Tesla says price drops are long-term thinking, but it’s really about demand
Tesla has just released its Q1 2023 earnings report amidst several price drops since the beginning of the year. This left investors questioning how these drops would affect margins, and Tesla has an explanation, but it’s perhaps only a partial one.
In a nod to the question on everyone’s lips, Tesla’s earnings report starts off immediately with a couple of paragraphs intended to address the effect of these price drops on its industry-high margins.
In the current macroeconomic environment, we see this year as a unique opportunity for Tesla. As many carmakers are working through challenges with the unit economics of their EV programs, we aim to leverage our position as a cost leader. We are focused on rapidly growing production, investments in autonomy and vehicle software, and remaining on track with our growth investments.
Although we implemented price reductions on many vehicle models across regions in the first quarter, our operating margins reduced at a manageable rate. We expect ongoing cost reduction of our vehicles, including improved production efficiency at our newest factories and lower logistics costs, and remain focused on operating leverage as we scale.
Tesla is pointing out that since its EV volume is so drastically higher than every other automaker’s, it can build cars at a lower cost than the competition.
And indeed, after yesterday’s price drops and other even larger price drops earlier this year, Tesla has gone from being near the top of the EV price range to near the bottom. Last year, Tesla repeatedly hiked prices while the industry faced supply challenges and EV demand well exceeded supply.
After tax credits, the base Model Y is now under $40k, while many electric SUVs have higher starting prices. And the base Model 3 is now available for $40k before credits are taken into account, though it now only qualifies for $3,750 due to the IRS’ new battery guidelines.
Tesla points out that these cuts reduced its margins but says that this margin reduction happened at a “manageable rate.” In Q1 last year, Tesla’s operating margin was 19.2%, and this year it’s 11.4%, a drop of 779 basis points.
This is a big chunk, cutting operating margins almost in half – and note that there have been further price cuts, both in the US and elsewhere, since the end of the quarter. So we could expect average selling prices to go down further in next quarter’s earnings and perhaps another cut to margins.
That said, Tesla is still planning to grow production at a CAGR of 50%, guiding for 1.8 million deliveries next year (about 31% growth from last year’s 1.37 million production). Tesla says it would rather focus on high volume and lower margins.
And it should be noted that higher volume also displaces more gas vehicles, which is better for the environment and public health.
There are other reasons for these price drops. For one, costs have come down, particularly with a massive global drop in the costs of resources like lithium after last year’s massive global spike. Also, as Tesla CEO Elon Musk has pointed out, rising interest rates have made it more expensive to get a loan on a car, which means Tesla has had to lower prices to make purchases seem more attractive (this is a case study in how rising interest rates can lower inflation).
But Tesla claims these margin cuts are manageable, and not only that, the company is taking a long-term view:
Our near-term pricing strategy considers a long-term view on per vehicle profitability given the potential lifetime value of a Tesla vehicle through autonomy, supercharging, connectivity and service. We expect that our product pricing will continue to evolve, upwards or downwards, depending on a number of factors.
Here, Tesla says that despite the vast majority of its revenue coming from sales of cars – in Q1, $19.9b came from cars and only $3.3b came from energy, services, and other – it feels confident that any losses in automotive sales revenue will be made up for in the long term by these other revenue categories.
Tesla currently sells access to its FSD Beta software for an eye-watering $15,000. This is an enormous chunk of change, particularly for a car that sells for $40k new. Tesla CEO Elon Musk has claimed that FSD has enormous value, though most who have used it recognize that it’s definitely not ready for primetime yet. Perhaps this is why timelines for its rollout keep getting pushed back. (Is it next year yet?)
Tesla also mentions Supercharging as a potential revenue center. Right now, Tesla doesn’t make a lot of money on Supercharging, but that may change very soon, as the company has started opening up Superchargers to other brands. Tesla used this opportunity to establish the “North American Charging Standard” using its connector, claiming that, since its connector is on the majority of cars and DC chargers in North America, other automakers should follow Tesla’s lead and use its plug.
This also opens the company up to the availability of billions of federal dollars earmarked for charger installation but which can only be used on chargers that are open to multiple brands of car. Until recently, only Teslas could use Superchargers, but now that they’re open to other cars, Tesla can presumably angle for some of those billions.
