Tesla shares surpass $1T in value(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Tesla shares surpass $1T in value
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/25/business/tesla-trillion-stock-price.html
102 comments
Just went to Bartell's to buy a coffeepot. The formerly $13 one is now $30.
Noticed this as well. Speaks volumes of the levels of wealth creation we are seeing in the present.
Just 10 years ago, the largest company by market cap was just shy of 400B; the richest man ~70B. Now, top 10 are all routinely above both according to wikipedia. Unicorns will probably give way to Trilobites at this rate ;). Definitely real, but no less elusive in the present day.
In the same vein that being a millionaire is no longer as rare as it used to be, I can envision being a billionaire may go the same way in my lifetime. Inflationary pressures or otherwise, it points in part to the futility of directly comparing wealth across time periods, as future generations are able to tap into more leverage from whatever emerging technologies arise.
Just 10 years ago, the largest company by market cap was just shy of 400B; the richest man ~70B. Now, top 10 are all routinely above both according to wikipedia. Unicorns will probably give way to Trilobites at this rate ;). Definitely real, but no less elusive in the present day.
In the same vein that being a millionaire is no longer as rare as it used to be, I can envision being a billionaire may go the same way in my lifetime. Inflationary pressures or otherwise, it points in part to the futility of directly comparing wealth across time periods, as future generations are able to tap into more leverage from whatever emerging technologies arise.
Interesting to note that while it took apple 38 years to get to $1 trillion, they are now three years later sitting at a market cap of $2.46 trillion.
For those who missed it, this is related to Hertz ordering 100,000 Tesla Model 3s: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-25/hertz-sai...
Hertz: Places order for $4 billion worth of cars
Tesla: Market value increase by $100 billion
Yup, this is all very logical.
Edit: Guys, we all know the term "Future Value", we all also know its a purposely undefined buzzword you can fit any insanity you want into. Virtually everything a company does adds "Future Value", the question is "How much Future Value".
Does selling $4B of cars really signal an entire General Motors worth of value on top of their already insane "Future Value"?
Tesla: Market value increase by $100 billion
Yup, this is all very logical.
Edit: Guys, we all know the term "Future Value", we all also know its a purposely undefined buzzword you can fit any insanity you want into. Virtually everything a company does adds "Future Value", the question is "How much Future Value".
Does selling $4B of cars really signal an entire General Motors worth of value on top of their already insane "Future Value"?
That's correct, the stock market uses information from the present to make a determination about the future. Hertz isn't buying Teslas because they are engaged in charity, they are doing it because they likely came to the conclusion that it's cheaper, or more optimal in some sense, to have a fleet of electric vehicles over ICE vehicles. Unless Hertz made a grave miscalculation, one can expect other vehicle rental companies to come to the same conclusion, along with other companies/industries that maintain large fleets of vehicles.
This move further entrenches Tesla in the electric vehicle space, along with all other related technologies (electric charging, insurance, battery technology, etc etc...). The truth is that most other car companies are just not well positioned to transition to electric vehicles.
This move further entrenches Tesla in the electric vehicle space, along with all other related technologies (electric charging, insurance, battery technology, etc etc...). The truth is that most other car companies are just not well positioned to transition to electric vehicles.
A bankrupt company Hertz has expressed intent to buy 100,000 Teslas to hype already hyped investors into bringing some fresh money into this venture.
Currently, you need just a "cool" intent, preferably with some buzz words (crypto, "green", space..etc) and you are golden.
> That's correct, the stock market uses information from the present to make a determination about the future. Hertz isn't buying Teslas because they are engaged in charity, they are doing it because they likely came to the conclusion that it's cheaper, or more optimal in some sense, to have a fleet of electric vehicles over ICE vehicles.
Any market participant could _already_ have gone through the same calculus. There is no new public information except the decision itself, which by this reasoning was A) perfectly predictable and B) not inherently worth $100B
Any market participant could _already_ have gone through the same calculus. There is no new public information except the decision itself, which by this reasoning was A) perfectly predictable and B) not inherently worth $100B
A contractual sales commitment is valued differently compared to a "what if" calculation.
As far as I can tell, there is no contractual sales commitment. Just a press release.
Except your average market participant doesn't have the same resources for that analysis as Herz.
