Website wait times for delivery change

[Perfectlogic]

I've just completed the analysis of all the data available for the NA wait time, and results are materially different from those on the Schonelucht's chart. The trend line for NA wait time is actually slightly up, not down. This needs to be sorted out as the conclusions drawn based on chart are obviously very different. Hopefully Schonelucht has a chance to comment on this.

My chart and the underlying data series are included below.

View attachment 177594

View attachment 177595

Your graph barely changes anything. The conclusion I have drawn all along is that S demand has been growing slightly. The rise in production has been much more significant as that is in the order of several thousand cars per year over the past 12 months. Whether the wait has gone up or down 1 week over the past 12 months only makes a difference of around 1000 cars in total demand difference over a year, aka 2%.

 

[schonelucht]

Hey, Schonelucht, I am trying to reconcile you graph with data, but not being able to do so. For example, according to your graph the US wait time in 2016 ranged from 3.5 to 9 weeks. According to my data, however, the wait time ranged from 4 weeks to 7.6 weeks.

View attachment 177574

It seems that there is a difference on how we treat data. Here is my assumptions:

• The wait time is accurate only on the day the update was made
• Reference to a month means the 1st of the month (June means June 1)
• Refernce to a "late" month means 16th of the month (Late June means June 16)

Can you clarify your assumptions and how they differ from mine?

You missed the periode from March 20th. US wait time was specified as April back then. I take that to mean second week of April (near end of period half). So from March 20 through March 24th, Tesla specified US delivery as 'April' which translates to at the lowest a 3 week delivery time in my accounting. On March 25th they switch to 'May' and so the wait time goes up to 6 weeks. There is a case to be made that normal month mentions would stretch into the 3rd week of that month. That would just shift some of the months by at most a week and on overage half a week.

On the other hand of the scale, my 9 weeks as compared to your 7.5 weeks come from the period around the beginning of this year. There the same mechanism is in play. I take the end of the accounting period (second week of march) while we were just barely in the first week of january. That makes 9 weeks.

In general, my assumptions are as follows : full months mentions refer to the second week of that month, 'late' months mentions refer to the last week of that month. Finally, since our input data is only (at best) I never calculate days but straight up work with weeks. However since I always 'round down' weeks you can have a +1 or -1 effect depending on if Tesla gave an update on monday rather than friday.

Generally since Tesla only gives 'half month' estimates it is perfectly fine to have a one week difference in the end results based on you how your round. And because you round wait time periods 'down' to the start while I round the 'up' to the end the expected effect is that my calculated shortest is shorter than yours but my calculated longest is longer than yours too. But the effect is really minimal and more important, consistent. So as long as you only compare my numbers with mine and yours with yours you can make historical comparisons based on them.

 

[schonelucht]

I've just completed the analysis of all the data available for the NA wait time, and results are materially different from those on the Schonelucht's chart. The trend line for NA wait time is actually slightly up, not down. This needs to be sorted out as the conclusions drawn based on chart are obviously very different. Hopefully Schonelucht has a chance to comment on this.

My chart and the underlying data series are included below.

View attachment 177594

View attachment 177595

Thanks for the work! A few quick remarks on top of the previous one

1) why not include all the data you have? You track these numbers longer than 12 months already.
2) The peaks are getting lower in your graph so that is consistent with mine.
3) Your lows are seemingly rising for the last three quarters but I feel your method of accounting misses to capture the real dip here because Tesla didn't report the 'late' part for that month so visually comparing it to quarters when it did is misleading. That artificially inflates the effect of only making the calculation at the beginning of a period. Secondly, this period has not yet concluded and its fairly possible we dip another week which would reverse the trend and make your lows go lower as well. In fact we already have. It's the 22nd that makes 22 days to the next delivery period of 3 weeks instead of 4.

 

[vgrinshpun]

Your graph barely changes anything. The conclusion I have drawn all along is that S demand has been growing slightly. The rise in production has been much more significant as that is in the order of several thousand cars per year over the past 12 months. Whether the wait has gone up or down 1 week over the past 12 months only makes a difference of around 1000 cars in total demand difference over a year, aka 2%.

I do not follow your logic.

The fact that wait time trend line is up means that rate of incoming orders increased faster than the production output. This means steady growth of the backlog, which is HIGHER (percentage wise) than the production growth.

The final conclusion is that based on the actual data THE RATE OF GROWTH OF DEMAND IS HIGHER THAN THE RATE OF GROWTH OF PRODUCTION.

 

[Spidy]

12/12/15 to 01/01/16 how do you get 2.9 weeks there? Didn't check any others...

 

[Perfectlogic]

I do not follow your logic.

