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

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
What the heck is a cybervault?


Yup, they totally squandered their head start in pretty sophisticated energy management. They were years ahead. Much like Tesla is now.
But after decades of doing so many things smart, they seemed to have just stalled out their R&D with the Prius era and failed to be aggressive with decision-making.
They’re the biggest one that missed the change to be a serious early player. The other one I can’t figure out is Honda. Such a savvy, high-quality company but....Totally dropped the ball with EVs.
Kodak, Xerox, GM, Toyota...
 
Last edited:
I almost did not respond, but this finally makes me do it. PLEASE read the Tavares quotation. He said the same thing Elon has said repeatedly. Tavares did NOT say that there was not enough lithium in the world. He DID say there is not enough supply. Elon repeatedly has said things like that:
Elon Musk says a lithium shortage is holding back Tesla. ...Fortunehttps://fortune.com › 2022/10/19 › elon-musk-lithium-sh...
It seems we often try to catch Carlos because he uses few words, famously so, do describe the effects of issues. Should he have explicitly said there is no shortage of lithium-bearing materials on Earth like this wiki:

Without discussing whether Stellantis may or may not survive we should at least realize he is not ignorant of basic issues. He is definitely conflicted on BEV's, after all he's on the board of Total.

As almost all of us are teslaphiles and advocates for reducing the impact of anthropomorphic climate change we might be well-advised to encourage traditional OEM transition rather than overstating the obvious weaknesses.

The oft predicted and seemingly inevitable demise of most traditional OEM's is nothing for us to applaud. Monopolies inherently impede progress!

We need much more cheap and plentiful refined lithium, in several distinct forms.
Does anyone really disagree with that?
 
Elon answered this question specifically during the Q&A session on Tesla Investor Day 2023. He said that it'll be a long, long time before AI can replace humans for design and planning.

Elon Musk Answers All Your Questions (Investor Day 2023)

Yes, Elon's answer makes a lot of sense. Yes, it will be a long long time. How long? Ray Kurzweil said 2045 for AGI.

As narrow AI is shaping up now, creation of manufacturing seems be one of the last things to go. White collar workers will be the first. Heck, our "job" 😁 to talk investments on this forum could be replaced today, and probably be done a lot better, by Chat GPT if MS or Open AI wanted to.

What I mean is that once there is AGI is on par or above human levels, the last human jobs will of course be supplanted because of economics if nothing else. The ability to make almost unlimited amounts of creative knowledge workers will enable every job, such as factory and logistics optimization, to be carried out to the nth degree, until there aren't a lot of advantages for any one player.
 
The oft predicted and seemingly inevitable demise of most traditional OEM's is nothing for us to applaud. Monopolies inherently impede progress!

We need much more cheap and plentiful refined lithium, in several distinct forms.
Does anyone really disagree with that?

Thank you for correcting the Tavares misunderstanding.

I disagree with the part quoted. The legacy automakers have known for decades (at least 43 years) that burning oil is contributing to a dangerous level of harm to life on Earth and human health. It would be terrible if they had simply chosen to ignore that to make money. However, many of them took it a level even more evil. For their greed, they hired engineers to build software to lie to the emission testing machines to present the lie that their products were less dangerous and harmful than they actual were.

I am looking forward to the day those companies are footnotes in history. If it were solely my decision, they would be shut down and dismantled today.
 
Sure, in the long term it may not matter who's first with FSD because of said manufacturing advantage.

From an intermediate time perspective perspective I think it's concerning if Tesla is not first with FSD.

FSD however, as a hard AI problem, must also be put in the perspective of AGI, which might very will come at the same time (i.e. per definition an AI that is general, can also drive).

Once there is AGI available to the auto industry, one could argue that there cannot be any manufacturing advantages, because AGI will figure out the most optimal production system and thus commoditize all finished products so that their cost will tend toward the input materials. The owner of the land, mines and raw material cycle would make all the money.

Competitive advantages depend largely on the time horizon.
Yeah, but since only Tesla attracts the best human talent, so Tesla will still have that significant competitive advantage. To render human talent immaterial, AI will have to improve to near perfection, and that will take a long time.
...My conclusion- it is a hard problem...competitors will find it equally hard, and hard to find staff with the ability to make a difference.
 
The other one I can’t figure out is Honda. Such a savvy, high-quality company but....Totally dropped the ball with EVs.
From the beginning Soichiro Honda saw the company as an engine company, something he repeated in various words over the years:
That history explains exactly why Honda achieved such success and explains how they've been unable to adapt well.
FWIW, I owned a Honda S600 with an 11,500 RPM rev limit in 1966. from the first piston ring that established Honda until now, perfection of ICE was the singular goal.

From Honda, Toyota and on until examples such as Aches Power:
Huge resources have been and are being spent to improve ICE.

The 'installed base' problem explains why the US remains non-metric, governments fight to preserve auto dealers, oil and gas companies and all those obsolete OEM's.

None of this is even hard to explain. The massive success of people such as Henry Ford, Soichiro Honda, John D Rockefeller etc built directly on the inventions of Nikolaus Otto, Rudolf Diesel and even a bit of Felix Wankel. All those successors did not question the concept ICE which was such and advantage over steam engines, themselves having fueled the industrial revolution thanks to Thomas Savery and Thomas Newcomen.

