backtop


Print 16 comment(s) - last by EricMartello.. on Jul 29 at 6:59 PM


Tesla Model S

Tesla Model X
Tesla posted a revenue decrease of $26.7 million from $58.9 million a year earlier

Tesla may have a winner on its hands with the Model S' recent release, but the electric vehicle (EV) company still reported financial losses for Q2 2012.

For the second quarter, Tesla posted a revenue decrease of $26.7 million from $58.9 million a year earlier. It also reported losses for the quarter of $105.6 million (89 cents per share) from $58.9 million (53 cents per share) last year.

Tesla is in transition mode at the moment. It's currently going from only selling a few thousand of its Roadster battery electric vehicle sports car, which goes for about $109,000, to now selling its first full production vehicle, the Model S.

The Model S was initially announced three years ago, and finally shipped June 22. The Model S comes in three different versions, with 40 kWh, 60 kWh or 85 kWh battery packs. The lower-end 40 kWh base model will sell for $57,400 while the higher-end model will sell for $105,400. The Model S is eligible for the $7,500 federal electric tax credit as well.

It was recently reported that the 85 kWh model could earn a 265-mile driving range window sticker rating from the EPA, which would put the Model S far ahead of the electric competition.

The Model S has proved to be quite popular with Tesla having 10,000 reservations for the vehicle before it shipped. Having the Model S onboard will definitely help Tesla as it moves toward becoming profitable. Up until now, it has reported losses of over $500 million since 2009.

"We are maintaining our revenue guidance of $560 million and $600 million and our Model S volume projection of 5,000 units for 2012," said Tesla in a letter to shareholders. "We expect to deliver approximately 500 vehicles to customers in Q3 with the balance delivered in Q4."

The next step on Tesla's list is to build its Model X crossover late next year.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: well
By Ringold on 7/28/2012 3:07:26 PM , Rating: 2
I love this issue. It's forcing you guys to take both sides of an argument.

On the one hand, you deny it's failing in the market place, even though they and hybrids, which the other high-brow snob above hung his hat on, make up a tiny, tiny portion of global sales. Liberals point to Porches and Lambo's, which receive no comparable tax subsidies federally, as comparable brands.

And yet on the other, despite this success, you guys generally say it needs not just the level of support it already gets, but perhaps even more subsidies. Why, then, if its so successful and obviously the future? Why help Musk get even richer since you think it's so obvious?

Not sure why liberals don't think anything at all can ever happen unless the government forces it. Battery technology will continue to push on even if this market collapses from being uncompetitive now simply because batteries are so widely used in other important (and unsubsidized) markets. Yes, I even agree, it's the future, but it doesn't need governments help.


"There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere." -- Isaac Asimov














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki