6 ms·

I thought Elon tweeted early last year that Tesla was on track to build 500K cars in 2019 year. 370K is way off from that number.

by adrr 7y ago

neogodless 7y ago
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1098080063801585664?lang=en https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1098080063801585664?lang... > Meant to say annualized production rate at end of 2019 probably around 500k, ie 10k cars/week. Deliveries for year still estimated to be about 400k. For deliveries 400k isn't too far from 367,500. But it's not clear (to me) what their annual production rate is. One would hope/imagine that if they get their production rate competitive with the biggest producers of automobiles (anything with 4 wheels), like Toyota, Ford and GM, then the average selling price could come down a bit, too. I just want a decent-looking electric car (preferably hatchback) I can charge at any available charging station with no frills but 250-300 mile range for $25-30k USD. I know batteries aren't there yet!
- foepys 7y ago
  367k is 9% off the 400k target. 9% is a lot.
  - ortusdux 7y ago
    The stock market doesn't seem to care.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - DanCarvajal 7y ago
      No one can point to $tsla as a functioning example of a rational actors.
      - Seanambers 7y ago
        Well, that statement may or not be right. I guess only the future will answer that one, but; How do you really value a company like Tesla? According to skeptics the company should've been dead 10 times over already. But if you actually do some research, you find that the technology is sound, the execution is there, and not at least the vision of an electric future is there. Further more its CEO has stated that 'We're going to do these other things also.' - Referring to Full Self Driving and production rates. It has a track record of delivering; 'maybe not on time - but we get it done.' There's no real reason to doubt that they are serious, go watch autonomy day and you'd get the idea. The vision isn't just automotive, it's solar for homes and grid batteries as well. a decentralized power grid for the future. Meanwhile all the promised competition and Tesla killers have proven to be vaporware. And that's before you start looking at the logistics of making an electric car. With electric cars you need batteries and lot's of them. No other car manufacturer has access to enough volume to even begin to compete with Tesla, these battery factories haven't even been built. And the electric motors of competitor are less efficient by a large margin, meaning they need larger batteries for the same range, and higher charging speed to be able to charge the same distance in time as a Tesla. Buying tsla is right now like buying a part of the future, and no other company is close. Is the share price ridiculously high? Yes, but which other company in the world right now is stumping the competition as badly as Tesla. The only real comparison is Apple after the release of the iPhone. But while apple got real competition after 4-5 years. Tesla still rules all the important metrics regarding electric cars wh/km, accel, charging speed. And apple still keeps most of the profits in the mobile market, even tough they have a small market share. So maybe it is rational pricing that you are seeing, the markets are trying to value more than just cars produced. After all the CEO is landing rockets on barges as well so who knows :)
        aguyfromnb 7y ago
        >The vision isn't just automotive, it's solar for homes and grid batteries as well. a decentralized power grid for the future. The "issue" is, these are low margin businesses. Why don't you provide some actual numbers? How many cars, roofs and batteries do they have to build/install to justify the market cap? Much of the Tesla valuation is based on self driving taxis and appreciate cars, and that ain't happening for a while. >But if you actually do some research, You don't think funds with billions on the line are "doing research"? That's...presumptuous.
  - Shaanie 7y ago
    I'd say within 10% fulfills (if barely) "about X".
    - aguyfromnb 7y ago
      Says 500k, corrects himself to "mean" 400k, still misses by 10%, Tesla shill blogs report they "crushed" expectations: https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-tsla-q4-2019-production-and-delivery-results/ https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-tsla-q4-2019-production-and-...
      - rmtech 7y ago
        What was the expectation from skeptics? 0?
      - zaroth 7y ago
        The communicated expectation was always 360k-400k. This was a range that “everyone” said was impossible to reach even at the low end. A tweet issued after hours and corrected the same day does not change the range explicitly stated in every earnings call and quarterly statement Tesla issued throughout 2019. It doesn’t matter what you or I think. The market speaks for itself. After announcing the number the stock is up ~3.5%. That indicates that reaching the lower range number was not fully priced in as of yesterday, and that the market deems this to be good news. Also, the annualized run rate with GF3 producing 3k/week would exceed 10k/wk based on 100,000 cars produced in Fremont in 13 weeks in Q4. Getting GF3 to 3k/week less than one year after breaking ground was also something the pundits said was “impossible”.
