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.
More money for leases:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/21/tesla-nearly-doubles-its-borrowing-capacity-for-car-leases-to-1-point-1-billion.html
 
More mass firings being reported, same explanation by TSLA.

Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity as employees say they were blindsided

Employee dismissals at Tesla are continuing, according to six former and current employees, and have spread from its motor division to SolarCity offices across the U.S.

Echoing reports from earlier this month, these SolarCity employees say they were surprised to be told they were fired for performance reasons, claiming Tesla had not conducted performance reviews since acquiring the solar energy business. Earlier this month, Tesla began firing hundreds of employees after it announced a recall of 11,000 Model X SUVs.

All the people spoke under condition of anonymity, citing fears of retaliation from Tesla.

Tesla had already announced plans to lay off 205 SolarCity employees at its Roseville, California, office by the end of October this year. However, SolarCity employees across the country have been fired in the last two weeks — not just in California, but also in Nevada, Arizona, Utah and beyond, according to these employees.

Two former employees told CNBC that the Roseville office was being completely shut down. A Tesla spokesperson said the office will remain open with about 50 full-time employees. In March 2015, SolarCity said it employed 450 people at that location and was planning to add 300 more. It is not known whether those new people were ever added.

The total number of dismissals could not be determined. However, former employees estimate around 1,200 people have been fired in the company's wave of dismissals at Tesla including SolarCity. That figure does not include previously announced layoffs.

A spokesperson for Tesla declined to confirm that number...
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/25/tesla-firings-spread-across-solarcity-employees-blindsided.html
 
In some way or another, layoffs/firings among SolarCity employees should have been expected, though my sympathies are with those who now find themselves out of work. From what I can see, SolarCity has been changing for the better as a result of the Tesla merger. They've eliminated door to door sales (and hopefully cold calls), they are promoting solar via Tesla galleries/showrooms and directly encouraging EV+PV+battery adoption, and they are getting good attention from premium products such as solar roofs (late in true Tesla style, but very cool).

Hopefully, Tesla truly has culled their lower performing employees as opposed to indiscriminate firing. Good organizations need to do this. It's impossible to perfectly vet incoming employees. Performance reviews serve as a paper trail, but they don't necessarily tell the full story.
 
edatoakrun and lorenfb are falling down on the job

https://www.thestreet.com/story/14366088/1/tesla-could-be-fresh-out-of-cash-in-as-few-as-4-quarters-ubs-says.html
 
Five Things Wall Street Wants to Know About Tesla’s Model 3

All eyes are on the affordable electric sedan and whether production stumbles will continue.


Tesla Inc. reports third quarter earnings on Wednesday after the market closes. All eyes will be on news of the mass-market Model 3 and the electric car’s slower-than-expected production. What with SpaceX launches, Boring Co. tunnels, and even dark warnings about the threat of artificial intelligence, Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk already has a few irons in the fire.

But Tesla is the center of the Muskian universe, and the second half of 2017 was to be the test of whether he could make enough Model 3s, and make them fast enough, to justify the billions of dollars already spent. So far, things haven’t been going that well.

Wall Street analysts will likely have some questions.

1. What exactly are the “production bottlenecks” and are they primarily at Tesla’s gigafactory?

Tesla reported earlier this month that it had made just 260 Model 3 electric sedans in the third quarter, well below its 1,500-unit forecast, citing unspecified “production bottlenecks.” While much of the speculation has centered on the company’s auto plant in Fremont, Calif., its gargantuan facility in Nevada—where the batteries are made—is also a critical part of the production story. In an August letter to shareholders, Tesla stressed that the Model 3 drive units, as well as battery packs made with new cells, are being built on new manufacturing lines at the Gigafactory outside Reno...

2. How much cash has Tesla spent?

Tesla had roughly $3 billion in cash on hand at the end of the second quarter and tapped the debt markets in August, raising $1.8 billion in its debut bond sale. The company has always expected to spend heavily in the second half of the year on the Model 3 as kinks in the lines are worked out and production accelerates.

