Tesla May Need Cash To Deliver On the Model 3, Says Analysts (cnbc.com) 162
An anonymous reader writes: After receiving more than 198,000 Model 3 preorders in the first 24 hours, Tesla may need more cash if it hopes to deliver their new electric vehicle to customers on time, analysts said. Elon Musk plans to launch the Model 3 in late 2017, eventually boosting the company's annual production tenfold to 500,000 by 2020. Many analysts believe some customers making early reservations may not receive their vehicle until 2019 or 2020. Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas, predicted Tesla's sales will hit under 250,000 in 2020. Barclays analyst Brian Johnson, believes the surge of Model 3 reservations could reach 300,000 by the end of June. Some analysts expect the first cars will sell for an average of $50,000-$60,000, but Tesla prices its current models in several "tiers," depending on content and optional features. RBC analyst Joseph Spak said strong initial orders for the Model 3 could help Tesla achieve positive free cash flow. In February, the company said it expected to be cash-flow positive in March. Spak said Tesla may not be able to fulfill many of the early orders before 2019: "Demand was never really our concern, it is more about execution and getting production up to meet demand."
Err - no. (Score:5, Insightful)
There are many commercial entities that would be overjoyed to finance Tesla some billions based on the outstanding pre-order book.
Re:Err - no. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Demand alone doesn't mean things are great for Tesla, though I'm certainly not claiming there is an issue. If there's huge demand now for something that can't viably be provided at the expected price point in an acceptable time period that's an issue regardless of immediate cash flow issues. I really want Tesla to succeed and it's great that a lot of other people clearly do as well, but that alone doesn't make it a certainty.
An issue for who? Sure, unfulfilled demand could let some other company scoop up the market but unless they got a hidden Gigafactory they'll probably be resource limited too. Right now Elon Musk is either going "awesome, just what I needed to secure funding and expand quickly" or "dang, I should have asked for $40k" but I don't see a single downside. Also despite getting in line they haven't really promised how they'll give priority, we know there'll be regional releases and that current Tesla owners get pr
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously I'm not saying that
Re: (Score:2)
Boloney.
Tesla stated before taking pre orders delivery is scheduled for late 2017. That's about 20 months away. I don't see how you can say Tesla can't begin to deliver in 20 months, as it already has a handful of prototypes right now (they gave test drives, you know it, doesn't you ?)
A for Tesla doesn't have enough money, that's another BS argument. Tesla is loosing money overall because its funding for Model 3 R&D with revenues from MS/MX deliveries. For the last reported quarter (Q4 2
Re: (Score:2)
UK buyers are looking at 2020 for delivery now. First cars are expected for 2019, but there are so many pre-orders production for the first year is all sold.
US buyers are probably looking at late 2018 now too.
Looks good fit investors, years of production already sold.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm wondering how many cancellations they will get once people find out the $7500 fed tax rebate is no longer available. This is lowering the cost of the car to $27,500, which frankly is a hell of a deal.
At this point, Teslas are still eligible, but once they hit the magic number (200K cars sold in the US) rebate goes bye-bye. Based upon preorders, latecomers are going to miss out if they have not already. Tesla sold what? 60,000 cars in the US so far? There's 140,000 left to be sold in the US before th
Re: Err - no. (Score:4, Insightful)
The rebate doesn't go away at 200,000 cars. That just marks the quarter the rebates start to fade out. For that quarter and the next, the rebate is still $7500. The next two months it is reduced to $3750, and the next two months it is $1875.
Tesla will likely hit 200,000 cars delivered in the US in 3rd quarter 2017. That means every tesla delivered in 2017 will probably get a $7500 rebate. Every car delivered in Q1/Q2 2018 will get $3750, and the rest of 2018 gets $1875.
It is entirely possible that hundreds of thousands of Model 3s will get a rebate. Of tesla is smart they will delay shipments of model S/X cars until 4Q 2017 so they get amother full quarter of $7500 rebates to entice customers.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't go by by at once, it is slashed in half for some time.
