Hertz orders 100k Teslas • Hacker News Board

Re: Hertz orders 100k Teslas

#441

Post by _ph_ » Tue, Oct 26, 2021, 4:22 PM UTC

HWR_14 wrote: post #434

_ph_ wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very little. First of all, a lot of cars are sold without this option, but most importantly, a large part the money isn't recognized as revenue yet, as the FSD isn't ready yet. A part of it is recognized due features like "summon" and "navigate on autopilot". But the large part of that money is still unrecognized revenue. There will be a boost to the revenue, when they can recognize the remaining part of the FSD paym…

This is interesting. You're claiming that the FSD money they collect isn't recognized yet? Can I ask you what leads to you thinking that? I'm sure it's in one of their financial disclosures, but you may be able to narrow it down for me.

There were statements made when they recognized parts of the FSD money.

Re: Hertz orders 100k Teslas

#442

Post by cinntaile » Tue, Oct 26, 2021, 4:33 PM UTC

TearsInTheRain wrote: post #436

dado3212 wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the record, their market cap is also greater than "Australia's Woodside Petroleum, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Imperial Oil, Royal Dutch Shell, Shell Energy North America, Canadian Natural Resources, ConocoPhillips and French group Total [combined]" [1], so they're also valued kind of crazy compared to energy companies...and that was in January 2021 before the most recent spike. Sure, part of that is faith in renewable…

They are also an innovation engine. You have to value all of the things they havent created yet but will.

What part of their market cap is unrealized tech dreams and what part is substance, in the traditional value investor sense, in your opinion?

Re: Hertz orders 100k Teslas

#443

Post by garaetjjte » Tue, Oct 26, 2021, 4:35 PM UTC

ComputerGuru wrote: post #175

tincholio wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. On petrol cars, if you let go of the clutch in 1st gear and not pushing on the gas, you'll most likely stall. Diesels often don't do this, and creep instead (all of this assuming you're letting go of the clutch slowly enough, otherwise, you'll stall for sure)

It depends on the condition of the clutch. If it’s a newer clutch or in great shape: definitely not once the gear is fully engaged. I can’t drive my petrol cars in forward or reverse at driveway speeds without riding the clutch a bit to stop from going too fast.

I think any differences in this are down to how much power is ECU software willing to apply to maintain idle speed.

Re: Hertz orders 100k Teslas

#444

Post by oxfordmale » Tue, Oct 26, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

stmfreak wrote: post #225

Waterluvian wrote: post #163

I was very pessimistic about Tesla and confused by their stock price. But I now believe that they indeed are doing it and that we’re finally at the EV revolution. I’m not an early adopter type and the Teslas don’t excite me at all, but I’m really delighted that the market is evolving. I’m delighted that I was wrong.

Tesla’s stock price is confusing if you compare them to a car company. But they are not just a car company. They are also a car manufacturing supply chain, having brought much of their component production in house. They are also an energy company, both generation and storage, but also distribution, like gas stations. Think Exxon, BP, Chevron, ARCO, etc. They are probably a few other things, but this is the mystery o…

Tesla is an amazing company, however, still hasn't reached the peak of inflated expectations. As a seasoned equity investor put it:

"Tesla the stock isn't being valued by any metrics that make sense and today investors are paying too much for their future growth which is dangerous."

Re: Hertz orders 100k Teslas

#445

Post by garaetjjte » Tue, Oct 26, 2021, 4:51 PM UTC

yardie wrote: post #57

atonse wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even higher margins with electricity. Instead of charging you $5 a gallon, they can even charge $.50 per kWh (or translate it to miles) and that's something like a 3x markup. Even more if they use a renewable energy source. In my rough calculations, it costs something like $5-$7 to charge from empty to full on my Model-3 mid-range.

My ICE car is $50-$70 to fill the tank (26gal/100l) from empty to full. And gets me 450-500 miles. So I'm a tad bit jealous, just not enough to take on a car payment.

Wow, that's cheap fuel. I pay equivalent of 70$ to fill my car with 45 l. On the other hand, I also get 500 miles from it...

Re: Hertz orders 100k Teslas

#446

Post by mike_d » Tue, Oct 26, 2021, 4:52 PM UTC

iso1210 wrote: post #401

mike_d wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is no longer a personnel need to drive gas-depleted cars to an offsite refueling station Rental car depots have their own on site gas stations. Fuel on return is one of the highest profit margins rental companies have.

In the last couple of months I've rented cars from about 10 (Enterprise) locations in the UK, only Heathrow had it's own fueling station.

The smaller locations you are using are retail fronts, not depots. When you return the car it is taken to an offsite location anyway to get washed, vacuumed, inspected, fueled, and returned.

Re: Hertz orders 100k Teslas

#447

Post by HWR_14 » Tue, Oct 26, 2021, 5:00 PM UTC

jlmorton wrote: post #283

HWR_14 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note, the EV revolution and Tesla being the winner of the EV revolution are different outcomes. They're certainly winning the EV race now, but it's possible that some of the other car companies can overtake them.

