TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

Q2 2017 Delivery Estimates

Discussion in 'TSLA Investor Discussions' started by EinSV, May 21, 2017.

Tags:
?

What is your Estimate for Q2 2017 Deliveries

Poll closed Jul 2, 2017.
  1. Over 29,000

    1.8%
  2. 27,001-29,000

    6.4%
  3. 25,001-27,000

    40.0%
  4. 23,001-25,000

    36.4%
  5. 21,001-23,000

    9.1%
  6. 19,001-21,000

    3.6%
  7. 17,001-19,000

    1.8%
  8. 17,000 or less

    0.9%
  1. bonaire

    bonaire Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,443
    Location:
    USA
    I use data. They use emotion. :) A lot of data.

    My spreadsheet now is 8.2MB as a file. over 25,000 line items for MS and MX including good projection of inventory layout. Why didn't I use a database and loading program? next time. TMC member Hank L. Wright probably has similar amounts of data for ev-cpo.com but doesn't make any predictions here for sales numbers.

    I figure the mutual funds are also doing at least this amount of research before investing Billions of their customers money. But if they are only going off of company press releases and tweets - shame on them.
     
    • Informative x 3
  2. bonaire

    bonaire Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,443
    Location:
    USA
    #82 bonaire, Jul 4, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2017
    Would like to see more details from @JonMc or others on this in-detail and perhaps confirmation on the "why" the packs were a problem. I am sure Jon may not be allowed to talk about this, in detail. A lot of European cars for Q2 would have been built starting in March. A lot of 100D and P100D in the Euro 192xxx and 193xxx inventory series Vins which landed in EU in May. The "market" sees that 3000 more cars built than sold does not equate to a production shortage. It looks far more like an inventory build out - which was reiterated in the 10-K about the MX inventory cars and "upscale" loaners (which we would assume are 100kWh packs). Did they make inventory cars ahead of paying customers with custom orders (again)? A car produced is always worth far more than the sum of its parts. So, you build inventory to keep the factory flowing. Sales divisions figure out what to do next.

    Regarding the "need" for a car with 100kWh on board versus a want - it's pretty clear that 75 kWh on board is very well sized for almost all EV drivers. The 100kWh is more fitting for the hungrier Model X. Model S outsold Model X by 20% so is this claim that more Model X would have been sold than that if the packs were made available?

    And could someone explain the 1-day to produce Vin #s for 52xxx (May 20) and 1 day to produce Vins for 53xxx (May 21)? The bordering 1000 unit Vin #s were 10 or 11 days apart so this is clearly some sort of planned inventory layout for Q3. If Model X custom orders come in at 700/wk, I have to wonder what is happening here with the roughly 2000 possible inventory burst - were those the "we finally made enough Model X demo/loaner fleet?" A good amount of 52xxx is P100D while many more are 100D. Similar for 53xxx. If they are giving P100D as loaners, then this block is helping to solve that - and might be a cause of a claimed 100kWh pack shortage.

    Another interesting thing is they have stopped printing the number of MS and MX cars produced, individually, in recent quarters. I am surprised they break out the sales anymore.
     
  3. EinSV

    EinSV Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2016
    Messages:
    3,571
    Location:
    NorCal
    Hmmm. Is analysis of all this data how you came up with your estimate in your tweet to Mark Spiegel that Q1 deliveries would be below 19000 "for sure." Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

    Actual results were 25,051, so a miss of over 30%.

    Or how you came up with your estimate to Mr. Spiegel of 18.6K deliveries in Q3? Actual results were 24.8K, another miss of over 30%.

    [​IMG]

    I could go on ....

    As someone mentioned before, this looks like the broken cuckoo clock method.;)
     
    • Like x 2
  4. bonaire

    bonaire Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,443
    Location:
    USA
    Sure - last year, the extreme push in Q3 was hard for anyone to gauge. You can keep looking backward but those days are over. Today, we have things like pre-bought Hong Kong inventory, unknown China rumors of distributors and more. My estimate was near perfect for 2017 Q2. Only one direction - forward. I also "won" the TMC 2014 guessing contest here. And was about #2 or #3 for 2015.

