Connect with us

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

on

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.

A Tesla Model X. (Photo: Andres GE)

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.

Advertisement
Model S in Norway
A Tesla Model S in Norway.

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.

(Credit: Elon Musk/Twitter)

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla stock gets hit with shock move from Wall Street analysts

Despite Tesla not being an automotive company exclusively, the Wall Street firms and analysts covering its shares are widely dialed in on its performance regarding quarterly deliveries. While it holds some importance, Tesla, from an internal perspective, is more focused on end-to-end AI, Robotaxi, self-driving, and its Optimus robot.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla price targets (NASDAQ: TSLA) have received several cuts over the past few days as Wall Street firms are adjusting their forecast for the company’s stock following a miss in quarterly delivery figures for the first quarter.

Despite Tesla not being an automotive company exclusively, the Wall Street firms and analysts covering its shares are widely dialed in on its performance regarding quarterly deliveries. While it holds some importance, Tesla, from an internal perspective, is more focused on end-to-end AI, Robotaxi, self-driving, and its Optimus robot.

In a notable shift underscoring mounting caution on Wall Street, three prominent investment banks slashed their price targets on Tesla Inc. shares over the past two weeks following the electric-vehicle giant’s disappointing first-quarter 2026 delivery numbers. The revisions highlight softening EV sales figures and, according to some, execution challenges.

Tesla’s Q1 delivery figures show Elon Musk was right

Tesla delivered 358,023 vehicles in the January-to-March period, a 14 percent sequential decline and a miss versus consensus forecasts of roughly 365,000 to 370,000 units.

Production hit 408,000 vehicles, yet the delivery shortfall, paired with limited updates on autonomous-driving progress and new-model timelines, rattled investors. Shares fell about 8.7 percent since April 1.

Wall Street analysts are now adjusting their forecasts accordingly, as several firms have made adjustments to price targets.

Goldman Sachs

Goldman Sachs cut its target from $405 to $375 while maintaining a Hold rating. Analyst Mark Delaney pointed to soft EV sales trends and margin pressures.

Truist Financial followed on April 2, lowering its target from $438 to $400 (Hold unchanged), with analyst William Stein citing misses in both auto deliveries and energy-storage deployments, plus a lack of fresh details on AI initiatives and upcoming vehicles.

It is a strange drop if using AI initiatives and upcoming vehicles as a justification is the primary focus here. Tesla has one of the most optimistic outlooks in terms of AI, and CEO Elon Musk recently hinted that the company is developing something for the U.S. market that will be good for families.

Baird

Baird’s Ben Kallo made a very modest trim, reducing its target from $548 to $538, keeping and maintaining the ‘Outperform’ rating it holds on shares. Kallo said the price target adjustment was a prudent recalibration tied to near-term risks.

Truist

Truist analyst William Stein pointed to deliveries and energy storage missing expectations, and cut his price target to $400 from $438. He maintained the ‘Hold’ rating the firm held on the stock previously.

JPMorgan

Adding to the bearish tone on Monday, April 6, JPMorgan’s Ryan Brinkman reiterated an Underweight (Sell) rating and $145 price target, implying roughly 60 percent downside from recent levels.

Brinkman highlighted a “record surge in unsold vehicles” that adds to free-cash-flow woes, with inventory swelling to an estimated 164,000 units.

Tesla’s comfort level taking risks makes the stock a ‘must own,’ firm says

He lowered his Q1 2026 EPS estimate to $0.30 from $0.43 and full-year 2026 EPS to $1.80 from $2.00, both below consensus. Brinkman noted that expectations for Tesla’s performance have “collapsed” across financial and operating metrics through the end of the decade, yet the stock has risen 50 percent, and average price targets have increased 32 percent.

This disconnect, he argued, prices in an unrealistic sharp pivot to stronger results beyond the decade, while near-term realities remain materially weaker.

He advised investors to approach TSLA shares with a “high degree of caution,” citing elevated execution risk, competition, and valuation concerns in lower-price, higher-volume segments.

The revisions have pulled the overall consensus lower. Aggregators show the average 12-month price target now ranging from approximately $394 to $416 across roughly 32 analysts, with a prevailing Hold rating and a mixed split of Buy, Hold, and Sell recommendations.

Brinkman’s $145 target stands as a notable outlier on the bearish side.

Not Everyone Has Turned Bearish on Tesla Shares

Not all firms turned more pessimistic. Wedbush Securities held its bullish $600 target, stressing that AI and full self-driving technology represent the core value drivers, with current delivery softness viewed as temporary.

These moves reflect a broader Wall Street recalibration: near-term EV demand faces pressure from high interest rates, intensifying competition, especially from lower-cost Chinese rivals, and slower adoption.

At the same time, many analysts continue to see Tesla’s technology leadership in software-defined vehicles, autonomy, robotaxis, and energy storage as pathways to outsized long-term gains once macro conditions ease and new models launch.

