TSLA corporate outlook

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
lorenfb said:
And where's even an indication that beta tests have completed? Or are deliveries to employees and key investors the beta tests
that will occur in July similar to the Model X "deliveries" in late 2015, i.e. less than a 100?
There's supposedly another big announcement event at the end of the month. You'd think this is when they will release the details about pricing and options. We'll probably know a lot more then. But yeah, I expect the delivery ramp up will be very slow at first, just like the model S and X, effectively making the early customers an extension of the test team :)
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
lorenfb said:
And where's even an indication that beta tests have completed? Or are deliveries to employees and key investors the beta tests
that will occur in July similar to the Model X "deliveries" in late 2015, i.e. less than a 100?
There's supposedly another big announcement event at the end of the month. You'd think this is when they will release the details about pricing and options. We'll probably know a lot more then. But yeah, I expect the delivery ramp up will be very slow at first, just like the model S and X, effectively making the early customers an extension of the test team :)

O.K., Let's wait and see.
 
Via IEVS:
Elon Musk On Tesla Model 3: Release Candidates Currently Being Built, Delivery Process Could Take Just 5 Minutes
http://insideevs.com/elon-musk-tesla-model-3/

Tesla CEO Elon Musk stated on the call that the “beta prototype” Model 3s that were being built starting a few weeks ago are actually referred to as “early release candidate” cars. Musk calls these “early release candidates” because they are essentially being built on production tooling and could almost pass for a production car.

A few other notes on these “release candidate” Model 3s via Electric Musk on Reddit:

  • show car -> alpha -> early release candidate
    “we will be driving it in a week or 2”
    entire car built with production tooling vs beta tooling, so higher precision.
    quality of release candidate way better than for S and X
    body panel gaps much better. . . .
 
Email from TSLA:

Discontinuing Model S 60 and 60D

One year ago, we introduced the Model S 60 kWh battery as a more affordable option to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles. However, most customers ended up buying an equivalent to the Model S 75 kWh. To simplify the ordering process for our customers, we will be removing the 60 kWh option from our lineup.

Customers who still want the opportunity to own a 60 kWh Model S will have until April 16, 2017 to place their order. Any 60 kWh Model S will have the ability to upgrade their battery to 75 kWh via an over the air update.
The "affordable" Tesla, is now only available for $77,800 and up:

https://www.tesla.com/models/design
 
edatoakrun said:
Email from TSLA:

Discontinuing Model S 60 and 60D

One year ago, we introduced the Model S 60 kWh battery as a more affordable option to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles. However, most customers ended up buying an equivalent to the Model S 75 kWh. To simplify the ordering process for our customers, we will be removing the 60 kWh option from our lineup.

Customers who still want the opportunity to own a 60 kWh Model S will have until April 16, 2017 to place their order. Any 60 kWh Model S will have the ability to upgrade their battery to 75 kWh via an over the air update.
The "affordable" Tesla, is now only available for $77,800 and up:

https://www.tesla.com/models/design
Yes, because a considerably more affordable Model 3 is going to be arriving reasonably soon (we hope), presumably with longer range than the S60 and maybe the 60D as well.
 
edatoakrun said:
Email from TSLA:

Discontinuing Model S 60 and 60D

One year ago, we introduced the Model S 60 kWh battery as a more affordable option to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles. However, most customers ended up buying an equivalent to the Model S 75 kWh. To simplify the ordering process for our customers, we will be removing the 60 kWh option from our lineup.

Customers who still want the opportunity to own a 60 kWh Model S will have until April 16, 2017 to place their order. Any 60 kWh Model S will have the ability to upgrade their battery to 75 kWh via an over the air update.
The "affordable" Tesla, is now only available for $77,800 and up:

https://www.tesla.com/models/design
Actually, its looks like it's $75,700 for a 75 kWh RWD including doc and destination fee before tax and $7,500 Federal credit. There is some weird defaulting possibly to an extra cost paint option and interior choices. If you solid black paint and multi-pattern black interior, it should come out to that in the PDF it generates for you when you click Print spec sheet.
 
GRA said:
Yes, because a considerably more affordable Model 3Visit the Model 3 Forum is going to be arriving reasonably soon (we hope)presumably with longer range than the S60 and maybe the 60D as well.

It's (Model 3's range) a simple function of the target price and minimizing the future sales loss to the Model S.
In any case, Tesla's gross profit will decline, i.e. it's all about in what product and volume, the most costly
component (the battery & its capacity) of a vehicle is used relative to the overall product line.
 
