Tesla

[MX793]

Actual sales numbers are projections.

wat?

[giant_mtb]

Yeah, I'm stuck on that one...

[r0tor]

Was suppose to say actual numbers aren't projections... My bad.  I must have just channeled my inner Trump

No idea where sporty got his projection comment from

[Morris Minor]

"Tesla Inc. TSLA -2.08% has asked some suppliers to refund a portion of what the electric-car company has spent previously, an appeal that reflects the auto maker's urgency to sustain operations during a critical production period.

The Silicon Valley electric-car company said it is asking its suppliers for cash back to help it become profitable, according to a memo reviewed by The Wall Street Journal that was sent to a supplier last week. Tesla requested the supplier return what it calls a meaningful amount of money of its payments since 2016, according to the memo.

The auto maker's memo, sent by a global supply manager, described the request as essential to Tesla's continued operation and characterized it as an investment in the car company to continue the long-term growth between both players.

While Tesla said in the memo that all suppliers were being asked to help it become profitable, it is unclear how many were asked for a discount on contracted spending amounts retroactively. Some suppliers contacted about the request said they were unaware of such a demand.

Tesla declined to comment on the specific memo. But it confirmed it is seeking price reductions from suppliers for projects, some of which date back to 2016, and some of which haven't been completed. The company called such requests a standard part of procurement negotiations to improve its competitive advantage, especially as it ramps up Model 3 production."

More (paywalled): https://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-asks-suppliers-for-cash-back-to-help-turn-a-profit-1532301091

[12,000 RPM]

(Warning- Jalopnik content)

Wall Street Journal's Dan Neil Deletes Twitter (Account) After Tesla Model 3 Review Blowback (from TSLA shorters)

"Just how charged is the discourse around Tesla these days? Can a journalist criticize the company without being called a short or a pawn for Big Oil? Can they write something positive without being called a member of Elon Musk's cult? Evidently not on both counts, if you're the Wall Street Journal's Dan Neil, who apparently deleted his personal Twitter account after facing blowback from a review of a Tesla Model 3.

On Friday, The WSJ published Neil's review of the new Tesla Model 3 Dual Motor Performance model. The review was short—more a first drive test than a full review—but a largely glowing take on the hottest Model 3 to date. To Neil's credit, it also kept things balanced by pointing out some flaws in the Tesla facade. It is possible to have mixed feelings about Tesla, after all, and Neil is nothing if not professional."

https://jalopnik.com/wall-street-journals-dan-neil-deletes-twitter-after-tes-1827785899

Personally I think he went about it all wrong. Seems he was unequipped to deal with the internet. Same time though, while Tesla is a shit show, attacking anyone who gives it objective praise is even shittier.

[Soup DeVille]

The internet has made everything horrible, and twitter is the sump towards which that awfulness flows.

[MrH]

Lol, he got murdered on twitter.  There was a lot of valid criticism and he wasn't ready for that at all.

[r0tor]

Must suck these days to be a Tesla short... Lol

[Soup DeVille]

No, what really sucks is having an intelligent and nuanced opinion about anything; because then you don't get to join any clubs and everybody hates you.

[r0tor]

Virtually all of those Twitter basher are known Tesla shorts... As Tesla approaches their 5k production goal and profitability, they become louder and more desperate

[MrH]

They're begging suppliers to give them refunds on purchases from 2016.  Yes, profitability must be very near

[giant_mtb]

They're begging suppliers to give them refunds on purchases from 2016.  Yes, profitability must be very near

The auto maker's memo, sent by a global supply manager, described the request as essential to Tesla's continued operation and characterized it as an investment in the car company to continue the long-term growth between both players.

Great way to run a business.  Hey, just give us some money back.......consider it...an investment. 

[Morris Minor]

Lol, he got murdered on twitter.  There was a lot of valid criticism and he wasn't ready for that at all.

It's a very positive review. Musk loved it & linked it when it came out.
Neil was dry-reamed by the holding-short-positions crowd.

Neil's a good writer, funny guy. I really like his reviews.

[GoCougs]

They're begging suppliers to give them refunds on purchases from 2016.  Yes, profitability must be very near

special charges to pump up those quarterly numbers yo

[r0tor]

Or it's just basic negotiations with suppliers mischaracterized by short....

[Soup DeVille]

Or it's just basic negotiations with suppliers mischaracterized by short....

There's nothing normal there, unless suppliers are consistently failing to fulfill their orders.

[giant_mtb]

Or it's just basic negotiations with suppliers mischaracterized by short....

Asking for money back ~2 years later is not "basic negotiations."

[Soup DeVille]

Asking for money back ~2 years later is not "basic negotiations."

