Tesla Motors Repays $465M Government Loan 9 Years Early

Tesla Motors announced today it has completely repaid the $465 million loan from the U.S. Department of Energy the company received in 2010. The funds were generated by Tesla through a recent sale of their stock, worth close to a billion dollars. The stock price had risen sharply after the company reported its first profitable quarter (and the stock still sits roughly 50% higher than before their earnings release). Today's payment of $451.8 million finished off both the loan's principal and its interest, nine years before the final payment was due. Tesla CEO Elon Musk said, 'I would like to thank the Department of Energy and the members of Congress and their staffs that worked hard to create the ATVM program, and particularly the American taxpayer from whom these funds originate. I hope we did you proud.'

Comments

It's about time!

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally!

Re:It's about time!

[LocalH]

And yet the thanks they get is the state of North Carolina (and probably others too, but NC is the one I've heard about recently) shitting all over them because they want to sell their vehicles directly to people instead of having to go through "third-party dealers".

Re:It's about time!

[Fluffeh]

In Australia, we call it Tall Poppy Syndrome where someone that is doing outstanding work is seen as a threat, a target and something to be cut back down to size. Though in this case, I would say that there is a hint of Schadenfreude thrown into the mix as well.

Basically, it's just sad and pathetic.

Re:It's about time!

[sgt scrub]

Texas is working on banning them too. I wonder if other companies that received loans are running into walls created by state and local governments with republican majorities.

Re:It's about time!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's also very much political. Elon Musk's and Tesla's success under this loan program means that it was a Good Idea, and the Republicans don't want ANYTHING that President Obama or the Democrats have been involved in to be considered a success. They want all these loans to fail as proof that Keynesian economics is flawed, that the very idea of the government loaning money to renewable energy ventures (rather than their own buddies, Big Oil) is doomed to failure.

The GOP is so out of their minds with insane rage that they would do anything to ensure that no progress is made under a Democratic administration, even if it means Americans have to suffer a prolonged recovery. They want the sole credit. They also want to make everyone forget that it was their own policies of deregulation that caused the economy to tank in the first place, so that their buddies on Wall Street can make even more money without being held accountable. The only kind of capitalism that these assholes want is the kind that makes THEM richer. That means pumping more oil, for one.

Re:It's about time!

[ChrisMaple]

Dealers are a huge lobby and major contributors in all states. This is a clear case of entrenched influence against the public interest, in opposition to individual rights.

Re:It's about time!

[djrobxx]

Did Tesla have to pay a penalty for early repayment? You know, like banks will do if you want to pay a mortgage off early. Or is it a different set of rules?

Most normal home mortgages do not have a pre-payment penalty.

Re:It's about time!

[Lumpy]

If your mortgage has a early repayment penalty then you got screwed hard. The only time I have sever seen that is when someone had no idea at all what they were doing and said yes to everything the banker asked.

Let me guess you also paid "points" as well. Intrest rates have been so low that paying $1000 in points to lower it by 0.01% is worthless unless you are buying a 2.5million mansion.

Re:It's about time!

[Anonymous Coward]

Your post is incorrect. Speaking as a blatant republican and businessman, I don't want the U.S. to invest in loan guarantees for fly by night operations that have absolutely no chance of success. Elon Musk, who successfully founded Paypal, knows how to run a company, had a real business plan and had a legitimate chance to make a long term profit was worthy of a federal loan guarantee. Solyndra is what we are trying to prevent.

BTW - good work rewriting history - lax lending standards / pushing acceptance of sub-prime loans that caused the housing crisis and recession were not caused by republicans. This shouldn't be a news flash...

Re:It's about time!

[dog77]

Oddly enough the loan program was established under the Bush administration.

From wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Motors http://www.drivingtoday.com/news_this_week/2009-07-17-4337-driving/index.html#axzz2U4akRe2c

The low-interest loans are not related to the "bailout" funds that GM and Chrysler have received, nor are they related to the 2009 economic stimulus package. The Department of Energy loan program was created in 2007 during the George Bush administration in order to get more fuel-efficient vehicle options to U.S. consumers and to decrease the country's dependence on foreign oil.

Re:It's about time!

[mattack2]

I don't want the government to lose money either, but investing in clean tech, with possibility of failure, seems better to me than investing in oil companies or subsidizing corn syrup.

Yes, I would rather get rid of ALL subsidies, but unfortunately I don't think that's going to happen.

