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

[sunwarriors]

I don't get it. You aren't an investor, OR a shortseller. Why spend so much time here? I think GOOG and AAPL are both really bad investments, and if someone asks me I'll mention it. I have even tweeted it a few times. But I wouldn't sign up for an account on an apple or google website to tell people in detail my thinking on it every day. That would be strange.

Yes, it's a total waste of time (like many things in life), but as I've stated in another post, the technology, solar, V2H, ESS, EVs, automation, Tesla is interesting of a topic for me to waste that time. I was here purely for solar/ESS prior, but that's a sorta dead topic now in CA/NEM3.0 days so I find learning about Tesla, FSD, AI, investing in general interesting enough. Call it a hobby or a personal interest if you will, but how someone chooses to waste their time might not make sense to you, but we/everyone waste a lot of it for all sorts of stuff. Some people waste tons on sports/home team/etc...no real difference here.

 

[WMTribe90]

Did he just press F9?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1788905017921159539

I have an acquaintance who who worked in the Supercharger division and was let go. The story, according to him, is that Elon asked the head of the Division to make additional cuts to her team. She declined. Elon said make cuts or I will layoff the whole division. She again declined. With this version of events it would make sense that Tesla would hire back some of the dismissed employees. Also, if true, I don’t love this decision by Elon. You might be frustrated with the manager or even aspects of the supercharger division, but each of those employees has a family and firings should not be conducted so willy-nilly based on a conflict in between CEO and an upper manager.

My acquaintance is not sure if he would accept an offer to come back. This is a good way to hurt company culture and kill morale. Elon could have fired the division head and taken a more deliberative approach to downsizing, instead of taking his anger at the division head out on the whole division.

I guess the good news it that it appears the mass layoff had little to do with actual supercharger strategy or plans for the future growth, etc.

 

[Blue horseshoe]

To those who imagine I see Tesla as 'just a car company':
You have never read my posts.
Since early years I have seen Tesla as an energy company primarily because of JB Straubel vision and Elon Musk being into that vision;
Since 2012 I have viewed Tesla as a design company, primarily because of the brilliant Model S which would never have happened without major bets on visionary approaches;
Since 2015 and the first Ludicrous I considered Tesl a a materials company because, in part,of the inconel fuse;
Then came Shanghai GF, which proved without question that Tesla was a manufacturing marvel;
The Hornsdale Power Reserve proved that Tesla could integrate multiple power sources, grid services and, shortly after, residential power grid integration. Soon Tesla was, and still is, a licensed power provider in many jurisdictions. Clearly, Tesla is a power utility.

In regard to FSD, those who ignore my pints also ignore fundamental facts regarding systems development and AI in particular. Nobody cared o ask my qualifications for these judgements, so I'll not waste time by stating them. Some here know them anyway. Any major new technology requires an undertrminable time to perfect. That was true in ancient human programmed days. Now, training neural networks exacerbates that problem. The 'march of nnes' growing increasingly difficult as the alter stages begin. In the case of FSD, as in aircraft systems, an abject failure is one that fails once in 100,000 trials. (I am reminded of designing aircraft doors and aircraft Autoland, FSD is very much like those.),

Any of you who are foolish enough to disregard all that in context of only a single AI related point may never understand Tesla. Those who assume Robotaxi is coming quickly simply do not understand risk analysis and the risk of a single failure). FWIW, all this is why actuaries invariably measure "loss severity" more stringently when "loss frequency" drops. That by the way, is a very superficial description.

Tesla will not successfully have autonomous FSD risk accepted without major proof of huge decline in loss frequency coupled with commensurate decline in loss severity, for both human and property. Those principles MUST be understood in order to even imagine commercial deployment of Robotaxi, apart from highly circumscribed tests.

Just because I am not now a Tesla shareholders does not mean I won't be when conditions improve. It also does not alter my continual effort to better understand Tesla. It also does not mean that I will stop trying my best to help people understand the importance of complex and arcane subjects that are not part of general vocabulary nor education.

