only one thought, be cautious because everyone around you seems to only think the same way. It's almost like any social media channel/news outlet now. This is obviously a Tesla investment forum, but any other counter opinions here (from what I've noticed) is massively drowned or insulted out. Anyone and you can take my comments for whatever they are worth (it's free so near worthless as well), and like Twitter, we'll see what ultimately happens in a few years (5+ is fair) to Tesla stock and to all the real investors here, but if folks here only care about bullish comments and shutdown the rest, be cautious since it all looks like cheerleading ultimately.

Again, has nothing to do with bullish vs bearish comments. FACTS. Honest discussions.

This thread has existed since 2018, but it actually dates back several years prior to that.

You simply do not know what you do not know about what long term investors have discussed over the last decade+++ and gone through. The echo chamber soliloquies are not only tiresome but also entirely inaccurate.

Bring the FACTS and long term investors will be all eyes and ears. Bring disingenuous bs and you will be called on it, all day long, every day.

We'll see where the stock is ultimately in a few years.

We will see. But note that the SP isn’t likely to accurately reflect the present day (in that moment) value of Business Tesla, which is literally and factually historical truth. Do you understand that? The reality of market valuation, via a SP given to any company in a moment of time, rarely reflects its true enterprise value.

 

[Webeevdrivers]

Testing with a human safety driver with the goal of going driverless by the end of next year.

Will you believe Elon if he announces that on 8/8?

Not based on what 12.3.4 is doing. Yes there have been some improvements but not remotely close to being autonomous. Who would pay all the traffic tickets for all the laws it breaks. . (Actually, that’s a good question. Who will pay the fines? )

 

[FreqFlyer]

Tesla China: Layoffs Hit Operations Way Harder Than Musk Let On - Gear Musk

Tesla layoffs in China were significantly more severe than Elon Musk's stated 10% global workforce reduction, with some teams seeing staff cuts of up to 50%.

gearmusk.com

Just the usual "fat trimming" in which two named executives resigned on the same day?

Over on Reddit, some Service Centers were hit with 40 to 50% cuts. I think when all is said and done it will be more than 10% as some have rumored.

On the positive side, Tesla will be lean, very lean.

 

[unk45]

There's a pretty massive difference there.

Nothing in existing law cared about your charging port in terms of if it was legal to deploy it or not.

Self driving laws do

You're making an apples and hand grenades comparison there.




And they are. Enshrined in the self driving car laws of every state currently allowing self driving. Which is why they matter fundamentally to deploying such a vehicle.

Lack of an SAE standard on NACS never stopped Tesla from deploying superchargers though- because nobody made it illegal to deploy chargers that don't comply with an SAE standard. They DO make it illegal to deploy self driving cars that don't comply with one.





back at ya


Now- if your argument is instead Tesla could lobby to get the laws changed I'd say three things:


Sure- though that is not a process that is remotely fast.

And sure- just like they could to allow direct sales of cars to consumers- something they've worked at for a decade and yet is still illegal in a surprising number of US states.

And sure- but there'd still need to be a standard--- Look at the time lapse from NACS existing and being an SAE standard. It wasn't quick. And self driving standards are much more complex.

So sure that's "possible" in a years distant future you can get those things done.. It's just not possible TODAY.

And might just be easier for Tesla to actually get the missing pieces to reach J3016 L4 standards than get a whole new standard established AND get all the relevant states to switch to it in law.

We enter into long regulatory and standards debates, which will definitely go OT. Still, you paint a static picture which fits conventional reality. I do not argue that. There are, however, countless examples of major technical or business practice changes that spawn SAE change and rapid consequencial regulatory changes. Such is not ever easy. From ancient ones like magnetic stripes, MICR to numerous data transmission and data security standards, when a serious commercial demand exists rapid alteration of regulation and enforcement also happens.
My point is not to discuss existing practice, but to stay unequivocally that if indeed FSD passes all responsible performance, stability and emergency requirements, one way or another the standards and regulations will quickly change.

Rather than argue examples and make arcane analogies (I have a few) we might all agree that IF FSD meets all working requirements very, very well, then and only then, the SAE and regulatory approvals will be rapid....by their standards!

In my opinion they certainly can obtain on road tests, once they have that. Some not very good ones have already done that. Once it's proven then the process accelerates.

Whatever happens this will not be widely available within this decade even if it is perfected now. Perhaps we might even agree about that!

 

[RSpanner]

Yeah, Elon is no my hero. Not even a dawn surprise.

The internal email was sent close to midnight PT, per a timestamp seen by Business Insider.

In the memo, obtained by BI, the Tesla CEO said that there has been a "duplication of roles and job functions in certain areas" as the company has grown rapidly.

