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

Why Tesla Will Fail

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I agree in that the Tesla is a great car and in NY I don't see too many. I disagree in that I love the new Panamera exterior and the interior is sooooo much nicer than my S. The new Jaguar, BMW etc.............. Some really good looking 2018 cars.
I guess they just don't impress me because they don't have the technology that Tesla has. Actually when I traded in my 2000 Jaguar XJ8 Vanden Plas in February of 2016, I seriously considered the new XJ8 but I could NOT get past the fact that it looked so much like every other car on the road.....I was used to the classic lines of my older XJ8 VDP (which only had 52,000 miles on it...probably should've kept it) but I also looked at the Acura TLX and ended up with the Toyota Avalon Hybrid Limited, loaded, top of the line, brand new of course. I drove it for almost 2 years and only had 8900 miles on it when I sold it when my Tesla was ready for delivery. Of course, it looked like every other car on the road does and quite frankly, so does my Model S, HOWEVER, the Avalon got me "into" electric driving and I definitely wanted to be all electric but also to have a Tesla because of everything it is and does. I don't really know how much nicer you can get inside a car, but I don't feel there is a whole lot more that could be done to make it more luxurious but I am sure there is. My Jaguar, for instance, had lambs wool floor mats. Luxurious? Yes. Beautiful? Yes. Practical? Hell NO! I put them in the trunk and put some floor mats that were a lot more serviceable after replacing the lambs wool mats that were original to my car and had become like a matted dog that has been in the rain. The new ones were the ones that went in the trunk. SO, I guess it's all up to an individual's preferences but I like a car that most people don't have......I see Lexus EVERYWHERE. (At one time, I was in the middle of 7 straight houses on my block that all drove Lexus and I was the only one who did not. I had a Jaguar.) It's just something about seeing a car everywhere....like wearing that "perfect" dress that you've searched high and low for, to make the best impression and look great, and you arrive at the party and whoa....there's someone else in the same dress! I don't WANT what everyone else has, but that's just me. Next door neighbor right now has a BMW. It's in the shop more than it is in their garage. I like them but I don't like THAT. Panameras are very nice, but....maybe it's where I live but I see them quite often and of course, there's the age factor LOL. I don't like the idea of being an OLD WOMAN driving a sports car. How silly is that? There is just something, for ME, that makes Tesla tantalizing. There's just something about it. It truly is different and is fun. I guess I am just over the commonality of Mercedes. I've had two and I'm like "Meh."
I guess my husband is lucky that I didn't want a Koenigsedd Trevita or a Bugatti Veyron!!! ;)
 
I understand that. I have always taken good care of my cars since my first one, a 1970 Chevelle. My wife has a Lexus ES350. A car I see everywhere and has no recognizable features. A boring car if there ever was one and yet, she loves it. She gets a new one every 3 years and scoffs at my suggestion to get a Model 3 instead. And she really does not like my Model S, or is just .ehhhhh about it :)
Works for me because she never drives it :)
 
  • Love
Reactions: Brando
This is why Tesla will fail -- not this year, not next year, but in a few years. It's just one story, but unfortunately it's representative.

Mid-december, the latch fails shut on my rear right door. I call up the service center I've been using to tell them that the latch is stuck shut (can't be opened from the inside or outside). They tell me that top management at Tesla (aka idiots) have told them they can't service my area any more and that I have to be directed to the "New York Mobile Service Team".

Now, there's no upstate NY service center. This is because Tesla top management (aka idiots) have *chosen* not to build one. It is legal for them to build one -- there is a limit on the number of stores, but no limit on the number of service centers. They are lying about this to their technicians, incidentally.

So, the service center I've been using refuses to make an appointment and says the NY mobile service team will call me. They refuse to give me the phone number for the NY mobile service team. They say they'll report my problem and order the part to be delivered to the NY mobile service team. I emphasize that it's the *latch*.

The NY mobile service team doesn't call me back after several weeks. I call the service center again and yell at them. This time I manage to get a phone number for the NY mobile service team. I call them. They say "our computer system says we tried to call you". They never tried to call me -- their computer system is lying. They say the parts came in a week ago (but they never bothered to call me....) I tell them *again* (since it's different people) that the problem is that the *latch* is stuck and ask them to make sure they have ordered the parts for the latch. "Omar" assures me that they have the parts for the latch. At this point, about four weeks after I first called, I am finally able to make an appointment. There is then a further delay because my schedule doesn't allow for an appointment in the next week (but would have in the earlier weeks which Tesla wasted).

Come today, the service tech shows up. He doesn't have the parts for the latch, because nobody ever wrote down that they were supposed to get the parts for the latch. Complete waste of time. I yell at the NY mobile service team guy (Omar), who lied to me, who now claims that the order regarding the stuck latch was never entered in his computer. I ask and he won't give me his manager's number. Or the number of the idiot in top management who ordered that we get all our mobile service through this idiot division. He says he'll talk to his manager -- we'll see.

This is par for the course with Tesla service. I have been dealing with this crap for five years, and it gets worse and worse every time. Meanwhile, the software team breaks basic functionality in updates (such as USB music playback).

This is going to kill the company. Not now, but as soon as there are other decent electric cars on the market -- ones where you can go to *independent service shops*.

They've had five years to fix this sort of crap and they've only made it worse. My advice to investors at this point is to hold on now, but dump the stock before 2020 if they don't fix the chronic and ever-worsening service problems.

It's not the bottom-line technicians. They're all fine. It's top management failure. There's no internal communications: information does not get passed from one person to another, and any one person who screws up the information ruins everything. The only way to get good service is to talk directly to the service tech who is going to do the work on your car. The only way to get a software bug fixed is to find the programmer who is responsible for fixing it. And Tesla does their best to *prevent* you from talking to the people you need to talk to.

This is an outrage on a 100K+ product. Only going to get worse with MS recall...
 
Because no one at Tesla stands up to Elon. Any employee who does is fired, and any investor who dissents is ridiculed by TMC Vigilante via petty disagrees and coordinated emotional abuse. This, not FUD, is the single most significant threat to Tesla and its mission.
How do you know this? Do you work there? No one has ever stood up to Elon without getting fired is pretty hard to believe. Sounds like FUD.
 
How do you know this? Do you work there? No one has ever stood up to Elon without getting fired is pretty hard to believe. Sounds like FUD.
I can't tell you how I know, but I know for a fact that you can stand up to Elon and make him change his mind without negative consequences. But you'd better be right.
 
I can't tell you how I know, but I know for a fact that you can stand up to Elon and make him change his mind without negative consequences. But you'd better be right.

If Elon is allowed to make many mistakes in the name of innovation, why aren't his employees when they stand up to him? What kind of an incentive structure does always having to be correct create for an employee who may have a useful suggestion, but just isn't 100 percent sure?
 
Last edited:
If Elon is allowed to make many mistakes in the name of innovation, why aren't his employees when they stand up to him? What kind of an incentive structure does always having to be correct create for an employee who may have a useful suggestion, but just isn't 100 percent sure?

People said the same thing about Jobs... and Bill Gates...

If you're going to make a stand, do it well, with conviction, with facts, and with an alternative. People like Musk actually want those smart discussions, not whimpering deference.

Your zombie-thread bump earlier mentioned that Musk will be the end of Tesla effectively. It's a little rich for bears to simultaneously argue that Musk is the problem, and Musk is the only reason for the 'over valuation' - you really can't have it both ways.

Elon Musk won't get in the way of healthy fundamentals, but he'll certainly buy a lot of good will and good faith when things look bleak (and already has done). There is no rational argument that can outline Tesla would be better off without him.
 
People said the same thing about Jobs... and Bill Gates...

If you're going to make a stand, do it well, with conviction, with facts, and with an alternative. People like Musk actually want those smart discussions, not whimpering deference.

Your zombie-thread bump earlier mentioned that Musk will be the end of Tesla effectively. It's a little rich for bears to simultaneously argue that Musk is the problem, and Musk is the only reason for the 'over valuation' - you really can't have it both ways.

Elon Musk won't get in the way of healthy fundamentals, but he'll certainly buy a lot of good will and good faith when things look bleak (and already has done). There is no rational argument that can outline Tesla would be better off without him.

The fact that you just identified me as a bear says it all. I rest my case.
 
What does Consumer Reports claim about Tesla reliability? Model S and do we have enough years for Model X?

Of course Model 3 will at best be based on Brand [TESLA] history.

Who will look it up? and please post, thank you!


PS- 2016 - Consumer Reports added the car [Model S] to its recommended list.
By 2017, in the Consumer Reports Car Reliability Survey, Tesla's position on the list had moved up four spots; the predicted reliability rating for Model S reached "above average" for the first time.
source: Tesla Model S - Wikipedia


<sarcasm>Seems that moron Chairman/CEO must be listening to someone and the product keeps improving.</sarcasm>
(continuous improvement as fast as possible - something like that)
 
Last edited:
I have my own views on whether and how Musk allows for dissent. It is true that it's possible to disagree with him, but you'd better have the data. That's OK. It's as it should be. However, it's also no secret that the Elon Distortion Field (EDF) is very much alive and a strong factor. If Musk convinces himself that something is right (over-automated "lights out" production, Falcon Wings, Phone as Key, etc), it's likely that only information that confirms his views will slip through the shields intact. This is a problem, and it will bite Tesla in the bum. You can't learn from your mistakes if you don't acknowledge them, or see them for what they are. For example, "Model 3 paint consistency is crap" is a verifiable fact. Some cars are just about perfect. Many cars are OK. But some cars are disasters that should never, ever have made it through QC. Passing through the EDF, it becomes "We're making real improvements in paint shop throughput" and "customer complaints are manageable" or even "They won't care."
Not, "WTF is going on with the paint shop that we can't put color on our doors properly?"
Tesla is still selling to believers and early adopters. And there are a lot of us. This is a forgiving market segment populated by buyers willing to trade quality for being a part of something important and worth promoting. Selling outside that market segment is harder, and I wonder if Tesla is ready for it. This segment will not "understand" when their new, expensive EV doesn't show up when promised, or has a cracked window, or leaking trunk seals, "holidays" in the paint job or software bugs that leave them without maps, the ability to switch off lights, or the ability to drive. Shipping, then fixing, is SOP. It's what Silicon Valley knows. I'm not sure it's a workable model for cars.
The oil industry and ICE manufacturers have their fingers crossed Tesla will crater. But building capacity didn't kill it. The Model 3 ramp didn't kill it. Lack of demand didn't kill it. Profit margins haven't killed it. But there's a non-zero chance that quality control problems and the service bottlenecks that come from them could.
Robin
 
What a miracle that Tesla has gone from ~500/year 2008 to ~200,000 by 2017 considering how incompetent that South African emigrant who never even worked in a car factory nor dealership is leading the company and never listens to anyone and after hiring ~45,000 employees still can't find a good autoexec to take over and get Tesla available in all US states and really start selling & making cars AND make them available world wide. Small wonder that the Chevy/GM Bolt out sells Tesla every day of the week AND you can buy the Bolt anywhere in the world and many US states. Not to mention Nissan and BMW. Even the Corolla can outsell Tesla Model 3 some days. </sarcasm>

Just what do people expect? How much better do you possibly think it can be?

I guess small wonder DaveT is so worried about the "narrative". Good thing there are some people who actually go look at cars and decide for themselves what they will actually pay for.

PS- The December 2017 Consumer Reports owner satisfaction survey has the Tesla Model S at the top.[15]
-The Tesla Model S was the top selling plug-in electric car worldwide in 2015 and 2016,[24][26][27] and by the end of 2017 continued to rank as the second most-sold electric car in history after the Nissan Leaf.[23]
-2016 Consumer Reports added the car [Model S] to its recommended list.
-By 2017, in the Consumer Reports Car Reliability Survey, Tesla's position on the list had moved up four spots; the predicted reliability rating for Model S reached "above average" for the first time.[83]
-Something to do with continuous improvement spending on the car vs spending on Madison Avenue Ads/PR.
-And what is this batteries for utility companies? and glass solar roofing? these can't add to the bottom line, can they?? Suppose to make cars, not batteries - just ask Bob Lutz one of the most famous autoexecs.
Yeah, the world largest factory for batteries in Nevada of all places. Next he'll want to build SEMI trucks.
 
