[GrussGott]

Good lord this is boring.

Paradise lost if this is their new look ... i'm sure it's designed to be easy to manufacture, but ZZZZzzzzz.....

[KRS_SN]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

Much like BMW, if anything is gonna kill Tesla it's gonna be design - new Model S/X interior:

[img]

View post on imgur.com

[/img]

[img]

View post on imgur.com

[/img]

new steering wheel and tablet orientation from portrait to landscape isn't really going to set hearts on fire. I do agree performance sounds great but a 2-3 tonne car would you really enjoy/use that with battery drain etc.

[KRS_SN]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

100% - Tesla is an energy stock; it's a decarbonization & electrification play. A growth bet on energy deregulation and local-level electricity generation and storage.

• If Tesla were only solar panels & power walls, it'd be single digits ...
• If Tesla were only Megapacks, also single digits ...
• If Tesla were only semi-trucks, maybe a penny stock ...

The fact that Tesla has proven it can profitably make consumer energy products (cars) on multiple continents AND has other arms in energy storage and management is what makes it a growth bet; albeit overhyped and overvalued (based on fundamentals)


Everyone (in the US at least) has heard of the Goodyear Blimp - people forget where that came from: the multi-decade platform war for air travel. There was a legit few decades where blimps fought it out with airplanes. Ultimately they lost of course and nobody even remembers those 30 years!

United, Martin, Sikorsky, Douglas, Pratt ... those were all, at one time, overhyped and overvalued growth companies with very uncertain futures ... just like Tesla.

But also great investments in retrospect!

This Sikorsky S-40 (via Juan Trippe's PanAm, ~1931-1940) took on Zeppelins to conquer air travel in South America
[img]

View post on imgur.com

[/img]

Goodyear Blimp by the Graf Zeppelin (~1928-1937)
[img]

View post on imgur.com

[/img]

This isn't the first time the Americans and Germans have competed over transportation platforms ...

Are you sure of profit

https://news.sky.com/story/tesla-pos...maker-12200866

721m profit
including selling £1.5 billion environmental credits(an imaginary item with a shelfl ife as others catch up withtheirown EV's)
I'd call that 780 million loss :

[David70]

Originally Posted by KRS_SN

Are you sure of profit

https://news.sky.com/story/tesla-pos...maker-12200866

721m profit
including selling £1.5 billion environmental credits(an imaginary item with a shelfl ife as others catch up withtheirown EV's)
I'd call that 780 million loss :

No matter how you collect the money it still goes to the bottom line. It's non operational income not too far from selling off land or buildings to hit your numbers. Still money but not close to the same as building cars
for profit. Issue I see is the $1.5 billion to the bottom line is guaranteed to go away in time and Tesla has no control over it.

This makes me laugh -

But investors hoped for clearer guidance than Tesla gave about the growth it expected in the year ahead.

Asked by an analyst whether it was targeting deliveries of between 840,000 and 1 million vehicles, Mr Musk said the target was "in that vicinity".

Every manufacturing company I have worked for or dealt with set goals for the next year and no one used "in that vicinity" for the numbers. He's the one in charge, just tell us what you think you will really do this year. Not like he doesn't constantly think about it and they aren't planning for it.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by KRS_SN

Are you sure of profit

Yes.

Originally Posted by David70

No matter how you collect the money it still goes to the bottom line. It's non operational income not too far from selling off land or buildings to hit your numbers. Still money but not close to the same as building cars for profit.

Corporations financial engineer to meet their needs and Zach is no exception - it's no coincidence 99% of companies beat expectations by 1¢ quarter after quarter; "profitably making cars" is red herring BS-talk nobody can answer fully except Tesla's CFO - everyone else is just making shit up.

Here's the best way to look at Tesla and what to watch:

• Tesla produced 179,757 vehicles in Q4 (+71% Y/Y) and delivered 180,667 vehicles (+61%)

• Tesla automotive gross margin came in at 24.1% vs.22.5% a year ago

• Tesla says the Gigafactory Shanghai has the ability to sustain a run rate at or above 250K Model 3s/year

• Tesla expects to achieve 50% average annual growth in vehicle deliveries over a multi-year horizon

• Tesla forecasts semi deliveries to start this year

In short it's the Warren Buffett good business test: are they growing sales and shrinking costs? Yes!

No matter what the financial engineering says, unless they lie like BMW does, sales data and costs data will tell the tale.

