Tesla Reports Q3 Sales: Model 3 Sales/Production Miss Mark

2 weeks ago by Jay Cole 256

Tesla Model 3

It’s Tesla Model 3 sales and production disclosure time!

Tesla has put out its end-of-quarter results for Q3’s sales and production – the only time (outside of an earnings call) when we get any hard data from the company on the metrics.

And while normally the focus is on the net amount of cumulative global total sales, this time…it’s all about the Model 3.  So, lets get to it!

  • Tesla Model S – 14,065 
  • Tesla Model X – 11,865
  • Tesla Model 3220
  • Total Q3 deliveries: 26,150

If one might recall, Tesla CEO Musk estimated that the company expected to produce 100 cars in August and “above” 1,500 in September.

Tesla CEO earlier on how he expected the Q3 ramp for the Model 3 to go

A number that was re-iterated during Tesla’s Q2 earnings report:

“Based on our preparedness at this time, we are confident we can produce just over 1,500 vehicles in Q3, and achieve a run rate of 5,000 vehicles per week by the end of 2017. We also continue to plan on increasing Model 3 production to 10,000 vehicles per week at some point in 2018. “

Tesla Model 3

Tesla came up short of its own forecasts when it came to the Model 3 in Q3

In the end, Tesla reported they built 260 Model 3s during Q3, about 1,400 light.

“Model 3 production was less than anticipated due to production bottlenecks. Although the vast majority of manufacturing subsystems at both our California car plant and our Nevada Gigafactory are able to operate at high rate, a handful have taken longer to activate than expected.”

The company did take a rare moment to explain that the production shortfall was not a serious issue going forward:

“It is important to emphasize that there are no fundamental issues with the Model 3 production or supply chain. We understand what needs to be fixed and we are confident of addressing the manufacturing bottleneck issues in the near-term.”

Overall Tesla deliveries were indeed at a higher rate of the first half (as guided earlier).

2017 quarterly numbers:

  • Q1 2017: 25,051
  • Q2 2017:  22,026
  • Q3 2017: 26,150
  • YTD total: 73,227

Q3’s result was slightly higher than a year ago (+4.5%).  The company also guided that they “now expect to exceed that (H1 results) by several thousand vehicles”, although estimates had already put the 2017 number at north of 100,000 units.

In total, we expect to deliver about 100,000 Model S and X vehicles in 2017, which would be a 31% increase over 2016.”

Interestingly, Tesla produced less cars than it sold in Q3, which underlines what we had been seeing in July and August, as a focus on selling built inventory seemed to be in play.  In Q3, 25,336 vehicles were built, some 800 less than were sold.

Tesla says they know the issues with current Model 3 production, but didn’t say that the issue had (as of yet) been resolved.

Tesla’s statement on the Q3 results:

ALO ALTO, Calif., Oct. 02, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — In Q3, Tesla delivered 26,150 vehicles, of which 14,065 were Model S, 11,865 were Model X, and 220 were Model 3. This was our all-time best quarter for Model S and X deliveries, representing a 4.5% increase over Q3 2016, our previous best quarter, and a 17.7% increase over Q2 2017.

We had previously indicated that second half Model S and X deliveries would likely exceed first half deliveries of 47,077, but we now expect to exceed that by several thousand vehicles. In total, we expect to deliver about 100,000 Model S and X vehicles in 2017, which would be a 31% increase over 2016.

In addition to Q3 deliveries, about 4,820 Model S and X vehicles were in transit to customers at the end of the quarter. These will be counted as deliveries in Q4 2017.

Q3 production totaled 25,336 vehicles, with 260 of them being Model 3. Model 3 production was less than anticipated due to production bottlenecks. Although the vast majority of manufacturing subsystems at both our California car plant and our Nevada Gigafactory are able to operate at high rate, a handful have taken longer to activate than expected.

It is important to emphasize that there are no fundamental issues with the Model 3 production or supply chain. We understand what needs to be fixed and we are confident of addressing the manufacturing bottleneck issues in the near-term.

Our delivery count should be viewed as slightly conservative, as we only count a car as delivered if it is transferred to the customer and all paperwork is correct. Final numbers could vary by up to 0.5%. Tesla vehicle deliveries represent only one measure of the company’s financial performance and should not be relied on as an indicator of quarterly financial results, which depend on a variety of factors, including the cost of sales, foreign exchange movements and mix of directly leased vehicles.

 

Tags: , , , ,

257 responses to "Tesla Reports Q3 Sales: Model 3 Sales/Production Miss Mark"

  1. bro1999 says:

    Tesla misses a sales projection. I’m shocked. Lol

    1. Murrysville EV says:

      Yeah, even the most pessimistic people thought they had produced only 500 Model 3s. Now we hear it’s half of *that*.

      1. WadeTyhon says:

        Yeah there are Vin numbers out there in the 300s and 400s I thought… Kinda strange.

        In the end it doesn’t matter. I won’t be getting mine anytime soon so a one month delay will not cause me any pain lol.

        1. unlucky says:

          It’s likely the same we’ve seen previously from Tesla (and they’re far from alone). They roll off the line built wrong and must be reworked.

          While you fix the ones you already had problems with you keep building more. So the VINs go up but they start to pile up on the lot waiting for rework.

          This may be how we saw that picture of lots of Model 3s sitting around the factory. They were there waiting for rework to be completed before they could be delivered.

          1. pjwood1 says:

            This time it will be more asymptotic. They can’t do a “plan B” order fill process, that rivals the production line I would guess they are planning on. For this, and reasons you explain, I think it’s either a game of “hundreds” or multiple thousands.

            They aren’t being too definitive, with “…bottleneck issues in the near-term.” We’re stuck going through Q4 in the dark, from here. They may not come forward again until 2018. Need lots of delivery anecdotes, from happy non-NDA buyers.

            1. Will says:

              I thought this was production car. Wall Street should start selling this stock

              1. Nix says:

                TSLA is currently down 5 and half to $336.

                So it is currently only UP $158 over last December when it was $178. Investors don’t seem too worried so far. We will see tomorrow and the rest of the month.

                Up $158 over less than a year? Horrible investment… /sarc

                1. Lawrence says:

                  People put too much emphasis stock performance. It may go down by half by the time the Model 3 actually sells in quantity and then swing back up. In the end it will be worth what it should be. Whatever it may be.

                  People act as if shorting the stock down to zero (if that were actually possible) somehow will put the company under. It still wouldn’t have any affect on the company’s ability to produce a product.

                  1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                    The stock price does affect how easy it is to borrow money, and the interest Tesla has to pay on that borrowed money. So long as Tesla has to keep borrowing more and more money to ramp up its production far faster than they’re generating income, the stock price is going to be important to Tesla’s business.

                    But I certainly do agree that “financial guys”, especially investors, seem to put far, far too much emphasis on Tesla’s stock price. Since TSLA is a speculative, high-profile stock, with an extreme “interest” from short-sellers, it varies up and down quite strongly, even wildly at times, and often or even usually the ups and downs have no relationship to the performance of the company.

                    Or to put it another way: For most companies, rises and falls of the stock price are a pretty good barometer of how well the company is doing. For Tesla, they’re not.

                    Presumably in a few years, Tesla will decide it has grown far enough for its initial growth phase, and take steps to start generating a net annual profit. It’s the Amazon.com path to success, and so far at least, Tesla is doing a remarkably good job of following that. Certainly Tesla has been far more successful at growing its business than nearly all the financial analysts predicted in Tesla’s early years!

                    Go Tesla!

                    1. Lawrence says:

                      Actually most prospectus on bonds state the DTI ratio. The more bonds there are out there, the higher the interest rate will be. True that the bond yield is based off of demand, because it drives up perception, but bond rates and stock prices are not connected in any way. In other words, stock prices in now way guarantee repayment of a bond.

                    2. Nix says:

                      Lawrance — It depends upon whether the bond is convertible. If it is convertible then the stock price is certainly a big factory. The vast majority of TSLA bonds have been convertible. Only one was not convertible.

                2. Nix says:

                  TSLA now up. no selloff on this news.

          2. Nix says:

            Reworks are normal. Every car maker has them. At least Tesla aren’t putting engines in backwards like was happening at GM:

            “Frank Langfitt: In his old GM job, Billy Haggerty put on hoods and fenders, and saw lots of mistakes go right down the line. So we had Monte Carlos with Regal front ends, and vice versa, and they would just stick it on, run it out to the yard, and then change.
            Frank Langfitt

            What did they look like, the cars?
            Billy Haggerty

            Half Regals and half– so those things would go out the door into the yard and be fixed out there. I did a lot of overtime in the yard changing things back.
            Frank Langfitt

            Workers told me they saw cars with engines put in backwards, cars without steering wheels or brakes. Some were so messed up they wouldn’t start, and had to be towed off the line. Fixing them piled on more costs, and sometimes, taking them apart and putting them back together, workers damaged them even more.”

            https://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/403/transcript

            1. WadeTyhon says:

              “So we had Monte Carlos with Regal front ends, and vice versa, and they would just stick it on”

              What’s the problem? I would totally drive that car! lol

            2. unlucky says:

              How do you know what Tesla is and isn’t doing wrong?

              I know you wanted to regale us all with stories of things you don’t like about GM. But you couldn’t tell them without also also relating information you couldn’t possibly know about Tesla?

            3. Stratos Tsompanellis says:

              You can’t be serious! That wasGM in the eighties, decimated by Roger Smith and a canal of useless accountants. Today’s GM is run by arguably the most capable engineer CEO producing some of the best cars in the world. You gotta update your perceptions

            4. Stratos Tsompanellis says:

              You can’t be serious! That wasGM in the eighties, decimated by Roger Smith and a cabal of useless accountants. Today’s GM is run by arguably the most capable engineer CEO producing some of the best cars in the world. You gotta update your perceptions

            5. philip d says:

              When alive my granddad would tell about when he worked at an autodealer years ago selling new cars. Many times the brand new cars delivered from the factory had doors that wouldn’t shut right.

              Their fix would be to take different sized wood shims and open the defective door, place the wood shim in the hinge side opening and then press the door close over and over until the hinges bent to the right degree so it would close properly.

            6. JeremyK says:

              This story is about GM cars being manufactured 50 years ago (1970’s I’m guessing). How the f# is that relevant to the conversation we’re having today?

              1. Nix says:

                It puts the current reworks into proper historical context. As in reworks now are nothing like they were in the past for all car makers. So whining endlessly about them like there is some horrible problem that will end the world if there are a few reworks a couple of hundred cars is not rational or reasonable.

      2. unlucky says:

        I’m pessimistic and even I had convinced myself it would be over 1,000.

        1. Vexar says:

          With you on that. I’d expected 1,000 for August and September produced. My guess is there’s a lot of mostly-finished Model III’s somewhere in Fremont waiting for a fix of some sort. Wonder what it was…

  2. Murrysville EV says:

    That’s a pretty serious bottleneck, to only be able to excrete 3 cars a day.

    They’re essentially hand-building the Model 3; no wonder they don’t want customers discussing its foibles. And, it sounds like they haven’t worked out the production issues yet – not a good omen of future reliability.

    In hindsight, I’m glad I’m far down the list even though I reserved on 3/31/16 before the reveal.

    1. menorman says:

      On the plus side, maybe the tax credit will last another quarter.

      1. DJ says:

        Always a silver lining 😀

        1. ModernMarvelFan says:

          I might be able to get a D version with tax credits then!

    2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      The are not in production yet, despite all the advertising buzz to congregation.

      200 cars per month may be pre-production, engineering validation, call it whatever but certainly not “production”.

      1. Nix says:

        Please provide a specific number of cars per month that a car maker supposedly must sell for a car to be officially considered in production.

        Because if you read this interesting site called inside EV’s, you would know from the monthly sales report that every month there are plenty of production cars that sell less than 200, or even 100 cars per month. Even well after release:

        http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

        And that’s just the ones reported here. There are even more cars with low sales numbers in the ICE world too:

        http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2017/09/august-2017-ytd-u-s-vehicle-sales-rankings-top-298-best-selling-vehicles-america-every-vehicle-ranked/

        So please just post that link where you show exactly how many cars the definition is for being in production. I’ll wait patiently.

