Slashdot Mirror


Tesla Seeks $1.5 Billion Junk Bonds Issue To Fund Model 3 Production (reuters.com)

As Tesla seeks fresh sources of cash to increase production of its new Model 3 sedan, the company announced on Monday that it would raise about $1.5 billion through its first-ever high-yield junk bond offering. "The debt offering marks Tesla's debut in the junk-bond market and the company will start road-shows on Monday, IFR reported, citing lead bankers on the deal," reports Reuters. From the report: Tesla has been riding high on investor expectations that its Model 3 will be a mass-market hit, with shareholders pushing its market value above that of General Motors Co and Ford Motor Co, the top two U.S. automakers that produce millions of cars each annually. But Tesla has yet to make an annual profit and its stock is a favorite among short-sellers, who continue to bet Tesla will fall short of its shareholders' high hopes. So far, Tesla has been raising money to pay its bills with a combination of equity offerings and convertible bonds, which eventually convert into shares. In March, the company raised $1.4 billion through a convertible debt offering. Following the announcement, Standard & Poor's assigned a "B-1" rating for the bond issue -- deep into junk credit territory. S&P also maintained its "B-" long-term corporate credit rating on Tesla. "We could lower our ratings on Tesla is execution issues related to the Model 3 launch later this year or the ongoing expansion of its Models S and X production lead to significant cost overruns," S&P said in a statement on the bonds. Meanwhile, Moody's assigned a junk "B3" rating to the bond issue and said the company's rating outlook was stable.

25 of 159 comments (clear)

  1. John DeLorean by CrAlt · · Score: 3, Informative

    To bad DeLorean isn't still alive. He could have helped Tesla with some creative funding ideas...

    --
    I have to return some videotapes...
    1. Re:John DeLorean by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Edison didn't win the electricity game by producing a better product... he simply understood the way things worked better than Tesla.

      No, Edison was an asshole who literally electrocuted neighborhood dogs and sued his competition of rudimentary patents because the only thing he cared about was money. Telsa cared about science and the advancement of society rather than profit and allowed companies infringing on his patents to continue, despite holding arguably the most valuable patents in history.

      Telsa wasn't perfect but Edison was a total asshole.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    2. Re:John DeLorean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      If only there were some way we could go back to the time that he was alive, and solicit his sage advice.

    3. Re: John DeLorean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      very little of the blame for the spread of the inferior Philips drive belongs to Ford. By far the blame is on the corrupt legal system in England for burning entrepeneurs with better drives and leading to an unwillingness to scale manufacture of these fasteners to levels necessary for Ford. Clearly Robertson refused to license the design of his drive, it was not that Ford was unwilling to pay, because serious offers were made.

  2. The shorts are loose by hord · · Score: 2

    This is after another press release a few days ago where they stated that Tesla lost 60k pre-orders. That stock could be a hyperloop if manufacturing slips at all.

    1. Re:The shorts are loose by Rei · · Score: 2

      *sigh*.

      60k cancellations over the course of a year. Meanwhile they've grown to nearly half a million active preorders. And since the launch event they've been netting (new orders minus lost orders) 1800 per day since the launch event. All this with Tesla attempting to anti-sell the Model 3 to preferentially push sales of S and X, since that means short-term cash that can be used to help fund their scaleup.

      --
      He's really very... gentle... and fuzzy. We're becoming fast friends.
    2. Re:The shorts are loose by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

      anti sell? that's a new.

      Only to people who are not paying attention is that "a new".

      so tell me again why did they repay their another loan in record time and then pursue this presumably more expensive loan?

      For one, by repaying early they avoided letting the US government cash out on $300m worth of stock options. For two, it deprived people like you of a cudgel to say "See, they're dependent on the government". Not like it stopped you, or not like people like you ever bring that up about companies like Chrysler that never repaid part of their loans.

      You know, by the way, you don't need to ask these things, you can just look them up for yourself.

      the reason why this is sort of interesting is that they're seeking money this way and that is usually not a very good sign for a company like this in a situation like this.

      So you think that stockholders should want to be diluted rather than pay interest, in a company undergoing a rapid expansion? Praytell why?

      it just isn't. it's a sign that the usual lenders/investors have put on a squeeze on how much they are willing to dump money

      Ah, yes, because you can just put $1,5 billion dollars on your credit card.

      if you had been touting ford as an industrial genius in 1901,

      Given that Ford Motor Company wasn't even founded until 1903, that's a stupid comparison.