Ah yes we are all fools. It is not lost on me that someone with considerable experience and expertise is describing the pitfalls he sees based on his experience and expertise. Putting your money where your mouth is is not only commendable, but adds further weight to your words of warning.

Where I find you've crossed the line is the condescending tone you've decided to take if someone disagrees with you. Sure maybe you're smarter than me, but you need not call me a fool lest you get punched in the mouth. (I joke, but in all seriousness I look down upon those who look down upon me)

 

[Mengy]

To those who imagine I see Tesla as 'just a car company':
You have never read my posts.
Since early years I have seen Tesla as an energy company primarily because of JB Straubel vision and Elon Musk being into that vision;
Since 2012 I have viewed Tesla as a design company, primarily because of the brilliant Model S which would never have happened without major bets on visionary approaches;
Since 2015 and the first Ludicrous I considered Tesl a a materials company because, in part,of the inconel fuse;
Then came Shanghai GF, which proved without question that Tesla was a manufacturing marvel;
The Hornsdale Power Reserve proved that Tesla could integrate multiple power sources, grid services and, shortly after, residential power grid integration. Soon Tesla was, and still is, a licensed power provider in many jurisdictions. Clearly, Tesla is a power utility.

In regard to FSD, those who ignore my pints also ignore fundamental facts regarding systems development and AI in particular. Nobody cared o ask my qualifications for these judgements, so I'll not waste time by stating them. Some here know them anyway. Any major new technology requires an undertrminable time to perfect. That was true in ancient human programmed days. Now, training neural networks exacerbates that problem. The 'march of nnes' growing increasingly difficult as the alter stages begin. In the case of FSD, as in aircraft systems, an abject failure is one that fails once in 100,000 trials. (I am reminded of designing aircraft doors and aircraft Autoland, FSD is very much like those.),

Any of you who are foolish enough to disregard all that in context of only a single AI related point may never understand Tesla. Those who assume Robotaxi is coming quickly simply do not understand risk analysis and the risk of a single failure). FWIW, all this is why actuaries invariably measure "loss severity" more stringently when "loss frequency" drops. That by the way, is a very superficial description.

Tesla will not successfully have autonomous FSD risk accepted without major proof of huge decline in loss frequency coupled with commensurate decline in loss severity, for both human and property. Those principles MUST be understood in order to even imagine commercial deployment of Robotaxi, apart from highly circumscribed tests.

Just because I am not now a Tesla shareholders does not mean I won't be when conditions improve. It also does not alter my continual effort to better understand Tesla. It also does not mean that I will stop trying my best to help people understand the importance of complex and arcane subjects that are not part of general vocabulary nor education.

I'm giving you a thumbs down as this was quite the condescending post. I've read many of your posts over the past few years yet I do not know your qualifications since you aren't willing to state them, but I do know a snarky post when I see one. Much of this is your opinion, you don't have a crystal ball like anyone else here doesn't. You could be wrong.

Then again, maybe I'm just foolish as you claim many of us here are.

 

[Ipcress]

Somebody ought to explain that to the idiot at MIT Technology Review who wrote this nonsense:

Why EV charging needs more than Tesla

Implying that Tesla is quitting their Supercharger business.

Thanks for the link, Surfer dude, but what's nonsensical about it? It is accurately written, very complementary to Tesla, and reflects the concerns of most Tesla investors, including many expressed on this board. Nowhere in the article does he imply "Tesla is quitting their supercharger business". Will Tesla hire some back, rebuild the team as is being suggested by some posts--who knows. I hope so.

Will Musk walk some of this back? No one knows. We'll know if/when it happens. I'm not trusting (or liking) much of what I hear from him lately, or how he treats his employees.

 

[geometro]

He rehired some people at Twitter too after the mass layoffs.

Two methods.

1. Slowly cut to get to the right team.
2. Cut big and rehire to get to the right team.

Method one probably takes longer and may create more dissatisfaction over longer period. Gets rid of dead weight quicker.

