Tesla is missing hard on their production volume and deliveries - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE][ Tesla delivered just 1,550 Model 3 sedans during the fourth quarter, falling well short of the 2,917 figure Wall Street expected. Tesla produced just 2,425 Model 3s in the quarter. In July, CEO Elon Musk tweeted that the company could most likely produce 20,000 Model 3s a month by December. Tesla shares were down more than 1% following the news.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.businessinsider.de/tesla-model-3-delivery-report-misses-fourth-quarter-2018-1?r=US&IR=T"]Raw sauce[/URL]

Really unlucky timing for Tesla. they had significantly ramped up just days before the end of the quarter: [quote=Global Newswire]During Q4, we made major progress addressing Model 3 production bottlenecks, with our production rate increasing significantly towards the end of the quarter. In the last seven working days of the quarter, we made 793 Model 3’s, and in the last few days, we hit a production rate on each of our manufacturing lines that extrapolates to over 1,000 Model 3’s per week. As a result of the significant growth in our production rate, we made as many Model 3’s since December 9th as we did in the more than four months of Model 3 production up to that point. This is why we were not able to deliver many of these cars during the holiday season, just before the quarter ended.[/quote] [url=https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2018/01/03/1281869/0/en/Tesla-Q4-2017-Vehicle-Production-and-Deliveries.html]Global Newswire[/url]

I find it interesting that they've allegedly been having trouble manufacturing steel body panels over the S and X's aluminum when the reverse has been true for all the big car giants who have been dabbling in aluminum to satisfy fuel mileage requirements.

[QUOTE=Humin;53025332]Really unlucky timing for Tesla. they had significantly ramped up just days before the end of the quarter: [url=https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2018/01/03/1281869/0/en/Tesla-Q4-2017-Vehicle-Production-and-Deliveries.html]Global Newswire[/url][/QUOTE] 1,000 cars per week is still significantly below the 5,000 per week that Musk claimed would be happening by last month. I'm surprised that their shares only fell by 1%.

[QUOTE=BF;53025370]1,000 cars per week is still significantly below the 5,000 per week that Musk claimed would be happening by last month. I'm surprised that their shares only fell by 1%.[/QUOTE] They lowered their projections a few months ago from 5000 to either 2000 or 2500 and pushed the 5000 per week to the end of Q1 2018.

[QUOTE=Humin;53025379]They lowered their projections a few months ago from 5000 to either 2000 or 2500 and pushed the 5000 per week to the end of Q1 2018.[/QUOTE] They lowered their projections again, to 2,500 per month by the end of Q1 and 5,000 per month by the end of Q2. They've really fucked over their shareholders.

They be fine if they can get to their intended mass production rates soon even if they're late. Going into the future though they'll need to get better at projections with the Semi, Roadster, Model Y, and pickup coming. [editline]3rd January 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=BF;53025394]They lowered their projections again, to 2,500 per month by the end of Q1 and 5,000 per month by the end of Q2. They've really fucked over their shareholders.[/QUOTE] The people who invest in Tesla are very forgiving and used to this. If anything it's a sign of relief for the legions of shorts

[QUOTE=Humin;53025332]Really unlucky timing for Tesla. they had significantly ramped up just days before the end of the quarter: [url=https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2018/01/03/1281869/0/en/Tesla-Q4-2017-Vehicle-Production-and-Deliveries.html]Global Newswire[/url][/QUOTE] At this point a lot of people are finding it hard to believe any of Tesla's excuses. They're never anywhere near realistic about their production timelines. We're now at 20% of the production speed Elon originally said we'd be at 6 months ago. People should be bullish on EVs in general, not Tesla in particular. Their problem isn't battery tech, it's that they can't figure out production (or knowingly overstate their capabilities.) [editline]3rd January 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=OvB;53025434]They be fine if they can get to their intended mass production rates soon even if they're late. Going into the future though they'll need to get better at projections with the Semi, Roadster, Model Y, and pickup coming. [editline]3rd January 2018[/editline] The people who invest in Tesla are very forgiving and used to this. If anything it's a sign of relief for the legions of shorts[/QUOTE] Personal investors, maybe. Institutional investors usually don't care for anything but stock price and financial performance. Evidently they do see a path to Tesla performing much better in the future once they figure out production.

