Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Meets Self-Imposed Deadline For Model 3, Rolls Out 7,000 Cars In a Week (cnbc.com)
Elon Musk tweeted on Sunday that the company produced 7,000 cars last week, including 5,000 Model 3 electric sedans. "Beating a self-imposed deadline, the final car rolling off the assembly line on Sunday morning, several hours after the midnight goal set by Musk, two workers at the factory told Reuters on Sunday." CNBC reports: The 5,000th Model 3 finished final quality checks at the Fremont, California factory and was ready to go around 5 a.m. PDT (1200 GMT), one person told Reuters. It was not clear if Tesla could maintain that level of production for a longer period of time. Tesla had a goal of producing 5,000 Model 3s per week before the close of the second quarter on Saturday to demonstrate it could mass produce the battery-powered sedan.
What if they hadn't beat that self-imposed deadline?
Oh. They would not have twittered.
I ... see. Well, nothing to see here, carry on...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
At the thought of all those day traders with HUGE shorts against Tesla realizing that they're going to get absolutely frickin' REAMED.
... and his crew succeed a million times over and become filthy rich while doing it. The penance with which Musk pursues his visions is inspiring and he serves as a very neat role model.
Two thumbs up for scaring the living sh*t out of the leading German car industry which, IMHO, has become way to complacent with its success.
And thanks for paving the way into carbon neutral traffic and land-transport.
My 2 eurocents.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
"Beating a self-imposed deadline, the final car rolling off the assembly line on Sunday morning, several hours after the midnight goal set by Musk, two workers at the factory told Reuters on Sunday."
Um, if the final car rolled off the line several hours AFTER the midnight deadline, then they didn't actually beat it.
With the pressure they’re under they must be slapping them together - probably better to wait a while
Those who predicted that Tesla would not be able to reach their goals and shorted them need to find something to salve their injured pride/pocketbook. Apparently it's FUDing the quality of the cars.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
sure. And why wouldn't they be able to put in those extra shifts all the time?
You can't run a line 24/7/365. There's routine maintenance, cleaning and various other reasons that production equipment needs to shut down for a period of time.
Oooh, that factory said they could make x units a week and they're doing it. There's no way that could be a good thing! Do you even hear yourself?
However, nobody else brags near his level and where he underachieves, nobody else goes to start with. Basically, he is a visionary putting his money, well other people's money mostly, where his mouth is. Well, his mouth is way ahead but then nobody else keeps up with it either.
So yes, visionary and game changer. Yes, his vision tends to be beyond even his game but that's not all that unusual. What is unusual is the degree to which he eventually delivers. Which makes Tesla stock really badly shortsold. Which leads to a lot of frantically bad press and double standards.
So yes, a braggard and underachiever. Don't expect to hear much else from media run (or at least astroturfed on their dime) by rich people who have made a fortune by betting against people thinking they could make it against their will.
No more than there have already been.
Perhaps, but spamming it here, like the head cheetos himself does on Twitter, does not help.
Sure it does help - it helps Trump.
The constant spamming of fantasy bullshit just makes Trump look less unreasonable.
In fact, one wonders if the constant spamming is actually paid for by Trump or Trump supporters.
Meanwhile, in the real world, despite shorts insisting that last quarter's weekly numbers (2k) would be an unsustainable burst rate, they maintained it for weeks, all the way up to the next scheduled downtime. Then they got back up to 3,5k and maintained that until the next set of upgrades. Now they're at 5k. But if you really think the 5k is a burst, by all means short that.
Why must all aquatic villains play the organ?
Why, today they will make this weeks number 1, right after last weeks #7000.
If you only look at the quarter average, they won't be making anywhere near 5000 a week, especially given they've had several shutdowns to retool.
That doesn't really matter looking forward. The question is whether they can get to the necessary production rate fast enough to get the cash flowing and without blowing up quality in the process. Sure it would be nice if they did 5000 on average for the previous quarter but it's no secret that they weren't going to do that. The question is whether they can continue to meet production milestones next quarter and whether those will be sufficient to get the cash flow going fast enough to keep the company afloat.
Their main problem will still be cash flow, since they're not making enough to cover their expenses. If the "pay another $2500 to order now" thing doesn't pan out, they'll need even more high-interest loans, or worst case, another round of stock offerings.
