Tesla Logged $713 Million In Revenue In Q1 and Built 7,535 Cars 131
cartechboy (2660665) writes "Tesla just announced its first-quarter earnings and the numbers are interesting. It logged revenue of $713 million on deliveries of 6,457 Model S electric cars. It's worth noting that's basically the number of vehicles it said it would sell in the quarter, but that number is slightly down from the prior quarter. It built a total of 7,535 Model S cars in the quarter as it built inventory as shipments began to China where sales just started last month. Net orders in North America grew 10 percent, and production for the second quarter is expected to increase to 8,500-9,000 Model S cars. Tesla expects to deliver 35,000 cars during the 2014 calendar year. Musk told analysts that China's enthusiastic and that government support is crucial. The Model X is delayed until spring of 2015 with production-design prototypes being ready in the fourth quarter. Tesla hopes to possibly break ground as early as next month on its gigafactory, though the location has yet to be announced. Of course, the stock market is already reacting to these numbers and is currently down nearly 3 percent in after hours trading."
Down 3%?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
it's all about what the expected report was vs. what the report really was. because the market prior to the report was at the level of the expectation.
supposedly anyways. some people just forget they own something until the report hits their inboxes..
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Down 3%?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Fine. What I see is a goddam good time to invest.
TSLA too expensive (Score:2)
What I see is a goddam good time to invest.
I think Tesla is an interesting company but I wouldn't touch their stock with a barge pole at the current price. The market cap of the company is 12X annual revenue. A reasonable revenue multiple is between 1X and 3X annual revenue. Tesla might be a great company but that doesn't make it a great investment at the current price.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe, maybe not. The best case scenario is that the market for electric vehicles contunues to grow at increasing rate as gasoline-powered ones get replaced, and Tesla can leverage their current position and experience to take a significant portion of it. While that's certainly risky, such extr
Re: (Score:2)
The best case scenario is that the market for electric vehicles contunues to grow at increasing rate as gasoline-powered ones get replaced, and Tesla can leverage their current position and experience to take a significant portion of it.
An investment strategy based on absurdly optimistic scenarios is a very good way to lose a lot of money. You are making the same sort of argument they made for .com stocks during the internet bubble 15 years ago. Is it possible that TSLA might grow into its current valuation? Sure. Is it likely? Hell no, at least not in a short enough time frame to matter. Are you seriously going to argue that Tesla is worth 1/3 of Ford right now? Because that is where its market cap is ($22B vs $60B). There is no s
Re: (Score:2)
Why yes i do
Re:Down 3%?! (Score:4, Interesting)
Damn phone sent my reply too soon.
People who invest in things like Tesla doesn't always do it for hand over fist profit. They sometimes do it because they support the objectives of the company or that is aided by the company's operations. There is an entire industry related to investing based on your social concious. They don't typically earn as much money as other investments bur they know that going in.
So yes, yes i would grab a parking spot when people are fleeing a burning skyscraper. Its because my mind set might be to put the fire out or help injured people comming down instead of being safe and secure far away. I kniw that analigy sucks but a burnibg skyscraper and investing is hard to tie together when the reasoning isn't exactly obvious.
Re: (Score:2)
What's the point of that? After the IPO, the company reaps little to no benefits from you buying their stock. At that point, it's a casino chip with a corporate logo. If you like a company and want to support them, then buy their products (although I realize that is difficult with an $80,000 car). But
Re: (Score:2)
Every public offering makes them money, not just the Initial ... thats what its only the 'initial' public offering.
Re: (Score:2)
Every public offering makes them money
Yes, but they are not doing another offering. If you buy Tesla stock today, you are not buying it from the company. You are buying it from a third party who holds it today. Tesla does not see a dime of the exchange of their previously issued shares between you and someone else. Additionally, secondary offers of new shares are very uncommon.
Long story short: when you buy a stock, you are not giving any money to the company you invested in. Your purchase can help them indirectly - pushing up their stock price
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
In addition to public offerings, stock price can affect their ability to borrow money and entice talent through stock options. It also keeps stockholders happy, who might otherwise demand profits.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that is a _major_ reason.
You also can earn dividends, however. If you think that the stock price will _at least_ be stable, you can earn at least several percent on dividends, vs 1% or so on CDs. Yes, you are risking your principal, but you're also earning more than you can otherwise.. If the stock goes up, you benefit there too (when you sell).
Re: (Score:2)
The point of that can be a number of things but most likely their concious or mental well being.