Besides that this US income tax credit is fully useful for relatively rich people only anyway. You need to be due these $7,500 in income taxes in single year and can't rollover credit to next year. For that you need around $56,000 taxable household income. That is income after standard $12,600/household or bigger itemized deduction, $4,000/person exemption, and all other various deductions. Gross income may need to be closer to $100,000 in pra
Re: (Score:2)
Leasing an EV results in the leasing company getting the $7500 tax credit and rolling most/all of that $7500 into the lease.
Re: (Score:2)
You need to be due these $7,500 in income taxes in single year and can't rollover credit to next year. For that you need around $56,000 taxable household income.
People buying a new $35K+ car should be over that, or they are buying the wrong car.
In addition, keep in mind that $35K is the starting price of the car, most that are sold will be $10K over that price, give or take something.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it is the case with Tesla, but there are or will be other cheaper electric cars. Or they may have a choice of buying $25 + $10k for gas over the life of the car, or $35 for electric and e.g. $5k for electricity if their rate is low. Even if they earn $40-$70k/year, it may be more reasonable to buy a new car instead trying luck with old clunker that may require spending much more time/money on maintenance.
Sure you can lease, but it is one more restriction that slashes potential customer base. In short,
Re: (Score:2)
The life of the car doesn't matter to the person who is only going to own it for 3-5 years.
Consider the Ford Fusion, a similar sized car to the Model 3. The Fusion gets 29 MPG mixed city/hwy.
At the average of 37 miles a day, 3 years of ownership is about $2,700 @ $2/gal.
So if you buy a mid-trim SE with reasonable features for $22K, you're looking at $25K including fuel for 3 years.
If electricity is 1/4 the cost of fuel, then you're saving about $2K over the 3 years in fuel costs. by going EV.
That is nice,
Re: (Score:3)
I'm wondering how many cancellations they will get once people find out the $7500 fed tax rebate is no longer available. This is lowering the cost of the car to $27,500, which frankly is a hell of a deal.
It would lower it to $27,500, if most people bought base model cars.
In general, they don't. Everything from the Ford Focus to the Tesla Model S are sold are higher level trims.
In addition to the rebate going away at some point, when people see that the Model 3 will really be $50K with all the options on it, that will draw a lot of cancellations.
Musk was really careful with his words: All Model 3 cars would come with autopilot hardware installed, and the base model would come with the emergency braking feat
Re: (Score:2)
People buy cars all the time without maxing out the options, such as 3 series BMW without the "M" badge. The base Model 3 was said to be delivered with autopilot safety features enabled and 0-60 under 6 seconds, supercharging and at least a 215 EPA rated range. My prediction is people might opt for a range upgrade to 250+ miles that should cost $5k or less.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say "max out", I said mid-level trim...
Few people buy the base model or the maxed out model... But there are exceptions...
More than 50% of all Yukons sold are the Denali trim, but that is an exception.
The Fusion, for example, comes in a S, a SE, and a Titanium trim, and the SE is by far the best seller.
---
I took a look at the Fusion Hybrid, based on someone else's comments...
Actually, the price is pretty reasonable, all things considered... $29K gets you a nearly loaded SE model with adaptive cru
Astrological stock analysis (Score:5, Insightful)
There are many commercial entities that would be overjoyed to finance Tesla some billions based on the outstanding pre-order book.
And even more commercial entities that would be overjoyed if Tesla crashed and burned.
Analysts are falling over themselves trying to paint Tesla in a bad light. Usually this is done by "black-box analytics" without taking the context into account. We're seeing this in the original article: massive public demand is bad for Tesla because it will hurt them in the long run.
For example, Tesla has had little or no profit for the last couple of quarters because they're putting everything into the gigafactory [wikipedia.org]. Looked at as a black box, Tesla is a company with little or no revenue.
The price point of Tesla is all over the map, analysts put it anywhere from $100 to $1900 [investorplace.com] .
It's insane. There's a subtext among certain analysts and pundits that they are *only* dissing Tesla because they want to bolster their GM stock. Then there's the analysts and pundits who put sterile figures into an algorithm and come up with a "buy", "sell", or "hold" outcome and then justify that outcome (any outcome, it doesn't matter) from whatever is going on at the time.