Finally, Tesla says that service could be a profit center, a big change from Musk’s original philosophy on the topic. Here’s a video from Tesla’s 2013 shareholder meeting, timestamped to 1:36 when his answer on service begins:
Clearly, things have changed since then, and Tesla is much larger and has different goals and considerations now than before. But in the context of discussing auto dealerships, with which Tesla is still in a battle, one would think that this overarching “philosophy” would not have changed with transient business conditions.
Nevertheless, this is one way in which Tesla could conceivably offer reduced upfront prices, with the hopes that the continual business of servicing vehicles in the field would help to shore up margins. Most other automakers don’t have this option since they don’t own their dealerships, but Tesla does, which gives it the flexibility to capture this portion of revenue. It sounds like the company now explicitly intends to seek this revenue after originally promising not to.
Electrek’s Take
But there’s another reason that Tesla doesn’t mention in its report: demand.
I know; we’ve heard it before. For the last decade, other automakers, media, incumbent industry, oil companies, captured regulators, and so on have all said that there just isn’t enough EV demand. We’ve called them wrong every time, and they’ve been wrong every time.
But specifically, here, we’re talking about demand solely for Tesla, after the huge price hikes that the company engaged in over the course of 2021 and 2022 and amid questionable public behavior by the CEO.
At the time when Tesla was raising prices, EV demand was very high, and EV supply was very low. This gave Tesla, the company with the most EV supply, significant pricing power.
Now, we still have high global EV demand, with many other brands selling out vehicles while gas cars go unsold. But in the US, we have an ever-changing tax credit environment, with some new rules going into place yesterday. This means there’s a lot of shifting happening in the industry, and it’s hard to predict which models will have the most demand as only some qualify for the tax credit (however, you can bypass most restrictions by leasing).
And while Tesla is mostly on the good side of this – its cars are now much lower in price, and most of them qualify for credits – it also has a ton of supply, is continuing to ramp quickly, and may be alienating potential customers.
Anecdotally (and in data), CEO Musk’s recent behavior related to the Twitter “dumpster fire” he keeps burning his money in has affected the company’s reputation. Musk says that TSLA shareholders will benefit in the long term from all the irrelevant nonsense he’s very publicly getting himself into, but we are not convinced.
So between high prices, erratic behavior from the CEO, and availability of other EV models, customers have perhaps looked elsewhere over the last year. As a result, Tesla’s inventory started to grow in a way that the company hasn’t ever really dealt with before, and it had to start pulling demand levers. It first did this with incentives, but this year has focused instead on large price drops.
Those price drops will definitely be able to bring some customers back, but it remains to be seen if some customers were permanently turned off by the high-profile behavior of the CEO.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Despite the will-they, won’t-they uncertainty surrounding the future of tariffs and union jobs and – let’s face it – just about everything else in every industry these days, GM says it has no plans to move production of its Ultium-based EVs from Mexico to the US.
GM has exclusively produced electric cars at its plant in Ramos Arizpe, Mexico since last year, and has created some 5,000 new jobs in the area according to economist Raquel Buenrostro, who currently serves as Mexico’s Secretary of Anti-Corruption and Good Government. And those cars – including the popular Chevy Equinox EV and Honda’s hot-selling Prologue – have been huge hits in their respective segments.
The General seems to know a good thing when it sees one, so it should come as no surprise to learn that GM has no plans to scuttle its assembly lines out of the country.
“At this time, GM has no plans to halt or relocate production of any of our EV models made in Mexico,” the director of GM de México’s EV operations, Adrián Enciso, told the Spanish-language newspaper, Milenio. “It’s possible that additional models, such as (the new 2026 Chevy Spark) could be built here, too.”
Market Watch is reporting that the proposed tariffs, if they take effect, could raise GM’s cost to make electric cars in Mexico by up to $4,300 per vehicle. But while that could put a significant per-unit dent in GM’s profits, it’s worth noting that the EVs might continue to be built in Mexico and sold in Canada and other markets – the new Spark, especially, is targeted towards Central and South America, anyway.
And, frankly, GM can afford it.
SOURCE: Mexico News Daily.
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The mining equipment experts at Epiroc will supply a fleet of autonomous, zero-emission electric Pit Viper 271E and SmartROC D65 BE drill rigs at a number of Australian mines operated by multinational metals firm, Fortescue.