    The estimate you posted was in August. This is before the Elon letter, 2-year lease deals, $30k off of P90DL "sweet deals" and other push actions in September. Who knows what tweets and sales sweeteners are yet to come?
     
  5. EinSV

    EinSV Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2016
    Messages:
    3,571
    Location:
    NorCal
    Not just Q3, but in Q4 you predicted 16.5K deliveries Website wait times for delivery change -- another 30% miss.

    Also Q1 2017, as noted in my post above a confident prediction of less than 19K "for sure" turned out to be another 30% miss.

    Your predictions of doom and gloom, which clearly seem to be driven by something other than data, have not come to fruition.
     
    • Like x 2
  6. bonaire

    bonaire Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,443
    Location:
    USA
    #86 bonaire, Jul 4, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2017
    The data wasn't showing those sales numbers - what seemed to happen was some flushing of the growing inventory which needs to be put into models now. Now, after Q2, the Produced but not Sold number have reached 8500 or so. That is a base of inventory that can throw off models that do not include sales-location active selling. This move from mostly custom orders to active selling on-site is changing things. So, with my Q2 estimate being very close, I'm back on track again.

    I miss the Trip Chowdhry estimates that would have been thousands higher than any typical estimate. Where'd he go to these days? I still want to see how things work out to meet Elon's "100k to 200k Model 3 sales in H2 of 2017". Elon Musk: Tesla Model 3 Production Target Is Up To 200,000 In Second Half Of 2017

    What is possibly dangerous is seeing these quarterly guesstimate graphs by members here and seeing a bell curve that ends up being 2000-3000 higher than actual sales - that has happened in both the annual guessing contests and here in this quarter's. Investors (incl mutual funds and pension funds) might look at such data and think "they're gonna do great - look at the actual owners' sentiments". This plus tweets and the link above with the "guidance" given one day and then the results following it must be viewed as desire to hype-the-future without regard to trying to live a more truthful existance. The only reasons to do that is to create a higher stock price over a more realistic, predictable and truthful environment. Of course, everything is couched by his statement that their goals are not to reached but to drive the employees harder. Guidance then becomes an "employee stick" rather than a fiduciary and proper market guidance factor. Employee-shredding aspirations work well for a while in a niche - but then what happens when bigger things need to be done? You get Unions and eventual employee push-back. For instance - where's the activity at the Buffalo plant? Compare that to recent news articles about Tesla will announce even more gigafactories this year. Shouldn't GF1 and GF2 be proven entities first? I guess the answer is send production offshore where there are far less constraints over employee abuses. China maybe? Thousands of companies and factories have done it and now we get our Walmart products "cheaper" and faster. But at what human cost? I hope you get what you're looking for - a higher stock price. But I hope real people aren't paying too much of a human cost to give it to you.
     
    • Informative x 1
  7. techmaven

    techmaven Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    3,618
    S-curve. After touring the Fremont factory, my guess is the 100 kWh packs are built at the Gigafactory using new pack production processes designed for 3rd gen. And the observation that @bonaire made about the Model X is probably close... they allocated for more Model X production and a lot of those orders these days is overseas, specifically China. 3,000 cars is less than 1.5 weeks of production and the shipping cut off was 1st week of June for any chance of reasonable Q2 delivery in Europe. Definitely not a chance for UK or Asia. They caught up in terms of production, but can only do so much for deliveries. Interesting they didn’t talk about overhang this time.

    In any case, I think the days of expedited shipping at very high cost at end of quarter for the S/X is likely over. They probably figured they’d make guidance and that was good enough in the face of the Model 3 launch.