There's literally(*) no source of reliable information about stocks that a common person can access.
So far as I can tell, the best you can hope for is to have an engineer's understanding of the context and make an educated guess. Company is working on an implantable insulin delivery device? If you think the concept is feasible, it's probably a good bet. Can a company makes a razor that cuts hair with a laser [bgr.com]? Probably not a good bet.
Reading analysts predictions about stocks is worthless. You can get just as good information by plotting a stocks' astrology chart [stockastrologer.com].
(*) I'm using the term "literal" by it's dictionary definition.
Re:Astrological stock analysis (Score:5, Insightful)
No company with pre-orders of this magnitude can or should have cash problems. It's a bit like SpaceX: They have cornered the market for launches in the classes they can launch and are booked for years. This is not money that is already earned but it is the next thing close to that. If you have cash-flow problems in such a situation and if you do not look like a scam getting money for modest interest should be the most easy thing in the world.
But yes, people wanting to buy 200000 cars from them will be bad news for those companies who will NOT sell these 200000 cars then. These will not be additional cars, mostly. Almost all companies in this business apart from Tesla will HATE these numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
Other than your religious belief in the Cult of Elon - why would you believe that?
No, it's not even close to that - as a deposit isn't a commitment to pay. Lenders know that even if you don't.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a car without the range to do a road trip. I realize they want to change that with rapid charging stations but it's not there yet.
This weekend we took a road trip to Galveston to visit the beach. So yea, it really isn't a road trip car.
That being said:
So for a lot of people this would be a secondary vehicle, with a primary vehicle being gas or hybrid. Could be done Werth a married family. Certainly no range anxiety for commuting
Yep, we own two vehicles, a really big expensive SUV and a full size car. The Model 3 could easily replace the car, except that it is smaller than our full size car and costs more.
I pay $347 a month for my car and that was with nothing down, and I'll own it at the end, that isn't a lease.
It would, frankly, take the Model S to provide a similar size vehicle, but even if we consider the
Re: (Score:1)
The Model 3 could easily replace the car, except that it is smaller than our full size car and costs more.
An Audi R8 does too though right?
I pay $347 a month for my car and that was with nothing down
The Tesla market isn't people who want the cheapest possible car for their money. It's a new and interesting segment and as such will attract people who don't mind paying a premium for something new and interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
The Tesla market isn't people who want the cheapest possible car for their money. It's a new and interesting segment and as such will attract people who don't mind paying a premium for something new and interesting.
You might be right, but if that is the case, they are going to have trouble selling millions of them.
The question becomes, what is the goal? Musk claims it is to change transportation for all. But that won't happen as long as it remains expensive.
It is almost like people are so enamored by the whole thing they suspect the laws of economics.
An Audi R8 does too though right?
Yes, it does. How many of those does Audi sell? Is it changing the world?
Re: (Score:2)
We know EVs are getting cheaper and will continue to do so with scale
We do?
Since when did cars becomes computers that get cheaper and faster each year?
Is there a law of economics that says EVs will become cheaper than gas cars, but gas cars will just keep getting expensive?
so at some point there is a threshold that makes an EV a more attractive proposition for most people. It might not this year or in the next 5, but I think it will be in the next 10.
1. Tesla has made a bold announcement, lets see if they can deliver. A whole lot of people are assuming this is a done deal. I might tend to agree if it was launching in 6 months, but 20 months is a LONG time.
2. I can draw a straight line on a chart with the best of them, but that doesn't mean it will co
Re: (Score:2)
Is there a law of economics that says EVs will become cheaper than gas cars, but gas cars will just keep getting expensive?
I remember a few years ago listening to a lecturer who asserted that the world had hit "peak oil," and that gasoline would continue from that point forward to get more and more expensive--to the point where gas-powered cars would become increasingly expensive to operate and electric cars would become cheaper and cheaper to operate by comparison (and hence more and more in demand, obviously).
