General Discussion: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[aubreymcfato]

I think that what's to be seen is how many they will make (production), and how many they will sell (demand).
Do they have forecasts of sorts?

One thing that actually settles disputes with shorts is showing them Bolt numbers: yes, GM was there 1 whole year before Model 3, but the car was no match and actually GM didn't want to sell it.
Musk was right all along, less than 25k per year, it is a compliance car, not something they really want to market.
I would say that the only one who are really trying are Nissan with Leaf and the Chinese, let's see if Jaguar is serious or not.

 

[JRP3]

Giga Lot almost complete

Tesla Gigafactory 1 expands with massive new lot as site activity increases

 

[wnorris]

Thanks -- found it.

Tesla has guided for ~ 1 GWh storage total this year. This person says they are currently producing at a 4.5 GWh/year rate for PR alone.

I would love for that to be true but am highly skeptical.

The source is in the comments to the article below in case anyone wants to review and form their own conclusions.

Tesla has ‘about 11,000’ energy storage projects underway in Puerto Rico, says Elon Musk

What I found most interesting in those comments was that, if true, Tesla should be at a current production capacity of 45 GWh/year at GF1.

 

[Waiting4M3]

Giga Lot almost complete

Tesla Gigafactory 1 expands with massive new lot as site activity increases

Does anyone know what the building to the west of the new lot is? It's to the right of the lot in the picture. It's not in the BuildTesla satellite image comparison's scope, so no idea how long it's been there.

 

[dc_h]

- Autonomy isn't working yet, which I predicted way back when. It's a much harder problem than Musk thought.
- Tesla Energy output is being diverted almost entirely to Puerto Rico, where there are 11,000 installations in progress right now, and roughly 4.5 GWh of battery production capacity (courtesy a leak) dedicated entirely to Puerto Rico production.

Is Elon or Tesla funding the Puerto Rico work? That will be a big question, or possibly paid off as a utility at 19 cents per KWh? PR had very high rates, so roi potential is high.

 

[JRP3]

Does anyone know what the building to the west of the new lot is? It's to the right of the lot in the picture. It's not in the BuildTesla satellite image comparison's scope, so no idea how long it's been there.

That's a building of a nearby company, don't know which one.

*Edit: Looks like Thrive Market.

 

[scaesare]

The first I-Pace reviews are out and they show how difficult it will be for Jag without a working supercharger network 2019 Jaguar I-Pace Review: From London to Berlin in an All-Electric Jag - Motor Trend

Have a read! Also the energy usage is extremely high, higher than an Tesla Model X which, with the lack of fast chargers makes the I Pace not feasible for long distance travel

It's nice to see a manufacturer pushing to get a serious BEV effort out the door. It may have some tradeoffs whrn compared with Tesla, but this was Elon's goal... to spur other manufacturers on.

A few thoughts from the article:

- 432 cell pack. This likely means either 72 or 108 cell-groups in series. The former makes it a 302v max (nominal 259V) pack, the latter a 454V max (nom. 389V) pack. Interesting that it doesn't appear to be a 96S configuration

- The 50KW CCS charger pictured was listed as 500V/125A. Assuming the higher voltage pack configuration, I'd guess that meat they saw max charge rates in the ~45KW neighborhood

- Lower HP but greater torque than the Tesla 75D. The PM motors would seem to account for this. I wonder what the final drive gear ratio is.

- Looks like there may have been a removable panel in the hatch floor, but not sure. If so there could be a spare tire down there

- It appears that the energy usage they were seeing during their driving stint dictated charging to/near 100%... I wonder how common this will be and what that portends for battery life.


All in all a laudable effort. Now if Jag would just sign on as a Supercharging Partner...

 

[wnorris]

What I found most interesting in those comments was that, if true, Tesla should be at a current production capacity of 45 GWh/year at GF1.

Can someone who tracks this more closely provide some insight? I am tracking the S/X capacity at 8.5 GWh per year. Model 3 at a little less than 10 GWh for 2018. Let's say 20 GWh of batteries are needed for auto in 2018. This does not jive with a possible 45 GWh/year capacity for GF1 as that would entail 25 GWh remaining for Tesla Energy.