Many of them have more resources. Hedge funds have been using satellite photography to estimate Tesla's production numbers for years. The price is expected to move if even a few participants have the new information.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20243810
Honestly I'm a little dumbfounded that people are arguing this is definitely a rational move in the price while we've got phenomena like GameStop still happening.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20243810
Honestly I'm a little dumbfounded that people are arguing this is definitely a rational move in the price while we've got phenomena like GameStop still happening.
[deleted]
I think it's more that the $4B Hertz order is a big vote of confidence from a big rental car player that signals a higher likelihood of all the other big rental car companies (since this made the news, I'm assuming other big rental car companies haven't done so, or at least on that scale, at least for an "ordinary" vehicle, since a quick search shows you can rent a Model S from Enterprise, but only from their Exotic's section) to follow suite, and a potential ensuing continuous revenue flow for Tesla as these rental cars end their life-cycles and need to be replaced. Of course these are all just possibilities, essentially bets.
Also: "You know who Hertz CEO is? The former CEO of Ford.
And he didn’t order the Mustang Mex-E. He ordered 100,000 Tesla Model 3" - @WholeMarsBlog
And:
"To be clear, cars sold to Hertz have no discount. Same price as to consumers." - Elon Musk
So you have the former CEO picking Tesla (with GM, Volkswagen, and Ford losing out) and for the first time ever a rental company is paying full price for a 100,000 order.
And he didn’t order the Mustang Mex-E. He ordered 100,000 Tesla Model 3" - @WholeMarsBlog
And:
"To be clear, cars sold to Hertz have no discount. Same price as to consumers." - Elon Musk
So you have the former CEO picking Tesla (with GM, Volkswagen, and Ford losing out) and for the first time ever a rental company is paying full price for a 100,000 order.
Haha. Having Hertz as a customer is a huge validation for Tesla. It means other rental fleets will be asked questions about electrification. It also means a bunch of people will test drive Teslas - people who wouldn't otherwise look at it. The car sells itself, because it is great.
Wait until an entire parking garage of Teslas goes up in flames, let's see if the stock price budges then...
Why aren't the insurance industry more active about this?!
https://www.rt.com/news/538335-germany-electric-vehicle-bus-...
https://www.rt.com/news/538335-germany-electric-vehicle-bus-...
ok. These things have been discussed on reddit/twitter the last 3-4 years over and over again. Tesla has sold a decent chunk of cars now, from which you can do meaningful projections on it's fire safety.
From Tesla's website (https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport) "From 2012 – 2020, there has been approximately one Tesla vehicle fire for every 205 million miles traveled. By comparison, data from the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and U.S. Department of Transportation shows that in the United States there is a vehicle fire for every 19 million miles traveled. In order to provide an apt comparison to NFPA data, Tesla’s data set includes instances of vehicle fires caused by structure fires, arson, and other things unrelated to the vehicle, which account for some of the Tesla vehicle fires over this time period."
From Tesla's website (https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport) "From 2012 – 2020, there has been approximately one Tesla vehicle fire for every 205 million miles traveled. By comparison, data from the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and U.S. Department of Transportation shows that in the United States there is a vehicle fire for every 19 million miles traveled. In order to provide an apt comparison to NFPA data, Tesla’s data set includes instances of vehicle fires caused by structure fires, arson, and other things unrelated to the vehicle, which account for some of the Tesla vehicle fires over this time period."
The last place to look for info on BEV fire safety is a manufacturer's website. Talk to fire fighters, look at the independent stats.
NTSB: Lithium-Ion Battery Fires in Electric Vehicles - Safety Risks to Emergency Responders
https://youtu.be/J6eS6JzBn0k
https://youtu.be/J6eS6JzBn0k
Wait until you learn what happens to gasoline when it gets hot!
And don't post links to RT, they're the Russian state mouthpiece.
And don't post links to RT, they're the Russian state mouthpiece.
You clearly have no idea about the difference between a gasoline fire and battery thermal runaway/stranded energy/reignition issues.