Re:It's about time!

[PopeRatzo]

Did Tesla have to pay a penalty for early repayment?

Early repayment penalties are illegal in most of the US.

The benefit of this kind of loan program is not in the interest earned, but in the fact that you get a successful company that creates jobs and pays taxes, which used to be considered a good thing. Having an additional player in a heavy industry also creates competition in a fairly consolidated sector, which also used to be considered a good thing.

These kind of government loans to business in the US go back to the 18th century, and were considered a very good idea until recently, when one of the two political parties lost its mind.

Re:It's about time!

[PopeRatzo]

There's a good risk of loss in many cases (see the history!)

Taken as a whole, government investments like have very rarely lost. Even in the contentious past 5 years, the government investment in emerging technologies have been very profitable, even with the poster boys like Solyndra which are used to argue that all government investment in technology is a bad idea. This argument is usually made on the Internet, which is more than a little bit ironic.

Re:It's about time!

[WaywardGeek]

Speaking as a blatant democrat and businessman, I agree with your first paragraph. Tesla had a good chance. I cheered the decision to extend the government backed loan. They'd already produced the most successful electric car in my lifetime, losing not too much money in the process, while developing core competencies - the drive train and battery packs. The basic principle that government should invest where there is a track record of success falls on deaf ears in Washington. Companies like Fisker did not meet this threshold, and Solyndra was essentially an idea on paper, worth more research, but not a half billion dollars. I think a 1 in 3 success rate is about the best we could expect from government investments, regardless of the party in charge. No VCs I know of have a 1 in 3 success rate. Still... Fisker was a doomed investment. I was pissed when I heard of it. I'm just glad we never gave them the second half of the money.

As for the second part, yes democrats pushed for bad loans, but unregulated banks got unregulated insurance on unregulated derivatives, while everyone knew that they were all too big to fail. That lack of regulation on businesses that the government will give a trillion dollars to before allowing to fail is the GOP's fault. There's blame to go around, and that's not rewriting history. Still, good post overall.

Re:It's about time!

[riverat1]

If local bookstores and video stores had the same amount of political clout as auto dealers then Amazon and NetFlix wouldn't be able to sell in those states either.

Re:It's about time!

[Jeremi]

If electric cars take over the market, the demand for car maintenance will collapse. Thats a big chunk of the job market in some areas and there will have to be some adjustment.

We should all have such problems. Also if they find the cure for cancer, a lot of oncologists will be out of a job. It's still a big net win for society in either case.

Congratulations!

[tnk1]

Good job!

So, when do they start making a car that I can afford to drive?

Re: Congratulations!

[tnk1]

Except for the cars that I have stolen, I factor in purchase price with operating costs when I determine whether I can afford to drive that vehicle.

Re: Congratulations!

[Mitchell314]

Some people are bald, you insensitive clod.

Re:Congratulations!

[tnk1]

Actually, that comment was sort of amusing because, while Musk is actually African, he's about as white as I am.

Re:Congratulations!

[quantaman]

Hey - we don't know if he is a guy. Her could be a girl. Or a dog. Or a AI. Who knows?

tnk1 is a guy's name.

Re: Congratulations!

[swillden]

Anyone who wants to pay $30K for a car is not going to be too concerned about gas costs.

I am, and gas costs made me decide to pay $30K for my Nissan LEAF.

I analyzed TCO (excluding maintenance costs, which are much lower for electrics, but I couldn't quantify that so I just ignored it) for about 20 different vehicles, including EVs, hybrids and pure ICE vehicles,. My model assumed that the new vehicle was going to be an additional vehicle, and that the other (gas-burning) vehicle would be available for trips beyond the range of the EV. I assumed very conservative ranges for the EVs, for example I estimated the LEAF's range at 60 miles (it's really more like 80-120, depending on conditions). Finally, I created a statistical model of my driving habits and calculated the total cost over 8 years.

The result was that the three EVs I looked at had the top three spots... they were the cheapest to drive overall, in spite of being by far the most expensive up front. Even better, thanks to tax credits the break-even point was at 2-3 years. Without the tax credits it was about 6 years. The vehicle immediately behind the EVs was the 18K Honda Insight hybrid, then a mix of other hybrids and more-efficient gas vehicles and finally a long tail of gas vehicles trailing the pack.