Last edited:
PS- The December 2017 Consumer Reports owner satisfaction survey has the Tesla Model S at the top.[15]
-The Tesla Model S was the top selling plug-in electric car worldwide in 2015 and 2016,[24][26][27] and by the end of 2017 continued to rank as the second most-sold electric car in history after the Nissan Leaf.[23]
-2016 Consumer Reports added the car [Model S] to its recommended list.
-By 2017, in the Consumer Reports Car Reliability Survey, Tesla's position on the list had moved up four spots; the predicted reliability rating for Model S reached "above average" for the first time.[83]
-Something to do with continuous improvement spending on the car vs spending on Madison Avenue Ads/PR.
-And what is this batteries for utility companies? and glass solar roofing? these can't add to the bottom line, can they?? Suppose to make cars, not batteries - just ask Bob Lutz one of the most famous autoexecs.
Yeah, the world largest factory for batteries in Nevada of all places. Next he'll want to build SEMI trucks
All that seems right. But it is also correct that CR rated Model X dead last for reliability. Even Jaguar (!) came out ahead.

Robin
 
The fact that you just identified me as a bear says it all. I rest my case.

It doesn't say anything, other than my inference was mistaken. My apologies for that.

Whether bear or bull, the argument that Musk is damaging Tesla is tenuous - it's like saying the sun is dangerous... it is, but not having it there would be far worse.
 
All that seems right. But it is also correct that CR rated Model X dead last for reliability. Even Jaguar (!) came out ahead.

Robin
...deliveries of the Model X began in September 2015.[15] After one full year on the market, the Model X ranked in 2016 seventh among the world's best-selling plug-in cars. [16] Global cumulative sales since inception totaled about 72,059 units through December 2017.[16][17][18][19][20]
  • On April 20, 2017, Tesla issued a worldwide recall of 53,000 (~70%) of the 76,000 Model S and Model X vehicles it sold in 2016 due to faulty parking brakes that affect the Model S and Model X. The recall caused Tesla stocks to lose two percent of their value and added further questions about the reliability of Tesla's vehicles.[95][96][97][98][99]
    • October 2017, Tesla issued an 11,000 vehicle recall for a faulty locking cable mechanism in the second row seats, estimating that about 3% of recalled vehicles may be affected.[100]
    The Tesla Model X has faced criticism for issues with the falcon-wing doors, which sometimes did not open or latch properly, and the windows, which sometimes did not open or close all the way.[88] Tesla addressed these issues with several software updates, and no known issues remained after the 8.0 firmware was released.[89] On June 27, 2016, Tesla settled on a lawsuit over usability concerns, accepting that the Model X was rushed to production before it was ready,[90] and by October 2016, Tesla claimed the problems had been reduced by 92%.[91]
source: Tesla Model X - Wikipedia

Perhaps that continuous improvement thing is just not Madison Avenue PR. Maybe Tesla/Elon are actually committed to continuous improvement as fast as possible/reasonable. What do you think? not good enough?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mongo
No. It's not really good enough. Popularity and reliability are different things. Model X has sold well in an environment without any real competition, and to people spring-loaded to the "give Tesla a break" position. Many people who buy them really like them. And Consumer Reports (which I think of as pretty straight and not too warped by Madison Avenue) really did rate it dead last for reliability.
People who own E Types love them, too. Nobody would mistake an E Type for a reliable car (unless it's one of the new electric E Types!).
Robin
 
WHY TESLA WILL FAIL - let us have a look at the RISK Tesla mentions in SEC Form 10-Q
I encourage people to always read source documents for themselves when possible
You will find links (if you can't find on your own) in the below/next post. OR read my cut&paste

Concentration of Risk

Credit Risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject us to a concentration of credit risk consist of cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts receivable and interest rate swaps. Our cash balances are primarily invested in money market funds or on deposit at high credit quality financial institutions in the U.S. These deposits are typically in excess of insured limits. As of June 30, 2018, no entity represented 10% or more of our total accounts receivable balance. As of December 31, 2017, no entity represented 10% of our total accounts receivable balance. The risk of concentration for our interest rate swaps is mitigated by transacting with several highly-rated multinational banks.

Supply Risk

We are dependent on our suppliers, the majority of which are single source suppliers, and the inability of these suppliers to deliver necessary components of our products in a timely manner at prices, quality levels and volumes acceptable to us, or our inability to efficiently manage these components from these suppliers, could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

Management Opportunities, Challenges and Risks

Automotive Demand, Production and Deliveries

We drive demand for our vehicles by continually improving our vehicles through over-the-air software updates, expanding our retail, service and charging infrastructure, and by periodically developing and introducing new passenger and commercial electric vehicle variants and models. Our goal is to produce the world’s highest quality vehicles as quickly and as cost-effectively as possible with a priority on workplace health and safety. The worldwide automotive markets for alternative fuel vehicles and self-driving technology are highly competitive and we expect them to become even more so. A growing number of companies, including established automakers, have announced plans to expand, and in some cases fully transition to, production of electric or environmentally friendly vehicles, and/or to develop self-driving technologies.

Nevertheless, we believe that the unique features of our vehicles, our constant innovation, our growing brand, the increased affordability introduced with Model 3, our global Supercharger network and our future vehicles will continue to generate incremental demand for our vehicles by making our vehicles accessible to larger and previously untapped consumer and commercial markets. For example, we recently expanded our Model 3 offerings by commencing production of the performance-level trim of the dual motor all-wheel drive version of Model 3, and we plan to add less expensive variants, begin deliveries outside of North America and offer leasing options. We also commenced Model 3 test drives and moved to a direct order system for this vehicle in North America, and vehicles are now being ordered by both existing reservation holders and customers without prior reservations.

We produced more than 5,000 Model 3 vehicles during the last week of June 2018, and repeated the production of approximately 5,000 Model 3 vehicles in a week multiple times during July 2018. Although we experienced certain challenges ramping our main Model 3 general assembly line, the simplicity of the Model 3 architecture allowed us to quickly build a second Model 3 general assembly line with a resulting vehicle quality and cost of production roughly equal to those of the main general assembly line. We are continuing to make progress on the main Model 3 general assembly line and evolve the second general assembly line, and at our current point in the ramp we have maintained a high level of automation in our other manufacturing processes, including stamping, body welding, paint shop, powertrain assembly and battery pack assembly. Accordingly, while keeping our capital expenditures limited, our aim is to further increase production to a rate of 6,000 Model 3 vehicles per week by late August 2018, then beyond that rate over the next few quarters, and ultimately to a rate of 10,000 vehicles per week by sometime in 2019. Indeed, we believe that the majority of our Model 3 production processes will be capable of producing 10,000 vehicles per week by the end of 2018, but achieving that rate will require that we increase capacity in certain production processes and that our suppliers ramp further. Moreover, it is to be expected that additional bottlenecks will arise as we continue to ramp, and it will be important that we address them promptly.

We continue to expect Model S and Model X deliveries to be approximately 100,000 in total in 2018, constrained by the total available supply of cells with the 18650 form factor used in those vehicles. As our sales network continues to expand to new markets, we believe vehicle orders should continue to grow. With demand outpacing production, we plan to optimize the trim and option mix in order to optimize revenue and gross margin. We have made significant and sustained progress in the production processes of Model S and Model X, and we will continue to improve manufacturing efficiencies for these vehicles in 2018.

We are also making strides in other aspects of our vehicle production, deliveries and customer infrastructure. For example, we expect to continue to lower the cost of manufacturing our vehicles due to economies of scale, material cost reductions and more efficient manufacturing and equipment utilization. We have achieved cost improvements through material cost reductions from both engineering and commercial actions and increased manufacturing efficiencies including better inventory control for Model S and Model X. We have also seen improved product reliability in our vehicles, batteries and drive units. We are also realigning and streamlining our delivery process to ensure that each delivery session is informative, convenient and quick, and that the overall flow of deliveries is both scalable at volume and more linear throughout each quarter rather than back-ended toward the end of each quarter. We believe this change will provide a better customer experience and reduce the stress on our delivery system. As sales of Tesla vehicles ramp further, we plan to continue to open new Tesla retail, locations, service centers and delivery hubs around the world, we plan to continue to expand our Mobile Service fleet, and we plan to significantly increase the number of Superchargers and Destination Charging connectors globally as the Model 3 fleet continues to grow.

In July 2018, we delivered our 200,000th vehicle in the U.S. Under current regulations, the full $7,500 federal tax credit for the purchase of a qualified electric vehicle will continue to be available only for any of our new vehicles delivered by the end of 2018 in the U.S., and then will be reduced to $3,750 for each vehicle delivered by the end of the second quarter of 2019, then to $1,875 for each vehicle delivered by the end of 2019, then to $0 for each vehicle delivered thereafter. In the near term, we believe this phase-out will pull forward customer orders, before normalizing. In the long run, we do not expect a meaningful impact to our sales in the U.S., as we believe that our vehicles offer a compelling proposition at their full price.

Moreover, we recently adjusted our vehicle pricing in China in order to partially offset tariffs on vehicle imports to China from the U.S., which increased to 40%. While this adjustment may have some negative impact on our vehicle sales in China in the near term, we do not expect our global vehicle deliveries to be heavily impacted since we will partially divert deliveries to North America and Europe if necessary.

Finally, we continue to make progress with our self-driving technology. Our neural net and functionality continue to improve, and we frequently release minor software updates and from time to time release significant version updates, including most recently in March 2018. While we are subject to regulatory constraints over which we have no control, our ultimate goal is to achieve full autonomy.

Energy Generation and Storage Demand, Production and Deployment

We are continuing to reduce customer acquisition costs of our energy generation products, including by cutting advertising spend and shifting our sales strategy significantly in the second quarter of 2018 to sell these products exclusively in Tesla stores with dedicated energy product sales personnel and on our website. As we implement this strategy, we expect that our solar deployments will remain stable in the short term before growing, including through cross-selling opportunities to our expanding base of vehicle owners. Our emphasis for retrofit solar products remains on executing projects for upfront cash generation and profitability, rather than absolute volume growth.

We are steadily ramping Solar Roof production at Gigafactory 2 and are also continuing to iterate on the product design and production process with learnings from our manufacturing and field installation experience to date, including units deployed during the second quarter of 2018. After we simplify the production and installation processes, we plan to increase automation at Gigafactory 2 and further ramp production toward the end of 2018.

We expect energy storage products to experience significant growth, with our aim being to at least triple deployments in 2018. We are ramping up production for these products at our Gigafactory 1 over the next several quarters, but demand is greater than our current production capacity for energy storage. For example, even as our energy storage business in May 2018 reached a significant milestone of 1 gigawatt hour deployed in total since inception, our net backlog continued to grow in the second quarter of 2018.

Trends in Cash Flow, Capital Expenditures and Operating Expenses

Capital expenditures in 2018 are expected to support increases in Model 3 production capacity at Gigafactory 1 and the Tesla Factory, and for building additional stores, service centers and Superchargers. However, we have significantly reduced our projections for capital expenditures by focusing on the critical near-term needs that will benefit us primarily in the next two years. At this stage, we are expecting total 2018 capital expenditures to be slightly below $2.5 billion. Ultimately, our capital expenditures will develop in line with Model 3 production, our profitability and our operating cash generation.

We incurred certain costs in the second quarter of 2018 in connection with a significant cost restructuring. In addition, we expect operating expenses to grow in 2018 as compared to 2017, although operating expenses should decrease significantly as a percentage of revenue due to the significant increase in expected revenue in 2018 and as we focus on increasing operational efficiency. The growth in operating expense will mainly be driven by engineering, design and testing of new products or changes to existing products and higher sales and service costs associated with expanding our worldwide geographic presence. In addition, we expect operating expenses to increase as a result of increased selling, general and administrative expenses incurred by our energy generation and storage business.

In March 2018, our stockholders approved a new 10-year CEO performance award for Elon Musk with vesting contingent on achieving market capitalization and operational milestones. Consequently, we may incur significant additional non-cash stock-based compensation expense over the term of the award as each operational milestone becomes probable of vesting.

Automotive Financing Options

We offer loans and leases for our vehicles in certain markets in North America, Europe and Asia primarily through various financial institutions. We offered resale value guarantees or similar buy-back terms to all direct customers who purchase vehicles and who financed their vehicle through one of our specified commercial banking partners. Subsequent to June 30, 2016, this program is available only in certain international markets. Resale value guarantees available for exercise within the 12 months following June 30, 2018 totaled $139.3 million in value.

We have adopted the new revenue recognition standard ASC 606 effective January 1, 2018. This impacts the way we account for vehicle sales with a resale value guarantee and vehicles leased through our leasing partners, which now generally qualify to be accounted for as sales with a right of return. In addition, for certain vehicles sales with a resale value guarantee and vehicles leased through leasing partners prior to 2018, we have ceased recognizing lease revenue starting in 2018 and now record the associated cumulative adjustment to equity under the modified retrospective approach.

