TSLA Q2 2020 GAAP Income poll

[vikings123]

Fun thread for GAAP estimates.

 

[Green Pete]

seriously there, the street average estimate is a loss. is everyone here really sure theres no chance of a loss?

 

[UCF3]

seriously there, the street average estimate is a loss. is everyone here really sure theres no chance of a loss?

No chance. I expect profit even excluding FCA credits

 

[Tslynk67]

seriously there, the street average estimate is a loss. is everyone here really sure theres no chance of a loss?

How could it be a loss when the previous quarter was a profit, with 5k less deliveries, Plus 5k of the deliveries in Q2 came from inventory, the factory was shut for 6 weeks, with most workers being furloughed, all staff took a pay cut of between 10-30%, lots of high-spec MY in the Q2 mix, more MIC M3 with higher margins, and we all bought loads of merchandise in the final few days of the quarter.

Based on all that alone, I expect profits, and THEN Tesla can choose to recognise some deferred revenue and ZEV credits, finally they could bring deferred tax-revenue into play, which is $1.8b on the balance sheet when they feel like it.

 

[StealthP3D]

seriously there, the street average estimate is a loss. is everyone here really sure theres no chance of a loss?

You sure seem to put a lot of faith in Wall Street analysts.

I've been investing my hard earned money for over 30 years and I learned very early in the game to not listen to a word they say. At all. This has been working out VERY well for me.

Of course that doesn't mean there couldn't be a loss - it's just that their opinion doesn't sway my opinion one way or the other, not even a little bit.

 

[Doggydogworld]

How could it be a loss when the previous quarter was a profit, with 5k less deliveries,

2k fewer deliveries in Q1, not 5k.

Plus 5k of the deliveries in Q2 came from inventory, the factory was shut for 6 weeks, with most workers being furloughed,

This is not helpful for net income.

all staff took a pay cut of between 10-30%, lots of high-spec MY in the Q2 mix, more MIC M3 with higher margins

The first two are helpful. We don't know Shanghai margins because Tesla doesn't disclose them (though they should).

 

[Green Pete]

Well, thanks to those in this thread who dissuaded me from selling my leaps

 

[adiggs]

How could it be a loss when the previous quarter was a profit, with 5k less deliveries, Plus 5k of the deliveries in Q2 came from inventory, the factory was shut for 6 weeks, with most workers being furloughed, all staff took a pay cut of between 10-30%, lots of high-spec MY in the Q2 mix, more MIC M3 with higher margins, and we all bought loads of merchandise in the final few days of the quarter.

Based on all that alone, I expect profits, and THEN Tesla can choose to recognise some deferred revenue and ZEV credits, finally they could bring deferred tax-revenue into play, which is $1.8b on the balance sheet when they feel like it.

Looks to me like the deferred FSD revenue recognition plus ZEV etc.. credits was necessary for profitability. Then again, I don't see what all the fuss is about whether the business works with or without them. (Or maybe they reported revenue ex. credits and I missed / forgot about that).

Anyway, other companies / competitors all have the same underlying regulatory environment to navigate, and they've all got their own success or failure with dealing with it. I suppose this could be wrapped up under governments picking winners and losers (a point of view I would frequently agree with).

However, I wrap this up under governments engaging in one of their most important charges - causing externalized costs to be internalized. The particular mechanism I consider to be badly chosen (I prefer a refunded carbon tax) which will improve the economics for EVs as a secondary effect), but it's still doing something in that direction.

 

[Doggydogworld]

Looks to me like the deferred FSD revenue recognition plus ZEV etc.. credits was necessary for profitability. Then again, I don't see what all the fuss is about whether the business works with or without them. (Or maybe they reported revenue ex. credits and I missed / forgot about that).

Anyway, other companies / competitors all have the same underlying regulatory environment to navigate, and they've all got their own success or failure with dealing with it. I suppose this could be wrapped up under governments picking winners and losers (a point of view I would frequently agree with).

However, I wrap this up under governments engaging in one of their most important charges - causing externalized costs to be internalized. The particular mechanism I consider to be badly chosen (I prefer a refunded carbon tax) which will improve the economics for EVs as a secondary effect), but it's still doing something in that direction.

They disclosed a whopping 428m regulatory credits, but not FSD revenue. Deferred revenue went down a little, so I imagine they took some out of the cookie jar.

 

[MP3Mike]

They disclosed a whopping 428m regulatory credits, but not FSD revenue. Deferred revenue went down a little, so I imagine they took some out of the cookie jar.

They did take some FSD: "deferred revenue recognition of $48M related to a Full Self Driving (FSD) feature release."