Bloomberg Model 3 tracker shows production crashing below 1000/week

[bwilson4web]

Thanks:

I'm not interested in anything other than the most accurate numbers available. As a result we were less than 500 units off of U.S. delivery estimates in Q2 and about a dozen off for combined U.S. deliveries in Q2. AKA within 4% of actual US numbers. We were also within 300-400 on July numbers based on a graph released by Tesla. So yeah, we're confident.

A couple of questions:

• Wards - Used by Autoline Daily, I've seen their Prius numbers look off when compared to Toyota reported Prius numbers. I was under the impression they use Polk for numbers derived from vehicle registrations. Just I don't trust them ... you?
• GoodCarBadCar - nice web site but I have little experience with their numbers. You?

In the past, I've used the monthly Dashboard reports from Hybridcars.com. However, there appears to be a problem as they stopped publishing them. I've been thinking about using GoodCarBadCar to fill the gap. Thoughts?

Thanks,
Bob Wilson

 

[TeslaInvestors]

Dominick is referring to myself and Steven. We track Tesla sales, not Vanja, and we place no importance on Bloomberg as far as IEV estimates are concerned.

As I explained months ago in this very thread:

Bloomberg Model 3 tracker shows production crashing below 1000/week

"The Bloomberg production tracker is often incorrect because it is not adjusted on the fly or corrected when it is wrong. And it is never outright stopped.

Bloomberg over-estimated April production by at about 3,000 units. Primarily this is because they did not account for the 5 days when production was down. Or the 3-5 days immediately following when production ramped back up to previous levels.

The current production is not 1,000 units / week. Far more than that. Rather than simply correct their number, they are adjusting it below actual production for a few weeks to offset the inflated numbers. Within 2-3 weeks it should be back on track.

The bloomberg tracker is useful and interesting to look back on over time. But it isn't particularly useful as a real time estimator. "

I'm not interested in anything other than the most accurate numbers available. As a result we were less than 500 units off of U.S. delivery estimates in Q2 and about a dozen off for combined U.S. + Canadian deliveries in Q2. AKA within 4% of actual US numbers. We were also about 300-400 on July numbers based on a graph released by Tesla. So yeah, we're confident.

It's impossible to be 100% accurate. We just want to have the best numbers possible.​

I don't know what comment may have been deleted. But you seem to be missing the actual text of Vanja's story:

"Keep in mind that the tracker is not accurate when it comes to daily or even weekly current output, but rather, long-term estimates. Also, even if Tesla did have a week that exceeded 6,000 units or a day that would extrapolate to that over time, this doesn’t directly correlate with sustained production. Moreover, as the end of the month is nearing, we always need to keep in mind that production and deliveries are two very different things."

If you don't like the article that's fine. But Vanja's article reported on Bloombergs numbers as "estimates" as they are. And he also provided caution that Bloombergs numbers are not accurate on a short term scale but can signify general trends long term. So attacking him doesn't seem at all appropriate.

OK, got it! I was referring to that particular article, and my rather harmless comment being deleted.
BTW, is IEV going to publish the September numbers before Tesla publishes it on Oct 2 or 3? Last time, IIRC, IEV postponed it till Tesla itself announced the Q2 delivery numbers.

 

[WadeTyhon]

Thanks:

A couple of questions:

• Wards - Used by Autoline Daily, I've seen their Prius numbers look off when compared to Toyota reported Prius numbers. I was under the impression they use Polk for numbers derived from vehicle registrations. Just I don't trust them ... you?
• GoodCarBadCar - nice web site but I have little experience with their numbers. You?

In the past, I've used the monthly Dashboard reports from Hybridcars.com. However, there appears to be a problem as they stopped publishing them. I've been thinking about using GoodCarBadCar to fill the gap. Thoughts?

Thanks,
Bob Wilson

Hybridcars.com used to get their numbers from a market research firm. In the past they were fairly accurate.

From what I understand, recently there were a number of changes in ownership of the site and in the writing staff. I'm not sure what exactly occurred, but recently they've been taking longer and longer to post their numbers. It was pointed out to us that they were starting to use some of our EV estimates. Then just stopped posting. I'm guessing their partnership with that market research firm ended.

