Here's the way I look at it... If Tesla shoots for the claimed automotive industry standard of a 6% margin...?... .
The typical cost of dealer distribution for a major manufacturer (which sells a range similar in price and positioning to that of 2020 Tesla) is around 10-15% of MSRP. That is composed of some disclosed items, like MSRP-Invoice, some consumer incentives, other dealer ones, and manufacturer support for dealer facilities. That 10-15% range tends to increase for less-than-desirable models/brands/options. Overall no manufacturer I have known budgets less than 20% for dealer distribution costs. Because Tesla has no dealers. a 20% cushion can be a powerful force.
FWIW, I worked on manufacturer-level assessment of these costs in several countries for several manufacturers ranging from low-volume luxury to high-volume entry-level. The costs do vary quite a lot, but on average the 20% figure keeps repeating itself. For the tiny handful of countries in which onon-franchised-dealer models are common, I have assessed only three. Each of the three had distribution costs or around 10-12%. Other things are not equal in this world, so generalizing is risky. In the cases I dealt with the advertising budgets ran between 4-6% of total costs, but were frequently obscured in many different budgets, so never transparent.
Given all that I'll postulate that Tesla distribution costs run around 8% of sales, and the promotional costs are around 2% of sales. If so, that would give Tesla 4%-8% of sales advantage over typical competitors. That advantage, in a world of 8% gross ROS being pretty much the highest end, is huge! That advantage is dwarfed by the Tesla construction/sales model. In the Tesla case WIP includes raw materials (a la Ford River Rouge in the 1920's), with vertical integration far higher than any other typical auto builder today. So WIP is presumably high than, say, Toyota, famously the leanest builder (true or not). On the other side Tesla holds title until the end-user has taken delivery. That cycle means Tesla holds as WIP somewhere between 60-90 days of finished goods that most manufacturers will have already sold to distributors/dealers. GAAP sales recognition for auto manufacturers is an entertaining subject (for accountants anyway
) but Tesla actually carries more than is typical on both input and output sides. Further the typical large car manufacturer outsources large amounts of design work, ranging from the entire car to major components, thus reducing design work. Similarly, many outsource even the actual manufacturing. How would Mercedes or BMW customers feel if they knew their shiny new high value chariot actually was made by Valmet or Magna-Steyr. All of that dramatically reduces capital and marginal costs to the banded car. Tesla, despite loading up on Mercedes supplier-supplied switchgear, compressors and assorted other stuff, still has been more and more vertically integrated.
Tesla does have one serious Tier One supplier, sort of, Panasonic, except that Tesla itself is the primary design leader, Panasonic the battery-builder leader, tesla again design and quality control leader or co-leader depending on the case. This relationship is not unusual in kind (e.g. GM and Ford sharing their new 9-speed automatic transmission) but it is in that this one is braking technological, materials and manufacturing precedent. There is no clear way to understand the impact on capital expenditure or cost on the gigafactory without tons of data proprietary to Tesla, Panasonic, or both.
Entertainingly the Tesla manufacturing approach owes not too much to Silicon Valley conceptually. except for those robots, of course. Another topic relating to quality control, capital costs and scale economies
Once all that is done my personal guess is that Tesla is more than doubling effective gross margins due to their unconventional approaches, which will improve dramatically with scale.
these are my views. I might be wrong but I'll need proof to change my thinking