Investor's Corner

Tesla Model S, X softer sales in Europe are NOT due to the Audi e-tron and Jaguar I-PACE

The Tesla Model X and the Audi e-tron. (Photo: Achim Hartmann/AutoPista.es)

Published

6 years ago

August 22, 2019

Simon Alvarez

In a note to clients on Wednesday, Bernstein senior technology analyst Toni Sacconaghi concluded that increased competition from vehicles such as the Audi e-tron and the Jaguar I-PACE is responsible for the recent weakness in Tesla’s sales volume in Europe. The analyst further warned that the arrival of other premium electric vehicles like the Mercedes-Benz EQC and the Porsche Taycan could worsen Tesla’s problem.

Explaining further, the Bernstein analyst added that the total market for Europe’s premium electric cars has only grown modestly in 2018 and 2019, and over this time, Tesla’s sales volume has decreased. “Our analysis suggests that the deteriorating sales trajectory of the Model S and X may be primarily due to competition, particularly in Europe, from Jaguar and Audi. In other words, the market isn’t growing much, and Tesla is losing share,” Sacconaghi wrote.

According to TSLA investor @Incentives101, an economist with a background in macro research, Bernstein’s conclusions are inaccurate. In a message to Teslarati, the economist provided a deep dive into the likely causes of the Model S and X’s sales decline in Europe, as well as the reasons why vehicles such as the Jaguar I-PACE and the Audi e-tron are in no way responsible for the reduced market share of Tesla’s flagship sedan and SUV.

Model S and X sales decline

It should be noted that Europe is a region, which means that it is comprised of multiple countries, each with a population of consumers that usually have different preferences in vehicle purchases. Looking at past vehicle sales data, the economist noted that from January-June 2018, Tesla sold 13,426 Model S and X in Europe, while in the first six months of 2019, the figure was 8,037.

“In those months of 2018, Norway and the Netherlands accounted for 52% of sales, while in 2019 it was just 28%. This means that 87% of the drop in sales of Model S and X in Europe is explained by the Norwegian and Dutch market. Furthermore, the Netherlands had Model S and X sales for the first six months of 2018 of 2,833 units and 167 for 2019. This means that the Netherlands by itself explains 50% of the drop in sales for Tesla’s flagship vehicles,” the investor wrote.

The Netherlands and Norway

If one were to look at the sales of the Audi e-tron and the Jaguar I-PACE in the Netherlands for the first half of 2019, one would find that the two vehicles only sold 362 and 111 units, respectively. This means that in the Netherlands, which was behind 50% of the drop in Tesla’s European sales, the e-tron and I-PACE couldn’t have been responsible since their combined sales are only 16% of the Model S and X’s 2018 sales for the same period. With this in mind, some headwinds were met by the Model S and X in the Netherlands, particularly in the form of a change in BIK incentives at the end of 2018, as well as the arrival of the more affordable Model 3, which has reached sales of over 6,000 units in the country.

As explained by the economist, Norway is a key market for Tesla in the European region, and it is responsible for 37% of the drop in Model S and X sales. For the first six months of 2019, Model S and X sales were 2,079 units, while the Audi e-tron sold 2,273 units and the Jaguar I-PACE sold 2,101. Bernstein’s note claimed that the market for premium electric vehicles didn’t increase, and thus, Tesla’s share of the European market just fell. This, according to the investor, is not correct. “If you take the previous Netherlands sales out of the equation — because it becomes incomparable — you’ll see that the market actually increased in Europe,” he wrote.

The actual reasons

The economist noted that there are a couple of factors that likely played a notable part in the decline of the Model S and X’s sales in Norway. First off, Tesla discontinued the 75 kWh (Standard Range) Model S and X, a variant that accounted for more than 80% of the sales in the country. More importantly, Tesla has entered the Norwegian market with the Model 3, a smaller, more affordable vehicle that boasts the best technologies that the electric car maker has to offer. “Norwegians have proven preferences for smaller and cheaper vehicles. Historically, the share of luxury vehicles in Norway is relatively low. It is then by no surprise that the Model 3 is currently selling at levels not seen in any other market, holding 14% of market share for total vehicles,” the economist explained.

In Norway’s case, at least, Tesla appears to have made a notable trade-off. It entered the market with the Model 3, which allowed the company to command 14% of the country’s total vehicle market. This came at a price in the form of a 50% decline in Model S and X sales. Of course, the removal of the Model S and X’s 75 kWh variant, as well as buyer expectations of an impending refresh of the two flagship vehicles, likely played a notable part in Norway’s sales decline as well.

