Tesla’s shares stumbled in premarket trading after the company’s long-awaited robotaxi event in Burbank, California. The event showcased the robotaxi Cybercab, the futuristic-looking Robovan concept, and the latest version of the humanoid robot, Optimus.

Just hours after the event, some top Wall Street analysts began weighing in, praising the impressive lineup of new innovative products that will revolutionize transportation and other areas of the economy but noting a lack of technical details. 

Robotaxi details pic.twitter.com/AVSoysc6pS

— Tesla (@Tesla) October 11, 2024

Robovan details pic.twitter.com/Pdito0dfRq

— Tesla (@Tesla) October 11, 2024

Optimus is your personal R2D2 / C3PO, but better

It will also transform physical labor in industrial settings pic.twitter.com/iCET3a9pd8

— Tesla (@Tesla) October 11, 2024

A team of Goldman analysts led by Mark Delaney and Will Bryant attended the robotaxi Cybercab.

The analysts said Tesla “demonstrated very strong progress with the Optimus humanoid robot, and we think the Cybercab looked attractive,” but noted, “the lack of data shared on Full Self Driving (FSD) performance, relatively limited details on the robotaxi business plan, and absence of a lower-cost consumer vehicle unveil may be disappointing for some market participants.” 

Here are more of their thoughts about Cybercab and Optimus:

Cybercab

Tesla unveiled a two-seat Cybercab vehicle without a steering wheel or pedals/controls, and with winged doors. The company also showcased a Robovan that can carry up to 20 people or could transport goods. Tesla expects to start unsupervised FSD robotaxi operations in Texas and California next year with its currently available models (e.g. 3 and Y) and be in production with the Cybercab in 2026/before 2027 (although the company noted that it tends to be optimistic with timelines).

Given that vehicles are only typically used for several hours per week, Tesla believes that autonomous vehicles can offer 5X or even 10X higher utilization. Importantly on costs, Tesla believes the average operating cost of its Cybercab over time will be ~$0.20 per mile and may be priced at ~$0.30-$0.40 per mile including taxes and other costs. Tesla expects the Cybercab to cost ~$30K or less. Tesla also commented that it plans to over-spec the computer for the Cybercab (AI 5 computer) as the company believes that distributed inference compute can be utilized when the vehicle is not in use. Additionally, the robotaxi will use inductive charging, and Tesla indicated there would be self-cleaning capabilities. Finally, Tesla said one business model could be a person owning a small fleet that they put onto the network. Tesla did not provide other details on its business plan (e.g. scope of the initial deployments, pricing to start, if Tesla will own the early fleet, remote assistance, etc).

The timelines for AV deployment (next year with 3/Y in Texas and California) and with Cybercab (in 2026/by 2027) and lack of incremental FSD performance data will likely leave the debate on how close Tesla is to unsupervised FSD (L4) unresolved.

As we have previously written in our report, “Can new AI technology help accelerate AV deployments? Updating our global ADAS and AV forecast” we believe there is a material long-term revenue opportunity from robotaxis. However, revenues from initial smaller scale deployments would likely be more limited, as we show in Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2.

We also provide an illustrative cost model for an owned and operated fleet of robotaxis in Exhibit 3. At scale, we believe that Tesla could benefit from lower per mile costs for its vehicle depreciation (e.g. if Tesla can produce a robotaxi at $30k vs a competitor robotaxi at $50k-$75k, at 100k miles per year and a three year useful life, Tesla would have depreciation costs of $0.10/mi vs a standard robotaxi at $0.15-$0.25/mi). This is driven by the volume leverage Tesla already has making cars (with each vehicle already equipped with inference silicon), and its more narrow sensor stack (e.g. no lidar). Tesla said the cybercab will use vision and AI, implying that it may not use radar (and how it would handle operating in certain weather/lighting conditions without a secondary sensor type is something that may remain a debate).

Optimus

The progress with Optimus was impressive in our view especially given where Tesla was just a few years ago. The robots were very life like in several of the movements, and interacted via voice with attendees, danced, and gave out snacks. We had an impromptu conversation with one of the robots which asked us if we’d checked out the snack bar, and when we asked what it would suggest to eat, it said to ask its friend that was actually giving out snacks (which we found to be relatively human like). We expect Optiumus to be a growing part of the Tesla story.

