5 ms·

Tesla Earnings Slide 37%

34 points by pg_1234 3y ago

VHRanger 3y ago
Oh good the stock valuation corrected from "delusional" to "still delusional"
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  It’s just a number in a database. Don’t get too wrapped up about it. If you’re Elon or an investor, it might matter. If you’re a consumer, all that matters is the vehicle price and fast DC story in your jurisdiction. If you’re a climate activist, you just care they keep growing volume and making legacy auto suffer enough to have to electrify too. It’s a meaningless number for the most part as long as the business is cashflow positive and still has ~$25B in cash equivalents on hand. For comparison, half of public companies aren’t profitable. https://medium.com/short-business-articles-by-svyatoslav-biryulin/loss-making-as-a-business-model-29e2a2003485 https://medium.com/short-business-articles-by-svyatoslav-bir...
  - itsoktocry 3y ago
    >If you’re a climate activist, you just care they keep growing volume Why is Elon railing against work from home then, if he cares so much about the climate? >It’s a meaningless number for the most part as long as the business is cashflow positive and still has ~$25B "It's a meaningless number, unlike this other meaningless number I prefer and may not understand."
    - toomuchtodo 3y ago
      I don't care about Elon, he is a monster that I can acknowledge has delivered material value. Tesla survived because he is an obsessive, power hungry dude seeking validation (also luck, lots of luck). His ownership interest in Tesla is down to 13%. It appears him and I both agree billionaire shouldn't exist, we just differ on the methodology to arrive there (taxes vs value destruction a la Twitter). I care about Tesla (as someone deeply concerned about climate change), that is the valuable machine spinning up. 2 million EV units a year at current run rate [1], tens of thousands of fast DC charger stalls [2], 40GWh/yr in utility scale battery storage manufacturing capacity [3]. I understand this might be a difficult concept to grasp for some mental models (not a sleight, it seems some don't understand how you can dislike the person but fully support the enterprise they are entwined with). We are arguing different OSI layers (wealth and securities, shared delusions, vs physical manufacturing and supply chains). The most ideal outcome is Tesla remaining profitable enough to continue rapidly expanding EV and battery storage deployments (dragging legacy auto and electrical generation towards net zero) while not so profitable it materially improves Elon's wealth. Unfortunately, I am just a moderately well off internet pleb, not someone who can fire Elon, entice JB Straubel (phenomenal engineer, excellent human, proven leader) to return as CEO, and merge up Redwood Materials into the Tesla org to fully vertically integrate and spin up faster. C'est la vie. [1] https://www.statista.com/chart/30758/most-popular-plug-in-electric-car-brands/ https://www.statista.com/chart/30758/most-popular-plug-in-el... [2] https://supercharge.info/map https://supercharge.info/map [3] https://electrek.co/2023/04/19/tesla-reports-massive-increase-energy-storage-deployment-thanks-megafactory/ https://electrek.co/2023/04/19/tesla-reports-massive-increas...
      - itsoktocry 3y ago
        I'm more interested in your financial analysis. Cash flow is not profit. How much of that cash is in China, unable to be repatriated? How much increase is due to more debt? What are the "cash equivalents", and are they marked properly? How much is due to subsidies, which I'm fine with, but could disappear tomorrow? This company is not a financial juggernaut, there are still many risks.
        toomuchtodo 3y ago
        There are always risks. Every US automaker has gone bankrupt at some point except Ford and Tesla. Success is not assured, and there is substantial peril ahead. Regardless, Tesla is not fighting for it's life like it was 5-10 years ago. They are on firm footing, through a combination of insatiable demand for energy storage products, robust EV subsides to get off of fossil fuels (which I refuse to debate the merits of, that is wasted time), and a brand that is popular. Tesla may still die, but we must get to the point where it is immaterial if they do, where there is no going back to combustion for mobility. The financials I reference are public in EDGAR, I currently do not have access to material non public information and would not share if I did.
        itsoktocry 3y ago
        >The financials I reference are public in EDGAR. Yes, I know, I follow their finances closely. "They have $25B in cash according to their balance sheet" is practically meaningless. I understand this might be a difficult concept to grasp for some mental models, but there are many historical analogs to look at why that's the case. They'll produce whatever numbers simple minded analysts will post on Twitter. Look at the discourse around their decrease in COGS. Many metrics are trending down. Of course, I'm not a "they're going bankrupt" person; I just believe they'll be a much smaller company than most imagine.