Essentially an EV fire is analogous to an out of control 220 volt welder as this video illustrates in some detail https://youtu.be/tuVxwmnhqP4
Your comment about RT merits no reply except to suggest your being a little more open minded about the difference between facts and publishers
Essentially an EV fire is analogous to an out of control 220 volt welder as this video illustrates in some detail https://youtu.be/tuVxwmnhqP4
Your comment about RT merits no reply except to suggest your being a little more open minded about the difference between facts and publishers
Expected future value. Most rental companies haven't committed to large EV fleets. This changes things.
That said I think the current valuation is a joke.
That said I think the current valuation is a joke.
What is logical is massive amounts of leverage in the form of call options results in a gamma ramp. Option dealers bought anywhere from $50B to $100B of Tesla today. Such a tremendous injection of capital must affect the price.
Gamma ramp down will be equally massive.
Gamma ramp down will be equally massive.
Is this information freely available anywhere? I mean volume breakdown by the type of buyer/seller (institutional/retail/market maker)?
Financial engineering with debt and leverage; central bank policy breaks markets. It ends with megacorporations, oligarchs, inequality and tears.
If you think that is wild, did you know Tesla is worth almost 1,000 Palms!
The iPhone launched in '07 & AAPL saw its cap go from $100b → $2,400b in 14 yrs
In the same 14 yrs
Nokia: $110b → $32b
RIM: $72b → $6b
Palm: $54b→ $1.2b
FYI, the global auto industry is not Apple in this example
The iPhone launched in '07 & AAPL saw its cap go from $100b → $2,400b in 14 yrs
In the same 14 yrs
Nokia: $110b → $32b
RIM: $72b → $6b
Palm: $54b→ $1.2b
FYI, the global auto industry is not Apple in this example
The real question is. Have you ever driven a Tesla?
I sure hope they're going to disable most of the autopilot features. The last thing we need is thousands of rental customers doing "look ma no hands!" for giggles on unfamiliar roads.
Tesla should buy all of the remaining rental car companies and do the same with those to go to $2T next year.
Today's gains alone for Tesla surpass all American rental companies combined. They could do it if they wanted.
Today's gains alone for Tesla surpass all American rental companies combined. They could do it if they wanted.
They could, but then the purchases would not be independent validation. The value of Hertz purchasing Teslas for their fleet is that Hertz independently came to the conclusion of Tesla's value.
If they figure out self driving, they'll displace car rental companies anyway by being the next Uber.
That's a P/E ratio of 533 for those interested https://www.gurufocus.com/term/pettm/TSLA/PE-Ratiottm/Tesla#....
It's 154 if their earnings stay constant for the next 3 quarters. If price stays constant and analysts are accurate, P/E will drop under 100 next year. The P/E was 3000 at the beginning of the year.
Tesla's price isn't reasonable yet, but it's getting there fairly quickly.
Tesla's price isn't reasonable yet, but it's getting there fairly quickly.
Yep, and in just one quarter that'll be a PE of ~300. PE ratios change really fast when growth is fast.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/470829/us-car-rental-ave...
Pre-Pandemic Hertz had a fleet of ~500K cars. So 100K represents ~20% of their fleet.
Tesla cars keep their resale value (https://insideevs.com/news/490348/tesla-model-3-resale-value...) so Hertz should be able to sell them wholesale back to Tesla, Carvana, etc.
https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2012/07/13/surprising...
Pre-Pandemic Hertz had a fleet of ~500K cars. So 100K represents ~20% of their fleet.
Tesla cars keep their resale value (https://insideevs.com/news/490348/tesla-model-3-resale-value...) so Hertz should be able to sell them wholesale back to Tesla, Carvana, etc.
https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2012/07/13/surprising...
Well there goes my plan of buying used Tesla. Rental cars are driven poorly because the drivers don’t care
For those who missed it.
Hertz was bankrupted and it's the investors that saved it, that seem to want the company to buy Tesla.
> Hertz’s new owners, Knighthead Capital Management and Certares Management, are making clear with this move that they want post-bankruptcy Hertz to have a modern business model in tune with where customer preferences are heading.
https://fortune.com/2021/10/25/tesla-stock-hertz-100000-elec...
I'm really curious how vested ( in stock ) they already were in Tesla :)
Hertz was bankrupted and it's the investors that saved it, that seem to want the company to buy Tesla.