On Sunday night, workers who were impacted by the layoffs received an email to their personal accounts, informing them their roles had been eliminated.

"Effective now, you will not need to perform any further work and therefore will no longer have access to Tesla systems and physical locations," the email read.

 

[Webeevdrivers]

You aren't thinking large enough!

The economics of TaaS makes it more financially appealing than actual car ownership. Meaning with an EV RT fleet, the costs per mile for consumers should be cheaper than owning and driving your own car.

This is why so many people are so bullish on TaaS. Historically new products which are more efficient financially for consumers always displaces old tech. It's happened over and over, again and again, with many tech breakthroughs. Given enough time, TaaS will very likely reduce the auto sales market to a mere fraction of what it is today.

What good will those cheap Chinese EV's be if no one is buying them ten years from now because almost everyone is now using TaaS?

This might be what Elon is considering, if the rumors of scrapping the $25K car turn out to be true.

Maybe. But the car culture is still strong in North America and to some degree in Europe. It could be a decade or more before RT significantly affects personal vehicle sales. Will tesla stay with the same five models until then? You would think there would be at least rumours of other product (vehicle) development going on at tesla. And maybe there is. But it would be helpful for investors to know that.

Jmho.

 

[nativewolf]

You aren't thinking large enough!

The economics of TaaS makes it more financially appealing than actual car ownership. Meaning with an EV RT fleet, the costs per mile for consumers should be cheaper than owning and driving your own car.

This is why so many people are so bullish on TaaS. Historically new products which are more efficient financially for consumers always displaces old tech. It's happened over and over, again and again, with many tech breakthroughs. Given enough time, TaaS will very likely reduce the auto sales market to a mere fraction of what it is today.

What good will those cheap Chinese EV's be if no one is buying them ten years from now because almost everyone is now using TaaS?

But how will a TaaS market move people? Our traffic jams exist for a reason. There is no traffic on many roads for many hours for a reason. I just don't see it from a network POV. Then I would add that I don't see it from a societal POV either. I don't see how the average family moves the crapola out of the car. I have posted all these concerns many times but nobody has ever responded with legitimate solutions.

I could see some movement if we shifted to remote work much more aggressively. EM does not like remote work. Traffic jams exist. Ride sharing buses make only 1 or max 2 trips in and out. They go 1 direction almost always completely empty. Still the best thing for traffic.

I think if an outsider actually looks at how people use cars and why they will become very very skeptical of TaaS. If it is cheaper than owning a car it will be really cheap. If the miles are that cheap, how do you make $. Todays owners take on all the variable costs and don't actually account for them.

I come back to RT simply replacing Ubers current market and expanding on the edges, so more likely a traveler uses a RT than renting or asking family for rides. Everyone contemplating driving somewhere for a short time and searching for expensive parking would likely use a RT. Etc etc. Same markets Uber serves.

 

[jerry33]

You aren't thinking large enough!

The economics of TaaS makes it more financially appealing than actual car ownership. Meaning with an EV RT fleet, the costs per mile for consumers should be cheaper than owning and driving your own car.

Provided that it's also convenient. I suspect it would have to be somewhere around 90% cheaper than owning a car if it takes ten minutes or longer to arrive. Child seats and time to arrive are two very inconvenient items. If there are enough RTs to cover the rush hour, then most of the fleet will be idle until the next rush hour.

 

[2daMoon]

People without $$ at stake are possibly less bias since they have no actual $$ to gain/lose. If someone has 10000 shares of Tesla, obviously they are bullish and anything they say is through an owner's mindset to practically will it higher because they have been making good $ the last 10 years.

It's also a concern to most everyone here that bulls here aren't that open to any other opinions or comments. When everyone in a discussion has only one thought, be cautious because everyone around you seems to only think the same way. It's almost like any social media channel/news outlet now. This is obviously a Tesla investment forum, but any other counter opinions here (from what I've noticed) is massively drowned or insulted out. Anyone and you can take my comments for whatever they are worth (it's free so near worthless as well), and like Twitter, we'll see what ultimately happens in a few years (5+ is fair) to Tesla stock and to all the real investors here, but if folks here only care about bullish comments and shutdown the rest, be cautious since it all looks like cheerleading ultimately.

We'll see where the stock is ultimately in a few years.

Please, provide a similar thesis on why a shareholder would place any value on the words from an admitted non-shareholder who finds it necessary to post in a Tesla investment forum.

Go into some detail on the motivation behind this choice.

Lastly, provide some insight on how you discern the difference between being "drowned or insulted out" and being called out when an ill-informed opinion is demonstrated to be factually false.

