Musk endeavours

[BobbyD]

Fake news, Bobby, there was a tweet about it - it must be true!

But the obverse is on the internet, and thus must also be true... The modern world is so confusing!

Exclusive: Saudi PIF in talks to invest in aspiring Tesla rival Lucid - sources

- https://www.reuters.com/article/us-luci ... SKCN1L40MP

[TUK020]

Come on, this is a reputable financial forum, we should be keeping a balanced perspective here.
What does Mystic Meg say?

[redsturgeon]

Interesting article comparing Musk with Ford.

https://www.theinstitutionalriskanalyst ... of-Failure

John

[odysseus2000]

Interesting article comparing Musk with Ford.

https://www.theinstitutionalriskanalyst ... of-Failure

John

The article tells you more about the author than either Ford, Musk or Edison.

The article makes generalised sweeping statements based on imagination not fact and indicates a lack of understanding of the entrepreneur and of how Tesla is run. To suggest that Musk runs Tesla alone is fanciful, anyone who has listened to the conference calls knows that. The central point that it was not Ford who created Ford but the men around him, misses the point that without Ford there would have been no men around him.

The author further argues that electric propulsion is just a small change in the car and that lithium technology is not green. Electric propulsion and batteries marks a change from an unsustainable and dirty hydrocarbon economy to a sustainable and much cleaner electric economy. Sure one can say one just has a box that moves from a to b, but before that we had horses that moved you from a to b. It is not the move from a to b it is that the technology for the first time allows quick movement from a to b with renewable fuel and no emissions. On top of that we have the move to self driving, let go of a Model T's steering wheel and you wouldn't get around the next bend and we also have the development of the over the air updates to the car. Put all of this together and you have something so far beyond a model T that it is hard to compare the two, one is hard pressed to argue that it is not revolutionary, just as the jet was when it replaced the propellor.

As yet another knock down Tesla piece one has to acknowledge that the author will potentially influence some folk, but I suggest that within a few hours we will all have forgotten about the article just as most have forgotten what Miss Banks had to say, save from violating the general rules of invitation, that what goes on when invited to a house, save for illegal actions, stays in the house and is not used to try and enhance a career.

Regards,

Ps speaking of Tesla with all the negative press over the weekend and yet the share price ends up nearly 1%.

[odysseus2000]

Musk inside the Tesla car factory giving a tour:

https://youtu.be/mr9kK0_7x08

Interesting how it is all put together and the relatively slow speed of the line and component installation.

If they have 4 model 3 lines, producing 5000 per week, that is 1250 cars per line per week, about 178 cars per day per line, then each car on full 24-7 production takes about 7x24/178 = 168/178 ~ 1 hour to make.

Guessing it likely takes about 0.5 hours to weld up the metal, paint and dry, leaving about 0.5 hours to put all the components in, test etc.

Looking at what is shown in this video there will have to be substantial improvements in component design to make installation more capable of automation. As things now are the line production shown looks quite slow to me. Whether this is just the area that safety feel is the least dangerous or the least new and innovative for potential rivals to see might be an explanation, but the stated production figures and what is shown don't stack up to me.

One can also find examples of companies saying they produce cars every few minutes, but its more difficult to find out what the average rate is and the output per line. Ford for example talk about producing 7000 cars every few hours, but don't say from how many lines.

No doubt someone here will know comparative figures and can comment more knowledgeably on what is shown in the video.

Regards,

[redsturgeon]

Interesting video.

I was surprised at how basic the factory looked.

Here for comparison is the Swindon Honda plant where they build the Civic Type R.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dibClbd-Tx0

This line vs the Tesla line looks to me like comparing Waitrose with Aldi.

I was very surprised for example to see the cardboard boxes of parts on the Tesla line. Look at the Honda video, can you see any cardboard boxes anywhere?

The Tesla line just looks cluttered and haphazard whereas the Honda line looks organised and smooth.

I know which line is more likely to be able to produce a quality product with zero faults.

When I buy a car, I want one that will be reliable, I would have real doubts about the latest Tesla model threes built under severe time pressure in a tent in order to meet some arbitrary target promised by an autocratic, micromanaging leader.

