Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3 • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3

#221

Post by detaro » Thu, Nov 02, 2017, 5:49 AM UTC

makomk wrote: post #79

chollida1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ummm > Some lines are at only 500 cars a week. Namely the battery pack assembly, body shop welding and final vehicle assembly. of those, the battery pack is the big issue. From Gabrielle Coppola, bloomberg's auto analysts: > The biggest production constraint by far is the battery module assembly. A systems integration contractor dropped the ball, and Tesla only realized they dropped the ball until very recently. Tesl…

So basically, the whole thing about Tesla being more a battery company than a car company that was supposed to help justify their valuation was bullshit. They don't even have the in-house capabilities to tell that the company that they contracted the work out to had screwed up until well after they were supposed to be shipping.

Not necessarily. If making battery cells is going to be the global bottleneck, having some issues making battery packs out of them is likely a lot easier to fix than not having the cells.

Re: Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3

#222

Post by api » Thu, Nov 02, 2017, 5:50 AM UTC

Animats wrote: post #213

Someone wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

”Some lines are at only 500 cars a week.” That sounds better than what Tesla claims. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ABEA-4CW8X0/549293785... (emphasis added): ”Other lines, such as battery pack assembly, body shop welding and final vehicle assembly, have demonstrated burst builds of about 500 units per week and are ramping up quickly.” If you can do burst runs of 15 km/hour, that doesn’t mean you can run a th…

Most auto production lines produce nearly 500 cars per shift . Normal cycle times in an auto plant are about one minute. Here's a Mercedes production line.[1] That's a vehicle on a par with Tesla's products. Something is terribly wrong in Fremont. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbfTlwm248k

It's almost like Mercedes has been doing this for a long time.

Re: Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3

#223

Post by petre » Thu, Nov 02, 2017, 6:05 AM UTC

pacificmint wrote: post #186

namlem wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, the Bolt doesn't really impress me. I hope Nissan makes a better version of the Leaf. That's something I'd actually consider.

The second generation Leaf was just launched in Japan, and will come to the US next year, I believe. It seems to have much better range (two battery options with 40kWh and 60kWh which give est range of 150 and 200 miles, resp).

That sounds exactly like Renault Zoe's range and battery options.

Re: Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3

#224

Post by pasta » Thu, Nov 02, 2017, 6:27 AM UTC

chollida1 wrote: post #3

Since this came out as part of the Tesla earnings, here's my recap from their earnings release and call.... - Tesla will be late getting up to 5,000 units a week of Model 3. It will happen at the end of Q1 instead of the end of this year. The bottleneck is batteries. - Some lines are at only 500 cars a week. Namely the battery pack assembly, body shop welding and final vehicle assembly. - The $2.92 a share loss was m…

Last week I saw a Model 3 where the back door thought something was in the way and just opened a little bit so the passenger had to squeeze out.

Those 'bugs' are a big problem for a company already behind in production.

I hope for Tesla this was just a single event. But new cars with new tech always have issues. You don't want that when you are already behind.

Re: Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3

#225

Post by sah2ed » Thu, Nov 02, 2017, 6:36 AM UTC

peoplewindow wrote: post #109

dzdt wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a part of their core product differentiation. They can get better performance and longer battery life by owning the hardware design and OS design and being good at it. Apple in particular understood lomg before competitors that battery life is an extremely important real world metric. Doing their own SOC helps them optimise that.

Seems like revisionism to me? Before the iPhone/smartphones in general, battery life on a mobile phone of a week was not uncommon. One of the first criticisms of the iPhone was that you had to charge it every night. I'm not sure I'd say that they had some unique insight into the importance of battery life.

Not revisionism. Prior to the launch of the iPhone, "smartphones weren't very smart" to quote Steve Jobs.

Anyway, you are comparing the battery life of touch-based smartphones with its non-touch predecessor which isn't a fair comparison. Besides, mobile phones that could last for a week from a single charge are definitely not considered smartphones, those are feature phones.

