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

[neroden]

Plus 2450 cars in Canada.

Canada source citation plz?

Also we know nothing of Mexico numbers, though they're probably insignificant so far (as of March, new orders were getting May guesstimates for delivery).

Anyway, at this point I'm seeing 10K US, 2.5K Canada Model 3 deliveries (both of which I'll treat as "close enough to production numbers", since I think US inventory-in-transit will be near-constant between end Q1 end April) , 8000 shipped to Europe from April production, and 3000 shipped to China from April production (the first ship in April was carrying Q1 production, rumor is as few as 300 cars).

I primarily care about production; I think delivery is being straightened out. So it's looking like over 5000/week production rates. Dare we hope for 5500, which is what these numbers naively tell me? I hate to guess as high as 6000/week since I'll probably be wrong... the estimates on ship loading numbers have massive error bars.

 

[neroden]

I was wondering if there is a way to buy a few shares of Tesla without going through an agency. I am not a trader and just want a few share to hold for posterity.

You always have to go through a broker to buy. If you pay the fee (which is often $0), you can have them transfer the shares into "direct registration", and then say goodbye to the broker forever. If you pay a larger fee you can get an actual certificate but then you have to have safe place to put it (safety deposit box etc.)

 

[Navin]

You always have to go through a broker to buy. If you pay the fee (which is often $0), you can have them transfer the shares into "direct registration", and then say goodbye to the broker forever. If you pay a larger fee you can get an actual certificate but then you have to have safe place to put it (safety deposit box etc.)

What’s your best guess on when and how we get out of this ditch we are in with regard to stock price?

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Hands on wheel is necessary, because it is a level 2 system, with the human having full responsibility.
The example you talk about (pulling to side, Example 3 on page 12) is when a mechanical failure happens!

Look at table 1 on page 19 of the SAE document for definition of various automation levels.
Level 3 requires that the ADS (Automated Driving System) performs the entire DDT (Dynamic Driving Task) while the user is receptive to ADS-issued request to intervene as well as system failures (such as a mechanical failure).

The human is not responsible for correcting driving mistakes. Note the wording of level 2 in contrast, which requires the driver to supervise the system. Tesla NoA currently very much requires supervision by the driver, and it is not just my opinion but clearly stated in the manual and you have to acknowledge that fact when you enable the feature in the setup menu.

Section 3.18 defines a DDT Performance-Related System Failure as a failure in the ADS system *and/or* mechanical breakdown of the vehicle.

Section 3.23 Note 2 states that a driver of a level 3 system is expected to be receptive to a request to take over *or* an evident system failure, whether or not the system issues a request.

 

[Dutchie]

U.S. Auto Sales Brand Rankings – April 2019 YTD | GCBC

I think Tesla does pretty well. Beating Acura, Volvo, Infinity and even Chrysler!

 

[Navin]

Enjoy

The Tesla FSD Is Four Years Head of the Competition

 

[neroden]

Do you think we will see 3 or 4 ships make it in time for Q2 deliveries to EU?

I think 10-11k in transit at quarter end is going to become the new normal.

If you'd been following the discussion, you'd know that many of us think the number in transit at quarter end will INCREASE.

At steady state without a "wave", they have to have a number in transit equal to the average transit time. 1 to 2 weeks within the US; call it 1 week for half the cars and 2 weeks for the other half. 24 days shipping to China, plus another week within China. Should be 20 to Europe, plus a week within Europe (though it's been running long). So if we figure 20% western US, 20% rest of US, 40% Europe, 20% China, we'd get an average of a bit over 21 days. When they get to 7k/week, at 1k/day, that would be 21k in transit. They also need non-transit inventory at the stores; there are maybe 250 stores needing about 6 cars each (SR+/LR/P, white and black interiors) so that's 1500 minimum, but round up to 2k. That means 23k in transit. That's just Model 3.

Add another 6 cars per store for S & X (three color schemes) for another 2k, plus about 6k in transit (to add up to 21 days), so that means the target number should be about 31K inventory. (This number will drop a bit when Shanghai comes online, obviously; even though it raises production to 10k/week, it lowers transit time substantially for China.) If they can cut transit times they can have smaller inventory, but you can't really make the ships go any faster.

 

[neroden]

What’s your best guess on when and how we get out of this ditch we are in with regard to stock price?

When? Hell if I know. "The market can remain irrational" etc. etc.

How? Manufacturing lots of cars and delivering them. Deliver sufficient cars, and as a result generate lots of cash, and all the negative stories become untenable.

 

[ZsoZso]

Section 3.18 defines a DDT Performance-Related System Failure as a failure in the ADS system *and/or* mechanical breakdown of the vehicle.

Section 3.23 Note 2 states that a driver of a level 3 system is expected to be receptive to a request to take over *or* an evident system failure, whether or not the system issues a request.

Your problem is that you think a driving mistake is classified as a "system failure". It is NOT!
System failure is defined in section 3.18, page 12. It is defined as a malfunction that prevents the driving automation system to perform DDT on a sustained basis. Failures that prevent performance according to design intention.
Specifically look at Note 2:

NOTE 2: This term does not apply to transient lapses in performance by a level 1 or 2 driving automation system that are due to inherent design limitations and that do not otherwise prevent the system from performing its part of the DDT on a sustained basis.

Look at examples 2 and 3 below, both list hardware failures (broken radar sensor or broken tie rod), not talking about the software making a mistake, that would be a transient failure exactly as per Note 2.

ps: receptive != monitoring
The difference is explained bottom of page 13, section 3.19.4. Clearly states at levels 1-2, the driver monitors the system's performance, while in levels 3-5, the ADS has to monitor its own performance, not the human!