GoodCarBadCar has been mostly good in my limited experience. Most of their numbers come directly from automakers. A few some of them are estimated and I think they should note it as such but they do not. They use our Tesla estimates. When looking at their monthly sales rankings, keep in mind that GM is obviously not counted. But otherwise they're fine. More likely to be right than wrong.

I don't believe Wards provides their numbers to the public (unless that changed recently). So I honestly couldn't tell you for sure how accurate they are.

 

[WadeTyhon]

OK, got it! I was referring to that particular article, and my rather harmless comment being deleted.
BTW, is IEV going to publish the September numbers before Tesla publishes it on Oct 2 or 3? Last time, IIRC, IEV postponed it till Tesla itself announced the Q2 delivery numbers.

I calculated and scheduled/posted my numbers before Tesla numbers came out. While I was already at work for my day job, I received notice from the other writers that Tesla had released their numbers several days earlier than we expected. So while at work, I updated the article.

Despite a large number of Tesla fans being upset that we released a number they didn't like, telling us "oh, you're wrong, 5,000+ Model 3s were sold in Canada at least!" and what have you, we now have access to Canadian numbers from Q2 and our quarterly numbers were very close.

However, because of the related 200k discussion... we decided not to update the chart. And things got quite insane! Tesla would not respond to us or any other site for weeks regarding the issue. And the IRS would not respond to anyone for clarity on their rules.

Of course the good news for Tesla fans was... either our long term historical estimates were off (by about 2 weeks of production) or IRS has some strange ways they calculated for the tax rebate. We lean toward the latter since we found that Ford IRS numbers seem to lag a month or two behind the sales data Ford reports to IEVs. But we still don't know which. You can view the entire crazy episode here, including updates after the fact from 7/2, 7/8 and 7/12. :

https://insideevs.com/why-we-believe-tesla-passed-200k-u-s-sales-in-june/

We knew Tesla would be between 2,000 and 3,000 in Canada. We don't generally track Canada but I pegged them at about 2,250 based on the limited data I had on Canada.

Following the release of Canadian data at ~2,750 registrations we made our final update to the sales chart, revising our U.S. estimates down ~500 units. These are the numbers you can see in our sales chart currently. The original Q2 estimates are available at the link above. Our monthly sales report notes all historical updates we have made to sales data.

We will post our initial estimates for Tesla this quarter as well before Tesla releases theirs. Again, impossible for us to be 100% accurate. We just want to provide the best estimates available.

 

[Domenick]

Seems more like over confidence
When that article was published on Aug 23, I wrote in the comments that I am bookmarking it, and will see how long it takes for the model to retroactively correct itself. Not surprisingly, my comment was deleted. I find it rather disturbing, the practice of such fascism in moderating comments. If my comment violates some forum policy, then replace it with what policy it violated. These surreptitious deletion of any comment that is not 100% aligned with author's view is quite distasteful, imho.

Here is that article.
https://insideevs.com/tesla-model-3-production-now-exceeding-6000-per-week/

I didn't read your now-deleted comment, so I can't say why, exactly, it was expunged. Certainly, IEVs has a policy of deleting comments with obscenities, personal attacks, and attacks on the site itself and/or contributor's integrity.

You are certainly free to believe that our numbers are wrong, and/or that Musk makes an effort to mess with tracking efforts, and/or any of the other Tesla conspiracy theories that are being constantly generated on Twitter and Seeking Alpha. And, it's fine if you want to explain here or on the site proper why you believe what you do. However, if you attack the integrity of the site or its contributors, it's quite likely your comment will be deleted. If you do it multiple times, your account may be banned there.

We tend to be a bit more forgiving on the Forum but that is not to say we will countenance repeated attacks on our integrity. Please consider this the next time you want to comment in a similar fashion to your post #137 in this thread.

Your contributions here are welcome, but we have no obligation to tolerate libelous postings.

 

[TeslaInvestors]

What's worse, it's headed SOUTH, towards 2000 a week. I hope Elon stops the downtrend before it hits 0.
I see lifelong free supercharging coming for all Model 3. May be a bundle of cash on the hood also.

View attachment 2423
This seems to line up better with on ground checks by some people.

Whoa, not even a day since I predicted this. The bundle of cash already started appearing. I was expecting next quarter.
Now we know where the delivery bottleneck is.
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/posts/3056461/

They just offered my brother in law an inventory P3D+ red on white with 187 miles for 2,500 off, he declined as he felt they should have discounted it further.