With Tesla’s first-quarter earnings report due later this month, upcoming details on cost discipline, Cybertruck ramp-up, and AI roadmaps will likely shape whether these target adjustments prove prescient or overly cautious. Investors remain divided between immediate delivery realities and the company’s ambitious vision.

Tesla shares are trading at $348.82 at the time of publishing.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX to launch military missile tracking satellites through new Space Force contract

SpaceX wins a $178.5M Space Force contract to launch missile tracking satellites starting in 2027.

Published

on

By

Space Force officials say the Falcon 9 booster pictured here in SpaceX's rocket factory will have to wait a few months longer for its launch debut. (SpaceX)

The U.S. Space Force awarded SpaceX a $178.5 million task order on April 1, 2026 to launch missile tracking satellites for the Space Development Agency. The contract, designated SDA-4, covers two Falcon 9 launches beginning in Q3 2027, one from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida and one from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. The satellites, built by Sierra Space, are designed to bolster the nation’s ability to detect and track missile threats from orbit.

The award falls under the National Security Space Launch Phase 3 Lane 1 program, which Space Force uses to move payloads to orbit on faster timelines and at more competitive prices. “Our Lane 1 contract affords us the flexibility to deliver satellites for our customers, like SDA, more easily and faster than ever before to all the orbits our satellites need to reach,” said Col. Matt Flahive, SSC’s system program director for Launch Acquisition, in the official press release.

SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket

The SDA-4 contract is the latest in a long string of national security wins for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported last month, the Space Force recently shifted a GPS III satellite launch from ULA’s Vulcan rocket to SpaceX’s Falcon 9 after a significant Vulcan booster anomaly grounded ULA’s military missions indefinitely. That move made it four consecutive GPS III satellites transferred to SpaceX after contracts were originally awarded to its competitor.

This didn’t come without a fight and dates back years. SpaceX originally had to sue the Air Force in 2014 for the right to compete for national security launches, at a time when United Launch Alliance held a near monopoly on the market. Since then, the company has steadily displaced ULA as the dominant provider, and last year the Space Force confirmed SpaceX would handle approximately 60 percent of all Phase 3 launches through 2032, worth close to $6 billion.

With missile defense satellites now part of its launch manifest alongside GPS, communications, and reconnaissance payloads, SpaceX is giving hungry investors something to chew on before its imminent IPO.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla reports Q1 deliveries, missing expectations slightly

The figure, however, fell short of Wall Street’s consensus estimate of 365,645 units, reflecting ongoing headwinds in the global EV market.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla reported deliveries for the first quarter of 2026 today, missing expectations set by Wall Street analysts slightly as the company aims to have a massive year in terms of sales, along with other projects.

Tesla delivered 358,023 vehicles in the first quarter of 2026, marking a 6.3 percent increase from 336,681 vehicles in Q1 2025.

The figure, however, fell short of Wall Street’s consensus estimate of 365,645 units, reflecting ongoing headwinds in the global EV market. Production reached approximately 362,000 vehicles, with Model 3 and Model Y accounting for the vast majority. The results come as Tesla navigates softening demand, intensifying competition in China and Europe, and the expiration of key U.S. federal tax incentives.

Energy storage deployments provided a bright spot, hitting a record 8.8 GWh in Q1. This underscores the accelerating momentum in Tesla’s energy segment, which has become a critical growth driver even as automotive volumes stabilize.

Year-over-year, the energy business continues to outpace vehicle sales, with analysts noting strong backlog demand for Megapack systems amid rising grid-scale needs for renewables and AI data centers.

Looking ahead, analysts project full-year 2026 vehicle deliveries in the range of 1.69 million units—a modest 3-5% rise from roughly 1.64 million in 2025.

Growth is expected to accelerate in the second half as production ramps and new incentives emerge in select markets. However, risks remain: persistent high interest rates, price competition from legacy automakers and Chinese EV makers, and potential margin pressure could cap upside.

Tesla has not issued official full-year guidance, but executives have signaled confidence in sequential quarterly improvements driven by cost reductions and refreshed lineups.

By the end of 2026, Tesla plans several major product launches to reignite momentum. The refreshed Model Y, including a new 7-seater variant already rolling out in select markets, is expected to boost family-oriented sales with updated styling, efficiency gains, and interior enhancements.

Autonomous ambitions remain central to Tesla’s mission, and that’s where the vast majority of the attention has been put. Volume production of the Cybercab (Robotaxi) is targeted to begin ramping in 2026, potentially unlocking new revenue streams through unsupervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) deployment.

A next-generation affordable EV platform, possibly under $30,000, is also in advanced planning stages for 2026 or 2027 introduction. On the energy front, the Megapack 3 and larger Megablock systems will drive further deployment scale.

While Q1 highlights transitional challenges in autos, Tesla’s diversified roadmap, spanning refreshed consumer vehicles, commercial trucks, Robotaxis, and explosive energy growth, positions the company for a stronger second half and beyond. Investors will watch Q2 closely for signs of sustained recovery, especially with new vehicles potentially on the horizon.

Continue Reading