        1. Get Real says:

          +1 Nix,
          I guess that according to zzzz “logic” that ALL fool cell cars are nothing more then pre-production.

          Tesla is obviously going to get everything right before they go full-bore production so as to fully capitalize on the extended tax-credit wind-down.

          All in all it shows Tesla is learning from its past and making necessary adjustments despite limited resources working in a very high-growth process.

        2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          Most of these low volume cars are produced on the same line as other models. Did you never heard about that? E.g. Bolt is produced on the same line as Sonic. It is robotics, not a stone age anymore when you needed to stop a line to switch to different model.

          Other cars are planned from the beginning to be produced in low volume manual production. E.g. Ferrari cars. Or Toyota Mirai is produced manually, tightening every nut by hand, in a factory originally designed for manual supercar producton. It is not how you produce a car that you are supposed to make on 500,000/year dedicated production line.

          E.g. GM prototyping stage:
          http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f12/gmi-goes-inside-gm-prototyping-stages-96009/
          Manufacturing starts after “Production Process Validation” and after “manufacturing validation build”. That is when you have running mass production line. Try to figure out all by yourself at what stage the Tesla is now and what time it will take to reach Production Stage compared to for example well publicized Chevy Bolt stage timing. Without any alfa-beta OTA alien dreadnought BS for star-eyed idiots.

          1. floydboy says:

            A production line “producing” cars is in fact PRODUCTION, even if it’s producing them slowly!

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            zzzzzzzzzzz continued his Tesla hater propaganda campaign:

            “GM prototyping stage: …Try to figure out all by yourself at what stage the Tesla is now…”

            They shouldn’t oughta let them count sales of them newfangled motorcars as real sales, since you can’t examine the teeth and inspect the hooves like you can on a real horse! /snark

            But seriously, ignoring how the established industry leaders are doing things, and trying different and innovative approaches, is what “Young Turk” companies always do during a disruptive tech revolution. Sometimes the new approaches work, and sometimes they don’t. But I for one am very glad that Tesla isn’t hamstringing itself by slavishly following GM’s hidebound rule book!

            Go Tesla!

        3. JeremyK says:

          Let’s use the Bolt as a benchmark. When Tesla sells over 600 cars/month to actual people (not employees or investors with NDAs), then we can consider the Model 3 to be “in production.

          1. Nix says:

            Why is the Bolt suddenly the benchmark for the number of cars it takes to be considered in production or not in production?

            By that logic, the majority of EV’s on the monthly scorecard are not in production:

            http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

            Seems like a completely arbitrary and false metric.

  3. Benz says:

    The machine that makes the machine.

    It takes time to get it right.

    Patience

    1. Me says:

      The machine that makes machine exists since 1800’s Industrial Revolution.

      1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

        Show us.
        Machines only make parts/subassemblies for machines.

        1. Will says:

          GM and VW dont have issues with thier machine

          1. QCO says:

            Yes they do… You just don’t notice it because there isn’t a spotlight on that part of their business.

            Not uncommon for new platform vehicles to have production flow optimisation issues.

            1. ModernMarvelFan says:

              There was plenty of spot light on both Volt and Bolt production launch.

              The difference is that they don’t make those “bold” claims on ramp up as Tesla often does.

              Tesla will ramp up eventually. But it is just the speed that it does is often exaggerated a bit.

              But think of it this way, Tesla will get “double” coverage for it. Once when it misses and once again when it exceeds it…

              So, two free media coverage per event!!!

              1. leafowner says:

                Volt / Bolt geared up to make hundreds of cars per week — not thousands…..big difference in the scope.

                1. ModernMarvelFan says:

                  “Volt / Bolt geared up to make hundreds of cars per week — not thousands…..big difference in the scope.”

                  That is a result of the demand. If there are that much demand, then it would be done.

                  1,000/week is only 52,000 per year.

              2. eltosho says:

                No, they just cheat outright on emission tests. And after that they claim that they will lead the EV revolution while selling only a single compliance EV…

                But if Tesla miss their targets by 1000 units they are suddenly the worst car maker on the planet….

                1. Lawrence says:

                  Chevy cheated on an emissions test? Do provide the link.

                  1. Nix says:

                    Lawrence, if you put “Chevy cheated on an emissions test” into google you get tons of results. How many links do you need? Here are two:

                    https://jalopnik.com/new-lawsuit-accuses-gm-of-cheating-diesel-emissions-tes-1795548486

                    http://fortune.com/2017/05/25/gm-diesel-emissions-cheating-lawsuit/

                    1. Kdawg says:

                      Those look like accusations, not guilty verdicts?

                    2. Nix says:

                      kdawg – just 2 examples of all the links. If you don’t like those examples, look into GM’s Opel division using cheat software similar to VW in the EU, and Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, and Buick Enclave having bad EPA mpg numbers.

                      *shrug*

                      The dirty secret of the ICE car industry is that cheating is common and done by lots of ICE car companies. It is like Lance Armstrong doping and everybody acting shocked, and then having it turn out that a whole lot of the top riders were doing it too. After a while, it was shocking to hear about a ride who wasn’t cheating. Same thing with ICE cars and EPA and EU regulations. I’m not sure why you act surprised to hear an ICE car company cheating emissions or MPG EPA regs.

                    3. Kdawg says:

                      Again, I see no guilty verdicts.

          2. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

            Well, show us GM and VW’s machines making machines.

            Like I said, machines make parts/subassemblies.
            Tesla doesn’t even have one those. That’s why they have human employees.

            1. Jake Brake says:

              GM sold almost 800k full size trucks last year. They have the machine.

          3. Jim J Fox says:

            Dieselgate? No?

  4. David Murray says:

    As long as they are able to ramp up next month, it isn’t a problem, really. In the grand scheme of things, 1 or 2 months isn’t much to worry about.

    1. theflew says:

      And people wonder why GM and other legacy car companies have pre production lines to test the line before it even reaches the “production” stage. They say it’s not a major problem, but it hasn’t been fixed in 2 months. Also you don’t go from building ~3 cars a day to hundreds in a short period of time. You have to validate with each ramp up that quality isn’t decreasing.

      1. ffbj says:

        I guess they weren’t checking for ignition switch failures, in their pre-production tests.

        1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

          Some of the Beta Bolts weren’t handling a cell failure correctly either.

        2. Big Solar says:

          Bwaahahaha

        3. unlucky says:

          That was a rolling change, smarty.

          1. ffbj says:

            Right. You got in it you rolled off and a few months, years, later, you life was changed forever, if you still were alive.

            1. ModernMarvelFan says:

              If you actually had follow the story, it was Delphi who produced the defective parts and then notified GM later and GM engineer ignored it because the cost to repair was expensive.

              It had NOTHING to do with initial production ramp up.

              But feel free to bash GM in your defense of Tesla as you have always done in the past. At least you are consistent.

              1. CCIE says:

                Well Delphi might as well have been a division of GM since they had been spun out not long before. And it was foolish of them to ignore the issue.

                But, anyone who doesn’t know how to handle their car dieing on the highway should not be allowed to drive. A car may die at anytime, for any number of reasons.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        theflew said:

        “And people wonder why GM and other legacy car companies have pre production lines to test the line before it even reaches the ‘production’ stage.”

        Only people who know little about the auto manufacturing industry would wonder about that. Nobody who knows what he’s talking about is claiming GM’s more cautious approach isn’t safer. What you don’t seem to understand is that Tesla’s willingness to trade off less safety for more speed is a business strategy. A corporate strategy better suited to a fast-growing company which wants to grab as much of a new market segment as it can, before competitors move in.

        It’s exactly what we should expect from a “Young Turk” company challenging the established market leaders in a disruptive tech revolution. This strategy may not be safe, but it’s often successful.

        “They say it’s not a major problem, but it hasn’t been fixed in 2 months.”

        You calling it a “major problem” doesn’t make it one. Those waiting in line for a TM3 are not going to be happy at the delay, but in terms of whether or not Tesla is going to succeed or fail long-term, a couple of months of delay in ramping up TM3 production isn’t all that important. It’s almost certainly not going to be the deciding factor in whether or not Tesla is still in business 5 or 10 years from now.

        “Also you don’t go from building ~3 cars a day to hundreds in a short period of time.”

        Well, since the word “short” here is obviously relative, and you can later claim it meant whatever you want in hindsight, that’s a pretty meaningless statement.

        “You have to validate with each ramp up that quality isn’t decreasing.”

        Clearly Tesla doesn’t agree that it’s necessary to have discrete stages of ramping up, with a pause to validate after each step. I’d say it’s reasonable to think that Tesla prefers both ramping up and validation to be ongoing processes, other than the occasional necessity of shutting down the production line to install new equipment and/or reconfigure the line.

  5. Benz says:

    Total Cumulative Global deliveries (Model S + Model X): 256,732

    But how many were Model S deliveries?
    And how many were Model X deliveries?

  6. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

    “Get Smart: Missed it by that much”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPwrodxghrw

    😛

  7. ffbj says:

    Good numbers, putting a lie to the oft repeated sales of S & X are falling.

    As regards the 3 it’s to be expected.
    I doubt if they even beat the Bolt this year by much, probably not even hitting 20k.

    1. unlucky says:

      At this point I’m more certain they won’t beat the Bolt this year.

      But they will handily outproduce it next year. No change there.

      1. ffbj says:

        Oh, most certainly they will next year.

    2. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

      meh, I’m buying in 2020 so this isn’t much news to anyone but TSLA haters…..lol

      They act like Tesla should be up to speed with all the lame legacy manufacturers who have been building sloppy goo gobbling OPEC swallowers for the past 100+ years.

      1. Spider-Dan says:

        No, I think they’re acting like Tesla should be up to speed with the ridiculous, obviously false production targets Elon was “expecting.” “100,000 to 200,000” Model 3s in 2017 was ALWAYS pure fantasy, but not according to the Elon worshippers!

        This is on top of the obvious truth that the July 28 “delivery day party” was a complete sham. The Model 3 is not a finished product, but Elon needed to pretend that it was finished on 7/28 so he could have a shiny bauble to distract investors with. Now we will see that Tesla has not reinvented the wheel, and that they need to go through the same quality control process that everyone else does… they are just “selling” their test mules to NDAed insiders. (For how much? No one can say!)

        The irony of all this is that this is a completely unforced error driven entirely by Elon’s ego. Everyone understands how important the Model 3 is to Tesla, and investors would happily wait for Tesla to go through a rigorous process to make sure it’s the best product it can be at (a REAL) release. But instead, we get the Elon Musk smoke-and-mirror show, where we are encouraged to keep our eye on the ball as the cups are shifted around.

        1. Mint says:

          It doesn’t look like an error to me. 500k pre-orders means a lot of 2017-2018 EV buyers are not buying Bolts, Leafs, i3s, etc.

          What would Tesla gain by introducing the 3 in December?

          1. Spider-Dan says:

            You are presuming that the refundable $1000 deposit commits one to a Model 3; it does not. And as far as what Tesla has to gain from releasing in December: they gain the ability to start selling a finished vehicle that is ready for the public, instead of these shadowy sales of beta test mules to company insiders.

            It’s the same reason any company would delay releasing a product until it’s finished. You don’t have to worry about explaining “unauthorized” videos showing that your car doesn’t have an FM radio or Bluetooth audio yet.

            1. Mint says:

              It doesn’t matter if the sale isn’t final. If you’re tying up $1000 in a reservation, you have your eye on a Model 3, and aren’t buying a different EV in the meantime.

              It’s all but guaranteed that the Bolt and i3 would have higher sales and/or margins if Tesla delayed the reveal and pre-order until December.

              I don’t think it matters to Tesla’s reputation if people are leaking unfinished details. They’re already known for having bugs and for fixing them with updates.

              This isn’t a regular product by any old company. The downsides of a paper launch and early bugs are heavily outweighed by the upside.