The fact that wait time trend line is up means that rate of incoming orders increased faster than the production output. This means steady growth of the backlog, which is HIGHER (percentage wise) than the production growth.

The final conclusion is that based on the actual data RATE OF GROWTH OF DEMAND IS HIGHER THAN THE RATE OF GROWTH OF PRODUCTION.

Indeed that is correct, higher by 1 week compared to what has been thrown around earlier, but it is probably just about the starting point. 1 weeks production is 1000 cars or perhaps upwards of 1500 at this point, that is a demand of 1000/1500 cars over the span of 12 months in difference, 2 or 3% of the total yearly demand. Not very significant as the estimates are just that anyway, the conclusion about slightly rising demand over the last 12 months still stands.

 

[CButterK]

The final conclusion is that based on the actual data THE RATE OF GROWTH OF DEMAND IS HIGHER THAN THE RATE OF GROWTH OF PRODUCTION.

And also supported by the increase in deposit amounts...

 

[vgrinshpun]

And also supported by the increase in deposit amounts...

And by what is indicated in shareholder's letter...

It seems that some opinions have standing by themselves, independent from the available data.

 

[CButterK]

And by what is indicated in shareholder's letter...

It seems that some opinions have standing by themselves, independent from the available data.

Over on the Demand thread, I had some dialog with him regarding the specifics of the deposits and wait times. His response was certainly entertaining...

 

[vgrinshpun]

Indeed that is correct, higher by 1 week compared to what has been thrown around earlier, but it is probably just about the starting point. 1 weeks production is 1000 cars or perhaps upwards of 1500 at this point, that is a demand of 1000/1500 cars over the span of 12 months in difference, 2 or 3% of the total yearly demand. Not very significant as the estimates are just that anyway, the conclusion about slightly rising demand over the last 12 months still stands.

The important point, once again, is that based on historical data over more than a year, backlog grew FASTER than production. This was 100% consistent with what the Company and Elon communicated to everybody willing to listen over the same period of time.

Looking forward, Elon and the Company again indicated without any ambiguity that they see more than enough demand to meet the 80 to 90K guidance.

Enter Perfectlogic, who comes into the discussion, guns blazing, and based on data which was shown were inaccurate, insists that the Company does not have enough demand to meet the 80-90K guidance. Do you realize how preposterous this is?

 

[Perfectlogic]

The important point, once again, is that based on historical data over more than a year, backlog grew FASTER than production. This was 100% consistent to what the Company and Elon communicated to everybody willing to listen over the same period of time.

Looking forward, Elon and the Company again indicated without any ambiguity that they see more than enough demand to meet the 80 to 90K guidance.

Enter Perfectlogic, who comes into the discussion, guns blazing, and based on data which was shown were inaccurate, insists that the Company does not have enough demand to meet the 80-90K guidance. Do you realize how preposterous this is?

You seem to have a hard time understanding the scale of each factor. Let me try this again, if the wait on average has increased 1 week compared to 1 year ago (probably not even 1 week if you include the most recent data point) then that means 1 week of production extra in demand over the span of 1 year. There are 52 weeks in 1 year so it would equate to 1/52 in extra demand. The production rate has increased more than 10 times that making it more important.

If the wait had increased 10 weeks it would be significant, 1 week is more like a rounding error.

 

[vgrinshpun]

12/12/15 to 01/01/16 how do you get 2.9 weeks there? Didn't check any others...

Not sure I follow your question - it is calculated by Excel - subtracting 12/12/15 from 01/01/16 yields 20 days or 2.86 weeks, which rounds to 2.9 weeks

 

[schonelucht]

The important point, once again, is that based on historical data over more than a year, backlog grew FASTER than production.

It's unclear what you are comparing here? Backlog is a number of cars (or deposits), production (rate) is cars per week. That's like comparing distance with speed. You can't.

I think we are broadly agreeing. Demand grew, production grew. There is no sign of them dropping or flatlining. The only thing we may disagree on is : did demand consistently outpace production (the 'is Tesla demand constrained question'). I feel there has been no evidence at all that supports such a theory.

based on data which was shown were inaccurate,

I would be disappointed it you take this to mean my graph without first writing a rebuttal on my own thorough defense towards your questions a few posts earlier.

 

[vgrinshpun]

You seem to have a hard time understanding the scale of each factor. Let me try this again, if the wait on average has increased 1 week compared to 1 year ago (probably not even 1 week if you include the most recent data point) then that means 1 week of production extra in demand over the span of 1 year. There are 52 weeks in 1 year so it would equate to 1/52 in extra demand. The production rate has increased more than 10 times that making it more important.

