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

[KBF]

Many companies use the checkbox method. More boxes checked is supposed to indicate a better product. So ten boxes checked are better than five boxes checked, regardless of the silliness of the boxes. Basically this is marketing thinking.

Totally - critical thinking is massively lacking in this approach, too. Seriously, heated/cooled cupholders are:
-far more expensive
-waste energy
-add complexity (incl. Additional suppliers and things that can break)
-worst of all: barely heat or cool your actual beverage

But:
-"it makes us appear to be cutting edge/more advanced - let's do it!"



Edit: but theoretically, marketing could say, "here's a chance to sell customers on a custom cup that has a conductive bottom so that the heated/cooled cup holders actually DO something, plus we get to sell these customs mugs at a premium!"
^I don't know if they do this, but to me that's the only way it even makes sense. Maybe I should research the tech more before criticizing, but it's really not worth my time...

 

[aubreymcfato]

If other manufacturers (i.e.: from Italy, France, China) were to create adequate numbers of sub-compact BEVs for those markets, is it necessarily a given that Tesla would as well?

For example, there are many sub-compacts made in China, and Tesla has avoided entering that market. Possibly because making a vehicle at that size may be challenging to accomplish while also meeting their safety goals.

It seems the only reason Tesla would do that is if they had already filled the other vehicle categories and felt the sub-compact sector wasn't growing fast enough. Tesla would be unlikely do it merely for competitive reasons. The mission isn't necessarily for Tesla to target every segment of the market simply because it is there.

Either way, there is obviously a strong demand for good sub-compact BEVs in those places where the roads are narrower and/or traffic is denser. Hopefully there will be a wide variety of manufacturers vying for that market with quality designs.

It seems reasonable that Tesla could step in if needed, though I agree it is less likely for this to ever be moved to the top of the list ahead of others where they are more comfortable about hitting the quality and safety targets.

As said before, there are many compact EVs on the market, from the old Renault Zoe to the new Fiat 500e.
What matters, of course, are the evergreen details: range, price, quality of the car. Tesla is still the best bang for the buck, and it shows.
Being poor/savvy, Italians still buy more Teslas than any other EVs, which are deemed too expensive for what they provide.
IF, and it's a big IF, Tesla can make a smaller version of the 3 and Y with decent range for 22-25€, well, I expect to see a lot more on the streets. I'd even buy one myself ;-)

 

[MP3Mike]

Edit: but theoretically, marketing could say, "here's a chance to sell customers on a custom cup that has a conductive bottom so that the heated/cooled cup holders actually DO something, plus we get to sell these customs mugs at a premium!"
^I don't know if they do this, but to me that's the only way it even makes sense. Maybe I should research the tech more before criticizing, but it's really not worth my time...

No custom cup needed. I suspect that the majority of objects put into a cup holder are take-away cups or disposable bottles. Paper cups from Starbucks, Paper/plastic soda/milkshake cups from your burger joint of choice, bottles of water, bottles of Gatorade, etc. And those probably benefit from a heated/cooled cup holder just fine.

A cooled cup holder might be second on my list as a desired features for Tesla to add. (The first would be cooled/ventilated seats on the Model 3/Y, which alone might be enough to get me to upgrade.)

 

[AndrewZ]

Totally - critical thinking is massively lacking in this approach, too. Seriously, heated/cooled cupholders are:
-far more expensive
-waste energy
-add complexity (incl. Additional suppliers and things that can break)
-worst of all: barely heat or cool your actual beverage

But:
-"it makes us appear to be cutting edge/more advanced - let's do it!"



Edit: but theoretically, marketing could say, "here's a chance to sell customers on a custom cup that has a conductive bottom so that the heated/cooled cup holders actually DO something, plus we get to sell these customs mugs at a premium!"
^I don't know if they do this, but to me that's the only way it even makes sense. Maybe I should research the tech more before criticizing, but it's really not worth my time...

I second this, was about to spend $2.3million on one of these but am not eager to deal with repairing the cup holders. Oh well, guess I'll just settle for a Huayra.

 

[Dikkie Dik]

Eeeehhhhh whut?

Toyota targets Europe, China in hydrogen sales pivot

Toyota Motor will focus on selling hydrogen-powered trucks and cars in Europe and China, as part of a push to sell 200,000 of these vehicles by 2030, executives said on Tuesday.

www.reuters.com

 

[KBF]

Eeeehhhhh whut?

Toyota targets Europe, China in hydrogen sales pivot

Toyota Motor will focus on selling hydrogen-powered trucks and cars in Europe and China, as part of a push to sell 200,000 of these vehicles by 2030, executives said on Tuesday.

www.reuters.com

"by 2030" = "the breakthrough is still just a few years out, but we promise it will happen. "

 

[M|S|M MYP]

"by 2030" = "the breakthrough is still just a few years out, but we promise it will happen. "

"We are dead serious this time......"

 

[unk45]

If other manufacturers (i.e.: from Italy, France, China) were to create adequate numbers of sub-compact BEVs for those markets, is it necessarily a given that Tesla would as well?