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          You know, Spider-Dan, there’s a pretty wide gulf between expressing a healthy skepticism about a company’s claims, and being a tinfoil-hat nutjob who is getting increasingly shrill at repeating his conspiracy theory.

          Tesla put the Model 3 into production circa July 1 because (a) that was their oft-stated goal, which they went to great effort and expense to achieve, and (b) to avoid any expensive delays with generating profit from their investment in the TM3.

          To assert that Tesla did this as some sort of attempt to manipulate stock price or to fool investors, shows that despite the wide gulf that exists between skepticism and a conspiracy theory, you’ve stepped across it with both feet!

          “they are just ‘selling’ their test mules to NDAed insiders. (For how much? No one can say!)”

          1. Right, because Elon was so unclear when he sent that e-mails to his employees which read “There can never — and I mean never — be a discount on a new car coming out of the factory in pristine condition… This is why I always pay full price when I buy a car and the same applies to my family friends, celebrities, no matter how famous or influential.”

          Yeah, that is totally ambiguous. Who knows what he meant? No one can say! /snark

          2. Test mules are not made on a production line. You need to read up on what such terms as “test mule” and “pre-production unit” and “production prototype” and “production validation” mean.

          “the obvious truth that the July 28 ‘delivery day party’ was a complete sham.”

          The only “obvious truth” here is that you’ve got your tinfoil hat screwed on so tight it’s blocking the flow of blood to your brain. 🙄

          1. Spider-Dan says:

            I can’t say I’m very interested in hearing about what qualifies as “healthy skepticism” from people who considered the healthy skepticism of Elon’s “100k-200k Model 3s in 2017” claim to be the rabid rantings of EV-hating TSLA shorters.

            See, if certain people hadn’t been throwing around the “TSLA shorter!” accusation anytime anyone expressed something else than full-throated devotion to the sermons of St. Elon, days like today would be filled with a less aggressive chorus of I Told You So.

            But now, after a year and a half of accusations of being a shill for Big Oil every time the slightest skepticism of Elon’s wild-eyed claims is offered, I think some plates of crow are earned. And yet even now, you are insisting that this is all a “conspiracy theory.” Because Elon would never lie to his people! Remember, he isn’t in this for the money, he only wants to Save The World.

            I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: Tesla is a promising company with a bright future, but Elon is a con man who scams the public with high-minded rhetoric but the same scummy corporate baron behavior underneath.

            1. Ricardo says:

              Well said

            2. TVOR says:

              You nailed it. Well said.

            3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              Spider-Dan said:

              “I can’t say I’m very interested in hearing about what qualifies as ‘healthy skepticism’ from people who considered the healthy skepticism of Elon’s ‘100k-200k Model 3s in 2017’ claim to be the rabid rantings of EV-hating TSLA shorters.”

              Since I am among those expressing a healthy skepticism of Elon’s claim for 100k-200k Model 3’s produced in 2017, I don’t know who you think you’re addressing here. Your remarks certainly don’t apply to me!

              “See, if certain people hadn’t been throwing around the ‘TSLA shorter!’ accusation anytime anyone expressed something else than full-throated devotion to the sermons of St. Elon, days like today would be filled with a less aggressive chorus of I Told You So.”

              I don’t recall ever accusing you of being a TSLA shorter. You certainly are an anti-Tesla FUDster; your posts in this very thread, alone, are sufficient to earn you that label. Not every Tesla hater or FUDster is motivated by the greedy attempt to manipulate stock prices. I think you have some other motive.

              However, Spider-Dan, if your posts start bearing a close resemblence to posts from those who are posting FUD to support their TSLA stock shorting position… then perhaps it’s you who bear the blame for reasonable people mistaking you for an actual serial Tesla short-selling troll. Perhaps it’s not the fault of those who can’t tell the difference, when you go so far out of your way to sound like you’re one of those trolls. We can’t read your mind, and “A difference which makes no difference is no difference.”

              “But now, after a year and a half of accusations of being a shill for Big Oil every time the slightest skepticism of Elon’s wild-eyed claims is offered, I think some plates of crow are earned.”

              Again, your accusations seem aimed at someone quite different than myself. Given that I frequently complain about Elon’s hype, it seems that you should be thanking me instead of castigating me!

              “And yet even now, you are insisting that this is all a ‘conspiracy theory.’ Because Elon would never lie to his people! Remember, he isn’t in this for the money, he only wants to Save The World.”

              You need to turn down the gain on your reality-distorting Tesla hater goggles. You need to turn it down a lot. I, personally, have never ever claimed that Elon’s only motive, or even his primary one, is “to save the world”, and I have more than once pointed out that Tesla’s primarily goal must be — has to be — making money, and not altruism, just like every other business.

              So again, Spider-Dan, it seems your aim is wildly off when you’re directing these accusations at me.

              But to return to the actual point: Yes, business leaders do lie to their own employees, as well as their own customers and to the public in general. Sadly, that’s a normal part of business, one that I’ve personally witnessed at all but the smallest companies.

              However: What you’re accusing Tesla (or at least Elon Musk) of doing is making materially significant false claims in a financial statement filed with the SEC. And yes, I most certainly do think that in doing so, you are lowering yourself into an outright tinfoil-hat conspiracy theory. That would be fraud. And as has been said in the past to other FUDsters accusing Tesla of fraud: If you honestly believe that is true, then you should not delay in filing a complaint with the SEC. Merely posting such accusations in a public forum is not what responsible people do when they have real evidence of fraud.

              But of course, you don’t have any real evidence. The FUD you’ve posted here is pure 100% B.S., and it looks to me like it’s at least partly motivated by jealousy of Elon Musk.

              “I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: Tesla is a promising company with a bright future, but Elon is a con man who scams the public with high-minded rhetoric but the same scummy corporate baron behavior underneath.”

              A lot of anti-Tesla FUDsters suddenly pretend innocence and write butter-couldn’t-melt-in-my-mouth protestations, when confronted with their lies. After crying “Wolf!” so many times, they aren’t very credible. And you are beginning to resemble one of them, Spider-Dan, with the huge pile of B.S. you’re shoveling out here. Your protestations of innocence here are equally unconvincing.

              Claiming that Tesla is merely pretending to sell its production cars to employees of SpaceX and Tesla, and not actually selling them for real money as Tesla’s financial statements say, is very far indeed from asserting or suggesting “Tesla is a promising company with a bright future.” Accusing them of fraud is not-so-subtly suggesting the company has no future at all, except in banktruptcy court.

              Spider-Dan, let me give you some “Dutch Uncle” advice: I suggest you take some time away from posting about Tesla and Elon Musk. At least a few days to cool off, and consider just how your unfounded accusations, which are nothing but pure B.S., come across to reasonable people. As I said, you appear to be at least partly motivated by jealousy of Elon Musk. You’re certainly not helping your reputation here with these baseless accusations.

              That is, you should take some time to cool off unless you really are a troll. So far, I’ve given you the benefit of the doubt, in thinking you actually believe what you post, despite it being so obviously biased and factually incorrect.

              But I could be wrong about you. Sven originally appeared to be a very reasonable person making interesting and informative posts to this forum, but he gradually turned into a full-fledged anti-Tesla FUDster and, apparently at least, an outright serial Tesla hating short-seller. I hope you’re not going down the same path, Spider-Dan, but at the moment it looks like you’re headed that way.

              1. Spider-Dan says:

                I never said you lobbed these accusations at me, although I will note that you and Nix are the two most frequent employers of the “shorter!” accusation. (Strangely, I do not see the same disqualifying logic applied to people who have long positions in Tesla stock.)

                As far as what Model 3s are being sold for: given that Tesla also issues paychecks to its current Model 3 customers, it is quite easy for Elon to be making a completely true statement to the SEC while masking reality. The simplest way would be for employees who purchase unfinished Model 3s to receive a “testing bonus” that effectively discounts the price of the car (but on paper, they have paid full price).

                Of course, because of the NDAs Tesla has required these customers to sign, I guess we’ll never know!

    3. MTN Ranger says:

      I stand my my prediction of more Bolt EVs sold than Model 3s for 2017. It’s probably not going to be even close.

      My reservation is scheduled for Nov – Jan. I feel that will be extremely unlikely.

  8. Michael Will says:

    Missed sales? I don’t think so, they are sold out for a while with 500,000+ people waiting in line. But they did miss production / delivery expectations. Will soon be massiv though, once they ramp up the production line all the way all this will be history. The few people that already got one are super excited about it. Can’t wait to get ours 🙂

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      For Tesla, deliveries are sales. Reservations… are not.

      We Tesla fans should be honest and own up to the fact that Tesla has rather badly missed its goal for ramping up TM3 production for this initial quarter. We should leave the lies and half-truths to the trolls and short-selling FUDsters. We’re better than that, or at least we should be… much better!

      1. ModernMarvelFan says:

        Just curious, do you even own any EV right or even a PHEV? Or even a regular hybrid?

        Do you have Model 3 reservation or you are just some fanboi who loves to post here?

        1. QCO says:

          Apparently he got his first smart phone a month or so ago, and marvelled at its novel technology (ref his earlier post in another thread).

          It’s fair to assume he’s now also allowed to drive the family car.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            Pushi has stated several times he is not allowed drive an automobile.

            What gets me is he will not even buy a cheap used EV or PHEV for a relative who IS allowed to drive a motorcar.

            But he has no problem hurling dozens of unjustified insults to those of us who truly support EV’s and PHEV’s by our purchase with our own money.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              I certainly see why Nix refuses to divulge even the most trivial personal details in this forum. This isn’t the first time that my willingness to talk about my personal life has been turned against me by those who use such comments in a mean-spirited way to make gratuitous personal attacks.

              Bill, you certainly don’t feel any restraint at expressing your disdain for those who are not one of the rich one-percenters able to afford to buy a new Tesla Roadster or a Cadillac ELR. Your arrogance and condescension are nearly breath-taking.

              Thank goodness InsideEVs isn’t run by people as arrogant and snobbish as you are.

              “Criticism is something we can avoid easily by saying nothing, doing nothing, and being nothing.” — Aristotle.

              1. QCO says:

                Interesting…

                So to recap, it seems you have no money, you can’t drive, the vast amount of time put into researching and commenting suggests you don’t have a day job, your style clearly suggests OCD, and the ubiquitous insults suggest you have some kind of chip on your shoulder.

                Quite a pattern emerging… But if you come clean on the backstory I think most people here would be sympathetic. Have to keep a positive outlook on life.

                1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                  ROTFL!

                  And yet, I somehow have managed to educate myself far better on the subjects under discussion here than you.

                  How very, very embarrassing it must be for you to be repeatedly shown to be so clueless by someone for whom you have such a very low opinion!

                  🙂 🙂 🙂

              2. Bill Howland says:

                You are the one who always deflects the issue with insults – I’ve never criticized anyone for the amount of money they have earned, or told anyone in general how to spend their own money PROVIDED they have not criticized spending decisions of others.

                Just an ungrateful, mean-spirited twit of a 63 year old kindergartner who cannot discuss issues without picking on anyone who doesn’t have an independent thought not of the polemic.

                Might be good to get out of mommy’s basement and go out and talk to some real people.

                Mr. Musk is not like you at ALL. He THANKED me for my Roadster purchase, even though with zero options he didn’t make as much profit on my purchase as he did with the typical buyer.

            2. QCO says:

              I did not know that.

              Sure has a big mouth for someone completely detached from the website topic at hand.

              1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                Gosh, I’ll try to bear up under the terrible burden* of disapprobation by someone as ignorant regarding the subjects of discussion here as you are.

                You’re a fine example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action. 😉

                *That was sarcasm, QCO. Pretty obvious sarcasm, so most people wouldn’t need a sarcasm tag there. However, apparently you do.

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            QCO said:

            “Apparently he got his first smart phone a month or so ago, and marvelled at its novel technology (ref his earlier post in another thread).”

            Re my “marveling” at the tech of a smart phone: I give my readers credit for being able to tell when I’m being facetious or ironic, when I choose to use irony that is so very obvious that I think it doesn’t need a sarcasm tag or a winky emoticon.

            Clearly in your case, that is overestimating your perception, your intelligence, or both.