      In your analogy, 1901 is 2001 (Tesla was founded in 2003). Ford's prototype car Sweepstakes is AC Propulsion's tzero. The equivalent on Ford's timeline to the present is the middle of 1917. And ironically, in 1917 Ford was just starting on the River Rouge complex, the Gigafactory of its day.

      And as for your long "bank" screed, I don't even know which bank you're talking about. Tesla Motors as received investments from numerous sources (including banks) over the years. Tesla's starting capital was provided by Elon Musk and Mark Tarpenning out of their personal assets (Musk's from the sale of Paypal); the Series B funding round added in Valor Equity Partners. Wait a minute, is it Paypal that you're trying to say is a "bank that is not a bank" in your screed?

      --
      He's really very... gentle... and fuzzy. We're becoming fast friends.
    3. Re:The shorts are loose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      RESERVATIONS. Not pre-orders. People paid for the opportunity to secure a place in line, not for the vehicle itself (although that money CAN be applied to the vehicle if you choose to buy one or fully refunded). It was a masterful coup by Musk, he got a $5B interest-free loan from consumers almost instantly with no penalties assuming they don't go bankrupt, which I doubt they will.

      As for the "60K lost orders", a non-trivial chunk of those were people who got tired of waiting and instead ordered a S or X, you see it time and again on the forums where people said they did this. Again, sounds like a win for Musk, especially when they thought they would only get 100-250k reservations, not 500k.

  3. Re:Gov handouts not enough? by Smallpond · · Score: 4, Informative
  4. Better title. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

    Tesla Model 3 in Full Production

    I'm not sure why people are focused on stocks when there is a technology website rather than a business/trader website. I keep reading all this bad-mouthing about Elon's ventures but they have all been panning out albeit a bit delayed. I get the feeling the people writing these articles may have a vested interesting in causing a momentary dip in the stock price because they continue to be wrong time and time again.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Better title. by Rei · · Score: 2

      I'm sorry that you hate me (enough to mention me by name, apparently), but facts matter to me.

      Tesla's recall rate in 2016 per 1000 vehicles was 936. This places it lower than Mazda, GM, Subaru, Toyota, Nissan, Jaguar / Land Rover, Mitsubishi, Ford, Volvo, BMW, Hyundai, Honda, Chrysler, and Volkswagen (by the end of that list we're up to 1805 recalls per 1000 vehicles). Only three manufacturers had a lower recall rate than Tesla - Porsche, Mercedes, and Kia. Furthermore, Tesla was ranked the most proactive of all manufacturers, with 100% of recalls initiated by internal investigation rather than NHTSA investigation; and the top spot for recall timeliness. As for the cars being "mediocre", Tesla once again topped the Consumer Reports owner satisfaction index, with a 91% "would buy again" rating crushing the next closest competitor, Porsche at 84%.

      I fully and understand your reaction. You see other people happy about a product, think that they shouldn't be, and so that makes you mad. Has it ever crossed your mind that perhaps there is a real, legitimate reason that other people are happy with the product? And have you taken the time to consider where you're getting wrong information from, such as "Tesla has a high recall rate" - when in reality the opposite is true?

      --
      He's really very... gentle... and fuzzy. We're becoming fast friends.
  5. Re:Intelligent man loses his mind by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With the Model 3 costing just under Eighty Thousand there aren't going to be many buyers.

    First of all, you have the price all wrong because the base model is $35K. Secondly, Tesla already has more preorders to fill than they can keep up with which is why you don't see advertisements for Tesla's cars.

    People with money, are not going to open their wallets for it.

    That must explain why Tesla sells every single car they make. -_-

    You're a dummy.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  6. Re:Intelligent man loses his mind by Rei · · Score: 2

    Hehe... um... might want to check your pricing. Model 3 starts at $35k (without credits). With a standard featureset comparable to a BMW 3-Series optioned up to $41-42k.

