Tesla publishes its financial results for 2023; profit margin shrinks

Revenues only grew by 3 percent year over year, disappointing the market.

See full article...

 

[Uragan]

The Tesla CEO said on the company's earnings call on Wednesday that building Tesla's next-generation EV, which is set to enter production in 2025, will require Tesla workers to live and sleep on the manufacturing line at the company's Texas factory.

"We really need the engineers to be living on the line. This is not sort of an off-the-shelf 'it just works' type of thing," Musk told investors.

"That will be a challenging production ramp … we'll be sleeping on the line, practically. Not practically, we will be," he added.

 

[Uragan]

Don't worry, by 2018-ish they'll have fully self driving better than humans and it will skyrocket!

...I wonder how they can miss claim after claim and still stay high?

Because their CEO continually puts out bullshit hype to juice the market.

 

[doalwa]

It's just so weird Musk is taking such a public stance deeply in the conservative-right side of the political spectrum when so much of Tesla's market is the educated white collar city types who tend to lean more liberal. It's like Must is actively trying to hurt his company and his wallet.

Looking back it's comical how popular Musk was among the environmentally conscious liberal crowd. They sincerely believed Musk wanted to save the environment and thought he was a genius engineer like Tony Stark. The STEM fad was strong and cringey.

Not sure if that's really the case...at least here in Germany, most Tesla's that pass me by are driven by forty somethings like myself who couldn't be further from a liberal mindset.

Tesla's are the domain of the dreaded old white male crowd here in Germany, at least.

 

[thekaj]

Don't worry, by 2018-ish they'll have fully self driving better than humans and it will skyrocket!

...I wonder how they can miss claim after claim and still stay high?

Because once someone passionately believes in something, it becomes extremely hard for them to convince themselves they've been had, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. That's especially true when you've put skin in the game like investing money. You're much more concerned about being one of the "suckers" who pulled their money out right before the promises are delivered than one of the "suckers" who kept their money in wel after it was obvious to everyone else that the promises were never going to be delivered.

 

[Celery Man]

To nitpick I don't think peterford stated his reasons for being against Chinese manufacturers being in the lead on EVs. Therefore you can't really claim that such a statement is irrational. At most you can say that it needs to be supported with reasons.

I can think of a few possible rationales from the sinophobic (Xi = bad or PRC/Russia/NK = bad) to the mercantilistic (one country being able to low-ball all other countries on pretty much everything is not sustainable for a healthy world economy) to the humanistic (China is now a pretty well developed country so would ideally be supporting manufacturing in less well off countries through imports or plants; BYD seems to be doing this a bit by looking at a possible auto plant in Mexico).

But Xi and the PRC and the DPRK are bad, that’s not sinophobia, it’s reality.

 

[Nerdboi]

I'd take 3%, if that had been applied for my last 14 years instead of the 0% that I got for the majority of them I'd be making 10s of thousands more right now.

 

[TimeWinder]

I don’t recall them actually note that in any version I saw.

No, they added that explanation afterward, when they got caught.

 

[Uragan]

But Xi and the PRC and the DPRK are bad, that’s not sinophobia, it’s reality.

I mean, Russia and NoKo aren't part of China, so I'm not sure why the OP grouped them with the PRC or Xi when discussing sinophobia.

 

[THT]

There’s a reason no one is making new minivan models and it isn’t because it’s a growth sector poised to take-off. It’s a niche dead end.
Tesla needs to make more SUVs, CUVs and maybe a small pickup. Or a regular pickup if the Cybertruck goes nowhere (Honda tweaked the pickup and was savaged by the market for a very good vehicle).

This is a sad state of affairs for me. We love minivans. It’s a much better vehicle for house chores than a pickup truck. More room than a 7 seater SUV. Just great.

An EV minivan with AWD, solar surfaces, and easy reconfiguration would be an awesome vehicle for so many things.

Still have hope for Canoo.

 

[Celery Man]

I mean, Russia and NoKo aren't part of China, so I'm not sure why the OP grouped them with the PRC or Xi when discussing sinophobia.

