Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Near-future quarterly financial projections

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Tesla has guided consistently this year (most recently in August) for the Semi to ship in 22. Their recent practice has been to start production in the quarter prior to shipping (from new production lines) so I am hoping that there may actually be some Semi production reported in the Q3 P/D. It would be a nice positive surprise :).

I have not seen any guidance on target production volumes. That would be a bonus (at ER)!
 
Matt Smith (Good Soil) is at $1.58. He ends up with 34.7% automotive gross margin excl. credits after a fairly detailed analysis.
I watched the Good Soil video on Youtube where they go through their Q3 model and the main reason their EPS estimate is so high compared to everyone else is they anticipate more of the price rises coming into effect in Q3 rather than Q4 and Q1.

The price hike timing is the biggest wildcard factor in this quarter. Nobody outside the company really knows.
 
Good Soil estimates 369k deliveries. That seems to be below average for analysts in the retail (or in their case formerly retail) TSLA investment community.

The big thing is they anticipate a $3k increase in average revenue per vehicle delivered. That’s mainly how they end up with a giant jump to 34.7% gross margin excluding credits. I personally think most of this revenue improvement is likely to happen more in Q4 than Q3, due to the length of the backlog at the time in March and April when the prices went up. However, if the timing is actually in Q3 then earnings will probably be a 50% surprise blowout like they’re predicting.

Here’s their presentation for their model for Q3.

Not investment advice
 
Energy is a tough segment to forecast. There is some evidence that Tesla can do much better than what I have forecasted.
Here is how I forecast the number. We saw huge growth in Solar in Q2 (106 MW) so I kept Q3 at 100MW thinking Q2 was not typical.
I grew storage by 20% in Q3 vs Q2.

View attachment 851211
How did you figure in the 85% QoQ Megapack production? We have an idea that of course production doesnt mean financial gain in the quarter.
Still the 22% QoQ should effect more than just powerwall and shouldnt be as hard to add. I havent seen anyone mention that since Powerwall requires Solar installation that Solar deployed would go up as well. You want the powerwalls you need to get solar deployed. What am I missing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: unk45
How did you figure in the 85% QoQ Megapack production? We have an idea that of course production doesnt mean financial gain in the quarter.
Still the 22% QoQ should effect more than just powerwall and shouldnt be as hard to add. I havent seen anyone mention that since Powerwall requires Solar installation that Solar deployed would go up as well. You want the powerwalls you need to get solar deployed. What am I missing?
You are not necessarily missing anything. My calcs take into account those issues, but I ignore other things that TheAccountant does in far better detail than I do. The truth is that Tesla gives us insufficient detail in some key areas, especially in Energy and in Service, for us to model these aspects with any great confidence.
 
How did you figure in the 85% QoQ Megapack production? We have an idea that of course production doesnt mean financial gain in the quarter.
Still the 22% QoQ should effect more than just powerwall and shouldnt be as hard to add. I havent seen anyone mention that since Powerwall requires Solar installation that Solar deployed would go up as well. You want the powerwalls you need to get solar deployed. What am I missing?
Energy numbers over the past 6 quarters have been wildly inconsistent. For this reason, I have decided to take a conservative approach to the Energy sales forecast until the business becomes more predictable. I have Storage growing 20% (Q3 vs Q2) while it grew 34% (Q2 vs Q1).
 
Based on todays P&D numbers my updated Q3 fcast set alongside my pre-P&D one below. Obviously the 22k build in inventories is going to be quite a big error term for me. I do hope that Tesla becomes more of a steady-state operation in this respect so as not to frazzle everyone unnecessarily.

pre P&D >>>>> post P&D

Deliveries = 386,145 >>>>> 343,830
Revenue = $25.873 >>>>> $23,204
Auto GM% = 29% >>>>>> 29%
EPS (GAAP) = $3.83/3 = $1.28* >>>>>> $1.09