        aguyfromnb 7y ago
        >This was a range that “everyone” said was impossible to reach even at the low end. Really? Because I follow some of TESLAQ on Twitter, and many were expecting 115k delivered this quarter. Consensus was around 110k. One prominent poster had 367k for the year, and was within a fraction of a percent of what Tesla ended up delivering (isn't it odd that analysts can forecast more accurately than the CEO?) I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that "everyone" said the low end would be impossible. I don't know a single analyst who thought that. Care to provide a source? >stated in every earnings call and quarterly statement Tesla issued throughout 2019. I don't think they stated that number in any call except the Q3 call, but you could easily prove me wrong. What he did state, though, that Tesla wouldn't be "self-constrained to 400,000 units" (Q1 call). He also said that Freemont would be producing 8,000 - 9,000 cars per week in Q3 (Q2 call). >The market speaks for itself. Ah yes, the old infallible market. What does stock price have to do with anything?
  - SECProto 7y ago
    The actual guidance (not that tweet) was 360k-400k [1] [1] https://ir.tesla.com/news-releases/news-release-details/tesla-q1-2019-vehicle-production-deliveries https://ir.tesla.com/news-releases/news-release-details/tesl...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
Someone1234 7y ago
So he violated his agreement with the SEC again? Specifically he didn't get his statement pre-approved by Tesla's lawyers to assure accuracy (since it is factually inaccurate). In fact this exact type of tweet is listed by expressly in the updated agreement[0]. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/business/elon-musk-tesla-sec.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/business/elon-musk-tesla-...
- awrence 7y ago
  If the SEC's new standard is to reprimand every CEO that makes a forecast the company ends up coming short on they're gonna get pretty busy pretty quick...
  - Someone1234 7y ago
    It isn't. It is a settlement agreement that Musk personally and Tesla agreed to in order to avoid additional fines and penalties from his previous misconduct.
    - awrence 7y ago
      Yeah certainly seems as far as that whole thing is concerned no one cares to check / reinforce on the SEC side :) not that we can know for sure tbh. Bit of a super grey area all this imho. But like, if you're a potential TSLA investor and you can't be bothered to do two minutes of homework to figure out Musk's communcation "style", i don't know, like, should the SEC protect you? Maybe? Maybe not... And all things considered, there are plenty of CEO's doing worse by their shareholders than Elon so far...
      - Someone1234 7y ago
        So you're saying that Musk, Tesla's CEO, should be able to mislead investors unabated and that "buyer beware" is the solution rather than the SEC doing its job? I don't understand that argument. Ultimately Tesla and Musk agreed with the SEC that his previous conduct was wrong, and that's how we got to this settlement agreement. So to argue now that the SEC is wrong and that Musk's behavior is fine because that's his "style" seems to fly in the face of Tesla's own viewpoint on historical events vis-a-vis misleading tweets.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
turk73 7y ago
I just don't get how this company can have the kind of market cap it has. I greatly respect how hard an effort it all is and what Musk is trying to do. I still think a company must abide by certain standards or it is snake oil and investors should be wary. It is also unacceptable how the NHTSA has overlooked the marketing of "autopilot" which is anything but. It looks like regulatory capture to me. It's stinky in there and people are dying because of it. I hate how our government works--lobbyists can get preferential rules made like all the myriad different car seats parents must now purchase in order to be legally compliant. The little guy gets all the heat. On the other side, a billionaire can get away with manslaughter many times over while the regulators simply shrug and ignore the problem. Don't start with the whole "the self-driving cars are safer than the average driver" bit because that isn't defensible logic. The tech is clearly alpha quality. The crashes aren't because of what the tech really is, the crashes are because the tech was marketed to people in a way that led them to believe something that isn't true. Snake oil, iow. Now we have idiots who think Teslas are self-driving when they are not.
ctdonath 7y ago
Tweets are hype. Official statement: "We reaffirm our prior guidance of 360,000 to 400,000 vehicle deliveries in 2019." That was met.
- gpm 7y ago
  Another official statement was > Barring unexpected challenges with Gigafactory Shanghai, we are targeting annualized Model 3 output in excess of 500,000 units sometime between Q4 of 2019 and Q2 of 2020 Source: https://ir.tesla.com/static-files/0b913415-467d-4c0d-be4c-9225c2cb0ae0 https://ir.tesla.com/static-files/0b913415-467d-4c0d-be4c-92... Of course it's not yet Q2 2020.