Also, I always find it ironic when people complaining about sinophobia don’t differentiate between a people/culture and a ruler/government.

 

[thekaj]

I don’t recall them actually note that in any version I saw. Nor do I imagine that this was the first time trying this particular activity, which makes it less of a “test”. So I’m curious if this “follow-up information” explained why they chose to frame the shot (or edit the shot) to remove the puppeteer.

Because otherwise? No, the most likely explanation was that it was test of who’d buy into their hype and cover story.

The weird/funny thing is that it would have been trivially easy to crop that shot just a little bit to make sure that puppeteer wasn't visible. I almost wonder if maybe they left it in as a way to provide legal deniability that they were making unsubstantiated claims about where they are developmentally. So if in 10 years they still can't actually make their robots autonomously fold clothes and someone sues, claiming that they bought Tesla shares based on that video. Tesla lawyers can point out that they never actually claimed that robot was doing it on its own, and that you can actually see the puppeteer.

Basically, if I worked in Tesla Legal (shutter), by now I'd be making damn sure that every single wild claim that Musk makes has some way to plausibly deny that what he said could be construed as based in reality.

 

[theSeb]

While I doubt an IR rain sensor actually has a BOM cost of even $20 at scale, the real secret is that you don't need an automated rain sensor of any description in the first place. If you feel the rain drops are obscuring your vision, you can just...push a wiper stalk! (Though I guess if the purpose is to reduce costs not to improve the UX, it's understandable that Tesla deletes the physical interface, too...)

Do people legitimately prefer this kind of automation, or is it simply a gee-whiz fancy gizmo that impresses people the first time they see it and then slowly frustrates them as they discover its shortcomings ever after?

The issue is that since Tesla now relies on vision for autopilot, it has to use the wipers, whether you want to, or not, when the system believes that it cannot see the road. Thus you end up with dry wipes on a regular basis

 

[Uragan]

The weird/funny thing is that it would have been trivially easy to crop that shot just a little bit to make sure that puppeteer wasn't visible. I almost wonder if maybe they left it in as a way to provide legal deniability that they were making unsubstantiated claims about where they are developmentally. So if in 10 years they still can't actually make their robots autonomously fold clothes and someone sues, claiming that they bought Tesla shares based on that video. Tesla lawyers can point out that they never actually claimed that robot was doing it on its own, and that you can actually see the puppeteer.

Basically, if I worked in Tesla Legal (shutter), by now I'd be making damn sure that every single wild claim that Musk makes has some way to plausibly deny that what he said could be construed as based in reality.

I mean, considering Tesla's page about Autopilot has that phrase about the driver only being there for legal reasons still there, despite the system not being nearly as "flawless" as the video tries to claim and it has come to light that the video was highly staged for the absolute best run that the car did after multiple failures...

I honestly don't think Tesla (or Musk) give a single fuck about "plausible deniability" because their sycophants will believe almost any bullshit that comes out of their mouths.

 

[daveishereagain]

At the same time, it is hard to point to many companies poised for explosive volume growth in multiple enormous (or soon to be so) markets as is Tesla. To be sure $TSLA is priced for perfection, but the opportunities for them are absolutely grand. The potential value of the robot market is economy shattering.

Elon? Is that you? Come out of the shadows and talk to the little people.

 

[daveishereagain]

Because once someone passionately believes in something, it becomes extremely hard for them to convince themselves they've been had, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. That's especially true when you've put skin in the game like investing money. You're much more concerned about being one of the "suckers" who pulled their money out right before the promises are delivered than one of the "suckers" who kept their money in wel after it was obvious to everyone else that the promises were never going to be delivered.

Yeah, Trumpers fit that mold more than anyone.

 

[Oldmanalex]

While I agree with the rest of your comment, I'd say there are rational reasons to be wary of Chinese companies dominating markets, as they're backed by an authoritarian government which is using its economic power to gain greater political leverage.

Of course, since China has become the manufacturing powerhouse of the world, completely avoiding Chinese products would be impossible. Still, trying to at least minimise one's own contribution to the ambitions of its regime isn't necessarily irrational.