      2. Bill Howland says:

        “Lies and half/truths”.

        I remember your typical insults of another commenter who DARED to speculate that Tesla might manufacture 2,000 “3”‘s for 2017, and not the ‘20,000’ ordained. (even that is a much more humble forcast than 100 or 200,000). Now you are telling the rest of your childish compatriates that you shouldn’t act like the kindergartners you’ve been.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Yeah, you certainly did post a couple of half-truths there, Bill.

          1. My ridicule for the “only 2000 Model 3’s produced by the end of the year” was reserved for a so-called “analyst” who made that absurd prediction. Nobody deserves to be paid for making predictions that ill-informed and absurd. And that prediction is still absurd.

          2. Nobody at Tesla has “ordained” a goal of 20,000 Model 3’s for production by end of year. I recall Nix guesstimating that, and perhaps Jay Cole has, too. I think I’ve given that figure myself once or twice, as a ballpark figure. But to suggest I’ve used that figure as if it’s “ordained” shows that either your memory or your perception of my comments is very bad indeed.

          I’m sorry that you’re incapable of telling the pretty wide difference between myself and a Tesla cheerleader, Bill; one who would be outraged at any suggestion that Tesla would produce less than 100,000-200,000 Model 3’s this year. I have never, ever made any comment stating or suggesting I think they’ll reach that number by end of 2017.

          But then, neither judgement nor perception are your strong suit, are they?

          Now, go back to your conspiracy theory hobby, Bill. It’s the one thing that you’re good at. 😉

          1. QCO says:

            Just let it go Pushi… Winning a trivial argument point will not make the world a better place.

            Check your recent posts, how much bad karma do you want to push out in one night?

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              Do you own a mirror? Apparently not.

              1. TVOR says:

                If you looked in a mirror, you’d see Tesla’s head cheerleader waving huuuuuge pom poms.

                1. Mystery says:

                  Too good..ha ha ha. That was Comedy Central at its finest. Model s DOWN Q3 in USA but only ~6% YoY, but Model X actually up. So Peak Model S & X Continues (as would be expected for an almost 5 yr old car (S)), but not declining. Although Non-USA, DOWN from 12K to 10K, so the Mystery continues since TSLA refuses intl per country disclosure like every other automaker

  9. Warren says:

    July 30, August 75, September 115, October 1,500, November 10,000, December 20,000….easy peasy.

    1. Warren says:

      After all, it’s not rocket science. Could mass producing cars be harder than rocket science? 🙂

      1. floydboy says:

        It could be if something in the he production mix isn’t working properly. Remember, Musk has said repeatedly “only as fast as the least lucky”. So things are only going to move as fast as the bottleneck.

        Since production VINs are currently over 500(according to TMC) but only 200 delivers, then the drag may be some quality control issue.

        1. Mister G says:

          I think the bottleneck is really sabotage by fossil fuel industry.

      2. Warren says:

        I wasn’t being facetious. Modern automobiles are the most sophisticated machines we produce, in huge numbers. And they continue to become more complex. With EVs we confuse the reduced, simple mechanical parts count with simplicity. The electronic hardware and software is far more complex, and potentially just as deadly, as lumps of metal.

        I would be very surprised if Tesla didn’t start delivering Model 3s to regular people over the next few months. The fact that EVs are their only product, and therefore they must eventually make a profit on them, is the real problem here. Selling loaded status symbols to the one percent is completely different than selling a consumer product.

        I wish them well, as nothing else has moved the needle on eliminating ICE cars, in my lifetime. I suspect that the transition from ICE to EV to no private cars will happen much faster than most can imagine.

    2. Delta says:

      Exponential growth is July 30. Aug 60 Sep 120 Oct 240 Nov 480 Dec 960.
      What people are expecting is four times faster than exponential!

  10. Murrysville EV says:

    With the line running this slow, my guess is that they’ve run into a few serious problems with the design *and* the tooling which will require a hasty change to both – and those details aren’t worked out yet.

    They could be very small details, but are apparently the type that prohibit completion of the car until they are resolved.

    The line won’t be capable of ramping up the “S” curve until this stuff is worked out. My prediction is a 2-month slide in the ramp-up schedule.

    1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

      Somebody needs to sprinkle some EX-LAX on the line to get things moving…..lol

      1. DJ says:

        Perhaps Elon just needs to bring a cot out and sleep there. That’ll get things moving along!

        Seriously though, I hope he doesn’t do that.

        1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

          IMHO, he just might be the blockage.
          🙂

          If you’ve ever worked in manufacturing releasing a new product from the engineer(s), you’d never get the product out the door if it were up to the engineers.
          It’s their perceived perfection, perfection, perfection, before it’s RTM.

          No such thing as “Perfect”.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            It wasn’t the engineering team at Tesla who insisted the door sills of the Roadster be lowered two inches, months after the basic body design had supposedly been finalized; it was Elon.

            It wasn’t the engineering team who insisted on personally inspecting the fit and finish of the interior of every early production Model S; it was Elon.

            Yeah, there is a problem with perfectionism at Tesla. That problem is at the top.

            But that’s not to say that the delay in TM3 production is due to perfectionism. I’ve read that there was a problem with the welds on the TM3 battery pack, and that some units had to be recalled and reworked. That sounds like a real problem, not an issue caused by someone’s OCD.

            1. QCO says:

              It’s unfortunate that Elon does that, because “inspecting in” quality is actually against every Demming quality principal.

              Regardless, I don’t think there is any evidence to suggest there is anything more than production optimisation work going on here. Especially since Tesla don’t run pilot lines.

            2. QCO says:

              And as for the weld issue, as usual a fact could die of loneliness when looking from outside in.

              Perhaps a weld needed to be changed as a result of crash test data…
              Perhaps the jigs needed adjustment because the weld wasn’t meeting the spec…
              Perhaps it was a station flow optimisation issue…
              We don’t really know, and speculation is just that without a statement from an insider.

              But what we do know, especially at this late stage, is that it will get fixed, one way or another, after a few late nights for some unlucky engineers.

  11. DJ says:

    So IOW fewer Model 3’s were delivered than the # of Bolts that were sold the first month it was available. Wasn’t it also only available for like a week in 2016?

    I know I’m not alone but I really think October should be more likely the month that Tesla actually gets credit for selling the Model 3. The whole we’ve hand built a few for our investors and employees and forced them to sign a NDA IMO shouldn’t really count as a sale. It was clearly done to meet some date that they didn’t want to miss and isn’t really representative of a company truly offering their product up for sale. Personally I would have said to just miss the date and begin delivering them when they’re actually all ready.

    Next stop 20k a month in only 2 months time! Wish you the best of luck!

    1. bro1999 says:

      Bolt sold 579 units the last week of December last year in just Cali. More than the first 3 months of Model 3 sales combined. 😀

      1. Nix says:

        GM started the production of those Bolts in October. Tesla began in July. So it is 579 vs. 220 in roughly the same time period.

        Funny how you conveniently leave out big parts of Bolt production in Dec, Nov, and Oct and attempt to pretend that everything happened in the last week of December….

        1. bro1999 says:

          Ok, let’s compare production month #3 deliveries:
          Bolt – 579
          Model 3 – 120ish?
          Bolt looks even better. 😀

          1. Nix says:

            Tesla is behind. And if you think a few hundred is meaningful for two different cars that will both sell 10’s of thousands to hundreds of thousands in the next year, you have a problem.

            Month — GM sales — Tesla Model 3 sales
            Month 1 – zero sales – 30 sales
            Month 2 – zero sales – roughly 75 sales
            Month 3 – 579 sales — roughly 100+ sales, total of 220 of 260 built

            If you think this is some significant difference that actually matters at all over the long term, that tells more about you than it does about Tesla.

            1. bro1999 says:

              Same old story with Tesla/Elon: overpromise, underdeliver

              1. Anti-Lord Kelvin says:

                Yeah, we know that… Audi R-8 E-tron in mass – production in 2012 they said in 2008 (Audi was upset with first Tesla Roadster deliveries)..Where are they…? Q6 E-tron to be delivered in 2014 they said in 2010, where are they? Where is the promised BMW I5, should be there now. Elon, Elon, we are such a bad example for these century long legend, as for VW when they promised that Bluetec diesel engine were the greenest engine in the world, so in fact, they under-promised and over-delivered…in toxic emissions!

                1. Lawrence says:

                  So you’re saying …. that both Elon and VW are guilty of over-committing and under-delivering and is just doing what everyone else is?

                  1. Anti-Lord Kelvin says:

                    I’m just saying that Elon Musk have a good reason (good reasons in fact) to do so, internally (goals for Tesla team, Tesla suppliers) and externally (potential clients and the dictate of stock market) as they will be always in the razor blade until they reach some parity numbers in production capacity with others incumbents like porches, but more realistically, with BMW.
                    For the others, they are doing the same, but for the wrong reasons, like trying to prevent their usual clients to flew to Tesla or others, or only for greedy reasons that are sheating emissions for be able to put other systems in the cars that have more cash return (Audi reducing Adblue deposit to put a equipment for an high end sound system as a expansive option), etc…with all the production and engineering capacity they have, the experience, and deep pockets, they don’t have to act like a start up that is fighting to survive in the middle of a lake full of sharks (financial, industrial and political ones).

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “The whole we’ve hand built a few for our investors and employees and forced them to sign a NDA IMO shouldn’t really count as a sale.”

      It’s amazing the way that EV haters come up with excuses why sales of EVs are “not real sales”. We used to see the same thing from a couple of “diesel sniffers” on TheEEStory forum.

      A sale is a sale is a sale. And the dollars paid to Tesla for Tesla’s cars, by Tesla’s (and SpaceX’s) own employees, are just as good as dollars paid by others.

      You and the other Tesla haters finally have something real to crow about, DJ, what with Tesla seriously missing its goal for ramping up TM3 production this quarter. Why don’t you stick to the actual truth for once? Why is it that you FUDsters always, and I do mean always, resort to half-truths and lies, even when you don’t need to?

      Have you actually forgotten that most people really do care about the difference between what is truth and what’s not?

      Sad. Really sad.

      1. JustABit says:

        “It’s amazing the way that EV haters come up with excuses why sales of EVs are “not real sales”.”

        Has nothing to do with “EV hating”.

        Every car manufacturer builds a pre-series, uses it for testing and dumps the cars afterwards.
        Only Tesla insists on “seling” its pre-series to employees. They gain credit for delivering in 2017, but there are also good reasons other companies don’t sell their pre-series cars…

        1. Nix says:

          Tesla did have a fleet of pre-sales cars. Up to as many as 300. Many of them were reported right here on insideev’s. Those were a completely different set of cars.

          1. unlucky says:

            Yes, they may have reached the hundreds weeks before the delivery announcement.

            But other companies spend still more effort and time on this. GM had ordinary people driving Bolts at the LA auto show 11 months before the car shipped. Admittedly only about 9 months before they planned on shipping it though.

            That’s different from with Tesla where it was “we think we spotted one on the road driven by an employee” a month or two before the the delivery announcement.

            1. Nix says:

              I sometimes think you intentionally say this stuff to make anti-Tesla trolls look bad.

              Tesla had regular folks riding in demo cars on 3/31/2016. That’s about the same roughly 1 year as the Bolt.

              We all watched it live, right here on insideev’s. You commented as it happened. Do you need me to link to the youtube videos or to the insideev’s archives?

              1. unlucky says:

                Giving VIPs rides in hand built prototypes is not the same as letting the public at an auto show drive your cars.

                Here’s an example of ride along given. The car doesn’t even have the final doorhandles. They’re not even the same shape!

                1. Nix says:

                  So you are going from saying that Tesla didn’t give rides, and were only spotted on the street, to of course they gave rides, but they don’t count because those rides were to the wrong people????

                  *facepalm*

        2. Anti-Lord Kelvin says:

          Tesla NEED to sale cars and NEED to show that because this is a life or death event every time. For the others incumbents, it’s only one more car that they can delay almost as much as they need, nobody cares, as their financial viability is not affected by that, as they continue to sells to us a multitude of other ICE car models, with big margins, that are killings us slowly and smoothly.

