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.
I saw this comment from Khrom Capital (incredible track record, look it up) and thought of Tesla. Maybe it is another company but I doubt it.

http://www.gurufocus.com/news/355992/khrom-capital-june-30-letter-to-investors

We recently made a new investment based on taking this lifetime view of a business. This company is disrupting a large industry; it has only a 0.3% share of a growing market, a clear and increasing competitive advantage, an astute and well incentivized board of directors, and is run by an extraordinarily intelligent CEO who has a clear strategic vision and has created an outstanding corporate culture.

However, if our investment strategy focused on trying to estimate what the stock price could be in a year – or even five years – from now, we might have passed on this investment. There are many reasons that the stock price could decline in the near term. Competition will likely increase since the opportunity that this company is pursuing is large and lucrative. The company’s current profitability is depressed, and its CEO will likely continue to suppress it further in pursuit of significant advantages of scale. The U.S. economy may enter another recession, and since this business hasn’t previously proven itself through an economic contraction, there may be panicked sellers of the stock. These and other factors may make for a “messy” stock price over the next few years.

However, by encouraging ourselves (and structuring our partnership to allow us) to think as permanent owners of the business, we focused our attention not on the share price this company could trade for in a few years, but on the profits this business is likely to produce over the next few decades. Ironically, the farther out we look, the easier it becomes for us to approximately predict things.

Focus on long-term profitability

For example, take the risk of competition. We think that this company has obvious and growing competitive advantages that should help solidify it as the dominant player in its space. (Think how the number of search engine startups dried up once Google Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOG) solidified its dominant position.) We think it is ideal that this management is willing to reduce short-term profitability to invest in growing the company’s competitive advantage, increasing the quality of its long-term profitability. (Think how Amazon.com, Inc. [NASDAQ:AMZN] has barely shown any profits for over a decade, but the value of its business has grown significantly every year.) We think that a recession could benefit this company, since their cash-rich balance sheet, economies of scale and prudent management team would enable them to grow stronger as weaker competitors die off. (Think how Wells Fargo & Co. [NYSE:WFC] is earning more money today than before the Great Recession.)

In short, since we do not need to concern ourselves with where the stock price will be in the next few years (since you have allowed us to follow an investment strategy that focuses on the fundamentals of a business), we are able to look beyond all the short-term noise. That is how we attempt to generate our excess returns. By taking the profits that people cannot take (and hopefully avoiding the losses that they incur) because they want to rent a stock.






 
I saw this comment from Khrom Capital (incredible track record, look it up) and thought of Tesla. Maybe it is another company but I doubt it.

http://www.gurufocus.com/news/355992/khrom-capital-june-30-letter-to-investors

We recently made a new investment based on taking this lifetime view of a business. This company is disrupting a large industry; it has only a 0.3% share of a growing market, a clear and increasing competitive advantage, an astute and well incentivized board of directors, and is run by an extraordinarily intelligent CEO who has a clear strategic vision and has created an outstanding corporate culture.

However, if our investment strategy focused on trying to estimate what the stock price could be in a year – or even five years – from now, we might have passed on this investment. There are many reasons that the stock price could decline in the near term. Competition will likely increase since the opportunity that this company is pursuing is large and lucrative. The company’s current profitability is depressed, and its CEO will likely continue to suppress it further in pursuit of significant advantages of scale. The U.S. economy may enter another recession, and since this business hasn’t previously proven itself through an economic contraction, there may be panicked sellers of the stock. These and other factors may make for a “messy” stock price over the next few years.

However, by encouraging ourselves (and structuring our partnership to allow us) to think as permanent owners of the business, we focused our attention not on the share price this company could trade for in a few years, but on the profits this business is likely to produce over the next few decades. Ironically, the farther out we look, the easier it becomes for us to approximately predict things.