    Someone at Tesla basically has to order parts for the mix of X versus S likely at least a quarter before production. They had to have solved the s-curve of 100 kWh packs for Model X for China by beginning of May to have any shot at Chinese deliveries, and even then, on an expedited basis. And given the 75 kWh model change-over, it makes sense to sell 75’s out of inventory in June and replace with 100’s which are a current model. That’s S and X both.
     
  8. dennis

    dennis P85D

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,941
    Location:
    Silicon Valley CA
    I appreciate the analytical work you do. But it gets overshadowed by the negative motives you ascribe to Tesla with no facts to back them up. For example:
    How about they are going to put a factory in China so they can sell cars 25% cheaper because they don't get slapped with import fees? Or that planning and building a Gigafactory takes 3-4 years before reaching meaningful production so Tesla has to make plans in parallel with proving out the operations at GF1? I've been reading your stuff for 2 years and it shows some deep-seated negative bias towards Tesla and Elon. Can you please explain?
     
    • Like x 1
  9. bonaire

    bonaire Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,443
    Location:
    USA
    #89 bonaire, Jul 4, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2017
    Sure, they continue to make claims and guidance they miss. Or do drastic things like Hong Kong in Q1, Denmark in 15Q4. They do this to get bonds or stock sold on the market. One day, profits from Model S will fund Model X. Then two year delays. The next is the bonds are needed for GF1 but then are used up common operations. The more stock sold to fund more GF1. NY state gives SC a $750M free factory. Solar city buys and "closes" Silevo but tells NY that they will use Silevo tech as advantage. SC nearly fails so Tesla buys them to save and then ramp the stock off that. Solar roofs? It is all an orchestrated creation. There are a lot of reasons to do what they are doing but I do not see it being for philanthropic reasons or for the good of humanity. I believe other factors exist behind the curtain. Lets all try to find the truth within the hype. I would hate to be a winner on ill-gotten gains. Would be a moral problem. May as well invest in pot stocks or Cigarettes and liquor. The bigger Tesla gets, the more it seems to get into possible profit problems. How much would another Fremont and Reno cost? $8-12 Billion? On what profits? Or is profit off the table for the forseeable future?

    The work is important and doesn't need hype one year and misses on guidance the next. However, future financial needs of more money must be based on ever increasing growth curves "on the whiteboard". Last year, EM said that 100k-200k Model 3 would be produced in 2017H2. Or did he say 100-200,000? Meaning one hundred to two hundred thousand? (Coyly) What was said on Sunday was it may not see even 50k and some rumors from suppliers is 25k is likely. No other CEO is allowed to be this wildly off target and see stock gains on the tweets. Maybe the crazy leaders of Herbalife or the Internet Bubble players of 2000. I can only explain it as IB working up the stock and sending EM thank you cards. Be careful in the long run. fans of EVs should want an industry-wide success, not support of one dominant player who needs constant stock sales to survive. I want to see how Tesla plans to make a profit and truthful guidance. if something is to be a strategic human good, it must undergo stringent and strong analysis to prove it is not a house of cards within.
     
    • Disagree x 2
  10. tentonine

    tentonine Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    614
    Location:
    UK
    #90 tentonine, Jul 4, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2017
    Bonaire, I understand some of your concerns about the delivery rate being lower than the 100-200k Model 3 that Elon Musk indicated before (unless he meant annual rate), as it does somewhat affect his credibility, although I think most people expect things to be delayed a bit beyond his predictions because he always sets such aggressive timelines.

    Although this is short of what he predicted, it would have been shocking if the stock had collapsed after the indication of low tens of thousands instead. Why? Nobody believed him before and the stock did not go up after the 100-200k discussion, so it wouldn't make sense for it to plunge now. The numbers he is now indicating beat most expectations, and the current expectation of the market is what matters the most for the stock price, not necessarily what the CEO said in the past.

    Having said that, I have no idea if it will go up or down tomorrow, as that will depend also on the reaction to delivery numbers and the market in general, but this tweet alone should not cause a strong negative reaction.
     