    3. Nix says:

      DJ — GM started Bolt production in October, Tesla began in July.

      GM delivered zero Bolts in October vs 30 for Tesla in July.

      GM delivered zero Bolts in November vs ~75 for Tesla in August.

      GM delivered 579 Bolts in December vs Tesla totaling 220 by the end of Sept out of 260 built.

      GM took a couple of months to work out production problems too. They just hid it.

      1. unlucky says:

        Two things. First, you’re conflating building with building and shipping. GM shipped their cars cross country on a journey that took about 40 days. So my Bolt which was build before Thanksgiving wasn’t ready for sale in California until the first week in January.

        If GM had taken the same shortcut as Tesla and sold their cars down the street from where they built them they would have delivered a few cars in November and a significant amount in December.

        Now, beyond that, yes, GM hid their production ramp-up. And that’s the point. Other companies hide their production ramp up so they aren’t embarrassed by it later. Because you will have problems, you can’t expect to ramp up bang on day one.

        One of the points here is when Tesla says they’re shipping the car they mean they’re still working out ramp up. When other companies say they’re shipping the car it means they started to ramp up quite some time back and know how to produce it. Tesla skips over the “production intent vehicle” stage.

        GM held that event to announce the delivery of 3 Bolts after they had been producing the car at reasonable rates for a month already. My car was a month built already before they shipped those.

        Because if this one cannot consider Tesla’s availability date as the same thing as what other companies mean. At this stage in development and production Tesla is always further behind what they say they are. And we can no longer be fooled by this, we have to realize this is the case and expect it. And the Model 3 is reminding us of this.

        1. Nix says:

          It doesn’t take 40 days for GM to ship cars from the middle of the country to either coast.

          If your car was built in Nov and delivered in January, it was held for rework.

          Bolts built in Oct and then not delivered until late Dec shows that GM had a lot of holds for reworks.

          I’m sorry you think it takes over a month to ship a car by rail. GM advises 3-10 days for deliveries after the car goes from status “(4000) Vehicle available to ship” to status “(4B00) Your car is bayed and is waiting for transportation by Truck, Rail or transfer to vendor”

          All the major car makers use the same shipping companies, and they can’t let their inventory sit for over a month in rail cars. It just doesn’t work that way.

          If there is a longer delay than that after production, then it is typically due to “inspections still needing to be done, open recalls, or the need for new parts, just to name a few issues.”

          https://consumerist.com/2016/02/18/why-has-my-new-chevy-truck-been-sitting-in-a-toledo-rail-station-for-two-months/

          Pretty much the same thing that Tesla has been doing.

          1. unlucky says:

            Nix, you’re wrong. There was a person (bro1999 I think) who had the ability to track the trains. His car was built around the same date as mine (before Thanksgiving). It made it no further than Chicago for over 3 weeks. The cars were in the in-transit state, not “ready to ship”.

            https://bro05.blogspot.com/2016/12/so-close-yet-so-far-away.html

            It’s completely normal for shipments to go slow It isn’t a problem with the trains, they can cross the country in 2-3 days. It’s how the railroads manage the movements so as to minimize costs.

            1. Nix says:

              You obviously didn’t actually read the link you posted.

              Based upon your statement that this car was built mid-November, it didn’t leave the factory until mid-December. Then it took 10 business days to get from the factory to the dealership. Pretty much exactly the 3-10 business days I said.

              Based on your statement about build date, it shows that the car sat for close to a month before leaving the factory.

              That means it was held for reworks, or inspections, or similar. Based on this info, if they were still holding cars until early Dec, then they had about 2 months worth of holds, with the holds starting in Oct.

              1. unlucky says:

                I didn’t say mid-November, I said before Thanksgiving.

                You now change your 10 days to 10 business days.

                And you think somehow it is nearly a month from before Thanksgiving (20th, let’s say) to the 3rd of December. That’s 14 days. 14 days is nearly a month?

                I hope you’re fooling yourself because you aren’t fooling anyone else by backtracking.

                According to articles on insideevs GM started making Bolts on October 24th.

                https://twitter.com/WRVoltec/status/790610730139652096

                Two months of hold would be until December 24th. But GM shipped cars out at the start of December (if not earlier). Would you like to revise your story again to actually match the truth?

                1. bro1999 says:

                  He will revise….and revise…and revise some more. It’s his M.O.

                  1. Nix says:

                    Apparently you don’t know that businesses do business based on business days, and that businesses measure weeks of work based upon work weeks.

                    If you two guys want to paint me as being wrong I say “about 2 months” for 7 full work weeks — but see no problem when unlucky says 40 days is somehow normal when it is actually 14 days (10 business days) based upon his own source, you’re the one with the problem.

                2. Nix says:

                  So your 40 days being normal has shrunk to 14 calendar days even by your source, and you still can’t admit it?

                  It didn’t ship on the 3rd, it shipped on the 9th and arrived on the 23rd. 14 calendar days, 10 business days. Read your own source.

                  The week before Thanksgiving was the 14th-18th. That’s mid-November, and an absolutely reasonable guess as to what you meant by “before Thanksgiving”. If you wanted to say the 20th, you should have said the 20th. Even the 20th is still Mid-November anyways.

                  Early Nov == 1-10 (first 10 days)
                  Mid Nov == 11-20 (second 10 days)
                  Late Nov == 21-30 (last 10 days)

                  Dealing with businesses, business days are to be presumed. If you don’t, you are probably one of those people who get things wrong when dealing with businesses, then blame the business instead of yourself.

                  The two months of hold I calculated was based upon the 7 full work weeks from Oct 24th to Dec 9th when YOUR OWN SOURCE showed the car was held until leaving the factory. 7 full work weeks is indeed roughly 2 months. Again, businesses run on work weeks, not calendar weeks. GM is a business.

                  I have nothing to revise. But you have ALREADY (either wittingly or unwittingly) revised your supposed 40 days of delivery being normal down to 14 calendar days (10 business days).

                  All that is left is for you to read your own source, and admit that your 40 day number was way off, as proven by your own source you posted.

                  1. unlucky says:

                    20 calendar days according to my source. It was released to be shipped on the 3rd. It was there on the 23rd. And ready for this? This will throw your for a loop. Yes, I realize when I posted that I was wrong. See how I can say that? Can you say that? I went all the way until delivery and I guess I shouldn’t have. I didn’t expect the cars spent as much time near the destination before finally going to the dealer. I’m not quite sure how it matters since it is still part of the delivery process. But indeed I was wrong about how much of it was the train and how much was the other parts of delivery.

                    You just decide out of the blue you meant business days. No, no one here was talking about business days. Who are, you, Ricky Roma? When I said 40 days from Thanksgiving to the start of the next year I didn’t mean 40 business days. That would be 8 weeks. You know that. I know that. And no, you don’t not move freight because it is a weekend. Shipping isn’t a desk job. You might have noticed some of bro1999’s dates of his car arriving at places are on weekends.

                    Again, I hope you’re fooling yourself because you aren’t fooling anyone.

                    I don’t know why you are saying “week before Thanksgiving” as if it meant anything. I never said the week before Thanksgiving. I just said “before Thanksgiving”. Just read it, it’s right up there in black and white. My car was made the week of Thanksgiving, before Thanksgiving. Those days are the 21st, 22nd, and 23rd. This is not mid-November. And it wouldn’t matter if it were mid-November, it’s not the 15th like you’re counting from!

                    I’m not quite sure why you are counting hold from the day the plant started. bro1999 didn’t say his car was made on the first day. I didn’t either.

                    Either way, if GM sold the cars from the plant to locals as Tesla did, their cars would have been out a month or more earlier.

                    1. Nix says:

                      Since you can’t read your own source, I will repost it for you:

                      12/3 – Bolt ready for shipment
                      12/9 – on a truck from Orion to Toledo, Ohio

                      12/23, 5:34PM – Mira Loma, CA (woohoo!)

                      From the 3rd to the 9th it was still at the Orion factory. Not being shipped. It was being held.

                      The 9th, not 3rd. Go read your own damn source.

                      It was put on a truck on the 9th. 14 calendar days later (10 business days) it got woohoo!! delivered in CA on the 23rd.

                      I’m sorry you can’t count to 14, and don’t know the difference between the 3rd and the 9th.

                      All this because you can’t simply admit that 40 does not equal 14 (much less 10 business days).

                      Now, which is bigger?

                      40 or 14?

                      We are going nowhere until you learn basic math.

                    2. bro1999 says:

                      Hey NIX,

                      It was delivered to the MIRA LOMA unloading station on the 23rd. It was NOT delivered to the dealership for another week. And while the car was officially on its way to Toledo from the factory on 12/9, it could have been loaded on the truck taking it to the train station anywhere in the 12/3-12/9 window. So actual time elapsed from “departed factory” to “delivered to DEALERSHIP” could have been as much as 28 days. Which falls in line with what unlucky was saying. Just admit you’re wrong.

                  2. Nix says:

                    Even those numbers don’t support his 40 day claim being normal.

                    It is sad that you guys can’t just admit that the Bolt had holds prior to delivery!!!

  12. James says:

    With all the hype in media at Model 3 reveal i thought they would sell 50000 model s/x. 26000 is weak

  13. ericonline says:

    $7,500 tax credit slipping away for many. If I didn’t know better I’d say Tesla was sandbagging production to upsell the MS or fully Optioned M3s. Many will have to choose between waiting for the base M3 and losing the full credit or upgrading to the Long Range Battery/Premium Package.

    1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

      Bingo! +1

    2. Anti-Lord Kelvin says:

      Try to think about it again and you should find why it is exactly the contrary that will happen, with the tax credit gaining 3 more months…

      1. ericonline says:

        Wrong. Go study the S/X sales numbers and account for even a fraction of expected M3 deliveries. 200,000 gets hit in Q1. Sorry.

      2. ericonline says:

        If the S/X combined can average 4,000 cars per month in the U.S. (which is pessimistic) then about 32,000 M3 deliveries would put Tesla at 200,000. I guess it’s possible if M3 production is a disaster or they completely game the market and export all the Q1 2018 production.

  14. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    “In total, we expect to deliver about 100,000 Model S and X vehicles in 2017, which would be a 31% increase over 2016.”

    That would actually be a decrease in the rate of growth that Tesla has seen the past few years.

    Tesla’s annual automobile sales totals:
    2012: 2650
    2013: 22,300
    2014: 31,655 (+41.95%)
    2015: 50,580 (+59.8%)
    2016: 76,230 (+50.7%)

    Well, I’ve been saying for some time now that there were increasingly clear signs that production of the Model S was nearing, or had reached, the limit of demand that Tesla could generate without paying for a lot of mass advertising. What I find surprising here is that Tesla still isn’t using paid mass advertising to any great degree.

    Tesla’s overall business plan has been to accelerate its rate of growth over the next few years. If the YOY growth this year is only 31%, that represents a startling walk-back from that goal. Tesla has consistently missed production goals, but never by more than 10-15%. This year, apparently it’s going to miss its goal by far more than that.

    Well, the Tesla haters and short-sellers finally have something real to crow about. I guess this will make them happy. 🙁

    Hopefully this year’s slowdown in Tesla’s rate of growth will be just a bobble, and that next year we’ll see Tesla take a clear lead in PEV sales.

    Go Tesla!

    1. Don Zenga says:

      +1
      Thanks for the #. Yes Model-3 is a serious challenge and it will take some time to overcome it.

    2. Mystery says:

      Halleluyah, you are beginning to see the light. No one is happy abt Model 3 slow production to reach engr excellence. There are just No bogus Intl nonsense avenues for Model 3 to hide (yet). USA S&X, as verified by insideEvs stood at about 6800 for Jul and Aug, and Tesla has large Sep 2016 USA numbers to beat to avoid Q3/Sept Negative Growth for S&X like what factually happened for Aug.
      When the USA Sep numbers come out, the unknown Mystery difference amt between TSLA claimed 26K – insideEVs verified USA is assumed by the poorly educated to be International, BUT TSLA doesnt report any numbers by country, OR to real end users (non businesses or partner/investor/ whoever, which could be the DotCom bubble ad swap QuidProQuo scenario). Do the Math, make some sense when China is ~65% of global EV sales and Tesla is an “11K total sold there in 2016” market share joke.

