electracity
Active Member
they have an independent big four accounting firm signing off on their financials
Sigh
Tesla's reported margins are acceptable under GAAP.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
they have an independent big four accounting firm signing off on their financials
Knowledge of accounting. It is not complicated to understand why Tesla's reported margins are not comparable to other auto makers.
Okay... while not an actual accountant, I have a pretty reasonable operating knowledge of accounting. I'll concede that there is latitude for Tesla to move OPEX to CAPEX and fudge the margins. But where is the evidence that they're actually doing that? And please explain how you've been able to quantify that and hence recalculate the actual gross margin.
Okay... while not an actual accountant, I have a pretty reasonable operating knowledge of accounting. I'll concede that there is latitude for Tesla to move OPEX to CAPEX and fudge the margins. But where is the evidence that they're actually doing that? And please explain how you've been able to quantify that and hence recalculate the actual gross margin.
I'm not an accountant either. But I did go to business school, and I have worked in a factory.
Tesla would need to add R&D and SG&A to the expense side of their car margin calculation to be comparable to traditional automakers.
1) Traditional automakers intentionally expense R&D in direct car costs. They want to reduce taxes, and they don't want to push costs to later years when those old R&D expenditures could make a bad year worse. Tesla capitalizes R&D in part to show better margins and also to push the recognition of those costs onto a future larger company.
2) Traditional automakers sell wholesale. Tesla sells retail. The cost of Tesla stores and other selling costs is not in Tesla margin calculations. An apples to apples comparison would put sales and related costs into Tesla's margin calculation.
Tesla will lose money on the model 3 until they get to high volume, just as GM loses money on the Bolt.
Of course. But GM reportedly hasn't been able to bring their costs down enough on the Bolt to do that.But wouldn't it make even more sense to just see profitable EVs alongside profitable ICEs?
It's still beneficial for GM to have an EV to offer in some locales - even if they have to sell them at a loss - because if they DON'T sell enough zero-emission vehicles, they will be barred from selling ANY vehicles in that locale.I see no reason why GM would benefit from paying for the Bolt, instead of getting payed.
Do they? Please provide a citation for that information. From what I've read, GM is just creating the rolling chassis, while everything that makes it an electric car is being designed & produced by LG.And GM owns the design to the chemistry as well as to the motor/inverter.
Oh yes, that's the plan. But I've got a strong feeling that those in the market for a 3-series/A4/C-class are going to have a serious "WTF" moment when they sit in Model 3. Time will tell.But, hey, in case you didn't want to read through transcripts of previous investment calls or even the voluminous Secret Master Plans the basic idea was that the Model 3 is going to be a $35k base vehicle to compete with the BMW 3 series / Audi A4/ Mercedes C class. Not a $35k vehicle to compete with a $20k Civic.
That's just the thing. It can be the jack-of-all-trades, or at least closer than it is now. These extra features really aren't that expensive or particularly difficult to implement. If a Prius can incorporate a hatch into a $12k cheaper car, so can Tesla.This is the value car compared to the S. It can't be the jack-of-all-trades wonder car, it has to make compromises. Those compromises will be a deal killer for some, them's the breaks.
Economics of scale is something that gets thrown around a lot in these discussions, but essentially there is no difference if there are 2, or 5 production lines, to the cost of parts and labor. Batteries will be cheaper for Tesla and so might the inverter and motor, but that just won't cover the costs.
Yes, get over it.That's just the thing. It can be the jack-of-all-trades, or at least closer than it is now. These extra features really aren't that expensive or particularly difficult to implement. If a Prius can incorporate a hatch into a $12k cheaper car, so can Tesla.
No it doesn't -- it just needs to appeal to enough people, and judging by the number that put up $1k there are lots of peole that were happy with the released *sedan*.Model 3 has to be perfect and reliable when it comes out.
It is compromised only in your opinion (and likely lots of others). Sedans are popular in NA -- perhaps not in EU.Tesla can't mess this up. To ensure the ramp and initial production is smooth, Model 3 has been intentionally crippled to be as simple as possible. It's not just simple, it's overly simple. This is a bulletproof plan to make good on Elon's goals and promises, but it has resulted in a compromised car that doesn't have to be.
This is what the NA consumer wants, live with it.Nothing about this car screams what the consumer really wants. It was designed to be cheap and easy to build. That's disappointing and makes for a boring car.
It really doesn't seem like it should have taken Tesla this long to get to production. Its been 14 months since the first reveal and the 1st reveal hasn't really changed at all - except for small facelift and some additional cameras.As far as sightings go that was pretty weak. Oh well.
It really doesn't seem like it should have taken Tesla this long to get to production. Its been 14 months since the first reveal and the 1st reveal hasn't really changed at all - except for small facelift and some additional cameras.
What have they been doing?
It really doesn't seem like it should have taken Tesla this long to get to production. Its been 14 months since the first reveal and the 1st reveal hasn't really changed at all - except for small facelift and some additional cameras.
What have they been doing?
They have only recently started installing them....right. There was a recent photo with a ton of them lined up in the factory - still in the boxes.They only had to install over 400 highly advanced robots and other critical infrastructure.
Attempting to get it right!What have they been doing?
Anyone have a link?Attempting to get it right!
So you think they'd rather burn money than build a profitable car? Even at just 40k units globally, 10k in losses per unit is massive. It could lower their yearly profits by as much as 5%. Not sure if that would be called "no interest".
Yes, I do believe they would rather burn money on the Bolt. It helps fulfill the federal ZEV mandate and with the credits earned it mitigates their losses. So they take a little hit on each sale to insure that they can still make and sell their lucrative ICE cars and trucks. Makes good business sense for them. What DOESN'T make sense for them is for there to be a massive swing in public opinion towards electric vehicles. That would undermine the very core on which their company (and all the other ICE manufacturers) are built.
Dan