I thought Elon tweeted early last year that Tesla was on track to build 500K cars in 2019 year. 370K is way off from that number.

by adrr 7y ago

I thought Elon tweeted early last year that Tesla was on track to build 500K cars in 2019 year. 370K is way off from that number.

neogodless 7y ago

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1098080063801585664?lang=en https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1098080063801585664?lang... > Meant to say annualized production rate at end of 2019 probably around 500k, ie 10k cars/week. Deliveries for year still estimated to be about 400k. For deliveries 400k isn't too far from 367,500. But it's not clear (to me) what their annual production rate is. One would hope/imagine that if they get their production rate competitive with the biggest producers of automobiles (anything with 4 wheels), like Toyota, Ford and GM, then the average selling price could come down a bit, too. I just want a decent-looking electric car (preferably hatchback) I can charge at any available charging station with no frills but 250-300 mile range for $25-30k USD. I know batteries aren't there yet!

foepys 7y ago
367k is 9% off the 400k target. 9% is a lot.
- ortusdux 7y ago
  The stock market doesn't seem to care.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - DanCarvajal 7y ago
    No one can point to $tsla as a functioning example of a rational actors.
    - Seanambers 7y ago
      Well, that statement may or not be right. I guess only the future will answer that one, but; How do you really value a company like Tesla? According to skeptics the company should've been dead 10 times over already. But if you actually do some research, you find that the technology is sound, the execution is there, and not at least the vision of an electric future is there. Further more its CEO has stated that 'We're going to do these other things also.' - Referring to Full Self Driving and production rates. It has a track record of delivering; 'maybe not on time - but we get it done.' There's no real reason to doubt that they are serious, go watch autonomy day and you'd get the idea. The vision isn't just automotive, it's solar for homes and grid batteries as well. a decentralized power grid for the future. Meanwhile all the promised competition and Tesla killers have proven to be vaporware. And that's before you start looking at the logistics of making an electric car. With electric cars you need batteries and lot's of them. No other car manufacturer has access to enough volume to even begin to compete with Tesla, these battery factories haven't even been built. And the electric motors of competitor are less efficient by a large margin, meaning they need larger batteries for the same range, and higher charging speed to be able to charge the same distance in time as a Tesla. Buying tsla is right now like buying a part of the future, and no other company is close. Is the share price ridiculously high? Yes, but which other company in the world right now is stumping the competition as badly as Tesla. The only real comparison is Apple after the release of the iPhone. But while apple got real competition after 4-5 years. Tesla still rules all the important metrics regarding electric cars wh/km, accel, charging speed. And apple still keeps most of the profits in the mobile market, even tough they have a small market share. So maybe it is rational pricing that you are seeing, the markets are trying to value more than just cars produced. After all the CEO is landing rockets on barges as well so who knows :)
      - aguyfromnb 7y ago
        >The vision isn't just automotive, it's solar for homes and grid batteries as well. a decentralized power grid for the future. The "issue" is, these are low margin businesses. Why don't you provide some actual numbers? How many cars, roofs and batteries do they have to build/install to justify the market cap? Much of the Tesla valuation is based on self driving taxis and appreciate cars, and that ain't happening for a while. >But if you actually do some research, You don't think funds with billions on the line are "doing research"? That's...presumptuous.
- Shaanie 7y ago
  I'd say within 10% fulfills (if barely) "about X".
  - aguyfromnb 7y ago
    Says 500k, corrects himself to "mean" 400k, still misses by 10%, Tesla shill blogs report they "crushed" expectations: https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-tsla-q4-2019-production-and-delivery-results/ https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-tsla-q4-2019-production-and-...
    - rmtech 7y ago
      What was the expectation from skeptics? 0?
    - zaroth 7y ago
      The communicated expectation was always 360k-400k. This was a range that “everyone” said was impossible to reach even at the low end. A tweet issued after hours and corrected the same day does not change the range explicitly stated in every earnings call and quarterly statement Tesla issued throughout 2019. It doesn’t matter what you or I think. The market speaks for itself. After announcing the number the stock is up ~3.5%. That indicates that reaching the lower range number was not fully priced in as of yesterday, and that the market deems this to be good news. Also, the annualized run rate with GF3 producing 3k/week would exceed 10k/wk based on 100,000 cars produced in Fremont in 13 weeks in Q4. Getting GF3 to 3k/week less than one year after breaking ground was also something the pundits said was “impossible”.
      - aguyfromnb 7y ago
        >This was a range that “everyone” said was impossible to reach even at the low end. Really? Because I follow some of TESLAQ on Twitter, and many were expecting 115k delivered this quarter. Consensus was around 110k. One prominent poster had 367k for the year, and was within a fraction of a percent of what Tesla ended up delivering (isn't it odd that analysts can forecast more accurately than the CEO?) I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that "everyone" said the low end would be impossible. I don't know a single analyst who thought that. Care to provide a source? >stated in every earnings call and quarterly statement Tesla issued throughout 2019. I don't think they stated that number in any call except the Q3 call, but you could easily prove me wrong. What he did state, though, that Tesla wouldn't be "self-constrained to 400,000 units" (Q1 call). He also said that Freemont would be producing 8,000 - 9,000 cars per week in Q3 (Q2 call). >The market speaks for itself. Ah yes, the old infallible market. What does stock price have to do with anything?
- SECProto 7y ago
  The actual guidance (not that tweet) was 360k-400k [1] [1] https://ir.tesla.com/news-releases/news-release-details/tesla-q1-2019-vehicle-production-deliveries https://ir.tesla.com/news-releases/news-release-details/tesl...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

