To The Moon

If there is more news about the Joint Venture for Terafab (possibly a new company to run it with Outside capital to help fund it), I’d be very bullish. SpaceX and Tesla both stand to make massive savings on chips if this works, but need partners to pull it off.

However, S&P has a discretionary rule: the Index Committee can add an acquirer of an S&P constituent in a stock deal even if eligibility isn't fully met, to cut turnover and maintain representativeness. This might be invoked if $SPCX was to take over $TSLA, for example.

So, another over-the-air update? If it's Reuters you can be sure that they would omit a detail like that.

Well Q1 deliveries shouldn't really be compared to prior quarters, since the automotive industry is highly cyclical and Q1 is always the lowest quarter. It is up on 2025 Q1 however. As far as Tesla capex splurge, there are good reasons for doing this now, not least the 100% depreciation in year 1. So I'm not really overly concerned about that decision. As to revenue, we are on the cusp of Cybercab rollout, and Robotaxis hold the promise of far eclipsing automotive revenue in the relatively near future, let alone the growth of Tesla Energy, because all those new Datacentres are going to need heaps of BESS to be able to guarantee that their ravenous energy requirements are not going to negatively affect their local grid.

TeslaBoomerMama and Pejjy had a great discussion on YouTube discussing this scenario. Bottom line was that it's better for $Tsla shareholders to hold off selling their shares to participate in the IPO. The most likely scenario is that SpaceX IPOs around June 9th and bids for $TSLA much sooner thereafter than most people are thinking, the reason being to protect $Tsla from a possible hostile takeover. Existing Tesla shareholders would likely benefit from a takeover premium of between 20-40% (if they continue to hold $Tsla stock), whereas SpaceX shareholders would face dilution on a bid for $tsla.

Oops, sorry ... I started reading this as if it was serious then noticed it was from Reuters sooo...

Hmm. Have to be careful when looking at Tesla's China sales. Remember that Shanghai is Tesla's export hub, serving Japan, Korea, Australia, NZ and now Canada and possibly some others. It can be misleading to look at China registrations for a particular month since for some months most of Shanghai's output is shipped off to other countries.

I believe the market is right to worry about AI disrupting software companies. One only has to glance at "Macrohard", Musk's not so subtly named vehicle to attack Microsoft as a case in point. Clearly Musk believes that AI will inevitably disrupt the software space and is positioning his AI efforts to be part of that disruption.

Hmm, I can't help wondering whether Elon Musk's lawsuit against OpenAI is queering the pitch for this investment. Should Musk prevail, this would hit OpenAI and Microsoft badly and investing in XAI might be a better bet for Nvidia.

No, this is not the reason that Tesla is "pivoting away from EVs". Chinese automakers are struggling because their business model is to sell low-priced EVs at low margin at volume, because they can't compete with Tesla up market. Tesla continues to make decent margins at these elevated price points. The reason Tesla is not so concerned about EVs is because it has other juicy alternatives to extract higher margins from the batteries it consumes to make its products. For example, the Energy business makes much higher margins than the auto business. The Robotaxi business, though still nascent, will attract SAAS margins, of the order of 80%, which compared to the ~16% margins on autos makes the pivot somewhat of a no-brainer.