> Hertz’s new owners, Knighthead Capital Management and Certares Management, are making clear with this move that they want post-bankruptcy Hertz to have a modern business model in tune with where customer preferences are heading.
https://fortune.com/2021/10/25/tesla-stock-hertz-100000-elec...
I'm really curious how vested ( in stock ) they already were in Tesla :)
That's as much a one Vietnam, or two Ukraines.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_wea...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_wea...
[deleted]
As usual, keep in mind that Tesla shares are very forward-looking. Their current quarterly performance was probably priced in around 2018 and at this point the price is assuming they'll be the largest car manufacturer (they've said they want to do 20 million units by 2030). Given their relative performance over the last few quarters compared to legacy OEMs, it's not very hard to believe.
There's also various other bits priced in already - parts of FSD, utility-scale storage. I don't think the Tesla Bot is priced in yet.
There's also various other bits priced in already - parts of FSD, utility-scale storage. I don't think the Tesla Bot is priced in yet.
So Tesla is now worth more than Toyota, VW, Mercedes, GM, BMW, Ford, and Exxon combined. That seems like a lot of "looking forward" to me.
It depends on how you measure the value of these companies. If you go by market cap then yes Tesla is worth more than all of them combined.
The reason for this is that all those other companies you mention have enormous debt, whereas Tesla's debt is fairly negligible.
Tesla has 10 billion dollars in debt compared to GM which has over 100 billion dollars in debt or Ford which has over 150 billion dollars in debt.
The reason for this is that all those other companies you mention have enormous debt, whereas Tesla's debt is fairly negligible.
Tesla has 10 billion dollars in debt compared to GM which has over 100 billion dollars in debt or Ford which has over 150 billion dollars in debt.
It is, but TSLA has been like this since 2014-ish? They do well on one product and the market automatically thinks they'll make the next one even better.
Also, because it's sentiment-driven, it's very volatile. Nothing wrong with trading on sentiment, as long as you know that's what you're doing.
Also, because it's sentiment-driven, it's very volatile. Nothing wrong with trading on sentiment, as long as you know that's what you're doing.
If TSLA was 'very forward-looking', it wouldn't be so volatile. People are just gambling on stock value. Nothing more, nothing less.
On the very contrary, the more forward-looking something is, the more volatile it is likely to be.
Nothing is more difficult to predict than the future after all.
Nothing is more difficult to predict than the future after all.
It's precisely what makes it so volatile. People are pricing in things that have not happened because they think they're very likely to happen. Then their opinion changes and the stock tanks. Trading on sentiment is not my cup of tea, btw.
If you wanna buy and hold TSLA today, you pretty much have to be convinced that their FSD and TeslaBot plans will become reality.
If you wanna buy and hold TSLA today, you pretty much have to be convinced that their FSD and TeslaBot plans will become reality.
+1 I'm not in TSLA but it's pretty obvious the price reflects bets on things like becoming a utility scale storage provider etc.
Most equity investments are gambles on stock value, especially early-stage private tech startups like the ones many of us here work at.
We look at the product, exec team, and the marketplace -- and we make an educated gamble.
We look at the product, exec team, and the marketplace -- and we make an educated gamble.
This is crazy. I am happy for Tesla, it's an amazing company. But a trillion dollars seems a bit too much.
Every manufacturing nation on earth is ramping up on EV production, and they're not just betting on cars. They're building the exact same infrastructural pieces that Tesla is making.
There won't be a single winner. This valuation seems to imply that there will be.
I'm not bearish on Tesla or Musk, but this doesn't make sense to me. You can't monopolize these markets.
There won't be a single winner. This valuation seems to imply that there will be.
I'm not bearish on Tesla or Musk, but this doesn't make sense to me. You can't monopolize these markets.
It doesn't have to make sense, market cap is a flimsy meaningless value... If everyone holding TSLA tried selling at this price, a small fraction would manage to execute orders at that price before it plummetted.
The thing that doesn't make sense is treating (number of shares * last executed order price) as anything more than just that.
The thing that doesn't make sense is treating (number of shares * last executed order price) as anything more than just that.
Of course market cap is not the same as the equity value of a company. However market cap numbers are useful in comparing public companies to one another, and for broad categorizations of the scale of a business.
Ref: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketcapitalization.as...
Ref: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketcapitalization.as...
