61–70 of 302 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The parent commenter was discussing revenue and not profit. If they were aggressively expanding, I would expect that profits to remain small or negative, but I'd expect revenue to grow as a result.
Just to make it more clear what bqe is saying: they are selling the ~same amount of cars as 2 years ago. Both in terms of $ and in terms of #. Growth is completely flat.
So many red flags Profit is all regulatory credits, actual auto sales flat to down, accounts receivable balance is now 1.4B or >20% of revenue, interest income is $8M (down -20%) even though global interest rates were cut to near 0 in Q2, R&D and service spending down despite dozens of projects the company claims to be working on.
Maybe it's red flags when you make conservative measurements against a traditional industry proxy measurement - and applying classic investment banking logic. However you have got to remember that this is not just another company, it's not just another brand. They've already changed the world, it's all there in their track record.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is separate from the consumer EV tax credit. Every car manufacturer must produce a certain percentage of electric cars. If their actual EV sales aren’t enough to cover that requirement, they can purchase “EV credits” from companies that exceeded their regulatory requirements to avoid a fine. Essentially this policy gets car companies that aren’t producing EVs to subsidize the ones that are.
Interesting! I wasn't aware of this credit. How it's structured is fascinating in that they essentially have to pay their competitors for not meeting the quota. (Of course the markets for EV vs ICE is somewhat different, but not disjoint.)
The difference in the narrative versus the financial data is stark: Quarterly revenue has not shown any growth for nearly 2 years, despite introducing more models and expanding global deliveries. Their sales of regulatory credits this year is greater than all of the net income ever earned in their entire history.
>Quarterly revenue has not shown any growth for nearly 2 years, despite introducing more models and expanding global deliveries. Isn't this pretty easily explained by the total number of deliveries not growing? They might be expanding internationally to new markets or introducing new cars, but total deliveries have been pretty consistently around 90k for the last 2 years also. They still seem to be selling every car…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to make it more clear what bqe is saying: they are selling the ~same amount of cars as 2 years ago. Both in terms of $ and in terms of #. Growth is completely flat.
Most companies have shown big declines due to covid. Just being flat is good.
Pre Close: - From Bloomberg re Robinhood and TSLA "number of Robinhood accounts holding Tesla shares (in some form) is at an all- time high of 496,890. Tesla is the second-most popular stock on the platform over the last 24 hours, and the 19th-most popular stock over the last 7 days." Looking at: - if profitiable check for amount of regulatory credits that Telsa gets from other automakers, this could be the differenc…
Their intellectual capital is undervalued in my opinion and may worth more than $100 billion. No car company at this moment, can come close to Tesla, and they are all spending billions, to develop batteries, vehicles, self driving tech, and infrastructure. They are even working together as they can't cover the costs on their own.
Imagine Tesla selling their batteries/engines/platform/superchargers to every car company(like an intel for cars). They can sustain their revenue by providing the supercharger network(cloud service) to go with it; with a supercharger network being the new gas station, using clean energy(near zero cost energy). Then add their self-driving platform auto companies can lease.
Revenues down Year over Year, and yet their stock price is 8x. Profiability increased, but its market cap is larger than Toyota which has over 10x the revenues. This stock is truly one for /r/wallstreetbets.
Given their net income is positive, what is the probability that they are added to s&p500?
High, because of the Criteria to join the S&P500[0]: - a market cap of $8.2 billion - its headquarters in the U.S. - the value of its market capitalization trade annually at least a quarter-million of its shares trade in each of the previous six months - most of its shares in the public’s hands - at least a year since its initial public offering - the sum of the previous four quarters of earnings must be positive as…
I would assume that's already been priced in, if so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're investing aggressively in new factories and new product lines. If they wanted to show profits today they could give up building and expanding factories and stop entering new product categories. But that would be stupid.
> If they wanted to show profits today they could give up building and expanding factories and stop entering new product categories Can you show me in the financial statements where this "aggressive investing" in factories is, and how it affects net profit? Why are they doing it if revenues are stagnant?
They are doing it because they need more capacity to increase revenue, because their ASP is lower in the new markets they've entered. And because they need local factories to reduce tariffs. And do you really think that comparing this quarter YoY is a good way to evaluate their revenue growth?