-
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
KBF
Model X owner (formerly Cdn Signature Model S)
The most effective and efficient way to end ICE sales would be to start by ending oil and gas subsidies; and tax ICE vehicles to cover the true cost to the economy of their extra emissions.
Norway didn't ban ICE, they taxed it and exempted EV's (until recently, now EV's pay some tax IIRC). I think the Canadian government still talks about banning new ICE in 2035 (always far enough away that the timelines can be bumped, it's more virtue signalling) - but the actual effect it's had is increase resentment among the poor who are panicking. I do my best to share about how EV's (at least Tesla) are getting cheaper and ICE's aren't as cheap as they think, but outright bans are simply unnecessary.
With Tesla in the picture, all governments have to do is stay out of the way - they were the first to actually want to try to 'win' with BEV. If governments can resist the urge to bail out legacy auto, we'd transition faster.
When ICE becomes more expensive than BEV, people will change by choice. It's why I'm very much looking forward to the end of the year and our next gen models, whatever they may be. Build something safe but cheap without bells and whistles, and we can finally dominate the entire car market, not just the medium-high end.
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.
Ron Baron on CNBC this morning, who was just at SpaceX this weekend and Tesla and likely knows more than anyone outside of Tesla, explained :
1.Tesla has 1.2M in excess capacity and will use it to make the New Model. (So let's assume Tesla overshot 3/Y demand and overbuilt capacity and will smartly use it for New Model and help balance 3/Y supply to demand.)
2. New Model just won't be as cheap to build as they planned. (Sort of like what happened with the Model 3 alien dreadnought, but Test is skipping the experimental process and going right for the tents.)
3. Tesla plans to build 5M/yr of these new Models
4. TSLA will go up huge from here, this is the bottom and Ron has no plans of trimming his $3.5B position. He hasn't made financial progress in last 3 years while everyone else has gained, but he's gonna take a rubberband and catch up.
5. Robotaxi- He invested in Cruise to learn and they invest $250k per car. He got a ride with FSD V12 by software employee and believes only Tesla has the compute and data. Believes the timing is "now, now!"
6. Hybrids won't exist in the future, we'll be all electric (we all already know this)
7. SpaceX will go up 20x in the next 15 years, and quadruple in next 6-7 (two of Baron's funds are 10% SpaceX)
I remember Munro stating that you cannot make a cheaper Model "2" by deleting features in a Model Y. Removing a $25 screen and $15 power strut, and $20 cooled seats doesn't get you a cheaper Model. The only change in the New Model will be in manufacturing process and it will not noticeable to owners.
Model S/X are wider than 3/Y, they won't be built on the smaller platform.
Nobody else is doing anything other than sampling 4680s yet.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
This is along the same lines as my thinking yesterday. Today is a new day, so time for a new theoryI 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.
IMHO Tesla will build multiple new models starting in early 2025:
- Early 2025 - "off-road" variant of Model Y. Little/no sheet metal changes, mostly lift kit and plastic cladding. Costs more than Y.
- Late 2025 - "SUV" variant of Model Y with boxier back half/vertical 5th door and maybe non-joke 3rd row option. Costs more than Y.
- Early 2025 - "Model C", a small CUV with completely new sheet metal. Built in Shanghai only.
- Never (j/k) - Robopod aka Cybercab revealed on 8/8, to be built in Austin.
3-row SUV/CUV is over 10% of the US market.
But I suspect it's a lot less of other markets.
However, 3-row is a target of a lot of companies and it's a tougher challenge for EV at a time when the relatively high cost is a threat.
Companies were fleeing sedans when Tesla released the Model 3 and took a big bite.
When other companies are focused on big, it could pay to go smaller. Although there's a lot of competition globally, there's more appeal, and in the USA the market is badly served. Bolt is dead, and we're waiting for the LG LFP for a Boltium, the Kona* and Niro** , aren't that cheap, have no tax credit and have relatively slow DCFC.
The Volvo EX-30 is the real target, and use the not-Chinese advantage.
* Kona $32.7k for 200 miles and limited spec, $37k for 261 miles and more, $41k full spec
** Niro $39.6k for 253 miles, $44k full spec
But what about all the other car manufacturers? Other BEV only players get hurt just as bad by its withdrawl. Don't the legacy benefit from the IRA by selling their hybrids? Seems to me if the IRA goes away legacy will be hurt worse by it's withdrawl as they're already admitting they can't compete profitably in the BEV space and pivoting to hybrids. The IRA goes away and they're still not competitive in the BEV space, hybrids become more expensive (after they've transitioned to making the inferior to BEV hybrids) for the consumer and they're left with their dying ICE vehicles. IMO everyone else is far more dependant on the IRA to grow their BEV/hybrid businesses than Tesla and their ICE business will be irrelavent within a decade.
The IRA is a nice bonus for Tesla. It's a lifeline for everyone else trying to compete/transition from ICE in the US car market.
Don't even get me started on how USA isn't the only car market in the world.
Silly FUDster...
(Likely someone else has pointed this out, but busy day for me today and it'll be hours before I catch up to see if someone else has this covered. Apologies in advance if so.)
Doggydogworld
Active Member
Europe had sky-high gas taxes for decades, yet EVs were only 3-4% of the market until EU 95g mandated an overnight ramp to 20% in 2020-21.
