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

Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA)

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
In terms of the fundamentals of Tesla in regard to "rich man's toys:" it is worthwhile to remember that the cost of entry to buy a Model S is relatively high, but thereafter the cost of ownership drops dramatically below that of any gas car, in the areas of fuel and maintenance. I have had my Model S for 11 months, and 22,000 miles. It was a huge stretch for me to buy the car. Few in my income "category" would even consider the purchase. However, in the time that I have owned the car, my only costs have been around $320 dollars for electricity at my house, and $45 total for charging at several KOA campgrounds over that time. Even insurance is very reasonable, only 12 dollars a month more than I was paying for my 2003 Acura.
I live in Northern Wyoming, far from superchargers and service centers. I recently drove the Model S to visit my daughter in California, spent an extra two weeks travelling around the west coast visiting friends and family. Total miles travelled 6020. Total fuel cost: $0. While I was in California, the car needed to have seals replaced on the rear lift gate, and also needed to replace the on-board charger. I was able to get into the service center the same day, was repaired in 3 hours, during which time I was offered rental car to do whatever I needed to do. Declined the rental car so they gave me rides to and from local park with a delicious bakery/deli nearby for lunch. Cost to me: $0. (Well, except for the lunch, I paid for that.) My one other expense so far has been winter tires, which I bought together with the cool Rial Lugano wheels (that was an indulgence!).
One other time last summer I had an issue with my rear passenger window regulator, ranger service arrived at my home next day, completed the repair and proactively replaced the other side. Cost: $0.
So for those who watch their budgets, the Model S is a dream car. Once you are in, the cost to operate and maintain the car is very manageable. I would guess that over 8 to 10 years, the total cost of ownership of the car will be comparable to a gas car in the range of $40k.
In my particular case, I had saved $30,000 toward purchase of a new car. Invested that sum in shares in TSLA stock in February 2013, and by May, I was able to purchase my car, with the originally budgeted sum having grown to 92,500 which I paid for my S85! (Ok, so I got lucky.)

I can say without hesitation this has been the best purchase I have ever made. I drive the car everywhere, use it for work, for hauling, for camping, or just for going for a sunset drive. The pleasure I have gotten for the money is beyond anything I have ever owned. Worth every penny! And from now on, it is literally paying me back through savings. The Tesla Model S is an awesome piece of work!

So the notion that the Model S is a "toy for the rich," is completely off base in my particular case. The car is phenomenally practical and reliable. It has served every need that I have had. Has also performed amazingly well in severe winter conditions. I suspect I am not the only person who has had this experience.

The cost of ownership over several years falls right in line with cars that have much lower price tags.
 
In terms of the fundamentals of Tesla in regard to "rich man's toys:" it is worthwhile to remember that the cost of entry to buy a Model S is relatively high, but thereafter the cost of ownership drops dramatically below that of any gas car, in the areas of fuel and maintenance. I have had my Model S for 11 months, and 22,000 miles. It was a huge stretch for me to buy the car. Few in my income "category" would even consider the purchase.
The cost of ownership over several years falls right in line with cars that have much lower price tags.
"Rich man's toy" is very clever bear argument used to portray Tesla car buyers in a particular way. Here is my thinking behind this ploy: The whole population of world drivers is huge. That is the market that car manufacturers, including Tesla, are trying to win. Majority of drivers buy a car as a necessity. Very small subset of very wealthy drivers buys cars as 'toys'. Some very wealthy individuals fill their garages with all sorts of exotic cars. By labelling Tesla car 'a toy for the rich', bears are implying that only such individuals will purchase Tesla car. Bear conclusion: 'Necessity' drivers are not the market that Tesla can enter. Market for Tesla cars is extremely small and Tesla is doomed. Bears convictions are as strong as bull's conviction.
Any un-disputable signs that Tesla is tapping in the 'necessity' drivers pool will propel the shares as that will destroy one of the bear arguments.
 
Last edited:
The cost of ownership over several years falls right in line with cars that have much lower price tags.

Your total cost of ownership may be even lower than you think, if the Model S holds its resale value better than other cars, which seems likely due to its rustproof aluminum body, long-wearing motor, upgradeable battery, upgradable software, and continuing high demand. Maybe in a few years, you could trade in for a Model E and get money back.
 
Elon Musk invested into the software startup that mimics human learning. Their first technilogy "is a visual perception system that interprets the contents of photographs and videos in a manner similar to humans. Powering this technology is a new computational paradigm we call the Recursive Cortical Network" Seems to be a perfect fit for a company that is working on driverless cars!

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/mar/21/zuckerberg-invest-startup-brain-software-vicarious
 
Last edited:
I really hope this latest Russian standoff pushes the EU even more towards solar and wind for everyday power generation. Germany is already a big proponent, I even heard of an intiative to build huge solar power plants in Northern Africa and supply up to 15% of Europe's energy from there.