Vehicle deliveries with the resale value guarantee do not impact our near-term cash flows and liquidity, since we receive the full amount of cash for the vehicle sales price at delivery. While we do not assume any credit risk related to the customer, if a customer exercises the option to return the vehicle to us, we are exposed to liquidity risk that the resale value of vehicles under these programs may be lower than our guarantee, or the volume of vehicles returned to us may be higher than our estimates or we may be unable to resell the used vehicles in a timely manner, all of which could adversely impact our cash flows. Through 2017, we only had an insignificant number of customers who exercised their resale value guarantees and returned their vehicles to us. Based on current market demand for our vehicles, we estimate the resale prices for our vehicles will continue to be above our resale value guarantee amounts. Should market values of our vehicles or customer demand decrease, these estimates may be impacted materially.

We currently offer vehicle leases in the U.S. for Model S and Model X directly from Tesla Finance, our captive financing entity. Leasing through Tesla Finance is available in 39 states and the District of Columbia. We also offer financing arrangements through our entities in Canada, Germany and the United Kingdom. We also offer leasing through leasing partners in certain jurisdictions. Leasing through our captive financing entities and our leasing partners exposes us to residual value risk. In addition, for leases offered directly from our captive financing entities, we assume customer credit risk. We plan to continue expanding our financing offerings, including our lease financing options and the financial sources to support them, and to support the overall financing needs of our customers. To the extent that we are unable to arrange such options for our customers on terms that are attractive, our sales, financial results and cash flows could be negatively impacted.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

As of June 30, 2018, we had $2.24 billion of cash and cash equivalents. Balances held in foreign currencies had a U.S. dollar equivalent of $440.3 million and consisted primarily of Chinese yuan, euros and Canadian dollars. Our sources of cash are predominately from our deliveries of vehicles, sales and installations of our energy storage products and solar energy systems, proceeds from debt facilities, proceeds from financing funds and proceeds from equity offerings.

Our sources of liquidity and cash flows enable us to fund ongoing operations, research and development projects, investments in tooling and manufacturing equipment for the production ramp of Model 3, the continued construction of Gigafactory 1 and the continued expansion of our retail stores, service centers, mobile repair services and Supercharger network. Having achieved an approximately 5,000 weekly production rate for Model 3, we are now aiming to further increase our production rate to 6,000 Model 3 vehicles per week by late August 2018, then beyond that rate over the next few quarters, and ultimately to a rate of 10,000 vehicles per week by sometime in 2019. We also expect that such expansion will require limited additional capital expenditures. At this stage, we are expecting total 2018 capital expenditures to be slightly below $2.5 billion. Ultimately, our capital expenditures will develop in line with Model 3 production, our profitability and our operating cash generation. We continually evaluate our capital expenditure needs and may raise additional capital to fund the rapid growth of our business.

For the twelve-month period ending June 30, 2019, we expect total capital expenditures to be approximately $2.5 billion. As we continue to expand our existing manufacturing capacity, introduce new products, expand our retail stores, services centers, mobile repair services and Supercharging network, we are utilizing our increasing experience and learnings from past and current product ramps to do so at a level of capital efficiency per dollar of spend that we expect to be significantly greater than historical levels. Moreover, we expect that cash generated from our core operations will generally be sufficient for such future capital expenditures, although we may choose to seek alternative financing sources with respect to certain projects outside of the ordinary course of business. For example, we expect that much of our investment in our Gigafactory 3 to be constructed in Shanghai, China will be funded through indebtedness arranged through local financial institutions.

We have an agreement to spend or incur $5.0 billion in combined capital, operational expenses, costs of goods sold and other costs in the State of New York during the 10-year period following full production at Gigafactory 2. We anticipate meeting these obligations through our operations at Gigafactory 2 and other operations within the State of New York, and we do not believe that we face a significant risk of default.

We expect that our current sources of liquidity together with our projection of cash flows from operating activities will provide us with adequate liquidity over at least the next 12 months. A large portion of our future expenditures is to fund our growth, and we can adjust our capital and operating expenditures by operating segment, including future expansion of our product offerings, stores, service centers, delivery centers and Supercharger network. We may need or want to raise additional funds in the future, and these funds may not be available to us when we need or want them, or at all. If we cannot raise additional funds when we need or want them, our operations and prospects could be negatively affected.

In addition, we had $1.31 billion of unused committed amounts under our credit facilities and financing funds, some of which are subject to satisfying specified conditions prior to draw-down (such as pledging to our lenders sufficient amounts of qualified receivables, inventories, leased vehicles and our interests in those leases, solar energy systems and the associated customer contracts, our interests in financing funds or various other assets; and contributing or selling qualified solar energy systems and the associated customer contracts or qualified leased vehicles and our interests in those leases into the financing funds). Upon the draw-down of any unused committed amounts, there are no restrictions on the use of such funds for general corporate purposes. For details regarding our indebtedness and financing funds, refer to Note 10, Convertible and Long-Term Debt Obligations, and Note 13, VIE Arrangements, to the consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Foreign Currency Risk

We transact business globally in multiple currencies. Our foreign operations expose us to the risk of fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates against the functional currencies of our foreign subsidiaries and against the U.S. dollar. Upon consolidation, as foreign currency exchange rates vary, revenues and expenses may be significantly impacted, and we may record significant gains or losses on the re-measurement of our monetary assets and liabilities, including intercompany balances. As of June 30, 2018, our largest foreign currency exposures were from Japanese yen, Chinese yuan and Canadian dollar. In the six months ended June 30, 2018, we recognized a net foreign currency exchange loss of $6.2 million in other income (expense), net.

We considered the historical trends in foreign currency exchange rates and determined that it is reasonably possible that adverse changes in foreign exchange rates of 10% for all currencies could be experienced in the near-term. These reasonably possible adverse changes were applied to our total monetary assets and liabilities denominated in currencies other than our functional currencies as of June 30, 2018 to compute the adverse impact these changes would have had on our income (loss) before income taxes. These changes would have resulted in an adverse impact of $149.4 million.

Interest Rate Risk

We are exposed to interest rate risk on our borrowings that bear interest at floating rates. Pursuant to our risk management policies, in certain cases, we utilize derivative instruments to manage some of this risk. We do not enter into derivative instruments for trading or speculative purposes. A hypothetical 10% change in our interest rates would have increased our interest expense for the six months ended June 30, 2018 by $3.6 million.

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Securities Litigation Relating to SolarCity’s Financial Statements and Guidance

On March 28, 2014, a purported stockholder class action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against SolarCity and two of its officers. The complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws, and seeks unspecified compensatory damages and other relief on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of SolarCity’s securities from March 6, 2013 to March 18, 2014. After a series of amendments to the original complaint, the District Court dismissed the amended complaint and entered a judgment in our favor on August 9, 2016. The plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal, and on December 4, 2017, the Court heard oral argument on the appeal. On March 8, 2018, the Court upheld the District Court ruling of dismissal and judgment in our favor. The case is concluded.

Securities Litigation Relating to the SolarCity Acquisition

Between September 1, 2016 and October 5, 2016, seven lawsuits were filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware by purported stockholders of Tesla challenging our acquisition of SolarCity. Following consolidation, the lawsuit names as defendants the members of Tesla’s board of directors and alleges, among other things, that board members breached their fiduciary duties in connection with the acquisition. The complaint asserts both derivative claims and direct claims on behalf of a purported class and seeks, among other relief, unspecified monetary damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs. On January 27, 2017, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the operative complaint. Rather than respond to the defendants’ motion, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. On March 17, 2017, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On December 13, 2017, the Court heard oral argument on the motion. On March 28, 2018, the Court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss. Defendants filed a request for interlocutory appeal, but the Delaware Supreme Court denied that request, electing not to hear an appeal at this early stage of the case. Defendants filed their answer on May 18, 2018. This case will now proceed.

These plaintiffs and others filed parallel actions in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware on April 21, 2017. Those actions have been consolidated and are stayed pending the Chancery Court litigation. They include claims for violations of the federal securities laws and breach of fiduciary duties by Tesla’s board of directors. That action is stayed pending the Chancery Court litigation.

On February 6, 2017, a purported stockholder made a demand to inspect Tesla’s books and records, purportedly to investigate potential breaches of fiduciary duty in connection with the SolarCity acquisition.

We believe that claims challenging the SolarCity acquisition are without merit and intend to defend against them vigorously. We are unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any, associated with these claims.

Securities Litigation Relating to Production of Model 3 Vehicles

On October 10, 2017, a purported stockholder class action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Tesla, Inc., two of its current officers, and a former officer. The complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws, and seeks unspecified compensatory damages and other relief on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of Tesla securities from May 4, 2016 to October 6, 2017. The lawsuit claims that Tesla supposedly made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s preparedness to produce Model 3 vehicles. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on March 23, 2018, and defendants filed a motion to dismiss on May 25, 2018. The court hearing on the motion to dismiss is set for August 24, 2018. We believe that the claims are without merit and intend to defend against this lawsuit vigorously. We are unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any, associated with this lawsuit.

Litigation Relating to 2018 CEO Performance Award

On February 21, 2018, a purported Tesla stockholder made a demand to inspect Tesla’s books and records, purportedly to investigate potential breaches of fiduciary duty in connection with the Tesla board’s approval of a conditional stock-based compensation plan for Elon Musk, Tesla’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, in January 2018. On June 4, 2018, that stockholder filed a putative class and derivative action in the Delaware Court of Chancery alleging that Tesla’s directors breached their fiduciary duties by approving the stock-based compensation plan. The complaint seeks, among other things, monetary damages and rescission or reformation of the stock-based compensation plan. We believe the claims asserted in this lawsuit are without merit and intend to defend against them vigorously.

Other Matters

From time to time, we have received requests for information from regulators and governmental authorities, such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the National Transportation Safety Board and the Securities and Exchange Commission. We are also subject to various other legal proceedings and claims that arise from the normal course of business activities. If an unfavorable ruling were to occur, there exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, prospects, cash flows, financial position and brand.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

You should carefully consider the risks described below together with the other information set forth in this report, which could materially affect our business, financial condition and future results. The risks described below are not the only risks facing our company. Risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial also may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

We have experienced in the past, and may experience in the future, delays or other complications in the design, manufacture, launch and production ramp of new vehicles and other products such as Model 3, our energy storage products and the Solar Roof, which could harm our brand, business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

We have previously experienced launch, manufacturing and production ramp delays or other complications in connection with new vehicle models such as Model S, Model X and Model 3, new vehicle features such as the all-wheel drive dual motor drivetrain on Model S and the second version of Autopilot hardware and a significant increase in automation introduced in the manufacture of Model 3. For example, we encountered unanticipated challenges, such as certain supply chain constraints, that led to initial delays in producing Model X. Similarly, we have experienced certain challenges in the production of Model 3 that led to delays in its ramp. Moreover, in the areas of Model 3 production where we have had challenges ramping fully automated processes, such as portions of the battery module assembly line, part of the material flow system and two steps of the general assembly line, we reduced the levels of automation and introduced semi-automated or manual processes. If issues like these arise or recur, if our remediation measures and process changes do not continue to be successful or if we experience issues with transitioning to full automation in certain production lines or other planned manufacturing improvements, we could experience issues in sustaining the Model 3 ramp or additional delays in increasing Model 3 production further. In addition, because our vehicle models share certain production facilities with other vehicle models, the volume or efficiency of production with respect to one model may impact the production of other models or lead to bottlenecks that impact the production of all models.

We may also experience similar future delays or other complications in bringing to market and ramping production of new vehicles, such as our Tesla Semi truck, our planned Model Y and new Tesla Roadster, our energy storage products and the Solar Roof. Any significant additional delay or other complication in the production of our current products or the development, manufacture, launch and production ramp of our future products, including complications associated with expanding our production capacity and supply chain or obtaining or maintaining regulatory approvals, could materially damage our brand, business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

We have experienced and may continue to experience delays in realizing our projected timelines and cost and volume targets for the production and ramp of our Model 3 vehicle, which could harm our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

Our future business depends in large part on our ability to execute on our plans to manufacture, market and sell the Model 3 vehicle, which we are offering at a lower price point and which we are producing at significantly higher volumes than the Model S or Model X vehicles. We commenced production and initial customer deliveries of Model 3 in July 2017, and since then have achieved a weekly production rate of approximately 5,000 Model 3 vehicles per week. We are aiming to further ramp to a production rate of 6,000 Model 3 vehicles per week by late August 2018, then beyond that rate over the next few quarters, and ultimately to a rate of 10,000 vehicles per week by sometime in 2019.

