
Tesla Ships 25,000 Vehicles in First Quarter, Beating Estimates - rayuela
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-02/tesla-delivers-25-000-vehicles-in-1st-quarter-beating-estimate
======
petewailes
To put this into context, BMW, Audi and Mercedes moved around 200k each.
Porsche managed about 60k. Jaguar Land Rover did around 130k.

Zero to 25k is solid growth, but they're still a long way from bring equal,
let alone dominant and profitable, which feels like where people think they'll
be in the future.

~~~
martin_bech
To put that into context, most of those cars are not Full Size luxury sedans.
Tesla only has 2 models right now, and completely dominates the fullsize
luxury space.

[http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2017/01/usa-
december-2016-large...](http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2017/01/usa-
december-2016-large-luxury-car-sales-stats.html)

~~~
oblio
Hmm... you've linked a report with data only for the US for the other
manufacturers, while, as far as I can see, Tesla's report is for global sales.

I doubt Tesla dominates anything regarding global sales, at this moment :)

~~~
parhurs
The link does have estimates for Tesla U.S. sales in December 2016. Tesla:
2400 (WSJ) to 5300 (hybridcars.com) compared to the "class leading" Mercedes-
Benz S-Class: 1494. It does seem Tesla is dominating in this class (luxury
cars). Figures for the whole year are 26,525 - 29,156 (Tesla) vs. 18,803
(Mercedes-Benz S-Class).

~~~
petewailes
I'm willing to go out on a limb and say the S Class and the Model S aren't in
the same category. The E would be closer, but given the mindset behind
purchasing each, I'm not certain there _is_ a competitor to the Model S.

There's no equivalent to "buying a Tesla" for another brand, which is a lot of
why you buy one. The picture gets more interesting when you look outside the
US, where they sell about 15/20% of the E class, BMW 5 series, Audi A4 and
other similar cars, which are a much closer match to a Tesla.

~~~
koreyb
It is a tough comparison. E class starts at $52k USD, Tesla Model S at $72k
(no fed tax credit, and the 60 will be discontinued soon so jumps to $78k w/
the 75), S class at $97k.

Model S tops out at $160k, S class at ~$250k w/ a S65 or technically a
Maybach.

Interior and luxury the S class wins for sure. Performance and tech the Tesla
wins.

~~~
Cyph0n
Are you sure that Tesla's tech is significantly better than that of a S class?
The S class Benz has been at the forefront of safety tech for over a decade
now; I recall it having adaptive cruise control in 2005 or so.

~~~
koreyb
I didn't write significantly. Anecdotally, it is better (I own both). Highway
self-driving, OTA updates, situational awareness, screens, auto Homelink, GPS
air suspension, etc.

~~~
Cyph0n
Ah, since you own both, I'll take your word for it.

~~~
koreyb
:) just one opinion

~~~
Cyph0n
An informed opinion. Most people would probably have tried only one of them.

------
rodionos
> The delivery figure is a preliminary number that may change slightly in May
> when the company reports earnings for the period.

> The delivery count only includes a car if it’s transferred to the customer
> and all paperwork is correct.

I wonder, how can these two statements be reconciled? If the car is delivered,
then the total number cannot be preliminary?

~~~
derefr
Preliminary because the figure might go up, not down.

~~~
baldfat
Slightly

~~~
limeyx
Slightly up

------
JonRB
See also
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14018765](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14018765)

------
skdotdan
As a company, Tesla would have interest in focusing on high-end cars (with
high margins). But, on the other hand, their vision implies making Tesla cars
affordable.

~~~
sametmax
It's a limited market. Once all the rich people have their tesla, they won't
buy many more because:

\- they already have one and want another toy

\- it's not trendy anymore since everybody has it

The ideal move would be to create separate models. Affordable ones to keep
Tesla afloat. Luxury ones (with a very distinct design) to keep the brand PR
on top.

~~~
joatmon-snoo
So cars with doors that open like this?

[https://youtu.be/_ih1ptOguaM?t=2m2s](https://youtu.be/_ih1ptOguaM?t=2m2s)

~~~
sametmax
Yeah, something to keep pieces of the pie to come down the pipe. A pie piper
if you wish.