I didn't really understand your point insofar as it sounds like a truism you could plug in any company name for: "If everyone holding TSLA tried selling at this price, a small fraction would manage to execute orders at that price before it plummetted." ??
The fact that not everyone is going to sell at once is built into the price.
You make it seem that the share price of Tesla is determined by rational decisions. If this is the case, it can't be shaken by "stock price is too high imo" tweets by the boss. He launched a rocket on June 1st 2020, and Tesla stock price went up.
Tesla has such a high stock price because of an army of Musk fans believing in him. The company nearly went bankrupt multiple times. The cars are garbage quality. But Musk is awesome at selling dreams.
Tesla has such a high stock price because of an army of Musk fans believing in him. The company nearly went bankrupt multiple times. The cars are garbage quality. But Musk is awesome at selling dreams.
>Tesla has such a high stock price because of an army of Musk fans believing in him.
Right, and they are not going to dump their shares. So the projected scarcity from that lack of supply is priced in.
I'm talking about price discovery, which is (as proved many times) independent of rationality.
Right, and they are not going to dump their shares. So the projected scarcity from that lack of supply is priced in.
I'm talking about price discovery, which is (as proved many times) independent of rationality.
Not sure what you mean by "projected scarcity". A Tesla shareholder will sell their shares if what they get in exchange is worth more, according to their opinion, than the shares. This applies to Musk fans as well, the only difference being that Musk fans tend to value Tesla shares higher than regular investors and therefore will only be willing to sell at a higher price compared to regular investors. Is that "priced in"? Well, yes, the current share price reflects that, but that's exactly the point the OP was making—that Tesla shares are overpriced because Tesla fans systematically overestimate their worth.
"garbage quality"
In 2021, really? {{citation needed}}
In 2021, really? {{citation needed}}
https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-owner-details-quality-...
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/03/business/elon-musk-tesla-...
https://www.thedrive.com/tech/27989/teslas-screen-saga-shows...
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/03/business/elon-musk-tesla-...
https://www.thedrive.com/tech/27989/teslas-screen-saga-shows...
Panel gap issues have been fixed in the latest iterations.
> "In 2018, engineering consultant Sandy Munro said Tesla's Model 3 had serious production flaws."
Yeah, and listen to the incredible praise this same Sandy Munro is giving them this year. As early as January 2021, around the time the other articles were published: https://www.teslaoracle.com/2021/01/26/2021-tesla-model-3-sa...
These articles may have been published in 2021, but by the time of publication they were in large part already out of date.
> "In 2018, engineering consultant Sandy Munro said Tesla's Model 3 had serious production flaws."
Yeah, and listen to the incredible praise this same Sandy Munro is giving them this year. As early as January 2021, around the time the other articles were published: https://www.teslaoracle.com/2021/01/26/2021-tesla-model-3-sa...
These articles may have been published in 2021, but by the time of publication they were in large part already out of date.
What is that supposed to mean? If you have a car that is worth $1000 but you can only sell less than 1% of it at this price, is the car really worth $1000. The answer is no. If you sell the car, not just a small fraction of it, you will get considerably less than $1000, therefore the car not worth $1000.
Companies buy out other public companies all the time. They usually pay more than the stock price per share.
Right now if someone wanted to buy Tesla, they would have to pay more than the share price in order to get investors (the owners) to sell it.
Right now if someone wanted to buy Tesla, they would have to pay more than the share price in order to get investors (the owners) to sell it.
Share capital value is used in more than a few places. Like taking out a loan on your TSLA shares
> Every manufacturing nation on earth is ramping up on EV production...There won't be a single winner
While true, it seems like Tesla has at least a decade head start and can be the "winner" for at least that long.
Ford are finally going "all in" with their electric F150 and it could finally be the "Tesla Killer".
Ford are planning on these production numbers for the Electric F-150[1]:
2022: 15,000
2023: 55,000
2024: 80,000
I don't see how making 80,000 vehicles in a year 3 years from today is going to have any impact on a company already making a million vehicles this year, and will likely surpass 2 million next year.
[1] https://www.electrive.com/2021/08/24/ford-doubles-f-150-ligh...
While true, it seems like Tesla has at least a decade head start and can be the "winner" for at least that long.