If the wait had increased 10 weeks it would be significant, 1 week is more like a rounding error.

Except that comparing RATE of increase in demand and production requires dividing both by the 52 weeks...

Look, you are trying to defend indefensible. Your conclusion that Tesla can't meet guidance because it lacks demand is wrong.

If backlog increases, while both production and deliveries increase, the demand grows faster than production.

 

[Perfectlogic]

Except that comparing RATE of increase in demand and production requires dividing both by the 52 weeks...

Look, you are trying to defend indefensible. Your conclusion that Tesla can't meet guidance because it lacks demand is wrong.

If backlog increases, while both production and deliveries increase, the demand grows faster than production.

What? I'm not even sure I follow you anymore. If the wait increases by 1 week over the span of 1 year then the demand was 53 weeks of production over the span of 52 weeks, aka 2% higher than the capacity. The production rate for the S has increased something like 20% over the last year. So if the wait increased by 1 week which I still don't quite buy but it doesn't really matter then the total demand increased 22%.

Problem is that capacity is about to increase 50% very soon. The demand would have to increase much faster than trend if Tesla is to fill this new production capacity pretty much instantly (if they want to meet the yearly guidance).

 

[vgrinshpun]

It's unclear what you are comparing here? Backlog is a number of cars (or deposits), production (rate) is cars per week. That's like comparing distance with speed. You can't.

Yes, I misspoke. I am comparing rate of incoming orders to the production. The fact that wait time grew, means that the incoming orders grew faster than the production.

I would be disappointed it you take this to mean my graph without first writing a rebuttal on my own thorough defense towards your questions a few posts earlier.

Of course I will address what you've posted, point by point. I am limited in time today, so it might come later. I did, however, looked at the data, and it is obvious to me that wait time both for NA and overall (average does not work, must be weighted average) increased slightly, rather than decreased. This means that incoming orders grew faster than the deliveries and production.

 

[neroden]

Look, we all knew the Model S market would saturate *eventually*. Now that Model S account for 30% of the cars sold in the US in the "large luxury" market, we know that we're coming to the stage where growth in demand has to slow down. It would be unduly optimistic to expect yearly sales to go up by a factor of more than 4 at this point.

And indeed, we find from ample data that the growth in demand is still faster than the growth in production. But not by a huge amount. Great. That's what we're expecting at this point, as the market for cars at this price point will be saturated soon.

 

[kenliles]

Look, we all knew the Model S market would saturate *eventually*. Now that Model S account for 30% of the cars sold in the US in the "large luxury" market, we know that we're coming to the stage where growth in demand has to slow down. It would be unduly optimistic to expect yearly sales to go up by a factor of more than 4 at this point.

And indeed, we find from ample data that the growth in demand is still faster than the growth in production. But not by a huge amount. Great. That's what we're expecting at this point, as the market for cars at this price point will be saturated soon.

I think this is a fair point. Although I'll remind we are witnessing a complete disruption here. If ICE makers never offer a competitive EV (in ModS class category)- the market will be 100% available. Don't expect this to happen, but I use it to illustrate the unknown. That said, you're right that it will clearly slow as we move forward. Good point

Regardless though, it accentuates the imperative to monitor and track based on actual data and actual perfect-logic.

In that regard, I'd like to take this opportunity to applaud @vgrinshpun for his critical, long-standing commitment and contribution to factually based research, posts, opinions and conclusions; and the time that takes.
1) the value of this approach to this forum is immense
(and extends to others who maintain this relationship to their posts- you know who you are- and they are numerous)
2) one reason for this expression of appreciation is self interest. Preemption of potential fatal frustration induced from arguments source from an imperfect-logic.
@vgrinshpun - your commitment to our collective well being is much appreciated... Don't let that fact be lost in the hyperbole of recent protraction. In short,
thank you

 

[vgrinshpun]

Thank you for kind words, @kenliles, it is really appreciated. I am really happy to contribute back to this community - feels great to be part of it.

P.S: No plans to scale back...

 

[vgrinshpun]

Just got done with going through more than a year worth of data for Europe. The snapshots of the wait time charts for NA and Europe and the trend lines (as constructed using Excel trendline feature) are included below. To get rid of the week rounding business, all wait times shown in days.

The conclusion, as expected, and as I eye balled before is that trend lines for both NA and Europe are upwards inclined, with the European one more so than the NA one. This means that wait time increased since March of last year, indicating that rate of incoming orders was outpacing the deliveries. This is opposite from what was commonly believed before.

The chart for Asia/Pacific and reconciliation of my charts with ones made by Schonelucht will be coming later.