Connect with us

Investor's Corner

Tesla Semi-truck: What will be the ROI and is it worth it?

Published

on

Elon Musk’s announcement that a Tesla Semi will be arriving as early as September is the first step to what will eventually be a reinvention of an entire industry. We’ve discussed before what, exactly, that means, but given that the man in charge of the Tesla truck program is Jerome Guillen who has a history with Daimler (specifically Freightliner) and large Class 8 semi-trucks, it’s not hard to see where Tesla plans to go with this. That leaves only the question of how far, literally, they plan to take it. In tractor-trailer operations, there are two basic types of freight moving: short-haul and long-haul.

We’re going to look at each of these types of freight hauling and how the return on investment (ROI) for a battery-electric rig (such as that we expect Tesla to unveil) would be. If there is any. We’ll also consider what type of equipment this might entail, in a broad sense, and how that compares to current paradigms in tractor-trailer freight hauling.

Before we dive into that, a few words on what the trucking industry is like are needed. About 69.5 percent of the freight moved in the United States is moved on a commercial truck. The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) also says that a staggering 92 percent of prepared foods are moved by trucks and 82.7 percent of agricultural products are moved by truck, as are 65 percent of pharmaceuticals. However you measure it, that’s a lot of goods being moved on highways and surface roads nationally.

Currently, the trucking industry is seeing a lot of change, internally, as technology improves the way that freight hauling operates. The Internet and faster communications, for example, has begun to erode the traditional consignee-broker-hauler paradigm in which someone with goods to haul contacted a freight broker who then contracted a freight hauler to move the goods, skimming a percentage off the top for the connection. The middleman is often cut out in today’s trucking, with many trucking companies having load brokers on staff.

Electronics and global positioning have also changed how trucks operate, with computers more efficiently organizing load and truck movements to minimize empty movement. The USDOT says that about 29 percent of all truck movement is pulling an empty trailer to or from a freight drop-off point, costing about $30 billion annually. That number, while high, has been dropping for some time and drops exponentially as networks of computers get more efficient at organizing trucking and trucking companies consolidate into larger and larger fleets.

Advertisement

Finally, we should note that the longer the average trip (load to delivery) is for a tractor-trailer, the faster the truck’s ROI for the owner. Shorter hauls have higher per-mile maintenance costs than do longer hauls. Even discounting the cost of fuel, that becomes true as equipment maintenance costs beyond engine and fuel are still higher with shorter distances. There are several reasons for this, including how often brakes are used, how much time is spent not working (idling or sitting), and higher incidences of accidents. To name a few. Many short-haul operations are undertaken on less than ideal roads and in areas where any kind of breakdown, including a flat tire, can mean hours wasted waiting for repair.

Knowing those things, we can look at potential ROI for both short-haul and long-haul Tesla electric semi-trucks.

Short Haul

Conventionally, short-haul operations are defined as being tractor-trailer shipments moving 250 miles or less and long-haul is defined as being those same types of shipments moving more than 250 miles. Each of these has sub-categories, of course, but in the main, those are the two major markets for large Class 8 semi-trucks pulling freight. It should be noted that the overlap between short-haul and long-haul is large, as many short-haul shipments are being carried to a distribution location where it’s reassembled for longer distance hauling.

Of the two operations, short-haul has the most diversity in terms of machines used and types of freight carried. It’s in this category that we find items as aggregate as grain freshly harvested from fields to stones to specialized equipment being carried. Sometimes by the same truck and driver over the course of a year’s work. It’s also in this category that we find specialized rigs meant for entering pit mines, climbing steep grades on primitive dirt roads, moving overweight and outsized items, and so forth. For the most part, trucks in this category are “day cabs” meaning they have no sleeper unit attached for the driver to use as a rest quarters when not at the wheel.

So far, the electrified Class 8 vehicles we’ve seen actually enter the market have nearly all fallen into the short-haul category. These have included battery-electric, hydrogen fuel cell, and hybrid units working as “yard dogs” moving trailers around a dock area, as portage trucks moving containers and freight out of port to staging areas or local distribution centers, and local area urban and suburban delivery vehicles. Currently, there is a large push in California to make all port vehicles (including container-moving trucks) as zero-emissions as possible.