We have limited experience to date in manufacturing vehicles at the high volumes that we recently achieved and to which we anticipate ramping further for Model 3, and to be successful, we will need tocomplete the implementation and ramp of efficient and cost-effective manufacturing capabilities, processes and supply chains necessary to support such volumes. We are employing a higher degree of automation in the manufacturing processes for Model 3 than we have previously employed, and in some cases we have temporarily reduced the levels of automation and introduced semi-automated or manual processes, for which we are likely to incur additional labor costs. It is also to be expected that additional bottlenecks will arise as we continue to ramp, and it will be important that we address them promptly. Moreover, our Model 3 production plan has generally required significant investments of cash and management resources, and we expect to deploy additional resources as we further progress our ramp.

Our production plan for Model 3 is based on many key assumptions, including:
• that we will be able to sustain and further expand our high-volume production of Model 3 at the Tesla Factory without exceeding our projected costs and on our projected timeline;
• that we will be able to continue to expand Gigafactory 1 in a timely manner to produce high volumes of quality lithium-ion cells to be integrated into battery modules and finished battery packs and drive unit components for Model 3, all at costs that allow us to sell Model 3 at our target gross margins;
• that the equipment and processes which we have selected for Model 3 production will be able to accurately manufacture high volumes of Model 3 vehicles within specified design tolerances and with high quality;
•that we will be able to maintain suppliers for the necessary components on terms and conditions that are acceptable to us and that we will be able to obtain high-quality components on a timely basis and in the necessary quantities to support high-volume production; and
•that we will be able to attract, recruit, hire, train and retain skilled employees to operate our planned high-volume production facilities to support Model 3, including at the Tesla Factory and Gigafactory 1.

If one or more of the foregoing assumptions turns out to be incorrect, our ability to meet our Model 3 projections on time and at volumes and prices that are profitable, the demand for and deliveries of Model 3, as well as our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition, may be materially and adversely impacted.

We may be unable to meet our growing vehicle production plans, delivery plans and servicing needs, any of which could harm our business and prospects.

Our plans call for achieving and sustaining significant increases in vehicle production and deliveries to high volumes in a short amount of time. Our ability to achieve these plans will depend upon a number of factors, including our ability to utilize installed manufacturing capacity, achieve the planned production yield and further increase capacity as planned while maintaining our desired quality levels and optimize design and production changes, and our suppliers’ ability to support our needs. In addition, we have used and may use in the future a number of new manufacturing technologies, techniques and processes for our vehicles, which we must successfully introduce and scale for high-volume production. For example, we have introduced highly automated production lines, aluminum spot welding systems and high-speed blow forming of certain difficult to stamp vehicle parts. We have also introduced unique design features in our vehicles with different manufacturing challenges, such as large display screens, dual motor drivetrain, Autopilot hardware and falcon-wing doors. We have limited experience developing, manufacturing, selling and servicing, and allocating our available resources among, multiple products simultaneously. If we are unable to realize our plans, our brand, business, prospects, financial condition and operating results could be materially damaged.

Concurrent with the significant planned increase in our vehicle production levels, we will also need to continue to significantly increase deliveries of, and servicing capacity for, our vehicles. Although we have a plan for delivering and servicing significantly increased volumes of vehicles, we have limited experience in delivering a high volume of vehicles, and no experience in delivering and servicing vehicles at the significantly higher volumes at which we are manufacturing Model 3, and we may face difficulties meeting our delivery and growth plans into both existing markets as well as new markets into which we expand. If we are unable to ramp up to meet our delivery and servicing needs globally, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

We are dependent on our suppliers, the majority of which are single-source suppliers, and the inability of these suppliers to deliver necessary components of our products according to our schedule and at prices, quality levels and volumes acceptable to us, or our inability to efficiently manage these components, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating results.

Our products contain numerous purchased parts which we source globally from hundreds of direct suppliers, the majority of whom are currently single-source suppliers, although we attempt to qualify and obtain components from multiple sources whenever feasible. Any significant unanticipated demand would require us to procure additional components in a short amount of time, and in the past we have also replaced certain suppliers because of their failure to provide components that met our quality control standards. While we believe that we will be able to secure additional or alternate sources of supply for most of our components in a relatively short time frame, there is no assurance that we will be able to do so or develop our own replacements for certain highly customized components of our products. Moreover, we have signed long-term agreements with Panasonic to be our manufacturing partner and supplier for lithium-ion cells at Gigafactory 1 in Nevada and PV cells and panels at Gigafactory 2 in Buffalo, New York. If we encounter unexpected difficulties with key suppliers such as Panasonic, and if we are unable to fill these needs from other suppliers, we could experience production delays and potential loss of access to important technology and parts for producing, servicing and supporting our products.

This limited, and in many cases single source, supply chain exposes us to multiple potential sources of delivery failure or component shortages for the production of our products, such as those which we experienced in 2012 and 2016 in connection with our slower-than-planned Model S and Model X ramps. Furthermore, unexpected changes in business conditions, materials pricing, labor issues, wars, governmental changes, natural disasters such as the March 2011 earthquakes in Japan and other factors beyond our and our suppliers’ control, could also affect our suppliers’ ability to deliver components to us on a timely basis. The loss of any single or limited source supplier or the disruption in the supply of components from these suppliers could lead to product design changes and delays in product deliveries to our customers, which could hurt our relationships with our customers and result in negative publicity, damage to our brand and a material and adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition andoperating results.

Changes in our supply chain have also resulted in the past, and may result in the future, in increased cost. We have also experienced cost increases from certain of our suppliers in order to meet our quality targets and development timelines as well as due to design changes that we made, and we may experience similar cost increases in the future. Certain suppliers have sought to renegotiate the terms of supply arrangements. Additionally, we are negotiating with existing suppliers for cost reductions, seeking new and less expensive suppliers for certain parts, and attempting to redesign certain parts to make them less expensive to produce. If we are unsuccessful in our efforts to control and reduce supplier costs, our operating results will suffer.

In particular, because we are producing Model 3 at significantly higher volumes than any of our other products to date, the negative impact of any delays or other constraints with respect to our suppliers for Model 3 could be substantially greater than any supply chain-related issues experienced with respect to our other products. As some of our suppliers for Model S and Model X do not have the resources, equipment or capability to provide components for the Model 3 that are in line with our requirements, we have engaged a significant number of new suppliers, and we need such suppliers to sustainably ramp and deliver according to our schedule. There is no assurance that these suppliers will ultimately be able to meet our cost, quality and volume needs, or do so at the times needed. Furthermore, as the scale of our vehicle production increases, we will need to accurately forecast, purchase, warehouse and transport to our manufacturing facilities components at much higher volumes than we have experience with. If we are unable to accurately match the timing and quantities of component purchases to our actual needs, or successfully implement automation, inventory management and other systems to accommodate the increased complexity in our supply chain, we may incur unexpected production disruption, storage, transportation and write-off costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating results.

Our future growth and success is dependent upon consumers’ willingness to adopt electric vehicles and specifically our vehicles, especially in the mass market demographic which we are targeting with Model 3.

Our growth is highly dependent upon the adoption by consumers of alternative fuel vehicles in general and electric vehicles in particular. Although we have successfully grown demand for Model S, Model X and Model 3, and believe that we will be able to continue to grow demand separately for each of these and future vehicles, there is no guarantee of such future demand or that our vehicles will not compete with one another in the market. Moreover, the mass market demographic which we are targeting with Model 3 is larger, but more competitive, than the demographic for Model S and Model X, and additional electric vehicles are entering the market.

If the market for electric vehicles in general and Tesla vehicles in particular does not develop as we expect, or develops more slowly than we expect, or if demand for our vehicles decreases in key and other markets, our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results could be harmed. The market for alternative fuel vehicles is relatively new, rapidly evolving, and could be affected by numerous external factors, such as:

•perceptions about electric vehicle features, quality, safety, performance and cost;
•perceptions about the limited range over which electric vehicles may be driven on a single battery charge;
•competition, including from other types of alternative fuel vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and high fuel-economy internal combustion engine vehicles;
•volatility in the cost of oil and gasoline;
•government regulations and economic incentives; and
•access to charging facilities.

Future problems or delays in expanding Gigafactory 1 or ramping operations there could negatively affect the production and profitability of our products, such as Model 3.

To lower the cost of cell production and produce cells in high volume, we have vertically integrated the production of lithium-ion cells and finished battery packs for Model 3 and energy storage products at Gigafactory 1. While Gigafactory 1 began producing lithium-ion cells for energy storage products in January 2017 and has since begun producing lithium-ion cells for Model 3, we have no other direct experience in the production of lithium-ion cells. Given the size and complexity of this undertaking, it is possible that future events could result in the cost of expanding and operating Gigafactory 1 exceeding our current expectations and Gigafactory 1 taking longer to ramp production and expand than we currently anticipate. In order to reach our planned volume and gross margin for Model 3, we must have significant cell production from Gigafactory 1, which, among other things, requires Panasonic to successfully ramp its all-new cell production lines to significant volumes over a short period of time. Although Panasonic has a long track record of producing high-quality cells at significant volume at its factories in Japan, it had never before started and ramped cell production at a factory in the U.S. like at Gigafactory 1. In addition, we produce several components for Model 3, such as battery modules incorporating the lithium-ion cells produced by Panasonic, at Gigafactory 1. Some of the manufacturing lines for such components took longer than anticipated to ramp to their full capacity. While we have largely overcome this bottleneck after deploying multiple semi-automated lines and improving our original lines, we continue to identify and address smaller bottlenecks in order to continue to increase the production rate. While we currently believe that we will reach our production targets, if we are unable to resolve ramping challenges and expand Gigafactory 1 production in a timely manner and at reasonable prices, and if we or Panasonic are unable to attract, hire and retain a substantial number of highly skilled personnel, our ability to supply battery packs or other components for Model 3 and our other products could be negatively impacted. Any such problems or delays with Gigafactory 1 could negatively affect our brand and harm our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

If our vehicles or other products that we sell or install fail to perform as expected, our ability to develop, market and sell our products and services could be harmed.

If our vehicles or our energy products were to contain defects in design and manufacture that cause them not to perform as expected or that require repair, or certain features of our vehicles, such as full self-driving, take longer than expected to become enabled or are legally restricted, our ability to develop, market and sell our products and services could be harmed. For example, the operation of our vehicles is highly dependent on software, which is inherently complex and could conceivably contain latent defects and errors or be subject to external attacks. Issues experienced by customers have included those related to the software for the 17 inch display screen, the panoramic roof and the 12-volt battery in the Model S and the seats and doors in the Model X. Although we attempt to remedy any issues we observe in our products as effectively and rapidly as possible, such efforts may not be timely, may hamper production or may not be to the satisfaction of our customers. While we have performed extensive internal testing on the products we manufacture, we currently have a limited frame of reference by which to evaluate detailed long-term quality, reliability, durability and performance characteristics of our battery packs, powertrains, vehicles and energy storage products. There can be no assurance that we will be able to detect and fix any defects in our products prior to their sale to or installation for consumers.

Any product defects, delays or legal restrictions on product features, or other failure of our products to perform as expected could harm our reputation and result in delivery delays, product recalls, product liability claims, significant warranty and other expenses, and could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects. Model 3 has not yet been evaluated by NHTSA for a star rating under the New Car Assessment Program, and while based on our internal evaluation we expect to obtain comparable ratings to those achieved by Model S and Model X, there is no assurance this will occur.

If we fail to scale our business operations and otherwise manage future growth and adapt to new conditions effectively as we rapidly grow our company, including internationally, we may not be able to produce, market, sell and service our products successfully.