(However, none of that would be a reason to support Musk in any way – like you said, there are plenty of other options out there.)

Historically, for most of any kind of industrial base, China has been the 300 lb gorilla in the room. The UK, then Europe then the USA displaced them over a 200 year period, but it looks as though they are back in the position they probably held for the best part of 5000 years. Whether that is good or bad is a different question, but it is hardly unexpected.

 

[nehinks]

I like the automatic wipers on my Avalon, especially since they'll start going faster if it starts raining harder. It tends to work pretty damn good, with a tendency to go a little faster that I would generally prefer. Toyota figured this out over 14 years ago. The fact that Tesla can't figure it out speaks volumes to their engineering. Obviously it's something I could easily do without, but it's nice to have, much like the RFID keys and push button start

Same on my Mazda. To be fair, it's not a feature I would have paid extra for (flipping the stalk isn't that big a deal), but I've been impressed by how well it works.

 

[Oldmanalex]

jandrese said:
Yet again financial geniuses who assumed that exponential growth would continue unabated are surprised to discover growth following an S curve, just like it has every other time in history without exception.

I cannot upvote this comment hard enough.

If by definition something, like for example exponential growth, cannot go on for ever, it will stop at some point. A lot of our brainiacs seem to find this difficult to understand. I do not see Tesla at all as a failure, but it is in an industry which cannot sustain the PE ratios that current investors expect. Plus of course there may be a Tesla board meeting one day, with the chief techdouche coming out and announcing "all your base belong to me". My brother worked in 2000 for a giant company which expected to replicate the 50% year growth rates of some of its tiny rivals, and I worked at the same time for a Pharma which expected growth rates such that it would be receiving the entire expected world GDP in 2050. Needless to say neither wet dream was mirrored by reality, and we both lost our jobs.

 

[vought1221]

On a side note Dankpods recently showed a clip of the inside trim quality on a BYD car in Australia and it was atrocious. Cheap horrible creaking plastics galore.

So, on par with Tesla, then.

 

[vought1221]

The fact that Tesla can't figure it out speaks volumes to their engineering.

BMW and other German makers had rain-sensing wipers that worked flawlessly over 25 years ago.

Part of Tesla’s problem is NIH.

 

[Peflitydap]

But Xi and the PRC and the DPRK are bad, that’s not sinophobia, it’s reality.

Phobias can have a rational basis. I myself have a moderate fear of multi-story heights. There's nothing irrational about that.

 

[Peflitydap]

I wonder if Mr. Musk's latest tantrum demanding more stocks in exchange for more effort as CEO is really him attempting to distance himself from the company as it becomes apparent that is is not as revolutionary as originally sold. "of course Tesla socks are falling, I am only putting in minimum effort in as CEO. I could turn it around if only properly motivated."

The thing is that as CEO he has a fiduciary duty to the other stockholders. I really wonder whether he's setting himself up, especially with the latest demand for an additional 12.5% of the company or he'll grow AI elsewhere, for a massive lawsuit that will seriously undercut his net worth or even possibly eliminate his Tesla shares entirely.

 

[kkeane]

While I doubt an IR rain sensor actually has a BOM cost of even $20 at scale, the real secret is that you don't need an automated rain sensor of any description in the first place. If you feel the rain drops are obscuring your vision, you can just...push a wiper stalk! (Though I guess if the purpose is to reduce costs not to improve the UX, it's understandable that Tesla deletes the physical interface, too...)

Do people legitimately prefer this kind of automation, or is it simply a gee-whiz fancy gizmo that impresses people the first time they see it and then slowly frustrates them as they discover its shortcomings ever after?

It's a minor convenience, but one that can justify a higher price for the trim level. Basically, cars without it are perceived as "they should cost a lot less". Since the big-ticket item in a battery car is the battery, such a car can't be offered that cheaply. So you need the features from the higher trim levels to justify the price tag in the buyer's eyes.

It's basically the same reason Tesla started with the high-end Model S.

 

[kkeane]

Not sure if that's really the case...at least here in Germany, most Tesla's that pass me by are driven by forty somethings like myself who couldn't be further from a liberal mindset.