To say his prediction never happened would be an understatement.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember a few years ago listening to a lecturer who asserted that the world had hit "peak oil," and that gasoline would continue from that point forward to get more and more expensive--to the point where gas-powered cars would become increasingly expensive to operate and electric cars would become cheaper and cheaper to operate by comparison (and hence more and more in demand, obviously).
:) That prediction has been around for a very long time. A number of things have happened to keep it from being true.
1. We didn't just stick to the old ways of recovering oil, we have gone back to the "depleted" fields and they are in some cases producing more today than they did in the 70s.
10+ years ago I was flying off shore in the Gulf of Mexico for an oil company, the platform I flew to for 6 months was built in the 70s and went almost dry in the 90s. It was sold off from a major oil company to a sma
Re: (Score:2)
Or do you think oil will last forever?
Of course not, but it will outlast me.
Asking people, average every day people, to upend their lives for something that won't change within their lifetime, is a tall ask.
Re: (Score:2)
Cars aren't computers, but all technology gets better with time, and EVs are still not what I'd call a mature technology. So you have to admit that there is room to move there.
Yes, of course. I simply am pointing out that it isn't a "forgone conclusion" that EVs will end up cheaper than gas cars. They might get close, they might be a bit more, or a bit less, but from the comments I read, some people think they will drop in price by half, then half again, like computers have.
We also know that oil doesn't last forever. I know we've been hearing about peak oil for decades, but the premise is still true. At some point oil production will peak, and when that day comes (even if it takes another 30 years), EVs get a lay down misere.
The "another 30 years" comment is a human thing, not a planet thing. It is easy as humans to only think of and measure stuff in terms of our own lifetimes. But we are but a blink of an eye to the planet.
Th
Re: (Score:2)
We do?
Since when did cars becomes computers that get cheaper and faster each year?
Is there a law of economics that says EVs will become cheaper than gas cars, but gas cars will just keep getting expensive?
Cars aren't computers, but all technology gets better with time, and EVs are still not what I'd call a mature technology. So you have to admit that there is room to move there.
I agree that EVs will continue to improve over the next decade or two: battery technology has a long way to go, both in capacity/weight and cost to manufacture. The trend is toward lighter cheaper battery packs allowing bigger ranges and lower costs. The Model 3 and Chevy Bolt are both examples of this: We're seeing a doubling of range versus a car like the Leaf from just a handful of years ago, and all the articles I read say we're just on the beginning of the curve of battery improvements. Meanwhile ICE m
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, I like that much more than the current Model 3 nose. Of course, aerodynamics may have something to say about how the nose should look ;-)
Range Anxiety (Score:2)
My brother in law has a Model S, and he has never had problems with range anxiety. He lives in southern England (Kent) and travels to London and Peterborough frequently and says it isn't a problem. From my point of view living in Southern Florida, there are charging stations all up I75 and Across the I10, so I could visit my parents in Houston without an issue. We have driven there several times, and we stop in the gas stations and truck stops and usually spend 20 minutes or so getting drinks, hitting th
Re: (Score:2)
200-mile range is pretty damn good. On a real road trip, that means a stop every 3-4 hours. If you really are a 1,000 mile a day driver then rent a car for the trip! If you are fine with 600 miles per day, and two long stops en-route, it isn't that big of a deal.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a car without the range to do a road trip. I realize they want to change that with rapid charging stations but it's not there yet.
So for a lot of people this would be a secondary vehicle, with a primary vehicle being gas or hybrid. Could be done Werth a married family. Certainly no range anxiety for commuting
I am a Leaf owner and I think you are mostly right. People are jumping on you a little prematurely.
Where you're right is, 1) even with a 200 mile range a road trip would still be much easier/preferable in a gas/hybrid car for most people*; 2) EVs work really well for 2 car households; 3) there is no range anxiety for commuting.
Where you're wrong is, that an EV would only be secondary vehicle. For most people the vast majority of their driving is local commuting to work and errands, which EVs are perfect for
Re: (Score:2)
" I do a 500 mile road trip a couple times a year to see my family and it takes between 7-8 hours in a gas car."