Of course, your driving patterns may be different, your electricity costs may be higher or gas prices lower (oh, I assumed that gas prices would continue increasing at the same rate they've increased over the last 8 years), etc., etc, etc., but I've walked several other people through applying my model to their situations and in every single case the EVs have been extremely competitive -- and usually the very cheapest.

In practice, what I've found -- for me -- is that my model was very conservative. In fact, the LEAF is even cheaper than I expected. Partly that's because I was able to get a better deal on the car than I had assumed, and partly it's because I do most of my charging at work, so my actual energy costs are dramatically lower than my model had anticipated.

Oh, and it's a very nice car, not a "tin can" that can't keep me as warm or cool as I like. It's a 3000-pound vehicle that accelerates 0-60 in 7.8 seconds, will do 90+ mph and can easily keep the cab at 60 degrees or 90 degrees or anywhere in between, regardless of outside temperature. It also has power everything, a nice stereo, GPS navigation, XM radio, bluetooth, backup camera, and computer or smartphone-based remote control... it's loaded. Of course, stomping on the gas pedal, driving 90 mph and blasting the heat (the AC doesn't use so much, plus it doesn't have to work against the heat generated by an ICE) will drop my range from 120 miles down to about 70 -- but my model only assumed a 60 mile range. It's a compact, but the alternatives I compared it against were also compacts.

EVs are very real, and very practical, today. And it's only going to get better. If Tesla can produce a $30K car with a 200-mile range, it'll be a huge hit with cost-conscious people, because that's enough range that for most people it can be a primary car -- no need for another ICE vehicle except on the rare long-distance trips, and it's cost-effective to rent for those.

No, no

[Intrepid imaginaut]

Electric cars will lead to nipples and other unamerican things.

Re:No, no

[girlintraining]

Electric cars will lead to nipples and other unamerican things.

... Like paying back your government loans instead of yelling "Too big to fail! ahahahaaha..." and running to some tropical island to take daily wealth showers and drink out of gold-lined cups. :/ They should be commended... it's a decidedly unamerican approach to business. Fiscal responsibility? It's like an F-word in Congress.

Nice.

[Nemyst]

I think this sends an excellent message to naysayers: Not all American startups with DOE loans end up like Solyndra.

Bravo to Tesla, and let's hope the current trend continues. The US really could use some new blood in the automotive industry.

Re:Nice.

[morcego]

And, Solyndra ends up like Solyndra because we lost a subsidy battle with China.

I'm not sure if you are reporting the fact, or complaining about it. If you are just reporting it to provide accurate information, kudos for you. Not only are you are well informed, you have more common sense than most people I know (or know of), and please stop reading here :).

I'm forced, however, to remember anyone who complains about "subsidy battles" that the USA is huge on subsides, and wages this battle against many countries, several times winning it. Orange/orange juice and corn are quick examples.

Unfortunately, subsidies are a necessary evil, specially since they are, many times, not a tool to fight an external competitor, but to regulate the internal market. In this, no country is blameless.

Re:Nice.

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I think this sends an excellent message to naysayers: Not all American startups with DOE loans end up like Solyndra.

In fact, of the 23 companies that received funding under the same program as Solyndra did, at least 19 of them are still in business - that's an 83% success rate. When you factor in the fact that these were all loans that the free-market was too risk averse to take on itself, that number is pretty fantastic. Most venture capital funds are lucky to have a 10% success rate.

Re:Nice.

[sneakyimp]

Maybe this is because the oil industry evolved from the same people who ran the cattle industry, where a man's word was his bond and multi-million dollar deals were made on a handshake. Integrity was everything, and if you lost that, you simply weren't in the business anymore.

Oh GAWD please stop with the cheesy platitudes and the pining away for older, ostensibly better times. That is such a tired trope. Surely you recognize that this is a ludicrous and unprovable statement based on no evidence whatsoever?

Government (and "free governemtn money") corrupts pretty much everything absolutely...

And surely you recognize that this is a contradiction of your previous statement? The oil industry enjoys enormous tax breaks and subsidies. Are those billions in subidies not government money? Is the oil industry somehow immune to corruption because of its mythical birth among cattle barons?

Re:Nice.

[Alomex]

Governments are terrible at "picking winners

[citation needed]

DOE funds had a better rate of return than Mitt Romney's investment fund as per widely reported figures during the election.

Re:Nice.

[ShanghaiBill]

DOE funds had a better rate of return than Mitt Romney's investment fund as per widely reported figures during the election.