And I think Tesla is going to get really challenged this year from the Germans - Tesla's future will be determined if:

(a.) They can keep growing despite the attacks *AND* keep up their customer satisfaction and re-ups (the highest in the biz right now)

(b.) The Germans lose on re-ups ... which is my guess. It'll play out like Apple iPhones and Nokia/Ericksson/Microsoft: Tesla will take an initial hit as customers try other options, then Tesla will boom as customers abandon other options and settle on the market/product leader.

For me though? Not thrilled with their offerings.

[David70]

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/27/elon...valuation.html

According to Musk, he can justify their current stock price, you just need to believe in a product that doesn't exist but he has been promising for many years. Problem I see with this is if everything works as he hopes then the current stock price makes sense and if it doesn't? Seems difficult to come out ahead.

Elon Musk explains how self-driving robotaxis will justify Tesla’s massive valuation

In the car maker’s fourth-quarter earnings call on Wednesday, Tesla’s CEO said there is a “roadmap to potentially justify” its market cap, which has topped $800 billion, making it the fifth-most valuable U.S. company.

Musk’s valuation math goes like this: Assume the company soon reaches $50 billion to $60 billion in annual car sales (the company generated $9.31 billion in automotive revenue in Q4 and said that vehicle deliveries would increase an average of 50% a year going forward). As Tesla’s self-driving technology continues to improve, those vehicles will become self-driving robotaxis, allowing usage to go from 12 hours a week to 60 hours a week. Tesla could charge additional fees for those robotaxis, allowing the company to generate much more revenue per car. Basically, it would be like bringing software economics to the manufacturing-intensive car business.

It’s possible that investors are already presuming Tesla’s cars will eventually turn into revenue-generating robotaxis. But the company isn’t close to having those capabilities yet, and Musk has a history of over-promising when it comes to technological innovation.

For instance, when Tesla began to discuss self-driving technology in 2016, Musk said the company would complete a hands-free trip across the U.S. by late 2017. The company has yet to complete that mission.

[KRS_SN]

Originally Posted by David70

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/27/elon...valuation.html

According to Musk, he can justify their current stock price, you just need to believe in a product that doesn't exist but he has been promising for many years. Problem I see with this is if everything works as he hopes then the current stock price makes sense and if it doesn't? Seems difficult to come out ahead.

Elon Musk explains how self-driving robotaxis will justify Tesla's massive valuation

In the car maker's fourth-quarter earnings call on Wednesday, Tesla's CEO said there is a "roadmap to potentially justify" its market cap, which has topped $800 billion, making it the fifth-most valuable U.S. company.

Musk's valuation math goes like this: Assume the company soon reaches $50 billion to $60 billion in annual car sales (the company generated $9.31 billion in automotive revenue in Q4 and said that vehicle deliveries would increase an average of 50% a year going forward). As Tesla's self-driving technology continues to improve, those vehicles will become self-driving robotaxis, allowing usage to go from 12 hours a week to 60 hours a week. Tesla could charge additional fees for those robotaxis, allowing the company to generate much more revenue per car. Basically, it would be like bringing software economics to the manufacturing-intensive car business.

It's possible that investors are already presuming Tesla's cars will eventually turn into revenue-generating robotaxis. But the company isn't close to having those capabilities yet, and Musk has a history of over-promising when it comes to technological innovation.

For instance, when Tesla began to discuss self-driving technology in 2016, Musk said the company would complete a hands-free trip across the U.S. by late 2017. The company has yet to complete that mission.

musk made a ugly behemoth sexy by making it fast and clean and reaped rewards. I saw his love for ferrari in a old video where he actually looks bald(pointless observation) so the petrolhead in him combined with the businessman and nerd and IT geek has done a great job.
He didn't overvalue the shares others did. If shares crash but he gets to keep his billions fair play
but there are competitors around
most people don't care about 0-60 times
https://thedriven.io/2020/11/10/kia-...uk-in-october/

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by David70

According to Musk, he can justify their current stock price

"justifying stock prices" is definitely an art as we see with GAMESTONK! There are 3 general camps:

(1.) Value investors - these people look at "fundamentals", stock price, trends & forecasts and then buy & hold what they see as an underpriced stock with lots of long-term upside, and usually use a lot of math; e.g., Warren Buffett.

(2.) Growth Investors - these people look at trends, estimate future expansion, and identify companies with what they believe is long-term upside, they can use math, but it's estimates; e.g., Chamath Palihapitiya

(3.) Market Traders - These people watch things like market price trend "technicals" to determine if a stock is below price trend and buy, as well as get into all kinds of complicated shit like options (saddles, straddles, etc), leveraged buying, etc and, depending on how close to wall street they are, play even larger games. e.g., Dave Portnoy

And now maybe we have a new one:
(4.) Movement Traders - Basically WSB-type people using apps like Public, RH, etc who trade for reasons other than just profit. E.g., Jaime Rogozinski


Anyway, the point is, let's define "justify" - if you agree with those general categories of investing then one two apply to TSLA: #2 & #4, and since TSLA obviously isn't #4, then TSLA is only justifiable as a growth story ... so then the question becomes what's going to grow?