 

[Roy_H]

I see a lot of good posts on the reasons for the very low production indicated on the Bloomberg Tracker. I don't believe the conspiracy theories about Elon deliberately messing with the data. I believe Tom Randall correctly identifies the production gaps as the reason the graphs got out of whack, but did not adjust correctly. My theory is that these number gaps are AWD versions and Tesla grossly underestimated demand for the AWD version. They simply did not have enough front wheel drive motors to fulfill the demand, so they skipped these and built more RWD versions. Bloomberg's tracker assumes that these skipped VINs were built and falsely stated production exceeded 6000, but instead of going back and correcting the earlier production figures, he is now compensating with low current production values to bring the average back in line. I believe Tesla has now scaled up the front motor drive production and is filling this gap in VINs now as fast as they can. However since the Bloomberg Tracker shows these as already built, it doesn't count them now. Tesla has registered 59866 Model 3 VINs since July 1 and I believe the gap is being filled now so I expect most of these to be built by the end of the month. My prediction is that we will see 60k+ for the quarter.

 

[TeslaInvestors]

I see a lot of good posts on the reasons for the very low production indicated on the Bloomberg Tracker. I don't believe the conspiracy theories about Elon deliberately messing with the data. I believe Tom Randall correctly identifies the production gaps as the reason the graphs got out of whack, but did not adjust correctly. My theory is that these number gaps are AWD versions and Tesla grossly underestimated demand for the AWD version. They simply did not have enough front wheel drive motors to fulfill the demand, so they skipped these and built more RWD versions. Bloomberg's tracker assumes that these skipped VINs were built and falsely stated production exceeded 6000, but instead of going back and correcting the earlier production figures, he is now compensating with low current production values to bring the average back in line. I believe Tesla has now scaled up the front motor drive production and is filling this gap in VINs now as fast as they can. However since the Bloomberg Tracker shows these as already built, it doesn't count them now. Tesla has registered 59866 Model 3 VINs since July 1 and I believe the gap is being filled now so I expect most of these to be built by the end of the month. My prediction is that we will see 60k+ for the quarter.

You are mostly correct. But the Bloomberg new tracker will count the AWD models as it finds sample data in those gaps. The tracker decreased cumulative count by 4.4% , as stated in the last update comment. When they are counted, it will recoup this decrease.

It also corrected the past data points, as seen in the line plot now. This plot reflects the new more accurate (presumed) model.
Regarding Tesla's intent to fudge/fool the data: Look no further than their past history of randomizing VIN assignments etc.

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Whoa, not even a day since I predicted this. The bundle of cash already started appearing. I was expecting next quarter.
Now we know where the delivery bottleneck is.
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/posts/3056461/

At the end of every quarter, Tesla sales reps to try to sell off as many of their demos and service loaners as possible. Perhaps they are making even more of an effort than usual this quarter, since it's now so important for Tesla to demonstrate that it can be consistently profitable, starting this quarter and going forward. But doing this type of sales outreach calling at the end of a quarter is normal procedure for Tesla. It's sadly predictable that "TeslaInvestors" would try to portray this as somehow being a bad thing, since he does the same with everything Tesla does.

For readers interesting in looking beyond the repetitive and worn-out Tesla bashing here, you might be interested in this article about everything Tesla is doing to maximize sales and revenue (including selling used cars in China) this quarter:

"Bay Area Bonanza: Tesla Insider Leaks Model 3 Delivery Extravaganza"

Go Tesla! Keep going Tesla!

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

It also corrected the past data points, as seen in the line plot now.

I don't think so. I've seen it said that Bloomberg makes no attempt to correct its previous estimates; it just under- or over-estimates current production in an attempt to compensate for previous over- or under-estimations.

And that's exactly what Roy_H said. You continue to give us reasons to believe that whenever you disagree with anyone regarding anything related to Tesla, "TeslaInvestors", that they will be right and you very nearly always wrong.

 

[bwilson4web]

I am coming to a similar conclusion:

. . . "TeslaInvestors", that they will be right and you very nearly always wrong.