The $350 million AUD (approx. $225 million US) deal will see Epiroc AB supply its customer, Fortescue, with a number of blast hole drill rigs powered by either a cable connection to grid energy or, for more remote sites, batteries.
Fortescue will put the rigs to work at its iron ore mines in the Pilbara region in Western Australia. The driverless machines will eventually be operated fully autonomously, overseen by remote operators at Fortescue’s Integrated Operations Centre in Perth – more than 1,500 km away!
Epiroc says the machines will eliminate around 35 million liters of diesel consumption annually, according to Fortescue.
“Fortescue is at the forefront of the mining industry in reducing emissions from operations, and in using automation to strengthen safety and productivity, and we are proud to support them on this important effort,” says Epiroc President Helena Hedblom. “Not only is this the largest contract we have ever received, but it is also a major step forward for our electric-powered surface equipment. We look forward to contributing to Fortescue’s continued success now and in the future.”
The Pit Viper 271 E rotary blast hole drill rig that offers the same levels of performance that the diesel Pit Viper line is acclaimed for. Its patented cable feed system that prolongs component longevity and reduces operational costs. The SmartROC D65 BE is a new, battery-electric version of the proven SmartROC D65 drill rig. They’re manufactured in Texas and Sweden, respectively.
Fortescue has been a pioneer in the electrification of the mining industry, whether it’s converting its massive Liebherr excavators to electric, funding the development of 6MW EV chargers, or deploying autonomous electric drill rigs like these in their mines – they’re well on their way to achieving their goal of carbon neutral operations by 2030.
Electrek’s Take
From drilling and rigging to heavy haul solutions, companies like Fortescue and Epiroc are proving that electric equipment is more than up to the task of moving dirt and pulling stuff out of the ground. At the same time, rising demand for nickel, lithium, and phosphates combined with the natural benefits of electrification are driving the adoption of electric mining machines while a persistent operator shortage is boosting demand for autonomous tech in those machines.
We covered the market outlook for autonomous and electric mining equipment earlier this summer, and I posted an episode exploring the growing demand for electric equipment on an episode of Quick Charge I’ve embedded, below. Check it out, then let us know what you think of the future of electric mining in the comments.
More EVs means more mines
SOURCE | IMAGES: Epiroc.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Solar and wind accounted for almost 98% of new US electrical generating capacity added in the first two months of 2025, according to new Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) data reviewed by the SUN DAY Campaign.
In FERC’s latest monthly “Energy Infrastructure Update” report (with data through February 28, 2025), FERC says 39 “units” of solar totaling 1,514 megawatts (MW) were placed into service in February, along with two units of wind (266 MW). They accounted for 95.3% of all new generating capacity added during the month. Natural gas provided the balance (87 MW).
For both January and February, renewables (6,309 MW) were 97.6% of new capacity, while natural gas (147 MW) provided just 2.3%, with another 0.2% coming from oil (11 MW).
Solar dominated February generating capacity
Solar accounted for 81.1% of all new generating capacity placed into service in February. It was 73.3% of new capacity added during the first two months of 2025.
Recent solar additions include the 237.3 MW Fence Post Solar in Texas, the 150-MW Northern Orchard Solar in California, and the 135-MW Prairie Ronde Solar Project in Louisiana.
Solar has now been the largest source of new generating capacity added each month for 18 consecutive months, since September 2023.
Solar + wind now almost 25% of US utility-scale generating capacity
New wind accounted for most of the balance (14.3%) of capacity additions in February. New wind capacity (1,568 MW) added in January and February combined was 70% more year-over-year (922 MW).
The new wind farms that came online in February were the 140.3-MW Pioneer DJ Wind in Texas and the 126-MW Downeast Wind in Maine.
The installed capacities of solar (10.7%) and wind (11.8%) are now each more than a tenth of the US total. Together, they’re almost one-fourth (22.5%) of the US’s total available installed utility-scale generating capacity.
Further, approximately 30% of US solar capacity is in the form of small-scale (e.g., rooftop) systems that aren’t reflected in FERC’s data. Including that additional solar capacity would bring the share provided by solar and wind to more than 25% of the US total.