Debunking Bernstein’s thesis

With these factors in mind, it appears that Bernstein’s findings are, for lack of a better term, inaccurate. The economist summed up his thesis as follows. “Two countries explain the drop in sales for the Model S and X almost entirely, and it’s absolutely clear that competition wasn’t the factor. Regulation and consumer preferences are. It is also important to mention that 28% of sales of the Audi e-tron were in Germany as well, a country where the Model S and X have never been strong, even at their peak.

“Consumers in the aggregate always behave rationally. There hasn’t been one example in history where a product(s) that is inferior in every way dominates the market or segment in which they compete. The Audi e-tron, the Jaguar I-PACE, and the Mercedes-Benz EQC are not even in the Model S and X segment specs-wise. Rather, they are closer in specs to the Model 3 and Model Y, both of which undercut them in price. The only reason people mistakenly put them against the Model S and X is their cost,” the investor explained.

Up Next

Singapore minister dismisses Elon Musk and Tesla, states hydrogen is ‘cleaner’ option

Don't Miss

Tesla (TSLA) investment reportedly being considered by VW CEO (UPDATE)

Simon Alvarez

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Comments

Investor's Corner

Shareholder group urges Nasdaq probe into Elon Musk’s Tesla 2025 CEO Interim Award

The SOC Investment Group represents pension funds tied to more than two million union members, many of whom hold shares in TSLA.

Published

1 day ago

August 22, 2025

Simon Alvarez

Credit: xAI/X

An investment group is urging Nasdaq to investigate Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) over its recent $29 billion equity award for CEO Elon Musk.

The SOC Investment Group, which represents pension funds tied to more than two million union members—many of whom hold shares in TSLA—sent a letter to the exchange citing “serious concerns” that the package sidestepped shareholder approval and violated compensation rules.

Concerns over Tesla’s 2025 CEO Interim Award

In its August 19 letter to Nasdaq enforcement chief Erik Wittman, SOC alleged that Tesla’s board improperly granted Musk a “2025 CEO Interim Award” under the company’s 2019 Equity Incentive Plan. That plan, the group noted, explicitly excluded Musk when it was approved by shareholders. SOC argued that the new equity grant effectively expanded the plan to cover Musk, a material change that should have required a shareholder vote under Nasdaq rules.

The $29 billion package was designed to replace Musk’s overturned $56 billion award from 2018, which the Delaware Chancery Court struck down, prompting Tesla to file an appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court. The interim award contains restrictions: Musk must remain in a leadership role until August 2027, and vested shares cannot be sold until 2030, as per a Yahoo Finance report.

Even so, critics such as SOC have argued that the plan does not have of performance targets, calling it a “fog-the-mirror” award. This means that “If you’re around and have enough breath left in you to fog the mirror, you get them,” stated Brian Dunn, the director of the Institute for Comprehension Studies at Cornell University.

They don’t even HAVE an investment with Tesla. They are just a political activist group using a loose relationship with a “coalition of unions” to write letters to advance an agenda that IS NOT making Tesla and AI, robotics and energy leader. Their letter does not include any…— Amy (@_SFTahoe) August 21, 2025

SOC’s Tesla concerns beyond Elon Musk

SOC’s concerns extend beyond the mechanics of Musk’s pay. The group has long questioned the independence of Tesla’s board, opposing the reelection of directors such as Kimbal Musk and James Murdoch. It has also urged regulators to review Tesla’s governance practices, including past proposals to shrink the board.

SOC has also joined initiatives calling for Tesla to adopt comprehensive labor rights policies, including noninterference with worker organizing and compliance with global labor standards. The investment group has also been involved in webinars and resolutions highlighting the risks related to Tesla’s approach to unions, as well as labor issues across several countries.

Tesla has not yet publicly responded to SOC’s latest letter, nor to requests for comment.

The SOC’s letter can be viewed below.

Nasdaq+Letter Tsla Socig Final by Simon Alvarez

Investor's Corner

Tesla investors may be in for a big surprise

All signs point toward a strong quarter for Tesla in terms of deliveries. Investors could be in for a surprise.