Omission of key elements in citations and using dodgy sources marginalizes postings. When the signal-to-noise ratio begins to interfere with accurate communications, there comes a time to 'turn up the squelch' and filter out the static. I'm close but not there yet.

Q3 ends in 7 days and credible reports in 8 days. By November 1, we should have the Q3 financials and a better understanding of the Tesla trials and tribulations. There will be projections for Q4 but I don't do quarter-by-quarter investing.

My current 401k has conservative holdings. Come January, I can draw another tranche to diversify into metals and round out my Tesla holdings.

Bob Wilson

 

[TeslaInvestors]

Gosh. It keeps falling lower and lower instead of reaching the 10k a week Elon as targeting. I guess that means no $35k Model 3 ever.
Does anyone know the weekly production rate of Toyota Camry, whose demise the delusional folks are expecting?

 

[TeslaInvestors]

Now at 2898 a week. One good thing with this new model is that it varies continuously and doesn't stay static for a whole week like before.
The weekly histograms were wrong anyway.

Curiously, Panasonic's current production with 10 lines is good for 388K long range Model 3 a year. About 7500 cars a week.
So it doesn't make sense how battery production is the bottleneck, as Tesla has barely averaged 4k a week. The plot shows like 2k a week for the last 9 months.
There should also be a lot of excess batteries piled up high from previous months where model 3 production was way lower. Nothing makes sense about Tesla.

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Nothing makes sense about Tesla.

Amazingly enough, deliberately choosing perverse interpretations of nearly all facts and figures about Tesla's production and sales -- as well as treating Bloomberg's production estimations (repeatedly shown to be far from accurate) as Gospel -- have lead to irrational conclusions on your part.

Who could have guessed that would happen?

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

I've seen it said that Bloomberg makes no attempt to correct its previous estimates; it just under- or over-estimates current production in an attempt to compensate for previous over- or under-estimations.

I have to correct myself here. I took a closer look at Bloomberg's so-called Model 3 production "tracker" website (again, it's only an estimator, not actually a tracker), and I do see some notes there that they did correct a few of their earlier data points. Mea culpa; I was wrong on that point.

Of course, that doesn't help any with the accuracy (or rather, inaccuracy) of their current estimations!

​

 

[TeslaInvestors]

Spoke too soon. Now it is 2335/week. Morning was 2833.
It's in a free fall. I think it will be stuck in 1k-2k a week till the European deliveries pick up the slack in US demand.

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Spoke too soon. Now it is 2335/week. Morning was 2833.

The only information any rational person could glean from your repetative -- indeed, apparently obsessive -- posts on this subject is that Bloomberg's production estimator is getting further and further away from reality.

It's in a free fall. I think it will be stuck in 1k-2k a week...

Yet another missive from Earth-2.

Here on Earth-1, Tesla is once again in the middle of an end-of-quarter push to deliver as many of the cars they have produced as possible, pressing into service volunteer Tesla enthusiasts to help with deliveries, and now even talking about making their own car carrier semi trailers, to deal with a shortage of such trailers!

The only thing in "free fall", TeslaInvestors, is the probability that anyone would believe anything you have to say about Tesla's production or sales.

 

[bwilson4web]

Perhaps the SEC might require a monthly or bi-weekly report of sales and production which appears to be the largest source of FUD. For good measure, initiate a parallel rule requiring everyone to open source, comply.

Bob Wilson

 

[TeslaInvestors]

Perhaps the SEC might require a monthly or bi-weekly report of sales and production which appears to be the largest source of FUD. For good measure, initiate a parallel rule requiring everyone to open source, comply.

Bob Wilson

Wouldn't that be nice for Elon to be "transparent" as he claims he wanted to be with his totally fraudulent privatization tweet? But you won't get a peep out of him on these useful information. Instead, he insults the auto journalists and public by saying that they are so dumb that they can't understand Tesla's monthly figures.
What's more, seeing these scammy practices of not disclosing monthly sales figures, GM has also started following the same scammy 'only quarterly sales number' disclosures. My hunch is that the analyst named Adam Jonas might have persuaded Mary Barra to do this. May be, she thinks GM stock will also become overvalued if it follows the same scammy business practices as Tesla.

BTW, the tracker is down to 2266/week. Total has declined to 93,989

 

[bwilson4web]

My expectation is we'll see the first metrics Monday morning.

Bob Wilson