

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.
Investor's Corner
Tesla just got a weird price target boost from a notable bear

Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) just got a weird price target boost from a notable bear just a day after it announced its strongest quarter in terms of vehicle deliveries and energy deployments.
JPMorgan raised its price target on Tesla shares from $115 to $150. It maintained its ‘Underweight’ rating on the stock.
Despite Tesla reporting 497,099 deliveries, about 12 percent above the 443,000 anticipated from the consensus, JPMorgan is still skeptical that the company can keep up its momentum, stating most of its Q3 strength came from leaning on the removal of the $7,500 EV tax credit, which expired on September 30.
Tesla hits record vehicle deliveries and energy deployments in Q3 2025
The firm said Tesla benefited from a “temporary stronger-than-expected industry-wide pull-forward” as the tax credit expired. It is no secret that consumers flocked to the company this past quarter to take advantage of the credit.
The bump will need to be solidified as the start of a continuing trend of strong vehicle deliveries, the firm said in a note to investors. Analysts said that one quarter of strength was “too soon to declare Tesla as having sustainably returned to growth in its core business.”
JPMorgan does not anticipate Tesla having strong showings with vehicle deliveries after Q4.
There are two distinct things that stick out with this note: the first is the lack of recognition of other parts of Tesla’s business, and the confusion that surrounds future quarters.
JPMorgan did not identify Tesla’s strength in autonomy, energy storage, or robotics, with autonomy and robotics being the main focuses of the company’s future. Tesla’s Full Self-Driving and Robotaxi efforts are incredibly relevant and drive more impact moving forward than vehicle deliveries.
Additionally, the confusion surrounding future delivery numbers in quarters past Q3 is evident.
Will Tesla thrive without the EV tax credit? Five reasons why they might
Tesla will receive some assistance from deliveries of vehicles that will reach customers in Q4, but will still qualify for the credit under the IRS’s revised rules. It will also likely introduce an affordable model this quarter, which should have a drastic impact on deliveries depending on pricing.
Tesla shares are trading at $422.40 at 2:35 p.m. on the East Coast.
Investor's Corner
Tesla Q3 deliveries expected to exceed 440k as Benchmark holds $475 target
Tesla stock ended the third quarter at $444.72 per share, giving the EV maker a market cap of $1.479 trillion at the end of Q3 2025.

Benchmark has reiterated its “Buy” rating and $475 price target on Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) as the company prepares to report its third-quarter vehicle deliveries in the coming days.
Tesla stock ended the third quarter at $444.72 per share, giving the EV maker a market cap of $1.479 trillion at the end of Q3 2025.
Benchmark’s estimates
Benchmark analyst Mickey Legg noted that he expects Tesla’s deliveries to hit around 442,000 vehicles this Q3, which is under the 448,000-unit consensus but still well above the 384,000 vehicles that the company reported in Q2 2025. According to the analyst, some optimistic estimates for Tesla’s Q3 deliveries are as high as mid-460,000s.
“Tesla is expected to report 3Q25 global production and deliveries on Thursday. We model 442,000 deliveries versus ~448,000 for FactSet consensus with some high-side calls in the mid-460,000s. A solid sequential uptick off 2Q25’s ~384,000, a measured setup into year-end given a choppy incentive/pricing backdrop,” the analyst wrote.
Benchmark is not the only firm that holds an optimistic outlook on Tesla’s Q3 results. Deutsche Bank raised its own delivery forecast to 461,500, while Piper Sandler lifted its price target to $500 following a visit to China to assess market conditions. Cantor Fitzgerald also reiterated an “Overweight” rating and $355 price target for TSLA stock.
Stock momentum meets competitive headwinds
Tesla’s anticipated Q3 results are boosted in part by the impending expiration of the federal EV tax credit in the United States, which analysts believe has encouraged buyers to finalize vehicle purchases sooner, as noted in an Investing.com report.
Tesla shares have surged nearly 30% in September, raising expectations for a strong delivery report. Benchmark warned, however, that some volatility may emerge in the coming quarter.
“With the stock up sharply into the print (roughly ~28-32% in September), its positioning raises the bar for an upside surprise to translate into further near-term strength; we also see risk of volatility if regional mix or ASPs underwhelm. We continue to anticipate policy-driven choppiness after 3Q as certain EV incentives/credits tighten or roll off in select markets, potentially creating 4Q demand air pockets and order-book lumpiness,” the analyst wrote.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk slams ING Deutschland for denying TSLA shareholders ability to vote
Musk posted his criticism of the firm in a post on social media platform X.

Elon Musk has slammed ING Deutschland after the bank confirmed that it was not offering a way for clients to vote in the upcoming 2025 Tesla Annual Shareholders Meeting.
Musk posted his criticism of the firm in a post on social media platform X.
Musk’s criticism
Musk’s criticism of ING Deutschland came as a response to the bank’s comment to a Tesla shareholder. The shareholder, Maximilian Auer, noted that he has not received a response from the German bank’s customer support on how he could vote with his TSLA shares. In response to the Auer’s comment, ING Deutschland confirmed that it does not offer such a service.
“We do not offer the proxy voting process or the transmission of a control number. There is no legal obligation to do so for general meetings under foreign law,” ING Deutschland wrote in its post.
The firm’s reply received a lot of criticism from users on X, with many stating that such comments could drive clients away. Elon Musk later weighed in with some strong words of his own, stating that the bank is effectively denying shareholders the ability to vote. “Denying shareholders the ability to vote, as you are doing, certainly should be a crime,” Musk wrote in a post on X.
Tesla’s annual meeting
Tesla’s upcoming annual meeting this year is particularly important as shareholders are voting on the approval of Elon Musk’s new CEO performance award. The pay package, which could pave the way for Musk to become a trillionaire, is also designed to increase his stake in the electric vehicle maker to 25%. This, Musk stated, should prevent activist shareholder advisory firms to disrupt the company.
Tesla highlighted the importance of this year’s annual meeting in a post on X.
“We pay for outstanding performance – not for promises. In 2018, shareholders approved a groundbreaking CEO Performance Award that delivered extraordinary value. At our Annual Meeting on November 6, Tesla shareholders can vote on a pay-for-performance plan designed to drive our next era of transformational growth and value creation. Seven years ago, Elon Musk had to deliver billions to shareholders – now it’s trillions.
“This plan creates a path for Elon to secure voting rights and will retain him as a leader of the company for many years to come. But as explained below, Elon only receives voting rights after he has delivered economic value to you. Your vote matters. Vote ‘FOR’ Proposal 4!” Tesla wrote in its post on X.
-
Elon Musk1 week ago
Tesla FSD V14 set for early wide release next week: Elon Musk
-
News1 week ago
Elon Musk gives update on Tesla Optimus progress
-
News1 week ago
Tesla has a new first with its Supercharger network
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla job postings seem to show next surprise market entry
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla makes a big change to reflect new IRS EV tax credit rules
-
Investor's Corner1 week ago
Tesla gets new Street-high price target with high hopes for autonomy domination
-
Lifestyle1 week ago
500-mile test proves why Tesla Model Y still humiliates rivals in Europe
-
News6 days ago
Tesla Giga Berlin’s water consumption has achieved the unthinkable