Battery production is a part of the production constraint, though. Thus the need for the Gigafactory. They could have 400 thousand Model 3 bodies ready to go but it means nothing if you don't have batteries. It's probably more realistically a bit of both.

[QUOTE=OvB;53025483]Battery production is a part of the production constraint, though. Thus the need for the Gigafactory. They could have 400 thousand Model 3 bodies ready to go but it means nothing if you don't have batteries. It's probably more realistically a bit of both.[/QUOTE] It doesn't really matter what the constraint is, the fact that there is a constraint is the problem. In the capacity of CEO of a publicly-traded company, you can't just announce to the world (and therefore also your shareholders) 'in six months time we will be producing 20,000 cars per month!' - creating an expectation of future profits for current and potential investors - and then going on to slash production forecasts not just once, but [i]twice[/i]. Tesla has been a textbook example of awful corporate governance.

As soon as companies like VAG, GM, and all the various Japanese brands make EVs that can compete with Tesla in range, Tesla is gonna get shit on so hard

[QUOTE=OvB;53025483]Battery production is a part of the production constraint, though. Thus the need for the Gigafactory. They could have 400 thousand Model 3 bodies ready to go but it means nothing if you don't have batteries. It's probably more realistically a bit of both.[/QUOTE] I sincerely doubt that battery production is the Model 3 bottleneck. The batteries are being made in the factory by Panasonic so there's no reason to believe that they would be at fault considering they are a competently run company. Considering that we have multiple reports of Model 3s being [URL="http://fortune.com/2017/10/07/tesla-model-3-bottlenecks-built-by-hand/"]literally welded together by hand,[/URL] I'd consider the bottleneck to be from them rushing the cars out the door before the welding machines and production line robots were completely ready.

[QUOTE=Fayez;53025559]I sincerely doubt that battery production is the Model 3 bottleneck. The batteries are being made in the factory by Panasonic so there's no reason to believe that they would be at fault considering they are a competently run company. Considering that we have multiple reports of Model 3s being [URL="http://fortune.com/2017/10/07/tesla-model-3-bottlenecks-built-by-hand/"]literally welded together by hand,[/URL] I'd consider the bottleneck to be from them rushing the cars out the door before the welding machines and production line robots were completely ready.[/QUOTE] The bottleneck was the Gigafactory. Not the cells in particular, but putting them into the modules. They was doing it by hand and had shit loads of cells sitting around, in December they finally got this process automated. Musk cracked the whip on this issue. [url]https://electrek.co/2017/10/31/tesla-model-3-bottleneck-gigafactory-1-panasonic-ceo-battery/[/url] Tesla had already guided in Q3 that Q4 would see lower than expected production due to setting up Model 3, yet still had a record quarter. We already have a thread about this anyway. [editline]4th January 2018[/editline] The amount delivered really doesn't matter now that they've got the rate up tbh.

[QUOTE=Araknid;53025552]As soon as companies like VAG, GM, and all the various Japanese brands make EVs that can compete with Tesla in range, Tesla is gonna get shit on so hard[/QUOTE] Bolt? Similar range and price. Been out for a year. Still under 1000 units a week but closing in. Should have a promising year. Don't know what kind of dent it will put in Model 3 sales because of brand/styling preference. Bolt might outpace M3 for a bit in 2018 if Tesla doesn't get it's shit together soon.

[QUOTE=OvB;53025688]Bolt? Similar range and price. Been out for a year. Still under 1000 units a week but closing in. Should have a promising year. Don't know what kind of dent it will put in Model 3 sales because of brand/styling preference. Bolt might outpace M3 for a bit in 2018 if Tesla doesn't get it's shit together soon.[/QUOTE] Bolt looks kinda poo visually. An e golf with good range would sell a shitload because it looks like a standard good looking car, and the petrol and diesel ones are popular as is

[QUOTE=OvB;53025688]Bolt? Similar range and price. Been out for a year. Still under 1000 units a week but closing in. Should have a promising year. Don't know what kind of dent it will put in Model 3 sales because of brand/styling preference. Bolt might outpace M3 for a bit in 2018 if Tesla doesn't get it's shit together soon.[/QUOTE] They also have to compete in production numbers.

