For someone who used the "we have the data and the data proves we're right" approach, something just feels off in what Musk is quoted as saying:
>
"We did actually get a lot of cancellations as a result of The New York Times article. It probably affected us to the tune of tens of millions, to the order of $100 million, so it's not trivial,” Elon Musk, the chief executive, said on Monday.
“I would say that refers more to the valuation of the company. It wasn't as though there were 1,000 cancellations just due to The New York Times article. There were probably a few hundred."
"Probably" a few hundred? Can't he be certain how many car orders have been canceled? And in what time period, and how long of time period, did these cancellations take place? And how does this rate compare to other periods in time? And if he's going to claim that the impact was non-trivial, then why leave so much fuzziness in the interpretation of how much was lost in direct car sales and how much through a loss of valuation?
The use of data, as it did in his rebuttal to the NYT, would help his case here. But in this interview he sounds like someone just throwing out rumors he heard from someone in the finance department.
Tesla currently only makes 2 cars: the Roadster, which sells for about $100,000, and the Model S, which sells for around $50,000.
To reach $100 million in canceled sales, 1000 Roadster orders or 2000 Model S orders would have to be cancelled.
If a few hundred meant 300 cancelled orders, then their losses would be limited to between $15-30 million.
So the 2 sentences reflect a disparity of at least 700 cars. I wonder if someone is trying to confuse the 1500 cancellations in Q4 with the cancellations caused by the NYT article. 1500 cancellations would represent around $100 million in cancelled sales, and this was announced at about the same time as the NYT article.
> "We did actually get a lot of cancellations as a result of The New York Times article. It probably affected us to the tune of tens of millions, to the order of $100 million, so it's not trivial,” Elon Musk, the chief executive, said on Monday.
“I would say that refers more to the valuation of the company. It wasn't as though there were 1,000 cancellations just due to The New York Times article. There were probably a few hundred."
"Probably" a few hundred? Can't he be certain how many car orders have been canceled? And in what time period, and how long of time period, did these cancellations take place? And how does this rate compare to other periods in time? And if he's going to claim that the impact was non-trivial, then why leave so much fuzziness in the interpretation of how much was lost in direct car sales and how much through a loss of valuation?
The use of data, as it did in his rebuttal to the NYT, would help his case here. But in this interview he sounds like someone just throwing out rumors he heard from someone in the finance department.