3 ms·
Notice that his response to the Economist is in the form that I said -- the word "need" is present. As for Tesla's targets, they have changed (downwards) sever
by greglindahl 9y ago
Notice that his response to the Economist is in the form that I said -- the word "need" is present.
As for Tesla's targets, they have changed (downwards) several times, and I've seen plenty of people noticing. IIRC the target announced after Q4 earnings was 2,500 Model 3's per week by the end of Q1, and they missed by 500.
Honestly, this entire discussion is the kind of thing I'd expect on Seeking Alpha, not Hacker News.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> As for Tesla's targets, they have changed (downwards) several times, and I've seen plenty of people noticing Bloomberg has even charted the successive reduced projections against measures of actual production. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla-tracker/ https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla-tracker/
- erikpukinskis 9y agoTesla might raise to accelerate the Semi production line or the Model Y line, but I can’t fathom that’d happen this year. If we’re talking about Model 3, there’s also no way they’ll have unforeseen expenses in Q3/4. It takes way more than 6 months to plan a billion dollar expenditure, so it seems exceedingly unlikely Tesla’s expenditure model is wrong. So that leaves their revenue model as the only wildcard. If they dramatically fail to increase production... say they plateau at 3k per week... that’s like $50k * 3k * 35 weeks = $5 billion in Model 3 revenue. Plus they have a couple billion in the bank? I just don’t see how this is a bankruptcy year for them.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> Tesla might raise to accelerate the Semi production line or the Model Y line, but I can’t fathom that’d happen this year. Even with release of the Model Y pushed out to 2020, if they need money and they aren't raising it this year, it probably means more delays.