My understanding is that Safety Score is turned off (or at 100%) whenever FSD is used.
Andy O
Member
I agree with most of your post, but I think there is something the Canadian government could do a lot more of to help with the switch to EVs, namely subsidize the installation of superchargers in the northern regions of Canada. I'm on the northern edge of the supercharger network and effectively can't take take a full day trip north and back. And I'm only 108 km from the US border. The vast majority of Canada is not conveniently accessible by EV.
Norway was going well with generous incentives, but what gave the biggest boost was the introduction of more affordable long-range BEVs.
Part of the overall fast ramp of 2020 may have been that the regulatory change date became the release target for new models.
KBF
Model X owner (formerly Cdn Signature Model S)
I do think that building infrastructure is a legitimate use of taxpayer money - as long as the bidding process is open and transparent. My bias is that I trust Tesla to actually produce quality charging infrastructure that lasts, but our federal government seems to want to deal with the likes of VW... I know that some provinces (BC at least) have made an effort to build charging facilities. Though it's still concentrated in the south. Would be nice to make a corridor up to Alaska to help those folks up there get connected to the rest of the continent.
I still love how Tesla forged ahead with the network without government funding, because so often there are strings attached that can get in the way of quality infrastructure (and it just won't happen in some areas). But the limitation is there's a bit of a chicken and egg conundrum - they won't build chargers where there's minimal EV market existing, but that market can't grow without chargers connecting them - I wasn't in range of Superchargers for the first 7 years or so, so I get it. MB was a bit of a dead zone until they finished the Trans-Canada network.
Food for thought:
-- Sales numbers aren't a perfect indication of demand. If Kia only made, or otherwise was only willing and able to sell 1,281 EV9's, how could we know if potential demand was higher than that?
-- What if the EV9 isn't exactly what people are looking for in a 3-row? Could Tesla do better?
-- Tesla's goal isn't to compete with other EV's, but with all vehicles. We should instead evaluate the market by looking at sales of all the other medium-sized 3-row crossover/SUV's (Honda Pilot/Passport, Toyota Highlander, etc) and the sales numbers for the big 3-row SUVs (Chevy Tahoe/GMC Yukon, Suburban, etc.), and maybe also think about all the vans and minivans on the road too.
With Tesla talking of building variants on their existing lines, I'd love to see not only smaller/cheaper versions (with my usual request for smaller wheels with higher-profile, non-performance tires), but also a bit roomier 3-row Y, and I'd also love to see a 3-row SUV or Van built on the Cybertruck platform. A CyberSUV or CyberVan that shares the entire front end with the existing truck and has modifications for more seating (and, of course, a roof and windows) in the back half would be amazing and seems like a no-brainer. GM/Chevy have been using that model for decades, and Rivian did it with their SUV/Truck....
Admittedly, I'm probably in a relatively small minority with 4 kids and a decent sized dog that goes most of the places we go, so I actually need room for 6+. We use our 7-seat Y for some trips, and we use the minivan when we need to haul more stuff along with us or just want to be a bit more spread out. The X would be hard to justify...but I'm also still hoping that a CyberVan/SUV would (eventually) come in closer to the original Cybertruck announced prices.
None of this changes the impact to Tesla specifically lol, and earnings or what may be required in terms of further price cuts if the IRA benefit disappears.
The IRA benefit could disappear next year regardless depending upon implementation of the restriction that will disqualify EVs from the credit starting in 2025 if they contain any critical battery minerals from foreign entities of concern. China and North Korea together have a borderline monopoly on some of this stuff including battery-grade graphite.
The % sourcing from free trade countries also continues ramping up.
But I haven’t kept up with new developments in this area so not sure if any news has dropped about how this will unfold next year.
Not snark. it seems to me they can and might achieve quite major decreases in Capex for the new vehicle(s) while simultaneously reducing manufacturing costs by a combination of GigaCasting and even more extensive modularization as in Model Y already. Combining those with already in production rare earth content in motors and vastly cheaper batteries (whether 4680 or not, battery component costs are continuing their slide.
Considering what we already know it seems quite likely that this will actually deliver something amazing.
Will it be enough? Will margins be high enough? Will FSD actually deliver with it? Will there be a small van, SUV versions? What will be RT? Right now we simply do not know. Sometime quite soon we probably will know.
I saw that interview with Ron. I think its safe to say that by "now, now!" he means in the very near future.
RT is revealed on 8/8/24, goes into production late 2025, first road use at small scale likely in early 2026, maybe very late 2025 in very small quantitites.
So "now" is probably a relative term, but its certainly starting up "soon" given FSD v12 progress this past month.
Good question. In the past, I recall some info that my score would go up if I engaged FSD more often, along the same lines as if we drive at night the score goes down (a while ago). This implies that Tesla scored FSD higher than Humans, and maybe they valued the data more and just encouraged us to use it.
Would be cool to know for sure and makes me wonder... what else they know from that gigantic data pool? I'm at 100 using Tesla Insurance and FSD heavily now. We used to be low 90's score. So either I got better at driving due to FSD increased usage, or Tesla still favors FSD over humans driving and scores all FSD actions as 100 is my bet. But I doubt that's the reality if they scored themselves. Not yet anyway.
Hopefully cars on boats explains much of the low delivery numbers for Q1 and that Q2 will be better. (See thread.)
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