Avis/Hertz has the solution for your twice a year problem and it will likely cost you less to rent than to rack up miles on your personal car for those long trips.
What you see as a problem with a Model 3 is really not a problem at all. Or, for that matter, a problem with an EV with even shorter range. In California you can but a Spark EV for $500 out the door and lease payments of $100/mo and p
Re: (Score:2)
Avis/Hertz has the solution for your twice a year problem and it will likely cost you less to rent than to rack up miles on your personal car for those long trips.
That 500 mile trip was only one example, there are others that pop up through the year, and some extended "local" driving that exceeds the LEAF's 70-80 mile range. Even if I was taking a fairly short 100 mile round trip, extending a ~1.5-2 hour drive to ~2-2.5 hours for a charging break is pain myself and many others probably don't want to deal with. My Avis budget would get ridiculous, which is why my wife's car is a Honda Accord. We swap cars when the other needs to go further in a day. In the past year t
Re: (Score:2)
(*) I'm using the term "literal" by it's dictionary definition.
You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means. [gizmodo.com]
Re:Astrological stock analysis (Score:4, Insightful)
...but this doesn't account for the gigafactory, or that Tesla will pretty-much corner the market in cars *and* lithium batteries in a couple of years.
However, the market for electric cars is a small percentage of overall vehicle sales. According to Wikipedia, Toyota delivered 9.9 million cars in 2012, VW delivered 9.8 million in 2013 and GM delivered 9.9 million in 2015. So, even if Tesla could deliver all 300k cars in 1 year - and it sounds like they can't - it would represent 3% of what the giant automakers deliver in a single year. Given their timeline for delivery, it is more like 1%.
Now, don't get me wrong. I think Tesla is a cool company, and I don't think it's doomed because it "only" has a 1% marketshare. However, we need to consider it in context of the entire automotive industry, and it most likely won't end up as the one car company to rule the world.
Great response! (Score:2)
Those are fine numbers, and I really *really* appreciate an argument based on numbers and simple logic.
It's refreshing not to hear "nuh-uh" or "I think it's the opposite" with no support or rationality.
Good work!
Re: (Score:2)
Consider it in the context of what people want. Go electric or resign yourself watching taillights tail lights recede in the distance. From now on, performance means electric [wikipedia.org], end of story. Break the price barrier and the damn will burst. Chances are, you already bought your last internal combustion car.
Re: (Score:2)
The Porsche you linked to is a hybrid. 608HP of internal combustion power, plus 279 HP of electric. Running only on the electric, its range is 12 miles.
I think my next Porsche will have an ICE in it.
Re: (Score:2)
The point is, the fastest production cars are now electric. The 918's motor is basically just there to charge the batteries, plus it provides a modest share of extra power, but the main acceleration is electric.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the 918's gas motor provides 75% of the power, however the point still stands: everything fast from now on will have an electric motor in it. As batteries improve, hybrids will rapidly be displaced by full electrics. The next iteration of the 918 will no doubt have bigger electrics and smaller internal combustion, saving weight.
Re: (Score:2)
Why on earth would you need a 600 horsepower engine to charge a battery? The electric portion is a cheap way to boost the HP to over 800 without designing a new engine. Until they can make a 1000+ HP electric motor that still has range, ICE engines will still be faster.
"The point is, the fastest production cars are now electric. "
Uh, no. With a top speed of
Re: (Score:2)
Why on earth would you need a 600 horsepower engine to charge a battery? The electric portion is a cheap way to boost the HP to over 800 without designing a new engine.
No. A car that costs the better part of a million dollars can have any engine it wants. The car has electric motors because they have a better power/weight ratio than gas engines, an advantage maximized by a relatively small battery. It has just enough electrics to take the top spot in the 0-60 list and the rest is gas for the energy density. Each time battery energy density goes up, the electric/gas ratio will go up until the gas motor disappears completely, with a huge weight saving in motor, transmission
Re: (Score:2)
Consider it in the context of what people want. Go electric or resign yourself watching taillights tail lights recede in the distance.