Not to mention the "investment" line; which is basically saying "if we paid you what we owe you, we'd be broke."

[GoCougs]

Virtually all of those Twitter basher are known Tesla shorts... As Tesla approaches their 5k production goal and profitability, they become louder and more desperate

So of course this is not correct. Most of who/what is shorting Tesla are institutional investors, and most of them know they have strict rules/laws about nefarious politicking.

No, it's mostly that Musk makes himself a target - he's not terribly bright, has low self-awareness and high sensitivity, and all sprinkled with these hilarious PR failings.

[r0tor]

So of course this is not correct. Most of who/what is shorting Tesla are institutional investors, and most of them know they have strict rules/laws about nefarious politicking.

No, it's mostly that Musk makes himself a target - he's not terribly bright, has low self-awareness and high sensitivity, and all sprinkled with these hilarious PR failings.

Right... It's not like if you go back to this thread and read the attack articles posted you'll find 90% are pure horseshit

Wall Street is known to be very ethical

[MrH]

Why are you so butthurt by shorts anyways?  If the company is firm in their financial position, why even worry about them?

[MrH]

Or it's just basic negotiations with suppliers mischaracterized by short....

Also, this isn't basic negotiations...

I ran the supply chain for one big Tesla supplier, and worked at another big Tesla supplier. I structured cost down models and deals, resolved AR issues with OEMs, I've done the whole gamut.  This isn't normal.

[GoCougs]

Actually, IME, it's not uncommon to reach back in time to get discounts from suppliers in the now, as supplier fault can't be established till down the road, for various reasons. For example, say Tesla buys a bunch of fuses from XYZ Fuse Corp in 2016 but the MY2017 Model S experience a higher rate of fuse failures than allowed by the contract but the warranty info isn't fully collected and consolidated till 2018.

[12,000 RPM]

Also, this isn't basic negotiations...

I ran the supply chain for one big Tesla supplier, and worked at another big Tesla supplier. I structured cost down models and deals, resolved AR issues with OEMs, I've done the whole gamut.  This isn't normal.

So of course this is not correct. Most of who/what is shorting Tesla are institutional investors, and most of them know they have strict rules/laws about nefarious politicking.

No, it's mostly that Musk makes himself a target - he's not terribly bright, has low self-awareness and high sensitivity, and all sprinkled with these hilarious PR failings.

Not to mention the "investment" line; which is basically saying "if we paid you what we owe you, we'd be broke."

Asking for money back ~2 years later is not "basic negotiations."

[Soup DeVille]

Actually, IME, it's not uncommon to reach back in time to get discounts from suppliers in the now, as supplier fault can't be established till down the road, for various reasons. For example, say Tesla buys a bunch of fuses from XYZ Fuse Corp in 2016 but the MY2017 Model S experience a higher rate of fuse failures than allowed by the contract but the warranty info isn't fully collected and consolidated till 2018.

Yes, but that's a "you failed to fulfill your end of the deal" payback. What's being asked for is a retroactive "discount" that should be considered an "investment in Tesla.".

Doesn't sound like the same thing at all.

[CaminoRacer]

Actually, IME, it's not uncommon to reach back in time to get discounts from suppliers in the now, as supplier fault can't be established till down the road, for various reasons. For example, say Tesla buys a bunch of fuses from XYZ Fuse Corp in 2016 but the MY2017 Model S experience a higher rate of fuse failures than allowed by the contract but the warranty info isn't fully collected and consolidated till 2018.

+1

But that doesn't sound like Tesla's current deal.

[r0tor]

+1

But that doesn't sound like Tesla's current deal.

and we know that how - by information that was "leaked" by a "manager"?

[MrH]

Actually, IME, it's not uncommon to reach back in time to get discounts from suppliers in the now, as supplier fault can't be established till down the road, for various reasons. For example, say Tesla buys a bunch of fuses from XYZ Fuse Corp in 2016 but the MY2017 Model S experience a higher rate of fuse failures than allowed by the contract but the warranty info isn't fully collected and consolidated till 2018.

That's an end of year true up, and not what's being described at all.

[MrH]

and we know that how - by information that was "leaked" by a "manager"?

Tesla just released a memo and said they want refunds on capex projects opened in 2016 and still aren't complete.  This is totally crazy talk from Tesla.  I know what kind of thing they're talking about, and no, it doesn't make any sense to me.

The only exception would be a supplier whose entire business is the Model 3, and the death of Tesla means the death of them.  However, most of the supply base for Tesla also supports many other OEMs.

[r0tor]

So are the 2016 projects past their deadlines?   Fail to meet specs?  Nobody on the internet knows...