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

What will happen within the next 6 1/2 weeks?

Which new FSD features will be released by end of year and to whom?

  • None - on Jan 1 'later this year' will simply become end of 2020!

    Votes: 106 55.5%
  • One or more major features (stop lights and/or turns) to small number of EAP HW 3.0 vehicles.

    Votes: 55 28.8%
  • One or more major features (stop lights and/or turns) to small number of EAP HW 2.x/3.0 vehicles.

    Votes: 7 3.7%
  • One or more major features (stop lights and/or turns) to all HW 3.0 FSD owners!

    Votes: 8 4.2%
  • One or more major features (stop lights and/or turns) to all FSD owners!

    Votes: 15 7.9%

  • Total voters
    191
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
What I am concerned is that their ”feature complete” may not have anything to do with ”Level 5 no geofence feature complete” which was Tesla’s claim on Autonomy Investor Day.

I am not clear on why you are so concerned about this. Are you worried that Tesla is not actually planning on L5 autonomy? Or are you concerned that Tesla will be forced to settle for less than L5 due to hardware or software limitations?

I think Tesla is certainly planning for L5 nogeofence. Elon and Tesla have consistently described the final version of FSD as being able to self-drive with no driver, anywhere in the US, while you sleep in the back. If that is not L5 no geofence, I don't know what is. Of course, there is always the possibility that the hardware won't be good enough.

But keep in mind that feature complete is an intermediary step. Feature complete is not the final product. That means that feature complete won't be able to do everything that the final version of FSD will be able to do. So if you are expecting feature complete to have every single feature needed for L5 no geofence, then I am telling you right now that you will probably won't consider feature complete to be L5 nogeofence.

But this is very important: even if feature complete is not L5 no geofence because it lacks every single L5 feature, that does not mean that Tesla won't get to L5 nogeofence in the final version of FSD. Tesla has been very clear that they do not intend to geofence FSD. And Tesla is working on FSD that will eventually be able to self-drive from coast to coast while you sleep in the back seat. But Elon has been clear that feature complete will just be the essential features for highway driving, parking lot driving and city driving and Tesla will then build on feature complete to get to the final version of FSD which will be L5 nogeofence when it is complete.
 
I am not clear on why you are so concerned about this. Are you worried that Tesla is not actually planning on L5 autonomy? Or are you concerned that Tesla will be forced to settle for less than L5 due to hardware or software limitations?

I am concerned Tesla lied when they said they expected to be ”Level 5 no geofence feature complete” at the end of 2019.

This lie would be concerning on multiple levels, not only from lying to customers and market perspective, but from the perspective that Tesla would for some reason need to sugarcoat their autonomous progress in such a manner which would suggest concern in their ”sleep in your car coast to coast” progress.

That is why I of course hope it was not a lie but they are indeed very close to feature complete Level 5 no geofence now.
 
I think it can be argued Tesla would have done just as well or even better had they not made the lofty ”sleep in your car” Level 5 no geofence ”feature complete” promises for AP2/3 in 2016-2019 and just focused on great BEV technology and gradual AP progress.

I continue to think this may be one area when Tesla unnecessarily shot themselves in the foot, similar to the taking private debacle. Now, that doesn’t mean they can’t survive it (yes they can), but these can still be unnecessary self-inflicted wounds.

I totally agree with the above. Tesla would have done just as well without the promise of a driverless car on an unreasonable time line, and they shot themselves in the foot when they made it.

But my point is that I'm not sure we'd have Tesla at all without someone like Musk who was so over-confident that he truly believed these things could be done. He was wrong about the driverless car, but he was right that Tesla could build the best cars ever made, and do it without electric motors; and he was right that SpaceX could make space flight a lot less expensive, partly by building booster stages that would return and land to be re-used.

Elon Musk is a package: You can't have just one slice of him.

I am concerned Tesla lied when they said they expected to be ”Level 5 no geofence feature complete” at the end of 2019.

This lie would be concerning on multiple levels, not only from lying to customers and market perspective, but from the perspective that Tesla would for some reason need to sugarcoat their autonomous progress in such a manner which would suggest concern in their ”sleep in your car coast to coast” progress.

That is why I of course hope it was not a lie but they are indeed very close to feature complete Level 5 no geofence now.

There is a third option: Not a lie, and not "very close" to FSD. But he truly believed it and he was wrong.

"Never" is a long time..