Yes cash flow is THE big question. Elon likes to push the limits so it will be interesting to watch Tesla over the next 6-12 months.
that was produced in this all-hands-on-deck sprint of factory operation?
Tesla fanboys dont realize Elon would roll out the cars even if they are very buggy, just to meet a deadline.
Pissed about what? The stock is triple what it was four years ago.
Corporate goals/deadlines are generally always 'self imposed'. Seems folks think Tesla deserves some type of credit for this?
Not where there are big interest payments coming due in the near future.
It is the mark of a well run company to be able to accurately predict performance and then to hit those goals on schedule.
That's one way to measure it but the most important measure is their ability to consistently develop and maintain substantial free cash flow. Nobody really cares if a company meets artificial expectations if they consistently generate substantial profits. Companies generally can only "predict" performance accurately by fudging the numbers anyway. If you see a company that consistently "beats" wall street expectations by just a little every quarter, you can be dead certain there is some financial engineering going on. (I'm an accountant so I should know) In reality businesses are rarely so predictable so some amount of variation should be expected. You just don't want any huge negative surprises but a little up and down is generally fine unless you are some wall street asshat who only cares about the current quarter.
Musk isn't very good at defining targets that can be hit on schedule and/or hitting them on schedule. That doesn't mean he will fail, but it is generally a bad sign.
For most companies I would regard this as a negative but it's no secret that Musk sets very hard to achieve "deadlines" all the time so I think that is baked into the stock price. In a way it's kind of genius in that he acts a little irrational so it makes it harder for analysts to hold him to a standard of performance. He's also taking a page from the Amazon playbook in not really giving a shit about short term results and apologetically so.
Can you provide any evidence for this?
I ask, because a) they shut down twice this month to retool and reconfigure assembly lines, and b) the production rate has steadily risen. It's not like they doubled production for a week out of the blue.
An "all-hands-on-deck sprint" sounds like the standard bullshit that the people in short positions have chronically been pushing over the last year or so. Are you one of those people, or do you have evidence to back up your claim?
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
Read what Elon actually said. 5000 Model 3s were 'factory gated', not produced. That means, according to Elon himself, a chunk of that number were already built at the beginning of the last week of June. Knowing this week was coming up, that chunk could be a significant portion. They are counted in the final tally even though in the last week Tesla may have done as little as move them from one lot to another. So Tesla didn't even pull off a true 5K burst week. This is why sustained production numbers are the only accurate ones. Those numbers are what Moody's pays attention to.
If I had stock in Tesla (or any car company) I would rather want to know how many cars they sell, not how many they produce.
Every car they produce at the moment is effectively already sold so at least for now it's the same number. Once they get through the initial bolus of orders then it will be more interesting. Of related interest Tesla doesn't maintain large stocks of inventory like the traditional automakers (they are basically building to order), nor do they account for when a sale occurs in precisely the same way either.
You can't run a line 24/7/365. There's routine maintenance, cleaning and various other reasons that production equipment needs to shut down for a period of time.
Nobody expects them to. But it isn't unheard of to run assembly plants on three shifts either. Maintenance time and equipment upgrades are scheduled in advance whenever possible - often weekends or between shifts. I've seen this handled a variety of ways depending on the particular equipment needs. It's challenging but not a new problem or an unsolved one.
>when they originally planned to do it with one line,
they did ?
However, nobody else brags near his level and where he underachieves, nobody else goes to start with.
"Underachieve"? Seriously? Yes he sets unrealistic self imposed deadlines and misses a fair number of them but anyone calling Musk an underachiever is delusional. The guy has started PayPal, SpaceX, Tesla, SolarCity, and The Boring Company and he actively manages the last four. He has completely reshaped the space launch business and it looks likely he will do the same to the auto business. If that's underachieving then give me some of that.
Frankly if you had achieved 10% of what he has you'd be bragging about it too. And bragging isn't really a problem if you can actually back it up and so far he mostly has.
I was in a traffic jam caused by a burning car this weekend. It was gasoline powered, not electric, but it was a pain. They should ban that gasoline stuff.
Amazon did care about short term results, and generally hit or exceeded their short term targets.
