4 ms·

Tesla bought Solar City for $2.6 billion, and now it looks like the Tesla Energy division had about that much in net income last year alone.

FreeRadical 2y ago
Tesla Energy existed before Tesla acquired Solar City
refulgentis 2y ago
Solar City was a debacle, it died immediately. Tesla's story in court was they were about to go bankrupt, and it was a financial necessity to redeploy all Solar City assets, including all employees, to Model 3 production. It breaks my heart because my rust belt hometown got a substantial investment from the state they had been chasing for a couple decades. $700M of the Buffalo Billion went to a Solar City facility, Elon even said they were going to build the solar roofs there! New York State didn't dare pick a fight with him as the factory set empty for years. Full story via Bethany McLean, 2019: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/how-elon-musk-gambled-tesla-to-save-solarcity https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/how-elon-musk-gamble...
- grakasja 2y ago
  Huh, DOGE ought to look into where that 700M went..
foobarqux 2y ago
Putting aside the fact that you can't justify fraud by post-hoc outcomes (Shkreli and SBF also claimed that they didn't commit fraud because they would or did win it back), I doubt any of the Tesla Energy division income (even assuming the accounting is okay) is a result of businesses that can be traced back to Solar City. I suspect most of the business is battery storage and the Powerwall was introduced by Tesla before the acquisition.
- enslavedrobot 2y ago
  The vertically integrated Tesla strategy is to use batteries to arbitrage the value of stored energy. This is well described in the Tesla "Master Plan" documents. Solar is a huge part of this. According to the company filings the solar assets Tesla acquired are still generating revenue at the rates projected during the acquisition.
  - foobarqux 2y ago
    Well I trust Elon's statements (even the financial statements) as far as I can throw them but can you point out where it says that? I'm searching the 10-K and I don't see solar broken out. But even if it's true I assume they are including their utility-scale solar and battery packs, which has nothing to do with Solar City: the panels are generic, the customer lists are not residential, they don't use the fancy shingles. Solar City did not help them in any way with these getting or fulfilling these contracts.
mdorazio 2y ago
And how much of that is solar instead of Powerwall and Megapack? They don’t break it out in filings unless I missed it.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- bboygravity 2y ago
  Exactly. So then why draw conclusions about how SolarCity was a bad deal for shareholders (see parent comments)? There's no substantiation of that either way.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    We know the batteries are a lot of revenue. The substantiation is not zero.
    - glenstein 2y ago
      Exactly, and theres plenty of third party companies buying and installing these for customers and their economic activity testifies to the significant scale of the Tesla battery business.
  - timewizard 2y ago
    The burden of proof is on the publicly traded company. That they don't make this information clear and obvious speaks volumes.
  - stefan_ 2y ago
    Because Tesla abandoned the SolarCity model? Like, SolarCity was a bunch of sales people going door-to-door to sell questionable leases on solar systems and hawking off the junk bonds resulting.
    - joquarky 2y ago
      > questionable leases I have a SolarCity install that came with the house. The Power Purchase Agreement lease seemed shady at first, but ultimately I believe it's working out better for my family than for Tesla. I'm paying just under 11 cents per kWh and it can only go up a maximum of 3% per year for the next ~15 years.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Alive-in-2025 2y ago
So what, Tesla energy is a separate division? Tesla solar products are basically dying in the solar roof failed. It's a great idea, who wouldn't want to buy it if it lasted and was practical.
Zigurd 2y ago
None of that is solar roofs. That product never worked. It's nearly all batteries. The Solar City was worthless and it hasn't improved.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- grandempire 2y ago
  How do you know which assets and people were useful on which projects?
  - skinnymuch 2y ago
    How does grand parent know solar city is responsible for the net income?
    - grandempire 2y ago
      That wasn’t the claim. They just speculated that acquiring one solar company helped in their other solar ventures, which seems like a good default assumption. If you have evidence that’s not the case, that would be interesting to share.
      - refulgentis 2y ago
        I wrote a comment 2 hours before the initial comment in this subthread that explains Tesla held in court that Solar City ended up contributing nothing because it needed to be liquidated immediately lest Tesla go bankrupt. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/how-elon-musk-gambled-tesla-to-save-solarcity https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/how-elon-musk-gamble... For what it's worth, I don't even know what the inverse position would be, SolarCity was a solar panel maker, and famously, the idea after they realized they couldn't come close to China's prices, was solar roof tiles. They would be a major breakthrough project that would make Solar City a breakout financial hit. Do people think Tesla makes solar panels? Solar roofs? I don't blame them, I guess, this carnival has been going on for years. I'm somewhat surprised how dedicated you are to avoiding information and asking for someone, anyone, to give info. It's been 18 hours and 3 replies on your end, albeit without people taking the time to spell it out to you like this. Personally, I would have looked into it a bit myself.