    Of course you can option it up further. The current announced options are:

      * Premium upgrade package (misc added luxury details): +$5k
      * Metallic paint: +$1k
      * Long-range (310 instead of 220 miles range; 5,1 second instead of 5,6 second 0-60; 8yr/120k mi battery warranty instead of 8yr/100k mi): +$9k
      * 19" "turbine" wheels: +$1,5k
      * All-wheel drive: TBD (stated to be cheaper than on the Model S, where it costs $5k)
      * Performance variants (should be a 0-60 in 3-4 seconds): TBD

    So, with every option available you can bring it up to maybe $55k (without credits), possibly more for fully optioned-out performance versions. But it's not even possible to bring to $80k.

    "Stores and malls" are not "closing at an alarming rate". The US is in an expansion.

    Giving a bond offering is hanging onto stocks. That's the whole point, to avoid dilution of stock.

    It's very simple. Tesla has customers lined up for nearly two years, and that's if their scaleup goes as planned. They have business out the wazoo, if they can deliver. Which takes tons of money. There's about a dozen different ways they can get large amounts of money, but the goal is to do so in the manner that minimizes how much ownership in the company they have to give up to do so.

    --
    He's really very... gentle... and fuzzy. We're becoming fast friends.
  7. Re:So pre-orders aren't enough? by Rei · · Score: 2

    Selling more convertible stock means more dilution. Selling bonds means that they want to hang onto their share in the company, and feel that paying interest after the plant is online is worth the benefit of not having to dilute.

    --
    He's really very... gentle... and fuzzy. We're becoming fast friends.
  8. Re:Bad comments by Rei · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The margin on S and X is 25%. Model 3's expected margin is also around 25%.

    Furthermore - and please pay attention to this part - A company undergoing an exponential scaleup is not supposed to be returning profits. They're supposed to be investing every last penny they take in in order to minimize how much additional capital they have to raise to fund the scaleup.

    --
    He's really very... gentle... and fuzzy. We're becoming fast friends.
  9. Re:Bad comments by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

    Uhh, that's a 25% GROSS margin. The profit margin of TSLA is currently -12.06%. Negative. Tesla does not make a profit today, nor has it in the past.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  10. Re:Intelligent man loses his mind by green1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Model S was a $50k car for $60k, the Model 3 is a $35k car for & 49k. This is not a surprise to anyone who's been watching tesla for any length of time.

    I own a model S, I love it and think it's the best car ever made. It is also nowhere even close to what Elon promised it would be.

    Tesla is the absolute slimiest company I've ever done business with. When they aren't flat out lying about what their product can do, they're wildly exaggerating it, or actively at war with their existing customers.
    The Model S is still the best car on the market today. But if I have to replace mine, I could not in good conscience give another penny to such an unethical company. Which is a shame because no other company has yet decided to try to compete with Tesla. I really hope I can keep my Model S going until a competitor arrives, but Tesla isn't making it easy.

  11. Re:Intelligent man loses his mind by green1 · · Score: 2

    "not yet available" is a bit of an exaggeration considering it will NEVER be available with the hardware currently on those cars.

    Of course considering that the original AP hardware on the S can't do any of the things that Elon promised it would when it was first launched either, that's no suprise. Of course Tesla's been getting a pass on the outright lies around the model S so I'm not sure why they would bother caring about telling the truth on their newer cars.

    Anyone who pays for "full self driving" is a sucker.

  12. Re:So pre-orders aren't enough? by thomst · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Rei observed:

    Selling more convertible stock means more dilution. Selling bonds means that they want to hang onto their share in the company, and feel that paying interest after the plant is online is worth the benefit of not having to dilute.

    Exactly so.

    Junk bond status begins at BBB- rating. That doesn't mean they aren't a good investment. It merely means that they carriy greater risk than do "investment grade" bonds. What type of risk that consists of, and the degree of risk involved varies from bond issue to bond issue. Wikipedia's article on high-yield debt is fairly well-written, and it does a good job of explaining the basics. I recommend it to people who feel tempted to throw the term "junk bond" around without actually understanding what that actually means.

    Elon haters are legion. Many of them are "car guys" who bet their reputations - and in some cases their shirts - that Tesla would fail before it ever sold a car. They resent Musk because he proved them wrong. Others are Washington beltway bandits who fear the disruptive effects of SpaceX's success on the defense industry gravy train, because it's their oxen that stand to be gored by it ...

    --
    Check out my novel.
  13. Re:Slashdot sure has become a shithole by WrongMonkey · · Score: 2

    A lot of people thought their money increased 12-fold under Bernie Madoff and Charles Ponzi, too. Until you actually the sell the stock, you haven't made a dime.