Any failure to manage our growth effectively could materially and adversely affect our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition. We continue to expand our operations significantly, including internationally and by a transition to high-volume vehicle production with the ramp of Model 3 and the worldwide sales, delivery and servicing of a significantly higher number of vehicles than our current vehicle fleet in the coming years. In addition, we plan to expand our manufacturing capabilities outside of the U.S., where we have limited experience operating a factory or managing related regulatory, financing and other challenges. For example, we announced in July 2018 a plan to build Gigafactory 3 in Shanghai, China to manufacture vehicles and battery packs for China. Furthermore, we are developing and growing our energy storage product and solar business worldwide, including in countries where we have limited or no previous operating experience in connection with our vehicle business. Our future operating results depend to a large extent on our ability to manage our expansion and growth successfully. We may not be successful in undertaking this global expansion if we are unable to control expenses and avoid cost overruns and other unexpected operating costs; establish sufficient worldwide automobile sales, delivery, service and Supercharger facilities in a timely manner; adapt our products and conduct our operations to meet local requirements; implement the required infrastructure, systems and processes; and find and hire a significant number of additional manufacturing, engineering, service, electrical installation, construction and administrative personnel.

If we are unable to achieve our targeted manufacturing costs for our vehicles, including Model 3, our financial condition and operating results will suffer.

While we have experienced and expect in the future to realize cost reductions by both us and our suppliers, there is no guarantee we will be able to achieve sufficient cost savings to reach our gross margin and profitability goals. We incur significant costs related to procuring the materials required to manufacture our vehicles, assembling vehicles and compensating our personnel. We may also incur substantial costs or cost overruns in utilizing and increasing the production capability of our vehicle manufacturing facilities, such as for Model 3. Furthermore, if we are unable to achieve production cost targets on our vehicles pursuant to our plans, we may not be able to meet our gross margin and other financial targets. Many of the factors that impact our manufacturing costs are beyond our control, such as potential increases in the costs of our materials and components, such as lithium, nickel and other components of our battery cells or aluminum used to produce body panels. If we are unable to continue to control and reduce our manufacturing costs, our operating results, business and prospects will be harmed.

We are significantly dependent upon revenue generated from the sale of a limited fleet of electric vehicles, which currently includes Model S, Model X and Model 3.

We currently generate a significant percentage of our revenues from the sale of three products: Model S, Model X and Model 3 vehicles. Model 3, which we are producing at significantly higher volumes than Model S or Model X, has required significant investment and will require additional resources in connection with its ongoing ramp, and there is no guarantee that it will be commercially successful. Historically, automobile customers have come to expect a variety of vehicles offered in a manufacturer’s fleet and new and improved vehicle models to be introduced frequently. In order to meet these expectations, we may in the future be required to introduce on a regular basis new vehicle models as well as enhanced versions of existing vehicle models. To the extent our product variety and cycles do not meet consumer expectations, or cannot be produced on our projected timelines and cost and volume targets our future sales may be adversely affected. This could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

Our vehicles and energy storage products make use of lithium-ion battery cells, which have been observed to catch fire or vent smoke and flame, and such events have raised concerns, and future events may lead to additional concerns, about the batteries used in automotive applications.

The battery packs that we produce make use of lithium-ion cells. On rare occasions, lithium-ion cells can rapidly release the energy they contain by venting smoke and flames in a manner that can ignite nearby materials as well as other lithium-ion cells. While we have designed the battery pack to passively contain any single cell’s release of energy without spreading to neighboring cells, there can be no assurance that a field or testing failure of our vehicles or other battery packs that we produce will not occur, which could subject us to lawsuits, product recalls or redesign efforts, all of which would be time consuming and expensive. Also, negative public perceptions regarding the suitability of lithium-ion cells for automotive applications or any future incident involving lithium-ion cells such as a vehicle or other fire, even if such incident does not involve our vehicles or energy storage products, could seriously harm our business.

In addition, we store a significant number of lithium-ion cells at our facilities and plan to produce high volumes of cells and battery modules and packs at Gigafactory 1. Any mishandling of battery cells may cause disruption to the operation of our facilities. While we have implemented safety procedures related to the handling of the cells, there can be no assurance that a safety issue or fire related to the cells would not disrupt our operations. Such damage or injury could lead to adverse publicity and potentially a safety recall. Moreover, any failure of a competitor’s electric vehicle or energy storage product may cause indirect adverse publicity for us and our products. Such adverse publicity could negatively affect our brand and harm our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

Increases in costs, disruption of supply or shortage of materials, in particular for lithium-ion cells, could harm our business.

We may experience increases in the cost or a sustained interruption in the supply or shortage of materials. Any such increase, supply interruption or shortage could materially and negatively impact our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results. We use various materials in our business including aluminum, steel, lithium, nickel, copper and cobalt, as well as lithium-ion cells from suppliers. The prices for these materials fluctuate, and their available supply may be unstable, depending on market conditions and global demand for these materials, including as a result of increased production of electric vehicles and energy storage products by our competitors, and could adversely affect our business and operating results. For instance, we are exposed to multiple risks relating to lithium-ion cells. These risks include:

•an increase in the cost, or decrease in the available supply, of materials used in the cells;
•disruption in the supply of cells due to quality issues or recalls by battery cell manufacturers or any issues that may arise with respect to cells manufactured at our own facilities; and
•fluctuations in the value of the Japanese yen against the U.S. dollar as our battery-cell purchases for Model S and Model X and some raw materials for cells used in Model 3 and energy storage products are currently denominated in Japanese yen.

Our business is dependent on the continued supply of battery cells for the battery packs used in our vehicles and energy storage products. While we believe several sources of the battery cells are available for such battery packs, and expect to eventually rely substantially on battery cells manufactured at our own facilities, we have to date fully qualified only a very limited number of suppliers for the cells used in such battery packs and have very limited flexibility in changing cell suppliers. In particular, we have fully qualified only one supplier for the cells used in battery packs for our current production vehicles. Any disruption in the supply of battery cells from such suppliers could disrupt production of our vehicles and of the battery packs we produce for energy products until such time as a different supplier is fully qualified. Furthermore, fluctuations or shortages in petroleum and other economic conditions may cause us to experience significant increases in freight charges and material costs. Substantial increases in the prices for our materials or prices charged to us, such as those charged by battery cell suppliers, would increase our operating costs, and could reduce our margins if we cannot recoup the increased costs through increased vehicle prices. Any attempts to increase vehicle prices in response to increased material costs could result in cancellations of vehicle orders and reservations and therefore materially and adversely affect our brand, image, business, prospects and operating results.

We may become subject to product liability claims, which could harm our financial condition and liquidity if we are not able to successfully defend or insure against such claims.

Although we design our vehicles to be the safest vehicles on the road, product liability claims, even those without merit, could harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition. The automobile industry in particular experiences significant product liability claims and we face inherent risk of exposure to claims in the event our vehicles do not perform or are claimed to not have performed as expected. As is true for other automakers, our cars have been involved and we expect in the future will be involved in crashes resulting in death or personal injury, and such crashes where Autopilot is engaged are the subject of significant public attention. We have experienced and we expect to continue to face claims arising from or related to misuse or claimed failures of new technologies that we are pioneering, including Autopilot in our vehicles. Moreover, as our solar energy systems and energy storage products generate and store electricity, they have the potential to cause injury to people or property. A successful product liability claim against us could require us to pay a substantial monetary award. Our risks in this area are particularly pronounced given the relatively limited number of vehicles and energy storage products delivered to date and limited field experience of our products. Moreover, a product liability claim could generate substantial negative publicity about our products and business and could have material adverse effect on our brand, business, prospects and operating results. In most jurisdictions, we generally self-insure against the risk of product liability claims for vehicle exposure, meaning that any product liability claims will likely have to be paid from company funds, not by insurance.

The markets in which we operate are highly competitive, and we may not be successful in competing in these industries. We currently face competition from new and established domestic and international competitors and expect to face competition from others in the future, including competition from companies with new technology.

The worldwide automotive market, particularly for alternative fuel vehicles, is highly competitive today and we expect it will become even more so in the future. There is no assurance that our vehicles will be successful in the respective markets in which they compete. A significant and growing number of established and new automobile manufacturers, as well as other companies, have entered or are reported to have plans to enter the alternative fuel vehicle market, including hybrid, plug-in hybrid and fully electric vehicles, as well as the market for self-driving technology and applications. In some cases, such competitors have announced an intention to produce electric vehicles exclusively at some point in the future. Most of our current and potential competitors have significantly greater financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, vehicle sales networks and other resources than we do and may be able to devote greater resources to the design, development, manufacturing, distribution, promotion, sale and support of their products. Increased competition could result in lower vehicle unit sales, price reductions, revenue shortfalls, loss of customers and loss of market share, which could harm our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results. In addition, our Model 3 vehicle faces competition from existing and future automobile manufacturers in the extremely competitive entry-level premium sedan market, including Audi, BMW, Lexus and Mercedes.

The solar and energy storage industries are highly competitive. We face competition from other manufacturers, developers and installers of solar and energy storage systems, as well as from large utilities. Decreases in the retail prices of electricity from utilities or other renewable energy sources could make our products less attractive to customers and lead to an increased rate of customer defaults under our existing long-term leases and power purchase agreements. Moreover, solar panel and lithium-ion battery prices have declined and are continuing to decline. As we increase our battery and solar manufacturing capabilities, including at Gigafactory 1 and Gigafactory 2, future price declines may harm our ability to produce energy storage systems and solar systems at competitive prices.

If we are unable to establish and maintain confidence in our long-term business prospects among consumers, analysts and within our industries, then our financial condition, operating results, business prospects and stock price may suffer materially.

Consumers may be less likely to purchase our products if they are not convinced that our business will succeed or that our service and support and other operations will continue in the long term. Similarly, suppliers and other third parties will be less likely to invest time and resources in developing business relationships with us if they are not convinced that our business will succeed. Accordingly, in order to build and maintain our business, we must maintain confidence among customers, suppliers, analysts, ratings agencies and other parties in our long-term financial viability and business prospects. Maintaining such confidence may be particularly complicated by certain factors, such as our limited operating history, unfamiliarity with our products, any delays in scaling manufacturing and service operations to meet demand, competition and uncertainty regarding the future of electric vehicles or our other products and services and our quarterly production and sales performance compared with market expectations. Many of these factors are largely outside our control, and any negative perceptions about our long-term business prospects, even if exaggerated or unfounded, could harm our business and make it more difficult to raise additional funds if needed.

Our plan to generate ongoing growth and demand, including by expanding our network of Tesla stores, galleries, delivery centers, service centers and Superchargers, will require significant cash investments and management resources and may not meet expectations with respect to additional sales or installations of our products or availability of Superchargers.

We plan to generate ongoing growth and demand, including by globally expanding our network of Tesla stores, galleries, delivery centers, service centers, mobile service offerings and Superchargers. These plans require significant cash investments and management resources and may not meet our expectations with respect to additional sales or installations of our products. This ongoing global expansion, which includes planned entry into markets in which we have limited or no experience selling, delivering, installing and/or servicing our products, and which may pose legal, regulatory, labor, cultural and political challenges that we have not previously encountered, may not have the desired effect of increasing sales and installations and expanding our brand presence to the degree we are anticipating. Furthermore, the increasing number of Model S, Model X and Model 3 vehicles will require us to continue to increase the number of our Supercharger stations and connectors significantly. If we fail to do so, our customers could become dissatisfied, which could adversely affect sales of our vehicles. We will also need to ensure we are in compliance with any regulatory requirements applicable to the sale, installation and service of our products, the sale of electricity generated through our solar energy systems and operation of Superchargers in those jurisdictions, which could take considerable time and expense. If we experience any delays or cannot meet customer expectations in expanding our customer infrastructure network, or our expansion plans are not successful in continuing to grow demand, this could lead to a decrease or stagnation in sales or installations of our products and could negatively impact our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

We face risks associated with our international operations and expansion, including unfavorable regulatory, political, tax and labor conditions, and with establishing ourselves in new markets, all of which could harm our business.

We currently have international operations and subsidiaries in various countries and jurisdictions that are subject to legal, political, and regulatory requirements and social and economic conditions that may be very different from those affecting us domestically. Additionally, as part of our growth strategy, we will continue to expand our sales, delivery, service and Supercharger locations internationally. International expansion requires us to make significant expenditures, including the establishment of local operating entities, hiring of local employees and establishing facilities in advance of generating any revenue.

We are subject to a number of risks associated with international business activities that may increase our costs, impact our ability to sell our products and require significant management attention. These risks include conforming our products to various international regulatory and safety requirements as well as charging and other electric infrastructures, difficulty in establishing, staffing and managing foreign operations, challenges in attracting customers, foreign government taxes, regulations and permit requirements, our ability to enforce our contractual rights; trade restrictions, customs regulations, tariffs and price or exchange controls, and preferences of foreign nations for domestically manufactured products. For example, in China, which is a key market for us, certain products such as automobiles manufactured in the U.S. have become subject to a recently increased tariff imposed by the government, which could be further increased in the future. Moreover, recently increased import duties on certain components used in our products that are sourced from China may increase our costs and negatively impact our operating results.