Ford are finally going "all in" with their electric F150 and it could finally be the "Tesla Killer".
Ford are planning on these production numbers for the Electric F-150[1]:
2022: 15,000
2023: 55,000
2024: 80,000
I don't see how making 80,000 vehicles in a year 3 years from today is going to have any impact on a company already making a million vehicles this year, and will likely surpass 2 million next year.
[1] https://www.electrive.com/2021/08/24/ford-doubles-f-150-ligh...
While I understand the F-150 is the best selling vehicle in the US, it occupies a distinctly different market than Tesla's current vehicles. The Mustang Mach-E is the better comparison.
Then there's the Cybertruck. Despite being a big Tesla fan, my opinion is that it's not going to appeal to the majority of traditional truck buyers. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
Then there's the Cybertruck. Despite being a big Tesla fan, my opinion is that it's not going to appeal to the majority of traditional truck buyers. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
> The Mustang Mach-E is the better comparison.
I agree.
Ford are building only 50,000 of them in 2021, and their "best aiming high hope" is to build 175,000/year sometime in the future. [1]
Again, I don't see how building 175,000 vehicles in some future year has meaningful impact on a company that built a million in 2021 and will push close to 2 million in 2022.
Even when the "big car companies" want to go all-in electric, they can't. It takes a decade to scale up to what Tesla is doing, even for Ford.
[1] https://cleantechnica.com/2021/08/23/exclusive-ford-mustang-...
I agree.
Ford are building only 50,000 of them in 2021, and their "best aiming high hope" is to build 175,000/year sometime in the future. [1]
Again, I don't see how building 175,000 vehicles in some future year has meaningful impact on a company that built a million in 2021 and will push close to 2 million in 2022.
Even when the "big car companies" want to go all-in electric, they can't. It takes a decade to scale up to what Tesla is doing, even for Ford.
[1] https://cleantechnica.com/2021/08/23/exclusive-ford-mustang-...
> I'm not bearish on Tesla or Musk, but this doesn't make sense to me. You can't monopolize these markets.
TSLA does have a significant moat in the Supercharger network. No other system comes close to what they've built there, and while an alternate system can certainly be built, it's going to take years.
TSLA does have a significant moat in the Supercharger network. No other system comes close to what they've built there, and while an alternate system can certainly be built, it's going to take years.
Investors seem to pay large premiums for companies that have a certain quality of "we know what the future is and we're building it".
All the other companies doing it are somewhat riding on Tesla's coattails. They think Tesla will be around in the future and much bigger than it is now, I'm not sure the same can be said for any other car manufacturer to lesser or greater degrees.
All the other companies doing it are somewhat riding on Tesla's coattails. They think Tesla will be around in the future and much bigger than it is now, I'm not sure the same can be said for any other car manufacturer to lesser or greater degrees.
It’s not just EVs though, Tesla is going to vertically integrate and parlay a lot of their EV tech into general energy solutions. The gigafactories and solar installations are the future imo, the cars are the side show.
Isn't Solar City just a trainwreck? From the acquisition which looked almost entirely like Elon bailing out his brother's business, to all manner of customer complaints now about fragile installations that are having maintenance and reliability issues and people being unable to get that dealt with because everyone involved keeps passing the buck...
It's a work in progress, not a train wreck.
On the balance sheet it doesn't look good, but if you think about the strategic impact it will have on the business once they can bring costs down and ramp up installations, I think it's more fair to call it an investment.
On the balance sheet it doesn't look good, but if you think about the strategic impact it will have on the business once they can bring costs down and ramp up installations, I think it's more fair to call it an investment.
Yeah, if the future is for Tesla to integrate more storage solutions for the grid with renewables... There is logic in being bullish. Large-scale energy storage is probably one of the most critical sectors not solved of the green energy effort.
Tesla can't compete on energy storage on a $/kWh basis. CATL and BYD have them soundly beat. Yes it's not solved yet but Tesla is not the leader in solving it.
The solar business is basically dead. Tesla is a car company that builds electric cars until it shows otherwise.
Tesla isn't completely vertically integrated. They've been buying batteries from CATL and that is core EV tech.
They are vertically integrat-ing. Ref: battery day (Sep 2021)
Their recent contract with BYD seems to say it won't be soon.
