> Tsla was always storing cars at 761 but not this many
Production is up, ergo returns are up.
The count of units returned is useless without normalizing it against the units produced. Of course, even with that it's likely a bad score for Tesla. There have been many public reports of poor quality product leaving the factory because of Tesla's challenges scaling up production. These returns are just the inevitable outcome from those earlier reports.
Production is down actually from Q4 2018.
http://ir.tesla.com/news-releases/news-release-details/tesla...
> Production in Q4 grew to 86,555 vehicles
http://ir.tesla.com/news-releases/news-release-details/tesla...
> In the first quarter, we produced approximately 77,100 total vehicles
We don't know what timeframe the tweet author is talking about. Did he mean there weren't many Tesla's there last quarter or a long time ago?
I mean, that's expected for a growth company. What's unexpected for a "growth" company is a sudden halt in growth.
Why would production drop by roughly 10% and deliveries drop by 30% in one quarter? I think most people were expecting a drop of some kind due to the loss of the $7500 tax credit, but 30% drop is far larger of a drop than almost anyone ever expected.
Note that Tesla also dropped the price of all M3 by $2000. So Tesla also has lower-margins in Q1 2019 than Q4 2018. Lower-margins AND lower-volume is a pretty bad sign.
It's not a bad sign, they have the best selling EV in the world and expect to be profitable from here on out.
If they they aren't profitable the next 3 quarters then I'd be worried.
Why did PRODUCTION drop? What happened to US demand? The M3 sold 61,000 Units Q4 2018 in the USA alone. Why would expanding to China + Europe lower both production and deliveries?
Why would Tesla only make 51,000 M3 cars when trying to satisfy China + US + Europe?
Note what Tesla said: > At the end of the first quarter, approximately 10,600 vehicles were in transit to customers globally.
Okay, so lets say all of those vehicles in transit were delivered in Q1. That means Tesla "would have" delivered 70,000 cars (total, S+X+3), which is still a 20% drop from the 90,000 (S+X+3) delivered in Q4.
Ok, sure. Now what happens to y-o-y growth when q-o-q growth is stagnant?
[1] https://www.autoblog.com/2019/04/02/auto-sales-decline-march...
https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2019/4/2/18292752/ford...
They’re clearly staying in the car market.
Instead, they realized that gas guzzling midrange sedans don’t sell anymore, and killed those off. That lets them focus on smaller and larger vehicles, which is where the demand is.
When Daewoo entered the UK market they made a big deal about not having franchise dealerships or commissioned salespeople. After a few years, the Daewoo owned showrooms were replaced with traditional dealerships.
Companies outside of traditional franchises haven’t cropped up selling brand new cars. New car sales happen through dealerships. Online sales, through specialists like jamjar.com, never took off.
None of this says franchised dealerships are perfect nor that they’re the same between the UK and US. However, in a place without restrictions on who sells new cars there has been no significant change in the model.
Also, FWIW, Daewoo is basically a non-entity in the US auto market. I'm not sure how they fared in the UK and EU, but if it's similar, that may be a confounding factor with that particular answer. And, generally, I think the dealership model arose originally because the auto industry is immensely capital intensive before you start talking about having inventory sitting on a lot in every minor city in the world. And the auto industry was more speculative, so the manufacturers were happy to let someone else front the capital for carrying finished inventory. But the auto industry is established and capital is plentiful these days.