However, I do not know if solar could be the answer to the main usage of the Russian gas in Europe: heating. My country imports about 60% of the gas from Russia, through the Ukraine, others in Easten Europe do more, but even Western Europe is somewhat exposed. We can have pretty bad winters over here and I doubt we have enough sunshine to switch everyone to electric heating in, say, January or February.

Look up "superinsulation", "The Super Insulated Retrofit Book", and Passivhaus standards. I'm a *huge* advocate of superinsulation.

(Do we have a thread about home energy efficiency somewhere here?)

If your building is super-insulated, you can easily run it off a very small heater. It's even easier to do for larger apartment buildings than it is for small houses. The super-insulation techniques were largely developed by Canadians and applied to 1850s farmhouses in Saskatchewan -- a very harsh environment with an awfully high heating need -- so Europe is MUCH easier.

If you can afford it, superinsulate any buildings you control. It will pay off really, really fast.

- - - Updated - - -

Elon also spends half his time with some of the best avionics and guidance/control systems engineers in the world at SpaceX. Launching autonomous multi-stage vehicles to dock with an object flying at 27,000 km/hr is not an easy task. With the confidence of his statements regarding autonomy, I think people are underestimating how far along autonomy R&D is at Tesla.
Autonomous automobiles are nowhere near useable. It's much, MUCH easier to run autonomous spacecraft -- they operate in a more controlled environment. (Really.)

FWIW, autonomous trains are a solved problem.

Bluntly, I'll believe that they're getting close when the "autonomous automobile" can spot a white-tailed deer standing at the side of the road and realize that it needs to slow down to 10 mph in case the deer decides to jump out in front of the car. They are nowhere, nowhere, nowhere near being able to replace competent drivers. (Incompetent drivers are another matter, but don't we have enough of those without making robot imitations?)
 
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by neroden viewpost-right.png

(Incompetent drivers are another matter, but don't we have enough of those without making robot imitations?)

I'd have to disagree. To my mind over half of the drivers on the roads fall in the incompetent bracket. :wink:

Ohdeer. I just missed a couple of deers the other night, around midnight. Don't know if they were robotical, but they decided to not cross the road as I approached. I stopped anyway, with hazards flashing, because there was another car a bit behind.

Sorry, did we just stray outside some boundary here? :redface:
 
Bluntly, I'll believe that they're getting close when the "autonomous automobile" can spot a white-tailed deer standing at the side of the road and realize that it needs to slow down to 10 mph in case the deer decides to jump out in front of the car. They are nowhere, nowhere, nowhere near being able to replace competent drivers. (Incompetent drivers are another matter, but don't we have enough of those without making robot imitations?)

I'd like to think that any system developed would have some type of infrared capabilities to spot live creatures on or alongside the roadway. There are currently heads up displays that are suppose to do that even in heavy fog at night.

I have a feeling that any car approved to drive itself will be a far better driver than I can be.
 
Polls reveal that over 80% of drivers believe they are above average. Most of the rest concede that they are about average.
We're talking about the mean, not the median. That could certainly happen if all the "badness" were concentrated in a handful of REALLY awful drivers and your evaluation system was not a rank order (best driver is 1, second best is 2, third best is 3).
 
WHO: air pollution 'is single biggest environmental health risk'

New figures link indoor and outdoor air pollution to around 7 millon deaths a year – more than double previous estimates

The new figures are more than double previous estimates and suggest that outdoor pollution from traffic fumes and coal-burning, and indoor pollution from wood and coal stoves, kills more people than smoking, road deaths and diabetes combined.

Air pollution is increasingly linked with ill health and deaths in rich countries as traffic emissions rise. In the US, air pollution causes about 200,000 early deaths a year, with emissions from cars and trucks causing 53,000 and power generation 52,000, according to MIT's environment laboratory. California suffers most from air pollution, with 21,000 early deaths.
In Europe, poor air quality is the top environmental cause of premature deaths in the EU, causing more than 100,000 premature deaths a year and costing from £300bn-£800bn a year in extra health costs, said Janez Potočnik, the EU environment commissioner.
Air pollution causes 29,000 early deaths a year in the UK and similar numbers in France and Germany.

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...-single-biggest-environmental-health-risk-who
 
We're talking about the mean, not the median. That could certainly happen if all the "badness" were concentrated in a handful of REALLY awful drivers
I can believe this. For some reason, in the US, drivers with long records of reckless driving keep getting their licenses back, and often don't get charged with anything; I've been reading studies about this. I could *easily* believe that the "badness" is concentrated in a relatively small group of repeat offenders.
 