That is completely not true. Here is every letter to shareholders from Jeff Bezos since 1997. Read the letter from 1997 and then you'll understand. Amazon hasn't given a shit about short term financial targets since their inception.
that was produced in this all-hands-on-deck sprint of factory operation?
I place my order 3 days ago, so while I can’t answer for the GP, yes, I would.
The shorters are the ones who set themselves up to profit from the misfortune of others, and collectively have also been working to bring about that misfortune.
When a stock is as irrationally over priced as Tesla there is nothing wrong with betting that it will fall back toward sanity. Honestly we need people who are willing to bet with their own money when something seems wrong. Tesla is doing some really interesting things but there is no rational basis for them to have a market cap larger than Ford. I honestly am kind of a fan of Tesla but I'm also a fan of financial sanity.
Furthermore when you are in a mature market like automobiles ANY investment is de-facto a bet on the misfortune of others. If you buy stock in Ford you are effectively hoping for misfortune for Toyota or GM. It's near as makes no difference a zero sum game. If you buy stock in Tesla you are hoping for misfortune for their competitors. That's fine but it's not really much different than shorting TSLA directly.
If it fails then it fails expensively, which discourages people from that practice thereby reducing the amount of misfortune in the world.
They are taking a risk and they are well aware of that fact but I think their thesis is correct. Tesla's current stock price cannot be justified with any rational analysis of likely future free cash flows. A $60 billion market cap on a company with $11 billion in revenue that has never made an operational profit? That's bananas. The only real question is when Tesla's stock price will come back to Earth. Might take a while but sooner or later it has to happen.
There has actually been a good amount of research on this, by sources that I am admittedly far too lazy to find again on this lovely Monday morning.
Trump's apparent supporters include a large army of bot and sockpuppet accounts (spread through Twitter and Facebook, with notably similar trends on 4chan that are more difficult to track) that become active around 8-9AM every morning, post throughout the day, and stop activity at around 5PM. Their language reflects an education through high school, but they tend not to use allegory or references to pop culture (except for memes of their own creation), and very low engagement with credible experts on any given subject. They also show a curious lack of activity on certain holidays.
These patterns are also shown by an army of accounts attacking Trump. Same working hours, same linguistic style, and the same engagement patterns, with the only difference really being which names are being dog-whistled. Yes, it certainly appears there's somebody with a professional organization aimed primarily at creating controversy and unrest.
Now, the fun part of the analysis is that the pattern of work hours and holidays don't align with American time zones or American holidays. Instead, they mostly align with the work patterns in Moscow.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
Because people get sick, take vacation, and leave the company?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
"Beating a self-imposed deadline, the final car rolling off the assembly line on Sunday morning, several hours after the midnight goal set by Musk, two workers at the factory told Reuters on Sunday."
They didn't meet the goal.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
I'm guessing, but I think the easiest way to meet a target once would be to divert some production in previous weeks as "requiring rework". Come the week you want to meet target, you send some folks out to the parking lot where the "rework" vehicles are stashed to install light bulbs, trim strips, or whatever else they are missing.
Not saying Tesla did that. Just that it or something similar could be done.
It seems sort of like a software capability demo. You can demo just about anything if you have enough time to set up the demo. The worse the product, the more time you need to spend setting up the demo.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
And you claim that with what authority?
Simple logic. Ford made $8 billion in PROFIT last year on $156 billion in revenue and has a market cap of $40 billion or so. Tesla lost $2 billion on $11 billion in revenue and has a market cap of $60 billion? Further Tesla has shown no credible path whereby they will generate profits superior to Ford's in the future. If you think that makes any kind of sense you are out of your mind. There is no rational scenario you can propose whereby Tesla is going to generate enough profit to justify that market cap in less than 15 years (and that's being generous) even with ludicrously optimistic assumptions.
I'm not entirely disagreeing, but I'm not willing to make the claim that it's "irrationally over priced", because Tesla is in a position that few companies have ever been in.
Evidently you do not recall the dotcom era around 1998-2000. Irrationally overpriced companies are nothing even remotely new and Tesla is not covering any new ground there. Seriously, show me any credible story whereby Tesla generates enough profits to justify their current market cap in less than 15 years. At the end of the day stock prices and market caps are all about profits (including expected profits), otherwise investors eventually have to look elsewhere to make money. If I invest $1000 in Tesla but have to wait 15 years to recover my money while playing a game of who is the greater fool then I'm an idiot.