The number of people who care what the 0-60 time is on their car is a very, very small percentage of the total number of car buyers.
Most, as in the VAST majority, don't know what their current car is, don't care, and it isn't a factor.
It just needs to be "good enough".
Performance will only sell so many cars.
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody would prefer a fast car if they could afford it.
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody would prefer a fast car if they could afford it.
That is either a troll comment, or a comment from someone who doesn't see anything beyond themselves.
My mother is 71 years old, she still drives, and couldn't care less what the 0-60 time is or how fast her car is. She really does drive like a little old lady.
My wife isn't quite that bad, but she doesn't care either. She wants something that is easy for the kids to get in and out of, something that is safe and reliable, and something that carries lots of stuff.
Performance is about number 47 on her care li
Re: (Score:2)
However, we need to consider it in context of the entire automotive industry, and it most likely won't end up as the one car company to rule the world.
This idea that it's the goal of companies to rule the world (in their their field) is nonsense. It comes from Microsoft doing that in the 90s. But despite that occurrence it's very rare indeed. And it's not what companies generally shoot for. Success doesn't require extermination of all competitors.
So, 1%. That coincidentally was the share of the market Steve Jobs said he was shooting for with the iPhone. Get in a few short years they were in the 30% to 60% area of market share, where they've remained ever
Re: (Score:2)
Now, don't get me wrong. I think Tesla is a cool company, and I don't think it's doomed because it "only" has a 1% marketshare. However, we need to consider it in context of the entire automotive industry, and it most likely won't end up as the one car company to rule the world.
I agree with you. What I predict will happen is that Tesla is the company we will all remember as causing the tipping point in the switch from ICE to BEV. Who knows whether they will even survive? But what they did was take a market that nobody else wanted to be in, except maybe as a dodge around CAFE fleet standards, and turn it into a market where people desire to buy these kinds of vehicles... to the point that the other manufacturers finally started treating it as a real market to be exploited.
Even Niss
Re: (Score:2)
There's literally(*) no source of reliable information about stocks that a common person can access.
There's literally no source of reliable information about stocks.
Re: (Score:1)
That pre-order book certainly is impressive, but that's balanced by their existing debt, their lack of positive cashflow, and the multiplier the pre-orders represent over their known (proven) production capacity.
There's no doubt entities willing to finance them, but I doubt they'd be 'overjoyed'.
Re: (Score:2)
Companies aren't expected to be profitable in their rapid growth stage. Money is expected to be spent on growth. Amazon wasn't profitable for most of it's existence. That doesn't mean it's a bad company. Nor does it mean that it wasn't very easy to raise finance.
Tesla keeps on investing in manufacturing capacity, as they keep growing 10 fold, and as they start manufacturing their own batteries.
So what? (Score:2)
0.o
Had I said they were expected to be profitable, you'd have a point. I didn't.
Nor did I say they wouldn't be able to get financing, only that it's not going to be the slam dunk the grandparent seems to assume as there are other factors at work than just a deep order book.
Did you even understand what I wrote? Or did you just reply to hear your own keyboard?
Re: (Score:3)
An existing order book does not show you everything about the company that you need to know about in order to risk an investment - look at Boeing, nearly 1000 orders for its flagship 787 model before it even flies, forecast of massive profits ahead, but now just breaking even on *production* costs after about 380 deliveries, massive deferred costs (meaning that the development costs are yet to be covered - infact, Boeing hasnt started paying them back yet), massive debts, an accounting block of well over 11
Just like American Bantam Car Company. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Because you just don't get it (TM).
Tesla could be profitable if it wanted to. But they choose to grow faster and do it right (TM) rather than do it profitably.
But, here's the kicker.
Once Q1 2016 financials are published, we'll see increasing revenues, and the end of Model X tooling/ramp-up expenditures. Meanwhile, Model X revenues begin to skyrocket. You do know that Model S/Model X generate about 20% positive cash flow, do you ? What happens is that 20% cash flow goes into R&D/tooling.
