Bosch overview of global diesel markets; optimistic about US, China
Range Resources fleet now largely fueled by CNG

Tesla sold 5,150 Model S units in North America in Q2; non-GAAP profit $26M, GAAP loss $31M

Tesla Motors reported strong sales results for the second quarter, posting 5,150 units of the battery-electric Model S in North America, along with a significant improvement in automotive non-GAAP gross margin. Tesla had projected deliveries of 4,500 units.

Q2 revenues were $551 million on a non-GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) basis and $405 million on a GAAP basis. While deliveries increased by 5% from Q1, overall revenues were flat due to an expected drop in ZEV credit revenue, falling to $51 million in the second quarter from $68 million in the first. On a non-GAAP basis, net income was 26 million or $0.20 per share, excluding one-time and non-cash items, and the effect of lease accounting. Including those, GAAP net loss for the quarter was $31 million or $(0.26) per share.

Q2 results, GAAP and non-GAAP reporting. Tesla introduced its lease-sale hybrid financing product for the Model S through one of the company’s specified banking partners at the beginning of Q2. (Earlier post.) More than 30% of vehicles delivered in Q2 took advantage of the financing program.

Although the company receives full payment for these cars upfront, GAAP requires treating the sales as leases and spreading the recognition of revenue and cost over the term covered by the resale value guarantee—approximately three years. GAAP reporting thus obviously can have a significant impact on Tesla’s reporting, given the hybrid leasing/sale model. For example, on a GAAP basis, automotive revenue in Q2 dropped 26% to $401.535 million from $555.203 million in Q1, with a Q2 net loss of $31 million compared to a Q1 net profit of $11 million.

To facilitate closer comparability with the first quarter, Tesla said, it presented non-GAAP financials excluding the effect of lease accounting by adding back all deferred revenues and related costs for Q2 Model S deliveries.

In Q2, the vehicle average selling prices (ASPs) also declined slightly as Tesla sold 60 kWh range limited cars at a $10,000 lower price point to honor orders for the now discontinued 40 kWh battery pack. This temporary unfavorable product mix impacted its automotive non-GAAP gross margin in Q2 by about 1 percentage point, the company said.

Tesla continued to supply full electric powertrains to Toyota for the RAV4 EV and completed various deliverables under the Mercedes Benz B-Class EV program which contributed to development services revenue of $3.6 million in the second quarter, down 45% from $6.6 million in the first quarter.

R&D expenses were $44 million on a non-GAAP basis and $52 million on a GAAP basis. R&D spending declined from Q1 on a non-GAAP basis, as Model S related development expenses continued to decline.

Total cash on hand was $747 million at the end of the quarter, an increase of $516 million from last quarter. During the quarter, Tesla raised a little over $1 billion through the issuance of 4.5 million shares of common stock and $660 million of convertible debt. About $450 million of the offering proceeds were used to pay off its DOE loan, including an $11-million fee for early payment.

Operations and margin. During Q2, Tesla improved its production rate by 25% from 400 to almost 500 vehicles per week. During the quarter, it produced several hundred more Model S vehicles for use as service loaners, for customer test drives and for deliveries to European customers in Q3.

Total non-GAAP gross margin improved to 22%, up from 17% last quarter. Despite an expected unfavorable product mix in Q2, non-GAAP automotive gross margin excluding zero emission vehicle (ZEV) credits improved by 8 percentage points.

Tesla said that it expects to further improve non-GAAP automotive gross margin via cost reduction to a target level of 25% (excluding ZEV credits) in Q4 this year. The company is cautiously optimistic that it may outperform that number in future quarters.

Outlook. Tesla plans to deliver slightly over 5,000 Model S vehicles in Q3, and remain on plan to deliver 21,000 vehicles worldwide for 2013. It expects that Q3 ASPs will rebound from the Q2 level as it delivers European Signature Series cars and demand for 85 kWh cars remains strong.

If demonstrated demand in North America and Europe is matched by similar demand in Asia, annualized global sales for Model S could exceed 40,000 units per year by late 2014, the company suggested.

Tesla expects Q3 non-GAAP gross margin to remain in the low 20% range, with continuing improvements in Model S vehicle margin, offset by significantly lower ZEV credit revenue.