      1. Anti-Lord Kelvin says:

        And then, they sale far more than any other foreign car brand in China, and for Chinese Brands, they benefit from a 25% subside in prices and they don’t have to pay import taxes. And I have family in China and what they are seeing (and it is well knowing) is that a lot of these Chinese brands are selling for Central/Provincial Government fleets, and big companies fleets. And the most of the best selling cars are hybrids or golf cart like cars…
        You have a point about Tesla S and X beating a roof in US, but at one point, after eating so much in the 100.000 car market share of German luxury cars, they eventually had to happen. But sometimes, we have surprises, like the numbers in Norway where Tesla cars was showing to have also beat a roof level and even going down with July and August numbers, but then, in this September, they beat all the records with 2.000 deliveries!

    3. R.S says:

      Well, they only need 8375 Model 3s sold to beat 2014 in terms of growth. A day ago I would have said they should easily beat that, now not so much. But it still seems possible. Next year should be a year with great growth, though.

      From seeing Model S and X sales, I do think the platform really needs a refresh now. Even with inventory sales and price reductions they barely managed to beat last years Q3.

      1. Mystery says:

        Not likely in the US after InsideEVs issues their verified Sept USA.
        Model S down Double Digit% again (as verified in August). There is No Model S&X USA growth, Peak was reached months ago. Remainder is a Mystery because TSLA doesnt disclose by country nor real end user customers.

        1. Nix says:

          Are you seriously whining again that Tesla has upsold buyer that would have previously had no choice but to buy a Model S, into higher dollar Model X sales? As if converting what would have otherwise been Model S buyers into Model X buyers was somehow a bad thing for Tesla?

          Only a troll would believe that increasing total sales by up-selling buyers into more expensive vehicles AND massively increasing total sales at the same time is somehow bad.

    4. eltosho says:

      30% growth after you have already nuked the segment in the previous year is actually a huge achievement. BMW, Mercedes and Audi could only dream about Tesla’s sales numbers and growth rates for their 150K USD large sedans….

    5. unlucky says:

      Tesla still has some room for relatively easy growth by moving into new markets (countries). But yes, $100K cars just aren’t going to sell a lot faster than they already are.

      The Model 3 is the most important thing for Tesla right now. They need to focus almost all their effort on finishing it (getting it to full production) and the only other thing that matters is the Model Y. Everything else is peanuts. Semis? later. Powerwalls? minor. Solar shingles? Shelve it for now.

      Get those 3s out there. That’s where the big growth comes from.

      1. Mystery says:

        Exactly, cut out the wet dream fantasy ADD distractions and crank out quality Model 3 in volume, AND that should almost solely justify or tank their stock price until Model3 waiting list in CA = 0. No more smoke-mirrors misdirection distraction, and pulling the wool over the eyes regarding Q3 numbers claimed overall, while its clear Peak model S & X in USA has already arrived (insideEVs ssheet numbers – do the math), and so the remainder is the Mystery. Not going to 65% total EV leader China, so where then? Zero reporting by country like Every other automaker.

        1. Nix says:

          Do you actually understand why there was a spike in Model S sales? And why every single year Tesla has seasonal high quarters and low quarters, and they aren’t sequential?

  15. bro1999 says:

    Tesla announces they are behind schedule on the Model 3 the same day GM announces plans for 20 new all-electric vehicles (and a couple FCVs) to be released in 5 years. I bet Elon loves those optics. 😀

    1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

      Isn’t competition great?!?!?!?!?!?
      😛

    2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      Nah, but Tesla cars will be jumping from N.Y. to Tokyo in one hour in a rocket soon! And driving on Mars in no time! Can GM land rockets on barges??? No, only Elon can do it!

      1. Anti-Lord Kelvin says:

        Elon can also crush some rockets in a barge, and he loves that as much GM dealerships love to sell EVs. But GM knows also how to crush things, like EV1, or to burn things like electric trolley bus, and they actually and seriously loved to do it at the sake of their Exxon buddy, both times!

    3. unlucky says:

      ‘Wish they’d do more. Off by a zero.’ – Elon Musk

    4. floydboy says:

      I’ve noticed your considerably LESS negative tone when you comment regarding Tesla on the Tesla Motors Club forum. Why is that I wonder, fellow EV advocate?

      1. Bill Howland says:

        That kind of thing I’d imagine is of passing concern to the editors here: that of having the conversation degrade into a shouting match: I myself am no Casper Milquetoast in illuminating childish comments. In that sense – InSideEvs is ‘self-policing’.

        But there are several who in my opinion have repeatedly violated terms-of-service here, and are degrading the website… That is why both of us notice the difference in tone at Tesla Motor Club.

        Initially at least, I think you had to be at one time a Tesla Owner, which tended to keep the troublemakers away, since only serious comments from owners were allowed.

        Now on the other hand, some of the violations do constitute ‘comic relief’ – so in that sense IEV’s is more ‘fun’ than serious TMC. Good for ad revenue, as those who watch probably find the discussions more fun also.

  16. Victor says:

    This is disappointing. This is worse than production hell. Is this part of the “S” curve? It’s going to be years before I get my model 3.

    1. floydboy says:

      More than likely not nearly that long. Believe Musk when he says Tesla will do everything in its power to get you your car as soon as they can, but they also want to give you a good car.

      Remember, this is going to be the bread and butter car, they want to get this right.

  17. Don Zenga says:

    They were originally expected to sell starting from 2018-01. Selling 220 Model-3 between 2017-07 to 2017-09 is still a success.

    So if they sold 30 in 2017-07, and 75 in 2017-08, then 120 was sold in 2017-09 which is still good. I never believed in that S curve of production. Let’s be realistic. Production will only double every month and this is still good.

    Still the overall sales crossing 25,000 is a great news and they will hit the 100,000 mark for the year. The only way they can really ramp up production is if they acquire a plant from another company.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Thank you, Don. Trolls and FUDsters have amazingly short memories! 😉

      It was less than a year ago that I, despite being a strong Tesla fan, was predicting that Tesla would only deliver a token few Model 3’s at the end of the year.

      I’m very, very happy to have been proven wrong! And even if TM3 production doesn’t ramp up any faster than MS production did, Tesla has accomplished something remarkable by very aggressively accelerating its timetable for putting the Model 3 into production… and succeeding!

      And nothing the trolls and FUDsters can say can take away that accomplishment.

      Go Tesla!

      1. Don Zenga says:

        Pushmi-Pullyu
        Unfortunately all the trollsters are going to have fun thru out September and probably October. Lets get ready to face them.
        Come December, things will start to change.

        Still Model-3 is better than the initial deliveries of Volt, Bolt, eGolf-2017 and so on.

        1. theflew says:

          Maybe better than the eGolf but worse than the other 2. And even the eGolf went to true end users. The whole NDA hasn’t helped the perception they’re hiding something. No FM, Bluetooth not working completely, etc… – who cares? We all know that stuff can be fixed Ota. So that leads you to believe there are larger skeletons in the closet.

    2. ModernMarvelFan says:

      “They were originally expected to sell starting from 2018-01.”

      Not after Elon reset “everyone’s expectation” promises of a much faster ramp
      for August/Sept. Of course, many were critical of that claimed ramp rate but were called as “anti-Tesla FUD trolls” by Tesla fanbois at the time.

      So, you can’t have it both ways. Either it is what was suggested or not.

      Of course, in the grant scheme of things it doesn’t matter much either way since the reservation is still there and “perceived demand” still far exceeds supplies. But the battle of critic and fanboi will continue as usual.

      1. eltosho says:

        He never promised anything! Having optimistic targets and promising stuff are two very different things!

        1. ModernMarvelFan says:

          Well, Tesla fanboi certainly took it as “promise” because if “Elon said it, then it will happen” according to them.

        2. Spider-Dan says:

          Elon said his “expectation” was to build “100,000 to 200,000” Model 3s in the second half of 2017.

          He’ll definitely be off by one zero and he MIGHT even be off by two zeroes.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “Not after Elon reset ‘everyone’s expectation’ promises of a much faster ramp
        for August/Sept. Of course, many were critical of that claimed ramp rate but were called as ‘anti-Tesla FUD trolls’ by Tesla fanbois at the time.”

        Quite seriously, I’d like to see if you can link to even a single comment here at InsideEVs saying that; a comment from anyone less crazy than EVnut or whatever screen name he’s using this week.

        What I recall is a lot of skepticism being expressed across a broad spectrum of us Usual Suspects; skepticism over Tesla being able to produce even 100,000, let alone up to 200,000, by the end of 2017. As I recall, Jay Cole and Nix and myself all gave ballpark guesses of around 20,000 for the year.

        Tesla has a lot of fanboys here, and deservedly so. If and when other EV makers show the same vision and achieve the same string of successes that Tesla has, then we’ll be fans of them too!

        What Tesla doesn’t have many of here, is outright cheerleaders. (You can see some of them posting at Seeking Alpha, altho they’re outnumbered about 5-to-1 or worse by the serial Tesla bashers.)

    3. WadeTyhon says:

      Yes, true. A year or so ago, I predicted a few hundred at most for 2017 based on past launches. I wasn’t the only one!

      Well that expectation has been met. Hopefully Q4 production skyrockets quickly, but I’m not too worried. Only up from here for all EVs.

    4. bro1999 says:

      Sure are moving those goal posts around!

      1. Bill Howland says:

        On the plus side bro1999 at least, what with 220 delivered, the Model 3 is a serious car, and, like the ‘x’, will apparently eventually be produced in numbers.

        Another thing is that we have seen enough of the car’s operation to be convinced that the car will ultimately be a success.

  18. Don Zenga says:

    Still Model S/X sold some 13500 units in September alone which is a big # and this should again put these 2 models as leaders in its segment.

  19. Nix says:

    That’s a bad miss. They are at least a month behind schedule, and only “near-term” as a description of when they think they will solve it.

    500-1000 units would have indicated they had entered ramp-up, and even if they missed the 1500 it would have been a victory. Building 260 and completing the delivery/sale of 220 is not entering ramp-up.

    With that said, the folks who claimed Tesla wouldn’t achieve ramp-up until 2019 (or even 2020) shouldn’t be talking smack with how badly they were off…

  20. bro1999 says:

    Gif describing Tesla’s *slight* miss on 3 deliveries:

  21. CCIE says:

    I can see bro is loving this. I want to see Tesla succeed, mainly because they are forcing other manufactures to compete with their own EVs. But, the blind faith in Tesla’s magic ability to start-up a low-defect assembly line faster than experienced companies have ever done so was getting annoying.

    Elon pushed the delivery date to summer 2017 because he knew he would need financing around that time. So, they delivered (not sold) some hand built validation units and made some unrealistic ramp-up estimates. That let him sell junk bonds at a very low rate.

    If they can start delivering reliable units in January then they should still be ok. If not, them the TSLA shooters will have a field day.

    1. Lawrence says:

      I have a moderate view of it as well, but to the Fanboi’s, you’re a troll because you aren’t caught up in the hype. They are more annoying for sure.

      I wouldn’t want them to deliver my car until the bugs are worked out, rather than to have them rush out a product riddled with defects. If it weren’t for the tax credit, I’d actually postpone delivery for a few quarters.

      Excellent point about his timing of the Summer release and strategy.

    2. Nix says:

      Yup, it is a big miss. But to be clear, both Elon and the CFO of Tesla stated for the record in the Q2 2017 quarterly report conference call that each and every Model 3 delivered are indeed sales where the buyer payed full list price for every transaction.

      If you aren’t familiar with that call, I believe you can still listen to it at ir.tesla.com, or read the transcripts elsewhere on the internet, and it was reported on here on insideev’s and is in the insideev’s archives.

      1. Lawrence says:

        I’m trying to think of loopholes where someone could technically buy it for full price, but they didn’t have to pay a cent. A bonus check to the employee in the amount of purchase, issued the following quarter?