Slowly pull the bandaid off or rip it off. I always rip it off.

Please don’t let this be a repeat of Twitter. While it didn’t fall apart, the jury is still out (or maybe it left) on its valuation.

 

[heltok]

I have an acquaintance who who worked in the Supercharger division and was let go. The story, according to him, is that Elon asked the head of the Division to make additional cuts to her team. She declined. Elon said make cuts or I will layoff the whole division. She again declined. With this version of events it would make sense that Tesla would hire back some of the dismissed employees. Also, if true, I don’t love this decision by Elon. You might be frustrated with the manager or even aspects of the supercharger division, but each of those employees has a family and firings should not be conducted so willy-nilly based on a conflict in between CEO and an upper manager.

My acquaintance is not sure if he would accept an offer to come back. This is a good way to hurt company culture and kill morale. Elon could have fired the division head and taken a more deliberative approach to downsizing, instead of taking his anger at the division head out on the whole division.

I guess the good news it that it appears the mass layoff had little to do with actual supercharger strategy or plans for the future growth, etc.

On the other hand, it might cut down the rate of mutiny from other departments in the future... Maybe a small price to pay long term... Compare this to VW etc where the entire company will fight change from Herbert Diess etc and how much it might cost long term.

Imo if you see someone doing a move your system 1 thinking disagrees with, your first thought should not be "this must be a mistake, clearly the person is stupid" but rather "I wonder what aspects I might have missed".

 

[geometro]

I have an acquaintance who who worked in the Supercharger division and was let go. The story, according to him, is that Elon asked the head of the Division to make additional cuts to her team. She declined. Elon said make cuts or I will layoff the whole division. She again declined. With this version of events it would make sense that Tesla would hire back some of the dismissed employees. Also, if true, I don’t love this decision by Elon. You might be frustrated with the manager or even aspects of the supercharger division, but each of those employees has a family and firings should not be conducted so willy-nilly based on a conflict in between CEO and an upper manager.

My acquaintance is not sure if he would accept an offer to come back. This is a good way to hurt company culture and kill morale. Elon could have fired the division head and taken a more deliberative approach to downsizing, instead of taking his anger at the division head out on the whole division.

I guess the good news it that it appears the mass layoff had little to do with actual supercharger strategy or plans for the future growth, etc.

I agree with this… it sends a message but maybe the wrong message. And as you said, people that are called back may not answer the call, despite believing in the mission.

 

[mongo]

I agree with this… it sends a message but maybe the wrong message. And as you said, people that are called back may not answer the call, despite believing in the mission.

Well, he has shared the core message before...

If an email is sent from me with explicit directions, there are only three actions allowed by managers:

1. Email me back to explain why what I said was incorrect. Sometimes, I'm just plain wrong!
2. Request further clarification if what I said was ambiguous.
3. Execute the directions.

If none of the above are done, that manager will be asked to resign immediately.

Thank you,
Elon

https://twitter.com/x/status/1462115299549925376

 

[EQC_]

Bears are being stuffed into the trunk:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1788703259818856691

Why wouldn't the Model Y be on the list for hands-free trunk capability? Or did I miss it and my Y already has it?

Seems like with the Y's powered trunk/hatch, and the rearview camera and/or ultrasonics, it should be readily possible on all Y's....

 

[wipster]

There is nothing to support that rumor.

BP is specifically interested in acquiring sites that have been stalled by the Tesla layoffs. These would be sites already planning to install Tesla Superchargers that have not broken ground. They are looking for desperate investors whose timeline has been set back so that BP can purchase rights to their project at a discount.

This is NOT about any existing Supercharger sites being acquired by BP.

Just putting it out there my friend. And with Elon's post today about Tesla's upcoming investment in the SC network, who the hell knows what's going on. Maybe some light will be shed during the shareholder meeting next month.

 

[Stretch2727]

Why wouldn't the Model Y be on the list for hands-free trunk capability? Or did I miss it and my Y already has it?