        toomuchtodo 3y ago
        I have nothing more to offer you. If you're a sophisticated capital market participant, place your bet. I have no current exposure to TSLA or any of their debt offerings. I do not care about the stock price. I care about a material movement in climate change outcome.
  - drowsspa 3y ago
    Yet he was able to use these numbers in a database to buy Twitter
  - vikramkr 3y ago
    The long term viability of the company you bought a car from absolutely matters when it's such an expensive purchase that is reliant on Tesla not only for service but also for charging. You don't know what thing you rely on might get cut when the bubble pops and they need to find cash - frothy markets hide weaknesses and make it easier for companies to pile up weaknesses without people paying attention (e.g. svb).
siquick 3y ago
> With the ability to pull near infinite mass and a towing capability of over 14,000 pounds, Cybertruck can perform in almost any extreme situation with ease. Can someone explain the “near infinite mass” claim?
- chaps 3y ago
  Give a tiny tug to something enormous and static and you'd technically be towing it. Its speed, however...
- zzzeek 3y ago
  The mass is made of bullshit. Now read the sentence again
- ben_w 3y ago
  Sounds like either pure BS or "well technically" BS e.g. in the form "it has a gravitational field, which means it will pull on all objects in the universe". That said, I don't see that quote in the article…
- smrq 3y ago
  It's marketing nonsense, obviously. The basis for this claim is that an electric engine can generate torque at an arbitrarily low RPM, so given low enough friction on the load it can move an arbitrarily massive object. That particular given, of course, renders the whole claim BS.
- thfuran 3y ago
  Well, as long as you set the mass on a frictionless plane in a vacuum, the car can pull pretty much any amount of mass. At some point, it'll all collapse into a black hole and the towing cable will stop working properly, so the capacity is only near infinite.
  - ChatGTP 3y ago
    So a completely useless claim then ?
gumballindie 3y ago
At this point you’d have to be crazy to want to buy anything from musk.
- jessepasley 3y ago
  Why?
  - cdelsolar 3y ago
    You know why.
    - jessepasley 3y ago
      What an immature answer. If I knew I wouldn't ask...I'm asking in good faith 'Why'? Space X is a genuinely successful and innovative company. I have friends who all like their Teslas or their Starlink service. I have no idea about Twitter because I've never liked it to begin with. So, Why?
- matkoniecz 3y ago
  SpaceX launches seem fine.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    Would be nice to be rich enough to afford to buy one of those. But yes, if I was in the market for spaceflight, those do beat all the competition.
- b0sk 3y ago
  I bought a Model Y. It's solid. But my next car won't be a Tesla
  - wendyshu 3y ago
    Why not?
jsnell 3y ago
Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37936134 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37936134
danw1979 3y ago
I truly hope UK/European regulators do not allow the cybertruck on our roads. The front end looks specifically designed to do serious head injury to children. Does anyone know if it’s actually passed whatever regulation is required to allow it to be driven anywhere on this side of the pond ?
- nickik 3y ago
  Im against trucks on roads here for the most part. But to act like Cybertruck is particluarly bad just isnt really make sense. Not having a huge nose will mean visibility is much better. The nose is also lower then an F-150 so the chance your head getting smash (the cause of deat most of the time would seem to be much lower). Cybertruck suspensions seem to also make it run closer to the ground when running on roads. Plus Tesla fleet all follow the newest generation outmatic breaking regulation that is still voluntary. While many car makers including trucks don't yet implement that. So in general, yes all pickup trucks are bad but this one seems better rather then worse. In general keeping all these things should be severly restricted for private use, specially in cities.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    I don't think I've ever actually seen a US-style flatbed anywhere in Europe (including the UK). They might exist and just be rare, but I normally see things like a Ford Transit with an open cargo section, and that cabin has much better visibility than the standard US shape: http://heavycherry.com/machineinfo/ford/-transit_ft_350_flatbed_ek_m__3_side_tipper_eu-2011-van_or_truck_up_to_7_5t-tipper.html http://heavycherry.com/machineinfo/ford/-transit_ft_350_flat...
akmarinov 3y ago
Elon’s blaming working from home workers, while simultaneously working 9 jobs and having 11 children…
mnky9800n 3y ago
Good. I've driven a number of electric cars since I don't own and just take rentals. Tesla's always suck compared to others.