Tesla has already sold pretty much all of the vehicles it will produce this year, and maybe next year, without sales people, showrooms or a national advertising campaign.
Impressive but let me know how you think they are going to manage that trick when they sell as many vehicles as Ford does. It's easy to sell out when you cannot produce all that much to begin with. 5000 vehicles a week? Ford makes and sells about 17,000 F-150s each week just on that model alone and they aren't scrambling to do it either. And more importantly they are making huge profits along the way.
Yes, compared to the established car companies, Tesla's valuation looks insane.
Compared to pretty much ANY company Tesla's valuation IS insane.
Ford's valuation is based on future earnings potential.
Correct. Same is true for any company. Tesla included. However stock prices in the sort term routinely can deviate from this rational analysis. We saw quite a lot of this back during the dotcom bubble.
Whether that's accurate or not, Tesla can change direction vastly more rapidly than can FoMoCo.
Tesla's valuation cannot possibly be based on any rational analysis of future free cash flows. The fact that they are currently more nimble than Ford is pretty much irrelevant in the short to medium term. Short term valuations don't have to be based on anything rational. Long term though they pretty much always are. Show me any rational analysis whereby Tesla's future earnings potential exceeds Ford's within the next 5 years by enough to justify their current valuation.
Investors need a return on their investment within a reasonable time period. Tesla is so overpriced that it is unreasonable to expect a return on investment any time soon. Doesn't mean it is a bad company or that they won't be profitable. It just means that they aren't likely to generate enough profits to provide a rational ROI to investors in a useful time frame. Right now we just have a bunch of people playing a game of who is the Greater Fool.
Not necessarily. You could be hoping that one of their competitors buys them.
Doesn't change the equation. If you buy Tesla stock and hypothetically GM buys Tesla, you still have an investment in Tesla and you still are hoping for misfortune for the competition because if someone buys a Tesla then they are not buying someone else's brand of vehicle. It might bump your ROI but it remains a zero sum game whereby a long position in one auto company is de-facto a synthetic short position in every other auto company.
Sounds like you are confusing people who buy stock with investors.
You could try to make out production numbers like that but the quarter was way more productive than the previous one so it's just not a credible analysis.
It will be a dire week for short sellers. I finally sold my TSLA last week, so it's sure to double next week!
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Everybody with whom you disagree is a Russian bot.
Now, that's not actually what I said at all. I said there are bots and sockpuppets on both sides, but they're focusing more on stirring up anger than having actual discussion. For example, one of the preferred tactics on both sides is "whataboutism", where they will bring up a completely unrelated subject like a recent court decision to steer the conversation away from rational analysis and towards partisan vitriol.
Did you know the Supreme Court, in effect, just destroyed public sector unions?
Oh look, there it is!
Why don't you focus on issues instead of the stupid Russian interference fantasy?
Foreign interference is an issue. It is probably the most important issue, because it undermines the legitimacy of every other democratic process.
Take your example, for instance. The SCOTUS has determined that collective bargaining is not necessarily always something a non-union worker wants (regardless of whether it's in their best interest), so under the First Amendment, non-union workers have the freedom to choose not to associate with the union.
Now, it's certainly easy to think this is a purely American problem. It's a case in an American court about American workers interpreting American laws governing American business practices. However, it's still a matter of international interest, as those American public-sector organizations are responsible for handling how the United States executes the duties of government, which in turn affects how the United States can compete globally with foreign efforts. If a foreign power can sway the American policy in a way that harms America's economic capabilities, they will create opportunities for their own advancement.
Similarly, American elections are vitally important for determining American policy. If a foreign government is able to promote a narcissistic President, for example, they would be able to sway any policy or political negotiations by simply rolling out red carpet and offering copious amounts of insubstantial flattery. It is imperative, then, that we fully investigate any allegation of impropriety during elections. Everything - from campaign funding to personnel selection, and beyond - should be open to scrutiny, even if nothing is ultimately found.
Even if the investigation ultimately finds no foreign influence, having a thorough investigation process itself deters foreign powers from trying to influence elections, as they can be sure the investigation will make such influence difficult to hide, at best.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
So. Much. This.
