Connect with us

Investor's Corner

Concerns about Tesla’s (TSLA) alleged ‘demand problem’ are likely overblown

Published

7 years ago

on

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.

Tesla Gigafactory 1, where Model 3 battery cells are produced. (Photo: Tesla)

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.

Advertisement
-
The Tesla Model 3 production line. (Photo: Tesla)

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.

Advertisement
-
Related Topics:

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

SpaceX stock gets a slew of price target boosts after bullish earnings call

Published

28 minutes ago

on

October 21, 2026

By

Wall Street analysts rapidly raised price targets on SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) after the company reported a bullish third quarter for 2026 following the market close on October 20. Shares were sent sharply higher in after-hours and premarket trading.

SpaceX posted revenue of $14.6 billion, a 161 percent year-over-year increase that comfortably topped consensus estimates, which fell near $12.7 billion. The company also posted a net profit of $4.4 billion from a prior-year loss, with adjusted EBITDA reaching $8.8 billion.

Its Super Intelligence (AI) division generated roughly $7.6 billion and became the largest revenue contributor, growing nearly 830 percent year-over-year, while the Connectivity segment delivered $5.2 billion on strong subscriber additions that lifted the consumer base to 13.6 million for Starlink.

The Earnings Call proved especially catalytic, as CEO Elon Musk and CFO Bret Johnsen outlined Q1 2027 revenue guidance of $33 billion to $37 billion, which was far above the roughly $22 billion analysts had modeled, alongside fourth-quarter capital-expenditure plans of $35 billion to $40 billion focused on AI compute infrastructure at sites including Memphis and Southaven.

SpaceX delivers blockbuster Q3 results as Super Intelligence segment booms

Management targets 2.5 to 3 gigawatts of nameplate compute capacity by year-end and discussed pathways to 13 gigawatts or more by the end of 2027. Musk described relentless demand from hyperscalers and other customers, with compute pricing supporting payback periods of less than a year and potentially as short as six months.

Additional highlights included Starship’s recent orbital success and V3 satellite deployment, Starlink pricing and enterprise momentum, rapid Grok Bot adoption, spectrum expansion plans, and the formation of special committees to explore a possible combination with Tesla.

These elements prompted a wave of price-target increases:

  • JPMorgan more than doubled its target to $500 from $240 while maintaining an Overweight rating.
  • Cantor Fitzgerald lifted its target to $345 from $246 (Overweight).
  • Barclays raised its target to $300 from $254 (Overweight).
  • Citi increased its target to $240 from $200 (Buy),
  • UBS moved to $230 from $210 (Buy), and
  • TD Cowen raised its target to $224 from $200 (Buy).
  • Morgan Stanley held an Overweight rating with a $300 target.
  • Other firms also adjusted higher, including Wells Fargo (to $274 from $214) and Clear Street (to $248 from $217). Analysts broadly cited the strong quarterly print, accelerating AI compute expansion, Starlink progress, and Starship milestones as drivers of higher long-term growth and earnings power.

Shares, which closed at $147.79 on October 20, jumped roughly 8 percent in early premarket trading on October 21 as investors digested the results and the newly elevated Street targets.

The average analyst price target has moved higher, which reflects greater conviction in SpaceX’s trajectory across launch, connectivity, and the Super Intelligence business, even as elevated spending remains a point of focus.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk just confirmed the Tesla and SpaceX merger step everyone was waiting for

Tesla and SpaceX formed special committees to weigh a merger, and Elon Musk supports it.

Published

15 hours ago

on

October 20, 2026

By

Elon Musk confirmed Tuesday that Tesla and SpaceX have each formed special committees of independent directors to study a possible merger, the first formal step toward combining the two companies after months of speculation.

Musk made the disclosure during SpaceX’s third quarter earnings call. “Both SpaceX and Tesla have formed special committees to discuss this idea at the request of shareholders,” he said. “Because I’m a conflicted party, I can’t actually be in the discussions of the special committees.” He described the setup as “an odd kabuki dance where two groups of people are talking and I can’t be in the conversation.”

Musk did not hide where he stands. “Do I think it would be a good idea? Yes,” he said, pointing to shared work on super intelligence software, chip design, the Terafab facility in Austin, robotics, mass to orbit and connectivity. “I do think there’s a lot of merit to combining the companies as we are pretty much in the super intelligence singularity.”

He also tried to cool expectations. The committees have not agreed on terms for any transaction, and Musk said assuming a merger is a certainty “would be overstating it.” Any deal would go to shareholders, and on the Tesla side it would need approval from 50 percent of all outstanding shares, not just the shares that are voted. Musk called that “quite a high hurdle.”

That bar has tripped Tesla up before. The company’s 2025 attempt to declassify its board won support from only 39.4 percent of outstanding shares and failed. Musk’s own voting stake sits near 20 percent after he exercised his 2018 options in June, so a deal would need broad backing from institutions and a retail base that often leaves votes uncast.