So what happens w
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla needs to continue to offer multiple models for just that reason. If they can go from 50->80->130->210->350->500k vehicles per year within their current factory and with available suppliers then it isn't that hard to pull off. They basically need about a 4-5% increase in production capacity per month.
Comparing to narrow body airplane production, it would be an impossible task; certification and limited vendors for certain parts (currently seats) make faster ramp-ups impossible. However
Re: (Score:2)
Tone (Score:5, Funny)
The tone of the article is a little off, like the author wants Tesla to fail for whatever reason, and is grasping on the flimsiest available reason he can find.
"Your product is in such high demand that there's no way you'll be able to produce enough! Take THAT, Elon!!!"
Re:Tone (Score:5, Funny)
"Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded."
Re: (Score:2)
Take THAT, Elrond Musk!
- GM Shillbag
Re: (Score:2)
The question isn't the number of orders Tesla has gotten or how strong demand is. It's whether or not Tesla can fill that demand while making a profit. If they end up losing money with each sale, higher sales numbers actually make their finances worse. I mean if Apple offered to sell iPhones for 1 cent each, the demand would be close to 7 billion units. They'd sew up 100% of the m
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla are not some inexperienced startup any more. This is their 3rd EV. They know what's involved.
They didn't have to announce the price just yet if they weren't confident of hitting it and still making a profit.
The reason for the anti-Tesla articles is the same as the reason for every single other thing on commercial news websites. They need to say something that will cause people to click. Controversial being a popular technique.
Re: (Score:2)
sigh...
As always the "lose money each sale" thing comes up.
They are in no danger of losing money on each sale. The only question is HOW much of their profit margin can they safely put into investing in scaling up the factory to meet demand.
If they want to take the safe way out, they could stop investing now, take until 2028 to deliver on their orders, and still make heaps of money. But of course that is stupid, and they are much better served by scaling up.
TLDR - the only question is how much they will scal
Re: (Score:2)
Bear in mind that quite a bit of Tesla profits are going into the Gigafactory, which is going to make them the largest producer of batteries in the world. So the cost for batteries for them go WAY down, and they can sell batteries to other companies for a profit. This is a big part of their plan. Their cars get cheaper to manufacture if they don't have to buy their batteries from third parties at a premium because they are sucking up a HUGE part of the market. If I want 70% of the batteries in the world
Re: (Score:2)
Bear in mind that quite a bit of Tesla profits are going into the Gigafactory
Profits? What profits?
A lot of people (you're not alone) here on Slashdot could really use a class in how to read a balance sheet and a P&L statement.
Tesla doesn't make a profit and the capital expense of building a factory isn't subtracted from short term profits, accounting doesn't work like that.
Even if you back out 100% of the R&D spent in the last year, they STILL don't make a profit.
Tesla is losing about $15K per Model S that it builds. The numbers never lie.
Re: (Score:2)
As Tesla expands from the 'enthusiast' into the general automotive market, most people aren't going to way 3-4 years for a car, they'll just buy their next choice. That's why it's an issue.
Re: (Score:2)
As Tesla expands from the 'enthusiast' into the general automotive market, most people aren't going to way 3-4 years for a car, they'll just buy their next choice. That's why it's an issue.
It doesn't matter if some of the people who preordered back out. Eventually they will actually start shipping cars and then the number of preorders is completely irrelevant. The preorder was just a publicity stunt to get the money needed to actually produce the car, which is a fairly normal thing for any kind of growing business to do.
Is it really like that? (Score:2)
The thing about that is, if it's a quality electric vehicle you're looking for, there aren't any other choices, and before any other choice could ramp up, your Tesla would probably be on your doorstep.
This probably is very little about "I need to buy a car" whereas it is very much about "I want an electric car."
I want a quality electric vehicle. T
Re: (Score:2)
Um. Yes. I can also get a bucket of horse manure. All three on on the same list: "do not get."
Short people got... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Tesla *invested* half a billion into a huge factory for an emerging product.
Like to try again?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Tesla *invested* half a billion into a huge factory for an emerging product.
Like to try again?