With their enormous debt load, low credit rating, shrinking capital reserves, and lack of cash flow - sprints are irrelevant. Sprints generate lots of publicity, lets the fanboys drool and crow, impresses the impressionable and the already convinced... They do very little to address the very real problems Tesla is facing in the short (>6 mos) term.
That's hilarious logic right there. You don't even understand that you're not comparing the same thing, do you?
What exactly do you think is not "the same thing"? Do you not recognize the same data for both companies? You think Tesla is somehow special so that profits and revenues shouldn't play any role in determining market cap?
So, what you're saying is that you don't know anything about Tesla. I get it.
Ok smart guy. Show us how brilliant your financial analysis is. Prove your case. Show me how Tesla is going to make a profit large enough to justify a valuation 50% larger than Ford with 7% of the revenue and negative profits nor any near term expectations of significant profits. Dazzle me with your brilliant insight.
With this level of expertise, I can't imagine why you're not the next Warren Buffet.
Never claimed to be Buffet but you don't have to be to know that TSLA is a ludicrously overvalued stock. Someday it might make sense for TSLA to be worth more than Ford but that day is definitely not today.
Stock prices are not based on what Tesla's year-old plans for the present time, any more than they're based on Tesla's two-year-old plans for the present time (which were less optimistic than reality). Stock pricing is based on current expectations, not old ones.
Why must all aquatic villains play the organ?
Heck, salves are great for injuries. I didn't see the problem.
that cheesy Mike Keaton movie when they pledge to build 15,000 cars to make a bonus, he gets in the last one made to prove its worthy of buying and the doors and wheels falls off!
If anyone's curious, here's the released footage of that 5000th car off the Assembly line.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvW_PDkElho
Please go easy with the negative ratings. I hope to buy either a Model 3, Y or Pickup myself and even own approximately 2 shares of Tesla stock. So I'm no Tesla hater. This post should be marked as Funny!
Not to mention the SolarCity self-dealing that's now blowing up. Musk had TSLA shareholders bail out his personal investment in SolarCity and now he's winding down that entire business now that he's whole. SolarCity alone has billions in debt coming due soon.
The stock valuation is definitely high because of speculation, but it's long term not short.
How long do you think is "long term"? Even a long term play still needs to have a justifiable ROI. It doesn't matter if it returns a 10% gain if it takes 10 years to do it based on the companies operating fundamentals.
If they can actually maintain sales and production of 5000 Model 3's a week that will generate profits around a couple billion a year, working from the assumption that their gross profit margin is only 20%.
Gross margin is not relevant here except insofar as it affects net margin. If Tesla builds 5000 Model 3s per week and sells them for $50K each then that is ~$13 billion in revenue (slightly over double their current revenue). 20% gross margin is in line with other automakers so the question is what the net margin will be. The most profitable automakers out there top out at around 11% net margins. Let's pretend Tesla can match that somehow even though they clearly won't in the near term. That would be a profit of $1.43 billion assuming some ludicrously optimistic assumptions come to pass. But realistically Tesla would be lucky to capture a fraction of that in the next few years. They might be very profitable in time but it won't happen in the next 12 months and they have some debt to serve next year.
Then you have to figure out how long it would take for the shareholders to recoup their money. With a market cap of $60 billion (equity) plus $10 billion in debt (debt gets paid first over equity) and profits of $1.43 billion it will take 49 YEARS for TSLA to generate a positive return on that investment at current share prices. ROI = Annual Cash Flow / Equity and that works out to around a 2.8% ROI under completely unrealistic profit assumptions of 11% net margins. I'm a patient guy but I need an ROI before I'm dead.
When you and the "institutional investors" voted for it did you guys know that Musk was an original seed investor for SolarCity with a 20% equity stake that was going to be wiped out when their debt came due at the end of this year? No, he didn't disclose that until after the vote. Did you and the "institutional investors" know that the solar roof shingles he demo'd at the shareholder's meeting were non-working mockups and that they didn't even have a working prototype? Other's would've already been charged with fraud for doing what he did with SolarCity. SolarCity is now winding down operations right before the massive California law requiring all new houses have solar. Why would they do that if there was any truth to the hype about that company?
Not disclosing his ownership interest in SolarCity before having TSLA shareholders bail him out is straight up fraud.
They aren't just laying off SolarCity mgmt, the entire business is being wound down (i.e. closed).
