

Investor's Corner
Concerns about Tesla’s (TSLA) alleged ‘demand problem’ are likely overblown
The past few months have not been kind to Tesla stock (NASDAQ:TSLA). Following the company’s lower-than-expected production and delivery figures from the first quarter, the negative narrative surrounding Tesla has gone on overdrive. At the forefront of this is a thesis that the electric car maker’s critics have been pushing: Tesla has a demand problem.
This particular point has spread like wildfire, particularly over the past few weeks. Analysts that recently downgraded TSLA stock would reference weak demand for the Model 3, and bears would echo the same assumption during segments in mainstream media. While this narrative is compelling in the way that it appears to be a foreshadowing of Tesla’s eventual demise, the demand problem thesis is at best inaccurate and at worst flat-out wrong, simply because one can’t base a thesis in one data point.
TSLA investor @Incentives101, an economist with a background in macro research, notes that there is a considerable misconception surrounding Tesla’s Q1 results and how it relates to the demand for the company’s electric cars. In a conversation with Teslarati, the investor explained that while it is easy to make assumptions based on Tesla’s Q1 2019 figures, there is simply not enough data to accurately and responsibly forecast Model 3 (and in extension, Model S and X) demand. Tesla’s Q1 2019 data is nevertheless useful, as it reveals a series of factors that could shed light on what is happening to the electric car maker.
Shocks, Backlogs, and Demand
The economist notes that demand shocks could be transitory or permanent. Taxes, for example, normally have a permanent effect and natural disasters have a transitory one. But these shocks have different effects over time depending on whether a shock is sudden or expected. Understanding how demand normally reacts to these shocks is very important, as it provides clues at what could be expected to make informed assumptions about Q1. When a shock such as a federal tax credit reduction comes, for example, its effect happens in three stages — given that consumers knew it was coming. Before the shock hits, demand generally increases (pulling demand), followed by a period where demand decreases by more than what could be considered a new equilibrium. Following these is another period where demand increases to reach a new equilibrium. Q1 most likely was the worst part of the second stage.
The backlog of Model 3 reservations was primarily used as a point against Tesla by critics, with an assumption suggesting that there will be no demand for the vehicle after the company clears out its initial batch of reservations. The economist argued that while Tesla’s backlog is widely believed to be a factor impacting demand, such a factor would likely not be relevant in the bigger picture. “Given the characteristics of auto demand (it recycles constantly, consumers preferences are well understood, and trends are clear) a ‘backlog’ has the same effect as a natural disaster if you really want to compare it to something. If the backlog happens at the same time as a tax shock or other shocks, it just exacerbates the move. The duration of the shock could be discussed, but in the end, the effect of the backlog is just irrelevant,” the investor said.
Tesla faced a number of shocks in the US auto market in recent months, and these could be translated into inaccurate assumptions. Among these are negative shocks such as the reduced federal tax credit, the “end” of the Model 3 reservation backlog, seasonality, and supply; as well as positive shocks like price reductions on the company’s vehicle lineup.
“There are some main conclusions that one can infer from the data: 1) There isn’t information available to know what the initial equilibrium was. The exponential shape of the curve gives no reference whatsoever to know this. Comparing Model S/X vs. Model 3, is easy to see that S/X had a stable path which would make it easier to measure the impact of these type of shocks; 2) Over time, the shock will be (almost) totally explained by the reduction in supply; 3) Shocks were expected, and price adjustments should more than cancel any negative permanent shock that taxes would have; and 4) Tesla had really bad luck with all these things happening at the same time,” the economist remarked.
Consumer Preferences
Based on these data, one can infer that the primary constraint that Tesla is facing is not demand, but supply. Demand for the company’s vehicles is not exclusive to the United States auto market. It is global, and in this sense, there is simply no indication that global supply for Tesla’s electric cars is already meeting global demand. The investor noted that the effect of the “backlog” argument in global markets would likely be marginal and transitory, and just as demand is not static, supply and prices have not been either.
Ultimately, the most significant factor that would affect the demand for Tesla’s vehicles is consumer preferences. In recent years, consumer preferences are changing in favor of smart devices, and this cascades into the auto industry. Tesla’s electric cars, which are arguably the most tech-focused consumer vehicles on the road today, are a perfect fit for this changing landscape.
