Spacep0d
Active Member
*$3,000, $1,000. Dollar sign goes before the number.
-
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
willow_hiller
Well-Known Member
Prior to the hiring freeze, Tesla was hiring people to collect Autopilot data for "prototype vehicles" during odd hours of the day: Tesla boosts its data collection team with hiring ramp for Prototype Vehicle Operators
It would be a little strange to hire prototype vehicle drivers before they had a prototype vehicle.
Not the best on your CV is “Preprototype Driver”
I have a theory about what is going on with the affordable compact Tesla car. For arguments sake lets call this car the Model 2, or the M2. Even though we know that will not be the name its easy and convenient to call it that (for now).
We now know a hybrid version of the M2 is coming, a mix of the current Gen2 designs (M3 & MY) and the upcoming unboxed design (the RT and what was going to be the M2). Lets call this hybrid design the Model 2.5, or M2.5.
Tesla said the release timeline of the affordable car has been accelerated. Before it was slated to release late 2025, so this new M2.5 will likely go into production in early 2025. But it won't be the new unboxed production line, its going to be made on existing M3 & MY lines alongside Gen2 cars, yet it will have some design qualities of what was going to be the unboxed M2.
My theory is this new M2.5 will release alongside the Juniper refreshed MY and both versions will have qualities of the unboxed design (RT). For example, steer by wire and 48v architecture, things which the CT also adopted from the unboxed design.
My hunch is the M2.5 will be a downgraded version of the MY+, with differences like these possibly:
- MY+ has new ventilated seats, M2.5 does not
- MY+ keeps heated seats and steering wheel, M2.5 does not have them
- MY+ has rear passenger LCD screen like the M3+ has now, M2.5 would not
- MY+ keeps the current motors or maybe even upgraded motors, M2.5 has lower power and cheaper motors and is slower
- In face M2.5 might come RWD only with one motor
- MY+ keeps current 82kWh battery pack and range, M2.5 has slightly smaller LFP pack with less range, maybe 220 to 250 miles
- MY+ has the interior light strips the CT and M3+ have now, M2.5 does not
- MY+ keeps powered liftgate, M2.5 has manual liftgate
This is what I think we might be seeing. A downgraded MY to fill the affordable car gap in the lineup. Rather than spend the money to build the true M2 on the new unboxed line in Austin they've decided to build a new cheaper version of the MY on the future Juniper MY lines as a new variant, to sell at a much reduced price. I also think we'll see a similar reduced M3 version on the Highland M3 lines too, with similar changes as I listed above.
This approach both utilizes existing lines to expand production higher, while also allowing the new Gen3 unboxed production line to be dedicated 100% to RT's, one model only, no variations, thereby greatly simplifying RT production and reducing costs.
Part of my thinking here is I do feel its unrealistic to expect Tesla to build a new unboxed design on the existing M3 & MY lines, these just aren't compatible manufacturing processes. I also don't think they've designed an entirely new hybrid unboxed / old car design in such a short timeframe. I feel its much more realistic we'll see them use current M3 & MY designs to downgrade into cheaper variants instead, especially given how soon this new M2.5 is expected to go into production.
Just my two cents. We'll know in a year or so for certain.
Hey, but how about "Preprototype PRO Driver"..!
jkirkwood001
Active Member
I think that's wishful thinking on our part. Here in Canada, the Liberal government may soon be booted out of office in no small part to it's rollout of a carbon tax. And the recent rise in favor of hybrids over EVs in the US is another example of citizens virtue-signaling they care about the environment... "just as long as I don't have to be the one paying for it." (Eco-NIMBY-ism)
Don't get me wrong: everyone here believes in Tesla's mission. But many general publics still don't want to actually make sacrifices towards a significant reduction in their impact on the climate (fewer holiday flights, anyone?)
Raising taxes to help our grandchildren live? Pfft. Let's kick that can down the road a little further, eh?
It looks like Tesla will need to win by creating the best car with the best value vs relying on people to do the “right thing” for the climate. Fortunately I think Tesla is in one of the best positions to do so.
So many people are flipping out in a positive way over the new model 3 performance and price / value.
So many people are flipping out in a positive way over the new model 3 performance and price / value.
