2Q 2013 Model S Deliveries Potential Surprise

[Darko]

Just to propose a balance between waitlist vs. immediate gratification, it appears Tesla doesn't want to become just another carmaker with dealerships that have massive lots full of unsold cars, and instead give buyers the opportunity to custom-order their car in exchange for an acceptable wait. But this need not preclude immediate sales given that they would be both premium in price and non-custom. In a mature marketplace there may be a balance between those wanting a car immediately and willing to pay the maximum price and not specific to color/details/etc. with others wanting a custom order for cost and/or specific details and willing to wait a month or two for it. It's the early days so that balance is not there yet, but we might imagine that would be a happy medium. The notion of "jumping the line" will simply go away. I know I'd be willing to wait for exactly what I wanted at the specific price-point, even knowing that others might buy a readymade option directly from the showroom floor. This is the case with all car dealerships, just that Tesla would tend toward custom orders and a lean overhead.

 

[ckessel]

It's more than impressing the press, it's about strengthening the shareholder's confidence.

And what good will that do? It has no impact on Tesla's operating capital. Tesla just had a stock offering.

Elon has several performance goals in his contract as CEO

All of which are tied to very long term goals and have nothing to do with Q2 numbers.

Doing this could speed up Model X and Genlll launches by 6 months.

How? Changing Q2 by a few million to be slightly profitable rather than a slight loss has, again, zero impact on operating capital which is what's required to get Gen3 out the door. The X timeline is already close enough very little is likely to be able to compress that.

Elon has stated without question that his goals are long term value. He said very explicitly in the shareholder conference that he has no interest in short term manipulation of numbers for quarterly stock impact.

 

[30seconds]

i just got around to the clark howard interview on tesla. what struck me was 1. how mainstream the model S is quickly becoming and 2. clark paid ~ $45k for his 40. granted the 40 isn't currently available, but who is to say that tesla couldn't bring it back? I think with the CR reports and the good customer experiences it could be an option for the company to generate alot of additional demand. like to fill a 2nd or even start a 3rd shift.

now i can understand if the 40 is inherently compromised in terms of range, but i can also imagine a near future where the model s is offered in 50, 75 and 100 variants. with ongoing economy of scale and battery cost reduction maybe the 50 price can drop to ~ $50k?

by the way, does anyone know if the battery pack is "full" to reach 85? I ask b/c if there is room for additional cells it gives the company more degrees of freedom when considering battery cost/ efficiency curves vs. what pack size to offer. this could apply to a swappable long distance pack as well.

 

[pGo]

Check this interesting email to 40kw owners.

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...-Upgrade-to-60?p=367434&viewfull=1#post367434

Last minute rush to beat the Q?

 

[pGo]

In one of the delivery threads, someone posted an email received from Tesla to get a discount if they upgrade the battery from 40kw to 60kw. This must be done prior to the quarter end.

Mad rush to beat the Q?

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

So, there is chatter on the forums today that there are no loaner cars to be had, they've all been sold. Sounds like perhaps we should not be subtracting 80ish units from this quarter's production for loaners. Looks like those are sales too.

It doesn't work that way. Tesla has said that as soon as a loaner has been sold, they will put a replacement into production. In the short term there can be a decrease in loaners because of purchases, but that balances in the long term as new loaners are built. The 100 loaners in the calculation need to be thought of as reserved loaner spots, rather than actual cars.

That said, it looks like Tesla is moving away from sequential VIN's. Now, the best data we have is battery data from Panasonic (which clearly points to less than 5,000 cars produced in Q2) and recall data for May 8/June 10 that lists only ~1,300 delivered cars that were produced with the defect. Since we know that Tesla tends to have 400 cars in transit, and Tesla has stated that they fixed undelivered cars before delivery (thus taking them out of the recall notice) we again are left with a production rate of ~1,700 cars/month.

 

[ShortSlaver]

Bringing this back to life.

It appears a user here has seen Tesla shooting for 100 cars a day now with signage inside the factory. In addition, they put out over 500 the previous week. We really could see numbers around the 5,200 range it sounds like?

