TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[KarenRei]

Uh, maybe about an order of magnitude off what you'd need? Let's have a look:

"Current bunker, that's the technical term, prices for fuel oil are between $309 and $340 per tonne, depending on where you are in the world. A cargo ship can use anything from 1 tonne per hour to 16 tonnes per hour for the largest ships traveling at 23 knots."​

About 13.3 MWh of heat energy is released by burning a ton of bunker sea oil. Modern ships engines burn about 171g/KWh so that's about 5.85 MWh of useful energy from each ton of bunker sea oil. That amount of energy costs about $400 odd bucks, or that same $400 buys about 1 KWh of powerpack energy storage. That's about an order of magnitude more expensive, even if the pack life is 500 cycles (>10 years).

It is about a 225 hr crossing from San Francisco to Shanghai at 23 kts using 16 tons/hr, requiring 3,600 tons of bunker sea oil. That's the equivalent of about 21 GWh of electric propulsion at 80% DoD and 90% drive eff. that requires a 30 GWh pack. That's a $12 Billion battery at today's prices.

Call it about 20x more expensive for batteries vs bunker oil given $400/KWh, 500 cycles and free electricity from renewables and $320/ton for bunker oil.

BTW, US Navy reactors go for $5B, and you get a free Nimitz-class carrier or Los Angles-class attack boat with each one. Hey, two-fer's!

We will get there with renewables, but the tech is not ready yet. I think there's great potential for shipping with flow batteries. Instead of loading bunker oil in port (or recharging batteries), the ship would offload expended electrolyte and load fresh. Recharging could be done in a few hours instead of weeks, and the ship's ballast situation is improved en route w/o depleating bunkers. Further, emergency refueling could be done away from port with a tender ship, adding safety. Lots of potential.

But first, let's electrify the car and truck fleet. This we can do now!

Cheers!

I agree with your analysis of the problem, but you missed an obvious solution

The era of electrified freight shipping has begun.

Feel free to skip ahead to the paragraph beginning with "A Maersk Triple E-class container ship". It shows that even with very ambitious battery price targets ($50/kWh) and a short route (NYC to London), it's still economically impractical to have a battery powered cargo carrier. Buuuuuut... (see the next paragraph)

Unfortunately, that solution doesn't work with electric aircraft :Þ

 

[X Fan]

^^^^^
and of course the era of electric powered aircraft is also near: EasyJet set to develop new planes powered by BATTERIES - would you fly in one?

 

[sundaymorning]

All of a sudden CNBC has credibility? People have been saying this kind of stupid stuff about Apple for decades. They've always been wrong. They're still wrong. Apple products keep getting better. Their Watch will own the world, while the iPhone keeps pushing the boundaries of the possible.

And I don't know about Netflix, but Amazon certainly doesn't seem to be done with changing the world.

I didn’t say they were done, but base on market reaction investors are weary that the hyper growth stage for these companies might be on hold for awhile. Investors may be looking elsewhere for growth stocks.

 

[KarenRei]

^^^^^
and of course the era of electric powered aircraft is also near: EasyJet set to develop new planes powered by BATTERIES - would you fly in one?

They'll make great puddle jumpers But we need big energy density improvements for long range. Thankfully - something Musk has alluded to a number of times but I don't think clarified properly for most people - is that the benefits of energy density improvements are highly nonlinear. At current energies, you burn up your energy just trying to get to altitude and speed. The improvement to range from better batteries is highly nonlinear. It's sort of like the improvement to a rocket's range from adding more dV.

Oh, and BTW, for anyone looking to waste a few minutes deciding where they think oceanic Gigachargers would be best:

Bathymetric Data Viewer

Disable "Multibeam Surveys", activate "Multibeam Bathymetry Mosaic", zoom way in, then decide what seamounts you'd like to anchor them to There's a surprisingly large number of them (not to mention, well, outright islands). Of course, oil platforms operate in waters up to 2500 meters / 8000 feet deep, but the shallower, the better

(It's actually pretty cool to see things like, for example, A) how poorly mapped our oceans actually are, and B) how Hawaii is actually a longer state than California (extending 40-50% of the way to Japan)... just, that most of that is underwater )

 

[neroden]

My feeling is when you have Trump as president, the mid term elections are non event. It doesn't matter if democrats will take over or republicans stay. Maybe I'am getting it wrong because I don't live in US

Yeah, you don't know the US system.

The expected outcome -- Democrats winning the House -- will probably cause the market to go up some. This is due to (a) removal of uncertainty, since the markets hates uncertainty, and (b) the placement of some sort of checks and balances on the Republican Party leaders, who are currently (correctly) perceived by the market as a bunch of erratic and dangerous lunatics.