FreeRadical 2y ago

Tesla Energy existed before Tesla acquired Solar City

refulgentis 2y ago

Solar City was a debacle, it died immediately. Tesla's story in court was they were about to go bankrupt, and it was a financial necessity to redeploy all Solar City assets, including all employees, to Model 3 production. It breaks my heart because my rust belt hometown got a substantial investment from the state they had been chasing for a couple decades. $700M of the Buffalo Billion went to a Solar City facility, Elon even said they were going to build the solar roofs there! New York State didn't dare pick a fight with him as the factory set empty for years. Full story via Bethany McLean, 2019: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/how-elon-musk-gambled-tesla-to-save-solarcity https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/how-elon-musk-gamble...

grakasja 2y ago
Huh, DOGE ought to look into where that 700M went..

foobarqux 2y ago

Putting aside the fact that you can't justify fraud by post-hoc outcomes (Shkreli and SBF also claimed that they didn't commit fraud because they would or did win it back), I doubt any of the Tesla Energy division income (even assuming the accounting is okay) is a result of businesses that can be traced back to Solar City. I suspect most of the business is battery storage and the Powerwall was introduced by Tesla before the acquisition.

enslavedrobot 2y ago
The vertically integrated Tesla strategy is to use batteries to arbitrage the value of stored energy. This is well described in the Tesla "Master Plan" documents. Solar is a huge part of this. According to the company filings the solar assets Tesla acquired are still generating revenue at the rates projected during the acquisition.
- foobarqux 2y ago
  Well I trust Elon's statements (even the financial statements) as far as I can throw them but can you point out where it says that? I'm searching the 10-K and I don't see solar broken out. But even if it's true I assume they are including their utility-scale solar and battery packs, which has nothing to do with Solar City: the panels are generic, the customer lists are not residential, they don't use the fancy shingles. Solar City did not help them in any way with these getting or fulfilling these contracts.

mdorazio 2y ago

And how much of that is solar instead of Powerwall and Megapack? They don’t break it out in filings unless I missed it.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
bboygravity 2y ago
Exactly. So then why draw conclusions about how SolarCity was a bad deal for shareholders (see parent comments)? There's no substantiation of that either way.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  We know the batteries are a lot of revenue. The substantiation is not zero.
  - glenstein 2y ago
    Exactly, and theres plenty of third party companies buying and installing these for customers and their economic activity testifies to the significant scale of the Tesla battery business.
- timewizard 2y ago
  The burden of proof is on the publicly traded company. That they don't make this information clear and obvious speaks volumes.
- stefan_ 2y ago
  Because Tesla abandoned the SolarCity model? Like, SolarCity was a bunch of sales people going door-to-door to sell questionable leases on solar systems and hawking off the junk bonds resulting.
  - joquarky 2y ago
    > questionable leases I have a SolarCity install that came with the house. The Power Purchase Agreement lease seemed shady at first, but ultimately I believe it's working out better for my family than for Tesla. I'm paying just under 11 cents per kWh and it can only go up a maximum of 3% per year for the next ~15 years.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Alive-in-2025 2y ago

So what, Tesla energy is a separate division? Tesla solar products are basically dying in the solar roof failed. It's a great idea, who wouldn't want to buy it if it lasted and was practical.

Zigurd 2y ago

None of that is solar roofs. That product never worked. It's nearly all batteries. The Solar City was worthless and it hasn't improved.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
grandempire 2y ago
How do you know which assets and people were useful on which projects?
- skinnymuch 2y ago
  How does grand parent know solar city is responsible for the net income?
  - grandempire 2y ago
    That wasn’t the claim. They just speculated that acquiring one solar company helped in their other solar ventures, which seems like a good default assumption. If you have evidence that’s not the case, that would be interesting to share.
    - refulgentis 2y ago
      I wrote a comment 2 hours before the initial comment in this subthread that explains Tesla held in court that Solar City ended up contributing nothing because it needed to be liquidated immediately lest Tesla go bankrupt. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/how-elon-musk-gambled-tesla-to-save-solarcity https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/how-elon-musk-gamble... For what it's worth, I don't even know what the inverse position would be, SolarCity was a solar panel maker, and famously, the idea after they realized they couldn't come close to China's prices, was solar roof tiles. They would be a major breakthrough project that would make Solar City a breakout financial hit. Do people think Tesla makes solar panels? Solar roofs? I don't blame them, I guess, this carnival has been going on for years. I'm somewhat surprised how dedicated you are to avoiding information and asking for someone, anyone, to give info. It's been 18 hours and 3 replies on your end, albeit without people taking the time to spell it out to you like this. Personally, I would have looked into it a bit myself.