For example, there are many sub-compacts made in China, and Tesla has avoided entering that market. Possibly because making a vehicle at that size may be challenging to accomplish while also meeting their safety goals.

It seems the only reason Tesla would do that is if they had already filled the other vehicle categories and felt the sub-compact sector wasn't growing fast enough. Tesla would be unlikely do it merely for competitive reasons. The mission isn't necessarily for Tesla to target every segment of the market simply because it is there.

Either way, there is obviously a strong demand for good sub-compact BEVs in those places where the roads are narrower and/or traffic is denser. Hopefully there will be a wide variety of manufacturers vying for that market with quality designs.

It seems reasonable that Tesla could step in if needed, though I agree it is less likely for this to ever be moved to the top of the list ahead of others where they are more comfortable about hitting the quality and safety targets.

Good questions, and given the great success of electric rickshaws in India and equivalent ones in China by the hundreds of suppliers, not to mention the Italian and French ban delivery vehicles and so much more it is certainly not an early priority for Tesla. I do not mean to suggest Tesla could or should make offerings there anytime soon. I do think that some combination of players such as Tesla, CATL and BYD will be offering high quality powertrain solutions in those markets. Why? Because in all markets this category tends towards generic powertrain components, often substandard by any definition and many of them subject to multiple defects including fire risk. In Japan, Italy and France the manufacturers are generally much more consistent in quality even though nearly all basically converted their old ICE to BEV.
Tesla has major advantages in delivering power to BEV's, major advantages in really understanding manufacturing efficiency and the ability to reimagine better technologies. Once the big things are even more varied than they now are, Tesla Energy will expand its services much more broadly. As grid services and utilities move more extensively towards wind and solar in poorer countries there will be much more tiny vehicle use, satisfied by thousands of suppliers, virtually none fo which will be vertically integrated.

Tesla Energy as a supplier of utility services fit naturally with Tesla being a supplier of standardized small vehicles and maybe more. That si quite likely when battery supplies are no longer the primary constraint on growth.

There are genuine examples from the ICE age, notably Honda that has made almost everything that was powered by an engine from chainsaws and outboard motors to airplanes, plus cars.

When considering the Tesla Mission there really is no use of fossil fuel that is out of scope. There is an ever increasing scope of possibilities as resources permit. All else is just timing.

 

[JupiterMan]

"We are dead serious this time......"

"forget what we said about solid state batteries last week, this time we're serious!"

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

"by 2030" = "the breakthrough is still just a few years out, but we promise it will happen. "

Researcher Translation

xkcd.com

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

GM throws in the towel concerning building affordable, smaller cars in the US.

GM positions new Chevy Trax, Buick Envista crossovers to fill an affordability gap

GM's new 2024 Buick Envista and redesigned 2024 Chevrolet Trax crossovers start at $23,495 and $20,400, respectively.

www.cnbc.com

Funny how CNBC buries that little detail in the article. I do hope that TSLA decides to open a "Model 2" (or whatever the "$25,000 Tesla will be called) assembly line in a US factory, just to keep the "Most US Made" title and shut down that bit of FUD.

The IRA is going to be great for the Mexican economy. Also, the Chinese food there is going to be amazing.

 

[cliff harris]

Also, the current creme-de-la-creme of designed-in-america, built-in-XY, sold-in-USA Compact cars are the 3 and Y, which are compacts in the US.

This is, I think, the whole point. Americans think the model 3 is small. This is why they shouldn't be trying to design small cars for Europe. The model 3 is NOT small by European standards. My model Y feels like a battleship next to a lot of the cars I park next to here, and I'm in rural UK, not zipping down side-streets in Rome or around London.

Tesla is STILL designing cars for Americans, specifically Californians (with a nod to Texans in the case of the cybertruck). Shrink the model 3 by 10% in every direction and its European sales would go up, not down.

Also BTW, true of Japan. Japanese cars are tiny, tiny tiny tiny. Tesla is not going to sell serious quantities in that market until they release a much smaller model.

 

[phantasms]

This is, I think, the whole point. Americans think the model 3 is small. This is why they shouldn't be trying to design small cars for Europe. The model 3 is NOT small by European standards. My model Y feels like a battleship next to a lot of the cars I park next to here, and I'm in rural UK, not zipping down side-streets in Rome or around London.

Tesla is STILL designing cars for Americans, specifically Californians (with a nod to Texans in the case of the cybertruck). Shrink the model 3 by 10% in every direction and its European sales would go up, not down.

Also BTW, true of Japan. Japanese cars are tiny, tiny tiny tiny. Tesla is not going to sell serious quantities in that market until they release a much smaller model.

As someone who just got back from ten days in France/Spain/Andorra [UTMB 160k race], I can say for sure the 3 and Y are not small. I rented a new X5 hybrid and it felt like driving a semi truck around. Even though this is like a $100k car my 8yo son kept saying “ugh, gas cars suck”. But the S and X have little business being in many parts of Europe, much less the cybertruck. I did see many Teslas but only one S. I saw a couple Ford Raptors and felt so bad for them. Im now in the camp of “Tesla should not waste their time with a RHD S and X”.

 

[SOULPEDL]

Outside here on this forum people have - in my experience- no clue this epic battle is happening right now.