If we fail to effectively grow and manage the residual, financing and credit risks related to our vehicle financing programs, our business may suffer.

We offer vehicle financing arrangements for Model S and Model X through our local subsidiaries in the U.S., Canada, Germany and the UK, including leasing directly through certain of those subsidiaries. Under a lease held directly by us, we typically receive only a very small portion of the total vehicle purchase price at the time of lease, followed by a stream of payments over the term of the lease. The profitability of the leasing program depends on our ability to accurately project residual values, secure adequate financing and/or business partners to fund and grow this program, and screen for and manage customer credit risk. We expect the need for leasing and other financing options will continue to be important to Model S and Model X deliveries and for Model 3 in the long term. If we are unable to adequately fund our leasing program with internal funds, or partners or other external financing sources, and compelling alternative financing programs are not available for our customers, we may be unable to grow our sales. Furthermore, if our leasing business grows substantially, our business may suffer if we cannot effectively manage the greater levels of residual and credit risks resulting from growth. Finally, if we do not successfully monitor and comply with applicable national, state and/or local financial regulations and consumer protection laws governing lease transactions, we may become subject to enforcement actions or penalties, either of which may harm our business.

Moreover, we have provided resale value guarantees to customers with certain financing programs, under which such customers may sell their vehicles back to us at certain points in time at pre-determined resale values. If the resale values of any vehicles resold or returned to us pursuant to these programs are materially lower than our estimates, our profitability and/or liquidity could be negatively impacted.

The unavailability, reduction or elimination of, or unfavorable determinations with respect to, government and economic incentives in the U.S. and abroad supporting the development and adoption of electric vehicles or solar energy could have some impact on demand for our products and services.

We and our customers currently benefit from certain government and economic incentives supporting the development and adoption of electric vehicles. In the U.S. and abroad, such incentives include, among other things, tax credits or rebates that encourage the purchase of electric vehicles. In Norway, for example, the purchase of electric vehicles is not currently subject to import taxes, taxes on non-recurring vehicle fees, the 25% value added tax or the purchase taxes that apply to the purchase of gas-powered vehicles. Notably, the quantum of incentive programs promoting electric vehicles is a tiny fraction of the amount of subsidies that are provided to gas-powered vehicles through the oil and gas industries. Nevertheless, even the limited benefits from such programs could be reduced, eliminated or exhausted. For example, in July 2018, a previously available incentive for purchases of Model 3 in Ontario, Canada was cancelled and Tesla buyers in Germany lost access to electric vehicle incentives for a short period of time beginning late last year. In April 2017 and January 2016, respectively, previously available incentives in Hong Kong and Denmark that favored the purchase of electric vehicles expired, negatively impacting sales. Moreover, under current regulations, a $7,500 federal tax credit available in the U.S. for the purchase of our vehicles will begin to phase out over the course of 2019. In addition, California implemented regulations phasing out a $2,500 cash rebate on qualified electric vehicles for high-income consumers, which became effective in March 2016. In certain circumstances, there is pressure from the oil and gas lobby or related special interests to bring about such developments, which could have some negative impact on demand for our vehicles.

In addition, certain governmental rebates, tax credits and other financial incentives that are currently available with respect to our solar and energy storage product businesses allow us to lower our installation costs and cost of capital and encourage customers to buy our products and investors to invest in our solar financing funds. However, these incentives may expire on a particular date, end when the allocated funding is exhausted or be reduced or terminated as renewable energy adoption rates increase, often without warning. For example, the U.S. federal government currently offers a 30% investment tax credit (“ITC”) for the installation of solar power facilities and energy storage systems that are charged from a co-sited solar power facility. The ITC is currently scheduled to decline to 10%, and expire altogether for customer-owned residential systems, by January 2022. Likewise, in jurisdictions where net energy metering is currently available, our customers receive bill credits from utilities for energy that their solar energy systems generate and export to the grid in excess of the electric load they use. Several jurisdictions have reduced or eliminated the benefit available under net energy metering, or have proposed to do so. Such reductions in or termination of governmental incentives could adversely impact our results by making our products less competitive for potential customers, increasing our cost of capital and adversely impacting our ability to attract investment partners and to form new financing funds for our solar and energy storage assets. Additionally, the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in the U.S. could potentially increase the cost, and decrease the availability, of renewable energy financing, by reducing the value of depreciation benefits associated with, and the overall investor tax capacity needed to monetize, renewable energy projects. Such changes could lower the overall investment willingness and capacity for such projects available in the market.

Moreover, we and our fund investors claim the ITC in amounts based on the fair market value of our solar and energy storage systems. Although we obtain independent appraisals to support the claimed fair market values, the relevant governmental authorities have audited such values and in certain cases have determined that they should be lower, and they may do so again in the future. Such determinations may result in adverse tax consequences and/or our obligation to make indemnification or other payments, or contribute additional assets, to our funds or fund investors.

Any failure by us to realize the expected benefits of our substantial investments and commitments with respect to the manufacture of PV cells and modules, including if we are unable to comply with the terms of our agreement with the Research Foundation for the State University of New York relating to our Gigafactory 2, could result in negative consequences for our business.

We own certain PV cell and module manufacturing and technology assets, and a build-to-suit lease arrangement with the Research Foundation for the State University of New York (the “SUNY Foundation”). This agreement with the SUNY Foundation provides for the construction of Gigafactory 2 in Buffalo, New York, which at full capacity we expect will be capable of producing at least 1.0 gigawatt of PV cells and modules annually, including for our Solar Roof. Under this agreement, we are obligated to, among other things, employ specified minimum numbers of personnel in the State of New York and spend or incur $5.0 billion in combined capital, operational expenses, costs of goods sold and other costs in the State of New York during the 10-year period following the completion of all construction and related infrastructure, the arrival of manufacturing equipment, and the receipt of certain permits and other specified items at Gigafactory 2. If we fail in any year over the course of the term of the agreement to meet these obligations, we would be obligated to pay a “program payment” of $41.2 million to the SUNY Foundation in such year. Any inability on our part to comply with the requirements of this agreement may result in the payment of significant amounts to the SUNY Foundation, the termination of our lease at Gigafactory 2, and/or the need to secure an alternative supply of PV cells and modules for products such as our Solar Roof. Moreover, if we are unable to utilize our manufacturing and technology assets in accordance with our expectations, we may have to recognize accounting charges pertaining to the write-off of such assets. Any of the foregoing events could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

If we are unable to attract and/or retain key employees and hire qualified personnel, our ability to compete could be harmed.

The loss of the services of any of our key employees could disrupt our operations, delay the development and introduction of our vehicles and services, and negatively impact our business, prospects and operating results. In particular, we are highly dependent on the services of Elon Musk, our Chief Executive Officer, and Jeffrey B. Straubel, our Chief Technology Officer.

None of our key employees is bound by an employment agreement for any specific term and we may not be able to successfully attract and retain senior leadership necessary to grow our business. Our future success depends upon our ability to attract and retain executive officers and other key technology, sales, marketing, engineering, manufacturing and support personnel and any failure to do so could adversely impact our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results.

Key talent may leave Tesla due to various factors, such as a very competitive labor market for talented individuals with automotive or technology experience. In California, Nevada and other regions where we have operations, there is increasing competition for individuals with skillsets needed for our business, including specialized knowledge of electric vehicles, software engineering, manufacturing engineering, and other skills such as electrical and building construction expertise. This competition affects both our ability to retain key employees and hire new ones. Our continued success depends upon our continued ability to hire new employees in a timely manner, especially to support our expansion plans and ramp to high-volume manufacture of vehicles, and to retain current employees. Additionally, we compete with both mature and prosperous companies that have far greater financial resources than we do and start-ups and emerging companies that promise short-term growth opportunities. Difficulties in retaining current employees or recruiting new ones could have an adverse effect on our performance.

We are highly dependent on the services of Elon Musk, our Chief Executive Officer.

We are highly dependent on the services of Elon Musk, our Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of our Board of Directors and largest stockholder. Although Mr. Musk spends significant time with Tesla and is highly active in our management, he does not devote his full time and attention to Tesla. Mr. Musk also currently serves as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Technical Officer of Space Exploration Technologies Corp., a developer and manufacturer of space launch vehicles, and is involved in other emerging technology ventures.

We are continuously expanding and improving our information technology systems and use security measures designed to protect our systems against breaches and cyber-attacks. If these efforts are not successful, our business and operations could be disrupted and our operating results and reputation could be harmed.

We are continuously expanding and improving our information technology systems, including implementing new internally developed systems, to assist us in the management of our business. In particular, our volume production of multiple vehicles necessitates continued development, maintenance and improvement of our information technology systems in the U.S. and abroad, which include product data management, procurement, inventory management, production planning and execution, sales, service and logistics, dealer management, financial, tax and regulatory compliance systems. We also maintain information technology measures designed to protect us against intellectual property theft, data breaches and other cyber-attacks. The implementation, maintenance and improvement of these systems require significant management time, support and cost. Moreover, there are inherent risks associated with developing, improving and expanding our core systems as well as implementing new systems, including the disruption of our data management, procurement, manufacturing execution, finance, supply chain and sales and service processes. These risks may affect our ability to manage our data and inventory, procure parts or supplies or manufacture, sell, deliver and service vehicles, or achieve and maintain compliance with, or realize available benefits under, tax laws and other applicable regulations.

We cannot be sure that these systems or their required functionality will be effectively implemented, maintained or expanded as planned. If we do not successfully implement, maintain or expand these systems as planned, our operations may be disrupted, our ability to accurately and/or timely report our financial results could be impaired, and deficiencies may arise in our internal control over financial reporting, which may impact our ability to certify our financial results. Moreover, our proprietary information could be compromised or misappropriated and our reputation may be adversely affected. If these systems or their functionality do not operate as we expect them to, we may be required to expend significant resources to make corrections or find alternative sources for performing these functions.

Any unauthorized control or manipulation of our products’ systems could result in loss of confidence in us and our products and harm our business.

Our products contain complex information technology systems. For example, our vehicles and energy storage products are designed with built-in data connectivity to accept and install periodic remote updates from us to improve or update their functionality. We have designed, implemented and tested security measures intended to prevent unauthorized access to our information technology networks, our products and their systems. However, hackers have reportedly attempted, and may attempt in the future, to gain unauthorized access to modify, alter and use such networks, products and systems to gain control of, or to change, our products’ functionality, user interface and performance characteristics, or to gain access to data stored in or generated by our products. We encourage reporting of potential vulnerabilities in the security of our products via our security vulnerability reporting policy, and we aim to remedy any reported and verified vulnerability. Accordingly, we have received reports of potential vulnerabilities in the past and have attempted to remedy them. However, there can be no assurance that vulnerabilities will not be exploited in the future before they can be identified, or that our remediation efforts are or will be successful.

Any unauthorized access to or control of our products or their systems or any loss of data could result in legal claims or proceedings. In addition, regardless of their veracity, reports of unauthorized access to our products, their systems or data, as well as other factors that may result in the perception that our products, their systems or data are capable of being “hacked,” could negatively affect our brand and harm our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results. We have been the subject of such reports in the past.

We are subject to various environmental and safety laws and regulations that could impose substantial costs upon us and negatively impact our ability to operate our manufacturing facilities.

As a manufacturing company, including with respect to facilities such as the Tesla Factory, Gigafactory 1 and Gigafactory 2, we are subject to complex environmental, health and safety laws and regulations at numerous jurisdictional levels in the U.S. and abroad, including laws relating to the use, handling, storage, disposal and human exposure to hazardous materials. The costs of compliance, including remediating contamination if any is found on our properties and any changes to our operations mandated by new or amended laws, may be significant. We may also face unexpected delays in obtaining permits and approvals required by such laws in connection with our manufacturing facilities, which would hinder our operation of these facilities. Such costs and delays may adversely impact our business prospects and operating results. Furthermore, any violations of these laws may result in substantial fines and penalties, remediation costs, third party damages, or a suspension or cessation of our operations.

Our business may be adversely affected by any disruptions caused by union activities.

