131–140 of 299 posts
Highlights: $143M GAAP Net Income (vs $74M loss expected) Trial production started at Shanghai Gigafactory Model Y production moved forward to Summer 2020
What's even the point of talking about timelines? Tesla's history of achieving them is horrible.
Consistently biased information is even better... it contains exactly the same data as unbiased information.
$143M GAAP / $342M Non-GAAP Net Income. $371M free cash flow. GAAP Gross Margin 18.9%. That is before G3 comes online which will, I believe, have an upward case for margins. That is the big news here today. And that is really great news for Tesla. Over $5.3B cash on hand. TSLA is in an amazing position going into Q4 and 2020. Highly confident of exceeding 360k deliveries for 2019. Just an amazing run up to the end of…
Assuming they are teens and old enough to think for themselves. I wonder if they felt safe and happily going out to play or working their ass off trying to get Scholarships.
I vaguely remember Tesla discussion on HN not long ago of it being cash strapped and was on the verge of bankrupt. ( Or something similar ). It is truly amazing how they managed to crush all naysayers and sceptics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another miracle quarter before a capital raise. If you don't think Tesla are paying fast and loose with their books, while at the same time playing games in China, I don't know what to tell you. Silicon Valley's an easy place to sucker.
It's very easy to manipulate financial results without illegally cooking the books. It all comes down to timing when you incur/pay expenses and when you record sales. Tesla has openly engaged in this in prior quarters, which is why their stellar quarters are usually followed by abysmal quarters. Cooking the books would involve changing the actual numbers. Not many people are alleging this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
News Guidelines: Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Paul Graham: I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness. https://news.ycombinator.com/it…
It's not obvious that an 11 year old comment from somebody who's not really involved in the community anymore should be taken as gospel.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure why people think long term Tesla is in an amazing position. Their market share can only go down. All of the car companies have or are releasing cars this year/next and are significantly more capitalised. Some of these cars are superior to Tesla e.g. Porsche Taycan and their ability to share platforms between brands helps to amortise costs. As we've seen with Summon their FSD program does not look like coming…
They can significantly grow with declining market share if the market for electric cars itself grows significantly. That market is currently < 1% of all cars sold.
They did all right.
I’m not a huge Tesla fan, but the idea that they might become an enormously profitable company without turning into one of those conglomerates that sells cars at every price point seems reasonable, especially in an age where the margins will be in tech and services rather than in selling steel bent into the shape of a car.
Tesla delivered 1,800 more cars in Q3 versus Q2, and somehow delivered $551MM more net income.
$143M GAAP / $342M Non-GAAP Net Income. $371M free cash flow. GAAP Gross Margin 18.9%. That is before G3 comes online which will, I believe, have an upward case for margins. That is the big news here today. And that is really great news for Tesla. Over $5.3B cash on hand. TSLA is in an amazing position going into Q4 and 2020. Highly confident of exceeding 360k deliveries for 2019. Just an amazing run up to the end of…
Not sure why people think long term Tesla is in an amazing position. Their market share can only go down. All of the car companies have or are releasing cars this year/next and are significantly more capitalised. Some of these cars are superior to Tesla e.g. Porsche Taycan and their ability to share platforms between brands helps to amortise costs. As we've seen with Summon their FSD program does not look like coming…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the hope is the Porsche Taycan will be a legitimate track car. Teslas are still known to overheat, and I have yet to find a single example of someone tracking a Tesla for even 5 laps in a row (I am aware of the Model 3 Track mode, but either nobody is using it or it doesn't work). EDIT: Found this article: https://insideevs.com/news/367599/video-tesla-model-3-track-... So it is doing significantly better than…
What’s the importance of trac performance in this context? The Tuscan also quickly runs out of charge at top speed and then be forced into a car or battery swap. PS: At the extreme Indy cars average 1.92 MPG, batteries are just a poor fit for any kind of endurance racing.
OP said the Model 3 was a superior vehicle, I was stating why it might not be.
> The Tuscan also quickly runs out of charge at top speed and then be forced into a car or battery swap.
The meat of my comment was about batteries overheating, not being drained. We have no idea how well Porsche will cool their batteries in their car until someone has had a chance to test it.
> PS: At the extreme Indy cars average 1.92 MPG, batteries are just a poor fit for any kind of endurance racing.
This is a disingenuous comparison. We are talking about street vehicles you or I can buy and drive on public roads, not track-only vehicles that cost more than a house anywhere but the Bay Area.
I also think it's disingenuous to call a half hour of racing an endurance run. I think it's more accurate to say batteries are a poor fit for racing with the exception of drag races.
Sorry if this is slightly off topic, but it is amazing to me how differently various publications are spinning the same basic facts. Some headline samples: "Tesla shares soar after crushing third-quarter earnings" CNBC "Tesla's Quarterly Profit Drops 54%" WSJ "Tesla returns to profitability and tops Wall Street's third-quarter earnings" Business Insider "Tesla ekes out a profit as all eyes turn to its China Gigafacto…
Every piece of market news that says "market change X, because incident Y" is pure speculation since there is no way to establish Y as the cause. I wish they would just say "X happened, and also Y" and stop thinking they can attribute cause and effect.
This is not correct. There are many market news items that can be directly attributed to another event. Boeing's numbers this week are directly attributable to the Max fiasco. The company and analysts agree on this. Why would you assert that it's "pure speculation."
The Shanghai Gigafactory going from breaking ground to production ready in 10 months is staggering. Has anything like that been accomplished in NA in the last 10 years?
When we want to, I think it's possible. It's not apples to oranges, but the incidents that come to mind are usually when critical transportation infrastructure fails and is too important to let sit. An example is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-35W_Saint_Anthony_Falls_Brid... , in which they were able to skip the typical three year timeframe and condense it down to a bit over one year from collapse to opening. For a…