The TAM for higher-end humanoid robots could be >$10 bn in 2030 per research from a report led by our colleague Jacqueline Du. Recall that on its 2Q24 earnings call, Tesla stated that it expects to have limited production of Optimus Version 1 starting early next year for internal Tesla use (and expects to have several thousand produced and deployed by the end of next year), and expects to ramp production and provide Optimus Version 2 to external customers in 2026.

The analysts are “Neutral-rated” on TSLA shares and believe “that Tesla can grow longer term including with FSD.” However, they noted that “headwinds in the auto business” will limit EPS growth in the near term. Their TSLA 12-month price target is $230, based on 65X applied to our Q5-Q8E EPS estimate, including SBC. 

Separately, other Wall Street analysts published notes to clients after the event, with many also detailing how Elon Musk and Tesla were light on details (list courtesy of Bloomberg):

Barclays analyst Dan Levy (equal weight, PT $220)

• Tesla’s Cybercab demo was similar to prior sketches, but “the event was light on the details”
• “Consumers able to buy Cybercab, but Tesla also likely planning to operate fleet,” Levy said
• The near-term stock reaction is likely to be sell the news, “as the focus now shifts back to fundamentals – which has been neutral at best”

Baird analyst Ben Kallo (outperform, $280)

• The company did not unveil a lower-cost vehicle which can be manufactured on existing factory lines.
• Investor attention will now shift to auto margins in the near term as the company reports 3Q results on Wednesday

Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Steve Man

• “Tesla will likely need to add steering wheels and pedals to scale its robotaxi production by 2026”
• However, the robotaxi announcement provides a better visibility of the company’s capabilities in affordable cars and autonomy

Citi analyst Ronald Josey

• Tesla’s event clarified the company’s vision and timeline for its robotaxi — leading us to be “incrementally positive on Uber shares as a result”
• “Importantly, details regarding distribution or a potential ride-hailing app for the Cybercab were limited, which leads us to believe it’s still possible that Tesla could partner with Uber for distribution in the future”

Jefferies analyst John Colantuoni

• Tesla’s event is a best-case outcome for Uber as the automaker did not provide verifiable evidence of progress in its self driving technology and it also did not outline the number of robotaxis planned

Morgan Stanley analyst Brian Nowak

• Tesla’s $0.20 cost per mile estimate is in line with expectations, confirming its cost advantage
• “This speaks to TSLA’s current theoretical cost advantage over Uber’s current cars and Waymo”

The market reaction to Thursday’s Tesla event this AM in premarket trading in NYC is simply underwhelming. Shares are down 6%. For the past two years, shares have traded sideways, facing resistance above $250. 

Nancy Tengler, the chief executive officer of Laffer Tengler Investments and a Tesla investor who attended the event, told Bloomberg that the only specifics Tesla gave were the $30,000 price tag for Cybercab. 

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

Remember the last time the globalists took the mask off?  It wasn’t that long ago, but some people might have already forgotten how the western world almost lost all individual freedom under the guise of an over-hyped health emergency.  When globalists are honest about what they truly want, it usually coincides with an engineered calamity.

In the two years since the failure of the covid pandemic narrative I have argued that globalist organizations are trying to regroup under a new plan. The evidence suggests that these people suffered a shocking revelation after their attempt to implement perpetual medical tyranny. They’ve realized they don’t have as much control over the flow of information and public discourse as they originally assumed.

Even with full-spectrum censorship using algorithms to bury contrary data, even with the full force of the government partnering with social media to silence dissent, even with the threat of economic exile for anyone refusing to take a steady series of mRNA jabs, they still failed. The truth about covid’s minimal Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) still spread, along with data proving the uselessness of the mandates and lockdowns.  There was nothing they could do about it.

Their golden ticket to total control was pushing the vaccine passport concept; the alternative media crushed that agenda like a pestilent cockroach. If the passport had been successful we would not be having this conversation now. Everyone would be in fear of having their passport rescinded. Everyone would be afraid to lose their economic access for saying the wrong thing. Everyone would be afraid of being forced into covid camps (which were indeed a real agenda). Or, we would be in the middle of a bloody civil war.

The events of 2020 were meant to initiate the ultimate coup against humanity. The globalists admitted to their plans over and over again. Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum proudly declared covid the catalyst for the “Great Reset” and the “Fourth Industrial Revolution.” They asserted that the lockdowns were just the beginning and that the sweeping restriction on our freedoms would be extended to climate change as well.