It is common for employees at companies with significant manufacturing operations such as us to belong to a union, which can result in higher employee costs and increased risk of work stoppages. Moreover, regulations in some jurisdictions outside of the U.S. mandate employee participation in industrial collective bargaining agreements and work councils with certain consultation rights with respect to the relevant companies’ operations. Although we work diligently to provide the best possible work environment for our employees, they may still decide to join or seek recognition to form a labor union, or we may be required to become a union signatory. The United Automobile Workers (UAW) has publicly announced a desire to organize the Tesla Factory, and has been engaged in a campaign against the company. As part of that campaign, the UAW has filed with the National Labor Relations Board a series of unfair labor practice charges against Tesla. Furthermore, we are directly or indirectly dependent upon companies with unionized work forces, such as parts suppliers and trucking and freight companies, and work stoppages or strikes organized by such unions could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition or operating results. If a work stoppage occurs, it could delay the manufacture and sale of our products and have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, operating results or financial condition.

Our products and services are subject to substantial regulations, which are evolving, and unfavorable changes or failure by us to comply with these regulations could substantially harm our business and operating results.

Motor vehicles are subject to substantial regulation under international, federal, state, and local laws. We incur significant costs in complying with these regulations and may be required to incur additional costs to comply with any changes to such regulations, and any failures to comply could result in significant expenses, delays or fines. We are subject to laws and regulations applicable to the supply, manufacture, import, sale and service of automobiles internationally. For example, in countries outside of the U.S., we are required to meet standards relating to vehicle safety, fuel economy and emissions, among other things, that are often materially different from requirements in the U.S., thus resulting in additional investment into the vehicles and systems to ensure regulatory compliance in those countries. This process may include official review and certification of our vehicles by foreign regulatory agencies prior to market entry, as well as compliance with foreign reporting and recall management systems requirements.

Additionally, our vehicles are equipped with a suite of driver-assistance features called Autopilot, which help assist drivers with certain tedious and potentially dangerous aspects of road travel, but require drivers to remain engaged. There is a variety of international, federal and state regulations that may apply to self-driving vehicles, which include many existing vehicle standards that were not originally intended to apply to vehicles that may not have a driver. Such regulations continue to rapidly change, which increases the likelihood of a patchwork of complex or conflicting regulations, or may delay products or restrict self-driving features and availability, any of which could adversely affect our business.

Moreover, as a manufacturer and installer of solar generation and energy storage systems and a supplier of electricity generated and stored by the solar energy and energy storage systems we install for customers, we are impacted by federal, state and local regulations and policies concerning electricity pricing, the interconnection of electricity generation and storage equipment with the electric grid, and the sale of electricity generated by third-party owned systems. For example, existing or proposed regulations and policies would permit utilities to limit the amount of electricity generated by our customers with their solar energy systems, charge fees and penalties to our customers relating to the purchase of energy other than from the grid, adjust electricity rate designs such that the price of our solar products may not be competitive with that of electricity from the grid, restrict us and our customers from transacting under our power purchase agreements or qualifying for government incentives and benefits that apply to solar power, and limit or eliminate net energy metering. If such regulations and policies remain in effect or are adopted in other jurisdictions, or if other regulations and policies that adversely impact the interconnection or use of our solar and energy storage systems are introduced, they could deter potential customers from purchasing our solar and energy storage products, threaten the economics of our existing contracts and cause us to cease solar and energy storage system sales and operations in the relevant jurisdictions, which could harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to various privacy and consumer protection laws.

Our privacy policy is posted on our website, and any failure by us or our vendor or other business partners to comply with it or with federal, state or international privacy, data protection or security laws or regulations could result in regulatory or litigation-related actions against us, legal liability, fines, damages and other costs. Substantial expenses and operational changes may be required in connection with maintaining compliance with such laws, and in particular certain emerging privacy laws are still subject to a high degree of uncertainty as to their interpretation and application. For example, in May 2018, the General Data Protection Regulation (the “GDPR”) began to fully apply to the processing of personal information collected from individuals located in the European Union. The GDPR has created new compliance obligations and has significantly increased fines for noncompliance. Although we take steps to protect the security of our customers’ personal information, we may be required to expend significant resources to comply with data breach requirements if third parties improperly obtain and use the personal information of our customers or we otherwise experience a data loss with respect to customers’ personal information. A major breach of our network security and systems could have negative consequences for our business and future prospects, including possible fines, penalties and damages, reduced customer demand for our vehicles, and harm to our reputation and brand.

We may be compelled to undertake product recalls or take other actions, which could adversely affect our brand image and financial performance.

Any product recall, including for solar or charging equipment, in the future may result in adverse publicity, damage our brand and adversely affect our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition. For example, certain vehicle recalls that we initiated have resulted from various causes, including a component that could prevent the parking brake from releasing once engaged, a concern with the firmware in the restraints control module in certain right-hand-drive vehicles, industry-wide issues with airbags from a particular supplier, Model X seat components that could cause unintended seat movement during a collision, and concerns of corrosion in Model S power steering assist motor bolts. Furthermore, testing of our vehicles by government regulators or industry groups may require us to initiate vehicle recalls or may result in negative public perceptions about the safety of our vehicles. In the future, we may at various times, voluntarily or involuntarily, initiate a recall if any of our products or our electric vehicle powertrain components that we have provided to other vehicle OEMs, including any systems or parts sourced from our suppliers, prove to be defective or noncompliant with applicable laws and regulations, such as federal motor vehicle safety standards. Such recalls, whether voluntary or involuntary or caused by systems or components engineered or manufactured by us or our suppliers, could involve significant expense and could adversely affect our brand image in our target markets, as well as our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Our current and future warranty reserves may be insufficient to cover future warranty claims which could adversely affect our financial performance.

Subject to separate limited warranties for the supplemental restraint system, battery and drive unit, we provide four-year or 50,000-mile limited warranties for the purchasers of new Model 3, Model S and Model X vehicles and either a four-year or 50,000-mile limited warranty or a two-year or 100,000-mile maximum odometer limited warranty for the purchasers of used Model S or Model X vehicles certified and sold by us. The limited warranty for the battery and drive unit for new Model S and Model X vehicles covers the drive unit for eight years, as well as the battery for a period of eight years (or for certain older vehicles, 125,000 miles if reached sooner than eight years), although the battery’s charging capacity is not covered under any of our warranties or Extended Service plans; the limited warranty for used Model S and Model X vehicles does not extend or otherwise alter the terms of the original battery and drive unit limited warranty for such used vehicles specified in their original New Vehicle Limited Warranty. For the battery and drive unit on our current new Model 3 vehicles, we offer an eight-year or 100,000-mile limited warranty for our standard range battery and an eight-year or 120,000-mile limited warranty for our long-range battery, with minimum 70% retention of battery capacity over the warranty period. In addition, customers of new Model S and Model X vehicles have the opportunity to purchase an Extended Service plan for the period after the end of the limited warranty for their new vehicles to cover additional services for up to an additional four years or 50,000 miles, provided it is purchased within a specified period of time.

For energy storage products, we provide limited warranties against defects and to guarantee minimum energy retention levels. For example, we currently guarantee that each Powerwall 2 product will maintain at least 70-80% of its stated energy capacity after 10 years, and that each Powerpack 2 product will retain specified minimum energy capacities in each of its first 10 to 15 years of use. For our Solar Roof, we currently offer a warranty on the glass tiles for the lifetime of a customer’s home and a separate warranty for the energy generation capability of the solar tiles. We also offer extended warranties, availability guarantees and capacity guarantees for periods of up to 20 years at an additional cost at the time of purchase, as well as workmanship warranties to customers who elect to have us install their systems.

Finally, customers who buy energy from us under solar energy system leases or power purchase agreements are covered by warranties equal to the length of the agreement term, which is typically 20 years. Systems purchased for cash are covered by a warranty of up to 10 years, with extended warranties available at additional cost. In addition, we pass through to our customers the inverter and panel manufacturers’ warranties, which generally range from 5 to 25 years, subjecting us to the risk that the manufacturers may later cease operations or fail to honor their underlying warranties. Finally, we provide a performance guarantee with our leased solar energy systems that compensates a customer on an annual basis if their system does not meet the electricity production guarantees set forth in their lease.

If our warranty reserves are inadequate to cover future warranty claims on our products, our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results could be materially and adversely affected. Warranty reserves include management’s best estimate of the projected costs to repair or to replace items under warranty. These estimates are based on actual claims incurred to-date and an estimate of the nature, frequency and costs of future claims. Such estimates are inherently uncertain and changes to our historical or projected experience, especially with respect to products such as Model 3 and Solar Roof that are new and/or that we expect to produce at significantly greater volumes than our past products, may cause material changes to our warranty reserves in the future.

Our insurance strategy may not be adequate to protect us from all business risks.

We may be subject, in the ordinary course of business, to losses resulting from products liability, accidents, acts of God and other claims against us, for which we may have no insurance coverage. As a general matter, we do not maintain as much insurance coverage as many other companies do, and in some cases, we do not maintain any at all. Additionally, the policies that we do have may include significant deductibles or self-insured retentions, and we cannot be certain that our insurance coverage will be sufficient to cover all future losses or claims against us. A loss that is uninsured or which exceeds policy limits may require us to pay substantial amounts, which could adversely affect our financial condition and operating results.

Our financial results may vary significantly from period-to-period due to fluctuations in our operating costs.

We expect our period-to-period financial results to vary based on our operating costs which we anticipate will increase significantly in future periods as we, among other things, continue to ramp production of Model 3, expand Gigafactory 1, open new Tesla stores and service centers with maintenance and repair capabilities, open new Supercharger locations, ramp production at Gigafactory 2, increase our sales and marketing activities, and increase our general and administrative functions to support our growing operations. Moreover, we expect to continue to design, develop and manufacture new and future products, and increase our production capacity by expanding our current manufacturing facilities and adding future facilities. As a result of these factors, we believe that quarter-to-quarter comparisons of our financial results, especially in the short term, are not necessarily meaningful and that these comparisons cannot be relied upon as indicators of future performance. Moreover, our financial results may not meet expectations of equity research analysts, ratings agencies or investors. If any of this occurs, the trading price of our stock could fall substantially, either suddenly or over time.

Servicing our indebtedness requires a significant amount of cash, and there is no guarantee that we will have sufficient cash flow from our business to pay our substantial indebtedness.

As of June 30, 2018, we and our subsidiaries had outstanding $10.91 billion in aggregate principal amount of indebtedness (see Note 10, Convertible and Long-Term Debt Obligations, to the consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q). Our substantial consolidated indebtedness may increase our vulnerability to any generally adverse economic and industry conditions. We and our subsidiaries may, subject to the limitations in the terms of our existing and future indebtedness, incur additional debt, secure existing or future debt or recapitalize our debt.

Pursuant to their terms, holders of our 0.25% Convertible Senior Notes due 2019, 1.25% Convertible Senior Notes due 2021 and 2.375% Convertible Senior Notes due 2022 (collectively, the “Tesla Convertible Notes”) may convert their respective Tesla Convertible Notes at their option prior to the scheduled maturities of the respective Tesla Convertible Notes under certain circumstances. Upon conversion of the applicable Tesla Convertible Notes, we will be obligated to deliver cash and/or shares in respect of the principal amounts thereof and the conversion value in excess of such principal amounts on such Tesla Convertible Notes. Moreover, our subsidiary’s 2.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2018, 1.625% Convertible Senior Notes due 2019 and Zero-Coupon Convertible Senior Notes due 2020 (collectively, the “Subsidiary Convertible Notes”) are convertible into shares of our common stock at conversion prices ranging from $300.00 to $759.36 per share. Finally, holders of the Tesla Convertible Notes and the Subsidiary Convertible Notes will have the right to require us to repurchase their notes upon the occurrence of a fundamental change at a purchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to, but not including, the fundamental change purchase date.

Our ability to make scheduled payments of the principal and interest on our indebtedness when due or to make payments upon conversion or repurchase demands with respect to our convertible notes, or to refinance our indebtedness as we may need or desire, depends on our future performance, which is subject to economic, financial, competitive and other factors beyond our control. Our business may not continue to generate cash flow from operations in the future sufficient to satisfy our obligations under our existing indebtedness, and any future indebtedness we may incur, and to make necessary capital expenditures. If we are unable to generate such cash flow, we may be required to adopt one or more alternatives, such as reducing or delaying investments or capital expenditures, selling assets, refinancing or obtaining additional equity capital on terms that may be onerous or highly dilutive. Our ability to refinance existing or future indebtedness will depend on the capital markets and our financial condition at such time. In addition, our ability to make payments may be limited by law, by regulatory authority or by agreements governing our future indebtedness. We may not be able to engage in any of these activities or engage in these activities on desirable terms or at all, which could result in a default on our existing or future indebtedness and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our debt agreements contain covenant restrictions that may limit our ability to operate our business.