* again this on a GAAP basis
 
Last edited:
Based on todays P&D numbers my updated Q3 fcast set alongside my pre-P&D one below. Obviously the 22k build in inventories is going to be quite a big error term for me. I do hope that Tesla becomes more of a steady-state operation in this respect so as not to frazzle everyone unnecessarily.

pre P&D >>>>> post P&D

Deliveries = 386,145 >>>>> 343,830
Revenue = $25.873 >>>>> $23,204
Auto GM% = 29% >>>>>> 29%
EPS (GAAP) = $3.83/3 = $1.28* >>>>>> $1.09

* again this on a GAAP basis
I am showing GAAP of $1.12 (we are close) and Non-GAAP of $1.23
My $1.23 vs Wall Street of $1.07. I need to see if WS has changed their number recently.
 
I am showing GAAP of $1.12 (we are close) and Non-GAAP of $1.23
My $1.23 vs Wall Street of $1.07. I need to see if WS has changed their number recently.
If I'm close to you then that's good enough for me. After all who cares about whether I'm close to the Tesla reality :)

More seriously, if anyone has a good handle on the production break downs between the various factories and the various models for the whole quarter that would be good to see. Clearly I need to chase the other 20k of errors out of my spreadsheet !

This what I had been working towards on PRODUCTION - so 22k has gone into inventory build (which as a result will go from 4d to 12d I think) and there is another 20k or so to apprtion out.

1664729962075.png
 
These production and delivery updates flow through to new fully diluted EPS estimates of $1.17 GAAP and $1.29 non-GAAP, which is 11% lower than my original estimates of $1.32 GAAP and $1.44 non. This would still be a 22% beat of Wall Street's original average GAAP forecast of $0.96/share, which was based on delivery estimates in the upper 350s to lower 360s depending on who you ask.

In my forecasts I have not bothered to try estimating differences between production and deliveries because it seems very difficult to estimate accurately with only public information and I don't want to spend time and energy counting trucks and ships. As such, my production forecast and delivery forecast are identical. Maybe I'll add this layer of sophistication in the future but it's not a priority because I'm focused more on predictions of long-term growth rate rather than a few percentage points of difference in the short term.

I had underestimated SX production but overestimated 3Y production, as shown below. Overall the estimates were very close and I'm especially glad that the 3Y forecast was so close, because that increases my confidence in this method for predicting future 3Y production and over time SX production will become a diminishing proportion of the whole. Still, it's nice to see an unexpected 19,935/16,411 = 21% QoQ jump for S&X, and so I've increased my ramp expectations accordingly. The S&X ramp is still mostly a guess because I have no good info other than the historical trajectory of the ramp and the fact that SX sales formerly peaked in 2017 at 25k per quarter, but the refreshed versions are much better than the S&X of 2017 and clearly have a lot more demand than in that era, even though many other viable EV options exist now.

Table 1: Gigapress's Q3 Production Forecasts vs. Actuals
ForecastActualDiff% Error
3Y354346-8-2.2%
SX18.119.91.910%
Total372366-6-1.6%
(All numbers in thousands)

Table 2: Gigapress's Adjusted S&X Ramp Forecast
Q4 202222.0
Q1 202324.2
Q2 202326.6
Q3 202329.3
Q4 202332.2
(All numbers in thousands)

I am glad to see real evidence Tesla is finally unwinding The Wave after more than a year of talking about doing it. Although that will hurt certain metrics for this quarter including earnings, inventory, and cash balance, with this move the business will be more efficient and stress the team less in the last weeks of each quarter so overall I think it's a better strategy.

The increase in inventory was ~6% of production for both 3Y and SX, so this has negligible impact on mix and consequently on the auto unit economics (average per-car revenue, cost, gross profit, gross margin %, etc.).

This is not investment advice.
 
The increase in inventory was ~6% of production for both 3Y and SX, so this has negligible impact on mix and consequently on the auto unit economics (average per-car revenue, cost, gross profit, gross margin %, etc.).