Seems like with the Y's powered trunk/hatch, and the rearview camera and/or ultrasonics, it should be readily possible on all Y's....

I think it's related to the UWB phone key support which is only on updated S/X and new model 3. I understand this gives the vehicle a better understanding of your actual location.

Tesla Update 2024.2.3 Is Improving Phone Keys By Adding Ultra-Wideband Support

Tesla is improving its phone key feature with ultra-wideband support in some of the latest vehicle models

www.notateslaapp.com

 

[Usain]

They are not comparable and winning at chess seemed impossible only for people outside CS. You can build a pretty strong chess algorithm quite early while learning to program (I did it as part of a homework in my second year of university), how it fared against a grandmaster was mostly a function of processing speed and iterating on those algorithms. There was also nowhere near the level of investment we are seeing now with autonomy, where billions of dollars are spent annually across the industry to get to a solution first.

Broadly, i also think it's a logical fallacy to take for granted something that has never been done before, just because we've been able to do other seemingly impossible things. Arguably there's an even bigger collection of things that always seemed to be on the cusp of being solved, but which ended up nowhere.

In the absence of anything else, my metric is the community based FSD tracker. The improvements are in the hundreds of percent, but still only a fraction or what's required.

I don't know when you went to university, but chess algorithms have evolved a lot. There definitely was a time when many in the CS community thought chess would never be solved. And to this day it's really not solved. It's just that it plays much better than any human. (End games are now solved, so I guess that's something.)

The methodology of the FSD tracker is deeply flawed. I put zero stock in it at all. I wouldn't want to be fooled in either direction from looking at the FSD tracker.

I agree that it's a logical fallacy to take for granted something that has never been done before. But problems that look solvable usually are.

About this time last year, I concluded that the problem was starting to look very solvable indeed! The thing that finally convinced me was when I saw the projected growth in Tesla's training compute and its commitment to an end-to-end solution. Since then, I've grown more and more confident as I witness the actual performance of end-to-end and the huge monetary commitment Elon has to seeing it through.

As I said, it's looking like a solvable problem now. It's probably the same way the IBM team felt in the 8th year of their 10 year quest to beat Kasparov.

 

[SPadival]

That doesn't seem unreasonable to think that since Elon liked a post stating that Tesla is pivoting from selling cars to selling rides

I would wait for Master Plan part 3 as a confirmation of that shift.

 

[SPadival]

I have an acquaintance who who worked in the Supercharger division and was let go. The story, according to him, is that Elon asked the head of the Division to make additional cuts to her team. She declined. Elon said make cuts or I will layoff the whole division. She again declined. With this version of events it would make sense that Tesla would hire back some of the dismissed employees. Also, if true, I don’t love this decision by Elon. You might be frustrated with the manager or even aspects of the supercharger division, but each of those employees has a family and firings should not be conducted so willy-nilly based on a conflict in between CEO and an upper manager.

My acquaintance is not sure if he would accept an offer to come back. This is a good way to hurt company culture and kill morale. Elon could have fired the division head and taken a more deliberative approach to downsizing, instead of taking his anger at the division head out on the whole division.

I guess the good news it that it appears the mass layoff had little to do with actual supercharger strategy or plans for the future growth, etc.

Unfortunately, this is “head on a pike” situation straight out of Sun Tzu’s playbook (h/t Hans C Nelson. Highly recommended following him). Elon wanted to make an example of SC deployment team for the rest of the 100k+ managers and employees still in Tesla.

Also, Elon has made it perfectly clear in the past that working for Tesla or SpaceX is not a 9 to 5 job with job security and the rest of it. He has also said Tesla is worth basically $0 without FSD. But people hear what they want to hear and cognitively filter out what they don’t want to hear.

Everything will be sacrificed at the alter of the AI gods in order to achieve autonomy.

 

[Knightshade]

Well, he has shared the core message before...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1462115299549925376

FWIW Elons 3 options here are 1000% reasonable.