 

[smorgasbord]

We really could see numbers around the 5,200 range it sounds like?

Yup, I'm guessing 5000 cars minimum for the Q. At 450/week avg, that's about 5800 for the Q.

 

[Benz]

About 5,200 Tesla Model S's delivered to customers in the US and Canada in Q2 2013 is very likely.
The start of the production of the Tesla Model S's for Europe will begin in July 2013.

 

[CyberDutchie]

Where is CapitalistOppressor when you need him? :biggrin:

I suspect he's hiding because he has figured out the earnings report already. But seriously, if we all start projecting these huge Q2 surprises, it won't be a surprise anymore. I'm sure every self respecting investor by now has figured out that TMC is the best source of information on all things Tesla...

 

[brianstorms]

I'm sure every self respecting investor by now has figured out that TMC is the best source of information on all things Tesla...

It's a good source but just one source. Try a few conversations with actual Tesla employees and you get a very different picture from what is discussed here. TMC has a tendency to amplify things out of proportion, negatively and positively. The forum is a great resource, the community is great, but it represents a small vocal minority of the overall Tesla market. But, like I said, it is a source, and for TSLA investors it's far better than say Motley Fool or Seeking Alpha which are questionable-content honeypots lying in wait for web traffic.

 

[ongba]

It's a good source but just one source. Try a few conversations with actual Tesla employees and you get a very different picture from what is discussed here. TMC has a tendency to amplify things out of proportion, negatively and positively. The forum is a great resource, the community is great, but it represents a small vocal minority of the overall Tesla market. But, like I said, it is a source, and for TSLA investors it's far better than say Motley Fool or Seeking Alpha which are questionable-content honeypots lying in wait for web traffic.

What are the perspectives from Tesla employees that lead to a different picture than what is discussed in the forums? I presume their outlook is more cautious than what is expressed here. Thanks.

 

[blakegallagher]

With a little research you can look into the past at predictions and analysis made by members here and some of them have a very high success rate. While I agree the forum can be overly optimistic.... recently it has been accused of that on several occasions when in fact we were shooting low.... The recent run up to over 100 is a good example. Most of us thought it was approaching its max well before it ever hit 110+

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

I don't have time to do real research June production right now, but I recall thinking that there were ~3,000 deliveries in April/May based off of solid VIN data. For the quarterly estimate I can write up the constraining parameters off of memory.

The recall covered ~1 month of production and included ~1,200-1,300 cars. Because Tesla probably has 400-500 cars in transit at any given time, and because those cars likely were not included in the recall (because Tesla fixed them before delivery), that tends to support the 1,600-1,700 deliveries that I expect happened in May. And VIN data was pretty solid for April having ~1,200-1,400 deliveries.

Remember also that there were 100 loaners built at some point (once built, sales of these cause a brief reduction in the pool of loaners until they are replaced, but over time we just need to deduct ~250 cars from VIN counts, assuming VIN's every become rational again).

Because I don't trust the VIN's for June, I am more comfortable with anecdotal reports like "500/week" or "100/day" for estimating June production.

The only other constraint is that the Panasonic announcement points mathematically to ~4,700 cars produced if you assume 2 weeks of transit time for the batteries. Because there were already cars in transit at the beginning of the quarter, we can assume that deliveries will be somewhere in that range as well.

Taking 3,000 deliveries pre-June, a 500/unit/week production rate in June would be sufficient to get us back to ~4,500-5,000 deliveries. BTW, that would mean an exact mirror to Q1, when we had ~1,300 deliveries in January, ~1,700 in February and ~1,900 in March, for 4,900 total.

For my part, I am comfortable expecting ~4,750 as a nice mid range estimate. I really don't believe in 5,000+ deliveries, but with VIN's screwed up the way they are we can't rule it out.

 

[Bgarret]

Remember also that there were 100 loaners built at some point (once built, sales of these cause a brief reduction in the pool of loaners until they are replaced, but over time we just need to deduct ~250 cars from VIN counts, assuming VIN's every become rational again).