“We hope for a more detailed plan for the company’s expected cash burn,” wrote analyst Jeffrey Osborne of Cowen & Co. LLC in an Oct. 19 research note. The company “still has not provided a realistic plan for [capital expenditures] that reflects both the company’s ambitions as well as cash generating ability.”...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-31/five-things-wall-street-wants-to-know-about-tesla-s-model-3

IMO, the first two questions above and their interrelation are far more important than the others that you can see at the link.

TSLA has promised investors ~ a $ billion dollars a month in revenue from model 3 sales by December.

Obviously, the most significant question tomorrow will be how small the fraction of that amount will actually be delivered.

As to question #1 above, if the very detailed report below is correct, It will be very difficult for TSLA to provide answers tomorrow that any investor, supplier, or model 3 reservation holder will want to hear:

Source: Tesla Responsible For Model 3 “Production Hell”


Tesla has been vague about its reasons for missing its first full-quarter Model 3 production goals by more than 80%, blaming “bottlenecks” for the delay and “emphasizing” that “there are no fundamental issues with the Model 3 production or supply chain.” But according to a source familiar with the development and deployment of the Model 3 production system, Tesla’s rushed and disorganized approach made the current “production hell” inevitable.

At the outset of the Model 3 program, Tesla asked a major automated tooling supplier to develop two Body In White (BIW) transfer lines for the Model 3. The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity for both himself and the supplier, says disagreements between Tesla’s designers and engineers resulted in numerous revisions to the scope of the contract and eventually led Tesla to drop the second line from its purchase order (PO).

“Tesla was in disarray when it came to knowing what they wanted,” the source tells Daily Kanban. “Manufacturing engineers were pressuring us to work on a design that was not yet approved.” Turnover in key positions at Tesla contributed to the chaos, as lessons learned during previous work on the joint Model S/X production line were lost with departing employees.

Despite Tesla’s public claims that the Model 3 would be “designed for production,” disagreements between its own designers and engineers contributed to five revisions to the Model 3 line design before a PO was even signed. At least four more revisions came after the PO was signed, forcing Tesla to pay extra for delivery on a compressed timeline. Even with these delays, the supplier was ultimately able to deliver on Tesla’s timeline.

In addition to the compressed deadline and high volume of design revisions, the Model 3 practice diverged from standard industry practice in that it was a so-called “cold build.”...

The “cold build” approach that Tesla took with the Model 3 BIW transfer line skips the supplier testing step, meaning the line was shipped to Fremont for installation at Tesla’s plant without having been validated, the source said.

Because of the compressed timeline and “cold build,” Tesla’s first Model 3 line will likely require more debugging than usual and could even require post-installation modification. That work must all take place at Fremont, requiring Tesla to pay for travel and overtime for the supplier’s highly skilled engineers. That installation and debugging work is ongoing according to the source, who confirms that Tesla has not yet built a Model 3 using the automated tooling....

Work on the the second Model 3 line, which the tooling supplier had originally planned to build and install in the second half of this year, has not yet begun. The supplier has been told that there is not enough room at the Fremont plant to install the second line, which was supposed to double Tesla’s Model 3 production capacity. It is not clear how or when Tesla will find the room for the second line.

Wards Auto has reported that Tesla needs a second body shop, in order to support the production volumes that CEO Elon Musk has forecast. “I understand they’re talking about a second body shop,” a “source in position to know” told Wards, “but I can’t see them reaching 2,500 to 3,000 weekly until the end of next year.”