 

[scaesare]

Yeah, Elon is no my hero. Not even a dawn surprise.

The internal email was sent close to midnight PT, per a timestamp seen by Business Insider.

In the memo, obtained by BI, the Tesla CEO said that there has been a "duplication of roles and job functions in certain areas" as the company has grown rapidly.

On Sunday night, workers who were impacted by the layoffs received an email to their personal accounts, informing them their roles had been eliminated.

"Effective now, you will not need to perform any further work and therefore will no longer have access to Tesla systems and physical locations," the email read.

How would you handle a large RIF?

 

[nativewolf]

Not based on what 12.3.4 is doing. Yes there have been some improvements but not remotely close to being autonomous. Who would pay all the traffic tickets for all the laws it breaks. . (Actually, that’s a good question. Who will pay the fines? )

The driver. Tesla

 

[Linkmeup]

Well, I turned on FSD for the first time this morning driving my parents. First timer thoughts:

- "sophisticated cruise control" from my 70+ year old Dad
- it onboarded the car safely while on the freeway with one easy lever movement and screen visualization!
- lots of disengagements, but the feedback mechanism was super easy to engage with and I sent useful voice feedback 4 times
- turning is an incredible experience and so is the fact it tries to keep at least one car length distance between the tesla and any other car in front

couple of issues:
1. Small speed bumps that require movement and a small hook movement (its a weird quirk of the road going onto Alma in Palo Alto) ... well FSD wanted to ram through the speed bumps rather than make the intuitive hook...i had to disengage pretty quickly
2. Construction on the freeway set my speed limit to 55 mph for a lot of miles instead of 65 and the car was annoyingly very slow on carpool lane at 55 mph instead of speed up. Thankfully, it switched to cruise control as I accelerated and kept the FSD experience in-sync

 

[nativewolf]

Provided that it's also convenient. I suspect it would have to be somewhere around 90% cheaper than owning a car if it takes ten minutes or longer to arrive. Child seats and time to arrive are two very inconvenient items. If there are enough RTs to cover the rush hour, then most of the fleet will be idle until the next rush hour.

Yes, the childs seat that fits to the stroller that is already in the trunk of the SUV/Van/Car. Plus the 9 years olds soccer stuff that is also there, plus +++. Going grocery shopping. Is the TaaS vehicle waiting for you for 20 mins? Or do you come out and wait 10 mins for another to show up?

I don't think people that push the RT model have child care responsibilities and take their kids to school and look at other parents cars, or go to the local metro station and talk to people commuting. Things that would drive RT - it would be faster than a train or bus on HOV bus lanes, cleaner, cheaper, no waiting.

 

[nativewolf]

How would you handle a large RIF?

I thought the firing was handled the way they normally are, it is never easy. In my industry I've seen factories shut and line workers making $20 an hour without jobs.

 

[2daMoon]

You aren't thinking large enough!

The economics of TaaS makes it more financially appealing than actual car ownership. Meaning with an EV RT fleet, the costs per mile for consumers should be cheaper than owning and driving your own car.

This is why so many people are so bullish on TaaS. Historically new products which are more efficient financially for consumers always displaces old tech. It's happened over and over, again and again, with many tech breakthroughs. Given enough time, TaaS will very likely reduce the auto sales market to a mere fraction of what it is today.

What good will those cheap Chinese EV's be if no one is buying them ten years from now because almost everyone is now using TaaS?

This might be what Elon is considering, if the rumors of scrapping the $25K car turn out to be true.

Add to this that Tesla will be selling the tech to enter the marketplace to each OEM who wants to remain relevant.

 

[Krugerrand]

Yeah, Elon is no my hero. Not even a dawn surprise.

The internal email was sent close to midnight PT, per a timestamp seen by Business Insider.

In the memo, obtained by BI, the Tesla CEO said that there has been a "duplication of roles and job functions in certain areas" as the company has grown rapidly.

On Sunday night, workers who were impacted by the layoffs received an email to their personal accounts, informing them their roles had been eliminated.

"Effective now, you will not need to perform any further work and therefore will no longer have access to Tesla systems and physical locations," the email read.

What point are you trying to make? The email was posted here a day or so ago.

He’s cleaning house. So, what? He’s done it multiple times before, he’s quite likely to do it again. It’s a positive for the company all around. Deadweight must be removed from the company for it to remain healthy and move forward with agility.

You don’t have to like the man, but you can’t honestly argue that he doesn’t know how to run a business profitably, expand it at breakneck speeds, attract the best people, drive innovation etc., etc., As an investor there isn’t a better business person to grow your money.