Published

1 week ago

August 14, 2025

Joey Klender

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla investors have plenty of things to be ecstatic about, considering the company’s confidence in autonomy, AI, robotics, cars, and energy. However, many of them may be in for a big surprise as the end of the $7,500 EV tax credit nears. On September 30, it will be gone for good.

This has put some skepticism in the minds of some investors: the lack of a $7,500 discount for buying a clean energy vehicle may deter many people from affording Tesla’s industry-leading EVs.

Tesla warns consumers of huge, time-sensitive change coming soon

The focus on quarterly deliveries, while potentially waning in terms of importance to the future, is still a big indicator of demand, at least as of now. Of course, there are other factors, most of them economic.

The big push to make the most of the final quarter of the EV tax credit is evident, as Tesla is reminding consumers on social media platforms and through email communications that the $7,500 discount will not be here forever. It will be gone sooner rather than later.

It appears the push to maximize sales this quarter before having to assess how much they will be impacted by the tax credit’s removal is working.

Delivery Wait Time Increases

Wait times for Tesla vehicles are increasing due to what appears to be increased demand for the company’s vehicles. Recently, Model Y delivery wait times were increased from 1-3 weeks to 4-6 weeks.

This puts extra pressure on consumers to pull the trigger on an order, as delivery must be completed by the cutoff date of September 30.

Delivery wait times may have gone up due to an increase in demand as consumers push to make a purchase before losing that $7,500 discount.

More People are Ordering

A post on X by notable Tesla influencer Sawyer Merritt anecdotally shows he has been receiving more DMs than normal from people stating that they’re ordering vehicles before the end of the tax credit:

Anecdotally, I’ve been getting more DMs from people ordering Teslas in the past few days than I have in the last couple of years. As expected, the end of the U.S. EV credit next month is driving a big surge in orders.

Lease prices are rising for the 3/Y, delivery wait times are… pic.twitter.com/Y6JN3w2Gmr

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) August 13, 2025

It’s not necessarily a confirmation of more orders, but it could be an indication that things are certainly looking that way.

Why Investors Could Be Surprised

Tesla investors could see some positive movement in stock price following the release of the Q3 delivery report, especially if all signs point to increased demand this quarter.

We reported previously that this could end up being a very strong rebounding quarter for Tesla, with so many people taking advantage of the tax credit.

Whether the delivery figures will be higher than normal remains to be seen. But all indications seem to point to Q3 being a very strong quarter for Tesla.

Elon Musk

Tesla bear Guggenheim sees nearly 50% drop off in stock price in new note

Tesla bear Guggenheim does not see any upside in Robotaxi.

Published

1 week ago

August 14, 2025

Joey Klender

Credit: Tesla

Tesla bear Guggenheim is still among the biggest non-believers in the company’s overall mission and its devotion to solving self-driving.

In a new note to investors on Thursday, analyst Ronald Jewsikow reiterated his price target of $175, a nearly 50 percent drop off, with a ‘Sell’ rating, all based on skepticism regarding Tesla’s execution of the Robotaxi platform.

A few days ago, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the company’s Robotaxi platform would open to the public in September, offering driverless rides to anyone in the Austin area within its geofence, which is roughly 90 square miles large.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms Robotaxi is opening to the public: here’s when

However, Jewsikow’s skepticism regarding this timeline has to do with what’s going on inside of the vehicles. The analyst was willing to give props to Robotaxi, saying that Musk’s estimation of a September public launch would be a “key step” in offering the service to a broader population.

Where Jewsikow’s real issue lies is with Tesla’s lack of transparency on the Safety Monitors, and how bulls are willing to overlook their importance.

Much of this bullish mentality comes from the fact that the Monitors are not sitting in the driver’s seat, and they don’t have anything to do with the overall operation of the vehicle.

Musk also said last month that reducing Safety Monitors could come “in a month or two.”

Instead, they’re just there to make sure everything runs smoothly.

Jewsikow said:

“While safety drivers will remain, and no timeline has been provided for their removal, bulls have been willing to overlook the optics of safety drivers in TSLA vehicles, and we see no reason why that would change now.”

He also commented on Musk’s recent indication that Tesla was working on a 10x parameter count that could help make Full Self-Driving even more accurate. It could be one of the pieces to Tesla solving autonomy.

Jewsikow added:

“Perhaps most importantly for investors bullish on TSLA for the fleet of potential FSD-enabled vehicles today, the 10x higher parameter count will be able to run on the current generation of FSD hardware and inference compute.”