Timing is another open question. Tesla filed its proxy statement Monday for its December 3 annual meeting, and the ballot has only three items: director elections for Musk, Robyn Denholm and JB Straubel, a say on pay vote and auditor ratification. Barclays analyst Dan Levy had argued that an announcement would need to land by late October or early November to make the annual meeting, as Teslarati noted in its SpaceX earnings preview. With no terms agreed, any vote would likely require its own special meeting.

Elon Musk gives his most telling Tesla-SpaceX merger conversation yet

Musk has been edging toward this for weeks. At the All-In Summit in September, he asked “who can imagine what action one might take when there’s so much close collaboration,” Teslarati reported. Last week’s Roadster unveil, built around SpaceX derived cold gas thrusters, pushed the talk further. The two companies already share the Terafab chip project, and Tesla holds a small SpaceX stake that came from its earlier investment in xAI.

SpaceX brought strong numbers to the conversation. It reported Q3 revenue of $14.58 billion, up 161 percent year over year, with its Super Intelligence segment now its largest at $7.56 billion. A higher SpaceX valuation would shape any exchange ratio Tesla holders are offered.

Tesla reports its own third quarter results after the close on Wednesday, October 21. Investors had already ranked merger timing among the top retail questions for SpaceX’s call, and the committees will almost certainly come up again on Tesla’s.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

SpaceX delivers blockbuster Q3 results as Super Intelligence segment booms

Published

17 hours ago

on

October 20, 2026

By

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX reported its third-quarter 2026 financial results on October 20, posting the company’s first solidly profitable quarter since going public earlier in the year under the ticker $SPCX.

Revenue reached $14.58 billion, up 161 percent year-over-year from $5.6 billion, and well ahead of consensus estimates in the $12.7 to $12.9 billion range. The results highlight a rapid shift in SpaceX’s center of gravity toward artificial intelligence/super intelligence, while Starlink and traditional space operations continue to show robust progress.

Here are the key financial results for the quarter:

  • Revenue of $14.58 billion (+161% YoY)
  • Adjusted EBITDA of $8.8 billion (+306% YoY)
  • GAAP net income of $4.4 billion (versus a $1.1 billion net loss in the prior-year quarter)
  • Adjusted EPS of approximately $0.35 (versus roughly $0.13–0.16 expected)
  • Income from operations of $2.8 billion

The AI/SI segment generated $7.56 billion in revenue, an 830 percent year-over-year increase, making it the company’s largest segment for the first time. Growth was primarily driven by the activation of major cloud services agreements, the integration of Cursor (acquired earlier in 2026), and rising usage of Grok models and the newly introduced Grok Bot personal agent.

SI adjusted EBITDA reached $5 billion, and nameplate compute capacity stood at 1.7 GW at quarter-end, up from 1.4 GW in June and 0.6 GW a year earlier. Capital expenditures totaled $19.6 billion, with the majority allocated to AI infrastructure, including continued expansion of the Colossus facilities.

The Connectivity segment, which primarily surrounds Starlink, produced $5.25 billion in revenue, a 69 percent year-over-year and 22 percent sequentially. These are pleasant results to see and expected, considering how many airlines have adopted Starlink over the past year.

Starlink consumer subscribers reached 13.6 million, an 89 percent increase from the prior year, and a sequential gain of 1.6 million. Consumer average revenue per user improved to $69. Meanwhile, Enterprise and Government revenue also grew strongly, and Starlink is now installed on more than 3,800 aircraft, making internet more accessible and better performing than previous options.

The Space segment also performed well and contributed $1.77 billion in revenue, up 6 percent year-over-year and 84 percent sequentially. A major milestone was the successful first revenue-generating Starship mission (Flight 14), which deployed 26 V3 Starlink satellites. Those satellites added roughly 10 times the downlink capacity of a typical Falcon 9 Starlink launch.

SpaceX completed 12 customer launches during the quarter, including NASA’s Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope mission, and continued to grow its backlog of crewed, national security, and commercial flights.

CFO commentary noted that the combination of launch leadership, recurring Starlink revenue, and rapid SI expansion is producing meaningful operating leverage.

The company ended the quarter with roughly $90 billion in cash and marketable securities, providing substantial resources for ongoing investment while targeting an investment-grade balance sheet. Sequential revenue nearly doubled from the $7.81 billion reported in the second quarter, illustrating the pace of the AI-driven acceleration. Things are looking strong for SpaceX.

What’s incredibly striking is the fact that SI has grown to be larger than the rest of the company in such a short amount of time. CEO Elon Musk said on the earnings call that Grok Bot is the “fastest-growing product I’ve ever seen,” so it seems that it could be a true keystone of SpaceXSI over the next few years.

Continue Reading