    • Like x 1
  11. geneclean55

    geneclean55 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,021
    Location:
    DC, DC
    Just a quick reminder. Bonaire was nowhere to be seen on the equivalent thread to this one after numbers came out for the last quarter.
     
    • Like x 2
  12. GoTslaGo

    GoTslaGo Learning Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    3,070
    Location:
    NV
    Meh, don't mind yesterday, IMO. Short trading day, between a weekend and a major US holiday. Big traders are taking a four day weekend, stocking up on fireworks and hot dogs. So market is easy to manipulate.

    Mmmm.... hot dogs....
     
  13. EinSV

    EinSV Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2016
    Messages:
    3,571
    Location:
    NorCal
    #93 EinSV, Jul 4, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2017
    Bonaire, I appreciate your "concern" for shareholders. I really do.:rolleyes:

    I will admit I don't share the same concern for short sellers. If they ended up relying on your wildly incorrect predictions in your tweets to Mark Spiegel that Q1 2017 would be "sub 19K" "for sure" and that Q3 2016 would have 18.5K, as well as your prediction that Q4 2016 would have 16.5K (all more than 30% off) then so be it, I guess.

    But I really don't understand how with this record you can criticize forum members' efforts to make educated guesses on deliveries and production, much less promote yourself as the expert on the subject.

    On that note, I notice you don't talk about production estimates. This quarter forum members who predicted production did well -- an average of 26,254 v. actual of 25,708 -- a difference of only about 2%. This was much better than your production estimate (23,600), which was much too pessimistic.

    You also seem to forget Q3 2016 when the forum's average delivery guess was almost exactly right (within 0.2%) and Q1 2017 when it was too conservative. Overall, while it tends to tilt somewhat toward the optimistic side on average, I think the forum has done a very credible job over the past four quarters, especially given the limited information available.
     
    • Like x 1
  14. Lump

    Lump Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2013
    Messages:
    2,626
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Since Tesla delivered 22,000 in Q2 you were only off by 4,500, not bad. :(
     
    • Like x 1
  15. EinSV

    EinSV Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2016
    Messages:
    3,571
    Location:
    NorCal

    Yeah that was pretty terrible -- off by 17%. But still downright Nostradamus-like compared to Bonaire's consistent >30% misses in his tweets to Mark BS.;)
     
  16. dw4ngg

    dw4ngg Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2017
    Messages:
    313
    Location:
    Houston
    Even a broken clock is right twice a day. /End convo with Bonaire
     
    • Helpful x 1
    • Like x 1
  17. dennis

    dennis P85D

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,941
    Location:
    Silicon Valley CA
    Did you ever consider that without the Elon Hype Machine Tesla and long range BEVs might not exist? The auto industry is huge and requires enormous amounts of capital. Look st Fisker and Faraday Future. Some mistakes, then they are starved for capital, then they fail. Lucid is likely next, currently unable to raise financing for their factory. And without the threat from Tesla, the existing OEMs wouldn't be investing in long range BEV's.

    Without Elon's relentless pushing of employees, hyping what's coming and unshakable belief in Tesla's ability to succeed they too could be relegated to the scrap pile of failed EV startups. And without Tesla's success there won't be any "industry wide success" of EV's.
     
    • Like x 2
  18. bonaire

    bonaire Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,443
    Location:
    USA
    If it is any concern regarding Mark - I sent him a private message back when TSLA was in the 180s telling him that I expected "the markets" to ramp the stock and that he should close his position out if he wanted to guard it. He basically said "I don't cover a zero" or something like that. Oh well. People have their biases. I can also understand how some people can "whip into a frenzy" the shorts like Chanos and others who use simply financials-only and not emotion, trends, favorable IB and future macro economic status. I'm certainly not listened to by anyone of importance. They listen to Ben Kallo and Adam Jonas who are "Pros" (and whos firms certainly accept fees for analysis coverage).
     