Maybe not so long, really. Just until climate change brings about the collapse of our industrial economy and the surviving humans return to the stone age. I think it's naive to think that exponential growth can continue forever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DanCar
I think it can be argued Tesla would have done just as well or even better had they not made the lofty ”sleep in your car” Level 5 no geofence ”feature complete” promises for AP2/3 in 2016-2019 and just focused on great BEV technology and gradual AP progress.

I continue to think this may be one area when Tesla unnecessarily shot themselves in the foot, similar to the taking private debacle. Now, that doesn’t mean they can’t survive it (yes they can), but these can still be unnecessary self-inflicted wounds.

They key here is that these claims that can not be met cause volatility in share price. That's a problem. So they need to take their lumps, come out and say "There's a long term internal project to research autonomous driving. As that project produces results, we'll release features, but this is going to be a very long road. We're committed to safety, though, and we're convinced that autonomous systems will lead to higher safety for all."

That single statement would fix nearly all of this going forward.
 
I’m not so concerned whether or not Tesla misses ”feature complete” at the end of 2019, after all it was always an internal deadline that would not be visible to the outside anyway.
You are mistaken.

FC was always going to be an actual release of City NOA but with (much) lower accuracy than needed for robotaxi. Looks like it has slipped by a quarter (or two). I think they will try their best to ship it in Q1. But would obviously depend on the error rate they are seeing. Hoping to atleast have the EAP in Q1.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: am_dmd
How so ?

Market assigns very low value to Tesla FSD (like the Robotaxi).

All the volatility we've seen is caused by deliveries and earnings.

Tesla's volatility is off the charts, and any excuse for it to dip is run with. You can watch days of CNBC content, real FT and Bloomberg articles for months, all of which make mountains out of mole hills. Tesla missing yet another deliverable is bad news.

As a illustration of this, notice what happened when Tesla was conservative with their delivery guidance for Model Y. Fall 2020. That was pretty good news for buyers, and then Tesla announced that actually we've done some things and we thing Summer 2020. Positive response. On the other hand, look at what happened when they missed guidance by even a small amount on Model 3 timelines.

Now consider you work for Tesla and shares are a major portion of your compensation because salaries are lower than market. Do you want a roller coaster ride every year or do you prefer the share price be smooth and continue on an upward trajectory? If you're looking for major institutional investors and a high credit rating, do you think having a smooth and predictable share price is helpful? And do you think the S&P wants to have a member that has prices swinging wildly?
 
You are mistaken.

FC was always going to be an actual release of City NOA but with (much) lower accuracy than needed for robotaxi. Looks like it has slipped by a quarter (or two). I think they will try their best to ship it in Q1. But would obviously depend on the error rate they are seeing. Hoping to atleast have the EAP in Q1.

That is not what Tesla claimed on Autonomy Investor Day.

On Autonomy Investor Day earlier in 2019 Tesla claimed ”feature complete” meant ”Level 5 no geofence”. That claim is very different from ”City NOA feature complete”.
 
They key here is that these claims that can not be met cause volatility in share price. That's a problem. So they need to take their lumps, come out and say "There's a long term internal project to research autonomous driving. As that project produces results, we'll release features, but this is going to be a very long road. We're committed to safety, though, and we're convinced that autonomous systems will lead to higher safety for all."

That single statement would fix nearly all of this going forward.

I would agree such a statement would be a useful start to fixing things, if they really are that much behind from their existing claims like ”Level 5 no geofence feature complete” ... ”at end of 2019”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: motocoder
That is not what Tesla claimed on Autonomy Investor Day.

On Autonomy Investor Day earlier in 2019 Tesla claimed ”feature complete” meant ”Level 5 no geofence”. That claim is very different from ”City NOA feature complete”.
Dude, we have discussed this umpteen times and I've shown you how what Musk said can and should be interpreted differently.

Its like Groundhog Day in this sub-forum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DanCar
Tesla's volatility is off the charts, and any excuse for it to dip is run with. You can watch days of CNBC content, real FT and Bloomberg articles for months, all of which make mountains out of mole hills. Tesla missing yet another deliverable is bad news.
Blame shorts (and possibly fossil fuel industries that back some of them) for the problems.

BTW, I haven't seen you post much in the Market thread - so I guess you don't know how active of an investor I am.

ps : I agree there is no point giving highly optimistic delivery timelines or numbers and missing them. But the market seems to completely ignore Musk's FSD related announcements.
 
ps : I agree there is no point giving highly optimistic delivery timelines or numbers and missing them. But the market seems to completely ignore Musk's FSD related announcements.