Advertisement

The good news for battery-electric truck makers and those who aspire to become them is that, according to the USDOT, about half of all of the shipments (by value) is moved less than 250 miles. That accounts for about 80 percent of the weight being moved around the country. The bad news is that in this segment, less is paid per ton for that freight to be moved and, according to the American Transportation Research Institute, this segment only accounts for about 25 percent of the trucks on the road. Equipment age also tends to be higher in this category, with trucks being used for more years (and generally fewer miles) than compared to long-haul trucks.

Nikola One all-electric Semi truck

In terms of cost, outside of maintenance, the most expensive items for a tractor-trailer, whether short- or long-haul, are fuel (38 percent), driver wages and benefits (34 percent), and truck-trailer lease payments and insurance (14 percent). These costs are about the same no matter what the truck is used for in most conventional operations, short-haul or long. Maintenance is about six percent higher in short-haul operations when compared to long-haul and insurance is usually a bit higher(1.5 percent), but not by so much that it can’t be averaged between them without skewing the numbers.

We can safely assume that a battery-electric semi-truck will have a higher price tag than its diesel-powered counterpart, which itself averages about $150,000 new. How much larger the electric truck would be is mostly conjecture, but we can probably be considered conservative to say it’s up-front costs will be at least 50 percent higher ($225,000) due to the expense of the batteries. Morgan Stanley’s report on electric and autonomous trucking assumed $75,000 for 500 kWh of battery storage, translating to roughly 150 or so miles of range in a fully loaded (80,000 pound) semi-truck. Given the current lithium crunch and the likelihood that economies of scale will take a lot of time to come to fruition, it’s easy to predict that more than half the Tesla Semi’s cost would be in batteries should it aim for a 250-mile range.

Over time, of course, that larger up-front price tag would be returned with fuel savings. In short-haul operations, about four years (250,000 miles) would be required to pay off $100,000 in battery premium with fuel savings. There are, however, other costs that would rise with the higher price of the rig. A higher-priced rig will have higher lease payments and higher insurance costs for replacement. This would stretch the ROI of the short-haul truck, by roughly another year, making it a five year investment return. If the truck stays in operation for the typical usage cycle in this segment, however, that would mean the truck pays for itself in about two thirds (70 percent) of its intended lifespan. Some percentage of the maintenance would also be lower in cost due to the nature of the electric truck, but much of it (tires, drivetrain, brakes, etc.) remains stagnant, further whittling at that ROI timeframe.

By and large, most forward-thinking fleet managers would jump at that. With one point of caution: by nature of their business and the long timeframes involved, most fleet managers are averse to change on a large scale. A few EV trucks here and there to prove out the technology and make the suits and ties happy are one thing. Jumping whole hog into the change is quite another. It would take some time (likely years) for fleet managers of short-haul fleets to decide that battery-electric trucks (or any type of unconventional powertrain) is a healthy decision. That, more than anything, will be the major delay towards adoption of something like a Tesla Semi.

Long-Haul Operations

Assuming that a Tesla Semi could be capable of hauling freight for 500-1,000 miles on a charge (the average long-haul trip is 600 miles per day), it would jump into a segment of trucking that accounts for more ton-miles than any other type of freight movement and that is growing faster than any other segment of commercial transportation in terms of both value and weight being moved. Further, the average turnover for a tractor in the long-haul business is 6.6 years (ATRI numbers) and the average mileage is over 110,000 miles per year per truck. ROI is typically faster as well, given the lower costs versus the miles driven.

Advertisement

Coming up with an ROI for a long-haul electric semi-truck is much trickier here and may be nearly impossible without knowing more about the EV truck to be used. At this stage, a battery-electric Tesla Semi would be nearly impossible for long-haul given the size and thus weight of the batteries required. So something involving very fast charging, battery swapping, or similar would be required. That adds costs to the equation that we cannot easily quantify without knowing what those logistics are.