The only other constraint is that the Panasonic announcement points mathematically to ~4,700 cars produced if you assume 2 weeks of transit time for the batteries. Because there were already cars in transit at the beginning of the quarter, we can assume that deliveries will be somewhere in that range as well.

Taking 3,000 deliveries pre-June, a 500/unit/week production rate in June would be sufficient to get us back to ~4,500-5,000 deliveries. BTW, that would mean an exact mirror to Q1, when we had ~1,300 deliveries in January, ~1,700 in February and ~1,900 in March, for 4,900 total.

For my part, I am comfortable expecting ~4,750 as a nice mid range estimate. I really don't believe in 5,000+ deliveries, but with VIN's screwed up the way they are we can't rule it out.[/QUOTE]

CO - I have followed your rationale for Panasonic battery delivery and production limits, but I believe the announcement said "by the end of June" they would deliver 100 million cells...would it change your analysis if 100 million was delivered June 5th rather than June 30th - which would still meet the criteria of "by the end of June". The reason I ask is both VIN and hybridcars.com estimates would point to approx. 3900 cars delivered by June 1 and VIN data (if it is Occam's razor) from 3100 produced in 2012 and 4900 delivered in Q1 2013 (8000 total) you have good evidence that European VIN's fall in the 14,200 - 15,500 range and that approx. 5500 - 6000 cars were produced (and mostly delivered) in Q2. I have a sneaking suspicion that Elon is about to attack one of the few straw-men remaining. After attacking quality, battery technology, range anxiety + supercharging, financing, federal loan and battery swapping - one of the few knocks left is "you can't be profitable without the government subsidy".

If he can deliver 6k cars is Q2 at $90k/car for 540k revenue at 19-20% margins....he may be able to be profitable with just making cars...the ZEV and other credits would then be gravy.

May be some hopium or I may be 1 quarter ahead of myself, but if TSLA produces and deliver 5k in Q2, they will have to deliver 5500 in Q3 and Q4 to make their "stated" goal. I think they can do better.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

lol, I was going off of memory, so don't call it analysis. I don't actually have access to my spreadsheets, and I never took a close look at June anyways, because it was almost immediately obvious that they were skipping VIN's. When I look at it closer ill post something better.

I don't think Tesla actually had delivered 11,000 cars until a few days into June, which is why I think they were ~3,000 deliveries for April/May.

As to Panasonic, yes, if those batteries were delivered in Early June, I wouldn't use them as a constraint.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

So there are no significant gaps between 8000 and 10'000. They were well documented back then:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgGtU6wnKp4CdDZKcGpwWkFqa1l5RjRwdTd2blNzOVE#gid=0

Then I went through the various threads, and tried gather other VINs between 10'000 and 14'000 to try and find gaps. Here are the 10 largest potential gaps. If you have, or know of a VIN in any of these ranges, please reply to this thread (first 3 numbers should be fine).

12144 -> 12805: 661
9808 -> 10357: 549
13435 -> 13812: 377
11711 -> 12061: 350
11380 -> 11711: 331

9555 -> 9808: 253
10357 -> 10600: 243
11141 -> 11380: 239
9332 -> 9555: 223
10647 -> 10843: 196

I have MS VIN 1219* (an 85 kWh), one of your "gap" number cars.

 

[Benz]

"Currently producing at an annualized rate of more than 25K units (saw a flat panel on the factory tour that indicated 5,454 units produced in the 2nd quarter."

That's what an owner saw himself at a factory tour during the TESLIVE event.

Here is the link: http://teslamodels.wordpress.com/

But how many of these were actually sold to customers (and paid for) and delivered to them as well?

 

[Jonathan Hewitt]

But how many of these were actually sold to customers (and paid for) and delivered to them as well?

The ones built buit but not sold and paid for (excluding the european ones) should be mostly canceled out from the 1Q13 ones that were built and not realized as revenue then. Soooo 4800 +/- 200?

 

[Benz]

I think that at least 5,000 will have been delivered and paid for in Q2 2013.