They thought they had won without firing a shot, but it’s not that easy. Far more people are awake and aware of their motives than they realized, and, at least in America, over 50 million of those people are armed.  The lockdowns are now gone, almost no one took the vax boosters, far fewer people took the vaccine than the CDC claims, and the vax passports were defeated. This victory was made possible due to the efforts of alternative media platforms circumventing Big Tech censorship. It’s that simple.

This is why the next event will probably be far worse in scale and consequence, and the globalists are already attempting to rectify their previous mistake of underestimating citizen journalism. They will try to silence us if they can and they are openly admitting to it in recent conferences and mainstream articles.  The mask is coming off once more and this suggests to me that something very bad is about to happen.

As I noted in 2023 in my article ‘From Covid To Climate Change: Vehicles For Global Authoritarianism’, the globalists seem to have shifted their more tyrannical efforts away from the pandemic and into the climate discourse. If you really want to know what they are up to these days, you have to watch the climate conferences.

At the end of September there was a host of climate change summits including one held by the WEF in New York called the Sustainable Development Impact Meeting.  It was held by the WEF in tandem with the United Nations General Assembly. Not surprisingly, discussion often veered away from climate into “threats to democracy” as well as bitter complaints about the “spread of disinformation.”

John Kerry, former Democratic presidential candidate, former Climate Czar under Joe Biden and a longtime participant in the WEF, said the quiet part out loud at the summit. He argued that the 1st Amendment was a “roadblock” to proper governance and was preventing the elites from controlling public consensus.

His statements are quite blatant.

First of all, consensus is highly overrated and often poisonous. The very basis of science is that it is always up for debate according to the evidence. Once you have forced a “consensus” you have abandoned all due diligence under the scientific method.

This was made obvious during covid, where the “consensus” was exposed as utterly fabricated and most of the claims made by governments and puppet “medical experts” have been proven false. Keep in mind, these were the same people that tried to ban YOU from going to parks and waterboarding at the beach in the name of “flattening the curve.”

I mean, how retarded do you have to be to believe that outdoor activities will lead to viral transmission? That’s not science, that’s hysteria promoted by people claiming to represent science. The same thing goes for the mask mandates, social distancing, the lockdowns, etc. Not one measure they enforced was legitimate.

If we are talking about the concept of man-made climate change, the claim of consensus in science is a lie. The data suggests there is simply no such thing as man-made climate change. There is no evidence of causation between carbon emissions and global warming. No evidence that global warming causes extreme whether. No evidence that our current warming cycle is significant or unique compared to any other warming cycle in history.

In fact, the Washington Post recently and accidentally proved the alternative media’s point on climate change when they tried to map the temperature history of the Earth over 450 million years, only to discover what I have been saying for the longest time – Today’s temps are far lower than they have been through most of the Earth’s history.

But the more important issue here is John Kerry’s assertion that governance requires public information control. Kerry’s fundamental disconnect is his notion that it’s the job of the elites and the government to moderate information for the greater good. No one gave them permission to do this. The government does not exist to create consensus.

The people are in charge, John. As a politician you are just a public servant, nothing more. Your opinions on free speech don’t matter.

Some of the most egregious disinformation is often released to the public by the government and their approved media sources in the name of “saving democracy.” They lie constantly. John Kerry is just angry because now the public has the means to expose him and his cohorts. If a “democracy” requires censorship in order to survive, then it’s not worth saving.

Finally and hypocritically, Kerry suggests that democracy is “too slow” in implementing the changes to society that he views as necessary to create consensus and “unity.” If the 1st Amendment is a “roadblack” to more effective information control and governance, then he and his slimy brethren must intend to remove it. In other words, he believes tyranny would work better because it’s much faster that trying to manipulate the public with propaganda.

He doesn’t explicitly say this, but that’s exactly what he’s inferring.

Besides some of the speeches made by Klaus Schwab at the height of the pandemic, Kerry’s statements might be the most open declaration of globalist authoritarian intent I have ever heard. He’s pulling the mask off and this has me concerned.

His arguments fall in line with a number of articles published in the past couple months from establishment media platforms. The New Yorker just posted an article asking ‘Is It Time To Torch The Constitution?’ The New York Times published a treatise titled ‘The Constitution Is Sacred. Is It Also Dangerous?’ They also wrote an article highlighting the potential positives of despotic governments in countries like Brazil threatening to shut down public access to Elon Musk’s X (Twitter) in order to force the site to censor citizen accounts. These people are on a war path to convince the public that free speech is a threat.