If the Republicans somehow retain the House, the market will crash.

 

[neroden]

Sorry, can't read link.. FT is the worst with their paywall.

But, I saw all the posts back in August when this was first reported, but we also heard that Funding was Secured. I'm just wondering, was there an official statement or filing from the company that showed the PIF as having actually taken that direct investment? At this point with Elon's comments, it seems they are hedging a bit - again.

There was a statement direct from the Saudi PIF confirming that they'd bought the stake Don't have a link right now.

 

[KarenRei]

There was a statement direct from the Saudi PIF confirming that they'd bought the stake Don't have a link right now.

More to the point, MBS confirmed a couple weeks ago that they still own the stake.

 

[SpaceCash]

There was a statement direct from the Saudi PIF confirming that they'd bought the stake Don't have a link right now.

Yup. And he deliberately said he would not speak ill of Tesla bc he's invested when the interviewer coaxed him to comment on Weedgate.

 

[neroden]

Indeed, I can read that. And all the other news reports of this investment simply say "according to the Financial Times". My question is still about is there some other corroboration about this investment?

And Elon's comment about "they may have already sold it", well why on earth would they sell it at a loss? Maybe it was prior to the PIF fund report and prior to "funding secured" pop, so they may have sold it after that, or at loss after THAT but I don't see a large sovereign fund like this TRADING. So, if Elon says "i don't know" they may have sold it, why?

Just as a math exercise, 2B$ in shares at lets just say an average 325$ per share (I would hope the Saudis had entered at a better price than this) that's over 6 million shares, which should put them in the top FIVE easily. I have looked at lists of "major fund, investors" holders that go all the way down to 1.7 million in shares held. And yet, I can't find ONE list that shows the PIF or other Saudi Fund or investor on any of these lists?

Investors are not required to disclose their stake in a company unless it is 5% of the shares outstanding.

*Funds* are an exception. Mutual funds, brokerages, and similar financial firms are required to disclose everything they own. That's where the "top fund investors" comes from.

But for investors like Tencent or the Saudi PIF or Daimler or Toyota, they are *not* required to tell us *anything* unless they go over 5%. You'll notice there hasn't been a report on Tencent's ownership for *years*, since it dropped below 5% due to dilution from employee stock options.

For all we know, Larry Ellison could have 4.9% of the shares outstanding, and Softbank could have 4.9% of the shares, and they'd never need to tell us. The Saudis only mentioned their stake because they were pressuring Musk to let them take the company private.

 

[Carl Raymond]

Yeah, this isn't confirmed. It's somebody's interpretation of a comment from Panasonic that GF1 would reach 35 GWh annual production. The throughput of the new lines was not specified. Don't get too excited.

Carsonight is a good source. He's saying 1.5x improvement:

 

[SPadival]

Incoming FUD Alert:

By the usual suspects - Reveal podcast to drop soon on "worker safety".

After being called out for hiding worker injuries at its factory, Tesla doubles down. Hear a sneak preview of our latest investigation.

No links - I am not feeding the click bait reporters

 

[TrendTrader007]

There are a few owners who own well over 35% together. Why does it have to be 1 owner? Nonargument



Welcome back!

Thanks but I’ll stay away from the board because my personality is better suited for $twtr
If you want you can always find me on $twtr


007@TrendTrader007

I love your bullishness and agree with your opinions overall and think you’re right
I just find it rather ironic/hilarious that some of these logical and mostly cautious bulls might be turning super bullish in 11 or 12 months from now when $tsla SP is likely to be anywhere from $700 to $1000 or even multiples of current SP, right when I’ll be selling all my calls trying to time a local peak
Have fun!

 

[neroden]

That's an aggressive and optimistic strategy that may be successful, or it could be the proverbial "picking up pennies before a steam-roller."

What happens if the counter-party to the puts you sold is a long holder who buys them as insurance; and, deus ex machina, the share price collapses to under three figures? Improbable? Perhaps, but that put buyer may just decide getting out is better even if it wastes a little theta-- on the theory that it is better to go to the sidelines until the dust settles and reassess with funds in his account rather than just a right to collect?

Well, I don't know how leveraged *Zhelko* is... probably too much since he's >100% invested in TSLA.

But what happens to me then is, I buy the TSLA stock. Cheap. I make sure I can actually do that. With funds from other, *uncorrelated*, investments.

Also, in the event of any serious decline in the value of shares (of TSLA or any other entity) supporting your margin option transactions, your broker may make some decisions for you.

Never. Basically Tesla would have to drop enough for me to have to buy all the shares, *and* everything else would have to drop enough for me to need to sell it to cover the purchases -- and my broker knows me well enough to give me enough time to pick what to sell. If everything else dropped a really substantial amount, I might have to go get the extra shares out of the safety deposit box, but that would require a really severe bear market *and* a major drop in TSLA.

