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

[KSilver2000]

FWIW, here’s a document from CA summarizing the new requirements: https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/title24/2...2018_Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ.pdf

“The standards require solar photovoltaic systems for new homes.”

You’re looking at the mandate summary. Of course you won’t find the details there. The actual law contains hundreds of pages. That can’t all be summarized in 1 or 2 pages.

 

[EVNow]

Their promises and actions are questionable. 180 kWh battery for a reasonable price? Tons of features and add ons? Base unit for $60K at a 20,000 vehicle/year output? Spending so much time and effort on PR and marketing when it is OBVIOUS there is demand for 20,000 of those vehicles?

We can assume the $60k is not for 180kWh model. They will also probably start at the high end costing > $100k and eventually produce a $60k version. If you see early PR / news reports of Tesla S, it would quote the highest range and the lowest price (remember $50k after tax credits and 200+ mile range ?).

 

[EVNow]

Buildings up to 3 stories tall. Single, multi, and even condos.

This goes back to my point on my previous post: In addition to condos, many new communities being constructed in urban areas are connected, 3-story townhomes where the roofs are not large enough (or even owned individually by a single homeowner) for roof solar to meet the energy offset requirements of the mandate. How do people who disagreed with me think the solar mandate can be met? (Hint: answer is in the text of Title 24 final approval)

You’re looking at the mandate summary. Of course you won’t find the details there. The actual law contains hundreds of pages. That can’t all be summarized in 1 or 2 pages.

Yes - CA (and other states too) is notorious for leaving huge loopholes in mandates. That's what the lobbyists get paid to ensure.

If you look at even the ZEV mandate - it will say something like 5% of vehicles should be ZEV - but details tell you one vehicle can be counted as 3 or 2 hybrids can be counted as one ZEV etc. All this is to make the mandate look tougher than it actually is.

 

[KSilver2000]

Yes - CA (and other states too) is notorious for leaving huge loopholes in mandates. That's what the lobbyists get paid to ensure.

It’s not a loophole.
The mandate’s intention is not to spur solar roof installation. It is to move the state faster towards meeting its renewable energy goals.

 

[jerry33]

Yes - CA (and other states too) is notorious for leaving huge loopholes in mandates. That's what the lobbyists get paid to ensure.

FIFY: That's what the lobbyists pay the legislators to ensure.

 

[Dan Detweiler]

Do we have any guesses at FSD pricing?
If it is able to earn $30k p.a. I do not see it costing less than $50k.

Thoughts?

The elephant in the room that nobody seems to see possible, is at what point does making cars for public sale become a costly liability?

If a true self driving Tesla fleet of robotaxis becomes viable, then it becomes far more profitable to simply manufacture enough vehicles to maintain/expand the fleet and reap the revenue from the taxi service, no? Retail sales becomes a thing of the past and the world transitions to renewables faster by simply not owning vehicles anymore and relying on an electric fleet of corporate owned Tesla taxis to get them where they want/need to go.

In 10-20 years does Tesla even sell personal vehicles to the general public or have they created an entirely new transportation infrastructure?

Crazy?

...maybe, maybe not.

Dan

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Buildings up to 3 stories tall. Single, multi, and even condos.

This goes back to my point on my previous post: In addition to condos, many new communities being constructed in urban areas are connected, 3-story townhomes where the roofs are not large enough (or even owned individually by a single homeowner) for roof solar to meet the energy offset requirements of the mandate. How do people who disagreed with me think the solar mandate can be met? (Hint: answer is in the text of Title 24 final approval)

I tried looking that up and it’s difficult to find(everything that comes up is something having to do with efficient lighting and there’s paywalls to get the actual original document).

That said, you’re correct about solar being difficult for such buildings. I lived in one before recently moving and most of the big solar installers, including Tesla, wouldn’t touch it because it’s a shared roof. I know one person in the complex managed, but only because their home was a corner unit with their roof offset and completely separate from their neighbors.

 

[Dynastar]

If anyone's interested in a Solar Roof pricing competitiveness data point, I've posted my bids over in the solar roof thread.

 

[traxila]

Regarding media. I see it not covered much if at all. But for me, one of the most important things said by Elon during the call was (rephrasing): We might do some advertising in the future just to inform the customers.