Wrong. The DOE funds had a lower bankruptcy rate (8% vs 22%). That is NOT the same as a better rate of return. The government gives a loan, and loses it if the company goes bankrupt, and basically gets its money back if the company is successful. A private equity firm likewise loses its investment if the company goes bankrupt. But if the company is successful, a private equity firm can make many times its initial investment. Because of this asymmetry, PEs taking an equity stake, should and do make high risk investments than a lender would not. So the higher bankruptcy rate is expected. But the overall rate of return is still higher.

Re:Electric cars are just not going to take off...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is exactly what the horse and buggy industry said when the first cars came on the road. "Ha! Petrol! Where do they think they will get it, once on the road?" and "People already have horses - who's going to want to buy an automobile when the buggy is so much cheaper??"

Quite the contrary!

[goruka]

I think history has proven this again and again I believe that the technology for electric cars for everyone is not quite there yet, so focusing on the luxury market segment they can generate enough demand to have the possibility to actually work on this technology and, eventually, drive the prices down.
It's the same thing that happened with smartphones and other technologies, once the acutal product is there and proves to be profitable, technology advances much more strongly in that direction, helping to drive prices down and get more customers and markets.

Re:That's pretty cool

[kenaaker]

I leased a Focus Electric and drove it through about half of this winter in Minnesota. I initially was only going to drive it through the easy months, but this winter gave me examples of almost every sort of ugly possibility.

The car did well enough through all the ugliness that I'm going to use it year round. The range did drop off dramatically on the days when it was about 0 (F). But my commute is only 7 miles, so there was really no problem with using it for getting to work. The other thing that helped was that the car could be warmed up while it was still plugged in. I was also going to get a stage 2 charger installed, but with my typical daily use, the car is fully charged off 110 after midnight. I don't think I'll get a stage 2 charger until I get a second electric.

Re:Electric cars are just not going to take off...

[voidptr]

The Model S is comparable in purchase price to an otherwise equivalent gas-powered car. It's a large, high performance luxury sedan, and other cars of that size, horsepower, and trim level run $75 - $100k as well.

From the Archives

[gencha]

In case anyone wants to read some of those "insightful comments" from 2010: http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/06/24/1947208/Tesla-Nabs-465M-Government-Loan-To-Build-Model-S

Re:Maybe they missed the point of the loan...

[Teancum]

Tesla doesn't seem to be having much of a problem in terms of market penetration because their factory has barely been able to keep up with the people willing to simply purchase them over the internet or through convoluted sales venues that make the customers travel across several states or even from other countries and continents in order to make a purchase. Only recently has the delay from making a purchase to getting delivery even approached the logistical limits of the Tesla supply chain rather than dealing with the customer backlog and even paying other customers to "move to the front of the line" to get the delivery earlier.

Simply put, if Tesla is charging what the market can bear on their product, they are simply practicing capitalism... something I didn't think was a crime in America.

As for the government missing out on interest income, I think they are going to more than make up for that loss through corporate income taxes and taxes on the wages of the Tesla employees.... and federal excise taxes on the vehicles themselves. It might be in some weird theory a slight loss to the government, but not much. What it really did was give Tesla some short-term operating capital that allowed the company to be able to hire the employees at the old NUMMI plant at a time when they weren't selling cars.

Texas, North Carolina Fighting Tesla's Dist Model

[Radtastic]

Texas also has pushed back on the manufacturer-direct model

http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/20/autos/telsa-car-dealers/index.html

I especially take offense with this argument:

"When manufacturers discontinue a brand -- such as Pontiac, Mercury, Oldsmobile or Saturn -- auto dealers still remain to help the customer,"

In reality, if Tesla were to go out of business, individual mechanics would open shop assuming there was a business demand. If there wasn't any demand, then it wouldn't matter if the sale originally involved a dealer or not. (Unless said former-dealer was unclear on the concept of business.)

Re:That's Slashdot...

[xero314]

Musk has no employees on government assistance. Walmart explicitly pays employees just under the level to recieve government assistance so they don't have to provide health insurance. Tesla makes high quality products as they have shown they will reduce cost with out quality. Walmart sells disposable shit that ultimately cost more because they have no longevity. Teslas are manufactured in the usa. Walmart products are almost exclusively manufactured in china. Musk sells directly to his customers. Walmart is nothing but an unnecesary middle man getting wealthy off the ignorance of the people you think they are helping. Should I go on?