Larry Goldberg Profile picture
Dec 29 12 tweets 3 min read
In 2020 Tesla delivered 353 cars short of the 500,000 goal they had set for themselves in 2014, a goal considered impossible by critics and analysts alike. With this milestone behind them, they set themselves a new, and equally challenging goal 🧵
January ‘21 Tesla guidance: “over a multi-year horizon, we expect to achieve 50% average annual growth in vehicle deliveries. In some years we may grow faster…The rate…will depend on our equipment capacity, operational efficiency and capacity and stability of the supply chain.”
In 8 consecutive quarterly guidance since, Tesla reiterated, adding in Q4-21 and Q1-22 the following rider: “Our own factories have been running below capacity for several quarters as supply chain became the main limiting factor, which is likely to continue through...2022”
We can construct a table comparing the consistent company guidance with the 2021 actual, 2022 estimated and 2023 consensus expectations. The table shows that Tesla are way ahead of their guidance:
Here is a graphical view of the guidance vs actual and anticipated deliveries:
So why are many, including highly respected industry and investment analysts, and even knowledgeable Tesla community members, saying that the current expectation of about 1.31m cars would represent a miss, when the numbers clearly show it as beat of 200,000 vehicles (>15%)?
It is because of a simplistic, but very flawed understanding of the clear guidance that Tesla has given repeatedly, most recently in the 3rd Q earnings report. It seems that the pundits re-set the baseline for the 50% growth with each beat of the target!
In 2021 Tesla beat the 50% by 37%. Suddenly, the 2022 count became the “new” baseline, so now the 50% is applied to 936K instead of the correct 750K (50% above 2021) per guidance. Result: in 2022 the 50% expectation has become 1,400K, instead of the correct 1,125K (750K + 50%).
If deliveries hit, say 1,300K in 2022 (current expectations), then in 2023 the expectation will suddenly become 1,950K in 2023, instead of the 1,686K which properly represent an average of 50% growth as provided by the consistent Tesla guidance.
Some pundits point to Zach Kirkhorn and Elon Musk’s statements during the ’22 Q3 Earnings Call, claiming that they affirmed guidance of 50% above 2021 deliveries. But a careful listening to the call shows that they instead confirmed the standard guidance.
Zach stated “we're on track for the 50% annual growth…” clearly referencing the standard guidance. Elon was at pains to stress the average rate of 50% of compound growth, and fluctuations from one year to the next.
Looking to 2023, Tesla faces a stern test with the uncertainty of renewed pandemic in China, war in Eastern Europe, and apparent global recession. Auto sales retreat dramatically in uncertain times, But I remain confident that yet again Tesla will outperform guidance. By a lot.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Larry Goldberg

Larry Goldberg Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @TeslaLarry

Dec 12
Elon Musk is known for seemingly outlandish goals he sets. However, not many investors appreciate the quality of guidance that Tesla provides to its investors. This 🧵compares the company’s forecasts and guidance over a period of almost a decade to illustrate the point. 1/7
In Feb. 2014, Tesla issued a revolutionary document. Having delivered just 35,000 vehicles for 2013, it projected an astounding 500,000 production for 2020, and announced plans to build a battery factory with a capacity exceeding the world’s then total battery output. 2/7 Image
The target seemed unreachable and was met by disbelief and even ridicule. But seven years later Tesla came within 353 vehicles (.0007%) of its target, despite a global pandemic shutting the Tesla Fremont factory for > 3 weeks in April 2019. 3/7
bit.ly/3HuGJ6q
Read 7 tweets
Dec 10
WSJ’s “Heard on the Street” claims the "Tesla’s cool factor won’t take the Semi very far". This thread exposes the columnist’s willful blindness as the uncool factor. A🧵 in 2 parts.
Heard on the Street: Tesla’s 500-mile Semi truck may be too expensive bit.ly/3BLnEJx
The article argues thusly: a 500-mile range truck is costly – the battery alone will cost over $100K – therefore the truck will not be able to compete with conventional ICE trucks which cost "roughly $120,000". Better would be the lower range (300 mile) truck.
The basis of this logic is that the lower mileage truck would cost less, completely ignoring “total cost of ownership” (TCO), which the article admits is the primary factor in buyers’ choice of commercial trucks.
Read 26 tweets
Dec 5
Launch excitement is over; now let’s look at the Semi’s potential. TL:DR U.S. production is unlikely to reach the 40k units by 2024 in the US, but the golden opportunity lies in AsiaPac that could rapidly build the Semi in a business as large as Tesla is today. Let's get started!
Research is difficult in this field as the best data are only available on paid subscription. This analysis relies on public data and my Statista subscription and is the deepest dive I can do not being in the industry and without paying big $$$ for research. Here goes.
The global heavy duty (Class 7&8) market 2021 exceeded $350b on 4.3m units, growing at 4% per annum; the largest market/growth is AsiaPAC with 77% by units, dominated by China, India distant second; NAFTA with >10%; Europe with >7%; South America >3% and RoW 1%.
Read 20 tweets
Nov 29
Part 1: The Future of Twitter. TL:DR – Twitter could plausibly be a win for Elon and his investors (details provided), but the political risks are clouding the outcome. A long🧵in 2 parts
“we simply attempt to be fearful when others are greedy and to be greedy only when others are fearful” (Warren Buffet, Berkshire Chairman’s letter 1986.)
The timing of Elon Musk’s Twitter bid may have been an act of greed when others were greedy!
Hence Musk’s efforts to reverse the deal when, just after he made the unconditional offer, fear overcame greed in the markets. This was due to a dramatic reversal of the Feds “free money” policy, the root cause of a decade and a half of “greed”.
Read 35 tweets
Sep 2
This is tiresome. The likes of Moodys, Tony Sacconaghi, and even, yes, our own @garyblack00 second guessing Tesla's strategy is ironic. Tesla, having reinvented the auto business, are being held to measures and standards based on that outdated model!🧵
It is incorrect to state that there are only 2 models in the Tesla lineup. There are 4. The S & X will deliver $2.5b of revenue in this quarter, a record Q revenue for 10yr old models at high margins, proving the timelessness of design when supported with modest refreshes
Saying it is not possible to achieve 3m+ sales with 4 products is ignoring the facts: in California last Q, with these 4 models, Tesla commanded 10.7% of the TOTAL market, slightly behind Toyota (with 12 models). Translated to global market share this exceeds 5m vehicles.
Read 9 tweets
Jul 31
Just finished studying the Tesla Q2 10-Q. Found little in the details that haven’t already been discussed here. The overwhelming impression is outstanding execution as a matter of course! Other impressions are mainly about cash. A brief🧵
Amazing the lack of stress in the 10Q of the Shanghai forced shutdown. Looking at the results without any foreknowledge, one would have been astounded to hear of that news. It’s like the company just took it in stride. Also undeniable is that TSLA has become a money-printer.
Operating cash flow of $6.3b(!) allowed capital investment of $3.5b while paying down $2.2b of long-term debt. Given the Shanghai shutdown limits on revenues + ramping of two plants, the future estimates of $6-8b Capex p.a. look like trivial barriers to TSLA growth
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(