When speccing something as complex as a car production line, the engineers know the numbers, they know how far they can push the line, they know the limits for quality vs quantity vs speed. Musk has ridden rough shod over all of that to try to please the market...this is not good practice and will come back to bite him.

I can't see a happy ending for Tesla but I would not go anyway near the share either long or short...I do my gambling on the poker tables...I have better odds that way.

John

[argoal]

Interesting how it is all put together and the relatively slow speed of the line and component installation.

If they have 4 model 3 lines, producing 5000 per week, that is 1250 cars per line per week, about 178 cars per day per line, then each car on full 24-7 production takes about 7x24/178 = 168/178 ~ 1 hour to make.

Guessing it likely takes about 0.5 hours to weld up the metal, paint and dry, leaving about 0.5 hours to put all the components in, test etc.

I think you have a fundemental misunderstanding of how a production line works.

Your assumption is that there is one car on the production line at a time....Hence the eroneous conclusion that a car takes an hour to make.

In practice there will be many cars being built in a serial manner on the line with each car slowly moving forward between workstations each of which completes a small part of the work. Each work station will have a set of tasks that fill a roughly fixed time slot (say 2-3 minutes) before the car moves onto the next work station.

Welding of the body parts will probably be done off line in a separate shop - probably by robots (in a modern plant) - as will some of the sub system assemblies (i.e. electrical wiring systems) or delivered part assembled from a sub contractor.

The production line itself could be anywhere from around 300 to 900 meters in length and a car can take several hours to move from the start of the line to rolling off the end of the line through inspaction.

As redsturgeon said, the line looks relatively undeveloped and haphazard. It takes time to set up efficient supply chains, develop a balanced production line with effective material flows and train workers to the level that is needed to produce cars to modern day standards.

Setting up the line in the time that it has taken Tesla is an incredible achievement but it is not enough to produce top quality cars reliably.

[odysseus2000]

Just watched the Honda video & then re-watched the Tesla video.

Looking at things now the great difference imho between the two factories is that at Honda it is all about bolting together pre-made stuff very much like the early lines of Ford.

At Tesla there is two stage manufacturing going on: One is the line type stuff, the snaking in of components that was mentioned etc and then (2) there is the assembly of components to make the sub assemblies that later get put into the car. This leads to more movement of stuff & likely gives more flexibility and presumably helps margins by having the stuff made in situ & not paying some one else to make them & then the shipping costs to get the stuff to the factory plus one can more closely do quality control. The downside is the number of people needed & whether that overhead more than cancels out the efficiency gains from buying in components.

On my second viewing I liked the Tesla assembly a lot more than I did on my first viewing. With all those people in situ what one likely wants is minimal turnover to reduce training costs and having the share price widely fluctuate probably does not help staff retention, given they all employees are also share holders, whereas a private Tesla would lead to more confidence in the wealth building of working at Tesla as one would not see the wild fluctuations in the equity.

Regards,

[odysseus2000]

Two other things also caught my attention:

Everything in the Tesla factory, even Elon Musk's tee shirt was branded with Tesla, I didn't see the same branding at Honda Swindon.

Fitting with this was the guy in the Honda video who said he would remove the Honda label from the back of his car. I can't imagine anyone wanting to take the Tesla label off their Tesla.

Regards,

[redsturgeon]

Two other things also caught my attention:

Everything in the Tesla factory, even Elon Musk's tee shirt was branded with Tesla, I didn't see the same branding at Honda Swindon.

Fitting with this was the guy in the Honda video who said he would remove the Honda label from the back of his car. I can't imagine anyone wanting to take the Tesla label off their Tesla.

Regards,

I think you are struggling for positives here.

John

[argoal]

Everything in the Tesla factory, even Elon Musk's tee shirt was branded with Tesla, I didn't see the same branding at Honda Swindon.
Regards,

I'm an ex-manufacturing guy (some automotive) and the focus is always be putting effort and money into things that make a difference to the customer.

This boils down to making processes more efficient (reduces cost > allowing a lower price), improving quality and delivering on-time.

Customers don't care about factory branding as they will never see it, so unless you need it to create a sense of team and unity (which I suspect Tesla is striving for) which leads to greater quality etc then it is just waste.

