EVNow
Well-Known Member
It’s going to be difficult to figure this out. We don’t know how much of their depreciation is linear vs per unit, for eg.I'm usually a big fan of this type of number crunching, but I think it's premature here. If I were to wade in, I'd start by subtracting the 188m expense for inventory writedown/firm purchase as that won't be part of their long term cost structure. That gives us a ~400m starting point. I'd very roughly break that down as:
100m depreciation -- Of 118m total
100m labor -- assume fully staffed, 5k of 11.5k total employees on 1/1/22
100m parts/mat'l -- 80k per vehicle nominal cost (excludes the writedown/firm commit charge)
100m ???? -- scrap/rework, equipment recalibration, OT, employee training, off-site meetings in Cancun?
The first two are mostly fixed, spread over 40k vehicles a quarter vs. 1.25k they reduce from 160k per to 5k. The last two are pure guesses. I figure their nominal parts/materials must exceed 60k or they wouldn't have raised prices. But they must at least have a path to sub-100k, otherwise it would be a disclosure item. And I just don't see what would drive it to something crazy like 2x Taycan.
Finally, I don't think there's any way to compare vs. Tesla startup. Rivian is launching three vehicles almost simultaneously and planned to ramp 2-3x faster than Tesla. Rivian's IPO and go-to-market environment was also completely different -- investors cared only about speed and not at all about costs.
Either way, I think the most important thing to figure out is whether Rivian is like one of those highly funded dotcom era companies that spent big and just burnt out spectacularly or not. There is no easy way for an outsider to find this out. Tesla definitely was very conservative in spending which helped them survive.