A 94% drop in price to reach parity with Toyota is a bit much, when I did this exercise the other day I aimed for a P/E of 15 to 20 which I think is more realistic as Tesla is an industry defining company and is taking big risks with the robots and taxis.
That being said, it would still be a 60% drop in the current valuation to get there.
I also didn't realize Tesla had so much debt, 45b in debt seems like a lot.
I think they could make money if they added a few things, even as an option to their vehicles. a dashboard. stalks for turn signals and drive select (with wipers/lights). a few dedicated buttons for critical controls.
Could easily make $1-2k per car as an extra-cost option. it would be popular.
I feel like Tesla is more equipped to be a first-generation brand, when sheer novelty is a big part of the product appeal. You can get away with weird user interfaces and marginal quality when you're the only major mainstream EV brand on the market.
It takes an entirely different product vision to compete in a second-generation market, when customer preferences have solidified and "we're the only product on the market" no longer cuts it.
In 2035, we'll be cross-shopping Corolla and Civic EVs that offer no surprises whatsoever. Will Tesla's atypical design choices be considered whimsical and niche (think Saab or Subaru) or just signs of failing to understand what consumers in a mature market want (like Suzuki or Jaguar)
Musk has access to the U.S. Treasury, current government contracts and soon, most of his competitors' through Procurement Capture [0] and any day, access to Fort Knox. These don't seem to be part of the "normal" analyst's info feed. Because things are not normal. They are part of a government takeover, for ideology and money. [1]
That being said, it would still be a 60% drop in the current valuation to get there.
I also didn't realize Tesla had so much debt, 45b in debt seems like a lot.