Even backing that out, they lost money, hundreds of millions of dollars.
Even backing out ALL R&D doesn't make them profitable.
Tesla is losing about $15K per Model S sold. The fanboys like to talk about future investments and the gigafactory, but if you bother to read their income statement, you'll see that backing those out doesn't redress the problem.
Tesla isn't profitable on what they build now. The Model 3 won't be profitable either, not for awhile. There is no assurance they will EVER been profit
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla has not method to grow the
Re: (Score:2)
Musk's explicitly stated goal is to revolutionize personal transport not sell vanity goods.
Fair enough, but so far he has been doing the later, not the former.
To do the former, he has to deliver a product that people want to buy in large quantities. Price, features, performance, utility, all matter in that market.
Right now, it doesn't really matter what the Model S is, so long as it is decent, because of the volume shipped worldwide (which is small, compared to major car companies).
To scale that up will require appealing to people who don't actually care as much about the whole EV thing as the e
Personalization (Score:4, Funny)
Can I have mine with carburators, please?
Love to tweak those things...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There might be an app for that. They have that lovely big screen instead of the dials. I can see adding something like Torque and maybe a carburetor-simulator app. Add in some sound effects for the old-time gear head to get audio feedback and you might have a seller there.
Re: (Score:2)
T I can see adding something like Torque
I hadn't thought about that, i'd like to see Torque connected to a Tesla. wait for the "WTF?" screen to show up on the sensor options.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure... they might not be hooked up to anything, but I'm sure Tesla can bolt a carby onto the chassis somewhere
Re: (Score:2)
Considering the massive storage space and poor range (compared to ICE) of the Tesla, I had always wanted to put a generator in there.
Do this and make sure your generator have carburetors.
Ford Credit Has A Plan For Them (Score:2)
Comparable to Chrysler (Score:3)
Old news (Score:2)
Re: Old news (Score:1)
Right on!!!
EV is the next thing. And energy harvesting is the next next thing.
Battery is the Keystone.
Tesla will be THE manufacturer.
Every car company will buy from Tesla. Every bus, train and motocycle companies will buy from Tesla.
Every homeowner, industry and business owner will buy from Tesla.
Even if Tesla doesn't sell a car, their success is a done deal.
Re: (Score:2)
You say this because Edison hasn't arrived yet.
This just in... (Score:2)
What about a $5000 reservation (Score:2)
With all the press about the number of reservations I think that would be fair. Pay more money to receive your car earlier; esp in the first year.
Bait and Switch (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
None of this should be surprising (Score:2)
And Musk has gone on record saying he expects people to drop an average of $7000 on extras. So clearly that $35,000 is a headline price for a very basic vehicle and Tesla have an incentive to sell the rest as optional extras. I wouldn't even be sure that stuff like
"on time" (Score:2)
I was under the impression Tesla's goal was to begin delivery of the Model 3 at the end of 2017. The key word there is "begin". Musk never said that all pre-orders will be delivered by such-and-such date. The reason people waited hours in line is so they could be earlier on the delivery list - nobody is expecting car number 300,000 to be delivered on the same day as car number 1.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Some will cancel (Score:2)
Since this time Tesla has to hit Q1 of 2018 at the last for all cars sold that quarter to get $7500 rebates, he has far more incentive to hit his targets this time.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't think it'll be a negligible percentage, given 2019 and 2020 delivery dates. Plenty of other electric options will ship before that.
If you mean BEV, not sure I see who else is getting ready to ship competing product in that timeframe other than GM?
I think you may be right that lots of people will cancel their pre-orders because after all, 3-4 years is a very long time to wait for a car. Situations change and all. On the other hand, I think for every order they lose, they'll gain one or more back as cars start to roll off the production line. The unexpected number of pre-orders shows that lots of people think this is a very desirable car
Re:need Cash? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
but it is clear that an electric vehicle can meet the needs of some drivers
Not the same range or price.
Perhaps you missed the word "some". Some drivers are willing to spend a lot of money to purchase a car. Some drivers have been known to travel fewer than 200 miles before refueling.