34 points by pg_1234 3y ago

VHRanger 3y ago

Oh good the stock valuation corrected from "delusional" to "still delusional"

toomuchtodo 3y ago
It’s just a number in a database. Don’t get too wrapped up about it. If you’re Elon or an investor, it might matter. If you’re a consumer, all that matters is the vehicle price and fast DC story in your jurisdiction. If you’re a climate activist, you just care they keep growing volume and making legacy auto suffer enough to have to electrify too. It’s a meaningless number for the most part as long as the business is cashflow positive and still has ~$25B in cash equivalents on hand. For comparison, half of public companies aren’t profitable. https://medium.com/short-business-articles-by-svyatoslav-biryulin/loss-making-as-a-business-model-29e2a2003485 https://medium.com/short-business-articles-by-svyatoslav-bir...
- itsoktocry 3y ago
  >If you’re a climate activist, you just care they keep growing volume Why is Elon railing against work from home then, if he cares so much about the climate? >It’s a meaningless number for the most part as long as the business is cashflow positive and still has ~$25B "It's a meaningless number, unlike this other meaningless number I prefer and may not understand."
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    I don't care about Elon, he is a monster that I can acknowledge has delivered material value. Tesla survived because he is an obsessive, power hungry dude seeking validation (also luck, lots of luck). His ownership interest in Tesla is down to 13%. It appears him and I both agree billionaire shouldn't exist, we just differ on the methodology to arrive there (taxes vs value destruction a la Twitter). I care about Tesla (as someone deeply concerned about climate change), that is the valuable machine spinning up. 2 million EV units a year at current run rate [1], tens of thousands of fast DC charger stalls [2], 40GWh/yr in utility scale battery storage manufacturing capacity [3]. I understand this might be a difficult concept to grasp for some mental models (not a sleight, it seems some don't understand how you can dislike the person but fully support the enterprise they are entwined with). We are arguing different OSI layers (wealth and securities, shared delusions, vs physical manufacturing and supply chains). The most ideal outcome is Tesla remaining profitable enough to continue rapidly expanding EV and battery storage deployments (dragging legacy auto and electrical generation towards net zero) while not so profitable it materially improves Elon's wealth. Unfortunately, I am just a moderately well off internet pleb, not someone who can fire Elon, entice JB Straubel (phenomenal engineer, excellent human, proven leader) to return as CEO, and merge up Redwood Materials into the Tesla org to fully vertically integrate and spin up faster. C'est la vie. [1] https://www.statista.com/chart/30758/most-popular-plug-in-electric-car-brands/ https://www.statista.com/chart/30758/most-popular-plug-in-el... [2] https://supercharge.info/map https://supercharge.info/map [3] https://electrek.co/2023/04/19/tesla-reports-massive-increase-energy-storage-deployment-thanks-megafactory/ https://electrek.co/2023/04/19/tesla-reports-massive-increas...
    - itsoktocry 3y ago
      I'm more interested in your financial analysis. Cash flow is not profit. How much of that cash is in China, unable to be repatriated? How much increase is due to more debt? What are the "cash equivalents", and are they marked properly? How much is due to subsidies, which I'm fine with, but could disappear tomorrow? This company is not a financial juggernaut, there are still many risks.
      - toomuchtodo 3y ago
        There are always risks. Every US automaker has gone bankrupt at some point except Ford and Tesla. Success is not assured, and there is substantial peril ahead. Regardless, Tesla is not fighting for it's life like it was 5-10 years ago. They are on firm footing, through a combination of insatiable demand for energy storage products, robust EV subsides to get off of fossil fuels (which I refuse to debate the merits of, that is wasted time), and a brand that is popular. Tesla may still die, but we must get to the point where it is immaterial if they do, where there is no going back to combustion for mobility. The financials I reference are public in EDGAR, I currently do not have access to material non public information and would not share if I did.
        itsoktocry 3y ago
        >The financials I reference are public in EDGAR. Yes, I know, I follow their finances closely. "They have $25B in cash according to their balance sheet" is practically meaningless. I understand this might be a difficult concept to grasp for some mental models, but there are many historical analogs to look at why that's the case. They'll produce whatever numbers simple minded analysts will post on Twitter. Look at the discourse around their decrease in COGS. Many metrics are trending down. Of course, I'm not a "they're going bankrupt" person; I just believe they'll be a much smaller company than most imagine.
        toomuchtodo 3y ago
        I have nothing more to offer you. If you're a sophisticated capital market participant, place your bet. I have no current exposure to TSLA or any of their debt offerings. I do not care about the stock price. I care about a material movement in climate change outcome.
- drowsspa 3y ago
  Yet he was able to use these numbers in a database to buy Twitter
- vikramkr 3y ago
  The long term viability of the company you bought a car from absolutely matters when it's such an expensive purchase that is reliant on Tesla not only for service but also for charging. You don't know what thing you rely on might get cut when the bubble pops and they need to find cash - frothy markets hide weaknesses and make it easier for companies to pile up weaknesses without people paying attention (e.g. svb).

