Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
There's already over 34 cents per share on the books for 2024 due to energy revenue accrued in 2023:

"The margins are even higher! There is a very long tail ($3.8b!) in reserves that will be recognized in future years from Performance Obligations ($1b in the next 12 months alone).

From the 10Q:
"We have elected the practical expedient to omit disclosure of the amount of the transaction price allocated to remaining performance obligations for energy generation and storage sales with an original expected contract length of one year or less and the amount that we have the right to invoice when that amount corresponds directly with the value of the performance to date. As of December 31, 2023, total transaction price allocated to performance obligations that were unsatisfied or partially unsatisfied for contracts with an original expected length of more than one year was $3.43 billion. Of this amount, we expect to recognize $1.05 billion in the next 12 months and the rest over the remaining performance obligation period."

 
Last edited:
The NHSTA investigation is on the NHSTA website, easy to read the source instead of the Reuters spin on it, just search for Tesla and view “investigations” under the model.

(Doesn’t seem that serious?)

Here’s the text:

April 25, 2024 NHTSA ACTION NUMBER: RQ24009OPEN INVESTIGATION
Recall 23V838 Remedy Effectiveness
NHTSA Action Number: RQ24009

Components ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

Opened From: April 25, 2024–Present

Summary

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) is opening a Recall Query to assess the remedy adequacy of Recall 23V838. On December 12, 2023, Tesla filed a Defect Information Report (Recall 23V838) applicable to all Tesla models produced and equipped with any version of its Autopilot system, which Tesla described as an SAE Level 2 (L2) Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS). Autopilot is the simultaneous engagement of Tesla’s Traffic-Aware Cruise Control (TACC) and Autosteer. In describing the safety defect, Tesla’s Defect Information Report (DIR) explained that “the prominence and scope of the system’s controls may be insufficient to prevent driver misuse,” and Tesla committed to the deployment of a multipart remedy aimed at improving system and engagement controls and reducing mode confusion.

EA22002 (upgraded from PE21020) was opened to investigate whether Tesla’s Autopilot contained a defect that created an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety and involved extensive crash analysis, human factors analysis, vehicle evaluations, and assessment of vehicle control authority and driver engagement technologies. The work conducted in these investigations aligns with Tesla’s conclusion in its 23V838 recall filing. During EA22002, ODI identified at least 13 crashes involving one or more fatalities and many more involving serious injuries in which foreseeable driver misuse of the system played an apparent role.

Tesla filed Recall 23V838 to address concerns regarding the Autopilot system investigated in EA22002. Following deployment of the remedy in Recall 23V838, ODI identified concerns due to post-remedy crash events and results from preliminary NHTSA tests of remedied vehicles. Also, Tesla has stated that a portion of the remedy both requires the owner to opt in and allows a driver to readily reverse it. Tesla has also deployed non-remedy updates to address issues that appear related to ODI’s concerns under EA22002. This investigation will consider why these updates were not a part of the recall or otherwise determined to remedy a defect that poses an unreasonable safety risk.

ODI is therefore opening this Recall Query investigation to further evaluate the adequacy of the remedy for recall 23V838
This may have had a negative effect on the TSLA opening price, as algobots and chicken littles reacted to the news. Then calmer heads must've realized that it only involves the degree of FSD "nagging", and a share price dip may have presented them with a buying opportunity.
 
Washington water power FTW! How's about $127 a month for a Model 3 lease? Wowzers! That's less than a bus pass!


Forget the $25k Model 2, you can get a new Model Y for $23.5k in WA!

Even though the income is hilariously low, at least 50% of the people I work with who makes 40k/year ends up buying a new car that cost about 28-32k with 8+% interest rates and ridiculously long terms of 7 years.
So if you can get a new Tesla with these lease terms

$127/month for @Tesla Model 3
$207/month for @Tesla Model Y

It's actually a good financial decision for people who works at starbucks to get one. Seattle's gas prices are 5-6 dollars a gallon! Most would spend 127/month just on gas easy!
And this is why we need an explosion of L2 chargers at apartment complexes and places of employment.

IMO, L2 charging is far more critical to EV adoption than DC fast chargers. Road tripping is mostly solved. But apartment dwellers need access to convenient, inexpensive charging or it won't make sense to buy an EV, regardless of the initial cost.
 
And this is why we need an explosion of L2 chargers at apartment complexes and places of business.

