Great data, Truly. I like the way that you came up with the numbers as it is a little different than anyone else had done previously.
That being said, the nice litmus test of your "44.85%" number as it looks like that is where the majority of your estimations end of derriving from is tested from the Year end report for 2014 by Tesla. They stated the following:
In 2014, about 55% of new Model S vehicles were delivered into North America. While North American Model S orders grewyear-on-year, deliveries were about flat as we directed vehicles into Asia/Pacific (APAC) markets to support our first year ofdeliveries there. The APAC region represented about 15% of our deliveries for the year, and the remaining 30% of deliverieswere to Europe, where delivery volume more than doubled from a year ago. Since we remain production constrained, wemanage regional deliveries to balance customer wait times globally.
This means that the total sales was recorded as 31,655 and we take 55% of that to come out to a 2014 NA total of 17410 (rounded down). Your estimates come out to: 13589. To me, this signals that your CA percentages went down more over time. They 2014 CA percentage of NA sales looks like it would be around 35.09%
| Total 2014 | CA 2014 | CA percentage | NA Estimate (55%) | APAC (15%) | Europe (30%) |
| 31,655 | 6,110 | 35.09% | 17410 | 4748 | 9497 |
What is of course lost is the Q/Q granularity of that percentages you had. But from your number we can pretty safely say your 45.30% is correct, so we must down adjust the other three quarters (which is only going to drive the percentage lower). This comes out to (35.09 * 4 - 45.30) / 3 = 31.69 (yes, that doesn't quite add up correctly, but using more exact numbers the 35.09 is rounded down to begin with so 31.69 is more accurate I also used more precise numbers when dealing with your 45.30 number)
That said, once I reapplied the numbers back into the chart with the new calculations my NA totals exceeded the "55%" statement by around 400 units. So for Q4 specifically I adjusted the percentages upward to reflect 33.55%. This now perfectly lines up the NA numbers back to meet the golden number of 17,410.
So we have pretty solid numbers for each quarter for EU (yes, the reported numbers vs the percentages given is actually off by 24 units, but that is close enough of an error that it shouldn't matter too much). We also have solid quarterly numbers for NA that actually sorta make sense given what we knew happened with deliveries getting "stuck", so it makes sense for CA to go up for that quarter alone because they were originally going to deliver some 2400 extra cars that never got to their destinations in time. So now, subtracting out those values I come up with new APAC numbers that also fit the data (they are actually down by 24, which guess what caused that?) So here is the new 2014 data set:
| ........... | North America | Europe | Asia | Australia | Global | California | California../ North America |
| Q1 2014 | 3,384 | 3,073 | 0 | 0 | 6,457 | 1,533 | 45.30% |
| Q2 2014 | 3,010 | 2,482 | 2,087 | 0 | 7,579 | 954 | 31.69% |
| Q3 2014 | 3,910 | 1,583 | 2,292 | 0 | 7,785 | 1,239 | 31.69% |
| Q4 2014 | 7,106 | 2,382 | 281 | 65 | 9,834 | 2,384 | 33.55% |
I got nothing at the moment to help you with 2015 numbers, because after doing all that, it has completed destroyed making sense out of anything going forward. I'll keep playing with them until it seems to line up with what we know vs what we don't know.