        1. CCIE says:

          Yeah, who’s to say what lost price was for the day when those sales were made?

          I seriously doubt that they paid anything more than a token amount for those cars ($1). If they truely paid normal list, then I feel sorry for them. No way those first units will ever be reliable.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            “I seriously doubt that they paid anything more than a token amount for those cars ($1).”

            Repeatedly asserting that without the slightest shred of evidence just shows how very strong your anti-Tesla bias is.

            In fact, it’s worse than that. For Tesla to make such a claim, without it being true, would constitute a false material statement on the part of the company. If my understanding is correct, for Tesla to do that would be a violation of SEC rules, and would constitute fraud.

            Elon understands what a material false statement is regarding his company’s performance. That’s why he took pains to very publicly issue a correction about his initial erroneous claim of nearly 500,000 Model 3 reservations; he corrected that to 455,000 a short time later.

            What you’re asserting here is that Tesla made another statement which is even more false — it would be intentionally misleading — and decided not to issue a correction.

            That certainly is FUD on your part, which makes you a FUDster. Your assertion that “I want to see Tesla succeed” rings rather hollow.

            1. CCIE says:

              Link to some statement by Tesla which says the dollar amount that each person who took delivery of an M3 in July paid. That should end all debate on this.

              Until I see that, I’m going with the most likely scenario: they delivered hand assembled beta units to employees and called it a launch so they could sell junk bonds. The employees will likely turn them in for production units in 6-12 months.

              1. Nix says:

                I’ve already provided the source, multiple times. Tesla Q2 2017 conference call on ir.tesla.com.

                http://ir.tesla.com/events.cfm

                1. CCIE says:

                  No actual sale price stated. That day the list price could have been set at $1.

                  1. Nix says:

                    They released the price information at the same time as the delivery. So no.

                    http://insideevs.com/first-tesla-model-3s-delivered-watch-livestream-launch-details-here/

        2. Nix says:

          Yes, folks like you tend to fight very hard to make up stuff that is false.

          Meanwhile, I’ll go by the documented factual accounts coming straight from primary sources in a forum where what they said was legally binding under SEC rules to be factual and accurate.

          What you choose to do says more about you than Tesla.

          1. CCIE says:

            As unlucky days below, I’m just going with the most likely scenario. It doesn’t make sense that Tesla would sell hand built beta units.

            But, maybe I’m wrong and a bunch of unfortunate employees got stuck paying full price for a beta car.

            1. Nix says:

              They aren’t hand built.

              Tesla began production on their assembly line way back in Feb 2017. As reported right here on Insideev’s.

              Cars built on the assembly line, are not hand built by definition, no matter how slow they are built.

              1. unlucky says:

                No they didn’t. I went to the plant mid-summer and the tour person said that the line wasn’t built yet but that it was expected to be finished in a week.

                I reported this on here.

                There is no way they built Model 3s on their assembly line in February as the line did not exist.

                1. Nix says:

                  1) You aren’t a reliable source. Did you see the assembly line?
                  2) Actual reliable sources (insideev’s) report otherwise, with production tooling being used to build “early release candidate” cars.

                  http://insideevs.com/elon-musk-tesla-model-3/

                  Do you need me to re-re-repost yet again the same long list of links showing Tesla beginning their build out of their assembly line starting late summer 2016? Their start of unit testing in fall of 2016? Their shutdown of the Model S/X assembly lines in order to bring the Model 3 Paint assembly line up in Feb 2017?

                  For the last year you have continually wrongly conflated updating and upgrading of their Model 3 assembly line to mean that the line doesn’t exist and isn’t being used at all and cars are being built by hand. The reality is that Tesla will keep improving their line for years as they keep increasing automation.

                  Having a task that is currently done by a human on the assembly line that will later be automated DOES NOT mean that the cars aren’t being built on the assembly line. I’m sorry you don’t understand what “hand built” means vs. being built on an assembly line. I’m sorry that after you being provided source after source that you choose to remain intentionally blind even after being handed source after source on a silver platter.

                  1. unlucky says:

                    That article says nothing about being built on the Model 3 line or any line. It says production tooling. He’s talking about the stamping equipment. The production line is final assembly, nothing to do with stamping.

                    Cars can be hand-built with parts stamped on production tooling and there’s no reason to think that wasn’t the case.

                    The final assembly line wasn’t built. The tour guide said so and pointed to the equipment that would be installed on the line when it was built.

                  2. JeremyK says:

                    Not to wade into this love-fest, but production tooling does not mean production assembly line. Making a car from production tooling could simply mean that the body panels and sheet metal for formed from “production tooling”. It doesn’t mean the car was assembled by robots on a production-intent line.

                2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                  “No they didn’t. I went to the plant mid-summer and the tour person said that the line wasn’t built yet but that it was expected to be finished in a week.”

                  Don’t you see the contradiction inherent in what you said there, Unlucky? If they were going to have the production line “finished” in a week, then very clearly it was mostly finished at that time.

                  The reasonable inference from what both you and Nix are saying, is that the earlier production prototype cars which Tesla built, some hundreds of which were reportedly tested at a closed testing site in Ohio, were partially or mostly built on an incomplete production line, with those production prototypes being finished by hand.

                  The Model 3’s which were delivered to Tesla and SpaceX employees, and paid for by them — actually paid for with real money, not Monopoly money, despite all the FUD posted here — were actual production cars as defined by Tesla, and reported by Tesla in at least one official financial statement to the SEC.

                  The fact that Tesla had not gone through all the slow and careful stages that GM and other more established, more conservative auto makers put them through, does not alter the fact — not opinion, but fact — that those cars are counted by Tesla as production cars, and that they were sold as new cars. With the window sticker and everything, which again is contrary to anti-Tesla FUD posted here at InsideEVs.

                  Altho I have in the past expressed the hope that Tesla would adopt a more conservative development path for its models, at the same time I understand why Tesla’s current business model pretty much demands that Tesla not take the slow and careful approach. Going slow would be directly contrary to Tesla’s overall current business strategy, which is to grow the company as fast as possible and grab as much market share as they can before the older and more established auto makers finally move to make multiple strong entries in the PEV field. It looks like that will happen in 2020, which gives Tesla only 3 years, or a bit less, to expand as rapidly as it can while it has virtually no competition.

                  Tesla isn’t GM, and GM isn’t Tesla. Expecting Tesla to act like GM is ignoring reality pretty firmly.

            2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              “As unlucky days below, I’m just going with the most likely scenario.”

              No, the scenario where Tesla is committing fraud in its SEC filings is very, very far from the “most likely” scenario.

              It is a conspiracy theory of the same type we keep seeing from serial anti-Tesla FUDsters. It’s quite similar in many ways to the conspiracy theory that claimed Tesla was faking its production numbers, and making large numbers of “inventory” cars which were supposedly being sold on some mysterious gray market… atho oddly enough, none of the FUDsters could ever come up with even a single VIN from one of these supposed gray market cars.

              So the only real question here, CCIE, is whether you and Spider-Dan and anybody else repeating this latest anti-Tesla conspiracy theory are among those serial anti-Tesla FUDsters… or if you’re just useful idiots being used by FUDsters to spread their Big Lies.

              1. Spider-Dan says:

                You keep inflating these claims to accusations of SEC fraud, when no one else is saying that.

                It is incredibly easy to (legally, without fraud) manipulate the net price of a product when you are also providing paychecks to the people who buy it.

        3. unlucky says:

          Why even bother?

          These early models will require a lot to be brought up to the later spec. If you sell the car you have to negotiate with the owner as to how to fix it, given them loaners, etc. And you have to pay the labor to fix it.

          If you just give it to them as a company car you can show up at their desk, hand them a new set of keys, take the old one and say “here’s your new car, we’re taking the old one”. Then you use the old one for testing, fix it and swap it to the next person or crush it as you wish.

          I can’t see the value of selling those first units at all other than to say you did so. And Tesla doesn’t even bother to say that, they just say they delivered them.

          I don’t know if that’s how Tesla did it, but it’s how I would do it. Obviously you have to switch to actual sales at some point. I would have done that some time this quarter after we were making cars that got off the line with no rework.

          1. Nix says:

            The only problem with your comment is that it is completely false.

            Tesla (Elon and the CFO) stated outright that they were sold, and sold for full list price, with every customer having to pay for their car.

            You being too lazy to go back and listen to them say it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

            Again, you can fabricate whatever stuff you want to make up, I’ll stick to the actual facts.

            1. unlucky says:

              I said “I don’t know if that’s how Tesla did it. But that’s how I would do it.”

              Why do you go through all the trouble of saying I’m wrong when I only explained how I would do it and explicitly said I don’t know how Tesla did it?

              I did say Tesla doesn’t say sold, they say delivered or handed over. And it’s true. Read the press release above.

              1. Nix says:

                Unlucky, you can keep covering you eyes and ears and pretend that the conference call doesn’t exist and keep saying stuff like “I don’t know if that’s how Tesla did it”. But anybody willing to actually listen to the call don’t suffer from your intentional blindness and deafness.

                You are intentionally remaining blind and deaf and then playing word games with “delivered” as if the conference call didn’t exist. Now you are whining about being called on your games and intentional blindness and deafness.

                1. unlucky says:

                  I’m not a Tesla investor (right now). I didn’t listen to any conference call. Which conference call are you speaking of?

                  1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                    And yet, you continue to argue with someone from a position of ignorance, denying the reality of the facts he’s reporting, and pretending actual facts are “fake news”.

                    Are you a fan of The Donald? ‘Cuz you’re sure acting like him!

                  2. Nix says:

                    *facepalm*

                    So I’m wrong about the conference call I listened to, and listed details and where to get it above, because you didn’t bother to listen to it.

                    Got it.

                    Well, clearly you must now be 100% correct about everything, because like every other source I post, you intentionally remain blind to what it says and simply insert your reality instead. I’m clearly wrong under your alternate reality and I apologize for actually knowing the primary source information. /sarc

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            unlucky continued to deny reality:

            “These early models will require a lot to be brought up to the later spec. If you sell the car you have to negotiate with the owner as to how to fix it, given them loaners, etc. And you have to pay the labor to fix it.”

            You appear to be attempting to persuade us that it’s pointless to sell any cars which will have to be taken to a shop and have a major overhaul done. I’ll remind you, Unlucky, that Tesla quite intentionally did that with its first car, the Roadster. It was shipped with a non-functional transmission locked into second gear, with the promise to early customers that Tesla would replace that with the new drivetrain once it was ready for production.

            And that’s exactly what Tesla did.

            You can argue ’till you’re blue in the face that Tesla shouldn’t have done that, but all you’ve “proven” is that Tesla doesn’t choose to run its business in the slow and careful manner that you would, if you were in charge… thank goodness.

            Tesla chooses to grow rapidly and put its new models into production as fast as they can, contrary to how you’d run things if you were in charge. Thank goodness!

            Go Tesla!

  22. scott franco says:

    Good news! Model 3 production is up %100 over 2016 deliveries!

    1. Lawrence says:

      #DIV/0!

  23. cab says:

    Everyone’s delivery date…please take one big step to the right. Thanks.

    No good way to spin this one I’m afraid. Unfortunate for Tesla as the “winners” here aren’t so much the few Anti-Tesla folk, or Big Oil…it’s really Tesla’s competitors who all just got another month’s reprieve and likely even longer as they seem to be AT LEAST a month behind. You know BMW, Mercedes, etc are all smiling at this news.

    1. Nix says:

      Yes, all the companies who have been saying since 2012 that they would build a Model S killer and are at least half a decade behind should be overjoyed by a month or so setback for Tesla’s newest car they still can’t “kill”.

      1. unlucky says:

        There were no important companies who said they’d make a Model S killer in 2012. The big companies ignored it. The small companies who never were going to amount to anything (the FFs and Fiskers of this world) said they would do so but were not to be believed.

        Certainly it’s been 5 years since the S came out, a big lead. But most of that was because the big companies were napping, not even interested at all. I’m sure they regret it now.