Intellectually there is no distinction, we had the same industry in Amsterdam 300 years ago, in Venice 500 years ago. Trading is what makes a market. No market...no liquidity...no trading...no value. We have barely advanced the speed of trading, barely. I suggest some study of the history of markets, the synthetic stuff is crap but otherwise the markets are doing what they have always done. Faster, lower costs, market makers always dominate, buyer beware.
The market does NOT care how long you hold the stock. It just doesn't. Tesla doesn't either. You could have any number of reasons for buying and selling. The market does NOT care. You are not more virtuous because your horizon is different than any number of the people who discuss shorting. You just aren't. Don't think you are. That sort of thinking will distract from the primary question....is this a good investment.
One of our better know posters sold when he found out Tesla had resorted to generic advertising because to him that represented a sign that Tesla had issues. It didn't matter what price the stock was, it was that they were advertising. That's a thesis...he acted. He is not more or less virtuous today than yesterday. He's the same man.
If you are investing in Tesla for "impact" reasons than you are not so much investing as backing a cause. Don't conflate the two activities.
Krugerrand
Meow
My ‘backing a cause’ is ‘investing’ in YOUR descendants. I already ‘backed my other cause’ by not having descendants. You’re welcome on both fronts.
I just realized Lars Moravy actually speaks german - here he explains that new M3P is focused on handling and lacks cooling for long Nurburgring turns, more focus on street performance...
Every single person has a reason to invest...or not.
I plainly laid out mine.
I don't need a history lesson on how markets work.
I repeat, I am invested in Tesla and only sell as needed.
In my opinion, short sellers and option players are not investors.
Not sure where the discussion on being virtuous is coming from.
I plainly laid out mine.
I don't need a history lesson on how markets work.
I repeat, I am invested in Tesla and only sell as needed.
In my opinion, short sellers and option players are not investors.
Not sure where the discussion on being virtuous is coming from.
%100 !
More germane to the thread:
Regarding Robotaxi, 8/8 is unveil/ plan for manufacturing which will be built with the unboxed process on new lines at Austin no earlier than late 2025 (and aligned with FSD unsupervised).
These lines can also make a lower cost human driven variant, but that slot is occupied for now by the blended new tech on old line models which will see production before the second half of 2025.
cliff harris
Member
Fair point, but I'm thinking this because of 2 different drivers:I think that's wishful thinking on our part. Here in Canada, the Liberal government may soon be booted out of office in no small part to it's rollout of a carbon tax. And the recent rise in favor of hybrids over EVs in the US is another example of citizens virtue-signaling they care about the environment... "just as long as I don't have to be the one paying for it." (Eco-NIMBY-ism)
Don't get me wrong: everyone here believes in Tesla's mission. But many general publics still don't want to actually make sacrifices towards a significant reduction in their impact on the climate (fewer holiday flights, anyone?)
Raising taxes to help our grandchildren live? Pfft. Let's kick that can down the road a little further, eh?
1) The US has its own crazy climate denial politics which might spill a bit to Canada, but a lot of Europe is not like this. I don't think China is either. And despite all the anti-climate politics, the fact is that the US still has EV incentives.
2) We are just one major catastrophic event away from a sea change in attitudes to climate change. I guess the phrase '9/11 for climate' comes to mind. Sadly I think it will have to be something where a bunch of rich westerners suffer. The likelihood of such an event rises each year.
Imagine hurricane katrina but it hits Washington DC, or New York. The general public will suddenly demand to know why the govt isn't doing something.
Obviously I'd rather it didnt take tens of thousands of deaths for politicians to do something, but this is the sad reality.