Let us be both blunt and realistic, major technological advances are inherently disruptive causing the innovators of the past to seem antediluvian despite their massive contributions to human development.

Some of those past innovators among ICE OEM's will survive and perhaps thrive. It is not surprising that companies such as Hyundai+Kia are doing better than are ones like Toyota, General Motors and VAG. The Hyundai group made their very first car, a Ford Cortina in 1968 and their first own design, the Pony in 1976. I drove a Pony soon after in Kuwait, it was pretty bad. Honda had the T360 in 1963. All the other non-Chinese OEM's originated in the 1930's or before.

The previous paragraph describes the problem of 'installed base', the older the base is the harder it is to change. For confirmation look at aircraft manufacturers from piston to turboprop to ducted fan. Then compare NCR, IBM, Microsoft and Apple.

The history lessons show is that 'old dogs can learn new tricks' but that is uncommon.
They also show that the successful innovators invariably spawn successful imitators and that these are highly desirable, in fact necessary. It is that belief that drives me to attempt to find survivors...not just Chinese ones. Remember that the Japanese ones grew the 1970's, the Korean ones the 1980's and the Chinese ones have been doing the 2010's-2020's.
Then there is Tesla, unlike any other...
 
Haha, well this has been a valient defence of $200 by MM/hedgies. If $300 was Sparta, then $200 is BadMud... :p

sc.TSLA.10-DayChart.2023-03-31.09-58.png
 
Thank you for correcting the Tavares misunderstanding.

I disagree with the part quoted. The legacy automakers have known for decades (at least 43 years) that burning oil is contributing to a dangerous level of harm to life on Earth and human health. It would be terrible if they had simply chosen to ignore that to make money. However, many of them took it a level even more evil. For their greed, they hired engineers to build software to lie to the emission testing machines to present the lie that their products were less dangerous and harmful than they actual were.

I am looking forward to the day those companies are footnotes in history. If it were solely my decision, they would be shut down and dismantled today.
A sad fact of history is that those which foment great disaster often direct even more harm after their first disaster. In broader context just think of the Post World War II industrial leaders and those which profited most from that war. The situation with Oil and Gas, cigarettes and even prescription drugs regularly repeats this phenomenon.

Like it or not, 'rehabilitation' of some OEM's and some oil companies will be inevitable. Just observe recently approved oil exploitation in the fragile Arctic.

Those are indeed depressing thoughts. Tesla and a tiny handful of others are the hopeful signs.
 
I wonder if the Prius through Toyota off the right track in the sense that with the possible exception of the years 2005 - 2008, I don’t think they were ever in high demand or very profitable.

Maybe they thought pure BEVs would also be low margin…

If Toyota produced them, they might have been…

I know this is a late reply ...

I suggest you look at Toyota's electrified sales. US sales over 500k in 2022, over 580k in 2021. Sales of hybrids in 2005-2008 were never close to that.

Prius is now a small fraction of their hybrid sales. What happened was that they hybridized their whole line-up. Their top-selling hybrid is the RAV4, which was 150k, up from 120k in 2021. That's where the Prius was for a long time.

Drop was mainly due to drops in the sales of Sienna, Venza (hybrid only models) and Highlander hybrids.

Toyota bet on fuel cell. It's somewhat logical in a country with such densely-populated cities and few natural resources. They had reason to believe that BEV wouldn't work out, but they misread batteries and renewables and continued in the face of growing evidence. And Tokyo 2020 didn't help as they were the main sponsor and would have looked bad had they pivoted just before and had nothing to show.

 
April 18th for new EV tax credit rules.

First Squawk on Twitter: "US TREASURY SAYS NEW STRICTER EV TAX CREDIT RULES WILL TAKE EFFECT APRIL 18 || TREASURY SAYS JAPAN WILL BE CONSIDERED A US FREE TRADE AGREEMENT PARTNER FOR PURPOSES OF CRITICAL MINERAL REQUIREMENTS" / Twitter​

Tue, Apr 18, 2023? The day BEFORE Tesla's Q1 Conference Call and Financial results letter? You can't make this sugar up! But apparently Treasury can... :p

Well, at least the Panasonic 18650s imported from Japan for Models S/X could now qualify. Just need a $80K SUV lol.

Cheers!
 
[Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares] is not ignorant of basic issues. He is definitely conflicted on BEV's, after all he's on the board of Total.
I did not know about his Board seat on a major European oil company. Agree with the "definately conflicted".

We need much more cheap and plentiful refined lithium, in several distinct forms.
What does Elon do to solve the shortage of lithium refining capacity? Fast-tracks a Lithium refinery in Corpus Christi. What does Carlos do about the shortage of lithium? Conclude that EVs aren't possible, and we need to stop fooling ourselves? Is that his message to Lawmakers, regardless of his actual verbiage? He's been pretty consistent to support gascars, and depricate EVs all the while making no visible moves to ease the Lithium refining crunch. Doesn't Total do refining? or is it just for carbon molecules?