4 ms·

Actually Tesla would have to pay you to own the stock, since they lost money (negative earnings).

• jonknee 12y ago
  It depends on the accounting method. > Q1 non-GAAP net income was $17 million, or $0.12 per share based on 140.2 million diluted shares, while Q1 GAAP net loss was $50 million or $(0.40) per share. It will also get more confusing soon thanks to the new lease program: > For leased vehicles, we will recognize lease revenue over the term of the lease in both our GAAP and non-GAAP financials. In contrast, automotive OEMs recognize full revenue for the price of the vehicle, even if that vehicle is eventually leased, because the vehicle is first sold to an independent dealer.
  • sz4kerto 12y ago
    Non-GAAP is not an accounting method. GAAP is an accounting method (set of rules), non-GAAP says they have done something different.
    • jonknee 12y ago
      Non-GAAP is certainly an accounting method. It's especially common for tech companies, because employee stock options are a big cost in GAAP even though the bank account balances don't change. Also in Tesla's case is their buyback guarantee which is popular in the US market. It's effectively a lease and under GAAP rules that means you don't recognize the full amount of revenue at the time of sale and instead have to do it month by month. That makes a giant difference in revenue recorded even though they have all the cash up front.