For one, it was considered a concept car by regulators, so it didn't need to meet safety standards(I'm not even sure it has airbags, if it did, they were not certified). If they mass produced it, that would have changed status to a production model and the rules would have changed making it un available in the US and more countries.
They most likely won't need it, but they can issue more stock and bonds just like TESLA has been doing to keep afloat
Besides commercial fueling stations, the future may hold that home hydrogen fueling stations become commonplace. By the process of electrolysis, an electrical current can split tap water into hydrogen and oxygen, thus making it possible to fuel up your car at home before you hit the road
Why leave out warranty costs/inflation/tax incentives/etc. There are lots of variables, coach30 disclosed his assumptions so people could comment on them
Another assumption would be that it will take a $1B investment to produce the Model 3. Amortize this cost for 1M cars(5 years per the 200,000/year assumption), that is an additional $1,000/car to subtract off the profit(a , so $7,750/car, $50M/quarter less)
When they start taking reservations for the Model 3 next year, let's say $2500/car and they get 50,000 since it is suppose to be affordable to the masses, they will have raised $125M at no risk or interest to pay. If they happened to get into trouble, these deposits would not need to be repaid if they went bankrupt.
A person driving a Ferrari may want to "draft" close behind a car before passing, which the auto breaking feature would defeat. TESLA and Ferrari are built for different types of use.
That is why all the other manufacturers require a persons hands be on the wheel to keep autopilot activated.
Those same metrics apply to all 2015 cars in the evaluation. I don't have an account there, but if someone does, they can view the details.
Brakes(3%) and suspension(6%) were also on the list
And then this happens with it
• Tesla Director Kimbal Musk has sold 6,800 shares of the electric-car maker. Tesla's Q3 results on Tuesday missed views, but it forecast deliveries in Q4 that were better than some had expected.
Go to truedelta and look at how the 2015 model is doing. It has 78 reported repair trips per 100 cars on record. It rates as one of the worst cars for 2015 on that site. 59% were for body and trim issues, the rest were for more serious issues(drivetrain 13%, electrical and A/C 19%)
What you just described would be the death of TESLA, since the mass market is what is suppose turn them profitable.
""CHEAPER EVER-DECLINING BIGGEST MASS MKT."
Other auto makers also change the model year on the build sheet and car title when they make the change in the new release to distinguish the differencei, unlike TESLA, a 2015 car is a 2015 car even though most are not capable of accepting the auto pilot upgrade. At least they did add "D" to distinguish the AWD difference
It's not about just AWD the person says to lease them., that was just one item that there was no advanced notice what date it would become available, but it did come at a cost. This #$%$ off a lot of people who live in snowy climates
The change that came mid year(without any model or year designation changed to distinguish it being upgraded from the older version) is the sensors for auto pilot. One day the car did not have sensors, then the next they do have for the same price. The old/obsolete ones are not compatible witht the auto pilot upgrades.
It wouldn't bother you if you bought a car today, then your neighbor buys the same care, but upgraded version tomorrow for the same price( which should also hold its residual value better since your car would be obsolete in one day of ownership).
Audi(and the other manufacturers) gives customers more than one day to know about a new model they are releasing, which is why they tend to have large incentives to move the old models. . Tesla gave no warning to purchasers until it was too late, they avoided the cancellations and incentives taking this approach, but lost many customers trust.
Did I misinterpreted "zero risk proposition".
I agree it is zero risk(assuming they chose bankruptcy if they could not afford to refund them) for TESLA, not the depositor.
TELSA does not keep those deposits in a "trust Fund" to protect the buyer. They spend/invest it in the business with the hope they can deliver the car in the future and not have to make any refunds.
" the deposit is refundable so if you pay attention its a zero risk proposition."
I don't think that would hold up in bankruptcy court.