Lets take this a little sideways. People donate to cancer research knowing that any cures found would likely cost way more than they could afford. They think they did a good thing, i think they did a good thing but for all practical purposes, they helped someone else with little to no return. So we have people will only invest in religious companies, people who will only invest in enviromentally friendly companie
Re: (Score:1)
This is exactly how I invest: I put my money where my mouth is. I should note that this has made it possible to put a good down payment on the house we live in two years ago and to rebuild that investment since. And, yes, I did own some stock in Tesla, saw that with the current volatility it would drop more than reasonable for its value, sold it and will buy back in after the drop bottoms (next week). Might even pick up and extra share or two from the dif.
Re: (Score:2)
But the skyscraper is not burning. China is a huge market they are moving into. This company has potential.
Re: (Score:3)
Well thank goodness the stock market is such an accurate gauge of a company's fiscal health and true value
Of course it is. We have high-frequency traders ensuring this, at millisecond precision!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Down 3%?! (Score:2)
What was the total revenue and profit growth?
Probably meh
Re: (Score:2)
How does a rising stock price affect Tesla's profit? If Tesla sold more of it's own stock that would generate cash flow, not profit. Any other explanations?
Effect of rising stock price (Score:2)
How does a rising stock price affect Tesla's profit?
It doesn't directly. What it affects is Tesla's ability to raise investment funds in the future. More specifically their cost of capital [wikipedia.org]. If the stock price goes up, Tesla can raise more money for the same amount of dilution to existing shareholders. A rising stock price generally means a falling cost of capital. It's more complicated than that obviously but the relationship holds as a general principle.
The stock price also tends to correlate strongly with the happiness of the shareholders who are the
Re: (Score:3)
Right - If Tesla sells it's own stocks those funds are treated as cash flow. If Tesla issues bonds that would be treated as cash flow. Both of these end up on the balance sheet as either equity or a liability. In neither case does it show up on the income statement as profit or revenue.
As a side note, Tesla can only dilute it's own stock by issuing new stock as long as investors have a long term positive view on it's profitability. The more shares you issue the more you dilute any future profit that a singl
Re: (Score:1)
If you have absolutely no idea how the stock market works, don't post about the stock market.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have absolutely no idea how the stock market works, don't post about the stock market.
If Wall Street followed your advice 95% of analysts would be out of a job.
Re: (Score:1)
Every analyst knows how and why stocks drop 3% after good news. You don't.
Re: (Score:3)
Every analyst knows how and why stocks drop 3% after good news. You don't.
"Papa Smurf always says..."
Re: (Score:2)
Holy shit this site is full of retards.
Re: (Score:2)
If you look at GAAP numbers, as opposed to non-GAAP fiction, it starts to make more sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Today's /. fortune is particularly appropriate: "There has been a little distress selling on the stock exchange. -- Thomas W. Lamont, October 29, 1929 (Black Tuesday)"
Re: (Score:2)
Investors will spec buy into a company before they release good news in case it's something like, "Tesla Motors creates electric hover car that never needs charged!" Or something equally absurd. So when the news comes out that "Oh, so we're just doing business, made some good sales." Those spec buy investors cash out and are like aw man.
I really think like a lot of investors are freakishly skittish. It's hilarious.
Odd numbers (Score:4, Interesting)
There is a lot I don't understand at financial reports, but these numbers really strike me as odd.
How can you have a revenue of 731 M$ while producing in the same period about 500 M$ worth of merchandise? Said otherwise, for each car produced in Q1, they have a revenue of about 100 k$. I know the Tesla is not a cheep car, but that seems excessive. Or did I miss something here?
Re:Odd numbers (Score:5, Informative)
Service for current vehicles.
Powertrains for Toyota's RAV4.
They sell fuel credits to other companies that make polluting vehicles.
etc.
Lots of this and that.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes. Revenu is not the same as profits. In this case revenu was high, but expenses were higher, so the profit was negative.
Nothing odd at all (Score:5, Informative)
How can you have a revenue of 731 M$ while producing in the same period about 500 M$ worth of merchandise?
Because Tesla doesn't just make money selling cars. Read their financial statements and they'll detail their sources of revenue. Nothing particularly surprising there. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised to see Tesla end up making a big portion of their revenue manufacturing battery packs and power trains for other auto makers.
Re:Nothing odd at all (Score:4, Insightful)
For the battery packs, I would be surprised. The Gigafactory that Tesla is building will be majority owned by Panasonic. i.e., it is a Panasonic factory, building Panasonic batteries, but it is being built for Tesla, with Tesla money. It is “Tesla” factory because they will be getting the output.
I know that Tesla is looking for better battery solutions but I have not heard that they have come up with anything.
Who owns the IP? (Score:2)
The Gigafactory that Tesla is building will be majority owned by Panasonic.