[QUOTE=Morgen;53025623]The bottleneck was the Gigafactory. Not the cells in particular, but putting them into the modules. They was doing it by hand and had shit loads of cells sitting around, in December they finally got this process automated. Musk cracked the whip on this issue. [url]https://electrek.co/2017/10/31/tesla-model-3-bottleneck-gigafactory-1-panasonic-ceo-battery/[/url][/QUOTE] Forgive me if I take the words of Electrek with a mountain of salt considering they're essentially a Tesla fanboy site whose owner has a financial stake in Tesla. Even then, the fact that workers were [I]welding cars together by hand[/I] shows that the production line wasn't even close to being completed when deliveries were supposed to start. In fact, the battery packing machines not being automated only serves to prove my point further that the Model 3 production was rushed and that none of the assembly line machines were ready by the delivery date. Musk wasn't responsible for the assembly line working out the kinks. His workers are. They would've done it even if Musk didn't "crack the whip." [QUOTE]Tesla had already guided in Q3 that Q4 would see lower than expected production due to setting up Model 3, yet still had a record quarter. We already have a thread about this anyway. The amount delivered really doesn't matter now that they've got the rate up tbh.[/QUOTE] Uhh, the amount delivered means everything. Read BF's post above. It is absolutely not okay for the CEO of a company to make a production prediction that falls on its face so catastrophically. If this were any other automotive company the shareholders would've demanded the immediate sacking of the CEO for such an idiotic mistake, but this is Tesla. Tesla is losing so much money and is so cash negative that without Musk leading and fostering hype to bring in more money, it would've died long ago.

[QUOTE=Araknid;53025704]Bolt looks kinda poo visually. An e golf with good range would sell a shitload because it looks like a standard good looking car, and the petrol and diesel ones are popular as is[/QUOTE] e-Golf is doubling production this year, but only up to 2100 units a month, or about half of what the Model 3 is at now. VW need to redesign the golf to do it properly, as the battery incurs on boot space. [QUOTE=OvB;53025688]Bolt? Similar range and price. Been out for a year. Still under 1000 units a week but closing in. Should have a promising year. Don't know what kind of dent it will put in Model 3 sales because of brand/styling preference. Bolt might outpace M3 for a bit in 2018 if Tesla doesn't get it's shit together soon.[/QUOTE] Bolt production is only about 800 to 1000 a week iirc, so Tesla looks to have already beaten the Bolt unless they scale up extremely quickly as well. Problem with the Bolt is apparently they don't make any money on it at all without the ZEV credit so they aren't particularly incentivized to make it as big as the Model 3. [editline]4th January 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Fayez;53025813]Forgive me if I take the words of Electrek with a mountain of salt considering they're essentially a Tesla fanboy site whose owner has a financial stake in Tesla. Even then, the fact that workers were [I]welding cars together by hand[/I] shows that the production line wasn't even close to being completed when deliveries were supposed to start. In fact, the battery packing machines not being automated only serves to prove my point further that the Model 3 production was rushed and that none of the assembly line machines were ready by the delivery date. Musk wasn't responsible for the assembly line working out the kinks. His workers are. They would've done it even if Musk didn't "crack the whip." Uhh, the amount delivered means everything. Read BF's post above. It is absolutely not okay for the CEO of a company to make a production prediction that falls on its face so catastrophically. If this were any other automotive company the shareholders would've demanded the immediate sacking of the CEO for such an idiotic mistake, but this is Tesla. Tesla is losing so much money and is so cash negative that without Musk leading and fostering hype to bring in more money, it would've died long ago.[/QUOTE] Do you actually have a reputable source for the welding claims other than an "interview with an anonymous worker"? When these rumours first came out Tesla released videos of the Model 3 production line, which surprisingly didn't have any people welding panels together. The bottleneck was automating the battery module assembly, not body panels. Clearly investors still trust Tesla to be able to deliver massive amounts of Model 3s, even if the ramp up is slightly slower than expected.