Focus on long-term profitability

For example, take the risk of competition. We think that this company has obvious and growing competitive advantages that should help solidify it as the dominant player in its space. (Think how the number of search engine startups dried up once Google Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOG) solidified its dominant position.) We think it is ideal that this management is willing to reduce short-term profitability to invest in growing the company’s competitive advantage, increasing the quality of its long-term profitability. (Think how Amazon.com, Inc. [NASDAQ:AMZN] has barely shown any profits for over a decade, but the value of its business has grown significantly every year.) We think that a recession could benefit this company, since their cash-rich balance sheet, economies of scale and prudent management team would enable them to grow stronger as weaker competitors die off. (Think how Wells Fargo & Co. [NYSE:WFC] is earning more money today than before the Great Recession.)

In short, since we do not need to concern ourselves with where the stock price will be in the next few years (since you have allowed us to follow an investment strategy that focuses on the fundamentals of a business), we are able to look beyond all the short-term noise. That is how we attempt to generate our excess returns. By taking the profits that people cannot take (and hopefully avoiding the losses that they incur) because they want to rent a stock.


Absolutely must be TSLA. I love their analysis here and their investment attitude - it seems to line up very well with Elon's and this is the kind of institutional investor you want for thel long term.
 
The X timeline reminds me of the S rollout in 2012. Assuming that the X ramps faster than the X (as per Elon's statements), we should ramp production by the end of the year. Then by Q1 2016 we should have clarity as to free cash flow.

Of course, the signs will be there by the end of 2015. So if the ramp goes relatively smoothly, expect a nice rally by December. IMHO.
 
There's definitely points worth considering in your thesis Austin.

As to what design studio for X can do...

new features: I think there's one potential new feature that could make a big difference that you did not list... a ~100 kWh battery. my gut says it's better than a 50% chance. I know at least one person who will view that as a massive negative, but I think most would find it quite a positive. I think it would most likely near immediately be followed by a bigger battery for the Model S, at a better value than the current biggest size Model S. Best car and SUV, getting better in the one area still most criticized vs. ICE.


I know this is irresponsible but as long as we're speculating on Model X features, I'm gonna call it right now: optional quad motor AWD. Would be a game changer and could provide a major boost.
 
I know this is irresponsible but as long as we're speculating on Model X features, I'm gonna call it right now: optional quad motor AWD. Would be a game changer and could provide a major boost.

There may be a growing multitude of possible configurations for the Model X, and they all have to be tested. Any delay that may cause is understandable. I’d prefer this is done right rather than rushed.
 
There may be a growing multitude of possible configurations for the Model X, and they all have to be tested. Any delay that may cause is understandable. I’d prefer this is done right rather than rushed.

At this point, if it came out tomorrow, it wouldn't be considered rushed. What is it now.....22 months late?

I really believe Tesla needs to stop trying to re-invent the car with every vehicle they design and build. It's ok to build a run of the mill, small car or truck that gets 225-250 miles per charge - just get it to market. With all the time and money that has gone into the X, it HAS to be a huge winner. It can't have any deficiencies. I'm not sure why Tesla wants to put themselves under that kind of pressure as such a young car manufacturer (for example, gull wing doors - why?).

What differentiates Tesla from other manufacturers is the power train. That's enough. The Camry, Accord, and Fusion are all about the same, and all sell well. So, Tesla doesn't need to do something SO different to sell their cars. The same type vehicles, with the same features - just have Tesla quality and customer service - and be an electric car. That's enough.
 
At this point, if it came out tomorrow, it wouldn't be considered rushed. What is it now.....22 months late?

I really believe Tesla needs to stop trying to re-invent the car with every vehicle they design and build. It's ok to build a run of the mill, small car or truck that gets 225-250 miles per charge - just get it to market. With all the time and money that has gone into the X, it HAS to be a huge winner. It can't have any deficiencies. I'm not sure why Tesla wants to put themselves under that kind of pressure as such a young car manufacturer (for example, gull wing doors - why?).

What differentiates Tesla from other manufacturers is the power train. That's enough. The Camry, Accord, and Fusion are all about the same, and all sell well. So, Tesla doesn't need to do something SO different to sell their cars. The same type vehicles, with the same features - just have Tesla quality and customer service - and be an electric car. That's enough.

I have wondered for quite a while if the X design isn't suffering from the second-system effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month#The_second-system_effect). I'm hopeful that the 3 will just be a demonstration of what a BMW 3-series could be with an all-electric design. No crazy enhancements, just a battery-powered vehicle that will blow away any ICE in its class in a head-to-head comparison.
 