I mean, the increase in inventory is over $1B of potential sales (based on ASP), right? Close to $1B in cost to produce those vehicles? I guess it’s not COGS yet on account of no S but the drag on cost of inventory has to be in there. Is that reflected in these updated EPS estimates?
 
I mean, the increase in inventory is over $1B of potential sales (based on ASP), right? Close to $1B in cost to produce those vehicles? I guess it’s not COGS yet on account of no S but the drag on cost of inventory has to be in there. Is that reflected in these updated EPS estimates?
I'm not an accountant but my understanding is that the value of the inventory gets counted on the balance sheet, but the cost of producing the cars doesn't get charged until delivery, at the same time as the revenue is recognized. This does affect free cash flow though. Basically, I'm pretty sure that this adds to Tesla's current assets but reduces Tesla's current income recognition.

What is the Matching Principle?​

The matching principle requires that revenues and any related expenses be recognized together in the same reporting period. Thus, if there is a cause-and-effect relationship between revenue and certain expenses, then record them at the same time.


Tesla's 10-Q officially defines the revenue recognition as being triggered by the customer getting the vehicle.
Automotive Sales Revenue

Automotive Sales with and without Resale Value Guarantee

We recognize revenue when control transfers upon delivery to customers in accordance with ASC 606 as a sale with a right of return when we do not believe the customer has a significant economic incentive to exercise the resale value guarantee provided to them at contract inception.
 
Interesting exercise.
By plugging in the 343.8k deliveries into my model, Non-GAAP EPS decreased from $1.36 to $1.22 (still a beat to Wall Street of $1.07)
To get back to the $1.36 eps, ASP would have to come in higher in my model by $1,800 per car. It's possible.
More S/X (offset a little by lease)
Better automotive GM than Q2 (Shanghai idle charges), plus potential pact of product mix in transit (low GM/ content cars?).
I'm not an accountant but my understanding is that the value of the inventory gets counted on the balance sheet, but the cost of producing the cars doesn't get charged until delivery, at the same time as the revenue is recognized. This does affect free cash flow though. Basically, I'm pretty sure that this adds to Tesla's current assets but reduces Tesla's current income recognition.
Yah, concensus on TMC is that CoGS travels with car until sold.
 
Foreign Exchange Rate Impact on Q3 Earnings (My Estimate)
The impact to earnings from changes in Fx rates is very difficult to model. However, I do make an attempt to compute this impact and incorporate it into my model. I see the impact Q3 vs Q2 at $0.04 per share (negative); my Q3 eps estimate of $1.22 has $0.03 impact. Only $0.01 off so I decided not to change it.

The income statement of non-US countries are translated to US$ using the Average Exchange Rate for the period.
I take the average exchange rate for the month and then compute an average for the quarter.

1664900247436.png

I get my exchange rates here: X-Rates

I build my Q3 estimates by using Q2 as a starting point. So the last column in the table above is what is relevant to me.
The Yuan weakened to the US$ vs Q2 by 3.5%, the Euro 5.4%, etc. Here is how these exchange rate changes impacted Q3 (vs Q2):

1664900529825.png


As you can see, even though sales were negatively impacted by $439m (or $0.13 per share), foreign costs are reduced due to the strong dollar.
Also, Tesla importing batteries with payment terms in Yuan and Yen which will also reduce costs on the US P&L
Adding it all up, we end up with a net negative of $149m or $0.04 per share.

Here are some detailed supporting schedules:

1664900835958.png
 
I am glad to see real evidence Tesla is finally unwinding The Wave after more than a year of talking about doing it. Although that will hurt certain metrics for this quarter including earnings, inventory, and cash balance, with this move the business will be more efficient and stress the team less in the last weeks of each quarter so overall I think it's a better strategy.

I mean, the increase in inventory is over $1B of potential sales (based on ASP), right? Close to $1B in cost to produce those vehicles? I guess it’s not COGS yet on account of no S but the drag on cost of inventory has to be in there. Is that reflected in these updated EPS estimates?
One reason I've wanted to see The Wave be unwound is that (among the other reasons listed) it looks to me like optimizing one component of the business, value of inventory, for a specific point in time. In order to optimize for that, the company ends up increasing that value at all other points in time. I don't know this is the case but I would expect that Tesla's average value of inventory throughout the quarter is higher.