According to the economist, “Consumer preferences and regulation actually affect demand. Prices technically don’t affect demand — just the quantity demanded — and the trend shows that it will have a multiplier effect. It’s always important to ask the correct questions, and the question today is not what are they doing to ‘fix’ a transitory shock? Or where’s demand? The question is, how will you increase supply?”
Alleged ‘Cannibalization’ of the Model S and X by the Model 3
In terms of the alleged cannibalization of Model S and X sales by the Model 3, the investor notes that there is no reason, at least at present, to believe that cannibalization is actually happening. Tesla Model 3 sales increased while Model S and X remained in their path, and as sales of the flagship sedan and SUV decreased, Model 3 sales in the US decreased as well.
“Even if you disaggregate data to try to find signs of cannibalization, there’s still no proof. There’s only one market — Norway — that is big enough, that has reliable data and didn’t face any distortions (tax or subsidy), that could give us any insight about cannibalization. Without further information, it would seem that there was significant cannibalization. The only problem is that Tesla distorted the market by eliminating the most popular Model S and X variant (75kWh), which was, on average 70%+ of sales. It is simply impossible to know which effect (the Model 3’s introduction or the 75kWh variant’s elimination) had the biggest impact, or even measure them in any way. And even then, one market may not be enough to prove it,” the investor stated.
Ultimately, the continuing phase-out period of the federal tax credit in the US would likely affect Model S and X sales in the country. But similar to the Model 3, these effects will likely be transitory and not permanent, especially given that prices have changed accordingly, given that the vehicles have better value per dollar. As with the Model 3, the sharp decrease in Model S and X sales in Q1 2019 could be explained by supply changes in its totality. Thus, demand should return to its previous path after a short period of time.
Disclosure: I have no ownership in shares of TSLA and have no plans to initiate any positions within 72 hours.
Elon Musk
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
ISS said the size of the pay package will enable Musk to have access to “extraordinarily high pay opportunities over the next ten years,” and it will have an impact on future packages because it will “reduce the board’s ability to meaningfully adjust future pay levels.”

Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package, which was proposed by the company last month, has hit its first bit of adversity from proxy advisory firm Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS).
Musk has called the firm “ISIS,” a play on its name relating it to the terrorist organization, in the past.
“ISIS”
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 27, 2021
The pay package aims to lock in Musk to the CEO role at Tesla for the next decade, as it will only be paid in full if he is able to unlock each tranche based on company growth, which will reward shareholders.
However, the sum is incredibly large and would give Musk the ability to become the first trillionaire in history, based on his holdings. This is precisely why ISS is advising shareholders to vote against the pay plan.
The group said that Musk’s pay package will lock him in, which is the goal of the Board, and it is especially important to do this because of his “track record and vision.”
However, it also said the size of the pay package will enable Musk to have access to “extraordinarily high pay opportunities over the next ten years,” and it will have an impact on future packages because it will “reduce the board’s ability to meaningfully adjust future pay levels.”
The release from ISS called the size of Musk’s pay package “astronomical” and said its design could continue to pay the CEO massive amounts of money for even partially achieving the goals. This could end up in potential dilution for existing investors.
If Musk were to reach all of the tranches, Tesla’s market cap could reach up to $8.5 trillion, which would make it the most valuable company in the world.
Tesla has made its own attempts to woo shareholders into voting for the pay package, which it feels is crucial not only for retaining Musk but also for continuing to create value for shareholders.
Tesla launched an ad for Elon Musk’s pay package on Paramount+
Musk has also said he would like to have more ownership control of Tesla, so he would not have as much of an issue with who he calls “activist shareholders.”
Investor's Corner
Barclays lifts Tesla price target ahead of Q3 earnings amid AI momentum
Analyst Dan Levy adjusted his price target for TSLA stock from $275 to $350, while maintaining an “Equal Weight” rating for the EV maker.

Barclays has raised its price target for Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA), with the firm’s analysts stating that the electric vehicle maker is approaching its Q3 earnings with two contrasting “stories.”
Analyst Dan Levy adjusted his price target for TSLA stock from $275 to $350, while maintaining an “Equal Weight” rating for the EV maker.