So will the media step back and think about not intimidating a potential future customer with too much FUD?

Absolutely not.

The very epitome of what have you done for me lately.

 

[shrspeedblade]

There was literally one car in the parking lot. We drove around the whole place....it's a big factory.
Looks abandoned to me.

I don’t think Rivian is vaporware by any stretch, but this does make me think, “They ain’t gonna catch Elon that way!”

On robotaxis:
Since I do have quite a bit of knowledge in this industry I do think it’s a little too easy to flip a switch and Tesla makes billions. Uber has had its drivers subsidizing it’s growth and still can’t come remotely close to a profit.

More than likely it will be a similar pattern (as Elon has even stated) with owner’s cars making up the bulk of the fleet (in a more symbiotic relationship) which Tesla will supplement with their own cars. This largely reduces a huge service/upkeep headache as well which Uber, etc. have never even had to deal with!

It also serves accelerating the transition to sustainable transport to a greater degree. Fewer cars need be produced for the needed trips AND they are all EVs.

 

[nativewolf]

The elephant in the room that nobody seems to see possible, is at what point does making cars for public sale become a costly liability?

If a true self driving Tesla fleet of robotaxis becomes viable, then it becomes far more profitable to simply manufacture enough vehicles to maintain/expand the fleet and reap the revenue from the taxi service, no? Retail sales becomes a thing of the past and the world transitions to renewables faster by simply not owning vehicles anymore and relying on an electric fleet of corporate owned Tesla taxis to get them where they want/need to go.

In 10-20 years does Tesla even sell personal vehicles to the general public or have they created an entirely new transportation infrastructure?

Crazy?

...maybe, maybe not.

Dan

Not at all crazy. In fact, at current trajectory I'd say 20 years is about right...maybe not discontinue but it could be few personal vehicles are sold...at which point GM, Toyota, and VW will likely shutter. This is the most interesting thing about Tesla.

 

[Dreadnought]

My favorit tidbit from the earnings call was the announcement of an improved Smart Summon rollout in the next weeks in combination with possible "feature complete" FSD by EoY.

With SS public beta roughly 6 weeks after Early Access, I will closely watch the progress of the next iteration (that is: as close as possible without 1st-hand experience while EU regulations won't allow me), which would again be ~6 wks after general availability.
It will be interesting to see if they can advance from for-hardcore-fanbois-only to mostly-ok-but-silly-at-some-times to good enough to drop jaws within two iterations in roughly one quarter.
I expect City FSD rollout to follow the same pattern and possibly a similar timeline. This places usable FSD in the realm of attainable as early as 2Q20. Enough has been said about claiming the deferred revenue and the consequences for take rates / pricing. Much more importantly it will become very difficult to deny Tesla's lead in the robotaxi industry and stick to the $0 valuation.

 

[Prunesquallor]

Oh haha, good idea! Pump out some Michael Winslow and record the '100m dash' cam

Cheers!

I was thinking more like “Recording initiated.” in a calm HAL-voice at every Sentry event. That might keep those key-hole vandals away.

 

[jerry33]

The elephant in the room that nobody seems to see possible, is at what point does making cars for public sale become a costly liability?

If a true self driving Tesla fleet of robotaxis becomes viable, then it becomes far more profitable to simply manufacture enough vehicles to maintain/expand the fleet and reap the revenue from the taxi service, no? Retail sales becomes a thing of the past and the world transitions to renewables faster by simply not owning vehicles anymore and relying on an electric fleet of corporate owned Tesla taxis to get them where they want/need to go.

In 10-20 years does Tesla even sell personal vehicles to the general public or have they created an entirely new transportation infrastructure?

Crazy?

...maybe, maybe not.

Dan

While that scenario is not beyond the realm of possibility, to make it happen would require the service to be two or three orders of magnitude better than current taxi service. People don't want to take five minutes to schedule the ride and then wait another 45 minutes for the ride to get there (or in Uber's case, not to arrive at all some percentage of the time). The entire process from starting to schedule the service to the robotaxi's arrival should be no greater than five minutes. If not, it won't appeal to many who don't already use Uber or Taxi services--of course, those people will flock to it because of the lower rates, so there's certainly going to be a good market for robotaxi. Also, depending upon the city, some who now take public transit will instead opt for robotaxi assuming the price and travel times are right.