I could not agree more. In my own small company we do great work, hard on the ground forest management fixing decades of mis management. Great benefits for the forests and our clients forests are healthy through this deeply regenerative work. All the investors want to talk about is carbon and climate tech, which is all such a basket of crapola when it comes to nature based solutions. Just massive bag of crapola. We have major NGOs backed by investment banks trying to make markets in natural based forestry solutions that will in fact kill the forests by stopping disturbance at scale ( a regeneration requirement on tens of millions of acres of forests that they are targeting). Mind boggling bad decisions and if you peel it back Goldman, TPG, etc are lined up at the trough to feed. It is all just virtue signaling of the worst sort. 5 different middlemen lined up to suck money out when in reality the forests needs to carry half the carbon it does today. So we kill our forests so some investment banker (Goldman) and a broker (Friend of Auditor) and an appraiser (Friends of IB) and an audit firm ( E&Y, etc) can make a profit by selling credits to Amazon so they can pretend to be clean while at the same time are planning to bulldoze the last, largest pristine piedmont forests in Virginia. So they kill 2 sets of forests, one with a fax carbon offset credit and the second with bulldozers. Not hypothetical this is what is happening.I think that's wishful thinking on our part. Here in Canada, the Liberal government may soon be booted out of office in no small part to it's rollout of a carbon tax. And the recent rise in favor of hybrids over EVs in the US is another example of citizens virtue-signaling they care about the environment... "just as long as I don't have to be the one paying for it." (Eco-NIMBY-ism)
Don't get me wrong: everyone here believes in Tesla's mission. But many general publics still don't want to actually make sacrifices towards a significant reduction in their impact on the climate (fewer holiday flights, anyone?)
Raising taxes to help our grandchildren live? Pfft. Let's kick that can down the road a little further, eh?
In the EU the carbon price is plummeting because substitutions are happening faster than anticipated. IMO taxpayers in Canada are correct to react against a carbon tax. They can smell fraud and that's what the carbon tax schemes have been. Fraud on Fraud. I'm not against helping to account for externalities but carbon tax are not the answer.
Just a small data point, but I'm freakin ready for all cars to be autonomous. I drive across the DFW metroplex every day to get to work and people suck at driving. There are accidents constantly (one yesterday and two this morning!) that back up traffic. The next thing I see that creates traffic are people driving under the speed limit....like going 40 to 50 on the highway. WTF? Then there are these types of people (pic below) who probably don't even know anything about the road rules (ya know, the farthest left lane is fastest/for passing).
So - twice a day, I cross the metroplex and have to deal with this sh*t. Bring on the taxi network Tesla. LET'S. GO.
So - twice a day, I cross the metroplex and have to deal with this sh*t. Bring on the taxi network Tesla. LET'S. GO.
Paracelsus
Active Member
On this 70th anniversary of Bell Lab’s silicone solar milestone it’s a good day for a deep breath and some appreciation for how fast Tesla is actually executing given every man-made obstacle in their way. FSD, Robo Taxi, a $25,000 car, utility-scale battery deployment, Tesla Solar+Powerwall residential systems, the Cybertruck, Models 3, X, and Y, or even a single Gigafactory either didn’t exist or were only a whisper when I bought shares in 2013 (note to self and to TMC Family - HODL). The speed and the acceleration of development and implementation by the Tesla team is really quite staggering IMO when you stop to think that it was 70 years ago today that Bell Labs had created a 6% efficient solar cell that could change the World…if only the Existing Paradigm of Energy Generation and Regulatory Capture hadn’t stood in the way of changing course until pretty much the whole World had to recognize the existing course was going to run us all into the ditch. Not since the Carter Administration’s efforts to put solar on the White House has any administration taken the potential of Bell Lab’s discovery to change the World seriously, and of course the very next administration took those panels down.
I am grateful Elon has been willing and able to lean-in and to even bleed on the sharp end of that spear of Change that people fear and that the Existing Paradigm resists. Otherwise left to its own course, we would only trickle along at the speed of government to ensure that those that controlled the Old Paradigm would indeed develop and control the New Paradigm, and not until they were good and ready to.
“Bell Labs announced the invention on April 25, 1954 in Murray Hill, New Jersey. They demonstrated their solar panel by using it to power a small toy Ferris wheel and a solar powered radio transmitter.
Those first silicon solar cells were about 6 percent efficient at converting the energy in sunlight into electricity, a huge improvement over any previous solar cells.
The New York Times wrote that the silicon solar cell “may mark the beginning of a new era, leading eventually to the realization of one of mankind’s most cherished dreams–the harnessing of the almost limitless energy of the sun for the uses of civilization.”
www.aps.org
I am grateful Elon has been willing and able to lean-in and to even bleed on the sharp end of that spear of Change that people fear and that the Existing Paradigm resists. Otherwise left to its own course, we would only trickle along at the speed of government to ensure that those that controlled the Old Paradigm would indeed develop and control the New Paradigm, and not until they were good and ready to.