Tesla’s AI and autonomy narrative
Levy told investors that Tesla’s “accelerating autonomous and AI narrative,” amplified by CEO Elon Musk’s proposed compensation package, is energizing market sentiment. The analyst stated that expectations for a Q3 earnings-per-share beat are supported by improved vehicle delivery volumes and stronger-than-expected gross margins, as noted in a TipRanks report.
Tesla has been increasingly positioning itself as an AI-driven company, with Elon Musk frequently emphasizing the long-term potential of its Full Self-Driving (FSD) software and products like Optimus, both of which are heavily driven by AI. The company’s AI focus has also drawn the support of key companies like Nvidia, one of the world’s largest companies today.
Still cautious on TSLA
Despite bullish AI sentiments, Barclays maintained its caution on Tesla’s underlying business metrics. Levy described the firm’s stance as “leaning neutral to slightly negative” heading into the Q3 earnings call, citing concerns about near-term fundamentals of the electric vehicle maker.
Barclays is not the only firm that has expressed its concerns about TSLA stock recently. As per previous reports, BNP Paribas Exane also shared an “Underperform” rating on the company due to its two biggest products, the Robotaxi and Optimus, still generating “zero sales today, yet inform ~75% of our ~$1.02 trillion price target.” BNP Paribas, however, also estimated that Tesla will have an estimated 525,000 active Robotaxis by 2030, 17 million cumulative Optimus robot deliveries by 2040, and more than 11 million FSD subscriptions by 2030.
Investor's Corner
BNP Paribas Exane initiates Tesla coverage with “Underperform” rating
The firm’s projections for Tesla still include an estimated 525,000 active Robotaxis by 2030.

Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) has received a bearish call from BNP Paribas Exane, which initiated coverage on the stock with an Underperform rating and a $307 price target, about 30% below current levels.
The firm’s analysts argued that Tesla’s valuation is driven heavily by artificial intelligence ventures such as the Robotaxi and Optimus, which are both still not producing any sales today.
Tesla’s valuation
In its note, BNP Paribas Exane stated that Tesla’s two AI-led programs, the Robotaxi and Optimus robots, generate “zero sales today, yet inform ~75% of our ~$1.02 trillion price target.” The research firm’s model projected a maximum bull-case valuation of $2.7 trillion through 2040, but after discounting milestone probabilities, its base-case valuation remained at $1.02 trillion.
The analysts described their outlook as optimistic toward Tesla’s AI ventures but cautioned that the stock’s “unfavorable risk/reward is clear,” adding that consensus earnings expectations for 2026 remain too high. Tesla’s market cap currently stands around $1.44 trillion with a trailing twelve-month revenue of $92.7 billion, which BNP Paribas argued does not justify Tesla’s P/E ratio of 258.59, as noted in an Investing.com report.
Tesla and its peers
BNP Paribas Exane’s report also included a comparative study of the “Magnificent Seven,” finding Tesla’s current market valuation as rather aggressive. “Our unique comparative analysis of the ‘Mag 7’ reveals the extreme nature of TSLA’s valuation, as the market implicitly says TSLA’s 2035 earnings (~55% of which will be driven by Robotaxi & Optimus, w/ zero sales now) have the same level of risk & value-appropriation as the ‘Mag 6’s’ 2026 earnings,” the firm noted.
The firm’s projections for Tesla include an estimated 525,000 active Robotaxis by 2030, 17 million cumulative Optimus robot deliveries by 2040 priced above $20,000 each, and more than 11 million Full Self-Driving subscriptions by 2030. Interestingly enough, these seem to be rather optimistic projections for one of the electric vehicle maker’s more bearish estimates today.
-
Elon Musk3 days ago
SpaceX posts Starship booster feat that’s so nutty, it doesn’t even look real
-
Elon Musk2 days ago
Tesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
-
News2 days ago
Elon Musk confirms Tesla FSD V14.2 will see widespread rollout
-
News3 days ago
Tesla is adding an interesting feature to its centerscreen in a coming update
-
News5 days ago
Tesla launches new interior option for Model Y
-
News4 days ago
Tesla widens rollout of new Full Self-Driving suite to more owners
-
Elon Musk3 days ago
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
-
News5 days ago
Tesla makes big move with its Insurance program