With TSLA, Musk is tossing out robotaxis ... but I don't think many investors are buying SOLELY because of robotaxis, it's obviously much more than that ...

So what Musk seems to be doing is adding in some new tangible future profit streams to add (or resurface) to the growth story.

My 2 cents has been and still is that FSD is a futurecasting distraction and, as a technology, it's done and now it's simply productizing it (i.e., AI was done technically in the 70s, it just couldn't be productized until fast/cheap hardware existed to make it mass-marketable):

[Waymo CEO John] Krafcik says that Waymo has largely completed technical work on its self-driving software and is now focused on scaling the technology up.

Net-Net:
TSLA is unjustifiable as a value investment and may never be; any TSLA buyer better be (1.) a long-term growth investor, or (2.) a short-term trader.

It's why I'm not a TSLA investor (except via index funds) - I obviously believe in their growth story, but not enough to put money there at current valuations (though I almost got in pre-split had it dropped into the 300s ... I was like $20/share away if I remember )

[GrussGott]

Technology & market forces continue the beatings on the oil & gas industry:

This effectively makes new discovery harder and limits options to supply and costs - if this continues it will eventually hit a tipping point with ICE, accelerated by battery costs plummeting.

[David70]

Originally Posted by KRS_SN

musk made a ugly behemoth sexy by making it fast and clean and reaped rewards. I saw his love for ferrari in a old video where he actually looks bald(pointless observation) so the petrolhead in him combined with the businessman and nerd and IT geek has done a great job.
He didn't overvalue the shares others did. If shares crash but he gets to keep his billions fair play
but there are competitors around
most people don't care about 0-60 times
https://thedriven.io/2020/11/10/kia-...uk-in-october/

I agree, I don't blame the stock price being overly inflated on him. Multiple times he said he thought it was too high and it isn't his job to try to lower lower it.

I give him a lot of credit for what he has built, just am not a believer the stock price makes sense or that others can't do what he is doing now or even better.

Also think the vast majority of the world buys inexpensive, trouble free, basic transportation for many reasons. Tesla will have a harder time competing in this market. While the others aren't as good at EV's, they have spent many decades pulling every cost out of building basic cars.

Renault Zoe eclipses Tesla Model 3 as Europe's best-selling EV

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/n...ar%20increase.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by David70

Your idea that software is the cure for all problems is misguided.

The Economist falls for the misguided route:

"Pivoting from mechanical engineering to developing software and providing the mobility services that customers will increasingly demand ... established carmakers face an equally daunting challenge: learning how to write software. Electric cars require integrated software, not just to ensure that batteries and motors work together to provide the best performance, but to connect the car to the outside world. Incumbent carmakers are struggling to combine disparate electronic systems from different suppliers to create the seamless experience offered by Tesla, which constantly improves its cars with smartphone-style “over the air” software updates.

Though I do agree with you: software isn't the cure to all problems - as the article also points out, Tesla's challenge will continue to be scaling production; and I'd add, especially batteries!

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by David70

the vast majority of the world buys inexpensive, trouble free, basic transportation for many reasons. Tesla will have a harder time competing in this market.

I think most startups would be thrilled to know the success bar for them has moved to competing in every customer segment in every market globally!

Back to the 1930s United example: United eventually split into United Technologies & United Airlines amongst others, with UT selling aviation technology to the government and others, and UA obvs being the operator ...

The speculation with Tesla's new Model S yoke-wheel is so that eventually it can be retracted into the dash in FSD mode (as well as giving a better view of both screens) - you could see Tesla splitting like United into an energy tech company with a transpo division, and the other part an operator of robotaxis.


who knows where it goes?

[KRS_SN]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

I think most startups would be thrilled to know the success bar for them has moved to competing in every customer segment in every market globally!

Back to the 1930s United example: United eventually split into United Technologies & United Airlines amongst others, with UT selling aviation technology to the government and others, and UA obvs being the operator ...

The speculation with Tesla's new Model S yoke-wheel is so that eventually it can be retracted into the dash in FSD mode (as well as giving a better view of both screens) - you could see Tesla splitting like United into an energy tech company with a transpo division, and the other part an operator of robotaxis.

[IMG]

View post on imgur.com

[/IMG]
who knows where it goes?

