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

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Anyone want to take a guess as to why the SR deliveries have been delayed?

My guess: Homologation. That because the seats, and therefore the restraint system, are different that they have to get re-certified and additional crash testing may be required and Tesla thought they could skip it. (I seem to recall that P100Ds sat at delivery centers for a few weeks while a similar situation got dealt with.)
 
Initial reports from Sweden mentioned Tesla's problems with getting Model 3 delivered.
Is there some details about this development?
(if you can point to a Swedish source, I can recap it in English here).
No source as such, but I can personally vouch for one observation last Friday lunch time of a local white M3, which I guess belongs to the local member of Tesla Club Sweden who had remarked that he was expecting such a delivery. He was turning off from the Smögen bridge, heading for home or work probably.
There is this thread (in Swedish ... ) but it's long and I haven't even looked at it. HTH
 
  • Informative
Reactions: neroden
I had not thought of that, but you are right. They can barely get the current production out of Freemont as it is not a good area logistically. The middle of the desert at least doesn't have traffic congestion. Also, they could build a huge staging area at GF1 for cars waiting for trucks to ship.

Check out this satellite image of Gigafactory 1:
Gigafactory%201.png


In the top left corner there is a huge parking lot - built in May last year, which is mostly unused...
 
Anyone with a large social media following needs to post this information NOW...BEFORE the numbers are out.

Document clearly and in front of a large audience:

1. The current production/delivery estimates of the analysts (and how low they are).
2. That many have downgraded based on these estimates. (So their friends can buy cheap).
3. That the analysts are predicting profit/positive EPS DESPITE Tesla's guidance to the contrary.

We need to do this to prevent the shenanigans that happened during Q4. They key is to publicize the shenanigans...get the public's eye on it and call them out for it. That's the only way to make it stop.
I tweeted Oprah Winfrey yesterday , literally.
 
In theory, shorting makes the market "more efficient" because when negative developments at a company are spotted, the stock price can begin to adjust downward, rather than waiting for a big news story and then there's a rush by investors to sell. As we all know, however, short-selling can be abused, especially when combined with FUD.

I would rather campaign to remove the most negative feature of shorting than try to remove it entirely, because there are too many experts who will testify how shorting is good for the markets. For example, a lot of short-term shorting is carried out to expedite transactions by brokerage houses.
Story of Wall St is one of abusing anything & everything. So, it is best for the sake of the world to make them have less flexibility, even if several experts (always) testify that Wall St needs a lot of flexibility.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: neroden and Lessmog
Great article! I especially love this bit:



Shipload around shipload arrives on the continent of German competitors Mercedes , BMW and Audi . Tesla will teach these manufacturers to know fear. :D


Also, the farting easter egg was a stroke of genius. I have seen so many reviews highlight it.

Very interesting article with a very serious wake-up call for the German auto makers.

Since it is a German article I could have wished that they had used a translation of the actual name ("emissions testing mode") instead of "Furzkissen" (fart bag).

But I guess that would have been twisting the knife one turn too much.
 
Anyone want to take a guess as to why the SR deliveries have been delayed?

My guess: Homologation. That because the seats, and therefore the restraint system, are different that they have to get re-certified and additional crash testing may be required and Tesla thought they could skip it. (I seem to recall that P100Ds sat at delivery centers for a few weeks while a similar situation got dealt with.)

Fulfilling demand for SR+ LR (and the last few MR)?
 
But right now, Tesla's replacement capex is close to zero, so everything above the maintenance level is for growth. I expect quarterly maintenance capex is likely only $100-150m, so even in Q4 Tesla I expect had $300-350m of growth capex.

I think both of these assumptions are too rosy. Elon seems proud when he tells stories about how they purchased a line then replaced it by something else when it didn't work, when they dusted a flufferbot, when they quickly built a side line in a tent, when they realised they wanted to automate too much. Plus you compare two cars produced a few weeks apart and it there's already significant change, some of which needs updated tooling. I suspect their internal change on existing lines is far higher than zero. Secondly, they have about $9B in tooling and machinery. A basic budget of 10% to maintain and retool which is in my experience a very common guideline in industrial automation gets us to a budget of $900M a year.

I agree that we can put the majority of R&D costs as supporting growth. However, I suspect a significant part of R&D is software development and supporting promises made to current customers that require a continuous upkeep. For example, improving enhanced autopilot, maintaining the significant historical software maintenance debt for an increasingly diverse car system (AP1/AP2/AP2.5/AP3, old/new MCU, different sensor suites, different motors, different packs with different BHS, etc...)
 
China related.

According to a joint statement released by government agencies led by the Ministry of Finance and the top economic planner - the National Development and Reform Commission on Tuesday, the subsidy for pure battery electric cars with a driving range of 400 kilometres and above will be cut by 50 per cent to 25,000 yuan per vehicle from 50,000 . . .

Source: China cut subsidies for electric vehicles to boost high-quality development - YUAN TALKS | 元傳媒

That will be a tough one for the shorts. On one hand it impacts TSLA sales there, on the other- there is no demand for TSLA cars to begin with.
Tesla never gets any Chinese subsidies. So actually great news for Tesla cause every single local brand will take a huge hit.
In summary, Chinese subsidies down and Tesla just got comparatively cheaper.
 
China related.

According to a joint statement released by government agencies led by the Ministry of Finance and the top economic planner - the National Development and Reform Commission on Tuesday, the subsidy for pure battery electric cars with a driving range of 400 kilometres and above will be cut by 50 per cent to 25,000 yuan per vehicle from 50,000 . . .

Source: China cut subsidies for electric vehicles to boost high-quality development - YUAN TALKS | 元傳媒

That will be a tough one for the shorts. On one hand it impacts TSLA sales there, on the other- there is no demand for TSLA cars to begin with.

This isn't really negative for Tesla this year, currently it has no access to subsidies in China so it is at a disadvantage relative to the local EV competition. Next year, higher EV subsidies would have been nice, but i don't think Tesla was ever counting on them.

Current national EV subsidy is:
  • 150-200 km: 15,000 yuan (c.$2,230)
  • 200-250 km: 24,000 yuan
  • 250-300 km: 34,000 yuan
  • 300-400 km: 45,000 yuan
  • over 400 km: 50,000 yuan (≈$7,450)
It looks like this is moving to 0 for <250km, 250km-400km ? and >400km cut in half to 25k yuan (c.$3.7k)

It is also urging local governments to phase out subsidies (currently average 70-80k yuan i think).

EVs should still get significant benefit from no consumption/excise tax (tax varies with engine size: 1 litre engine 1%, 1-1.5L 3%, 1.5-2L 5%, 2-3L 9%, 3-4L 25%, >4L 40%) and no purchase tax (5% temporarily, normally 10%).

There have also been reports that China may introduce local subsidies for electricity to lower ownership costs of EVs further.

China also has its ZEV program to slowly enforce transition to EVs, but this isn't likely to be a market driver unless the targets are made significantly more aggressive.
 
That's supplier hell.
I particularly liked:
tijd.be said:
Door de grote vraag eiste het Zuid-Koreaanse bedrijf volgens Duitse media plots 10 procent meer geld voor zijn batterijen.
which, according to Google, translates to "Due to high demand, the South Korean company suddenly demanded 10 percent more money for its batteries, according to German media."

A point I've made before is that while Tesla is certainly battery constrained, their competitors are even more constrained and at the whim of their supplier for pricing. "That's a nice automotive business you've got there. But we have [competitor] after us to increase their supply and I'm afraid we'll have to cut delivery rates to you because what you're currently paying us isn't competitive."