The market knows that the FSD stuff is BS and has factored that into the price I guess.
However, isn't he sort of liable when he's talking like this in an investor meeting specifically concerning autonomous driving?
 
I am concerned Tesla lied when they said they expected to be ”Level 5 no geofence feature complete” at the end of 2019.

This lie would be concerning on multiple levels, not only from lying to customers and market perspective, but from the perspective that Tesla would for some reason need to sugarcoat their autonomous progress in such a manner which would suggest concern in their ”sleep in your car coast to coast” progress.

Sure, if Tesla is lying, that would be very troubling of course. But even if Tesla misses the deadline, it is does not necessarily mean that they are lying.

But frankly, I am well aware that Elon often says silly stuff when it comes to FSD. Maybe he's lying or maybe he is just underestimating how difficult FSD is. Luckily, he's not the one coding FSD. Tesla has engineers doing the real work. So at the end of the day, all I really care about are the FSD features that Tesla delivers to my car. First, I want traffic light and stop sign response and "city NOA". Then, I want any other features and improvements that Tesla can deliver to my car that will take autopilot to "eyes off" self-driving. I want "eyes-off" self-driving. As long as Tesla delivers that, I'll be happy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: arghx7 and Dr. J
so I guess you don't know how active of an investor I am

Don't take this the wrong way, but I absolutely could not care less how active an investor you are. It makes zero difference in my life, and zero difference to my original statement or my follow-up. You're a Tesla fan putting your money into Tesla. There's likely very little Tesla could do that would give you pause. That would be like trying to argue a short into being a pro-Tesla investor. I'm not going to waste my time on any of that.
 
Sure, if Tesla is lying, that would be very troubling of course. But even if Tesla misses the deadline, it is does not necessarily mean that they are lying.

But frankly, I am well aware that Elon often says silly stuff when it comes to FSD. Maybe he's lying or maybe he is just underestimating how difficult FSD is. Luckily, he's not the one coding FSD. Tesla has engineers doing the real work. So at the end of the day, all I really care about are the FSD features that Tesla delivers to my car. First, I want traffic light and stop sign response and "city NOA". Then, I want any other features and improvements that Tesla can deliver to my car that will take autopilot to "eyes off" self-driving. I want "eyes-off" self-driving. As long as Tesla delivers that, I'll be happy.

How many times can you make a blatantly false before its no longer "optimism"?
The way i have seen it, Tesla fans have made it impossible for Elon to make a statement to lie or mislead in order to get something done. No matter how many ridiculously false statements he makes and pushes as facts. Its regulated to him being an 'optimistic' when it doesn't happen. Yet the same people will turn around and call all other CEOs and companies liars. Sounds to me like Elon is literally 'God' as he cannot lie. Even when he said back in Oct 2016 that Enhanced AP will be here by December 2016 and it wasn't. Didn't show up till Oct/November 2018.

Literally Elon can come out and say He will build a time machine and have it running and working in 6 months and when it doesn't happen Tesla fans will say he's just being "optimistic". Aka he can do no wrong. Heck the way i see it, if Jesus and Elon took a purity test, according to the fans, Elon will come out on top!
 
How many times can you make a blatantly false before its no longer "optimism"?
The way i have seen it, Tesla fans have made it impossible for Elon to make a statement to lie or mislead in order to get something done. No matter how many ridiculously false statements he makes as facts. Its regulated to him being an optimistic. Yet the same people will turn around and call other CEOs and companies liar. Sounds to me like Elon is literally God as he cannot lie. Even when he said back in Oct 2016 that Enhanced AP will be here by December 2016 and it wasn't. Didn't show up till Oct/November 2018.

Literally Elon can come out and say He will build a time machine and have it running and working in 6 months and when it doesn't happen tesla fans will say he's just being "optimistic". Aka he can do no wrong. Heck the way i see it, if Jesus and Elon took a purity test, according to the fans, Elon will come out on top!

WTF are you talking about? I am not defending Elon one bit. I readily admit that Elon has made a ton of false statements. I am merely saying that for me, as a Tesla owner, I am focused on the autopilot features that I get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DanCar
WTF are you talking about? I am not defending Elon one bit. I readily admit that Elon has made a ton of false statements. I am merely saying that for me, as a Tesla owner, I am focused on the autopilot features that I get.

Sorry, it wasn't really a post addressed to you. More like a general post. Don't take it personal. You're definitely not like the typical Tesla fan.
 
Last edited:
  • Helpful
Reactions: diplomat33