IMO, L2 charging is far more critical to EV adoption than DC fast chargers. Road tripping is mostly solved. But apartment dwellers need access to convenient, inexpensive charging or it won't make sense to buy an EV, regardless of the initial cost.
Completely agree with this.
 
Read the fine print... income cap is hilariously low for WA state.... like 93k max income for a family for 4 in a state that's not cheap to live in.
The median household income for Washington state for 2017-2021 was $82,400.

Even the highest, King county which includes Seattle, was not that far above the limit at $106,326.

The lowest county, Whitman, was only $43,613. That gave it a rank of 2700 out of 3141 US counties.

No so hilarious.

And many people who live in the exurbs and rural areas commute, often for long distances, into a city or a town. So these people will disproportionately benefit from the lower fuel and maintenance costs of EVs. That may allow them to afford the FSD subscription which will improve their health and safety.

Not to mention the robotaxi income while they’re working in town.

Seems like a fairly enlightened law to me.

 
Last edited:
And this is why we need an explosion of L2 chargers at apartment complexes and places of employment.

IMO, L2 charging is far more critical to EV adoption than DC fast chargers. Road tripping is mostly solved. But apartment dwellers need access to convenient, inexpensive charging or it won't make sense to buy an EV, regardless of the initial cost.
It's a chicken and egg problem. I do believe we need more EVs first before landlords are starting to find a L2 charger becoming a selling point.
 
It's a chicken and egg problem. I do believe we need more EVs first before landlords are starting to find a L2 charger becoming a selling point.
I agree to a point. It's not static. That "selling point" already exists right now in cities on the West coast (all that I can personally speak to). That trend will wash across the country - particularly if there is proof of concept to point to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JusRelax
Good points.

Does every dollar in carbon tax go to a cause or program you and I believe in? No, of course not.
Is the only (Cdn.) party that supports a carbon tax the only good party? No, of course not (besides, the Green Party also supports a carbon tax).

I've consulted for our federal government, four provincial governments (our States), and several municipal government besides many private sector (and nonprofit) clients in the US, Canada and abroad, and I can say from experience that the public sector clients "waste" more money than the private sector by far. Or at least, they pay extra to remain highly risk averse (like NASA was before SpaceX) or wish to appear (politically) correct. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean I prefer anarchy! Running a company keeps your stakeholders very limited. Running a government means working for the wants and needs of minorities as well as the majority, so I don't think it's a reasonable comparison to say a government should be run like Tesla.

Back to @cliff harris ' original point, I think we still have a lot more pulling of many populations towards sustainability than there are populations pushing their governments for greater action (aka cost) towards sustainable policies.

Personally I'd be happy if our governments simply stopped spending taxes incentivizing citizens to buy electric cars (and solar panels, heat pumps, etc.) and instead would just stop protecting the oil & gas sector from progress! Like, seriously, Exxon + Shell + Chevron + BP made $159 billion dollars in profit last year?!? Big Oil needs to pay for the damage they're doing to you, me, our families & friends, and future generations across the planet. [/rant]

I had to laugh.

So few have even the remotest clue as to how much the fossil fuel industry profits from the status quo--it's why they fight like Hell to retain the status quo, usually through proxies and politicians, despite the tremendous risk it poses to our entire planet's future. (FYI: Dubai just had about 18 months of rain ALL IN ONE DAY.)

Try this factoid on for size: the industry's DAILY PROFIT was just a hair under ELEVEN BILLION DOLLARS in 2022:


Mind blowing how few have even the remotest clue, still buying their coffin cars (ICE vehicles) by the millions.

Perhaps our species doesn't deserve this beautiful planet after all?
 
It's a chicken and egg problem. I do believe we need more EVs first before landlords are starting to find a L2 charger becoming a selling point.
That's true, but landlords should realize that this is an opportunity to make some extra money. If charging is available, tenants WILL buy EVs because the price of an EV will continue to plummet.

Plus, the initial investment for the landlord is pretty low. It doesn't cost much to add a couple of chargers, then add more as needed.

So the landlord gets paid and the tenant saves money buying electricity instead of gasoline. Tenants also save money on unexpected repairs which makes them less likely to fall behind on the rent.
 
And this is why we need an explosion of L2 chargers at apartment complexes and places of employment.

IMO, L2 charging is far more critical to EV adoption than DC fast chargers. Road tripping is mostly solved. But apartment dwellers need access to convenient, inexpensive charging or it won't make sense to buy an EV, regardless of the initial cost.
if there's a will, there's a way


As of now, over 8000 chargers in London, using already existing infrastructure.
 