Tesla's are the domain of the dreaded old white male crowd here in Germany, at least.

Well, it has to be mostly forty-somethings because the younger people don't have the money.

How does age correlate with political leanings, though?

 

[thekaj]

I mean, considering Tesla's page about Autopilot has that phrase about the driver only being there for legal reasons still there, despite the system not being nearly as "flawless" as the video tries to claim and it has come to light that the video was highly staged for the absolute best run that the car did after multiple failures...

I honestly don't think Tesla (or Musk) give a single fuck about "plausible deniability" because their sycophants will believe almost any bullshit that comes out of their mouths.

Oh I agree that Musk doesn't give a fuck about plausible deniability. He's narcissistic enough to believe that anything that comes out of his mouth is the truth, even when it directly contradicts something he said earlier. And while I'm sure "placate Elon" is the #1 priority for any employee, including those in the legal department, I have to assume that not losing a costly lawsuit is somewhere on their list of priorities, since that loops back around to "placate Elon."

So it's basically like most other jobs at companies he owns. Nod, smile, and tell Elon he's got the best ideas when he comes bumbling in to give his expert advice on something he knows nothing about. Then get to work on something that isn't wildly illegal/breaks the laws of physics/isn't mind numbingly stupid, that still looks (to Elon) like whatever he suggested.

 

[kkeane]

BMW and other German makers had rain-sensing wipers that worked flawlessly over 25 years ago.

Part of Tesla’s problem is NIH.

It is. In all fairness, without that NIH, Tesla wouldn't exist. Back then, all the experienced people in the industry were saying "battery cars are impossible".

 

[Uragan]

Phobias can have a rational basis. I myself have a moderate fear of multi-story heights. There's nothing irrational about that.

Sure... but when one doesn't explain their rationale behind saying "Don't buy Chinese", that comes across as xenophobic. If one blurts out unfounded conspiracy theories about the PRC government, as one's basis for saying "Don't buy Chinese", that too is xenophobic.

Having rational and cogent reasons for minimizing the amount of Chinese goods one purchases isn't xenophobic.

 

[Snark218]

Yeah, Trumpers fit that mold more than anyone.

It's the same mold. Specifically, a slime mold.

 

[Uragan]

It's the same mold. Specifically, a slime mold.

Hey now... don't insult slime molds like that. They have some semblance of intelligence.

 

[Turbofrog]

It is. In all fairness, without that NIH, Tesla wouldn't exist. Back then, all the experienced people in the industry were saying "battery cars are impossible".

Except...no?

The GM EV1 in the 1990s was technically fine, it was just economically infeasible because of the cost of batteries at the time, and the technical shortcomings of the lead-acid and NiMH chemistries available at the time.

The widespread adoption of lithium-ion batteries in consumer electronics completely changed the technical and economic realities of the situation, which was not missed by Martin Eberhard and Mark Tarpenning when they founded Tesla. The technical foundations of the vehicle that would become the Tesla Roadster already existed before Musk invested in the company the year after its incorporation.

And literally the Nissan Leaf began sales in 2010, two years before the Model S, the first mass-produced Tesla, ended up in any customer hands.

To say nothing at all of the numerous smaller volume "compliance EVs" available at the time, like the Mitsubishi i-MiEV, that had been on the market since 2009.

I know people crave simplicity, but it seems like there's always this need for historical revisionism around Tesla specifically.

 

[klarg]

This (Q4) is precisely what the Elon planned in his masterful game of one dimensional tic-tac-toe.

 

[Peflitydap]

I mean, Russia and NoKo aren't part of China, so I'm not sure why the OP grouped them with the PRC or Xi when discussing sinophobia.

I was giving an example of a possible rationale that someone could take as to why supporting China is bad. It's the same rationale used by people who hate Israeli policy to condemn the US. China is a very, or somewhat, supportive ally of NK and Russia, respectively.

 

[Peflitydap]

Also, I always find it ironic when people complaining about sinophobia don’t differentiate between a people/culture and a ruler/government.