This looks like product positioning to me. For a long time Tesla didn't have any "lower" priced offering, so having an entry version of the Model S made sense to access customers at those price points. With the Model 3 coming on line they don't need that any more, and in fact probably want to avoid it, so they can make the Model S the "premium" offering. Also explains why they want to get the S and X to the 2170 cells this year, the last thing they want is to have the $100k+ cars perceived as having older tech than the $40k models. There could be some more shoes to drop on Model S options driving the entry point (and hence margins) a bit higher yet.
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
This looks like product positioning to me. For a long time Tesla didn't have any "lower" priced offering, so having an entry version of the Model S made sense to access customers at those price points. With the Model 3 coming on line they don't need that any more, and in fact probably want to avoid it, so they can make the Model S the "premium" offering. Also explains why they want to get the S and X to the 2170 cells this year, the last thing they want is to have the $100k+ cars perceived as having older tech than the $40k models. There could be some more shoes to drop on Model S options driving the entry point (and hence margins) a bit higher yet.

It's actually simpler than that - Tesla needs a volume vehicle (Model 3) for long term survival!
 
lorenfb said:
It's actually simpler than that - Tesla needs a volume vehicle (Model 3) for long term survival!
Hopefully for their sake they're figuring out how to do that profitably, losing money on each car and making up for it with volume is a flawed strategy :lol:

I'm no expert in such matters, but I think the goal from a marketing perspective is to draw more people into the brand via the lower cost offering, then over time some percentage of those customers aspire to the "luxury" offerings where margins are fatter - you know, impressing people you don't like spending by spending money you don't have. At some point it could even require spinning off separate branding like Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infiniti, but that's a long ways down the road.
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
lorenfb said:
It's actually simpler than that - Tesla needs a volume vehicle (Model 3) for long term survival!
Hopefully for their sake they're figuring out how to do that profitably, losing money on each car and making up for it with volume is a flawed strategy :lol:

I'm no expert in such matters, but I think the goal from a marketing perspective is to draw more people into the brand via the lower cost offering, then over time some percentage of those customers aspire to the "luxury" offerings where margins are fatter - you know, impressing people you don't like spending by spending money you don't have. At some point it could even require spinning off separate branding like Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infiniti, but that's a long ways down the road.

An OEM automotive company with two luxury vehicles (S & X) only and at their present volume, growth rate, and price points
isn't a long term viable business model. Obviously Model 3 needs to be profitable and not just from a gross profit standpoint
like Models S & X. Model 3 needs to "carry" the majority of Tesla's overhead structure long term.
 
Not sure if it is over-exuberance over the better than expected first quarter deliveries (25k between S and X), a short squeeze, or both.
But TSLA is up about $18/share today.
 
Zythryn said:
Not sure if it is over-exuberance over the better than expected first quarter deliveries (25k between S and X), a short squeeze, or both.
But TSLA is up about $18/share today.
As reported below, USA TSLA sales down over 20% from last quarter 2016, to only 10,400 vehicles:

http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

So it would be interesting to see where the majority of those first quarter deliveries went, if and when that is reported.

Meanwhile, the debt market seems to be making a somewhat different assessment of TSLA...

Tesla's New Debt Is A Bunch Of Junk

Tesla raised cash by selling additional shares and a five year bond two weeks ago to help fund its Model 3 production. The largest portion was the bond, which in total raised $709 million when you take into account the underwriter’s fees and the amount used to hedge the potential dilutive impact of the debt being converted to shares. When taking these items into account the 2.375% interest rate balloons to almost 7%, which would put it in non-investment grade or junk category...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2017/03/30/teslas-new-debt-is-a-bunch-of-junk/#6046f09769bb
 
edatoakrun said:
Zythryn said:
Not sure if it is over-exuberance over the better than expected first quarter deliveries (25k between S and X), a short squeeze, or both.
But TSLA is up about $18/share today.
As reported below, USA TSLA sales down over 20% from last quarter 2016, to only 10,400 vehicles:

http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

So it would be interesting to see where the majority of those first quarter deliveries went, if and when that is reported.

...

Seems rather simple to me, and obvious.
IF inside EVs estimate is accurate, the remaining vehicles were sold outside of the U.S.

As for being down over last quarter, I would be shocked if they weren't. EVs, almost universally, are down in the first quarter. End of year sales almost always surge. The Leaf first quarter sales are down 30% over fourth quarter.
 
Zythryn said:
edatoakrun said:
Zythryn said:
Not sure if it is over-exuberance over the better than expected first quarter deliveries (25k between S and X), a short squeeze, or both.
But TSLA is up about $18/share today.
As reported below, USA TSLA sales down over 20% from last quarter 2016, to only 10,400 vehicles:

http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

So it would be interesting to see where the majority of those first quarter deliveries went, if and when that is reported.