Tesla has not responded to Daily Kanban’s repeated requests for comment.
https://dailykanban.com/2017/10/source-tesla-responsible-model-3-production-hell

LTLFTcomposite said:
edatoakrun and lorenfb are falling down on the job

Tesla Could Be Fresh Out of Cash Very Soon: UBS
https://www.thestreet.com/story/14366088/1/tesla-could-be-fresh-out-of-cash-in-as-few-as-4-quarters-ubs-says.html
Earlier version of that article had the better headline:

Overly Optimistic Tesla Bulls Are the Dumbest Thing on Wall Street
https://www.thestreet.com/story/14361681/1/overly-optimistic-tesla-bulls-the-dumbest-thing-on-wall-street.html
 
cwerdna said:
hyperionmark said:
And many Tesla bears only look at their car segment and forget this is now a wide base energy company. And even though their car segment is largest it is comforting to know as a shareholder how diversified they are.
As you well know, Tesla sells two expensive vehicles in the luxury price segment and another that's currently barely being produced in the lower end of the luxury segment.

Here's one of the largest automakers in comparison w/a full line of cars from econoboxes to luxury cars to vans and trucks.
http://www.toyota-global.com/company/history_of_toyota/75years/data/conditions/product_lineup/vehicles.html

They produce about and sell about 10 million cars/year in more than 170 regions/countries (http://newsroom.toyota.co.jp/en/corporate/companyinformation/worldwide). In a single week, they produce and sell more cars than Tesla does in a year.

http://www.toyota-global.com/company/history_of_toyota/75years/data/business/index.html has their non-automotive businesses.
hyperion: You should attend Tokyo Motor Show the next time around in 2019 to see how wrong you are about how diversified Tesla is. I just finished my 1st day of TMS 2017 (my 5th year attending). Cars range from small cars and some interesting kei cars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kei_car) all the way to very high end. Very little emphasis was placed on EVs by most of the automakers, assuming they even had an EV. Maybe a major US auto show might be a decent substitute to prove my point.

Remember, BEV sales in the US make up less than 1% of total vehicles sales. And Tesla doesn't have coverage in many leading and growing segments of the US auto market: http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html.

Nissan all the way on the low end sells cars like the Datsun Go. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/auto/story/datsun-launches-the-redi-go-prices-start-at-rs-2-39-lakh/1/685946.html "The redi-Go has been priced at Rs 2.39 lakh(ex-showroom, New Delhi)". If I'm reading that right, that means about 239,000 Rupees or about $3700 USD. On the high end, Nissan goes past $100K (e.g. GT-R).
 
Tesla does have very aggressive goals and Elon Musk is not one to shy away from risk.

The biggest risks for Tesla, in my opinion, would be a stock market collapse and/or an economic downturn. As long as the market is strong and the overall economy is good, I think there will be some patience for Model 3 delays and Tesla will continue to have access to capital.

If the market tanks, I think Tesla will be forced to seek out a large infusion of funds from a cash-rich corporation (recall Tencent's buy of 5% equity in Tesla) or be acquired by another company. TSLA shareholders would suffer, but the brand and the Supercharger network would most likely live on.
 
Many recent reports indicate TSLA has major production problems at BOTH of it's factories, in Fremont and (east of ) Reno.

Panasonic CEO claims pack production automation at the "gigafactory" will begin "soon".

Panasonic says Gigafactory battery output to increase for Tesla's Model 3

TOKYO (Reuters) - Panasonic Corp on Tuesday said output at the $5 billion battery “Gigafactory” it runs with electric vehicle maker Tesla Inc could soon increase as the causes of bottlenecks that have hobbled production are now understood.

Panasonic, the world’s largest automotive lithium-ion battery manufacturer, makes battery cells to which Tesla adds electronics to make battery packs for its cars.

Tesla earlier this month blamed manufacturing bottlenecks for limiting quarterly production of its mass-market Model 3 sedan to 260 vehicles rather than its 1,500 goal.

Panasonic Chief Executive Kazuhiro Tsuga said at an earnings briefing that delays to the automation of the battery pack production line meant some stages had to be completed manually.