What is the timeframe when Supercharger can fully charge 85Kwh cars in 10-15 minutes? anyone willing to chime in and speculate? I think in addition to charging network availability, the charging speed is a crucial part too. JB Straubel mentioned once that full charge in 5-10 minutes is achievable.
Tesla CTO JB Straubel Says His Company Can Charge Electric Vehicles, With No Battery Swapping, in Five Minutes | MIT Technology Review

By charging faster, it also means that Tesla requires less charging spot per Supercharger location, because the congestion caused by the time to charge will be less.
There supercharger network might be split into 3 area:
- spot for batter swap,
- spot for 5-10 minute quick charging
- spot for parking, which probably will have achieve 180 Kw/H charging rate by then
 
Anybody know Dr. Menahem Anderman of AABC? He runs battery conferences and has a report out about batteries and EV makers.

Conferences - Advanced Automotive Batteries

Industry Reports - Advanced Automotive Batteries

Note page 3 of his report dated December 2013 that Tesla is not on the list. I assume Tesla did not cooperate with this study because Tesla wants to keep its secrets secret.

http://www.advancedautobat.com/indu...ustry-Report/Executive-Summary-Selections.pdf

It must drive him nuts that Tesla is not talking. I wonder if Tesla participates in his conferences. Attend perhaps, but probably not a presenter?
 
Last edited:
The once-a-year negative article from Barron's has arrived this weekend. With the expected 60-Minutes story tomorrow, Monday could be interesting.

(note: there is a paywall at Barron's)

Tesla's Giga-Plan Looks Too Ambitious - Barrons.com


Here are the last few sentences from the article:


... LG and Samsung have had losses or razor-thin profits at their underutilized factories; a $5 billion investment in a Gigafactory could yield similarly lousy returns unless Musk sells 500,000 cars annually. "What happens if the market is only a half or a quarter the size he thinks it is?" says Anderman. "Then he has a big factory running at only half or a quarter utilization, and his costs are not better than they are today."


Given how well Model S did in its first year (2013), the strong demand Tesla is
already seeing for the Model X, how well the Nissan Leaf is currently doing, there should no surprise that Tesla could sell more than 500,000 units per year by 2020 after Gen 3 matures. Given the performance and the quality of the Model S, understanding that Tesla is very much production constrained (in 2013/2014/2015/2016), I suspect current underlying demand for the Model S is well over 25,000 units per year in the USA and 2x that for the ROW. Model X will ramp even faster because of the groundwork laid by the Model S.

As battery cost goes down, the TAM of EVs is pretty staggering. By 2020 the world will be producing cars at the rate of 100 million per year. There are 800 million cars on the road today. By 2050 this number will quadruple to 3 billion.


The first Gigafactory Tesla wants to build will produce about 30-40 GWh of batteries per year to power 400,000 to 500,000 EVs. By 2050 our planet will need more than 100 of these gigafactories just for the auto industry (not including what will be needed for the stationary storage industry).

This is just the beginning of something that will take decades to play out. 500,000 EVs is just 0.5% of the 100 million cars that will be produced in 2020. Not only 100% of the capacity of the first gigafactory will utilized, by then planning will be well underway for the 2nd and 3rd gigafactories (by Tesla and others)

 
Last edited:
It strikes me that this may be the least risky moment to invest in Tesla in a while. Yes, issues like the Gigafactory still exist, but they have existed for a long time while other issues have systematically been addressed:

. Designing and Prototyping a new Car for a new Car Company
. Creating a Factory to Build it (and other models eventually)
. Having it be the best car made (seriously, I still am incredulous when I read, daily from new owners, "I test drove the Model S against a Panamera and it blew it away" - it's hard to grasp how amazing that statement is)
. Starting a sales and distribution network that upends 100 years of car buying (with it now looking like the backwards states are falling over each other in an effort not to be the last to outlaw direct sales)
. Exporting all the above to Europe and Asia
. Having another vehicle imminent (Model X) that will be a bigger hit than the Model S. It will.
. Being constantly under media scrutiny, getting screwtinized by the media all the time, and consistently blowing past it with social media, forums, blogs, and occasional interviews.
. Inventing, producing, and implementing the Supercharger network.
. Upgrading the car with constant software updates.
. My fingers will get tired if I keep going...

At each challenge, Tesla has not only solved the apparent problems, they have vastly improved things with those solutions. About 6 months ago I wrote in the comment section of an online article that I thought that going from 0-20,000 cars/year was the hardest part and going from 20,000-200,000 would comparatively be less difficult. I got raked over by a few people for that. I now see that it doesn't really matter. Tesla has been up for every challenge whether it has been more or less difficult than the previous ones. I still think the analyst who predicted $1,149/share by 2020 will likely been seen as a prophet. I know I hope he's right.