Elon has said many times lately they're trying to get all the batteries they can. They'll buy all the batteries Panasonic and others will sell them, and they'll make all the batteries they can in house.
So it's a bit of both in this case.
So it's a bit of both in this case.
Sure, so in that case they aren't trying to vertically integrate, unless they are currently scaling up production faster than anyone else and they're not.
> unless they are currently scaling up production faster than anyone else and they're not
They have Giga Nevada which is already the world's biggest battery plant (although technically a lot of the production is Panasonic.
They also make batteries at their China factory
They've also said they will make batteries at both Giga Berlin and Giga Texas, and they're increasing their operations in California, including making more batteries.
I think it's safe to say they are scaling up production extremely fast, and I'd be interested to hear of another company scaling faster than they are.
They have Giga Nevada which is already the world's biggest battery plant (although technically a lot of the production is Panasonic.
They also make batteries at their China factory
They've also said they will make batteries at both Giga Berlin and Giga Texas, and they're increasing their operations in California, including making more batteries.
I think it's safe to say they are scaling up production extremely fast, and I'd be interested to hear of another company scaling faster than they are.
The vast majority of their cars sold in China use CATL batteries, Tesla batteries are limited to the high end models (for now).
CATL scaled much faster than Tesla - the company was founded in 2011, and they are now the leader in battery production with >30% of production. They are still increasing production. They managed to double their battery production from 10GWh/year to >20GWh between 2016 and 2018.
CATL is on track this year to produce around 140GWh of batteries, which will mean that their highest producing factory has to produce more than 35GWh. Tesla says they can produce 500k Model3/Y battery packs per year at Giga Nevada which at a generous 75kWh/pack means they may, in theory, match the smallest possible biggest factory from CATL. In reality what this means is that Giga Nevada is not the world's biggest battery plant - it's the world's biggest battery plant from plants which publish their precise production rates, but nonetheless at best #2.
CATL scaled much faster than Tesla - the company was founded in 2011, and they are now the leader in battery production with >30% of production. They are still increasing production. They managed to double their battery production from 10GWh/year to >20GWh between 2016 and 2018.
CATL is on track this year to produce around 140GWh of batteries, which will mean that their highest producing factory has to produce more than 35GWh. Tesla says they can produce 500k Model3/Y battery packs per year at Giga Nevada which at a generous 75kWh/pack means they may, in theory, match the smallest possible biggest factory from CATL. In reality what this means is that Giga Nevada is not the world's biggest battery plant - it's the world's biggest battery plant from plants which publish their precise production rates, but nonetheless at best #2.
I’m not sure you can compare CATL’s batteries with what Tesla is cooking up. Their upcoming house-made 4680 cells are a whole new beast.
They're production and supply constrained. They need to continue to outsource some of their battery production well into the foreseeable future even if they go full steam ahead on their own batteries.
It doesn't seem so to me - BYD is selling batteries much cheaper than Tesla can make them themselves. In this case it's not just supply, it's cost too.
Yes, because Tesla hasn’t even started putting their batteries in cars. They have yet to reach economies of scale on the battery production line, but when they do, it is expected to be cheaper.
And what would you say for the behemoth that is $AAPL?
We have had better iPhones for 10+ years … and maybe the iPad, Watch and Airpods… this from the richest gizmo company.. No Apple Car… Pervasive Health product is a long way from the current watch
Now tell me again about $TSLA valuation ?!
We have had better iPhones for 10+ years … and maybe the iPad, Watch and Airpods… this from the richest gizmo company.. No Apple Car… Pervasive Health product is a long way from the current watch
Now tell me again about $TSLA valuation ?!
I started investing in AAPL around 2005. I remember prevailing repeated opinion back then was that the stock price would soon tank to oblivion because of some kind of Traditional Accounting Principles technobabble. Nowadays everyone is singing praises about how AAPL is one of the best stocks to own ever.
I see the same thing happening with TSLA nowadays. Not saying AAPL back then and TSLA today are directly comparable, but a lot of the naysaying about TSLA today is again, often about some kind of Traditional Accounting Principles thingamajig.
I see the same thing happening with TSLA nowadays. Not saying AAPL back then and TSLA today are directly comparable, but a lot of the naysaying about TSLA today is again, often about some kind of Traditional Accounting Principles thingamajig.
