Investor's Corner
Tesla Model S, X softer sales in Europe are NOT due to the Audi e-tron and Jaguar I-PACE
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.
Elon Musk
Tesla stock gets latest synopsis from Jim Cramer: ‘It’s actually a robotics company’
“Turns out it’s actually a robotics and Cybercab company, and I want to buy, buy, buy. Yes, Tesla’s the paper that turned into scissors in one session,” Cramer said.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) got its latest synopsis from Wall Street analyst Jim Cramer, who finally realized something that many fans of the company have known all along: it’s not a car company. Instead, it’s a robotics company.
In a recent note that was released after Tesla reported Earnings in late January, Cramer seemed to recognize that the underwhelming financials and overall performance of the automotive division were not representative of the current state of affairs.
Instead, we’re seeing a company transition itself away from its early identity, essentially evolving like a caterpillar into a butterfly.
The narrative of the Earnings Call was simple: We’re not a car company, at least not from a birds-eye view. We’re an AI and Robotics company, and we are transitioning to this quicker than most people realize.
Tesla stock gets another analysis from Jim Cramer, and investors will like it
Tesla’s Q4 Earnings Call featured plenty of analysis from CEO Elon Musk and others, and some of the more minor details of the call were even indicative of a company that is moving toward AI instead of its cars. For example, the Model S and Model X will be no more after Q2, as Musk said that they serve relatively no purpose for the future.
Instead, Tesla is shifting its focus to the vehicles catered for autonomy and its Robotaxi and self-driving efforts.
Cramer recognizes this:
“…we got results from Tesla, which actually beat numbers, but nobody cares about the numbers here, as electric vehicles are the past. And according to CEO Elon Musk, the future of this company comes down to Cybercabs and humanoid robots. Stock fell more than 3% the next day. That may be because their capital expenditures budget was higher than expected, or maybe people wanted more details from the new businesses. At this point, I think Musk acolytes might be more excited about SpaceX, which is planning to come public later this year.”
He continued, highlighting the company’s true transition away from vehicles to its Cybercab, Optimus, and AI ambitions:
“I know it’s hard to believe how quickly this market can change its attitude. Last night, I heard a disastrous car company speak. Turns out it’s actually a robotics and Cybercab company, and I want to buy, buy, buy. Yes, Tesla’s the paper that turned into scissors in one session. I didn’t like it as a car company. Boy, I love it as a Cybercab and humanoid robot juggernaut. Call me a buyer and give me five robots while I’m at it.”
Cramer’s narrative seems to fit that of the most bullish Tesla investors. Anyone who is labeled a “permabull” has been echoing a similar sentiment over the past several years: Tesla is not a car company any longer.
Instead, the true focus is on the future and the potential that AI and Robotics bring to the company. It is truly difficult to put Tesla shares in the same group as companies like Ford, General Motors, and others.
Tesla shares are down less than half a percent at the time of publishing, trading at $423.69.
There are a lot of Tesla bulls out there who have astronomical expectations for the company, especially as its arm of reach has gone well past automotive and energy and entered artificial intelligence and robotics.
However, some of the most bullish Tesla investors believe the company could become worth $100 trillion, and CEO Elon Musk does not believe that number is completely out of the question, even if it sounds almost ridiculous.
To put that number into perspective, the top ten most valuable companies in the world — NVIDIA, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, TSMC, Meta, Saudi Aramco, Broadcom, and Tesla — are worth roughly $26 trillion.
Will Tesla join the fold? Predicting a triple merger with SpaceX and xAI
Cathie Wood of ARK Invest believes the number is reasonable considering Tesla’s long-reaching industry ambitions:
“…in the world of AI, what do you have to have to win? You have to have proprietary data, and think about all the proprietary data he has, different kinds of proprietary data. Tesla, the language of the road; Neuralink, multiomics data; nobody else has that data. X, nobody else has that data either. I could see $100 trillion. I think it’s going to happen because of convergence. I think Tesla is the leading candidate [for $100 trillion] for the reason I just said.”
Musk said late last year that all of his companies seem to be “heading toward convergence,” and it’s started to come to fruition. Tesla invested in xAI, as revealed in its Q4 Earnings Shareholder Deck, and SpaceX recently acquired xAI, marking the first step in the potential for a massive umbrella of companies under Musk’s watch.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
Now that it is happening, it seems Musk is even more enthusiastic about a massive valuation that would swell to nearly four-times the value of the top ten most valuable companies in the world currently, as he said on X, the idea of a $100 trillion valuation is “not impossible.”
It’s not impossible
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 6, 2026
Tesla is not just a car company. With its many projects, including the launch of Robotaxi, the progress of the Optimus robot, and its AI ambitions, it has the potential to continue gaining value at an accelerating rate.
Musk’s comments show his confidence in Tesla’s numerous projects, especially as some begin to mature and some head toward their initial stages.
Elon Musk
Tesla director pay lawsuit sees lawyer fees slashed by $100 million
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
The Delaware Supreme Court has cut more than $100 million from a legal fee award tied to a shareholder lawsuit challenging compensation paid to Tesla directors between 2017 and 2020.
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
Delaware Supreme Court trims legal fees
As noted in a Bloomberg Law report, the case targeted pay granted to Tesla directors, including CEO Elon Musk, Oracle founder Larry Ellison, Kimbal Musk, and Rupert Murdoch. The Delaware Chancery Court had awarded $176 million to the plaintiffs. Tesla’s board must also return stock options and forego years worth of pay.
As per Chief Justice Collins J. Seitz Jr. in an opinion for the Delaware Supreme Court’s full five-member panel, however, the decision of the Delaware Chancery Court to award $176 million to a pension fund’s law firm “erred by including in its financial benefit analysis the intrinsic value” of options being returned by Tesla’s board.
The justices then reduced the fee award from $176 million to $70.9 million. “As we measure it, $71 million reflects a reasonable fee for counsel’s efforts and does not result in a windfall,” Chief Justice Seitz wrote.
Other settlement terms still intact
The Supreme Court upheld the settlement itself, which requires Tesla’s board to return stock and options valued at up to $735 million and to forgo three years of additional compensation worth about $184 million.
Tesla argued during oral arguments that a fee award closer to $70 million would be appropriate. Interestingly enough, back in October, Justice Karen L. Valihura noted that the $176 award was $60 million more than the Delaware judiciary’s budget from the previous year. This was quite interesting as the case was “settled midstream.”
The lawsuit was brought by a pension fund on behalf of Tesla shareholders and focused exclusively on director pay during the 2017–2020 period. The case is separate from other high-profile compensation disputes involving Elon Musk.
Tesla adds a new feature to Navigation in preparation for a new vehicle
Tesla stock gets latest synopsis from Jim Cramer: ‘It’s actually a robotics company’