I don't know how easy it is to distinguish them when at least a large fraction of the people of a country have to support its government for that government to continue existing, and when all of them are taxed (or have the output of their labor taxed) to support the actions of said government, regardless.

 

[klarg]

Historically, for most of any kind of industrial base, China has been the 300 lb gorilla in the room. The UK, then Europe then the USA displaced them over a 200 year period, but it looks as though they are back in the position they probably held for the best part of 5000 years. Whether that is good or bad is a different question, but it is hardly unexpected.

1980s - the Japanese, the Japanese!
1990s - the Japanese! The Asian tigers!
2000s - the Japanese, the Koreans!
2010s - the Koreans! The Chinese!
2020s - the Chinese, the Chinese!

 

[Random_stranger]

The minivan market seems like it could be a good fit for Tesla expanding the lineup. Not VW Buzz size but full Honda Odyssey/ Toyota sienna competitor.

Minivan market is generally price-conscious for at least some segment of the population. When FCA started clearing out Caravan/Town and Country vans for ~$20K after the new model hit, they sold like hotcakes.. Decently reliable, can transport up to 7, haul 4x8s and close the rear door, > 20 mpg fully loaded, etc, etc..

 

[Random_stranger]

Elon recently had a hissy fit where he issued an ultimatum he needs way more stock or he won’t work as hard.

I'm guessing that was to guard against banks calling in his loans where used existing stock as collateral. Stock price is down 12.6% as of right now ($182.xx), down $26+ just today. That's gotta take a chunk off his collateral margin. If he could double the stock, he'll have a larger burn margin by just pledging more stock..

 

[Random_stranger]

Isn't the model Y close to a compact crossover already? If they're going to introduce a new model, why not attack a big market segment they're not already adjacent to, like "normal looking trucks" or "large and affordable SUVs" or "delivery vehicles"?

I think the problem is they start at $40K, with the most common being closer to $50K. The market is dying for the Toyota Corolla / Camry equivalent that starts at $25K and can be fully loaded for like $30K.

 

[Uragan]

I was giving an example of a possible rationale that someone could take as to why supporting China is bad. It's the same rationale used by people who hate Israeli policy to condemn the US. China is a very, or somewhat, supportive ally of NK and Russia, respectively.

China puts up with the DPRK because it acts as a buffer between it and the RoK (and the US). And the DPRK knows this and exploits that to its advantage. However, China isn't a "very supportive ally" by any stretch.

Edit: My initial point was that the OP didn't give any rationale for why they think buying Chinese is bad.

 

[Random_stranger]

At the same time, it is hard to point to many companies poised for explosive volume growth in multiple enormous (or soon to be so) markets as is Tesla. To be sure $TSLA is priced for perfection, but the opportunities for them are absolutely grand. The potential value of the robot market is economy shattering.

Yeah, I can see it now: "Teslabot, powered by the same technology as X.ai and FSD!".

RUN AWAY!

 

[WildGunman]

Coincidentally, the Model Y was the only launch that was built on a platform that's common to another vehicle (the Model 3). Tesla has, of course, learnt its lesson and is building a common platform for all its vehicles instead of doing something stupid like building a completely new platform for an obvious dog like the Cybertruck that can't be reused for something else.

Is it obvious that the Cybertruck can't be the basis of anything else? The Cybertruck platform has two big systems that define it: the drive-by-wire drive train and the very weird frame design that essentially treats the structural frame as the exterior without additional molded body panels. Full drive-by-wire is clearly the future of automobiles, and while rolling it out first on the Cybertruck is a weird decision, I'd imagine that the integrated drive-train is modular enough to at least party re-use on other vehicles.

The frame design, admittedly the more important part of platform modularity, is another matter. A platform where the structural unibody is the exterior of the car without any bolt-on body panels was a very unorthodox decision with incredible development headaches, and it's easy to point out a whole host of potential problems. But I don't think we know yet whether it's an architectural dead end. Conventional wisdom says it's probably a dead end, and convention wisdom is usually conventional for a reason. If I had to bet on it, I would bet that it is a dead end, but I also wouldn't bet my house. I'm going to reserve betting my house until I see a couple of years of real world testing.