AAPL's P/E ratio is like 30 at the moment. The average for the S&P 500 is 20 and AAPL's isn't much higher than the rest of the industry.
TSLA's P/E ratio is 533. It's far beyond its segment and the irrational exuberance of the tech industry.
TSLA's P/E ratio is 533. It's far beyond its segment and the irrational exuberance of the tech industry.
apple has a 25% profit margin and did 275 billion in gross revenue last year, will likely be >300 billion this year. It's the most profitable company in the world and top 5 in overall revenue. Tesla isn't even in the top 50.
Amazon is a mostly US company. It didn't monopolize e-commerce globally and it doesn't need to in order to be successful
The market for retail as a category is way larger than the market for personal vehicles. Tesla is valued at a price that implies that the majority of cars being produced will be from Tesla.
It's a dumb tech stock multiple except the marginal cost of another car isn't zero like it is for a salesforce instance.
It's a dumb tech stock multiple except the marginal cost of another car isn't zero like it is for a salesforce instance.
[deleted]
The last 5 of the 18 paragraphs are critical of teslas self-driving efforts.
Not sure what the implication is here?
Many Tesla investor-fans (including some big names) are FSD and/or Robotaxi evangelists. They believe Tesla will continue to be incredibly successful but not because of sales to the public.
Rather, the key to Tesla's success will be mass rollout of FSD leading to the Robotaxi fleet.
Which in turn will lead to the banning of personal car ownership (save for a few exceptions). Everyone will be using Robotaxis instead. And Tesla, being in a first mover position to take advantage of such a paradigm shift, will continue to skyrocket to success.
Some of the extremists want Tesla to stop selling cars to the public ASAP so that they can stock them up for the Robotaxi fleet, which they confidently believe will be here much sooner rather than later.
Disclaimer: These aren't my personal views (although I am an investor). Personally I'd rather Tesla downplay the emphasis on FSD/RT, at least until the tech is far more mature than it is now. But I hang out in a few TSLA investor communities where these views are quite popular.
Rather, the key to Tesla's success will be mass rollout of FSD leading to the Robotaxi fleet.
Which in turn will lead to the banning of personal car ownership (save for a few exceptions). Everyone will be using Robotaxis instead. And Tesla, being in a first mover position to take advantage of such a paradigm shift, will continue to skyrocket to success.
Some of the extremists want Tesla to stop selling cars to the public ASAP so that they can stock them up for the Robotaxi fleet, which they confidently believe will be here much sooner rather than later.
Disclaimer: These aren't my personal views (although I am an investor). Personally I'd rather Tesla downplay the emphasis on FSD/RT, at least until the tech is far more mature than it is now. But I hang out in a few TSLA investor communities where these views are quite popular.
I think Tesla is in real danger with FSD.
The much publicized rollout, and reverts of FSD show just how little testing actually goes on at Tesla. It's a really poor look. And Elon's "that's why we're beta testing it publicly!" is the opposite of confidence-inspiring, especially given the latest roll back is due to a slew of phantom emergency braking activations and forward collision warnings. "Move fast and break things" sucks for everyone on the road when it is applied to car technology.
The Robotaxi thing, if it ever happens, is easily a decade away, no matter how much he says "this year!" "next year!".
The much publicized rollout, and reverts of FSD show just how little testing actually goes on at Tesla. It's a really poor look. And Elon's "that's why we're beta testing it publicly!" is the opposite of confidence-inspiring, especially given the latest roll back is due to a slew of phantom emergency braking activations and forward collision warnings. "Move fast and break things" sucks for everyone on the road when it is applied to car technology.
The Robotaxi thing, if it ever happens, is easily a decade away, no matter how much he says "this year!" "next year!".
Completely agree. Just saying that there are people out there who are pricing in some huge factor based on assumed blockbuster successful rollout of FSD and/or Robotaxi.
I believe Apple was the first trillion-$ US-listed company and made it in August 2018 - 38 years after its listing.
TSLA accomplished the same feat in 11 years...
That obviously says something about TSLA... but also a $trillion isn't what it used to be. We'll be seeing more trillion-dollar companies in the coming years thanks to inflation.