Tesla Q2 2024 Update [pdf]
Tesla’s Q2 2024 shareholder update prompts scrutiny of its weakening automotive margins, heavy reliance on regulatory credits, and negative year‑over‑year vehicle growth, all while its stock still trades at tech‑style multiples. Commenters weigh whether the company can justify its valuation through bets on Full Self-Driving, robotaxis, the Optimus humanoid robot, and grid-scale energy storage, amid delays on projects like the Tesla Semi and growing concern that Elon Musk’s political stance is hurting core EV demand.
Full Self-Driving (FSD) and Autonomy
- Some owners report major recent improvements, saying FSD now handles city driving with minimal intervention and is viable for long trips (with mandated supervision checks).
- Others report dangerous or erratic behavior: curb strikes, late braking, poor lane handling, unsafe merges, and “last-second” corrections even in Tesla’s home territory.
- Skeptics argue individual impressions are irrelevant given the massive scale of road miles; even very high reliability can still be unsafe at national scale.
- Debate over whether “technology is there” vs. still far from safe, regulator-approved robotaxis. Tesla’s own filing only refers to “FSD (Supervised)” and emphasizes that it is not autonomous.
Financials, Margins, and Regulatory Credits
- Automotive sales and profit are down year-over-year; vehicle volume growth is expected to be lower in 2024.
- Operating margin has compressed into low single digits. Half or more of operating income this quarter is attributed to regulatory credits, prompting concerns about core auto profitability.
- Counterpoint: credits are a small share of revenue and require actually building EVs; they partially offset costs, and company-wide pricing/spend could adjust if credits declined.
- Some see this as evidence Tesla has long depended on subsidies and aggressive accounting; others say the business is not “doing poorly” given macro factors and one-time restructuring costs.
Product Roadmap: Semi, Cybertruck, Robotaxi, Optimus
- Tesla Semi: critics highlight tiny deliveries vs. 2017 promises and long delays; defenders say it’s still in limited test deployment, not prioritized, and not tied to 4680 cell production.
- Cybertruck seen by some as an ego-driven “halo” product prioritized over the more practical Semi; others say it’s a valuable testbed and already the best-selling EV pickup.
- Robotaxi and “AI company” narrative are widely viewed as speculative or “smoke and mirrors,” especially given repeated delays and the cautious language in official filings.
- Optimus humanoid robot and Dojo/AI future are mentioned as key to long-term valuation by some, but filings give them minimal, nonspecific treatment, raising doubts.
Market, Competition, and Demand
- EV growth is slowing in 2024, but non-Tesla EVs grew strongly in 2023; Tesla now faces many newer, competitive models, especially from Korean and other automakers.
- Some Tesla owners plan to switch brands for better comfort, UI, and to avoid association with the CEO.
Politics, Brand, and Governance
- Many argue the CEO’s rightward political shift and attacks on “woke” culture are alienating climate-conscious buyers and damaging demand.
- There is extensive debate about fiduciary duty: whether personal politics that threaten tax credits and brand value should justify replacing the CEO.
- Discussion also touches on reported large political donations and whether they are aimed at preserving subsidies, avoiding legal exposure, or simply personal ideology.
Energy Storage and Infrastructure
- Energy generation and storage now form a meaningful and fast-growing revenue segment (though still minority of total).
- Some see a pivot toward grid-scale batteries and infrastructure as inevitable; others note battery cells are largely sourced from partners and view storage as a low-margin, commoditized business with growing competition.