------
s3nnyy
What does HN think: Does it now make sense to invest in tesla or is the stock
already inflated?

~~~
marvin
It's a super volatile stock and very expensively priced. The current stock
price assumes a successful Model 3 launch, and also growth beyond the Model 3
in the shape of new models, much greater market share and considerable
likelihood of success with battery pack sales and solar installations. Tesla's
current market cap is equal to Ford's, so a bull scenario would require Tesla
to operate at higher margins, and/or higher total market-share, relative to
the competition. Possibly combined one or more of the biggest traditional auto
manufacturers fumbling the transition to electric and going under. (And
obviously, a central thesis is that most people will want an electric rather
than a combustion engine-powered vehicle in 5-10 years).

On the other hand, in the best-case scenario Tesla has huge room to grow. The
4 largest auto manufacturers sell on the order of 10 million vehicles per
year, to Tesla's 100.000. Note that if Tesla were to grow production this
much, it would have to happen either with favorable capital raise terms,
requiring less capital than is generally understood, or by having very high
margins and reinvesting very aggressively.

Tesla also has ambitions to become a leading energy supplier, under the thesis
that solar installations will not be a commodity, but a product where superior
user experience and system integration will be in demand. The bear case for
this is that demand for solar installations will be limited to the cheapest
supplier slapping the cheapest panels on a roof and calling it a day, or that
a well-integrated solar system will be so simple to design that many companies
will do it. We don't have the answer here yet, since this market is not
mature. It also hinges on solar being at a tipping point where it is poised to
displace a large amount of fossil power generation due to rapidly decreasing
costs in cell and battery storage.

Tl;dr: you wouldn't invest in Tesla today unless you have a very big risk
appetite and also believe that the transportation and consumer energy
landscape will look very different in 10 years.

~~~
MegaButts
> Tesla's current market cap is equal to Ford's

While I think Tesla's valuation is high, it's worth mentioning that Ford's
valuation might be exceedingly low. They live in alternate universes. Tesla's
stock price is based on everything going right. Ford's stock is based on
everything going wrong, with a P/E ratio of 7 (roughly half of the industry
standard). Investors are already baking the subprime auto loan problem into
the stock price.

Personally I'm more interested to see how GM fares against Tesla now that
they're selling the Bolt. Everybody says it's a great car (never tried it),
but I don't think anyone expects it to sell like a Tesla.

Whatever happens, it's fun to watch from the sidelines.

~~~
dkrich
This is my take as well and I actually have the largest percentage of my stock
portfolio invested in them (also have a decent % in GM). Ford makes huge
profits and sells hundreds of thousands of vehicles a year, including the
F150, which is has been the best-selling vehicle in the US for some time (and
quite profitable too). They're also a very innovative company despite reports
to the contrary.

Tesla's stock price accounts for lots of assumptions about the auto market
that still remain to be seen. One other thing that I think people discount is
brand loyalty, which is stronger in the auto market than in most industries.

People who like a brand tend to buy most or all of their cars from that
manufacturer, and that's a very difficult thing to overcome for a new market
entrant. Every time Tesla releases a brand new vehicle it's an enormous risk.
Market demand for cars is pretty predictable for well-known brands, which is
why major car manufacturers have continued re-releasing new generations of the
same models for decades. Each model has its own brand that is worth millions
(in some cases, billions). A brand new model has to build that demand from
scratch. A new version of an existing model already has a huge market that
already know about and want that car.

~~~
MegaButts
What's your take on GM vs Ford?

~~~
dkrich
I view them both very similarly- both are very well-run with great leadership
teams and produce great products at nice margins. I personally like Ford a bit
more because I think the valuation at the current price is a little better and
because they sell the F-150 which is arguably the most valuable car model in
the world. But at the current valuations I like both.

~~~
MegaButts
I am not an expert in the traditional automaker space, but I think about it
more about where they're heading. While I certainly take into account the
subprime auto loan issue, I'm more curious how each company is adapting to the
future.

GM is focused on competing directly with Uber with their acquisition of Cruise
and rolling out the Bolt (they could use almost any car, but having a great EV
already in production certainly helps).

Ford is focused on competing with more traditional public transportation by
acquiring Chariot and investing $1 billion in Argo.ai, and hope to have
autonomous fleets ready to deploy in 2021.

I actually feel like they're going to become more unique moving forward. I
think Ford will likely have an easier time working with cities and using
Chariot as a new form of public transportation. I think GM will have an easier
time (hopefully) dominating the more traditional ride-share program.

I feel like there's more upside for GM, but it's riskier. I'm also very
confused by how Ford structured Argo.ai, but maybe it'll work the way they
intended.

I guess we'll find out in ~5 years.

------
SticksAndBreaks
I misread, and for a moment expected Giant Ships, transporting energy via
pumped empty baphyspheres from offshore solarfarms.

