,
7 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
$TSLAQ @BradMunchen Since Motorhead and Ark posted their models, I felt an overwhelming desire to share my innermost accounting geek-dom. My proforma Income Statement for Q3. Please feel free to go medieval on my assumptions Cathy Wood style. (1 of 7)
Assumptions: Unit ASP & Cost are calculated using a High-Low product mix change of 3/SX from the previous quarter to current quarter estimates. Leasing is totaled with auto sales due to only one-quarter of breakouts. I used TroyTeslike median delivery figures. (2 of 7) 
Manual adjustments need to be made to ASP and the overall income statement. Specifically, the ZEV and Sales Returns Allocation with its associated COGS. ZEV in the proforma is included in Other Gain/Loss as GAAP's conceptual framework intends for comparability (3 of 7)
To adjust for discounts, estimates are made for the product mix within the 3 & SX based on days outstanding in the quarter. These adjustments have been incredibily inaccurate in Q42018, Q12019, and Q22019 in estimating ASP and ACOGS due to fleet sales discounts. (4 of 7)
Remaing Revenues (Energy and Services) and their associated COGS are 4 quarter averages. Energy has a steady linear decline. Service has so many moving parts I do this as a simplifying assumption. Items below Gross are also 4 quarter averages and appear to behave. (5 of 7)
Misses from the Q2 model to Q2 results were ZEV, restructuring charges, & ASP. Too much ZEV, more restructuring, & fleet sales impact on ASP. ACOGS was also higher than actual but it appears the Model 3 mix went heavier to SR than previously. (6 of 7)
Here is the model. Troy's median especially in product mix seems optimistic. Fleet discounts from Q1 to Q2 were nasty and likely worse in Q3. But, I can't find a way to model it. ZEV is just a guess. (7 of 7)