When political elitists and their lackey’s start attacking free speech it’s usually in preparation for a major crisis that they hope to use as a vehicle to eliminate public freedoms. Free speech is the most important liberty because it enables the populace to discern through debate what the truth is and what to do about it.

The globalists thought they had a lock on information during covid and they were wrong. They won’t make the same mistake again. Whatever the next crisis ends up being, they will definitely seek to silence the the alternative media and any rebellious social media platforms before they move forward.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

According to alternative media outlet The Grayzone, the State of Israel has arrested US citizen and Grayzone investigative reporter Jeremy Loffredo just days after he defied censors by posting a report on Iran’s ballistic missile strike, to include documenting the precise location of an apparent impact close to the headquarters of the country’s principal intelligence agency, the Mossad. 

“I’ve just learned that @loffredojeremy was among the journalists arrested by the Israeli military and is still in jail,” said Grayzone founder and editor-in-chief Max Blumenthal via social media. “His phone has been confiscated. That is all I’m able to say for now.” On Wednesday at midday, Grayzone journalist Aaron Maté wrote that Loffredo had already been held for more than 24 hours.

Russian independent journalist Andrey X said he and Loffredo were among five journalists grabbed by Israeli security forces, with all but Loffredo having been released. No details have yet surfaced about where or why they were arrested.   

Today I was beaten, kidnapped, blindfolded and taken to a military base by the Israeli Occupation Forces, together with 4 other journalists.

Two of us were held for 11 hours without charges, my phone was confiscated (stolen), and one of us is still in custody.

Full story soon.

— Andrey X (@the_andrey_x) October 8, 2024

On Oct. 1, Iran unleashed multiple waves of ballistic missiles on Israel in retaliation for Israel’s assassination of Hassan Nasrallah, the secretary-general of the Lebanese political and military organization Hezbollah, and Iranian Revolutionary Guards commander Abbas Nilforoushan, among others. Despite compelling video evidence that many of those missiles found their targets, Israel downplayed the effect of the Iranian strike while simultaneously declaring it illegal to report on where missiles hit. 

Undaunted, Loffredo set out to find missile impact sites, and filed a 6-minute video report to The Grayzone‘s YouTube channel, which has nearly 400,000 followers, and to its Rumble channel. In addition to showing the remains of an Iranian missile near Israel’s Nevatim Airbase in the Negev desert, Loffredo was able to find what is almost certainly a huge missile blast site less than a thousand feet from Mossad headquarters.

“This information is missing from all Israeli media reports, due to the fact it’s been officially censored,” said Loffredo in his report, before showing the precise longitude and latitude of the impact site.  

When it comes to challenging Israeli government narratives, The Grayzone has been among the most intrepid outlets in journalism. It was among the first to report on evidence that many Israeli deaths during the Oct 7, 2023 Hamas invasion of Israel were inflicted by the Israeli Defense Forces. The Grayzone was also quick to credibly challenge near-universally-accepted claims that Hamas militants beheaded babies, burned babies in ovens, cut a fetus from its mother, and engaged in mass rape. On this Oct. 7, the outlet released a 44-minute documentary titled, “Atrocity Inc: How Israel Sells the Destruction of Gaza.”

Loffredo’s previous reporting from Israel included a set of candid and, to some, disturbing interviews with nationalist Israelis who were blocking humanitarian aid for war-ravaged Gaza. While it’s not clear why, it’s currently not possible to link directly to Loffredo’s posts on X/Twitter or to embed them.

Journalism is not a crime.

I will continue to stand strong for press freedom in Russia and worldwide, and stand against all those who seek to attack the press or target journalists.

— President Biden (@POTUS) July 20, 2024

President Biden claims to stand for press freedom around the world. Let’s see if his administration takes a stand against Israel on behalf of this American journalist…or instead shrugs and redistributes a few more billion dollars of American wealth to the perpetrators. In the meantime, watch Loffredo’s last report before he was seized and locked up: 

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

The Swedish government is considering a law change that would ban marriages between cousins, a move primarily aimed at curbing issues such as honor oppression prevalent in migrant communities.

The proposal, which was introduced by government investigators and aligns with policies laid out in the Tidö Agreement, which facilitated the formation of the current government, would also extend to marriages between other close relatives, such as uncles and nieces.

If approved, the ban could come into effect as early as 2026.

Currently, Swedish law prohibits marriages between parents and children or full siblings, though half-siblings can marry with an exemption. Marriages between cousins are still legal, but this may soon change.