Edit: My assumption would be that a portion of the remaining 25 GWh capacity is for Model 3 production increases and future energy growth. If true, this would give Tesla some runway to cover through at least 2019.

 

[Rarity]

Source: comment section at electrek, fellow in Reno who is trying not to expose his multiple Gigafactory sources. You decide how credible it is, but for me the numbers matched up with certain other numbers I'd heard long ago, so it makes sense to me.

He has no idea about the financing, and Puerto Rico does have financing issues, so it's quite possible that the revenue won't be booked this year even if the installs are done this year.

Thank you for helping tease out those cell capacity numbers, neroden.

20 lines x
14 machines x
750k cells per month per machine x
18 watt-hours per cell x
12 months =
45.36 gigawatt-hours per year

In other words, already 25% greater than the original complete gigafactory design capacity of 35 gigawatt-hours per year.

Wonder how long it will take to spin up all of those lines.

 

[Esme Es Mejor]

Of course Jaguar is trying to directly compete with Tesla. Jaguar have comparison videos talking about the highest performance Teslas while drag racing lower performance Teslas. Not ICEv.

Yeah, I saw the videos and the marketing, which I why I hope they realize they’re not competing with Tesla. To succeed, they need to attract the drivers who are excited by Tesla, but scared of it (new, American, technological, different). The people who need to take one step (BEV) at a time.

Jaguar can let them take the exciting step of driving BEV, while comforting them with a traditional European name— never mind that it’s actually Tata, and Ford before that. They can comfort them with a more traditional user interface, even though it’s inferior to Tesla’s UI. And if they had the sense to partner with Tesla for Supercharging (they don’t seem to), they’d give their drivers a really great experience converting to BEV.

 

[Esme Es Mejor]

I say we laugh at them the way they laughed at Tesla for the last 15 years.

Instead of acting like traditional carmakers and laughing, we should act like Tesla and just be better.

 

[ValueAnalyst]

Thank you for helping tease out those cell capacity numbers, neroden.

20 lines x
14 machines x
750k cells per month per machine x
18 watt-hours per cell x
12 months =
45.36 gigawatt-hours per year

In other words, already 25% greater than the original complete gigafactory design capacity of 35 gigawatt-hours per year.

Wonder how long it will take to spin up all of those lines.

Can someone who tracks this more closely provide some insight? I am tracking the S/X capacity at 8.5 GWh per year. Model 3 at a little less than 10 GWh for 2018. Let's say 20 GWh of batteries are needed for auto in 2018. This does not jive with a possible 45 GWh/year capacity for GF1 as that would entail 25 GWh remaining for Tesla Energy.

Edit: My assumption would be that a portion of the remaining 25 GWh capacity is for Model 3 production increases and future energy growth. If true, this would give Tesla some runway to cover through at least 2019.

I hope Elon brings clarity to this tomorrow, but I wouldn't be surprised if energy storage output was ramping in-line with Model 3 packs.

 

[MP3Mike]

Model 3 at a little less than 10 GWh for 2018.

I think you are underestimating this portion.

In Q1 they used just under 1GWh of batteries for the Model 3.
If they run at an average rate of 2.5k/week for Q2 that would be another 2GWhs.
Then if we assume that they are going to run at 5k/week starting in July through the end of the year, that only would be almost 10 GWhs of batteries.

So a minimum would be 13GWhs, but could go up significantly as they ramp beyond 5k/week.

But, from what I recall of the Q1 letter, I would only expect 4.5GWhs of batteries for storage for the entire year. (Not just for PR.)

 

[schonelucht]

Thank you for helping tease out those cell capacity numbers, neroden.

20 lines x
14 machines x
750k cells per month per machine x
18 watt-hours per cell x
12 months =
45.36 gigawatt-hours per year

In other words, already 25% greater than the original complete gigafactory design capacity of 35 gigawatt-hours per year.

I really want to believe the guy and the numbers you summarize here. But he also said 4 lines were online last year which should have been 9GWh over 2017. Yet there were not enough cells to go around for the Australian project?