 

[Knightshade]

We enter into long regulatory and standards debates, which will definitely go OT. Still, you paint a static picture which fits conventional reality. I do not argue that.

Ok, so far so good... because yes what I'm writing is current reality in law.

There are, however, countless examples of major technical or business practice changes that spawn SAE change and rapid consequencial regulatory changes.

I suppose that depends how you define "rapid"?

J3016 has been updated every 2-3 years for at least a decade now. But the revisions tend not to be wholesale re-writes...and the things we are talking about (OEDR, DDT fallback, and defined ODD) are foundational elements.

I'm not sure what new standard you think anyone (but Tesla) would be interested in that discards those concepts entirely, let alone rapidly?

Ditto lawmakers who don't understand any of this for the most part so will be far less likely to hew to some brand new unknown standards doc than they one they've had on the books for years. Even then changing existing laws is also, typically, a years long process... (in some states it HAS to be because the state legislature doesn't even meet annually-- Texas being somewhat famous for this)

Such is not ever easy. From ancient ones like magnetic stripes, MICR to numerous data transmission and data security standards, when a serious commercial demand exists rapid alteration of regulation and enforcement also happens.

Again what are you citing as rapid?

Surely not by 8/8 this year.

My point is not to discuss existing practice, but to stay unequivocally that if indeed FSD passes all responsible performance, stability and emergency requirements, one way or another the standards and regulations will quickly change.

Except currently the definition of "passes responsible performance, stability and emergency requirements" is... complies with J3016.

In every single state that allows self-driving.

You've yet to suggest what the alternative to that is, and what would motivate a state to switch to it?

Rather than argue examples and make arcane analogies (I have a few) we might all agree that IF FSD meets all working requirements very, very well, then and only then, the SAE and regulatory approvals will be rapid....by their standards!

I'm not sure how to parse the above.

Compliance with J3016 is largely self-declared. In most states there are no "regulators" that check, nor is the SAE directly involved. (CA is a weird outlier)

Outside of CA, you, as a company, state your vehicle is L4 J3016 compliant, can obey all traffic laws, and is insured.

That's it. You can now deploy it as a robotaxi broadly speaking.... (there's a few states where you have to submit as form saying the above, but no proof is required.... and a few more you need to submit a second document to law enforcement with your "plan" for how the no-driver vehicle will interact with cops, but that's it).

The problem isn't Tesla needs anyone to agree their car is L4. The problem is it's fundamentally not, lacking numerous specific requirements to be so right now.

if Tesla wants to deploy driverless cars- they will need to meet those specific requirements (complete OEDR, DDT fallback ability, and defined L4 ODD)

if they HAD those today they could deploy some RTS today

Whatever happens this will not be widely available within this decade even if it is perfected now. Perhaps we might even agree about that!

Ok... my bad for replying in line hence my above questions about how you're defining rapidly.

If as it seems right here you're defining it as "probably not this decade" I don't think we have any argument.

Honestly I think I might be MORE optimistic than you in that regard, I think it's POSSIBLE Tesla gets the missing pieces in place before end of decade.

But by 8/8 this year? Nope.

 

[RSpanner]

How would you handle a large RIF?

I would not have taken my company into that position.

 

[Chunky Jr.]

If Tesla goes all in on the Robotaxi (RT) for the next generation, who buys it? Does Tesla sell RTs to consumers/businesses? Or does Tesla not sell them and operates their own fleet of RTs?

I could see the value of owning a RT so you don't have to wait for one to come get you - you just jump in and go.

If Tesla operates their own fleet, that is a ton of money they will need to build out the fleet. Where does that money come from? 1m RTs at a cost of, say, $20K each is $20B. If it all works out they will be money printers, but until then, that's a lot of cash they'll need beyond what they have now. Debt? Another stock offering?

 

[Knightshade]

I would not have taken my company into that position.

Can you cite any large company that's been around more than a couple years that has never done a company-wide round of layoffs?

Or are you just a better manager than everyone who ever ran a large company?

Testing with a human safety driver with the goal of going driverless by the end of next year.

Will you believe Elon if he announces that on 8/8?

I think human safety driver would be a weird walkback of years of his describing how RTs and their rollout would work- but if he wants to buy more time for FSD development to justify betting the company on RT it's possible they announce that.

I would be dubious of the 'end of next year' claim simply because he's made that claim seemingly annually for a long time now (including where I directly quoted him doing so in 2019 at Autonomy day). Even he admits he has no idea how long it'll take him to accomplish things nobody has before.

That doesn't mean I don't believe he eventually tends to accomplish them. But nothing about my FSD experience (or that of many many others who've also been using it for years now) gives me any confidence actual driverless is that close.