User avatar
EVDRIVER
Moderator
Posts: 6734
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:51 am

Re: TSLA corporate outlook

Thu Dec 05, 2019 5:41 pm

WetEV wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:48 pm
iPlug wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:26 pm
The potential earnings on premium vehicles are much greater here that suggested, look at earnings reports. All the big auto manufacturers depend heavily on the high profit margins of their premium (luxury) brands, which command thousands more per unit than their much more popular lower cost, high revenue/low profit margin models.
So Tesla is going to take all the profitable business away from the big auto manufactures, and the big auto manufactures do not, will not, can not ever, compete with Tesla...

OK. I'm done. In case you run short:

https://www.koolaid.com/


Many are far behind and lack the battery capacity. Look at the new Ford it is battery constrained.

cwerdna
Posts: 10022
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:31 pm
Delivery Date: 28 Jul 2013
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: TSLA corporate outlook

Fri Dec 06, 2019 1:16 am

webb14leafs wrote:
Thu Dec 05, 2019 10:36 am
That's actually not quite true. Tesla is no doubt over-valued, but based on Gross Profit and EBITBA they only need to increase their revenue by about 2.5 times to achieve similar earnings as Ford right now. Goes to show how big their margins are.
...
Studying Tesla really makes you realize how slim the margins are for the Big 3s high volume compact cars and sedans. All of their profit comes from their Trucks and optioned out SUVs. Tesla makes a significant profit on almost all of their cars. How much is arguable, but skeptical experts have estimated that the standard model 3 has about 13% margin. If you assume each added option has anywhere from a 25%-300% margin, it's easy to see why their profits are so big.

Throw in speculation on the big rig, self-driving technology, and solar/energy storage and it's not to hard to say Tesla isn't over-valued at all.
Tesla's "high" "margins" are inflated (as I posted before at viewtopic.php?p=509813#p509813) because they don't include R&D costs as part of cost of automotive revenues/sales. If they did, their margins wouldn't be as hot looking.

I decided to check.

Look at Ford, for example at https://s22.q4cdn.com/857684434/files/d ... Report.pdf (from https://shareholder.ford.com/investors/ ... fault.aspx). On page 120, they have a line item for cost of sales. On page 131 they say "Engineering, research, and development expenses, primarily salaries, materials, and associated costs, are reported in Cost of sales". For GM https://investor.gm.com/static-files/54 ... a9b4d366de from https://investor.gm.com/sec-filings?fie ... ings-table on page 58 says "Research and development expenditures, which are expensed as incurred in Automotive and other cost of sales,".

Tesla's profits are not big. In the time they've begun reporting, including their few net profitable quarters, they've racked up over $6.5 billion in cumulative losses. Per https://ir.tesla.com/node/20246/html page 5, for the 9 months ending Sept 2019, their net income attributable to common stockholders is $967 million. Their total debt is over $12 billion (page 24).

You can see from page 41 of https://ir.tesla.com/node/19496/html#Item_6, for the years they list (2018 to 2014), every single year, they've recorded a net loss ranging from $294 million to almost $2 billion for a given year. Page 62 of https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data ... tx668062_9 has their net losses for 2013 to 2009, ranging from ~$55 million to ~$396 million. They have yet to report a single net profitable calendar year.

As others have pointed out, AFAIK, their solar business seems to be dying, just like it was before the bailout/takeover of Solar City.

As for "Big 3s high volume compact cars and sedans", what? The Big 3 have pretty much exited those segments in the US.

'19 Bolt Premier
'13 Leaf SV w/premium package (owned)
'13 Leaf SV w/QC + LED & premium packages (lease over, car returned)

Please don't PM me with Leaf questions. Just post in the topic that seems most appropriate.

webb14leafs
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:43 am
Delivery Date: 27 Mar 2017

Re: TSLA corporate outlook

Fri Dec 06, 2019 6:18 am

cwerdna wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2019 1:16 am
webb14leafs wrote:
Thu Dec 05, 2019 10:36 am
That's actually not quite true. Tesla is no doubt over-valued, but based on Gross Profit and EBITBA they only need to increase their revenue by about 2.5 times to achieve similar earnings as Ford right now. Goes to show how big their margins are.
...
Studying Tesla really makes you realize how slim the margins are for the Big 3s high volume compact cars and sedans. All of their profit comes from their Trucks and optioned out SUVs. Tesla makes a significant profit on almost all of their cars. How much is arguable, but skeptical experts have estimated that the standard model 3 has about 13% margin. If you assume each added option has anywhere from a 25%-300% margin, it's easy to see why their profits are so big.