The thing is, at the end he writes

"If none of the above are done, that manager will be asked to resign immediately."

Also totally reasonable.

But completely different from what Elon actually did- which is "If none of the above are done, that manager and 500 people below him who did NOT ignore my directive because they had no power to execute it will ALSO be fired"

If you have no way to motivate employees to follow your directions besides mass executions there's far more fundamental issues going on.

 

[Singuy]

FWIW Elons 3 options here are 1000% reasonable.

The thing is, at the end he writes

"If none of the above are done, that manager will be asked to resign immediately."

Also totally reasonable.

But completely different from what Elon actually did- which is "If none of the above are done, that manager and 500 people below him who did NOT ignore my directive because they had no power to execute it will ALSO be fired"

If you have no way to motivate employees to follow your directions besides mass executions there's far more fundamental issues going on.

However, in order to execute what Elon wanted the managers to do, people needs to be fired. That is the executive order, which is to lay people off.

Like say if the executive order was to swap 4680 Y packs for 2170s and no one did anything. The lead of manufacturing will be fired, and the pack will be swapped as Elon personally takes over to execute his order. Would you find the swapping of said packs to be unreasonable?

For whatever reason, people thinks Elon got so mad (or crazy) that he fired everyone when in fact that was his executive order and head of supercharger wouldn't do it without reason or couldn't change his mind, so he had to do it.

 

[Knightshade]

However, in order to execute what Elon wanted the managers to do, people needs to be fired. That is the executive order, which is to lay people off.

Sure... 10% from each manager it sounded like. In fact the specific reasons cited here are that the manager didn't want to execute that partial lay off in his department.

Elon added a 0 though to the 10%.

We know Elon did not originally order 100% of the time fired, because he had there'd have been no directive for that manager to refuse to execute. He ordered some specific amount of cuts substantially LESS than 100% and the manager wouldn't do those.

Like say if the executive order was to swap 4680 Y packs for 2170s and no one did anything. The lead of manufacturing will be fired, and the pack will be swapped as Elon personally takes over to execute his order. Would you find the swapping of said packs to be unreasonable?

Batteries aren't people. This analogy is horrendously bad.

For whatever reason, people thinks Elon got so mad (or crazy) that he fired everyone when in fact that was his executive order and head of supercharger wouldn't do it without reason or couldn't change his mind, so he had to do it.

.... dude.

He literally did fire everyone on that team. 500 people.
(TBC- THAT team, not "the entire supercharger team"- because the entire SC team is multiple groups not just that one)


Can you explain why he "had" to fire everyone under the manager instead of simply firing the manager and replacing them with someone who followed his orders to lay off 10% of staff? (or 14% or whatever less-than-100% number is the real one)

 

[Singuy]

Sure... 10% from each manager it sounded like. In fact the specific reasons cited here are that the manager didn't want to execute that partial lay off in his department.

Elon added a 0 though to the 10%.

We know Elon did not originally order 100% of the time fired, because he had there'd have been no directive for that manager to refuse to execute. He ordered some specific amount of cuts substantially LESS than 100% and the manager wouldn't do those.




Batteries aren't people. This analogy is horrendously bad.





.... dude.

He literally did fire everyone on that team. 500 people.
(TBC- THAT team, not "the entire supercharger team"- because the entire SC team is multiple groups not just that one)


Can you explain why he "had" to fire everyone under the manager instead of simply firing the manager and replacing them with someone who followed his orders to lay off 10% of staff? (or 14% or whatever less-than-100% number is the real one)

We honestly don't know if he did or did not inform this team that he wanted everyone laid off. The 10% was throughout the entire company, but we see clearly he targeted specific departments with much higher numbers than 10%.

Also like you said, he didn't lay off the entire SC team. So the entire SC team may be 5000 people large and 500 is 10%. Lots of missing information of what is going on.

 

[elasalle]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1789090445785440394

Hope it’s Okay for guys like me to continue posting on this esteemed thread