"I really believe Tesla needs to stop trying to re-invent the car with every vehicle they design and build. It's ok to build a run of the mill, small car or truck that gets 225-250 miles per charge - just get it to market. With all the time and money that has gone into the X, it HAS to be a huge winner. It can't have any deficiencies. I'm not sure why Tesla wants to put themselves under that kind of pressure as such a young car manufacturer (for example, gull wing doors - why?)."



Elon is the chief product guy, his ego could be getting in the way. Whoever asked for falcon door, or sculptured back seats,
AWD and 90kwh are enhancements that have an impact, the rest along with the complexity it adds to manufacturing is nonsensical.

Some of his craziness might explain personnel departures and airplane wing walks.
 
I know this is irresponsible but as long as we're speculating on Model X features, I'm gonna call it right now: optional quad motor AWD. Would be a game changer and could provide a major boost.
I'm glad we finally got around to airing wacky surprise ideas. I think with the towing package, it will back itself up to the trailer by itself. And once connected, it will back it up for you without jackknifing. This feature will be of great interest to like twelve people. The rest won't care. And the press will go nuts. And no one will be able to make sense of any of it :)
 
Rush a slightly compelling car to market to appease short-term investors? No thanks. That's not Tesla.

Honestly, just making the Model X a compelling CUV vehicle would have been better for Tesla's long-term goals--mass electrification of transportation. Less capital spent + more money for developing Model 3, the only car that really matters for achieving Tesla's end goal.

The flashiness of the Model X is going to generate a ton of press, but most of the extra fluff isn't going to make a huge difference to probably 95%+ of consumers. Plus Tesla could have always iterated and added these features in after the fact, just like they do with the Model S.
 
Honestly, just making the Model X a compelling CUV vehicle would have been better for Tesla's long-term goals--mass electrification of transportation. Less capital spent + more money for developing Model 3, the only car that really matters for achieving Tesla's end goal.

The flashiness of the Model X is going to generate a ton of press, but most of the extra fluff isn't going to make a huge difference to probably 95%+ of consumers. Plus Tesla could have always iterated and added these features in after the fact, just like they do with the Model S.

I don't understand this logic.
 
Honestly, just making the Model X a compelling CUV vehicle would have been better for Tesla's long-term goals--mass electrification of transportation. Less capital spent + more money for developing Model 3, the only car that really matters for achieving Tesla's end goal.

The flashiness of the Model X is going to generate a ton of press, but most of the extra fluff isn't going to make a huge difference to probably 95%+ of consumers. Plus Tesla could have always iterated and added these features in after the fact, just like they do with the Model S.

As a patient, long-term shareholder I strongly disagree. Tesla has succeeded where others have failed because of the brilliance of the top-down marketing approach. Elon understands that the long-term goal of transitioning to sustainable transportation requires building cars that blow away ICE counterparts on every dimension. The desirability of the product needs to be a no-brainer. People need to lust after the product in order to overcome their hesitations and and the FUD around electric drive. And creating a high-end, aspirational brand with halo cars like S and X will greatly increase the addressable market for Model 3.
 
I don't understand this logic.

Other than the drivetrain, you can find every feature of the Model X (except for the two-hinged falcon wing door) on other vehicles in the market. The only thing you can't find is the incredible drive train, range, and Supercharger network, which is even more true in a SUV format.

I just think they would have been better off doing a crossover version of the Model S and focusing those development dollars more toward the Model 3 and post-launch iterative improvement. Just like the Model S, they would have made those improvements anyways. (Do you think Tesla would have been as successful today if they held the original Model S launch until they had Autopilot, Insane Mode, and AWD? They could have done the same thing with the Model X).

Similarly, you could apply the same thing to the Model 3. If they delay the Model 3 for three years and wait to add crazy premium features in, this stock won't be doing too well.

The incredible press of the Model X's crazy features will be awesome, but ultimately crazy press hasn't turned Corvettes into a transformative mass market force and Tesla will really need to double down on making a mass market car with the Model 3 and they don't have much time to hit their timelines for such a drastic undertaking.
 