What we can easily project is that the cost-benefit for a Tesla Semi in a long-haul scenario would not likely be nearly as compelling as it is for a short-haul fleet manager. A typical over-the-road truck sees about a million miles during its lifespan with a cost of about $400,000 in fuel and $100,000 in maintenance (ATRI) during that time. Most fleets own the truck for about seventy percent that time (700,000 miles), on average. So the cost of a truck, in terms of purchase price, fuel, and maintenance over its expected fleet lifespan is about half a million dollars ($280,000 fuel + $70,000 maintenance + $150,000 purchase = $500,000). This might begin to look very close to break even on a higher-priced EV truck by comparison, which would very likely save on fuel but would have higher up-front costs in balance. Further, those fuel savings might not be as good given the likelihood that logistics like battery swapping or more frequent stops for plugging in would be required.

Conclusion

A Tesla Semi would likely have a good return on investment for any fleet manager who is willing to look over the long-term and consider the cost-benefit. For the short-haul manager, however, the potential ROI is far more provocative than it would be for the long-haul manager. We can see a clear business case for a Tesla Semi for a large proportion of the short-haul industry, though we do caution that it will likely take some time for those in the industry to cast anything but a dubious eye towards an unconventional powertrain.

Aaron Turpen is a freelance writer based in Wyoming, USA. He writes about a large number of subjects, many of which are in the transportation and automotive arenas. Aaron is a recognized automotive journalist, with a background in commercial trucking and automotive repair. He is a member of the Rocky Mountain Automotive Press (RMAP) and Aaron’s work has appeared on many websites, in print, and on local and national radio broadcasts including NPR’s All Things Considered and on Carfax.com.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey endorses Elon Musk Tesla pay package

Dorsey framed the pay package as an engineering and governance crossroads for Tesla.

Published

on

Twitter co-founder and Square CEO Jack Dorsey has publicly backed Elon Musk’s leadership ahead of Tesla’s pivotal shareholder vote, which is expected to be decided later today at the company’s 2025 annual meeting. 

Dorsey framed the pay package as an engineering and governance crossroads for Tesla.

Dorsey’s public nod framed as an engineering defense of Musk

In a post on X, Dorsey weighed in on Tesla’s post about being in a “critical inflection point.” As per the Twitter-co-founder, the vote on Musk’s 2025 performance award is not about compensation. Instead, it’s about ensuring the path for the company’s engineering in the coming years. 

“This is not about compensation. it’s about ensuring a principled (and exciting!) engineering approach to the company’s future,” Dorsey wrote on his post, later stating that users of Cash app with TSLA shares would be able to vote for the CEO’s proposed 2025 performance award. 

Elon Musk appreciated Dorsey’s endorsement, responding to the Twitter co-founder’s post with a heart emoji. Musk has been pretty thankful for the support for is fellow tech executives, also thanking Michael Dell recently, who also advocated for its proposed 2025 performance award.

Advertisement

Musk’s support

While Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award has received opposition from proxy advisors such as Glass Lewis and ISS, it has received quite a lot of support from longtime bulls such as ARK Invest, and, more recently, Schwab Asset Management following calls from TSLA retail shareholders. 

“Schwab Asset Management’s approach to voting on proxy matters is thorough and deliberate. We utilize a structured process that focuses on protecting and promoting shareholder value. We apply our own internal guidelines and do not rely on recommendations from Glass Lewis or ISS. In accordance with this process, Schwab Asset Management intends to vote in favor of the 2025 CEO performance award proposal. We firmly believe that supporting this proposal aligns both management and shareholder interests, ensuring the best outcome for all parties involved,” Charles Schwab told Teslarati.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla Robotaxi and autonomy dreams lean on shareholders: Wedbush

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Europe & Middle East/X

Tesla’s dreams of developing a Robotaxi suite that utilizes a fully autonomous platform developed by the company’s top-tier talent now lean on shareholders and perhaps the most crucial vote in its history.

That’s what Dan Ives of Wedbush said in a new note to investors on Wednesday. As the Annual Shareholders’ Meeting is now just one day away, investors are down to their final chance to vote for or against Elon Musk’s new compensation plan.

Ives wrote that, while the company has made its intentions clear, wanting to maintain Musk, pay him accordingly, and give him the voting power he has long wanted, ultimately, the responsibility falls on investors.

As many retail shareholders have pushed for people to vote for Musk’s compensation package, there are a handful of large-scale funds and firms that have decided to go in another direction. Bullish Wall Street firms, Wedbush being one of them, believe it is crucial for Tesla to maintain Musk.