“This process (for battery packs) will be soon automated, and then the number of vehicles to be produced will rise sharply,” Tsuga said. He declined to comment to what extent Model 3 production would be behind its targeted schedule...
https://in.reuters.com/article/panasonic-results-tesla/panasonic-says-gigafactory-battery-output-to-increase-for-teslas-model-3-idINKBN1D00WG

But this series of comments from-the-scene seems to claim the problems with the "giga factory" may be intractable, based on poor location and (ironically) the failure to secure a reliable electricity supply.

...I hate to say it because I’m a local (albeit transplanted from the Midwest) but the Gigafactory location decision was poorly made. Reliable power supplied to the factory likely wasn’t a consideration since the early plans were to be off grid, but there’s little excuse for the other location oversights that are now big issues with the physical location. The factory is too far away from where employees live with the nearest city being 20 miles away. The majority of the labor staff making $14 an hour the math doesn’t work for what it costs them in fuel and vehicle maintenance cost to make that 40 mile round trip daily. They should have also known they were building in an area where people didn’t have tech or production backgrounds...

Not that hard to figure out on your own that Northern Nevada doesn’t have production experienced people living in this part of the country where the local economy is based solely on casinos and tourist.

Not that hard to search Reno media and see how often NV Energy has constant power outages affecting thousands of people.

Not that hard to search Reno media and find how often I80 and ISA Parkway between Reno and Fernley gets closed down due to mainly accidents any given day of the year but also weather and fires depending on the time of year...
https://disqus.com/by/endeep/

TSLA and its corporate successors may find that the decisions made in selecting white elephant factory sites based on cheap government subsidized initial costs a very expensive mistake.
 
abasile said:
Tesla does have very aggressive goals and Elon Musk is not one to shy away from risk.

The biggest risks for Tesla, in my opinion, would be a stock market collapse and/or an economic downturn. As long as the market is strong and the overall economy is good, I think there will be some patience for Model 3 delays and Tesla will continue to have access to capital.

If the market tanks, I think Tesla will be forced to seek out a large infusion of funds from a cash-rich corporation (recall Tencent's buy of 5% equity in Tesla) or be acquired by another company. TSLA shareholders would suffer, but the brand and the Supercharger network would most likely live on.

Apple. What else you gonna' do with $200 billion in cash? Assuming someone at Apple still wants to change the world.
 
CNBC just reported 5k per week model 3 production rate pushed forward by three months, to end of Q1 2018.

Tesla earnings focus on Model 3 production ramp, demand: Live blog

Loss is worse than expected, $2.92 a share.
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2017/11/01/tesla-earnings-focus-on-model-3-production-ramp-demand-live-blog/

Letter gives no date for 10k per week model 3 production (formerly claimed by end of 2018) and also admits cutbacks in model S/X production of "about 10%" this quarter.

Most importantly, letter claims TSLA has enough cash to continue operations for ~ five months untill it is selling ~5k model 3's per month.

Letter doesn't say what the plan is if it can't build and sell ~5k model 3's per week by then...


...To date, our primary production constraint has been in the battery module assembly line at Gigafactory 1, where cells are packaged
into modules. Four modules are packaged into an aluminum case to form a Model 3 battery pack. The combined complexity of module
design and its automated manufacturing process has taken this line longer to ramp than expected.,,

While we continue to make significant progress each week in fixing Model 3
bottlenecks, the nature of manufacturing challenges during a ramp such as this
makes it difficult to predict exactly how long it will take for all bottlenecks to be
cleared or when new ones will appear. Based on what we know now, we currently
expect to achieve a production rate of 5,000 Model 3 vehicles per week by late Q1
2018...

...we plan to produce about 10% fewer Model S
and Model X in Q4 compared to Q3 because of the reallocation of some of the manufacturing workforce towards Model 3 production...