siquick 3y ago

> With the ability to pull near infinite mass and a towing capability of over 14,000 pounds, Cybertruck can perform in almost any extreme situation with ease. Can someone explain the “near infinite mass” claim?

chaps 3y ago
Give a tiny tug to something enormous and static and you'd technically be towing it. Its speed, however...
zzzeek 3y ago
The mass is made of bullshit. Now read the sentence again
ben_w 3y ago
Sounds like either pure BS or "well technically" BS e.g. in the form "it has a gravitational field, which means it will pull on all objects in the universe". That said, I don't see that quote in the article…
smrq 3y ago
It's marketing nonsense, obviously. The basis for this claim is that an electric engine can generate torque at an arbitrarily low RPM, so given low enough friction on the load it can move an arbitrarily massive object. That particular given, of course, renders the whole claim BS.
thfuran 3y ago
Well, as long as you set the mass on a frictionless plane in a vacuum, the car can pull pretty much any amount of mass. At some point, it'll all collapse into a black hole and the towing cable will stop working properly, so the capacity is only near infinite.
- ChatGTP 3y ago
  So a completely useless claim then ?

gumballindie 3y ago

At this point you’d have to be crazy to want to buy anything from musk.

jessepasley 3y ago
Why?
- cdelsolar 3y ago
  You know why.
  - jessepasley 3y ago
    What an immature answer. If I knew I wouldn't ask...I'm asking in good faith 'Why'? Space X is a genuinely successful and innovative company. I have friends who all like their Teslas or their Starlink service. I have no idea about Twitter because I've never liked it to begin with. So, Why?
matkoniecz 3y ago
SpaceX launches seem fine.
- ben_w 3y ago
  Would be nice to be rich enough to afford to buy one of those. But yes, if I was in the market for spaceflight, those do beat all the competition.
b0sk 3y ago
I bought a Model Y. It's solid. But my next car won't be a Tesla
- wendyshu 3y ago
  Why not?

jsnell 3y ago

Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37936134 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37936134

danw1979 3y ago

I truly hope UK/European regulators do not allow the cybertruck on our roads. The front end looks specifically designed to do serious head injury to children. Does anyone know if it’s actually passed whatever regulation is required to allow it to be driven anywhere on this side of the pond ?

nickik 3y ago
Im against trucks on roads here for the most part. But to act like Cybertruck is particluarly bad just isnt really make sense. Not having a huge nose will mean visibility is much better. The nose is also lower then an F-150 so the chance your head getting smash (the cause of deat most of the time would seem to be much lower). Cybertruck suspensions seem to also make it run closer to the ground when running on roads. Plus Tesla fleet all follow the newest generation outmatic breaking regulation that is still voluntary. While many car makers including trucks don't yet implement that. So in general, yes all pickup trucks are bad but this one seems better rather then worse. In general keeping all these things should be severly restricted for private use, specially in cities.
- ben_w 3y ago
  I don't think I've ever actually seen a US-style flatbed anywhere in Europe (including the UK). They might exist and just be rare, but I normally see things like a Ford Transit with an open cargo section, and that cabin has much better visibility than the standard US shape: http://heavycherry.com/machineinfo/ford/-transit_ft_350_flatbed_ek_m__3_side_tipper_eu-2011-van_or_truck_up_to_7_5t-tipper.html http://heavycherry.com/machineinfo/ford/-transit_ft_350_flat...

akmarinov 3y ago

Elon’s blaming working from home workers, while simultaneously working 9 jobs and having 11 children…

mnky9800n 3y ago

Good. I've driven a number of electric cars since I don't own and just take rentals. Tesla's always suck compared to others.