Re: Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3

#226

Post by Someone » Thu, Nov 02, 2017, 6:53 AM UTC

mcbrit wrote: post #124

Someone wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

”Some lines are at only 500 cars a week.” That sounds better than what Tesla claims. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ABEA-4CW8X0/549293785... (emphasis added): ”Other lines, such as battery pack assembly, body shop welding and final vehicle assembly, have demonstrated burst builds of about 500 units per week and are ramping up quickly.” If you can do burst runs of 15 km/hour, that doesn’t mean you can run a th…

"If you can do burst runs of 15 km/hour, that doesn’t mean you can run a three hour marathon." Once you're in 3 hour marathon territory, what you can do for 1 mile is a lot more relevant to what you can do for 26.2 miles than you might think. One of the tent poles of effective marathon/half marathon training is to make your race pace into a drumbeat. You want to feel your race pace in your bones. Very effective worko…

”In Q3, we delivered […] 222 Model 3 vehicles”

Assuming they didn’t produce a lot more than they delivered, if they had even one week in which they produced 500 Model 3s, they also must have had weeks in which they destroyed them.

Re: Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3

#227

Post by Aron » Thu, Nov 02, 2017, 6:54 AM UTC

Animats wrote: post #213

Someone wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

”Some lines are at only 500 cars a week.” That sounds better than what Tesla claims. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ABEA-4CW8X0/549293785... (emphasis added): ”Other lines, such as battery pack assembly, body shop welding and final vehicle assembly, have demonstrated burst builds of about 500 units per week and are ramping up quickly.” If you can do burst runs of 15 km/hour, that doesn’t mean you can run a th…

Most auto production lines produce nearly 500 cars per shift . Normal cycle times in an auto plant are about one minute. Here's a Mercedes production line.[1] That's a vehicle on a par with Tesla's products. Something is terribly wrong in Fremont. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbfTlwm248k

They aren't stopping at 500\week. They are admitting it's broken.

Re: Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3

#228

Post by Aron » Thu, Nov 02, 2017, 7:00 AM UTC

kristianp wrote: post #102

Someone wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

”Some lines are at only 500 cars a week.” That sounds better than what Tesla claims. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ABEA-4CW8X0/549293785... (emphasis added): ”Other lines, such as battery pack assembly, body shop welding and final vehicle assembly, have demonstrated burst builds of about 500 units per week and are ramping up quickly.” If you can do burst runs of 15 km/hour, that doesn’t mean you can run a th…

"To get that $1.4 billion in revenue, they will need to sell 40k Tesla 3s at $35k each, or 3,000 a week. To get it in margin, even assuming the average model 3 will sell for $50k, they will have to sell 12,000 a week or so (at 20% margin)" It seems like you're assuming that the cash burn will stay at 1.4billion. Expenditure should go down once the production line tooling is complete.

"Capital expenditures were $1.1 billion in Q3. The majority of capital expenditures were attributable to Model 3 and Gigafactory 1 production capacity increases. "

Re: Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3

#229

Post by dingaling » Thu, Nov 02, 2017, 7:32 AM UTC

hwillis wrote: post #51

jeffdavis wrote: post #35

What is the main practical selling point of a model 3 over, say, a leaf? Longer range and that's it? Good thing tesla has a lot of vertical investment in batteries. The market is very competitive.

> What is the main practical selling point of a model 3 over, say, a leaf? Much better value, larger size, better fuel economy, more conventional, more power, more range, and superchargers. Cost per mile of range: $200 for the 2018 leaf, 132 for the Model 3. 147 hp vs 258 hp, 10" of extra length and 6" of extra width, over twice the range at less than half the capacity. The Tesla is way superior to any other electric…

> The supercharger alone makes it the obvious buy for almost all consumers.

Perhaps in parts of the USA but not necessarily in Europe. For example there is ONE supercharger station on the whole island of Ireland, at Ballacolla south-west of Dublin.

I've lived on the island for 40 years and have never even been to that part of it.

Re: Tesla posts big loss, cuts production of Models X and S to catch up on Model 3

#230

Post by kgwgk » Thu, Nov 02, 2017, 7:46 AM UTC

inventtheday wrote: post #175

kristianp wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"To get that $1.4 billion in revenue, they will need to sell 40k Tesla 3s at $35k each, or 3,000 a week. To get it in margin, even assuming the average model 3 will sell for $50k, they will have to sell 12,000 a week or so (at 20% margin)" It seems like you're assuming that the cash burn will stay at 1.4billion. Expenditure should go down once the production line tooling is complete.

I don't think any of the upfront investment or capital expenditure is included in the 1.4 billion calculation. Thats purely operating loss.

The $1.4bn is $300mn cash flows used in operating activities + $1.1bn capex.