...

Seems rather simple to me, and obvious.
IF inside EVs estimate is accurate, the remaining vehicles were sold outside of the U.S...
At risk of asking you to look beyond the obvious, to where you think those deliveries were made?

Due to recent changes in TSLA financial reporting, there is an ongoing discussion of exactly what a Tesla delivery means in those markets where accurate reporting of vehicle sales is largely nonexistent, most significantly China.


Tesla And The One Word That Could Have Added $2.5 Billion To Its Market Cap


Summary

Tesla announced a great deliveries number over the weekend that beat estimates across the board.

However, peculiar wording of the company's press release prompts us to ask questions about "customers" versus "end customers".

We would love to hear a clear answer from the company, and we will remain skeptics until such time as we do...

If the company is changing the way it records this number, it is similar to a revenue recognition alteration that needs to be defined very clearly for shareholders so people don't get the impression that all of these vehicles are on the road and being driven around by Tesla customers when they are possibly sitting on a lot somewhere.

While we are not alleging that this is the case, we do find it more than peculiar that Tesla has changed this language. Again, when securities lawyers and counsel review these documents, there are usually very few changes that are made without good reason. We would be more than interested in hearing the reason, if there is any, for this language change...
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4060175-tesla-one-word-added-2_5-billion-market-cap

Since Tesla's sell in such tiny numbers, quarterly sales reports might of course also be easily manipulated, legitimately(?) with "end customers".

For example, increasing deliveries by a relative handful using corporate incentives or fleet buys would make the discussion above largely irrelevant.

Purely coincidental, I'm sure, that TSLA announced a major capital infusion from Tencent just last week:


Tesla deal boosts Chinese presence in US auto tech


China's Tencent Holdings has bought a 5 percent stake in U.S. electric car maker Tesla for $1.78 billion, the latest investment by a Chinese internet company in the potentially lucrative market for self-driving vehicles and related services.

Tencent's investment, revealed in a U.S. regulatory filing, provides Tesla with a deep-pocketed ally as it prepares to launch its mass-market Model 3. Tesla's shares rose 2.7 percent to $277.45 on Tuesday, closing in on Ford Motor as the second-most-valuable U.S. auto company behind General Motors.

Tencent also could help the U.S. company sell - or even build - cars in China, the world's largest auto market, analysts said...
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/28/messaging-app-parent-tencent-takes-stake-in-tesla.html
 
Your distaste for Tesla really is remarkable.
Tesla has stated they count deliveries when the vehicle is delivered to the customer.

If you constantly are going to mistrust Tesla statements and documents when they show good news, but trust them when they show bad news, well, I can't stop you.

However, I would suggest you are being blinded by your personal distaste for Tesla.
The record of Seeking Alpha is pretty horrid when it comes to Tesla.

I remember years ago, one author there that was very dismissive of Tesla, made a prediction.
He was sure that TSLA stock ($30 at the time) and his pet stock (about $10 at the time) would reverse in a year.

Well, TSLA just crested $300 and his stock made a reverse split of 20-1 then 50-1 and I believe a third time and is currently worth less than a penny.

Make all the unsupported claims you want, I'll continue to sit back and make money of the fools shorting the stock.
 
Why any one would read SA is beyond me. Total and utter Tesla-bashing. And to want Tesla to fail? there are a few idiots out there.

It's all too real for those in the way of Tesla and the coming disruption. Best to be on the right side of history for this one. And if ya can't be on the right side of history, hey, just keep bringing the pitches, 'cause Elon has a pretty good bat.
 
Via IEVS:
Possible Strike Threatens Tesla Model 3 Production
http://insideevs.com/possible-strike-threatens-tesla-model-3-production/

. . . Recently, Tesla acquired Grohman Engineering and then formed Tesla Advanced Automation Germany out of the deal. The plan was to secure an advanced engineering group in order to streamline/speed up the development and production process for the Model 3.

It sounded like an excellent idea, but now there’s trouble brewing.

As Germany’s Welt Am Sonntag reports, a worker strike at Tesla acquired Grohman is a real possibility. The strike could begin as early as this week.

Reasons for the strike include:

  • The 660 Tesla Grohmann employees are paid up to 30% below union rate

    Tesla cancelled all non-Tesla order at Grohman, which is fueling fears over job security

    Grohman’s founder has left the company within reason

Tesla has responded by offering to increase employee pay by some 150 euro per month, but this doesn’t provide wage parity with union rate. The union is asking for a wage increase of closer to 400 euro per month. Tesla is willing to increase compensation further through a TSLA stock program, but this too is being met with criticism from employees. . . .
 
Back
Top