The terms of certain of our credit facilities, including our senior secured asset based revolving credit agreement, contain, and any of our other future debt agreements may contain, covenant restrictions that limit our ability to operate our business, including restrictions on our ability to, among other things, incur additional debt or issue guarantees, create liens, repurchase stock or make other restricted payments, and make certain voluntary prepayments of specified debt. In addition, under certain circumstances we are required to comply with a fixed charge coverage ratio. As a result of these covenants, our ability to respond to changes in business and economic conditions and engage in beneficial transactions, including to obtain additional financing as needed, may be restricted. Furthermore, our failure to comply with our debt covenants could result in a default under our debt agreements, which could permit the holders to accelerate our obligation to repay the debt. If any of our debt is accelerated, we may not have sufficient funds available to repay it.

We may need or want to raise additional funds and these funds may not be available to us when we need them. If we cannot raise additional funds when we need or want them, our operations and prospects could be negatively affected.

The design, manufacture, sale, installation and/or servicing of automobiles, energy storage products and solar products is a capital intensive business. Until we are consistently generating positive free cash flows, we may need or want to raise additional funds through the issuance of equity, equity-related or debt securities or through obtaining credit from financial institutions to fund, together with our principal sources of liquidity, the costs of developing and manufacturing our current or future vehicles, energy storage products and/or solar products, to pay any significant unplanned or accelerated expenses or for new significant strategic investments, or to refinance our significant consolidated indebtedness, even if not required to do so by the terms of such indebtedness. We need sufficient capital to fund our ongoing operations, ramp vehicle production, continue research and development projects, establish sales, delivery and service centers, build and deploy Superchargers, expand Gigafactory 1, ramp production at Gigafactory 2 and to make the investments in tooling and manufacturing capital required to introduce new vehicles, energy storage products and solar products. We cannot be certain that additional funds will be available to us on favorable terms when required, or at all. If we cannot raise additional funds when we need them, our financial condition, results of operations, business and prospects could be materially and adversely affected.

Additionally, we use capital from third-party investors to enable our customers’ access to our solar energy systems with little or no upfront cost. The availability of this financing depends upon many factors, including the confidence of the investors in the solar energy industry, the quality and mix of our customer contracts, any regulatory changes impacting the economics of our existing customer contracts, changes in law (including tax law), risks or government incentives associated with these financings, and our ability to compete with other renewable energy companies for the limited number of potential investors. Moreover, while interest rates remain at low levels, they have risen in recent periods. If the rate of return required by investors rises as a result of a rise in interest rates, it will reduce the present value of the customer payment streams underlying, and therefore the total value of, our financing structures, increasing our cost of capital. If we are unable to establish new financing funds on favorable terms for third-party ownership arrangements, we may be unable to finance the installation of our solar energy systems for our lease or power purchase agreement customers’ systems, or our cost of capital could increase and our liquidity may be negatively impacted, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we update or discontinue the use of our manufacturing equipment more quickly than expected, we may have to shorten the useful lives of any equipment to be retired as a result of any such update, and the resulting acceleration in our depreciation could negatively affect our financial results.

We have invested and expect to continue to invest significantly in what we believe is state of the art tooling, machinery and other manufacturing equipment for our various product lines, and we depreciate the cost of such equipment over their expected useful lives. However, manufacturing technology may evolve rapidly, and we may decide to update our manufacturing process with cutting-edge equipment more quickly than expected. Moreover, because we have limited experience to date with high-volume manufacturing, we are continually implementing learnings as our engineering and manufacturing expertise and efficiency increase, which may result in our ability to manufacture our products using less of our currently installed equipment. Alternatively, as we ramp production of Model 3 to higher levels, our learnings may cause us to discontinue the use of already installed equipment in favor of different or additional equipment. The useful life of any equipment that would be retired early as a result would be shortened, causing the depreciation on such equipment to be accelerated, and our results of operations could be negatively impacted.

We are exposed to fluctuations in currency exchange rates, which could negatively affect our financial results.

Our revenues and costs denominated in foreign currencies are not completely matched. As we have increased vehicle deliveries in markets outside of the U.S., we have much higher revenues than costs denominated in other currencies such as the euro, Chinese yuan, Norwegian krone, pound sterling and Canadian dollar. Any strengthening of the U.S. dollar would tend to reduce our revenues as measured in U.S. dollars, as we have historically experienced. In addition, a portion of our costs and expenses have been, and we anticipate will continue to be, denominated in foreign currencies, including the Japanese yen. If we do not have fully offsetting revenues in these currencies and if the value of the U.S. dollar depreciates significantly against these currencies, our costs as measured in U.S. dollars as a percent of our revenues will correspondingly increase and our margins will suffer. Moreover, while we undertake limited hedging activities intended to offset the impact of currency translation exposure, it is impossible to predict or eliminate such impact. As a result, our operating results could be adversely affected.

We may face regulatory limitations on our ability to sell vehicles directly which could materially and adversely affect our ability to sell our electric vehicles.

We sell our vehicles directly to consumers. We may not be able to sell our vehicles through this sales model in each state in the U.S., as some states have laws that may be interpreted to impose limitations on this direct-to-consumer sales model. In certain states in which we are not able to obtain dealer licenses, we have opened galleries, which are not full retail locations.

The application of these state laws to our operations continues to be difficult to predict. Laws in some states have limited our ability to obtain dealer licenses from state motor vehicle regulators and may continue to do so.

In addition, decisions by regulators permitting us to sell vehicles may be challenged by dealer associations and others as to whether such decisions comply with applicable state motor vehicle industry laws. We have prevailed in many of these lawsuits and such results have reinforced our continuing belief that state laws were not designed to prevent our distribution model. In some states, there have also been regulatory and legislative efforts by dealer associations to propose laws that, if enacted, would prevent us from obtaining dealer licenses in their states given our current sales model. A few states have passed legislation that clarifies our ability to operate, but at the same time limits the number of dealer licenses we can obtain or stores that we can operate. We have also filed a lawsuit in federal court in Michigan challenging the constitutionality of the state’s prohibition on direct sales as applied to our business.

Internationally, there may be laws in jurisdictions we have not yet entered or laws we are unaware of in jurisdictions we have entered that may restrict our sales or other business practices. Even for those jurisdictions we have analyzed, the laws in this area can be complex, difficult to interpret and may change over time. Continued regulatory limitations and other obstacles interfering with our ability to sell vehicles directly to consumers could have a negative and material impact our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

We may need to defend ourselves against intellectual property infringement claims, which may be time-consuming and could cause us to incur substantial costs.

Others, including our competitors, may hold or obtain patents, copyrights, trademarks or other proprietary rights that could prevent, limit or interfere with our ability to make, use, develop, sell or market our products and services, which could make it more difficult for us to operate our business. From time to time, the holders of such intellectual property rights may assert their rights and urge us to take licenses, and/or may bring suits alleging infringement or misappropriation of such rights. We may consider the entering into licensing agreements with respect to such rights, although no assurance can be given that such licenses can be obtained on acceptable terms or that litigation will not occur, and such licenses could significantly increase our operating expenses. In addition, if we are determined to have infringed upon a third party’s intellectual property rights, we may be required to cease making, selling or incorporating certain components or intellectual property into the goods and services we offer, to pay substantial damages and/or license royalties, to redesign our products and services, and/or to establish and maintain alternative branding for our products and services. In the event that we were required to take one or more such actions, our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition could be materially adversely affected. In addition, any litigation or claims, whether or not valid, could result in substantial costs, negative publicity and diversion of resources and management attention.

Our facilities or operations could be damaged or adversely affected as a result of disasters.

Our corporate headquarters, the Tesla Factory and Gigafactory 1 are located in seismically active regions in Northern California and Nevada. If major disasters such as earthquakes or other events occur, or our information system or communications network breaks down or operates improperly, our headquarters and production facilities may be seriously damaged, or we may have to stop or delay production and shipment of our products. We may incur expenses relating to such damages, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, operating results and financial condition.

Risks Related to the Ownership of Our Common Stock

The trading price of our common stock is likely to continue to be volatile.

The trading price of our common stock has been highly volatile and could continue to be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control. Our common stock has experienced an intra-day trading high of $389.61 per share and a low of $244.59 per share over the last 52 weeks. The stock market in general, and the market for technology companies in particular, has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. In particular, a large proportion of our common stock has been and may continue to be traded by short sellers which may put pressure on the supply and demand for our common stock, further influencing volatility in its market price. Public perception and other factors outside of our control may additionally impact the stock price of companies like us that garner a disproportionate degree of public attention, regardless of actual operating performance. In addition, in the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and the market price of a particular company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against these companies. Moreover, stockholder litigation like this has been filed against us in the past. While we are continuing to defend such actions vigorously, any judgment against us or any future stockholder litigation could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

We may fail to meet our publicly announced guidance or other expectations about our business, which could cause our stock price to decline.

We provide guidance regarding our expected financial and business performance, such as projections regarding sales and production, as well as anticipated future revenues, gross margins, profitability and cash flows. Correctly identifying key factors affecting business conditions and predicting future events is inherently an uncertain process and our guidance may not ultimately be accurate. Our guidance is based on certain assumptions such as those relating to anticipated production and sales volumes and average sales prices, supplier and commodity costs, and planned cost reductions. If our guidance is not accurate or varies from actual results due to our inability to meet our assumptions or the impact on our financial performance that could occur as a result of various risks and uncertainties, the market value of our common stock could decline significantly.

Transactions relating to our convertible notes may dilute the ownership interest of existing stockholders, or may otherwise depress the price of our common stock.

The conversion of some or all of the Tesla Convertible Notes or the Subsidiary Convertible Notes would dilute the ownership interests of existing stockholders to the extent we deliver shares upon conversion of any of such notes. Our Subsidiary Convertible Notes have been historically, and the other Tesla Convertible Notes may become in the future, convertible at the option of their holders prior to their scheduled terms under certain circumstances. If holders elect to convert their convertible notes, we could be required to deliver to them a significant number of shares of our common stock. Any sales in the public market of the common stock issuable upon such conversion could adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common stock. In addition, the existence of the convertible notes may encourage short selling by market participants because the conversion of such notes could be used to satisfy short positions, or anticipated conversion of such notes into shares of our common stock could depress the price of our common stock.

Moreover, in connection with each issuance of the Tesla Convertible Notes, we entered into convertible note hedge transactions, which are expected to reduce the potential dilution and/or offset potential cash payments we are required to make in excess of the principal amount upon conversion of the applicable Tesla Convertible Notes. We also entered into warrant transactions with the hedge counterparties, which could separately have a dilutive effect on our common stock to the extent that the market price per share of our common stock exceeds the applicable strike price of the warrants on the applicable expiration dates. In addition, the hedge counterparties or their affiliates may enter into various transactions with respect to their hedge positions, which could also cause or prevent an increase or a decrease in the market price of our common stock or the convertible notes.

Elon Musk has pledged shares of our common stock to secure certain bank borrowings. If Mr. Musk were forced to sell these shares pursuant to a margin call that he could not avoid or satisfy, such sales could cause our stock price to decline.

Certain banking institutions have made extensions of credit to Elon Musk, our Chief Executive Officer, a portion of which was used to purchase shares of common stock in certain of our public offerings and private placements at the same prices offered to third party participants in such offerings and placements. We are not a party to these loans, which are partially secured by pledges of a portion of the Tesla common stock currently owned by Mr. Musk. If the price of our common stock were to decline substantially and Mr. Musk were unable to avoid or satisfy a margin call with respect to his pledged shares, Mr. Musk may be forced by one or more of the banking institutions to sell shares of Tesla common stock in order to remain within the margin limitations imposed under the terms of his loans. Any such sales could cause the price of our common stock to decline further.

Anti-takeover provisions contained in our governing documents, applicable laws and our convertible notes could impair a takeover attempt.

Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws afford certain rights and powers to our board of directors that could contribute to the delay or prevention of an acquisition that it deems undesirable. We are also subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law and other provisions of Delaware law that limit the ability of stockholders in certain situations to effect certain business combinations. In addition, the terms of our convertible notes require us to repurchase such notes in the event of a fundamental change, including a takeover of our company. Any of the foregoing provisions and terms that has the effect of delaying or deterring a change in control could limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their shares of our common stock, and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for our common stock.
Your post is why this forum needs a maximum word limit on posts. You posted a 20 page treatise. GTFO of here with that crap. No one here cares what you or anyone else has to say that much.