The median household income for Washington state for 2017-2021 was $82,400.

Even King county, which includes Seattle, was not that far above the limit at $106,326.

The lowest county, Whitman, was only $43,613. That gave it a rank of 2700 out of 3141 US counties.

No so hilarious.

The limit I cited was a family of 4.

The credit income max with a household of 2 (which is much nearer the median household in WA) is only $61,320. $45,180 if single.

So a couple with no kids would need to be ~25% below median income to qualify.

I mean, it's better than states passing anti EV laws, but it's still going to be a minority of people who can BOTH qualify for the credit AND (sensibly) afford a new vehicle).



if there's a will, there's a way


As of now, over 8000 chargers in London, using already existing infrastructure.

AFAIK most street lamps in the US are 120v, not 240v like in europe- so a lot less useful/practical here
 
if there's a will, there's a way


As of now, over 8000 chargers in London, using already existing infrastructure.

I love this use-case, but then it opens up the question of charge port location standards, for that to work they would have to be on the passenger side.
 
I had to laugh.

So few have even the remotest clue as to how much the fossil fuel industry profits from the status quo--it's why they fight like Hell to retain the status quo, usually through proxies and politicians, despite the tremendous risk it poses to our entire planet's future. (FYI: Dubai just had about 18 months of rain ALL IN ONE DAY.)

Try this factoid on for size: the industry's DAILY PROFIT was just a hair under ELEVEN BILLION DOLLARS in 2022:


Mind blowing how few have even the remotest clue, still buying their coffin cars (ICE vehicles) by the millions.

Perhaps our species doesn't deserve this beautiful planet after all?
Where is the sad reaction tab.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Artful Dodger
There's already over 34 cents per share on the books for 2024 due to energy revenue accrued in 2023:

"The margins are even higher! There is a very long tail ($3.8b!) in reserves that will be recognized in future years from Performance Obligations ($1b in the next 12 months alone).

From the 10Q:
"We have elected the practical expedient to omit disclosure of the amount of the transaction price allocated to remaining performance obligations for energy generation and storage sales with an original expected contract length of one year or less and the amount that we have the right to invoice when that amount corresponds directly with the value of the performance to date. As of December 31, 2023, total transaction price allocated to performance obligations that were unsatisfied or partially unsatisfied for contracts with an original expected length of more than one year was $3.43 billion. Of this amount, we expect to recognize $1.05 billion in the next 12 months and the rest over the remaining performance obligation period."

It's plain to see Energy Gross Margins are going to easily surpass 30% when Lathrop is fully ramped by year end. The real humdinger will be in 2027 and beyond when the revenue recognition alone between fully ramped Lathrop and Lingang numbers closer to $10B. To put this in perspective, the nearly pure profit unrecognized revenue that will be realized after 2027 is going to surpass the revenue of all of Tesla Auto in 2023 or 2024 (or 2025 for that matter). Think about that. Two Megafactories, just the UNREALIZED REVENUE (MOSTLY PROFIT) surpasses the profit of ALL 4 Gigafactories. So what happens in the late 2030s when Tesla has say 50-100 Megafactories? Tesla Energy is a beast.
 
Last edited:
It's plain to see Energy Gross Margins are going to easily surpass 30% when Lathrop is fully ramped by year end. The real humdinger will be in 2027 and beyond when the revenue recognition alone between fully ramped Lathrop and Lingang numbers closer to $10B. To put this in perspective, the nearly pure profit unrecognized revenue that will be realized after 2027 is going to surpass the revenue of all of Tesla Auto in 2023 or 2024 (or 2025 for that matter). Think about that. Two Megafactories, just the UNREALIZED REVENUE (MOSTLY PROFIT) surpasses the profit of 4 Gigafactories. So what happens in the late 2030s when Tesla has say 50-100 Megafactories? Tesla Energy is a beast.

And yet, Elon tells us that the Optimus / Teslabot business line will be bigger than all other Tesla product lines combined. This includes Tesla Auto, Tesla Energy, and Tesla Network / Autonomy.

No wonder Teslackies want to fire him as CEO! 🤷
 
Why? England is same as most of europe, you can park facing either direction.

The examples I have seen of this are people street parking at a lamp post in a urban area, not a proper parking lot.

1714152457800.png
 
  • Informative
Reactions: wtlloyd