Place your bets (and consider using spreads) since only the naive believe in risk-free option strategies

Certainly; it's all a matter of what risks you're comfortable with and how likely they are.

and/or hoping for Universal Income and Medicare-for-All (aka MedicAid, {or maybe just the Indian Health Service})

Every other semi-developed country in the world has the equivalent of Medicare-for-All now. Including Mexico. It's going to happen in the US eventually, because its lack is damaging our business competitiveness -- severely. It might take waves of illegal immigrants trying to move from the US to Mexico and being blocked by the Mexicans building a wall to keep us out, but it'll happen eventually.

(Probably sometime after Mexico legalizes marijuana to get rid of the US-created drug gangs, which actually could happen pretty soon. Mexico may legalize opium poppies too, for the same reason.)

 

[Artful Dodger]

Carsonight is a good source. He's saying 1.5x improvement:

View attachment 349372

Thanks for the update! He Who Must Not Be Named has shadow-banned me from Elecktrek so now nobody can see my comments, including all 3300 in my comment history. @neroden knows who I mean.

So, a quick estimate for 2019 bty cell production at GF1:

• 10 lines @ 2 GWh each: +10 GWh/yr
• 3 lines @ 3 GWh each: +5 GWh/yr
  • 1st installed in the last 3 weeks
  • 2nd installed by end of 2018 Q4
  • 3rd installed by end of 2019 Q1
• 2 more lines @ 3 GWh each: +5 GWh/yr
  • 4th installed by end of 2019 Q2
  • 5th installed by end of 2019 Q3

That pace would bring us to 35 GWh/yr capacity by Oct 1st, 2019. Personally, I'd prefer if Panasonic just kept adding 1 line per quarter indefinately.

@Fact Checking : your info. Cheers!

 

[SpaceCash]

Thanks for the update! He Who Must Not Be Named has shadow-banned me from Elecktrek so now nobody can see my comments, including all 3300 in my comment history. @neroden knows who I mean.

Voldemort. Duh

 

[neroden]

You think they'd only be for emergencies? There's huge growth in the demand for large batteries for grid storage. Tesla will always have some inventory on-hand, and the ability to redirect production to emergency needs where required.

Storage containers have become sort of a "quick deployment" way to deploy a lot of permanent installations.

And I think that's the idea we're getting at here. You order a Megapack (or two, or three); you pour a flat concrete or asphalt pad, Tesla comes up with a container truck, unloads the container onto the pad, opens up the front end of it and hooks up the power cable. Very fast install.

 

[neroden]

If someone can edit the recording to only keep Elon's talk, that would be great. I feel every time Elon gets into something interesting, she interrupts. I want to hear Elon talk about the details. Let him finish. I hope the future interviewers learn this, you don't have to go through all your questions, let Elon calmly finish his thought. This is not your normal talkshow where people look for entertainment. In Elon's interview, we want to hear the real content, the details.

We need a panel to find a few good candidates so in the future Elon can do interviews with those people.

Seriously, people, stop being uberdefensive of Musk. I thought it was a solid interview. Swisher has clearly known Musk for a long time, and they clearly get along well. She was respectful and polite, but she didn't totally softball the questions (and even pointed out that she'd told Musk in advance that no good would come of Trump's advisory panel, which he admitted was true). Came across very positive to me.

 

[neroden]

So bear trap or something else? What's the hard-to-barrow fee lately?

Sign of short covering. We're seeing other evidence of short covering (Ihor's reports, etc.)

 

[neroden]

this one had some depth - like termal vs. power limits on the speed of drilling etc. It genuinely made me understand how piss poor job of optimizing boring previous companies have done, and why there is such an opportunity there.

Yeah, though I think Musk still doesn't realize how much of the price of tunnel construction in the US is basically just *graft*. It's, like, half the cost. This makes it exceptionally easy to disrupt as long as you have good security and good lawyers.

The interesting thing is that tunnel companies were using battery locomotives to move the tunnel shield pieces in the *19th century*. Using diesel locomotives was probably adopted during a period when diesel was cheap and air supplies were cheap but batteries were expensive (maybe the 1920s or 1950s). And they're still doing it because they're basically in the graft business now so why bother to do things competently or even look up the alternatives which have been used in the past.

 

[Artful Dodger]

There was a statement direct from the Saudi PIF confirming that they'd bought the stake Don't have a link right now.

MbS said so directly in his interview with Bloomberg Business on about Oct 4, 2018. It's available in this topic history, or direct via a quick net search.

Cheers!