By optimizing for steady state sales, besides the primary goodness of better work loads throughout the company, I also expect that the actual value in inventory will (on average) be lower.


But of course investors and traders won't see that - we only see that single point in time each quarter.
 
It is ridiculous that the wave forces them to pull service techs into delivery (thereby making service worse) while periodically and regionally forcing them to offer incentives or play hardball on delivery dates to squeeze stuff in by the end of the quarter. If they really do unroll the wave, good riddance and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Speaking of which, I recall when there was inventory available in the USA and there were end of quarter incentives like free tire upgrades, supercharging for life, and so on. Demand seems to have caught up, to say the least, but there was a time when the US demand wasn't there to overwhelm the supply. My sense is that more cars in the wild and more word of mouth and more friends giving test drives led to more demand, but it took a while to become a steamroller.

I'm hopeful that the steamroller is building in China. It may not hit while there are still citywide lockdowns going around, and there may be months or (hopefully not) years where inventory is available, but I hope the same pattern will replay there.

I'm also noticing the battery supply situation... seems odd that the cheap Model Y would be close to immediately available while the LR has a long waiting list, where you'd think Tesla would want to align production so the reverse was true (more deliveries of high-trim models and more delays on low-margin models -- you know, like they did with the Plaids). I can only assume they have enough LFP batteries to crank out loads of SR cars, and not enough Nickel batteries to catch up to LR demand. I have no idea whether that's likely to change.

Do we know whether Tesla plans 4680 production in or around Shanghai any time soon? If not, why not? I can only come up with perilously close to conspiracy theories.
 
I am glad to see real evidence Tesla is finally unwinding The Wave after more than a year of talking about doing it.

It's early, but...https://eu-evs.com/bestSellers/ALL_DAILY/Brands/Month/2022/10

Tesla has sold 13 vehicles in October in the four European countries that report daily.

They sold >209 per day in those four countries in September.

Again, it's early and Tesla did not specify exactly where these regional deliveries were being smoothed out, but so far in Europe, the start to Q4 looks a lot like every other quarter there (based on the available data, of course).
 
  • Like
Reactions: petit_bateau
It's early, but...https://eu-evs.com/bestSellers/ALL_DAILY/Brands/Month/2022/10

Tesla has sold 13 vehicles in October in the four European countries that report daily.

They sold >209 per day in those four countries in September.

Again, it's early and Tesla did not specify exactly where these regional deliveries were being smoothed out, but so far in Europe, the start to Q4 looks a lot like every other quarter there (based on the available data, of course).

Yes it is early. There are three ships in transit Deneb Leader, Glovis Supreme, Hoegh Traveller heading to Europe. This was as of Oct 3. Much earlier than prior Qtrs. In Q3, the first ship out of Shanghai (Morning Chorus) departed 17 days into the Qtr. So Tesla is 2 weeks ahead on shipments to Europe in Q4 vs Q3.
 
It's early, but...https://eu-evs.com/bestSellers/ALL_DAILY/Brands/Month/2022/10

Tesla has sold 13 vehicles in October in the four European countries that report daily.

They sold >209 per day in those four countries in September.

Again, it's early and Tesla did not specify exactly where these regional deliveries were being smoothed out, but so far in Europe, the start to Q4 looks a lot like every other quarter there (based on the available data, of course).

To be fair those four countries are on the periphery. To the extent that the wave is/was being smoothed out I think that was largely to do with ship-timing out of China than with in-Europe transits. This means that there is a wave of emptiness moving from the ports towards the peripheries within Europe that will take a few more weeks to backfill. So my suspicion is that waves within continents are still a factor in play, but not necessarily waves between continents which were previously the dominant issue.

Until of course a decision is made to either go fully waveless, or revert to full-on surfing again.