That doesn't necessarily mean much. The important question is who owns the IP that is going into the products produced. Coke and Coke Bottling are/were separate companies. Guess which one makes the bigger profits? Apple outsources their actual manufacturing but they own the product produced. Who actually owns the manufacturing is important but it's often not the most important bit.
Re: (Score:2)
It will be producing Panasonic batteries so I assume that the majority IP would be Panasonic. Besides, it is not just the IP (knowledge) but also “total factor productivity” (ability to apply that knowledge.) I assume the ability to (hopefully) efficiently run the factor would mostly accrue to Panasonic. (and yes, I am making a lot of assumptions here. I would love to hear from anybody who knows more.)
Re: (Score:2)
It will be producing Panasonic batteries so I assume that the majority IP would be Panasonic.
I run a wire harness assembly company and we supply to battery harness makers. Ownership of the battery technology doesn't mean a thing as far as the assemblies that they go into are concerned. You may be right that Panasonic owns the IP on the batteries and their production but if Tesla doesn't own a lot or most of the assembly IP, I cannot really see any business angle that makes sense for Tesla. Tesla would have to own the rights to the product designs and probably some of the controls. I'd guess tha
Re: (Score:2)
The value add for Tesla, if I understand correctly, is that Tesla get a reliable source of battery packs. Panasonic was unwilling to invest in a new plant because of the risk – why build a expensive plant that will be gathering dust in 10 years because Tesla has moved on – either by going bankrupt or moving to a new battery technology.
It is not uncommon for a company to co-invest with a supplier to ensure their supply chain. Apple invested in new Samsung LCD foundries to ensure they would have a
Re: (Score:3)
There is a lot I don't understand at financial reports, but these numbers really strike me as odd. How can you have a revenue of 731 M$ while producing in the same period about 500 M$ worth of merchandise? Said otherwise, for each car produced in Q1, they have a revenue of about 100 k$. I know the Tesla is not a cheep car, but that seems excessive. Or did I miss something here?
Companies make money in lost of ways. If you can't understand the financial statement or how the company makes their money, don't invest in the company! No matter what!
I adopted this policy a short time ago and it has been a much better strategy than others I have tried. If you are want to start looking at simple financial reports, the easiest example I can think of is RICK's Caberet (RICK). Another simple business (aquire ships, lease them out) is Navios Maritime Holdings Inc. (NM), although I have
At a loss (Score:4, Informative)
Not mentioned in the post for some reason was the loss of $49.8 million for the quarter compared to an $11.3 million profit in the same quarter last year. Accumulated losses since 2009 are on the order of $800 million.
http://files.shareholder.com/d... [shareholder.com]
Making cars is hard. Making a profit doing it is harder still.
Re:At a loss (Score:5, Informative)
They were not planning to make a profit at this point. It's part of the long term strategy. Fancy that, a CEO who can see past the next quarter's results!
Re: (Score:2)
they _were_ planning on that.. but altered the plan in previous years already.
anyways, I'd be more worried about the 5 billion dollar bet the company is making on the GIGASUPERMEGADUPER plant.
Re: (Score:2)
Just reminds me of the late '90s / early 00's when Amazon was losing so much money each quarter for years on end. I thought there was no way they would ever dig themselves out of debt.
Re: (Score:2)
yeah, people should buy stock in a company that keeps on promising to make money one day when the CEO is off designing rocket ships and hyper tubes
Re: (Score:2)
Read up on Amazon circa 2000. Interesting times. Maybe a lack of profit isn't the only thing investors worry about.
Downsides to that strategy. (Score:2)
Given their debt and cumulative losses, it's a risky strategy. There's possibility that they'll run out of people who will loan them money, and then.... they're shut down and out of business. There's also a chance that they'll start making a profit, but insufficient to both pay off the accumulated debt and to attract further investment, stunting future growth. Etc... etc...
Re: (Score:2)
They were not planning to make a profit at this point. It's part of the long term strategy. Fancy that, a CEO who can see past the next quarter's results!
This is far more common than the financial experts here on /. appear to believe. There are many examples of companies successfully executing long-term growth strategies.
Sponsor? (Score:2)
Re:Sponsor? (Score:4, Insightful)
Looking at the big picture I think any Elon Musk story is kind of interesting. He is an uber geek trying to shift the world to sustainable energy and colonize Mars. Fast Cars and Rocket Ships are every kids dream as they said on 60 minutes.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Sponsor? (Score:2, Interesting)
This is a site for nerds. Name a nerdier topic than Tesla.