Well that depends on "pricing in." It can be argued by the time that CF+ is realized, it'll be too late because if Tesla executes and Model X turns out being as awesome as it's hyped up to be, investors will expect at an earlier point in time that CF+ will occur because the doubt right now is whether or not it will happen, not a question of when. When the SP, get's a pop it'll be a question of when, how much, and how often not will it occur or not.

I don't think it'll be priced in. And if we get an April's Fool tweet again on the subject.... But you make a good point, the stock should already be going up before the CF+ reveal because the X will be (yes, I'm certain) receiving accolades up the wahzoo from reviewers, mags, customers, etc... So much so that people might temporarily 'forget' about CF+. We might also be seeing buzz about Model 3 reveal around that time as well as buzz around progress of the Gigafactory. Next spring could be a VERY exciting time.

- - - Updated - - -

Elon is the chief product guy, his ego could be getting in the way. Whoever asked for falcon door, or sculptured back seats,
AWD and 90kwh are enhancements that have an impact, the rest along with the complexity it adds to manufacturing is nonsensical.

Some of his craziness might explain personnel departures and airplane wing walks.

This is to not understand any of it. The S and the X HAD to be/HAVE to be stunning. If they weren't/aren't then Tesla wouldn't have been able to sell enough to do everything else they have done to this point and will do moving forward. Nobody is going to buy an 'meh' EV for 100k plus unless it makes the equivalent ICE 100k car look like a piece of crap on several metrics.

The S and X HAD to be/HAVE to be COMPELLING on many fronts for Tesla to reach it's ultimate goal. That's why the fancy door handles, and the 17" UI screen, and the 0-60 craziness, and the voluminous cargo space, and, and, and. Lastly, for the millionth time, they are not 'gull wing' doors. They are 'falcon wing' doors....double hinged and entirely different and they are stroke of genius. People will eventually realize this when they get use the X on a day to day basis.

The wing walking is exactly the type of thing I'd expect a person such as Elon Musk to do for fun and to de-stress. Good on him, I say.
 
This is to not understand any of it. The S and the X HAD to be/HAVE to be stunning. If they weren't/aren't then Tesla wouldn't have been able to sell enough to do everything else they have done to this point and will do moving forward. Nobody is going to buy an 'meh' EV for 100k plus unless it makes the equivalent ICE 100k car look like a piece of crap on several metrics.

The S and X HAD to be/HAVE to be COMPELLING on many fronts for Tesla to reach it's ultimate goal. That's why the fancy door handles, and the 17" UI screen, and the 0-60 craziness, and the voluminous cargo space, and, and, and. Lastly, for the millionth time, they are not 'gull wing' doors. They are 'falcon wing' doors....double hinged and entirely different and they are stroke of genius. People will eventually realize this when they get use the X on a day to day basis.


I'd argue just the fact that a SUV gets 4-5x the fuel economy (equivalent) of the next best SUV, and also will go 0-60 in under 4 seconds, is stunning enough.

Anyways, I think the point I'm trying to make is that how they're handling the Model X doesn't bode well for the Model 3. Mass market and incredible premium EV are two different beasts entirely. I'm hoping Musk doesn't loose sight of the goal of the Model 3, and delays the vehicle for years over features that could easily be held for post-launch development or extra features. A 200 mile real world range EV with a Tesla drivetrain for $35k base with a Supercharger network is all that's needed to kick-start the EV revolution (just think of how many people buy $35k Leafs with 40-50 mile winter ranges and double digit 0-60 times), but more importantly to keep Tesla in a leadership role of the EV revolution.

Going back to the short term, any other delays to mass volume production will not bode well for the stock price, and could even put a damper on an Q1 2016 over continuing fears on meeting goals and maturing to a mass market audience.
 
I agree that the Model 3 doesn't need to be extremely complicated....just compelling. Model S and X, however, needed to be dramatically better than their ICE counterparts in order to be disruptive.

And regarding the Model X website, the release won't do much for the stock (unless it reveals unheard-of features, like smell-o-vision)....but any further delay of the release beyond August will have a short term negative effect on the price.