Friday 4th November 2011

Tesla Posts Chunky Losses, But Sees Stock Rise

But is the promise of profit enough to keep shareholders happy? Seems it is for now...

---

"Tesla Motors reports $65M third-quarter loss, beats expectations." This was the rather bizarre headlines in The Detroit News yesterday, as the electric car maker saw its third-quarter net loss almost double year on year.

For a company with a projected annual turnover of $200 million, to lose $65m in a single quarter seems pretty much unsustainable. But there seems to be a determined belief on the part of both the company and markets that Tesla has nothing to worry about.

Despite its losses equalling more than 60 cents per share, the company's line that the "continued investments in R&D and corporate infrastructure to support the launch of Model S" was more than enough to convince the stock market - Tesla's stock jumped to $30.25 in after-hours trading yesterday, a rise of 5.4 percent.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk said in a letter to shareholders that "as we've discussed since our IPO, net losses will obviously continue until we reach volume sales of the Model S in 2013".

Oddly, Musk seems to blame relatively low right-hook sales of the (albeit tangentially) on Dave: "the continuing adverse impact on the Roadster via reruns (we call them 'repeats', old boy - Ed) of 'Top Gear', the UK's leading car show."

"As a result, we had an excess inventory of right-hand drive versions of the Roadster and continue to incur additional costs to correct the consumer misperception," Musk said.

We know you're suing the Beeb over this Elon, but we must confess we're not sure if the sort of people who are looking at buying a Tesla Roadster are genuinely going to be swayed by the repeated ramblings of three middle-aged blokes... and it doesn't seem to be doing your share price too much harm anyway...

 

[cookie1600]

"Oddly, Musk seems to blame relatively low right-hook sales of the (albeit tangentially) on Dave"



You're my wife now.....

[hunt_the_fox]

Buy the rumour sell the fact.

[MrBennStep]

I'd think the lack of sales is more due to fact it costs £90k and isn't as good as a Lotus Elise, which looks the same but can be had for under £15k. Even at current petrol prices it's going to take you a while to make up the £75000 difference.

If they've got surplus stock I'll take one for £15,000, it'll be perfect for my 20 mile a day commute, and it will even fit in my garage so I can charge it once a week.

[k-ink]

Their manufacturing side of the business is small change compared to their consultancy side. They picked up major contracts to do development work for Toyota and Mercedes amongst others. It is these contracts which means Tesla were valued at a couple of billion last time I checked. Losing a few quid on their sports cars is neither here nor their in comparison to the future. Imagine the volumes they'll be doing if every Toyota ends up with Tesla tech under the hood. Think a decade away...

[A Scotsman]

Low levels of right-hook sales are more than likely due to the fact that the Brits, Aussies and Japanese are really quite sensible when it comes to chosing their cars rather than anything a Top Gear "bloke" might say.

[Riggers]

MrBennStep said:

If they've got surplus stock I'll take one for £15,000, it'll be perfect for my 20 mile a day commute, and it will even fit in my garage so I can charge it once a week.

Once a week?

[Corsair7]

How many people that sit in every night watching Dave repeats, scratchin their nads and picking their nose.... are likely Tesla buyers?

At £90k each, none I'd say.


Not really the target audience, I'd suggest.

[British Beef]

You have to be a very wealthy, daft tree hugger to opt for one of these things.

Not to mention the carbon footprint required to actually manufacture one of these is significantly more than the equivalent petrol engined Elise.

As development mules / stepping stones for future electric cars they work, as current viable alternatives for IC engined cars they are not!

[Stu R]

They're either deluded, or lying.

[Ed.]

British Beef said:

You have to be a very wealthy, daft tree hugger to opt for one of these things.

Not to mention the carbon footprint required to actually manufacture one of these is significantly more than the equivalent petrol engined Elise.

As development mules / stepping stones for future electric cars they work, as current viable alternatives for IC engined cars they are not!

You missed lucky company car buyer

[Dodgey_Rog]

I read this with interest back in 2010, a good article actually; http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/09/ff_tesla/all...

[MrBennStep]

Riggers said:

MrBennStep said:

If they've got surplus stock I'll take one for £15,000, it'll be perfect for my 20 mile a day commute, and it will even fit in my garage so I can charge it once a week.

Once a week?

20 miles a day, range of 150 miles, I make that one charge a week!

Blind optimism on so many fronts, not least the 90k asking price

[lionrampant]

Top Gear may not have helped sell the electric car very well, but Tesla themselves can only blame their own pricing strategy.

[thewheelman]

Can't say i care.

[KM666]

thewheelman said:

Can't say i care.

Exactly. pretentious and arrogent... That they managed to pull off that image next to Jeremy Clarkson speaks volumes.

[thewheelman]

KM666 said:

thewheelman said:

Can't say i care.

Exactly. pretentious and arrogent... That they managed to pull off that image next to Jeremy Clarkson speaks volumes.

I simply meant i couldn't care less what Tesla do. They're not on my radar of cars to own in the near future, too costly for what they are, & i'm not yet ready for a fully electric car. I wouldn't take too much from the Top Gear review as factual, as it's more of an entertainment show these days.

[Bob_Defly]

There are two of these in my work car park, along with Tesla installed charging stations.

They look great, and are insane pulling away from the lights in virtual silence!

[jazzyjeff]

British Beef said:

the carbon footprint required to actually manufacture one of these is significantly more than the equivalent petrol engined Elise.

Can you publish the figures please?

[Bob_Defly]

jazzyjeff said:

British Beef said:

the carbon footprint required to actually manufacture one of these is significantly more than the equivalent petrol engined Elise.

Can you publish the figures please?

That is probably correct, but they have to start somewhere. It's the same with the Prius, much more damaging to the environment in it's entire lifecycle than a normal car, but they have to start producing these turkeys to get better at it and with greater volume. Doesn't mean commuter cars should never change.

[tridave]

MrBennStep said:

Riggers said:

MrBennStep said:

If they've got surplus stock I'll take one for £15,000, it'll be perfect for my 20 mile a day commute, and it will even fit in my garage so I can charge it once a week.

Once a week?

20 miles a day, range of 150 miles, I make that one charge a week!

Blind optimism on so many fronts, not least the 90k asking price

But the £90k asking price for wealthy company owners or self employed is tempting, 100% tax relief on the purchase and zero company car tax would make a free purchase over a 3 year span when offset against tax liability.