51–60 of 189 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He meant up 8% over the five year period.
>The opportunity cost of owning it has been huge while the rest of the market ripped up Still doesn't make any sense. The S&P is up over 50% over five years. Outperforming TSLA by almost 3x (including the after-market change it is 5x).
A more reasonable brand comparison might be Mercedes-Benz Cars, which made 575,639 vehicles in Q2. It's quite impressive that Tesla have got to about 15% the volume that Merc do, but they're hardly going to take over the world with that kind of growth rate.
IMO they should stop chasing volume sales of lower cost vehicles and concentrate on premium vehicles with higher margins. What's the point of killing themselves trying to lift production numbers to try to make all the analysts who seem to be obsessed with that happy, which doesn't yet seem to be working, if the margins aren't worth bothering? It won't end well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They sold a lot of existing inventory (as in, cars sitting on lots) this quarter. That generates cash. Loss is more than $400M on record sales. Tesla has a demand problem and is discounting cars in order to maintain the growth story.
This report is bad news for Tesla, but I think it disproves the "demand problem" narrative. Tesla delivered more cars than they could produce this quarter. Both delivery and production numbers were at record highs. The average sale price of the Model 3 remained stable. Meanwhile they are nearing production of the Model Y which is likely depressing demand of both the Model 3 and Model X. Once the Model Y is available,…
Model 3 prices dropped yet again less than a week ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They sold a lot of existing inventory (as in, cars sitting on lots) this quarter. That generates cash. Loss is more than $400M on record sales. Tesla has a demand problem and is discounting cars in order to maintain the growth story.
This report is bad news for Tesla, but I think it disproves the "demand problem" narrative. Tesla delivered more cars than they could produce this quarter. Both delivery and production numbers were at record highs. The average sale price of the Model 3 remained stable. Meanwhile they are nearing production of the Model Y which is likely depressing demand of both the Model 3 and Model X. Once the Model Y is available,…
They've achieved a 0.5% increase in production volume in Q2, compared to Q4 2018, to 87,084 vehicles. I'd hardly call that "rapid progress". For comparison, Toyota make around 2.2 million vehicles per quarter. A more reasonable brand comparison might be Mercedes-Benz Cars, which made 575,639 vehicles in Q2. It's quite impressive that Tesla have got to about 15% the volume that Merc do, but they're hardly going to tak…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure how does the CapEx gets allocated for the projects that are already progressing. For example: Tesla started building GF2 in China a few months ago so any idea in which Quarter(s) Tesla account for the CapEx? Is it before the project starts or at the end or every month gets even distribution of CapEx allocation from Start until End of the project.
China GF is GF3. GF2 is in Buffalo, NY (old SolarCity facility, which also manufactures Supercharger station hardware). I can't speak to how GF3 capex is being accounted for, but competition was fierce to provide financing to Tesla [1]. China pulled out all of the stops not just for permitting and financing, but also construction (GF3 is already having Model 3 production line equipment installed, after breaking groun…
When will you realize that this company makes things up at every turn? They are cutting capex, again. They are slashing prices on cars with "unlimited demand". Let's see in a year how it's going,and what excuse you and they will have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's how I took it. They can then compare to what the human driver actually did, and find false positives (driver continued when the AI would've stopped) and false negatives (driver stopped when the AI would've continued).
ugh! the amount of supervised training data that would generate is staggering.
And even if they don't use the data to train, they can use it as an argument for how much better they are than humans. That's one hurdle that Waymo could have trouble with, whereas Tesla could point to tens of millions of miles where their sensors would have avoided crashes that humans failed to avoid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which company is in the lead is a very contentious topic it seems. This one specific feature doesn't seem to push it one way or the other. But IMO Tesla has the best approach and has a huge lead on the data collection pipeline. No other self driving company has even close to as many cars to test on / gather data from.
contentious? Genuinely curious for a source here. everything ive ever seen says Waymo is far in the lead, though I dont work in this space.
In truth there are only 3 self driving products that I know of available today. Tesla's Autopilot, GM's Supercruise (only on CT6), and commma.ai's openpilot.
Of those Autopilot is easily the best.
I never know why a source would matter in these cases as the writers of these sources usually have no idea and the answer isn't clear anyways. But if you want you can use me as a source because I'm an engineer who worked in automotive and has driven all 3 of aforementiond products. I also am not sure Waymo will ever release a feasible product other than their LIDAR.