I totally appreciate this info bubble we're in. It removes a lot of unnecessary stress. .
Hopefully I get to meet more of you out there along this ride.

 

[M|S|M MYP]

I totally appreciate this info bubble we're in. It removes a lot of unnecessary stress. .
Hopefully I get to meet more of you out there along this ride.

There is not another group of degenerates (I mean investors) that i would rather go down in flames or go to the moon with than all of you! (sans some trolls of course)

 

[unk45]

This is, I think, the whole point. Americans think the model 3 is small. This is why they shouldn't be trying to design small cars for Europe. The model 3 is NOT small by European standards. My model Y feels like a battleship next to a lot of the cars I park next to here, and I'm in rural UK, not zipping down side-streets in Rome or around London.

Tesla is STILL designing cars for Americans, specifically Californians (with a nod to Texans in the case of the cybertruck). Shrink the model 3 by 10% in every direction and its European sales would go up, not down.

Also BTW, true of Japan. Japanese cars are tiny, tiny tiny tiny. Tesla is not going to sell serious quantities in that market until they release a much smaller model.

Above all else Japanese domestic cars are Narrow. Since proof-of-parking law requires proof of a parking space the dimensions become crucial, not only to notoriously narrow residential area street, but also because parking spaces are very narrow too. That makes nearly all European and North American vehicles huge barges that are possible but very difficult. Larger cars exist but are ones, like taxi or executive chauffeur driven so have specialized parking arrangements. Obviously similar situations are not uncommon in older cities around the world, as are access restrictions on polluters and other giants. Even where BEV are permitted the giant Tesla's have problems. Idiot me, driving a Model X in Italian city centers. Never again, I want narrow, preferably short, as do others driving in old cities nearly everywhere.

 

[scubastevo80]

This is, I think, the whole point. Americans think the model 3 is small. This is why they shouldn't be trying to design small cars for Europe. The model 3 is NOT small by European standards. My model Y feels like a battleship next to a lot of the cars I park next to here, and I'm in rural UK, not zipping down side-streets in Rome or around London.

Tesla is STILL designing cars for Americans, specifically Californians (with a nod to Texans in the case of the cybertruck). Shrink the model 3 by 10% in every direction and its European sales would go up, not down.

Also BTW, true of Japan. Japanese cars are tiny, tiny tiny tiny. Tesla is not going to sell serious quantities in that market until they release a much smaller model.

You think the Model 3 is small? I'm looking for one of these as a weekend car...

 

[Two-rocks]

You think the Model 3 is small? I'm looking for one of these as a weekend car... View attachment 955279

Could probably substitute that Honda for may avatar - similar feel.
Although, I think the Honda can handle a larger tailpipe.

 

[SOULPEDL]

When's that "re-distribution" nonsense over? It's like a week long party isn't it? No idea.
I'm still waiting on 265 and just keeps taunting me.

 

[space_s3x]

Quick newbie question, I don't understand the Tesla graph below. From wikipedia, the top computer in the world is 1.6 ExaFlops. In 2024, Is Tesla aiming to be 100x more powerful with 100 Exa-Flops? And if you have 1/3rd of GPus in early2024, are you at 33Exaflops? It doesn't match the top 5 in the world (approx. 1Exa-flop).

That list is based on the LINPACK benchmark for traditional x86 (64-bit) CPU-based systems. Those supercomputers are designed for traditional compute workloads. Hence, it's not a useful comparison for Machine Learning systems.

CPUs are well-suited for general-purpose workloads (all software tasks), allowing them to handle diverse instruction types, including arithmetic, logical, control flow, and I/O operations. CPUs are highly optimized for sequential operations and quick memory access.

Traditional compute work is limited by algorithmic complexity. Scaling the system often doesn't provide proportional improvements in performance or results due to the inherent limitations of the algorithms being used.

On the other hand, in machine learning, better results are often achieved with more data and larger models (although there are other factors involved, this is generally true for very complex problems). Scaling supercomputers for machine learning tasks can provide significant improvements. The parallel and distributed nature of computing tasks allows for infinite scalability (in theory).

Machine learning computers use GPUs or accelerators, which are excellent for performing massive-scale matrix multiplication operations required for machine learning tasks. Accelerators and GPUs have hundreds of cores that can process these specific arithmetic operations in parallel.

Now, going on a bit of a tangent...

Not all theoretical FLOPs on accelerators are created equal. Other systems surrounding the accelerators play a critical role in overall system's utilization, occupancy, and energy consumption. Dojo was specifically designed for massive video training. It's important to recognize that Dojo's performance should be evaluated within the context of its intended purpose. It may not do well in some arbitrary training benchmarks used by the industry to compare training hardwares.

On a small benchmark model, Dojo's performance is on par with the A100.

However, Dojo excels in large-scale complex models with high-intensity arithmetic workloads. These models face critical data-transfer bottlenecks and diminishing returns when training is scaled on the Nvidia stack. Dojo is 3.2x and 4.4x faster compared to the A100:

Dojo V2 will be more general purpose (Autopilot, Bots, AGI and potentially, open it to everyone for a pay-as-you-go service).