“Bell Labs announced the invention on April 25, 1954 in Murray Hill, New Jersey. They demonstrated their solar panel by using it to power a small toy Ferris wheel and a solar powered radio transmitter.
Those first silicon solar cells were about 6 percent efficient at converting the energy in sunlight into electricity, a huge improvement over any previous solar cells.
The New York Times wrote that the silicon solar cell “may mark the beginning of a new era, leading eventually to the realization of one of mankind’s most cherished dreams–the harnessing of the almost limitless energy of the sun for the uses of civilization.”
This Month in Physics History
April 25, 1954: Bell Labs demonstrates the first practical silicon solar cell
Last edited:
While I don't disagree with your general thesis, if he's truly betting on robotaxis then any of these that allows for it will be part of the 2.5. Powered lift gates (and probably powered doors too), screens in the back, etc... will all be standard features so that it can work without a driver whether its the low end or the high end variant.
Were that to be the approach, seems likely given the comments during the Q1 discussions...I have a theory about what is going on with the affordable compact Tesla car. For arguments sake lets call this car the Model 2, or the M2. Even though we know that will not be the name its easy and convenient to call it that (for now).
We now know a hybrid version of the M2 is coming, a mix of the current Gen2 designs (M3 & MY) and the upcoming unboxed design (the RT and what was going to be the M2). Lets call this hybrid design the Model 2.5, or M2.5.
Tesla said the release timeline of the affordable car has been accelerated. Before it was slated to release late 2025, so this new M2.5 will likely go into production in early 2025. But it won't be the new unboxed production line, its going to be made on existing M3 & MY lines alongside Gen2 cars, yet it will have some design qualities of what was going to be the unboxed M2.
My theory is this new M2.5 will release alongside the Juniper refreshed MY and both versions will have qualities of the unboxed design (RT). For example, steer by wire and 48v architecture, things which the CT also adopted from the unboxed design.
My hunch is the M2.5 will be a downgraded version of the MY+, with differences like these possibly:
- MY+ has new ventilated seats, M2.5 does not
- MY+ keeps heated seats and steering wheel, M2.5 does not have them
- MY+ has rear passenger LCD screen like the M3+ has now, M2.5 would not
- MY+ keeps the current motors or maybe even upgraded motors, M2.5 has lower power and cheaper motors and is slower
- In face M2.5 might come RWD only with one motor
- MY+ keeps current 82kWh battery pack and range, M2.5 has slightly smaller LFP pack with less range, maybe 220 to 250 miles
- MY+ has the interior light strips the CT and M3+ have now, M2.5 does not
- MY+ keeps powered liftgate, M2.5 has manual liftgate
This is what I think we might be seeing. A downgraded MY to fill the affordable car gap in the lineup. Rather than spend the money to build the true M2 on the new unboxed line in Austin they've decided to build a new cheaper version of the MY on the future Juniper MY lines as a new variant, to sell at a much reduced price. I also think we'll see a similar reduced M3 version on the Highland M3 lines too, with similar changes as I listed above.
This approach both utilizes existing lines to expand production higher, while also allowing the new Gen3 unboxed production line to be dedicated 100% to RT's, one model only, no variations, thereby greatly simplifying RT production and reducing costs.
Part of my thinking here is I do feel its unrealistic to expect Tesla to build a new unboxed design on the existing M3 & MY lines, these just aren't compatible manufacturing processes. I also don't think they've designed an entirely new hybrid unboxed / old car design in such a short timeframe. I feel its much more realistic we'll see them use current M3 & MY designs to downgrade into cheaper variants instead, especially given how soon this new M2.5 is expected to go into production.
Just my two cents. We'll know in a year or so for certain.
1. That would simplify offering a high-end version at the outset i.e. a 'hot hatch' to facilitate high margins and strong appeal. Rather similar to Cybertruck initial approach. First production in Germany, birthplace of the concept;
2. That would also allow rapid offerings of optional extras, including the items common to new 3 and Y, think colors, all those trim features...
3. For sure, magical cost and capex decline by mass quantities ,Conehead style, but felicitous.
Last edited:
Because some folks make themselves out to be such dedicated targets?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