Re: Sponsor? (Score:5, Funny)
This is a site for nerds. Name a nerdier topic than Tesla.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if the Natalie Portman thing will still be mentioned when she is 40. Of course presuming /. will still be around.
Re: (Score:2)
7 years? Yeah, it'll be around. It may not be the same /. as it is today, but this is hardly the same place it was 7 years ago either. That's not necessarily a bad thing; evolve or die.
It's also interesting to me since I IMDB'd her birthday that she's one day older than my girlfriend :)
Re: (Score:2)
This is a site for nerds. Name a nerdier topic than Tesla.
Oh, almost forgot: Edison.
Re: Sponsor? (Score:4, Interesting)
All of these are nerdier, but perhaps not as easily digested.
Re: (Score:2)
or mass-production of parts from fibre reinforced plastic.
All of these are nerdier, but perhaps not as easily digested.
Yeah. I would not like to meet the person who can digest fibre reinforced plastic... I have a hard enough time with burritos with jalapeno peppers and hot sauce!
Re: (Score:2)
But aren't peppers and wheat basically fibre reinforced plastics? Proteins are polymers, after all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm probably going to get modded as flamebait or troll for saying this, but all EV's are "toys"... including Tesla.
The problem is that although a Tesla's range on a charge is going to be good enough for probably more than 90% of a person's driving, especially if they live in an urban area, unless a person wants to own an extra vehicle that they only very rarely use, an automobile really needs to be just as practical for extended trips as it is for commuting... One could rent a vehicle for those longer ti
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To be perfectly honest, if he were to ask me, I'd tell him to either give up on the idea that EV's are ever going to be suitable for most people based solely on allegedly practical advantages when they cost so much more, or else do something to actually address range anxiety. It doesn't just magically go away just because people who don't care about it that much think it's unimportant. The fact is that most people will make purchases based on emotion instead of logic... and anyone who fails to accommodat
Re: (Score:2)
Owning is more convenient than renting. I own a bicycle that I hardly ever use. That doesn't mean I'd want to get rid of it and deal with the hassle of renting one whenever I want to go for a bike ride.
And of course, garage space is limited... there's only room in there for the cars that we actually use. I don't think that in this respect, I misrepresent the majority of drivers.
Re: (Score:2)
That argument is as fallacious as claiming that you need to own the biggest SUV there is because once every couple of years you want to tow a boat. It can be extended to any extreme: "Oh, your new pack is 500 miles of range? Well, I want to do a 1500 mile trip without charging, so EVs are impratical!"
Re: (Score:2)
Only if you consider the convenience factor of owning vs renting to be "fallacious"
I don't care if I have to charge a car during a 1500 mile trip... I have to stop and fill up with gas every so often in a regular car. But I *do* expect to be able to finish said trip in about the same
Re: (Score:2)
As it happens, my wife and I each have a vehicle. One could be some sort of car suitable only for commuting with no problem. We'd use the other for everything we do together. The odds of both of us wanting to drive on long trips separately are very low, and in such circumstances we could certainly rent something.
A Tesla might very well make sense for us even if we couldn't take it on long trips. (AFAICT, it doesn't make sense for us right now, but it could.)
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless of how infrequent the demand for it might be, it is always going to be more convenient to own your own vehicle than it will be to deal with trying to rent one that meets your needs.
And hey... not everyone has a three-car garage, so there's probably not going to be the space for a vehicle that's hardly ever used.
Re: (Score:2)
In that case, why don't I own a moving van? I needed one about fifteen years ago, after all. I've needed a fairly large truck fully twice in the last fifteen years, in addition.
At some level of infrequency, it gets easier and cheaper to rent rather than buy and maintain.
Re: (Score:2)
I have no problem if other people want to drive a tesla...
What I do have a problem with is when people ignore facts that are actually relevant to considering a vehicle purchase such as convenience just because such facts may not be based on objectively measurable data like fuel economy.
but if you want objective, I will own a car for as long as about ten years, and probably spend about a thousand dollars a year on gas. The tesla model S, whitch is the only ev I've ever seen that didn't look like a piece
Re: (Score:2)
going off-grid (Score:3)
Looking at the spec's: a 60 kWHr battery! With that plugged into my house and an array of photovoltaics on the roof, I can tell the electric authority to go **** themselves. (In Western Australia we pay 26c/kWHr, despite having massive natural gas and coal reserves locally. Plus supply charge.)
Figuring that in the Tesla does not look quite so expensive. And as a bonus I can look down on all those carbon-polluting Prius drivers.
So the question: will they allow me to use the Tesla battery while parked, or will that kill the battery as surely as my 8-year warranty?