A government-appointed inquiry, which began in September last year, now recommends that cousin marriages be banned under the Marriage Code, citing both social and health concerns.

The proposed ban has significant implications for Sweden’s migrant communities, where cousin marriages are far more common. While this is defended as a cultural practice that prioritizes familial ties, government officials argue that such arranged marriages increase the risk of honor oppression, particularly for young women and girls.

By outlawing cousin marriages, they believe they can reduce the likelihood of coercion and other forms of control within family structures.

Preempting a loophole, a key element of the proposal is that cousin marriages performed abroad will also not be recognized in Sweden, regardless of the spouses’ connection to the country. This is intended to prevent couples from bypassing Swedish law by marrying abroad and then returning to Sweden.

“The recognition ban will be general and cover all cousin marriages,” the inquiry’s findings stated, as cited by the SVT broadcaster, reinforcing the aim to counteract honor-based oppression across all backgrounds.

In Norway, a similar law was enacted this past summer, with officials highlighting the increased risk of genetic disorders and health complications caused by inbreeding.

These risks include higher rates of stillbirth and infant mortality.

In addition to the ban on cousin marriages, the inquiry also suggests eliminating the current exemption that allows half-siblings to marry in certain circumstances, thus better protecting vulnerable individuals from coercion.

A final decision on the reforms is expected in the coming months which, if passed, is expected to enter into force in 2026.

Read more here…

Authored by Alan Tonelson via RealityChek,

So much outrage (including from Vice President and Democratic presidential contender Kamala Harris) about the claim in Bob Woodward’s upcoming book that Donald Trump during his presidency sent some test kits to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin at the height of the Covid pandemic when they were scarce in the United States. And about the famed journalist’s report that the former president called Putin seven times since the former left the Oval Office in January, 2021. (See, e.g., here.)

And so little about by far the biggest outrage described in War (if true, of course – as with the above revelations): that President Biden may have pushed the United States, and the world, to within a coin flip of nuclear war in Ukraine.

Think I’m kidding? Here’s the description by CNN – which broke the news about Woodward’s book – his account of a crucial moment in U.S. policy toward Russia’s invasion. It’s worth quoting in full:

By September 2022, US intelligence reports deemed “exquisite” revealed a “deeply unnerving assessment” of Putin — that he was so desperate about battlefield losses that he might use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

“Based on the alarming new intelligence reports, the White House believed there was a 50% chance Russia would use a tactical nuclear weapon — a striking assessment that had skyrocketed up from 5% and then 10%, Woodward reports.

“’On all channels, get on the line with the Russians,’ Biden instructed his national security adviser, Jake Sullivan. ‘Tell them what we will do in response,’ he said, according to Woodward.”

That’s the key phrase: “Tell them what we will do in response.”

It doesn’t necessarily mean that Mr. Biden had decided to use a nuclear weapon against Russia itself, or even against Russian forces inside Ukraine, or was considering such actions. Nor does it necessarily mean that the president had decided to deploy U.S. military forces in Ukraine in response.

But it’s difficult to imagine what else President Biden might have been thinking of that would deter the Russians from a step like tactical nuclear weapons use, or that would have convinced them to abandon this policy after firing one nuclear shot.

And the real outrage here – again, if Woodward has the story right – is that Mr. Biden actually was prepared to run such a catastrophic risk on behalf of a country whose fate Washington had never officially considered to be a remotely vital American security interest even at the height of the Cold War — and still hasn’t.

It’s one thing to threaten nuclear weapons use to protect a country or region that has been deemed a vital interest by U.S. leaders – like Western Europe or Japan. Or to do so when adversaries try to place nuclear weapons close to the American homeland (as was the case with the Soviet Union during the Cuban missile crisis of 1962).

But even to contemplate Armageddon in a situation meeting absolutely none of these characteristics? How can that be viewed as anything but needlessly reckless and even suicidal?

Bob Woodward reports that at one point Biden believed there was a 50% chance of Russia using nukes over Ukraine

He chose to escalate the war anyways and lied to the American people about the risk pic.twitter.com/Ce8IMAST9w

— Saagar Enjeti (@esaagar) October 8, 2024

Keep that in mind the next time you hear that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is too dangerously off his rocker to be fit for the presidency (in particular that his warnings about the current administration bringing World War III closer are nothing more than fear-mongering). And that the aforementioned Kamala Harris, when asked what she would have done differently from Mr. Biden, responded, “Not a thing that comes to mind.”