Of course, though ... past organizational performance often *is* indicative of future results. The same management team hitting milestones with ease indicates that you probably have a capable organization and approach to market that is serving you well; struggling and hitting them late may be because of a one-time setback or may indicate that bumpy roads lie ahead, too.
struggling and hitting them late may be because of a one-time setback or may indicate that bumpy roads lie ahead, too.
Or it may indicate that they just habitually set very high goals. There's a common notion in Silicon Valley that if you regularly achieve your goals, you must be setting them too low. Musk's companies have a history of doing incredible things while failing to do the even more incredible things he promised.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Oh bull. Stock prices are based on fairy dust and personality cults. Musk could change the name from Tesla to TeslaBlockchain and triple the stock price with no other changes at all.
My high school English teacher had a saying written on the chalkboard: it is better to aim for the stars and miss, than aim for a pile of manure and hit.
They aren't just laying off SolarCity mgmt, the entire business is being wound down (i.e. closed).
That's just a lie. SolarCity, as a brand name, is being retired, but "the business" is very much staying alive. The infrastruture, intellectual property, critical employees, etc. are all being retained; it's just that all future solar products will be sold under the Tesla brand.
They're confusing the "winding down" of Solar City's old low-margin installation business with the "winding down" of what Solar City's debt was actually accumulated to fund (Gigafactory 2), which is very much not being wound down.
Why must all aquatic villains play the organ?
Yah, that's fine, as long as we're not talking about the yardsticks that are involved in continued survival--- which is what we are. It's unclear how much access to debt or equity markets TSLA has, and they're attempting to thread the needle with very limited cash to profitability.
Yes, that's a description of the solar roofing product.
That's exactly what they're doing: using Tesla stores to sell the products, reducing duplication overhead.
Why are you quoting Tesla describing exactly what they're doing to argue that they're doing something else?
Why must all aquatic villains play the organ?
Yes, and they're an embarrassment by comparison, in terms of either volume, price point/capabilities, or both.
There's a reason that nearly half a million people lined up to wait ages for a Model 3 and not a Focus Electric, whether you understand why or not.
Why must all aquatic villains play the organ?
No, we're not. Tesla has no need for debt or equities markets to survive, and a several billion dollar buffer is not "threading the needle".
Why must all aquatic villains play the organ?
Are we reading the same financial statements? They had $2.8B of cash on hand 3/31, after net negative cash flows of $800M, and have unquestionably burnt a lot more this quarter. This is not billions of dollars of buffer. I don't know the terms of covenants on their debt and what kind of cash balance they're *allowed* to get to, but it's not $0. This is cutting it really fine-- any time you have less than 3 quarters of cash on hand at current burn it's absolutely nervewracking (been there, done that).
I'm neither short nor long on TSLA. It's not as desperate of a situation as the haters say, but .... it's not like you put it, at all, either ;)
Like the iPhone?
"Go to CNN [for a] spell-checked, fact-checked summary" -- CmdrTaco
Yes, that's known as a "several billion dollar buffer".
1) $675M
2) That's an entire year's worth. The concept that they can't become profitable in a year at the current high burn rate - let alone a declining rate - is utter nonsense.
3) Capex creates assets that can be borrowed against.
Have unquestionably not.
Why must all aquatic villains play the organ?
> > They had $2.8B of cash on hand
> Yes, that's known as a "several billion dollar buffer".
I don't know if you're a native English speaker, but a couple is usually "2", few is "3-4", and several usually means "4-7". Further, a buffer only extends to the amount that is **more than you need**.
> 1) $675M
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash (745,251) ... which is offset by $1.7B of issuance of debt during the period.
> Have unquestionably not.
Just to be clear as to what I meant: have burnt a lot more cash this quarter, but not necessarily more cash than the quarter before. We'll know in a few days the exact numbers.
> 2) That's an entire year's worth. The concept that they can't become profitable in a year at the current high burn rate - let alone a declining rate - is utter nonsense.
I didn't even notice this in your comment.
No. They had $3.96B in cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash on Jan 1. They had $3.22B in cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash on Mar 31. During this time they took in $1.78B in debt financing.
http://ir.tesla.com/node/18711...
(And just for completeness, paid down $1.39B of debt-- resulting in a net burn of about $1B a quarter).