 

[Navin]

When? Hell if I know. "The market can remain irrational" etc. etc.

How? Manufacturing lots of cars and delivering them. Deliver sufficient cars, and as a result generate lots of cash, and all the negative stories become untenable.

Sooner

 

[dc_h]

Well wouldn't there have been a spike in deliveries in Norway/Netherlands/Spain? I just saw a chart someone posted and there were just gradual daily sales in April in those countries. That does not sound like a ship arrival which would create peaks and valleys.

Exactly—the ships are ships, they are not planes. They chug across the water and take weeks to arrive. The rest of Europe probably had 4 to 5000 additional cars and the same in China.

 

[Singuy]

U.S. Auto Sales Brand Rankings – April 2019 YTD | GCBC

I think Tesla does pretty well. Beating Acura, Volvo, Infinity and even Chrysler!

Considering 1 freaken small sedan is beating other brand's ENTIRE lineup (lets say 9500 were model 3s), that's really impressive.
I mean Infiniti and Volvo's SUVs are pretty good.

 

[Singuy]

Enjoy

The Tesla FSD Is Four Years Head of the Competition

Not sure how they concluded that FSD is four years ahead. The hardware implemented in actual cars is probably 4 years ahead. But FSD has always been a software problem...

 

[lascavarian]

That's right CNBC. You don't mess with us TSLA long investors. We will dissect anything and then others will take that and create articles that will spread across the world.

CNBC:

CNBC seems to be incentivizing EM to come on and do an interview IMO. Cramer has been flirting with EM on Twitter or so he says and he has said that he thinks the world of Elon. At the same time they tend to knock the stock regularly with direct focus on EM as the source of the "issues". They seem to want him to come on to dispel their misunderstandings. Musk tends to do shows like "60 minutes" rather than stock trading shows, I approve BTW.

CNBC seems desperate to get him booked but it never happens for them and it seems to be making them crazy. It is a strange world out there and EM can do as he pleases as far as I am concerned.

 

[Singer3000]

GF3 is only for Greater China (China, Taiwan, Macau, Singapore).

It's quite unusual to group Singapore within Greater China. It's not even within the 9-Dash Line

In any case, contrary to China but in common with Japan, Australia and NZ, Singapore is a premium Right Hand Drive market. It wouldn't make obvious sense for Tesla to add the manufacturing complexity to Shanghai for a tiny number of RHD Singapore-bound cars, when they'll already have ships in the general vicinity for those other markets.

 

[Carl Raymond]

Not sure how they concluded that FSD is four years ahead. The hardware implemented in actual cars is probably 4 years ahead. But FSD has always been a software problem...

They didn’t. They are abbreviating FSD Computer as ‘FSD’. So you are in agreement with ARK.

 

[X Fan]

Wapner promotes each upcoming visit to his set by Tesla short seller Chanos as if it would be the second coming of a messiah. When Chanos appears, Wapner applauds rather than challenges any comments. Yesterday Wapner appeared to be parroting Chanos' anti-Tesla arguments, and then seemed upset with Palihapitiya for dismissing them. When Wapner cut off the interview, his disgust with Pailhaptiya was rather evident.

Palihapitiya was simply brilliant.

OT...we need people like him in our political class.

 

[M3Rider]

I'm delighted Tesla implemented version of "my idea" (please note quote marks), but a bit concerned they did it.

For anyone not following, It's now possible to buy SR(-) limited to 150km (86miles) for $CAD 44.999K and SR+ for $CAD 53.7K.
Introduction of SR- was necessary to qualify SR+, but due to the rules(max $CAD55K), no other higher model (LR, 3P) qualifies for $5K federal incentive.

This will tilt demand towards SR+ from LR and P models, and I doubt Tesla would have done it, except that they're trying to stimulate demand; so things might be dicy for them to make this move.
Let the disagreements fly!

You are forgetting what they have done to maximize $7.5k credits for their customers. They held back inventory to not cross the 200k limit and packed as many deliveries as they could into Q3/Q4 2018. This was an act of compassion that many people have speculated could happen, but did not truly believe would happen until it did.
We're seeing the same approach for Canada - help out the customers. This is in no way a sign of any problems.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Your problem is that you think a driving mistake is classified as a "system failure". It is NOT!
System failure is defined in section 3.18, page 12. It is defined as a malfunction that prevents the driving automation system to perform DDT on a sustained basis. Failures that prevent performance according to design intention.
Specifically look at Note 2:


Look at examples 2 and 3 below, both list hardware failures (broken radar sensor or broken tie rod), not talking about the software making a mistake, that would be a transient failure exactly as per Note 2.

ps: receptive != monitoring
The difference is explained bottom of page 13, section 3.19.4. Clearly states at levels 1-2, the driver monitors the system's performance, while in levels 3-5, the ADS has to monitor its own performance, not the human!

I don’t believe note 2 would apply, since a failure in the ADS isn’t an “inherent design limitation”. That note is talking about things like the old limitation in Autopilot that explicitly limited the turning radius such that it couldn’t perform sharp turns. It’s saying that doesn’t apply because it’s not a failure(where, for example, leaving the road or swerving towards another car for non-predetermined reasons would be).

For the rest, under 3.19.1 Note 2 it states that driver monitoring is primarily useful for level 2 and 3 systems to prevent misuse or abuse. There’s no requirement that a level 3 system not monitor the driver, and it explicitly states doing so can be useful.

 

[TradingInvest]

Is it a good idea to make Chamath a Tesla board director? We (the small shareholders) probably can help make it happen. It seems to me this guy has a good heart and is good at business/investment.