Netflix on screen...wonderful design combining woke and yoke at one go

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Most all of the software in a Tesla, or any EV for that matter, is UI related or driveline related

I'm not getting how amount ("most all") of software is relevant - is 1000 lines better than 100? Not if 100 does what 1000 does ... so what does "most all ..." mean? And if only 1% of the total software runs the antennas does that mean it's somehow not relevant? Or needs to be updated less? Or provides more efficiency somehow?

And as far as the UI, that seems like a pretty important component of any consumer electronics product, which the car is so it probably deserves a lot of attention, right? So what does "UI related mean"?

In any event, core competitive advantage in great EV software is:

(1.) Integrated: the software that runs the a/c also cools the batteries, thus all control decisions are made centrally and with all factors accounted for.

(2.) Upgradable: the integrated software can easily (and frequently) be updated, and is based on active near-real-time data & analytics from vehicles on the road.

(3.) Extensible: beyond being frequently cloud-updatable, the integrated systems software can extend to the cloud to analyze & run systems when/if needed, as well as download and send data.


But, to David70's point, it's not just software that'll give us a BEV leader and winner, it's other factors as well:

(a.) Supply chain - with BEVs, this is by far the largest factor in determining a leader (and obvs heavily impacted by design/architecture choices). Even with a great design and great product, if you can't scale you can't win.

(b.) Charging Network - even a great vehicle like the Mach-e seems to be suffers from a shitty charging network which'll likely frustrate normals.

[GrussGott]

For long-term investors who believe EVs are the future, but see Tesla as too crazy, here's a great way to cast a wide net, i.e., slow, steady, and cautiously:

[GrussGott]

Speaking of gas ... and everyone rushing to EVs, Apple can CERTAINLY write software, and they certainly know how to manage an international supply chain, but can they manage with with more than a phone? And can they find contractors willing to build their automotive product?

Seems iffy.

[Jaybrewdog]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

The Economist falls for the misguided route:

"Pivoting from mechanical engineering to developing software and providing the mobility services that customers will increasingly demand ... established carmakers face an equally daunting challenge: learning how to write software. Electric cars require integrated software, not just to ensure that batteries and motors work together to provide the best performance, but to connect the car to the outside world. Incumbent carmakers are struggling to combine disparate electronic systems from different suppliers to create the seamless experience offered by Tesla, which constantly improves its cars with smartphone-style “over the air” software updates.

Though I do agree with you: software isn't the cure to all problems - as the article also points out, Tesla's challenge will continue to be scaling production; and I'd add, especially batteries!

wow someone just realised this and got to write an article on it?

been well known for 5+ years - wow over the air updates? no way

no wonder people think the company is going to crash, only just learning about pretty basic concepts related to tesla's.

[KRS_SN]

problem is that in 10 years batteries will be much more powerful think smartphones of 2010 v smartphones of 2020s. Ie better range and lighter.
Will life cycles of current 'bloat EVs' be the most environmentally damaging production ever?
we know what happens to 2010 phones with poor battery (bin).
Hence my personal plan is I buy my first ev in 2030-2035. Also means if tesla is still around they would have sorted their Interior and build quality by then.
Until then I use my sublime ICE g05 x5

[Machinebuilder]

There is alot of push back on Tesla and electric cars but I think that when the change over happens it will be quick. I am thinking of get rid of my ice cars before their value drops too much. Electric cars are so quiet, smooth and effortless to drive there is no contest. I think all the major car companies are planning their transition to be faster than is being reported.

[KRS_SN]

Originally Posted by Machinebuilder

There is alot of push back on Tesla and electric cars but I think that when the change over happens it will be quick. I am thinking of get rid of my ice cars before their value drops too much. Electric cars are so quiet, smooth and effortless to drive there is no contest. I think all the major car companies are planning their transition to be faster than is being reported.

whatever you do don't buy an ev now thinking it will save money(unless you do mega miles daily).
All other points are valid.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by Machinebuilder

There is alot of push back on Tesla and electric cars but I think that when the change over happens it will be quick.

Exactly - oil companies are already getting credit warnings .. at a certain point:

• Petrol prices will start to rise & will be harder to find,

• ICE models will become fewer and harder to find (already happening with BMW! "mild hybrids")

• Performance & economy will favor BEVs: across every auto segment ICE will be slower, higher cost, more maintenance - younger people will have be baffled why anyone would buy a car that needs regular maintenance like oil changes that's slower and costs more.

Like KRS_SN, until then I'm probably gonna enjoy the final hurrah of ICE - these are the end days for them.

[GrussGott]

Ford turns to Google ...