Throw in speculation on the big rig, self-driving technology, and solar/energy storage and it's not to hard to say Tesla isn't over-valued at all.
Tesla's "high" "margins" are inflated (as I posted before at viewtopic.php?p=509813#p509813) because they don't include R&D costs as part of cost of automotive revenues/sales. If they did, their margins wouldn't be as hot looking.

I decided to check.

Look at Ford, for example at https://s22.q4cdn.com/857684434/files/d ... Report.pdf (from https://shareholder.ford.com/investors/ ... fault.aspx). On page 120, they have a line item for cost of sales. On page 131 they say "Engineering, research, and development expenses, primarily salaries, materials, and associated costs, are reported in Cost of sales". For GM https://investor.gm.com/static-files/54 ... a9b4d366de from https://investor.gm.com/sec-filings?fie ... ings-table on page 58 says "Research and development expenditures, which are expensed as incurred in Automotive and other cost of sales,".

Tesla's profits are not big. In the time they've begun reporting, including their few net profitable quarters, they've racked up over $6.5 billion in cumulative losses. Per https://ir.tesla.com/node/20246/html page 5, for the 9 months ending Sept 2019, their net income attributable to common stockholders is $967 million. Their total debt is over $12 billion (page 24).

You can see from page 41 of https://ir.tesla.com/node/19496/html#Item_6, for the years they list (2018 to 2014), every single year, they've recorded a net loss ranging from $294 million to almost $2 billion for a given year. Page 62 of https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data ... tx668062_9 has their net losses for 2013 to 2009, ranging from ~$55 million to ~$396 million. They have yet to report a single net profitable calendar year.

As others have pointed out, AFAIK, their solar business seems to be dying, just like it was before the bailout/takeover of Solar City.

As for "Big 3s high volume compact cars and sedans", what? The Big 3 have pretty much exited those segments in the US.
I understand your comments about R&D accounting, but it's apples and oranges. Electric vehicle production is core business at Tesla. Not so at Ford, which accounts the difference in allocation. Regardless, cash in/cash out is always a pretty decent metric.

Everything you said about losses through 2018 is correct and now outdated since the Model 3 is not being produced and sold at significant volume.

Yes, the big 3 are exiting the small car and sedan segment... due to their low margin and sales. Thanks, for adding to the point.

Regardless, I was simply talking about the current fundamentals and the difficulty with putting an appropriate price on Tesla as a business. Their earnings/revenue far exceed the Big 3. More in line with premium brand car makers, so we shouldn't be comparing their market cap and P/E to Ford/GM. Also, I'm conceding that their stock is over-valued. So no argument over there. Have to separate the stock from the company. Outlook is good for Tesla.

Dyefrog
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 6:57 am
Delivery Date: 18 Oct 2015
Leaf Number: 405967

Re: TSLA corporate outlook

Fri Dec 06, 2019 10:30 am

webb14leafs wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2019 6:18 am
cwerdna wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2019 1:16 am
webb14leafs wrote:
Thu Dec 05, 2019 10:36 am
That's actually not quite true. Tesla is no doubt over-valued, but based on Gross Profit and EBITBA they only need to increase their revenue by about 2.5 times to achieve similar earnings as Ford right now. Goes to show how big their margins are.
...
Studying Tesla really makes you realize how slim the margins are for the Big 3s high volume compact cars and sedans. All of their profit comes from their Trucks and optioned out SUVs. Tesla makes a significant profit on almost all of their cars. How much is arguable, but skeptical experts have estimated that the standard model 3 has about 13% margin. If you assume each added option has anywhere from a 25%-300% margin, it's easy to see why their profits are so big.

Throw in speculation on the big rig, self-driving technology, and solar/energy storage and it's not to hard to say Tesla isn't over-valued at all.
Tesla's "high" "margins" are inflated (as I posted before at viewtopic.php?p=509813#p509813) because they don't include R&D costs as part of cost of automotive revenues/sales. If they did, their margins wouldn't be as hot looking.

I decided to check.

Look at Ford, for example at https://s22.q4cdn.com/857684434/files/d ... Report.pdf (from https://shareholder.ford.com/investors/ ... fault.aspx). On page 120, they have a line item for cost of sales. On page 131 they say "Engineering, research, and development expenses, primarily salaries, materials, and associated costs, are reported in Cost of sales". For GM https://investor.gm.com/static-files/54 ... a9b4d366de from https://investor.gm.com/sec-filings?fie ... ings-table on page 58 says "Research and development expenditures, which are expensed as incurred in Automotive and other cost of sales,".