 

[traxila]

I believe that TSLA will continue to go up from here in volatile fashion in the short term. The real question I have is where the next trading range is.

Thinking low 400s to mid to high 300s after 420 is taken out. Maybe before the end of the year. Or the end of next week if this craziness continues.

The next step up can happen when we get through 2020 Q2 and the ramping is on full display for all to see with the Model Y and yet another Gigafactory in the mix. That should take TSLA to the 600s.

Obviously talking out of my butt, but that's what this thread is for sometimes, right?

Opinions?

 

[jerry33]

More than likely it will be a similar pattern (as Elon has even stated) with owner’s cars making up the bulk of the fleet (in a more symbiotic relationship) which Tesla will supplement with their own cars. This largely reduces a huge service/upkeep headache as well which Uber, etc. have never even had to deal with!

This will certainly inspire Tesla to create more bullet-proof cars in the future.

 

[Krugerrand]

Edit: I tried to correct this same mis-information last time the topic was brought up, but I guess it gets lost in the thousands of posts. Based on the number of disagrees on my previous post, I guess people like to believe what they want to believe because it pertains to something they have a bias for.

FYI, I disagreed for an entirely different reason. Don’t want you thinking you know my reason/s because it pertains to something you have a bias for. And no, I’m not going to elaborate at this time.

 

[Prunesquallor]

I believe that TSLA will continue to go up from here in volatile fashion in the short term. The real question I have is where the next trading range is.

Thinking low 400s to mid to high 300s after 420 is taken out. Maybe before the end of the year. Or the end of next week if this craziness continues.

The next step up can happen when we get through 2020 Q2 and the ramping is on full display for all to see with the Model Y and yet another Gigafactory in the mix. That should take TSLA to the 600s.

Obviously talking out of my butt, but that's what this thread is for sometimes, right?

Opinions?

I’ve always thought that more GFs were the most visible, undeniable evidence of growth. I expect when ground is broken for GigaEurope things will get interesting.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

If anyone's interested in a Solar Roof pricing competitiveness data point, I've posted my bids over in the solar roof thread.

Im still wondering what will happen for people(like me) getting solar panels halfway through the life of their roof. My roof will be good for another ~10-15 years. Warranty on the panels is 23 years. Waiting at least a decade for panels doesn’t make much sense, and I probably shouldn’t keep the roof 8-13 years past it’s EOL. Replacing with a solar roof would make a lot of sense, except that I’d be basically throwing away panels with a decade left on the warranty? If I replace the roof and keep the panels, then I need new panels again 10 years later, forever being offset. Hmmmm...

I wonder if Tesla will eventually do some kind of buyback on their panels for people who want to move to a solar roof...

 

[Oveeus]

I cannot imagine that Tesla won't simply offer a "personal use only" variant of FSD. So they can keep making cars and keep upping the ASP with FSD sales, without competing with their robotaxi network.

I also have trouble believing that the robotaxi network will scale faster than Tesla can make cars. A) Local approvals and consumer acceptance will automatically make robotaxi scaling slow (dragged out over years), B) Tesla can make whole Gigafactories in under a year (and they'll only get better at it with time), C) capital for Tesla will be basically unlimited if they can demonstrate the sort of robotaxi reliability needed for such a massive scaleup.

I don't understand, if you get robot taxi working then each car is worth 200k minimum, why would you want to even sell a single car to consumers at 40k?

I don't believe Tesla would be interested in spending the capital to put cars on the street as robotaxi matures. It's too much of a burden on its book for no apparent benefit.

Think it this way, if Tesla introduce say a Tesla-ber, and take a 30% cut every trip the robotaxi operates, those are almost pure profit with little to none capital expenditure.

If anything, Tesla would give out incentives (say a cheap version that always allows robotaxi... much like the Kindle with ads) for people to buy.

Tesla might deploy some cheaper alternatives, say lease returns into the robotaxi fleet. But it makes very little sense in my mind that they raise capital so that they can deploy brand new cars on the street when there'd be millions of Teslas out there capable of offering this service already.