  14. Re:Intelligent man loses his mind by green1 · · Score: 2

    Maybe I need to clarify. Most advanced. Best features. Best practicality.

    I won't claim best build quality or best reliability.

    There is simply nothing else on the market like it though, it has zero competition, so they can basically get away with anything, as they constantly prove. It's mind boggling to me that no other company is even making the slightest effort to compete.

  15. Re:Intelligent man loses his mind by Rei · · Score: 2

    I actually agree with that. I think it's stupid to pay for full self driving, and I think Tesla is being way too optimistic the timeframe. I'm not prepared to say that the hardware can't support it, but I think the challenge - both regulatory and technological - is IMHO much harder than their timeframe supports.

    AP works, although its reliability level gives it mixed reviews (more positive than negative, but still decidedly mixed). Tesla really got set back when they had to start over with AP2 after the contract dispute; it's only just now getting up to the capabilities of AP1. Some people find that AP takes a great load off their mind on long trips, having only to make the occasional correction rather than hyperfocus on every detail - while others find it puts more stress on them, having to watch doing nothing but still have to make corrections at random intervals. Most people like the adaptive cruise control, but that's not as impressive as what people really want from autopilot. Self parking and the like is also popular, but not considered worth the value on its own.

    There are a lot of people who think that autopilot is "the reason" to get a Tesla - they love it, they think it's the future, etc. Other reviews are decidedly more mixed. And of course FSD is a phantom product at the moment.

    --
    He's really very... gentle... and fuzzy. We're becoming fast friends.
  16. Re:Bad comments by geekmux · · Score: 2

    Uhh, that's a 25% GROSS margin. The profit margin of TSLA is currently -12.06%. Negative. Tesla does not make a profit today, nor has it in the past.

    Snapchat lost over $500 million in 2016, and was even arrogant enough to declare in their IPO that they haven't made a profit, and may never make a profit. Yet they're worth billions.

    Your talk of "profits" and financial common sense has no place in 21st century business. Narcissism, fake news, and hype are the new currency.

  17. Re:Intelligent man loses his mind by green1 · · Score: 2

    Every word out of their mouths is a lie.
    When they unveiled AP originally they made the following promises as they took everyone's money:
    - hands free on ramp to off ramp driving
    - summon that will find It's way to you anywhere you are on private property
    - automatic emergency braking that would bring the vehicle to a complete stop
    - stop sign and traffic light detection
    - automatically adjust to speed limits
    - system that worked at any speed

    Not a single one of those items was ever delivered. Now they have AP2.0 which does even less than the original, but that they now claim will be full self driving if you pay enough money. Thing is, AP2.0 can never be full self driving. It doesn't include enough hardware to do so. There is no way they'll ever get approval to put it on the road with autonomy when it doesn't even have rear of cross traffic radars. And the version currently available still hasn't caught up to their own product from 2 years ago.

    And it doesn't end there either. They've also been caught lying about horsepower, battery capacity, etc. After charging people an extra 10,000 for ludicrous mode they were caught putting counters in the cars that limit your acceleration if you use it too often, the list just goes on and on.

    And all of that is only secondary to my real objections to them.

    After purchase they actually reached in to the car that I own outright, and without my permission removed functionality that it had at delivery. In fact, with every single software update they removed more functionality. Autopilot was at its peak at the end of 2015, ever since then every software update has added nags, limited where it can be used, limited the speed with which it can be used, added punishment if it nags you more than 3 times in a trip, etc.
    You can pretend that software updates are optional, but if you don't update other features stop working, for example, of you're still on the firmware where AP was at its peak, you'd no longer have voice control or mapping.

    Beyond that, Tesla won't allow any third party repair. There is only one place that can fix a Tesla, and that's Tesla themselves. And I'm not just talking major repairs either, you can't change a door handle or a side mirror without reflashing the firmware, something only Tesla can do. And even if you could, they won't sell many parts to any third party. In addition to that, they have the highest hourly shop rates I've ever seen, and extremely high parts prices, if you can even get an appointment, and if they can even get the part themselves. Forums are full of people waiting 6 or 8 months for parts for collision repairs. And 2-3 months for a simple service appointment. And that's before Model 3 hits the road in large quantities.

    Tesla is the only company I've ever seriously considered a lawsuit against, and I still haven't ruled it out.