Tesla's profits are not big. In the time they've begun reporting, including their few net profitable quarters, they've racked up over $6.5 billion in cumulative losses. Per https://ir.tesla.com/node/20246/html page 5, for the 9 months ending Sept 2019, their net income attributable to common stockholders is $967 million. Their total debt is over $12 billion (page 24).

You can see from page 41 of https://ir.tesla.com/node/19496/html#Item_6, for the years they list (2018 to 2014), every single year, they've recorded a net loss ranging from $294 million to almost $2 billion for a given year. Page 62 of https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data ... tx668062_9 has their net losses for 2013 to 2009, ranging from ~$55 million to ~$396 million. They have yet to report a single net profitable calendar year.

As others have pointed out, AFAIK, their solar business seems to be dying, just like it was before the bailout/takeover of Solar City.

As for "Big 3s high volume compact cars and sedans", what? The Big 3 have pretty much exited those segments in the US.
I understand your comments about R&D accounting, but it's apples and oranges. Electric vehicle production is core business at Tesla. Not so at Ford, which accounts the difference in allocation. Regardless, cash in/cash out is always a pretty decent metric.

Everything you said about losses through 2018 is correct and now outdated since the Model 3 is not being produced and sold at significant volume.

Yes, the big 3 are exiting the small car and sedan segment... due to their low margin and sales. Thanks, for adding to the point.

Regardless, I was simply talking about the current fundamentals and the difficulty with putting an appropriate price on Tesla as a business. Their earnings/revenue far exceed the Big 3. More in line with premium brand car makers, so we shouldn't be comparing their market cap and P/E to Ford/GM. Also, I'm conceding that their stock is over-valued. So no argument over there. Have to separate the stock from the company. Outlook is good for Tesla.
To further add to your analysis, Tesla's liability of long term debt is just a fraction of their market cap. Unlike the legacy automakers where they routinely have a long term debt double their value.

Re:Altman Z score
https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmani ... n-z-scores

• VW long term debt = $211billion
• Toyota’s long term debt = $185 billion
• Ford’s long term debt = $154 billion
• GM’s long term debt = $100 billion ( + a $14 billion unpaid bailout loan)
• Daimler’s long term debt = $106 billion
• BMW’s long term debt = $127 billion
Tesla’s long term debt as of 9/19 was $13B
Conclusion,
“So the other OEMs have more debt than they are worth and their assets will soon be worthless. Ergo, those companies are all worthless. Tesla is the only company that is growing and has growing margins, and greatest efficiencies and best cars. I like those odds.”
I forgot to add the Z score analysis:
Typically, a score below 1.81 indicates that the company is most likely heading for bankruptcy or is under the weight of bankruptcy.

James Stephenson/Twitter found interesting information. According to current Altman Z-scores, per to gurufocus.com, we see next situation:
•1.91 Tesla
•1.84 Honda
•1.77 Toyota
•1.38 Nissan
•1.35 Fiat Chrysler
•1.14 Volkswagen
•1.09 Daimler
•1.09 GM
•0.95 Ford
•0.79 BMW
•-4.36 NIO
Higher is better.
2013 SV-Upstate New York
No QC
Bought used with 30,000 miles, 12 bars

webb14leafs
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:43 am
Delivery Date: 27 Mar 2017

Re: TSLA corporate outlook

Fri Dec 06, 2019 11:27 am

Dyefrog wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2019 10:30 am
To further add to your analysis, Tesla's liability of long term debt is just a fraction of their market cap. Unlike the legacy automakers where they routinely have a long term debt double their value.

Re:Altman Z score
https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmani ... n-z-scores

• VW long term debt = $211billion
• Toyota’s long term debt = $185 billion
• Ford’s long term debt = $154 billion
• GM’s long term debt = $100 billion ( + a $14 billion unpaid bailout loan)
• Daimler’s long term debt = $106 billion
• BMW’s long term debt = $127 billion
Tesla’s long term debt as of 9/19 was $13B
Conclusion,
“So the other OEMs have more debt than they are worth and their assets will soon be worthless. Ergo, those companies are all worthless. Tesla is the only company that is growing and has growing margins, and greatest efficiencies and best cars. I like those odds.”
I forgot to add the Z score analysis:
Typically, a score below 1.81 indicates that the company is most likely heading for bankruptcy or is under the weight of bankruptcy.

James Stephenson/Twitter found interesting information. According to current Altman Z-scores, per to gurufocus.com, we see next situation:
•1.91 Tesla
•1.84 Honda
•1.77 Toyota
•1.38 Nissan
•1.35 Fiat Chrysler
•1.14 Volkswagen
•1.09 Daimler
•1.09 GM
•0.95 Ford
•0.79 BMW
•-4.36 NIO
Higher is better.
Is the debt just related to self-financing?? If so, it doesn't make a lot of sense to apply the Z-score, or at-least to say 1.81 is the bar. Debt is a much bigger part of the business model for a car company compared to say a software company.