The bear thesis for Tesla has been something like, "Tesla might have an innovative EV-first design, but when the major manufacturers with a century of manufacturing know-how wake up to EVs, they will drown Tesla in vehicles." I think part of what's driving the increase in Tesla's value is the realization that this thesis was wrong. Tesla is now beating all the established manufacturers at gross automotive margins, an…

> If the major manufacturers aren't going to catch Tesla with manufacturing prowess, or capital, what are they going to catch them with?

Brand loyalty or aspiration that predates EVs; cheaper entry price (already happening); build quality; better UI (the giant touchscreen is a negative for a lot of people).

There are lots of reasons to buy a non-Tesla EV. I know people who, being told that the Mach-E wasn't going to be available for a while bought another ICE to drive until it was ready. I know people who bought Hyundais instead of Teslas. Heck, one person even opted for a plugin hybrid because only the Tesla had the range he needed for work and he didn't want one.

A good chunk of people I know are already opting for not-Tesla EVs. It's a brand that seems popular with a subset of the population, but doesn't have the widespread love that people on HN seem to assume.

I also think it's weird that people are comparing margins on ICE vs EV cars. Obviously, those will different. You want to focus on their margins in the EV space.

Re: Hertz orders 100k Teslas

#448

Post by breakyerself » Tue, Oct 26, 2021, 5:04 PM UTC

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #303

dado3212 wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the record, their market cap is also greater than "Australia's Woodside Petroleum, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Imperial Oil, Royal Dutch Shell, Shell Energy North America, Canadian Natural Resources, ConocoPhillips and French group Total [combined]" [1], so they're also valued kind of crazy compared to energy companies...and that was in January 2021 before the most recent spike. Sure, part of that is faith in renewable…

I might be a bit crazy, but you just mentioned a slate of companies that absolutely have no future at their current scale. Sure this won't happen overnight... But my theory with petroleum is that it has so many HUGE economies of scale built into its production that a demand collapse will send it into a rapid tailspin. A small version of this happened in the Dakotas when the Saudis started dumping oil to get it under…

Anyone intentionally investing in fossil fuels today is delusional. These companies should have died years ago, but they've managed to delay the inevitable by lobbying to delay action and protect their massive subsidies.

Tesla has shown electric cars can be superior to gas cars in all but one metric (road trips) and they're closing in on that. Wind and solar are now cheaper than coal and in some markets cheaper than natural gas. At peak times electricity from renewables is so cheap its creating a gold rush to develop low cost energy storage to soak up all the dirt cheap electricity that's being produced.

Theres also companies who can produce synthetic liquid fuels with co2 from direct air capture using renewable energy. With a decent carbon tax they could compete directly with fossil fuel companies but eventually renewable energy should be cheap enough that they won't even need a carbon tax.

Fossil fuel companies are as good as dead. They just dont know it yet.

Re: Hertz orders 100k Teslas

#449

Post by dado3212 » Tue, Oct 26, 2021, 5:05 PM UTC

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #303

dado3212 wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the record, their market cap is also greater than "Australia's Woodside Petroleum, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Imperial Oil, Royal Dutch Shell, Shell Energy North America, Canadian Natural Resources, ConocoPhillips and French group Total [combined]" [1], so they're also valued kind of crazy compared to energy companies...and that was in January 2021 before the most recent spike. Sure, part of that is faith in renewable…

I might be a bit crazy, but you just mentioned a slate of companies that absolutely have no future at their current scale. Sure this won't happen overnight... But my theory with petroleum is that it has so many HUGE economies of scale built into its production that a demand collapse will send it into a rapid tailspin. A small version of this happened in the Dakotas when the Saudis started dumping oil to get it under…

I think that’s definitely true for some of these, and I wouldn’t be as surprised by TSLA having a higher market cap then all of these companies. It’s the combined bit that’s weird. I think ExxonMobil would position itself more as an “energy company” than an “oil company” for instance, and I doubt it will just roll over and die.

Re: Hertz orders 100k Teslas

#450

Post by mike_d » Tue, Oct 26, 2021, 5:09 PM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #297

mike_d wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is no longer a personnel need to drive gas-depleted cars to an offsite refueling station Rental car depots have their own on site gas stations. Fuel on return is one of the highest profit margins rental companies have.

This varies. Laws on safely storing fuel frequently mean Hertz doesn't want to take on the risk (a small leak tends to cost millions in fines). Instead they'll pay staff to drive cars to a nearby station, where they'll have a discount.

Above-ground storage tanks for gasoline are quite safe and reliable. The laws aren't that tough, and most of the compliance requirements are satisfied by having double walled tanks. I struggled to find an instance of fines above $50k that didn't also involve gross negligence.

I know it sounds scary, but most of the fire stations, hospitals, business parks, and schools you drive past will have a few hundred gallons of diesel or LNG stored on site for backup generators. Your city or county public works, taxi yards, and larger post offices will have on site fueling. Large construction sites will usually have on site fuel, or a truck that comes every day or two.