Re:going off-grid (Score:4, Informative)
A 60 kWh battery, assuming you don't mind cycling it to 100% discharge, which is extremely severe treatment, represents about 3-4 days of electricity for a house with very light electricity use based on my electric meter, and those of people I know. OTOH, where I am, sunlight is not uncommonly extremely poor for periods longer than that. Unless your photovoltaics are over proportioned by 10-20 times, or you've got at least twice the battery, it ain't gonna cut it.
It would be nice to be able to tap the battery with an inverter during power outages though. In my area when you lose power, you lose water supply (and heat of course). Not very good for sanitation. There's nothing to make you appreciate flush toilets more than 2-3 days without well water.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:going off-grid (Score:5, Interesting)
Your house is very inefficient, but not untypical of some parts of the world.
Nissan has been offering this service for a few years in Japan. You use your Leaf as a UPS in the event of power failure. They say you can run your essential appliances (fridge/freezer, lighting) for a few days. You can also use it for a bit of solar PV smoothing. It isn't really designed to let you go off-grid though.
Re: (Score:2)
Guess you like living without climate control. Good luck with that winter with no heat ... which is the only way you're going to run off a Leaf pack for 'a few days'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most Japanese homes use gas for heating. Not everywhere is like the US. Incredible, I know.
Re: (Score:2)
Most Japanese homes use gas for heating. Not everywhere is like the US. Incredible, I know.
Most US homes in cold climates use natural gas for heating.
Re: (Score:2)
Good thing the gas furnace works when the power is out . . .
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
We have a smart meter so I can track my usage. We use between 3 - 6 kWh/day, on average a 60 kWh battery should last about 2 weeks.
price and ROI of solar panels (Score:1)
Looking at the spec's: a 60 kWHr battery! With that plugged into my house and an array of photovoltaics on the roof, I can tell the electric authority to go **** themselves. (In Western Australia we pay 26c/kWHr, despite having massive natural gas and coal reserves locally. Plus supply charge.)
Have you checked the prices of solar panels lately? The cost is certainly going down, but they're not cheap.
It's a matter of paying (a lot) now, or paying later (in smaller increments). Most folks don't have many thousands of dollars lying around for the upfront costs, and most folks also don't have the patience to wait out the many, many years it would take for the ROI for them.
At 26c/kWHr though, you'd probably recoup the costs a lot quicker than most. In North American the price is usually less than 15c/
Re: (Score:2)
I agree there unfortunately. I did the math a few years ago, during which time the electric price hasn't really risen substantially in the midwest. I basically figured that the cost of installing the PV panels would be recouped at about the same time that the panels reached about 30% of their original capacity... in other words by that point you'd be so close to replacement time that it was almost a wash. It just didn't make sense to me because when I also included costs of routine maintenance (you have to
Re: (Score:1)
I agree there unfortunately. I did the math a few years ago, during which time the electric price hasn't really risen substantially in the midwest. I basically figured that the cost of installing the PV panels would be recouped at about the same time that the panels reached about 30% of their original capacity... in other words by that point you'd be so close to replacement time that it was almost a wash. It just didn't make sense to me because when I also included costs of routine maintenance (you have to clean PV shingles or panels frequently to ensure maximum efficiency) it really was a net negative.
Now, if electricity prices were higher like in Australia then I could definitely see it making a lot more sense.
Where did you get these data? I can't even find any timetable for solar panels degrading to 30% rated capacity. The typical warranty is no worse than 80% of rated capacity after 25 years.
.7% per year, so getting to 30% would take ln(.3)/ln(.993) or 171 years. Even at 2% per year it's roughly 60 years. All I can say is electricity must be pretty cheap where you live, if it takes 170 years for panels to pay off.
Doing a little math: Normal degradation is around
Re: (Score:3)
"Tesla hopes to possibly break ground" (Score:2)
I think they can rest easy. Tesla will ABSOLUTELY break ground or not break ground on their new facility next month.
valued almost $1M per car sold (Score:2)
Sales to China ? (Score:1)
How do Teslas US sales compare to.. (Score:2)
..other cars of a similar price point?
In my mind, a Tesla is a luxury sedan more or less on par with BMW 7 series, Mercedes S550, Lexus LS460.
It'd be interesting to see how sales compare with those cars.
Outsells all direct competitors in the same areas (Score:2)
BUT, for sales in the same regions, Tesla is not only outselling them, but in a number of places actually outsells all of them COMBINED.
Yeah, but what was the P/L? (Score:1)
Revenue is important, and so are revenue trends, but where is the P/L?
The link that says "earnings statement" is anything but an earnings statement.
Re: (Score:2)