That said - it makes sense that many economists think the car loan bubble could strongly contribute to the next recession.

EatsShootsandLeafs
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:59 am
Delivery Date: 24 Aug 2012

Re: TSLA corporate outlook

Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:01 am

Dyefrog wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2019 10:30 am
To further add to your analysis, Tesla's liability of long term debt is just a fraction of their market cap. Unlike the legacy automakers where they routinely have a long term debt double their value.

Re:Altman Z score
https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmani ... n-z-scores

• VW long term debt = $211billion
• Toyota’s long term debt = $185 billion
• Ford’s long term debt = $154 billion
• GM’s long term debt = $100 billion ( + a $14 billion unpaid bailout loan)
• Daimler’s long term debt = $106 billion
• BMW’s long term debt = $127 billion
Tesla’s long term debt as of 9/19 was $13B
Conclusion,
“So the other OEMs have more debt than they are worth and their assets will soon be worthless. Ergo, those companies are all worthless. Tesla is the only company that is growing and has growing margins, and greatest efficiencies and best cars. I like those odds.”
I forgot to add the Z score analysis:
Typically, a score below 1.81 indicates that the company is most likely heading for bankruptcy or is under the weight of bankruptcy.

James Stephenson/Twitter found interesting information. According to current Altman Z-scores, per to gurufocus.com, we see next situation:
•1.91 Tesla
•1.84 Honda
•1.77 Toyota
•1.38 Nissan
•1.35 Fiat Chrysler
•1.14 Volkswagen
•1.09 Daimler
•1.09 GM
•0.95 Ford
•0.79 BMW
•-4.36 NIO
Higher is better.
That guy's analysis is patently idiotic and well past the threshold necessary for true comedy.

I wonder if he actually believes that Tesla is healthy on the same scale in which Honda is barely not at risk for bankruptcy, and then Toyota, VW, Ford, BMW are all either most likely headed toward or under the weight of bankruptcy. On its face this is absurd.

GRA
Posts: 11418
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: TSLA corporate outlook

Sun Dec 08, 2019 6:01 pm

Reuters:
Tesla boss Elon Musk wins defamation trial over his 'pedo guy' tweet
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-musk ... SKBN1YA13U


Good to get that behind them, although I admit to being appalled at the jury giving social media posts a free pass on libel.
Last edited by GRA on Mon Dec 09, 2019 6:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

webb14leafs
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:43 am
Delivery Date: 27 Mar 2017

Re: TSLA corporate outlook

Mon Dec 09, 2019 8:43 am

EatsShootsandLeafs wrote:
Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:01 am
That guy's analysis is patently idiotic and well past the threshold necessary for true comedy.

I wonder if he actually believes that Tesla is healthy on the same scale in which Honda is barely not at risk for bankruptcy, and then Toyota, VW, Ford, BMW are all either most likely headed toward or under the weight of bankruptcy. On its face this is absurd.
I think you're just not getting the context. He's simply showing an example of how it is difficult to apply the same value metrics to Tesla as other companies. It's not apples to apples.

I'm interested in his statement, and haven't had a chance to research it. I would guess it shouldn't be applied for auto companies. One thing is that "quality" of debt needs to be considered. If you could find the average credit score of Honda's debtors vs. Ford's, there would be a significant difference, so the Z score may need some other qualifiers.

GRA
Posts: 11418
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: TSLA corporate outlook

Mon Dec 09, 2019 7:08 pm

Tom Moloughney via IEVS:
Forget Waiting Months, My Tesla Model 3 Was Repaired In Days
https://insideevs.com/news/386670/tesla ... air-quick/


Actually a little under three weeks, nine days for all the parts to show up and another week for the repairs. Getting better.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

User avatar
LTLFTcomposite
Posts: 4732
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:06 pm
Delivery Date: 10 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Central FL

Re: TSLA corporate outlook

Mon Dec 16, 2019 9:58 am

Holy cow. What's going on?
LTL
White 2012 SV delivered 10 Dec 2011 returned 25 Nov 2014 replaced with stopgap ICE Sentra
[35 months] [35K miles] [9 Bars]
2013 Volt replaced after 36 months/30k miles with ICE Rogue
2016 SV-adjacent May 2016 lost 4th bar March 2018

Return to “Other Electric Cars & Plug-In Hybrids”