R&D expenses will increase significantly in Q3 as it accelerates product development efforts on Model X, Model S right hand drive, and localization of Model S for international markets. SG&A expenses will also rise, driven by the growth in retail locations, service centers and Supercharger facilities.

Tesla said it expects to be non-GAAP profitable and generate positive cash flow from operations every quarter this year excluding any benefit from ZEV credits.



How disturbing this must be to the experts in Detroit. Time and time and time again the experts said it just couldn't be done. Ther weirdest thing, which I didn't think was even necessary, is that Tesla is setting up it's own supercharger network, so not only a 200 mile range but chargers in many of the places you need them.

Account Deleted

Yeah, but all sane people would have said that Tesla was mission impossible. The fact that they are still alive and even thriving is the closest thing we will get to see a real business miracle. It is kind of insane to start a new car company from scratch in this industry where economics of scale is so important and technological advances so slow with very long product cycles and huge development costs. I am glad he did it though. It shows that this industry is still capable of delivering some genuine surprises and possible a paradigm shift about how to make automobiles.

However, Tesla is still fragile. It needs to grow much bigger so that it can compete on price when the big old car companies start selling similar products as Tesla makes.


Henrik, I have to agree that Tesla Motors is still fairly fragile unless Musk decides to use his own money to cover short-lays as they ramp up production.
But if they do get the Gen 3 out within 3-4 years at the price point Musk just spoke of, "$35,000 without a subsidy" all bets are off. Especially if the X is fairly successful and it actually comes out next year.
Interesting days.


His progress on the Gen3 model is gated by the improvement on battery technologies. I would peg its roll-out year to 2018, plus or minus 2 years.

Dave D may be right on his estimate after all.

Obviously the Model X is also very important to Tesla. It is unclear if Model X's Falcon Wing Door design will be a success, definitely a 10 on style point though.



"unless Musk decides to use his own money"

His own money is already tied up in Tesla (and SpaceX). For people like Musk, wealth more of a theoretical construct, it is not a fat bank account.


So what is Detroits excuse? They don't have the cash? They don't have the factories? They don't have the suppliers? They don't have the technical knowledge? Tesla does it and Detroit does not. No, they say it can't be done, that the world doesn't want it and technology doesn't exist and it's dangerous and the consumer is limited, and that it is squelching the free spirit of the american people who choose to buy what they are told to consume.

All the sane people believe what they are told to believe, that's what makes them sane. So, follow along Mr. stable, only a crazy person would choose self determination.


Why can't many of the 20+ world major vehicle manufacturers design and build a better and cheaper EV than Tesla?

Is it because they are not interested or because they don't believe in EVs strongly enough?

By 2018 or so, improved batteries will push Tesla 'S', 'X' and 'YZ' to 400+ miles e-range at lower cost? Installation of improved ultra quick chargers (10 minutes or so) will become common place.

Unfortunately, many States (under growing pressure from Big Oil, Ethanol and Corn Farmers election contributors) will impose e-charging taxes instead of raising liquid fuel taxes to compensate for reduced revenues.

Bob Wallace

"So what is Detroit's excuse?"

Perhaps more instructive to ask what might be the reason.

Most likely is because large organizations get caught up in what they are currently doing and don't put much energy into extreme innovation. They tend to evolve slowly, not make large jumps.

Making small progress in large organizations is rewarded. Taking a big chance and failing is likely to end your career.

That said, don't forget Carlos Ghosn at Nissan/Renault. There's a big manufacturer CEO who took the big leap.

Don't worry about road-use taxes for EVs, Harvey. The cost per mile spread will more than make them unimportant. There are only two things keeping EVs from totally dominating new car sales. Range and initial purchase price.

It's all about waiting for better battery technology to give us range and then manufacturing volume and competition will knock down purchase prices.


BW... I agree with you but the world needs more people like Nissan & Tesla CEOs to accelerate mass production of practical lower cost EVs.

Higher mass production of electrified vehicles will soon generate more attention/resources for the design and production of lower cost, higher performance EV batteries.

Many new technologies will move from labs to mass production facilities by 2020 or so.

The comments to this entry are closed.