Between cash on hand, future cash flows
and available lines of credit, we believe that we are well capitalized to accommodate the revised ramp of Model 3 production to 5,000 per
week.
Upon achieving this production level, we expect to generate significant cash flows from operating activities...
http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ABEA-4CW8X0/5492630722x0x962149/00F6EB90-2695-44E6-8C03-7EC4E06DF840/TSLA_Update_Letter_2017-3Q.pdf
 
Nubo said:
abasile said:
Tesla does have very aggressive goals and Elon Musk is not one to shy away from risk.

The biggest risks for Tesla, in my opinion, would be a stock market collapse and/or an economic downturn. As long as the market is strong and the overall economy is good, I think there will be some patience for Model 3 delays and Tesla will continue to have access to capital.

If the market tanks, I think Tesla will be forced to seek out a large infusion of funds from a cash-rich corporation (recall Tencent's buy of 5% equity in Tesla) or be acquired by another company. TSLA shareholders would suffer, but the brand and the Supercharger network would most likely live on.

Apple. What else you gonna' do with $200 billion in cash? Assuming someone at Apple still wants to change the world.
This is among the biggest risks Tesla shorts face. They are betting that human beings can't solve problems, can't solve them in a given time frame, and that the time frame can't be extended by other human beings who just happen to be good buddies with people at Tesla, drive their cars, and have the means to do practically whatever they want on a whim.
That's a big bet.
 
="abasile"

... As long as the market is strong and the overall economy is good, I think there will be some patience for Model 3 delays and Tesla will continue to have access to capital...
Chauncey Gardiner would approve of those sentiments.

There is no way to know when, or why, investors' obsession with greed will finally catch the whiff of failure and degenerate into a panic.

Considering the overwhelming stench already coming from TESLA though, that occurrence might not be too far in the future...

Tesla's Nightmare Before Christmas

By Liam Denning

It looks like Elon Musk just canceled Thanksgiving and probably Christmas, too -- if you work at Tesla Inc., anyway.The electric-vehicle-cum-battery-cum-solar-equipment company Musk heads reported third-quarter results on Wednesday evening. Tesla missed earnings forecasts by a mile. But that number, never a huge concern, mattered even less this time around. It's cash and cars -- specifically the somewhat more mass-market Model 3 -- that count.First, cash: Having racked up its first quarter of burning through more than $1 billion of cash in the three months ending in June, Tesla topped that with $1.4 billion of negative free cash flow in the third quarter. In the past two quarters, therefore, Tesla has burned through more cash than the previous six combined.More importantly, it has burned through roughly four out of every five of the $3.2 billion dollars it has raised since late March through selling new equity and convertible debt and its debut in the high-yield bond market.

Consequently, debt has soared. Even just using debt with recourse to the company, on a net basis it has almost tripled since the start of the year to $3.36 billion.This would matter less if the primary objective of sucking in most of that external funding -- mass production of the Model 3 -- was fast approaching. Instead, it has receded further...

Musk insists these are all early challenges that will be solved and downplays the short-term shifts in the production schedule as being immaterial to the long-term value of the Model 3 and Tesla overall.But the long term is really just an accumulation of short terms. And with Tesla now burning a billion dollars-plus per quarter, keeping the door open to capital markets and lenders is critical. Confidence about scaling up production of the Model 3 is the key to that door -- and it is slipping badly.
https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2017-11-01/tesla-earnings-the-nightmare-before-christmas
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
Nubo said:
abasile said:
Tesla does have very aggressive goals and Elon Musk is not one to shy away from risk.

The biggest risks for Tesla, in my opinion, would be a stock market collapse and/or an economic downturn. As long as the market is strong and the overall economy is good, I think there will be some patience for Model 3 delays and Tesla will continue to have access to capital.

If the market tanks, I think Tesla will be forced to seek out a large infusion of funds from a cash-rich corporation (recall Tencent's buy of 5% equity in Tesla) or be acquired by another company. TSLA shareholders would suffer, but the brand and the Supercharger network would most likely live on.