    • Informative x 1
  19. bonaire

    bonaire Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,443
    Location:
    USA
    #99 bonaire, Jul 5, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2017
    Fisker is "image only" (didn't he design a bit for Tesla early on?) and won't do well in industry. Faraday will probably fail as well. However, the real issue is not tesla announcing a new era of EV (primarily pushed due to acceleration and outward style). The real issue is oil. The entire world will look like Venezuela when it runs out - and so we need something else if this world population is to survive "at this level". The reason to have EV tech blossom now is when easy oil is gone in the mid-term of say 80 years from now, the existing 9-11 Billion people will need transportation. Or they learn to live an impossible life of strife and transport used only for food to keep them alive. Think Venezualans are off to their short-homes in the summer, going to amusement parks, driving 100 miles to their city jobs, doing Nascar type races? No, they are trying to eat. And the political strife in a failed government that actually *has* oil and not because it has run out is telling - just how bad will it be when oil does run out? It's no wonder EM and others want to run off to Mars. Can you imagine 11 Billion people being told that "oil has maybe 10 years remaining...good luck to you all" by some world leaders?

    Who is doing it well are places like Asia which are turning from bicycle to scooter (2-cycle) to electric scooter to get around. They aren't using much in terms of resources-per-mile. Why aren't we looking more at scooters and other low-resource products in the USA? Because we want "protection" and safety. We want "long range and luxury". We want it all. We cannot suffer. Thing is this is not America. This is Palo Alto and the money-magnet that is San Francisco making all the new toys for those who can afford it. There are what, 40% Americans who cannot come up with $500 in an emergency? They are not anyone's target market.

    When it becomes a public need, all auto companies would provide some solution to an oil shortage. What I see are oil-producing countries "pulling out the stopper" and draining oil as quickly as possible. OPEC is doing us no favors in a market glut - they are killing our grand-children ahead of time. If they slowed production, prices normalize and go up - and end up slowing down the oil drain. But world demand of 100Mbbld is expected soon. Doing the math - this century uses up the proven oil reserves. This century. People alive today will live in a world without oil. Will they have air conditioning? Mail services? Shopping malls? Or will they live in shanty old abandoned city sky scrapers and nationalized food services in a type of city-version of "The Road"? Oil made us rich, life fun and enticed us to "grow our families" - has anyone done the math on the reverse path?

    Maybe other automakers leadership is simply bean-counters as Bob Lutz put forth in his book. However, bean counters are truly needed for a firm to show profits and survive. Not all firms can be nationalized and live off of a non-profit future stance. I factor in a need for say doubling of the Tesla foot print (factory, battery plant, double stores, triple superchargers, quadrupling of dest chargers) and see that they would need another $8-12Billion or more. There are not any profits to provide that money - so the company needs to figure out just how to survive and it is not on profits. Could Elon sell his block of stock and "re-invest" in the company? Credit market and stock market are too supportive to suggest that. So, how does Tesla stay alive for say the next 50 years going into the oil doldrums? How does it compete against profit-making auto firms who can flip an existing factory into electric-transport with some work and money? How does it all proceed further? One can only ask for time-to-tell. Let's see how it goes. This is the view that the short sellers think about - the longer view. When someone says the future "will look like this" they have very interesting fortune telling experiences. So far, I haven't seen anyone who actually gets it right.
     
    • Disagree x 1
  20. neroden

    neroden Model S Owner and Frustrated Tesla Fan

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    13,868
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY, USA
    Disagreeing on the Venezuela comparison. That was caused by (a) heavy lead poisoning, and (b) petrostate (oil exporter) economics. Countries which eliminated lead from gasoline a lot earlier, or which are already oil impoters, will not have the same trajectory.

    (That said, Saudi Arabia and certain other oil exporters who kept lead in their gasoline until very late might well have the same trajectory.)

    ...but we should probably take this over to an oil-specific thread.
     
    • Like x 1

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.
  • Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


    SUPPORT TMC