With the inclusion of hydropower (7.6%), biomass (1.1%), and geothermal (0.3%), renewables currently claim a 31.5% share of total US utility-scale generating capacity. If small-scale solar capacity is included, renewables are now about one-third of total US generating capacity.
For perspective, a year ago, the mix of utility-scale renewables accounted for 29.3% of total installed generating capacity. Five years ago, it was 22.6%. Ten years ago, it was 16.9% (with more than half provided by hydropower). Thus, over the past decade, renewables’ share of US generating capacity has nearly doubled.
FERC’s 3-year solar + wind addition forecast
FERC reports that net “high probability” additions of solar between March 2025 and February 2028 total 89,497 MW – an amount almost four times the forecast net “high probability” additions for wind (22,890 MW), the second fastest growing resource. FERC also foresees net growth for hydropower (1,323 MW) and geothermal (92 MW) but a decrease of 130 MW in biomass capacity.
The net new “high probability” capacity additions by all renewable energy sources would total 113,672 MW. There is no new nuclear capacity in FERC’s three-year forecast.
Despite Trump’s big fossil fuel push, FERC is projecting that coal and oil will contract by 24,939 MW and 2,104 MW, respectively. Natural gas capacity would expand by 1,583 MW.
Thus, adjusting for the different capacity factors of gas (59.7%), wind (34.3%), and utility-scale solar (23.4%), electricity generated by the projected new solar capacity to be added in the coming three years should be at least 20 times greater than that produced by the new natural gas capacity, while wind’s new electrical output would eclipse gas by eight-fold.
If FERC’s current “high probability” additions materialize, by March 1, 2028, solar will account for nearly one-sixth (16.3%) of US installed utility-scale generating capacity. Wind would provide an additional one-eighth (12.7%) of the total. So each would be greater than coal (12.4%) and substantially more than either nuclear power (7.3%) or hydropower (7.2%).
Assuming current growth rates continue, the installed capacity of utility-scale solar is likely to surpass coal and wind within the next two years, placing solar in second place for installed generating capacity behind natural gas.
Renewables still on track to exceed natural gas in 3 years
The mix of all utility-scale (ie, >1 MW) renewables is now adding about two percentage points annually to its share of generating capacity. At that pace, by March 1, 2028, renewables would account for 37.6% of total available installed utility-scale generating capacity – nipping on the heels of natural gas (40.2%) – with solar and wind constituting more than three-quarters of the installed renewable energy capacity. If those trendlines continue, utility-scale renewable energy capacity should surpass natural gas in 2029 or sooner.
However, if small-scale solar is factored in, within three years, total US solar capacity (small-scale plus utility-scale) could approach 330 GW. In turn, the mix of all renewables would then exceed 40% of total installed capacity while natural gas’s share would drop to about 37%.
Moreover, FERC reports that there may actually be as much as 220,985 MW of net new solar additions in the current three-year pipeline in addition to 67,811 MW of new wind, 9,788 MW of new hydropower, 201 MW of new geothermal, and 39 MW of new biomass. By contrast, net new natural gas capacity potentially in the three-year pipeline totals just 20,856 MW. Consequently, renewables’ share could be even greater by late winter 2028.
“The Trump Administration’s assault on wind and solar has not – at least not yet – had an appreciable impact on the rapid growth of renewable energy generating capacity,” noted the SUN DAY Campaign’s executive director, Ken Bossong. “Moreover, if FERC’s current projections materialize, the mix of renewables will surpass natural gas capacity before the end of President Trump’s time in the White House.”
Electrek’s Take
Just three days ago, I reported on nonpartisan policy group E2’s latest Clean Economy Works monthly update, which revealed that nearly $8 billion in clean energy investments and 16 new large-scale factories and other projects were cancelled, closed, or downsized in Q1 2025. (E2’s cleaner net is wider than FERC’s and includes such things as EVs, battery storage, hydrogen, and grid and infrastructure projects.) Clean energy is growing, but Trump’s executive orders have still managed to slow its growth. Natural gas is still in the lead, but coal and oil still can’t touch renewables.
Read more: FERC: Solar + wind set for a strong 3-year run despite Trump’s sabotage
If you find yourself in this situation or even just want to check out other options to make sure you’re finding a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage. EnergySage is a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar – whether you’re a homeowner or renter. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20 to 30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and tell us to share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.”
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway