Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4 • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4

#301

Post by xkjkls » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 4:12 PM UTC

natmaka wrote: post #299

xkjkls wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Industrial solar generally has much less maintenance costs than distributed. There’s some exceptions, Hawaii for instance, but it’s very expensive to have to constantly maintain solar panels in peoples homes in ways that industrial solar isn’t

Many setups I saw (PV) are mainly maintained by being washed by rain, and I fail to understand why the maintenance of a (non obsolete) home solar panel would be expensive (neglecting vandalism/theft)(?) Moreover energy produced by solar panels in homes is locally consumed, therefore there is no maintenance (nor any non-neglectable cost or loss) related to distribution (they are non neglectable).

Solar panels and accompanying equipment break. It’s much easier to maintain a centralized installation than having people need to travel for service.

Re: Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4

#302

Post by xkjkls » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 4:15 PM UTC

mrtksn wrote: post #266

xkjkls wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a meaningful amount of capital though.

The idea here is that stock prices are determined by the people who want to pay for that stock. It's not a function of the company's operational success. What you are saying is circular reasoning, you essentially say that company performance matter because many people think that is should matter. There's no causality relationship here, essentially people think that matters because other people thing that matters.

No. Businesses are eventually valued by the capital they can return. Otherwise numbers are all meaningless

Re: Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4

#303

Post by _ea1k » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 4:45 PM UTC

xkjkls wrote: post #99

_ea1k wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They appear to be giving conservative figures this time around.

On which? Production or delivery?

Yes to both.

Re: Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4

#304

Post by _ea1k » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 4:46 PM UTC

xeromal wrote: post #189

_ea1k wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OTOH, they killed the RWD version. That likely would have had an even longer range, and certainly had a lower cost.

I used to think the same as you but it's not exactly what you think. The front motor is a bit smaller than rear so at cruising speeds on the highway, the rear motor disengages and the front can handle the speed while using less KW even with the added weight of the extra motor.

That has been true in the past with the S & X, but the motors on the 3 (and presumably Y) are a bit different. The RWD 3 was slightly more efficient than the AWD.

Re: Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4

#305

Post by ryandrake » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 6:57 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #293

nickik wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on what? Its cheap, can pull lots of stuff fast, you can plug in power tools and it has lots of storage area.

It looks stupid, the trapezoidal side walls around the truck bed actually make it much less usable, and it looks stupid. The whole problem with eg the BMW i-Series or most other electric cars is that they are designed in a silly way that says, “look at me, I’m a weird electric car, I’m not a normal car at all, I’m willing to look like a total dork in order to virtue-signal about being eco-friendly”. Teslas just look…

Wel, that’s just like... your opinion, man. Seriously, the world has enough identical-looking sedans and identical-looking trucks. I can’t tell most major brands apart anymore until I see them up close.

Re: Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4

#306

Post by jlbooker » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 7:04 PM UTC

xkjkls wrote: post #262

grecy wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point. Right now it's not much, but I think the valuation is based on the speculation that it could soon be a lot. Right now revenue from energy storage resembles Tesla's auto business in 2013[1].. so if it grows at the same rate... [1] https://twitter.com/kerooke/status/1222637828741439488

Their solar business, which they purchased, has declined every year since the acquisition

Until now. "The company marked a 26% quarter-on-quarter increase in solar installations"

https://cleantechnica.com/2020/01/29/tesla-energy-lifts-off-...

Re: Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4

#307

Post by xkjkls » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 7:10 PM UTC

jlbooker wrote: post #306

xkjkls wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their solar business, which they purchased, has declined every year since the acquisition

Until now. "The company marked a 26% quarter-on-quarter increase in solar installations" https://cleantechnica.com/2020/01/29/tesla-energy-lifts-off-...

QoQ. They still showed a YoY decline for 2019. And that's in a market that's been expanding, so they've significantly lost market share.

Re: Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4

#308

Post by xkjkls » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 7:12 PM UTC

lazyjones wrote: post #280

xkjkls wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla still lost $800 million this year and has never had a profitable year, on both record car sales and record regulatory credit sales. What about that indicates sustainability?

Here's a different opinion: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/29/business/tesla-earnings/i...

Using non-GAAP numbers. Non-GAAP gives you substantial lee-way to not charge things to your bottom line. I don't think you get to claim to run a profitable business just because you started paying your employees completely in stock.

Re: Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4

#309

Post by xkjkls » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 7:13 PM UTC

optimiz3 wrote: post #283

xkjkls wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. My bet is that they have been underinvesting in order to meet financial results, and that that will catch up to them. Looking at other financial statement history, this seems like a safe bet.

Our TSLA brokerage accounts thank you and your /r/RealTesla brethren for your sacrifice.

Well, let's check back next year. The bears are already 1-0 against Elon Musk, given that a large percentage of Tesla bears were originally short SolarCity.

Re: Tesla Financial Results 2019 Q4

#310

Post by xkjkls » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 7:16 PM UTC

manmal wrote: post #260

xkjkls wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is still more material in the Y than the 3. That doesn't seem to indicate better margins

But they might have reduced the number of stamped parts by an order of magnitude, improved wiring in a revolutionary way (there’s a patent by Tesla for that), MUCH less R&D and production setup than model 3 (they won’t make all the mistakes twice),... and let’s not forget economies of scale, they will produce more Y than 3.

All of this is theoretical and we don't have any real data on how it will affect gross margins. When the car is larger, many things are going to be more costly, like painting, which takes up a significant part of automotive margins.