Slashdot Mirror


Tesla On Track To Turn a Profit This Year (cbsnews.com)

Thanks to gains in Model 3 output, Tesla's second-quarter revenue grew by more than $1 billion. Unfortunately, the company's net loss rose dramatically as a result. In a statement, Tesla said it achieved its target of producing 5,000 Model 3 vehicles per week and that it aims to make 6,000 per week by the end of August. It's expect to produce 50,000 to 55,000 Model 3 vehicles in the third quarter -- a sharp increase from the previous quarter.

"It took 15 years to execute on our initial goal to produce an affordable, long-range electric vehicle that can also be highly profitable," Musk and Chief Financial Officer Deepak Ahuja wrote in a letter to shareholders. "In the second half of 2018, we expect, for the first time in our history, to become both sustainably profitable and cash-flow positive." Tesla has only turned a profit in two quarters. CBS News reports: The electric vehicle company founded by billionaire Elon Musk reported an adjusted net loss of $717 million for the period on revenue of $4 billion. Tesla went through $739.6 million in cash between April and June, less than the $900 million Wall Street analysts had forecast. In another boost, the automaker said it has trimmed its capital spending by manufacturing the Model 3 on existing assembly lines, rather than building new lines. Although Tesla is burning through less cash, it continues to lose money. The company reported an adjusted net loss of $3.06 per share, more than analysts expected. The loss more than doubled from the same quarter a year ago. Slashdot reader Rei adds: After the release of Tesla's Q2 results and followed by the investor call, Tesla's stock surged around 9% in aftermarket trading today. Among the main drivers: automotive gross margins rose to 21%, Model 3 gross margins turned positive (before the start of sales of AWD and performance variants, which are making up half of all new orders), and the reiteration and reinforcement of guidance for sustainable profitability from Q3 onward. [...] While no longer using a reservation system in the U.S. for first-production orders (retaining it only for less expensive Model 3 variants and overseas orders), new North American first-production orders are making up a large portion of current orders; consequently, no changes are announced for timing of overseas orders. The average selling price is expected to remain high "for several quarters" due to "a richer mix in the initial wave of Model 3 deliveries to Europe and APAC"; the "normalization of the Model 3 average selling price" is anticipated in the second half of 2019, and is not expected to impact gross margins, due to improved production cost efficiency over time. On the conference call, Musk sounded tired and admitted to getting too little sleep. He apologized twice, but was told by an investor: "Don't let the trolls get you down, but we do like it when you tease the trolls a bit."

6 of 271 comments (clear)

  1. Huh? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Tesla On Track To Turn a Profit This Year

    Unfortunately, the company's net loss rose dramatically as a result.

    So sales are up, losses are up - but they're on track to make a profit? Really? Something's not adding up... Losses for Q1 2018 were 17.5% of revenues. Losses for Q2 2018 (just announced) were 17.9%. Increasing losses as a percent of revenue does NOT lead to profit.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    1. Re:Huh? by Freedom+Bug · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The big difference is that much of the "loss" for this quarter is due to the fact that they stockpiled a bunch of cars. They wanted to make sure they didn't hit the 200,000 EV milestone in Q2 so their customers could enjoy the tax rebate for a little bit longer.

    2. Re:Huh? by sjames · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You do realize Toyota has been at it a few decades longer, don't you?

    3. Re:Huh? by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Would you rather some nerdier colour from the conference call? Okay, here's one.

      We all know the story of how Tesla's original plan for GA3 (General Assembly 3) was to have an automated conveyor belt system transport parts from the warehouse to each of the assembly workstations. Unfortunately, it just didn't work; they had to tear it out and do the transport manually. However, when general assembly became a bottleneck, they built a whole new line (GA4) in a Sprung structure, partly out of scrap - including said conveyor system, which now transports the cars down the line as they're assembled.

      What we found out today, however, was that they had a problem with the conveyor system in the engineering phase: since it was designed for transporting parts, not whole cars, it wasn't up to the job. It could hold a car fine, but the motors weren't strong enough to move it reliably. Their solution? Let gravity give them a boost. The GA4 line is built at a 1% downward grade, which reduces stress on the motors to within their design tolerances.

      Interestingly enough, the Sprung structure solved the warehouse transport problem on its own. Since it's a long, narrow structure surrounded by roads, trucks could just back up to each workstation and unload their boxes of parts right there - no centralized warehouse needed, and no redundant unloading / reloading work

      --
      Assuming ethanol comes from murdered children and the hydrogen from magic, hydrogen saves 132% more lives than ethanol.
    4. Re:Huh? by Freischutz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No other auto maker will be able to mass produce an EV in the next 5 years (BWM is the closest and won't be there for about 4 1/2 years at the earliest). The reason for this is while the auto makers can make cars, they can't make the EV batteries. Also, they don't have secured supplies for the Li and other rare earth metals they need. Finally, they don't have the knowledge of the battery chemistry to make those batteries efficient enough to sell them (or the EVs that contain them) at a profit.

      It's not that Tesla is the only company that has any knowledge of battery chemistry, or that US companies have a monopoly on battery chemistry tech, not even close. There are plenty of batter manufacturers in Asia and Europe who can compete there. It's more that there has been a race to secure the existing Li supply and the early birds (like Tesla) got the worm. People who decided to "wait and see if this electric vehicle fad leads to anything" are now having trouble obtaining Li for battery production. Estimates I've seen are that it will take something like 10 years to *begin* ramping up mining operations to extract the amounts of Li required to supply an electric vehicle (and grid storage/battery wall) duck curve. Those who made long term contracts for Li supplies have a huge head start.

  2. Re: Short sellers are going to be nuclear destroye by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fun fact: Tripp has denied both knowing how to code or use any sort of hacking tools. Funny story, people dug into his claims and found his Stack Overflow account, Adafruit acccount, Scribd, etc, and found that not only does he know how to code, he was even helping answer coding questions for others.

    Trip responded by deleting all of his old accounts.

    Fun fact #2: Want to take a guess as to the only other thing on his Scribd account apart from docs on packet sniffing tools and the like? If you guessed "NRA gun documents, you win a prize!" When asked about this, he had the most hilarious alibi ever: why, he was only had the NRA gun docs to trade for Kansas guitar tabs! Because that's a totally normal internet trade commodity, dontchaknow!

    Fun fact #3: Tripp has gone back and deleted all of his old alibi tweets, and the tweets where he admitted to having Tesla property.

    --
    Assuming ethanol comes from murdered children and the hydrogen from magic, hydrogen saves 132% more lives than ethanol.