[odysseus2000]

Everything in the Tesla factory, even Elon Musk's tee shirt was branded with Tesla, I didn't see the same branding at Honda Swindon.
Regards,

I'm an ex-manufacturing guy (some automotive) and the focus is always be putting effort and money into things that make a difference to the customer.

This boils down to making processes more efficient (reduces cost > allowing a lower price), improving quality and delivering on-time.

Customers don't care about factory branding as they will never see it, so unless you need it to create a sense of team and unity (which I suspect Tesla is striving for) which leads to greater quality etc then it is just waste.

I suspect the effort here is to reduce staff turn over as much as possible to reduce training costs. With 10,000 people the training bill for say 10% change in workers per year will be substantial.

If by branding, stock options etc, the staff turn over can be kept low, the training overhead can also be kept low.

Regards,

[redsturgeon]

When it comes to building teams to manufacture cars as efficiently as possible then the Japanese take some beating.

Strangely I have only ever owned one Japanese car, a Honda Civic Type R. It was phenomenal to drive but completely and utterly reliable to the point of being boring...it never missed a beat. My wife owned a Lexus which was the same, five years of ownership and not one single thing went wrong or dropped off. I owned many Japanese motorcycles and they were the same, the build quality was superb.

I have great admiration for Musk about many things but I remain sceptical about the stretch from building remarkable and expensive cars at a premium to building a mass market car that can compete on level terms with the likes of Toyota, VW etc. We shall see...

John

[argoal]

I suspect the effort here is to reduce staff turn over as much as possible to reduce training costs. With 10,000 people the training bill for say 10% change in workers per year will be substantial.

If by branding, stock options etc, the staff turn over can be kept low, the training overhead can also be kept low.

Regards,

Agreed.

There are good reasons why the branding makes sense at Tesla but it illustrates part of the reason why it is costly to set up an new production facility from scratch. There are many costs that will have been eliminated in the Honda plant because they are unnecessary.

[odysseus2000]

This is also an interesting video, that was recorded before the factory tour. Interesting how the interviewer and the film crew
were all wanting Tesla and presumably able to afford them although doing a job that does not look greatly taxing or greatly lucrative, but
presumably advertising still commands a lot of cash.

https://youtu.be/MevKTPN4ozw

Regards,

[odysseus2000]

A case against taking Tesla private:

https://ark-invest.com/research/tesla-private

Regards,

[odysseus2000]

Musk said to have changed his mind.

Does this mean he really has had a change of heart or could he not raise the money?

Interesting either way and over two days for the lovers and haters to ready their trading plans.

Could be a volatile start to the next trading session.

One commentary article here:

https://trib.al/Zfdke5N

Regards,

[odysseus2000]

Musk Tesla blog post:

https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/blog/stayin ... edirect=no

Regards,

[Itsallaguess]

Musk said to have changed his mind.

Does this mean he really has had a change of heart or could he not raise the money?

Either way, it highlights a severe lack of judgement to have gone public with the idea and then have to walk back -

Tesla chief executive Elon Musk says he will no longer be taking the electric car maker private, just two weeks after saying he was considering a deal.

The plan was cancelled after a board meeting on Thursday, he wrote in a post published on the company's site.

Since Mr Musk announced his plan to delist Tesla, its share price has dropped by 20%.

He said he had told the board "that I believe the better path is for Tesla to remain public," and that they agreed.

Mr Musk, who owns about a fifth of the company, said he had spoken with shareholders and major banks to consider the privatisation but found the sentiment was "please don't do this".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45306117

Maybe his telephone wasn't working when he wanted to have those discussions before declaring his privatisation plans....

Oh well - one thing's for sure, there's be another high-profile Musk-related issue along soon enough.

The guy might have a brilliant mind, but he's also got a very accident-prone sense of judgement, it seems....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[BobbyD]

You can see the fanpersons wanting to protect Musk by taking him out of the public light, but why on earth did he think institutional investors would want to see their investment made illiquid and the scrutiny on a frankly erratic Musk reduced?

An SEC investigation, several lawsuits to defend, and a further decrease in reputation in return for absolutely no gain...