The vote could have major implications on whether Tesla launches an autonomous Robotaxi suite in the near future, Ives says:

“Getting Musk’s pay package approved tomorrow at the highly anticipated meeting will be a big step towards advancing Tesla’s future goals with the autonomous and Robotaxi roadmap ahead.”

While some investors are convinced the company is ready to go in a different direction simply based on Musk’s political involvement over the past year, many investors are under the impression that the development of Tesla’s autonomy suite, as well as its prowess in the EV sector, would fall if Elon were not at the helm.

Tesla’s Board of Directors has already stated that they have received confirmation that Musk’s political involvement would wind down in a timely manner. Moving forward, his focus will not veer from the mission of any of his companies; at least that’s what can be gathered from some of the Board’s communications over the past month.

Musk’s new compensation package is incentivized by performance metrics and will require him to achieve a handful of lofty tranches. He will not get paid unless he drives shareholder value, which is something many skeptics tend to leave out.

Ives continues:

“This new incentive-driven pay package for Musk would also provide an additional 423 million shares of common stock (~12% of shares), which would increase his ownership of Tesla up to ~25% voting power, which we believe was critical to keep Musk at the helm to lead Tesla through the most critical time in the company’s history. We believe this was the smart move by the Board to lay out these incentives/pay package at this key time as the biggest asset for Tesla is Musk…and with the AI Revolution, this is a crucial time for Tesla ahead with autonomous and robotics front and center.”

Wedbush maintained its Outperform rating and $600 price target on shares.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

UPDATE: Tesla investors push Charles Schwab for Musk comp plan clarification

Published

on

tesla cybertruck elon musk
Tesla CEO Elon Musk unveils futuristic Cybertruck in Los Angeles, Nov. 21, 2019 (Photo: Teslarati)

Update: 4:00 p.m. EDT – Charles Schwab has reached out to TESLARATI with the following statement, clarifying that it plans to vote FOR Musk’s compensation package:

“Schwab Asset Management’s approach to voting on proxy matters is thorough and deliberate. We utilize a structured process that focuses on protecting and promoting shareholder value. We apply our own internal guidelines and do not rely on recommendations from Glass Lewis or ISS. In accordance with this process, Schwab Asset Management intends to vote in favor of the 2025 CEO performance award proposal. We firmly believe that supporting this proposal aligns both management and shareholder interests, ensuring the best outcome for all parties involved.”
There have also been updates to the headline and various paragraphs to reflect this as well as accuracy.

Tesla investors are pushing Charles Schwab for clarification after it was expected to vote against CEO Elon Musk’s pay package.

Several high-profile Tesla influencers are speaking out against Charles Schwab, saying its decision to vote against the plan that would retain Musk as CEO and give him potentially more voting power if he can achieve the tranches set by the company’s Board of Directors.

The Tesla community appeared to see that Schwab is one firm that tends to vote against Musk’s compensation plans, as they also voted against the CEO’s 2018 pay package, which was passed by shareholders but then denied by a Delaware Chancery Court.

Schwab’s move was recognized by investors within the Tesla community and now they are speaking out about it:

At least six of Charles Schwab’s ETFs were expected to vote against Tesla’s Board recommendation to support the compensation plan for Musk. The six ETFs represent around 7 million Tesla $TSLA shares.

Jason DeBolt, an all-in Tesla shareholder, summarized the firm’s decision really well:

As a custodian of ETF shares, your fiduciary duty is to vote in shareholders’ best interests. For a board that has delivered extraordinary returns, voting against their recommendations doesn’t align with retail investors, Tesla employees, or the leadership we invested to support. If Schwab’s proxy voting policies don’t reflect shareholder interests, my followers and I will move our collective tens of millions in $TSLA shares (or possibly hundreds of millions) to a broker that does, via account transfer as soon as this week.”
Tesla shareholders will vote on Musk’s pay package on Thursday at the Annual Shareholders Meeting in Austin, Texas.

It seems more likely than not that it will pass, but investors have made it clear they want a decisive victory, as it could clear the path for any issues with shareholder lawsuits in the future, as it did with Musk’s past pay package.

Continue Reading

Trending