Apple. What else you gonna' do with $200 billion in cash? Assuming someone at Apple still wants to change the world.
This is among the biggest risks Tesla shorts face. They are betting that human beings can't solve problems, can't solve them in a given time frame, and that the time frame can't be extended by other human beings who just happen to be good buddies with people at Tesla, drive their cars, and have the means to do practically whatever they want on a whim.
That's a big bet.

Who would really want to buy Tesla, anyway? Basically, all of its technology is widely available and "off-the-shelf". The only real eco-system that's
somewhat of value is the SC system, and that's not all that significant. There's no real barrier to entry to producing a BEV that buying Tesla would 
alleviate. Most importantly why would any company, Apple as an example, want to enter the automotive market where margins are low,
e.g. compared to Apple's existing high gross margin product lines? Tesla's gross margins are now decreasing as exemplified in its Q3 report,
and will continue to decrease.
 
^ That's downright silly to suggest that what they have built up doesn't have tremendous value, or that anyone even with unlimited resources could recreate what they have done in a short period of time. The brand alone is worth billions.
None of which is to say it's necessarily smooth sailing ahead, particularly for investors; quite the opposite I suspect.
Most people are too young to remember the history of Amazon. In 1999 people were saying the same things: losing money, anybody can do this, blah blah blah. It lost about 95% of its valuation in the dot com collapse. An investment at that time would have grown 200x in the 16 years since. Picture Tesla going from 380 to 17 a year from now, then in 2035 being at 4000. Think it can't happen? It has before.
 
lorenfb said:
Nubo said:
Apple. What else you gonna' do with $200 billion in cash? Assuming someone at Apple still wants to change the world.
Who would really want to buy Tesla, anyway? Basically, all of its technology is widely available and "off-the-shelf". The only real eco-system that's
somewhat of value is the SC system, and that's not all that significant. There's no real barrier to entry to producing a BEV that buying Tesla would 
alleviate. Most importantly why would any company, Apple as an example, want to enter the automotive market where margins are low,
e.g. compared to Apple's existing high gross margin product lines? Tesla's gross margins are now decreasing as exemplified in its Q3 report,
and will continue to decrease.
I agree w/lorenfb's sentiments. Right now, Tesla's market cap is over $50 billion, which is nutty. Their previous 10-Q SEC filing (latest n/a yet) at http://ir.tesla.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1564590-17-15705&CIK=1318605 says
As of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the net book value of our Supercharger network was $236.3 million and $207.2 million, respectively, and as of June 30, 2017, our Supercharger network included 884 locations globally.
Can't see why a company would want to blow over $50 billion in cash or stock or borrowed $ to buy a currently overvalued company that's blowing thru cash like crazy and racking up major losses to boot (somewhere past $3.8 billion in cumulative net loss). AAPL on the other hand reports many billions of $ of positive net income every quarter. We will hear the latest from AAPL on that today.

It's probably less risky for a company to start their own EV program for several billion $, which would still be WAY cheaper than buying TSLA.
 
cwerdna said:
Can't see why a company would want to blow over $50 billion in cash or stock or borrowed $ to buy a currently overvalued company that's blowing thru cash like crazy and racking up major losses to boot (somewhere past $3.8 billion in cumulative net loss).
They wouldn't. But at $20 a share I can easily see them being a buyer. What the actual number is who know, but my guess would be something that would have current shareholders in tears.
cwerdna said:
It's probably less risky for a company to start their own EV program for several billion $, which would still be WAY cheaper than buying TSLA.
Wasn't that project Titan? How did that work out? As much fun as it is to bash the likes of GM, Ford, Nissan or whatever, building all that from the ground up is a daunting task when you consider design, engineering, marketing, compliance, manufacturing, distribution, a nationwide if not worldwide network of sales and service locations (even if you do hate dealers, you need something), and a bunch of other things I'm sure.
 
Back
Top