Someone1234 7y ago

So he violated his agreement with the SEC again? Specifically he didn't get his statement pre-approved by Tesla's lawyers to assure accuracy (since it is factually inaccurate). In fact this exact type of tweet is listed by expressly in the updated agreement[0]. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/business/elon-musk-tesla-sec.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/business/elon-musk-tesla-...

awrence 7y ago
If the SEC's new standard is to reprimand every CEO that makes a forecast the company ends up coming short on they're gonna get pretty busy pretty quick...
- Someone1234 7y ago
  It isn't. It is a settlement agreement that Musk personally and Tesla agreed to in order to avoid additional fines and penalties from his previous misconduct.
  - awrence 7y ago
    Yeah certainly seems as far as that whole thing is concerned no one cares to check / reinforce on the SEC side :) not that we can know for sure tbh. Bit of a super grey area all this imho. But like, if you're a potential TSLA investor and you can't be bothered to do two minutes of homework to figure out Musk's communcation "style", i don't know, like, should the SEC protect you? Maybe? Maybe not... And all things considered, there are plenty of CEO's doing worse by their shareholders than Elon so far...
    - Someone1234 7y ago
      So you're saying that Musk, Tesla's CEO, should be able to mislead investors unabated and that "buyer beware" is the solution rather than the SEC doing its job? I don't understand that argument. Ultimately Tesla and Musk agreed with the SEC that his previous conduct was wrong, and that's how we got to this settlement agreement. So to argue now that the SEC is wrong and that Musk's behavior is fine because that's his "style" seems to fly in the face of Tesla's own viewpoint on historical events vis-a-vis misleading tweets.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

turk73 7y ago

I just don't get how this company can have the kind of market cap it has. I greatly respect how hard an effort it all is and what Musk is trying to do. I still think a company must abide by certain standards or it is snake oil and investors should be wary. It is also unacceptable how the NHTSA has overlooked the marketing of "autopilot" which is anything but. It looks like regulatory capture to me. It's stinky in there and people are dying because of it. I hate how our government works--lobbyists can get preferential rules made like all the myriad different car seats parents must now purchase in order to be legally compliant. The little guy gets all the heat. On the other side, a billionaire can get away with manslaughter many times over while the regulators simply shrug and ignore the problem. Don't start with the whole "the self-driving cars are safer than the average driver" bit because that isn't defensible logic. The tech is clearly alpha quality. The crashes aren't because of what the tech really is, the crashes are because the tech was marketed to people in a way that led them to believe something that isn't true. Snake oil, iow. Now we have idiots who think Teslas are self-driving when they are not.

ctdonath 7y ago

Tweets are hype. Official statement: "We reaffirm our prior guidance of 360,000 to 400,000 vehicle deliveries in 2019." That was met.

gpm 7y ago
Another official statement was > Barring unexpected challenges with Gigafactory Shanghai, we are targeting annualized Model 3 output in excess of 500,000 units sometime between Q4 of 2019 and Q2 of 2020 Source: https://ir.tesla.com/static-files/0b913415-467d-4c0d-be4c-9225c2cb0ae0 https://ir.tesla.com/static-files/0b913415-467d-4c0d-be4c-92... Of course it's not yet Q2 2020.