 

[TradingInvest]

Instead of acting like traditional carmakers and laughing, we should act like Tesla and just be better.

Easy said than done, while there are 11 billion dollars openly going against Tesla, and all kinds of dark forces actively trying everything to kill Tesla. Tesla's future road will still be super hard, the fight is far from over. "Just be better" is not going to survive, because these dark forces will continue to tarnish Tesla's brand name. I have seen the effect.

 

[Reciprocity]

Interesting info on the status of Model 3 reservations based on abused credit card data.

Tesla comments that the data doesn't align, which could mean it's way off or just not 100% accurate. In any event, I don't see this as negative even if accurate. That's still a ton of held reservations just as the car begins to be seen in public in numbers big enough to start generating interest from those not already fans of Tesla.

This is a non-issue. I think may woudl be surprised to find out that there are still a ton of Model S and X reservations that have never been refunded or used. Tesla doesnt sell reservations, they sell cars. The car is late and many had leases coming up and had to do something. when you have 450,000 of anything, you will have thousands of different reasons why they refunded and very few will be because they hate the car.

When this car hits the streets in mass it will have the same impact the Model S had on generating Model X and Model 3 reservations. Lets not forget that tariffs dropping in China will double or triple the market for all the models.

 

[hiroshiy]

It's nice to see a manufacturer pushing to get a serious BEV effort out the door. It may have some tradeoffs whrn compared with Tesla, but this was Elon's goal... to spur other manufacturers on.

A few thoughts from the article:

- 432 cell pack. This likely means either 72 or 108 cell-groups in series. The former makes it a 302v max (nominal 259V) pack, the latter a 454V max (nom. 389V) pack. Interesting that it doesn't appear to be a 96S configuration

- The 50KW CCS charger pictured was listed as 500V/125A. Assuming the higher voltage pack configuration, I'd guess that meat they saw max charge rates in the ~45KW neighborhood

- Lower HP but greater torque than the Tesla 75D. The PM motors would seem to account for this. I wonder what the final drive gear ratio is.

- Looks like there may have been a removable panel in the hatch floor, but not sure. If so there could be a spare tire down there

- It appears that the energy usage they were seeing during their driving stint dictated charging to/near 100%... I wonder how common this will be and what that portends for battery life.


All in all a laudable effort. Now if Jag would just sign on as a Supercharging Partner...

They seem to use 108S pack so higher voltage than most existing EVs including Tesla. At 454V they can charge 10% faster than 96S packs, at 125A 50kW CCS charger. I think this is to save charging time at existing 50kW infrastructure. On the other hand, Tesla has 333A supercharging network so it doesn't matter.

It might be possible that they chose 108S to charge 90kWh pack faster as the car was a little bit less efficient than Model X.

 

[ValueAnalyst]

"A group of dedicated Tesla owners and drivers has built an electric vehicle charging network that spans Australia, providing any and all EV drivers with a usable charging route while they wait for governments and industry to catch up."

ValueAnalyst on Twitter

Tesla owners roll out Australia-wide charging network – for all EVs

 

[scaesare]

They seem to use 108S pack so higher voltage than most existing EVs including Tesla. At 454V they can charge 10% faster than 96S packs, at 125A 50kW CCS charger. I think this is to save charging time at existing 50kW infrastructure. On the other hand, Tesla has 333A supercharging network so it doesn't matter.

It might be possible that they chose 108S to charge 90kWh pack faster as the car was a little bit less efficient than Model X.

Interestingly the CCS 1.0 spec tops out at 400V. I'd guess the I-Pace would not be ale to fully charge at one of these.

I have a hard time determining how many of the existing CCS installations are of the 1.0 flavor, so I don't know what that means in terms of actual issue in the wild...

 

[jkirkwood001]

Hi,

I bought a few TSLA shares in March when the stock really dipped. I'm interested to listen and participate in shareholder discussions - e.g. upcoming vote on Elon as CEO and Board membership - but I receive no notices from Tesla. I bought via my online broker (I'm in Canada).

Does anyone know how to "register" with Tesla for such official notices and reports?

Thanks.