        Things will look different in 3 years though. The world loves to buy German luxury cars and so when German luxury EVs come out they will sell. Whether they will supplement Tesla’s S/X sales or cannibalize them we don’t know yet. But 3 years from now we will know.

        1. Nix says:

          You just proven my point yet again.

          A month delay for about a thousand units isn’t of any significance at all when you are talking 3 years or more. And Tesla is talking hundreds of thousands of cars a year once full ramp up is reached.

          A ~1000 car delay for 1 month is a rounding error on that time frame and volume over that time frame.

          1. unlucky says:

            I have no idea what you are doing with this post.

            I agree that slow production right now doesn’t make a big difference. I said in other posts that they will still make a ton of them next year.

            You are creating a disagreement that doesn’t exist so you can slam me over it.

          2. Spider-Dan says:

            And why should we believe Tesla’s “hundreds of thousands of cars per year” claim any more than we believed their “100k-200k Model 3s in 2017” claim? Or their “first Model Xs delivered in late 2013” claim?

            This is what happens when you repeatedly make wild promises that you can’t deliver on.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              As has been pointed out by many analysts, Elon usually does eventually deliver what he promised. It’s just that it usually takes him longer than anticipated.

              If you think Tesla won’t eventually ramp up to sell hundreds of thousands of Model 3’s annually… well then, let’s revisit that argument in a few years and see who was right.

              1. mxs says:

                They certainly will, no question about it in my mind, but by the time they do, other established companies will do as well.

                Or will we dispute even that, pretending that others will be watching the slower than expected Tesla ramp-up?

              2. Spider-Dan says:

                I guess if you extend the deadline from “second half of 2017” to “sometime before the end of civilization,” then sure, lots of claims become achievable.

          3. theflew says:

            I agree a couple of months doesn’t matter. But I think GM’s announcement can’t be ignored. We can guess GM is going to show something this fall which will basically be an electrified Encore based on the Bolt platform with all the creatures features you can find on a Buick years before a Model Y. Maybe a vehicle that has Supercruise? And who knows what the second vehicles will be.

            My point is every month Tesla takes all of these vehicles that seemed in the future will be targeting the same audience and the future isn’t quite as far as it previously was.

            1. VFan says:

              True. GM has proven they can make a lot of cars.

  24. Four Electrics says:

    So far, the Model 3 launch is looking identical to the Model X launch: problem after problem, and excuse after excuse. In fact, I wouldn’t call it a launch at all, except, perhaps, prefixed with the word “paper.”

    1. Spider-Dan says:

      It’s not identical. Elon didn’t hold a Model X launch party in early 2015 so he could “deliver” test mules to insiders months before sales to the public.

    2. Get Real says:

      So far your anti-Tesla FUD is looking identical to your previous serial anti-Tesla FUD repetively over and over again….. in perpetuity.

  25. Four Electrics says:

    Looks like Model S sales are still flat year-over-year, but the X is up a bit. I predict X sales will continue to rise for some time. It has no equal in the marketplace.

    1. Mystery says:

      Yes, no other vehicle has been so laden with hubris such that its side doors get ripped off by speeding trucks in adjacent lane

      1. Get Real says:

        And no other mystery troll has been so laden with serial anti-Tesla BS tha his FUD has been ripped off by the speeding EV revolution that Tesla is leading.

        1. Will says:

          Sorry but that will be Nissan Alliance that leads the EV Revolution

  26. Don Zenga says:

    Look at the Monthly scorecard for Model-X deliveries in its earlier months.
    2015-09: 6 units
    2015-10: 4 units
    2015-11: 5 units
    2015-10: 199 units
    2016-01: 270 units

    And Model-3 has much higher rate of increase.
    2017-07: 30 units
    2017-08: 75 units
    2017-09: 115 units

  27. gary says:

    It’s become extremely obvious that the Model 3 is just a compliance car. With the limited availability and only in select markets it’s obvious they only want the ZEV credits.

    If it works when talking about non-Tesla companies, it should fit Tesla as well 🙂

    1. Nix says:

      No, it doesn’t work.

      Tesla is mandated to deliver exactly zero ZEV credits under the law. So in order to comply they need to sell exactly zero compliance cars. So it is impossible for Tesla to have to build a single car for compliance.

      I’m sorry you don’t understand how the ZEV mandate works, and what companies have to do to be in compliance with the mandate.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Oh c’mon, Nix, it’s obvious that he is just being snarky about what some GM bashers said repeatedly about the Bolt EV.

        He’s got a point, even if that same point has been made numerous times.

      2. mxs says:

        Jeez, calm down. It was a joke … I repeat a joke!!

    2. CCIE says:

      I seriously laughed! Great post!

      You’re right, if people can seriously believe the Bolt is a compliance car then Tesla deserves the same BS!

  28. Kdawg says:

    Personally I don’t care about the numbers until they start delivering to real customers, who can give real reviews. To me, right now, they are still in the debug phase. Let me know when the finished final product is rolling off the line, and then give me the rates.

  29. floydboy says:

    I DO appreciate the fact that deliveries are already moving east. That beautiful white one stole the show at the Tesla meetup in Texas!

  30. Bill Howland says:

    One thing is sure – my BOLT ev will be an old car before any substantial numbers of anything else comes along.

    You would think that the upcoming models would also be more modern than my car. It was fully expected that both Nissan and Tesla would at least make models comtemporary with the BOLT.

    But it looks like the end result will be Nissan and Tesla will have substantially more modern vehicles out before the production numbers are to the point where the vehicles are commonly seen.

    Or, at least they should be more modern.

  31. Another Euro point of view says:

    Lots of street fights in the comments section I see…maybe it is Model X allover again. Seems rocket science is more simple than manufacturing cars.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Seems like there is a zillion times more “short” interest, and FUD posted, about Tesla than SpaceX.

      If Tesla had high-profile failures such as SpaceX’s first three launches, a loss of one of the ISS resupply rockets, and the failure of its first attempt at landing a booster on a barge at sea, then the FUDsters would be…

      Well, frankly, I doubt I can imagine how much worse the online anti-Tesla bashing would be. Even without any complete failures, the amount of online anti-Tesla FUD is at times overwhelming.

  32. Another Euro point of view says:

    Why couldn’t they fix those production problems before the launch ? OK with Model X but now 2 years later with a car which design was supposed to be all about production ease it is rather weird.

    1. mxs says:

      Well, they needed funding for production, right? But they needed to show that model 3 is not far, right? So Musk came up with a date, even though everyone who has any experience with car manufacturing it’s impossible date. So now, he’s delivering “unfinished” cars in extremely low numbers ….. Tesla is all about stock price. He needs to keep it up to stay alive and have a shot in his goal of producing successfully a car model for masses. I don’t blame him …. although it’s laughable to see some of Tesla’s supporters to defend this strategy …. just admit the naysayers were correct when stated that the goals are overly optimistic and impossible. This proves them right, period, no further discussion around this is necessary.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        For those who either have not been following Tesla since the days of the Roadster, or who have short memories, here is a brief summary:

        2008: After repeated delays, Tesla starts delivering its new Roadster to customers, despite the car having a non-working transmission. The cars are sold with a promise to install the new drivetrain later when it has been fully developed. Some, or perhaps many, analysts call Tesla brilliant for this innovative approach to avoiding yet another delay in selling the car.

        2012: After repeated delays, Tesla starts delivering Model S’s as soon as they start rolling off the assembly line, without spending the months of test driving by its employees that more established auto makers use to eliminate early production problems. The inevitable and expected reports of early problems are mostly ignored due to the overwhelming number of staggeringly positive reviews of the car.

        2015: After repeated delays, Tesla starts delivering Model X’s, again forgoing any extended test period after start of production. The inevitable and expected reports of early production problems are amplified and repeated all over the Internet, with Tesla bashers and haters making this out to be something unexpected or new from Tesla. This FUD campaign has some success among those who are not aware of the company’s history. This grumbling is not very dampened by reviews rather more mixed, and less positive, than Model S reviews.

        2017: After an aggressive development schedule, Tesla starts production of the Model 3 on time, and in fact sooner than a previously announced target date, while restricting sales to employees of the company, and of SpaceX, who are required to sign NDAs, so Tesla can avoid the sort of online grumbling that plagued early Model X production. Tesla bashers, frustrated over not being able to crow about another delay from Tesla, respond by pretending that Tesla immediately selling the cars as soon as they roll off the assembly line is somehow different than how Tesla has always conducted business, and make up ridiculous conspiracy theories to claim that the sales “aren’t real” or “don’t count”.

        In summary: Tesla hasn’t changed how it conducts its business. What has changed is how successful Tesla bashers are at portraying, in an increasingly negative fashion, Tesla’s rather different approach to making and selling cars.

        Thank goodness Tesla isn’t letting the nattering nabobs of negativism slow up the company’s growth — no matter how hard the Tesla haters try!

        Go Tesla!

  33. Confused says:

    Any news on the coast to coast fully automated drive by the end of 2017?

  34. orinoco says:

    Well, that was predictable.
    The grass does not grow any faster by pulling on it.

  35. buu says:

    >Not after Elon reset “everyone’s expectation” promises of a much faster ramp for August/Sept.

    maybe it was expectation for someone who can’t read. 100 in august meant no mass production. 1500 in September – ramp in middle or end of month. So they are late about 2-3 weeks currently, will they be more – probably

  36. Ricardo says:

    Welcome to production hell

  37. Alok says:

    Also:

    1,000 Supercharger stations now online !!!

    supercharge.info

  38. Serial anti tesla troll thomas says:

    Tesla the world champion in making promisses but not fulfilling them.

    1. mxs says:

      Not quite correct I believe … in the end, they will deliver, just not along the timelines they dreamed up. That timeline was just for the people hungry buying their stock and lending them money for model 3 production. That’s all …

      1. HVACman says:

        That’s all? Just a little timeline word-game to “fool” potential lenders and stockholders into believing that Tesla’s cash flow will be much better in 2017 than it actually will be?

        Hmmmm…..I don’t know that Tesla’s lenders and stockholders will be interested in going along with these “dreamed up timeline” word games for much longer. Tesla is attempting to step up beyond the boutique start-up manufacturer division and into the Big Leagues. In the Big Leagues, cash, profit, and production estimates mean things. Missed projections are severely punished. There are other Big League players with more experience who play the auto production game a lot straighter. Tesla’s Q4 could be it’s make-or-break quarter. This will be VERY interesting to watch.

        1. Mystery says:

          Your point is Valid. But learn from the past 5+ years and burned short sellers, Elon has Unlimited friendly partners, investors, even the govt with Obama, so unlimited Bankroll to do whatever he wants as long as there is Innovation and Cool Factor, which there is.
          Tesla is not judged as an Auto Company, all he has to do is make a Working Cool car, which they have. He has Endless Amts of Time.
          No one said life was fair, nor everyone is judged by the same rules, but apparently he has earned that from his Paypal days and beyond.

  39. Roy_h says:

    To all these negative comments about not meeting the optimistic target of 1500. It was a TARGET, not a promise. Elon referred to this time as “production hell”. This was a clear warning that the target would be difficult to achieve.

    Also references to hand built are completely false. Tesla is getting its highly automated assembly line working and is not interested in hand building a few cars to get them out to customers. They will stop the line and fix whatever is necessary, not continue running and fix later.

  40. Ron Friedson says:

    Much as I personally would like Tesla as toy. And as much as I also think the cobalt and other battery component issues need to be solved before electric cars are viable in any volume: Being only a month behind is not a big deal. Realistically getting everything up to 1500 Model 3s a month is probably not happening until January and 10,000 a month is probably April of next year.

    With 20 thousand a month in July onward

    The bigger issue is July 4 weekend 2019

    Thing 3 hour waits at charging stations along the highways

  41. Scott says:

    Amazing what this small company has done in a short period of time with limited resources and R&D. Just think what this company could do if it had the manpower and money like GM. Tesla, you are still amazing! You saw the future and acted no matter all the bullying! Keep up the good Work. Musk is the battery man and as more cars roll out it will lower battery cost for homes and business microgrids!

Leave a Reply