特斯拉 (TSLA) 2014 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Tesla Motors fourth-quarter 2014 financial results Q&A conference call.

女士們，先生們，美好的一天，歡迎來到特斯拉汽車公司 2014 年第四季度財務業績問答電話會議。

(Operator Instructions)

（操作員說明）

I would like to turn the call over to your host, Mr. Jeff Evanson. Please go ahead.

我想將電話轉給您的主持人 Jeff Evanson 先生。請繼續。

Thank you, Patrick, and good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to Tesla's fourth-quarter Q&A webcast. I'm joined today by Elon Musk, Tesla Chairman and CEO; JB Straubel, our CTO; and Deepak Ahuja, Tesla's CFO. We announced our financial and operational results today in a shareholder letter that's available at the same link as this webcast and a replay of this webcast will be available later today at the same link.

謝謝帕特里克，大家下午好。歡迎收聽特斯拉第四季度問答網絡直播。今天，特斯拉董事長兼首席執行官埃隆·馬斯克 (Elon Musk) 加入了我的行列； JB Straubel，我們的首席技術官；和特斯拉首席財務官 Deepak Ahuja。我們今天在一封股東信中宣布了我們的財務和運營業績，該信函可在本次網絡廣播的同一鏈接中找到，該網絡廣播的重播將於今天晚些時候在同一鏈接中獲得。

The shareholder letter includes GAAP and non-GAAP financial results, as well as reconciliations between the two. Our non-GAAP measures add back deferred revenue and related expenses for cars delivered, where the cash has been or will soon be collected. These non-GAAP results also exclude stock-based compensation and non-cash interest expense. Revenues and costs associated with cars leased directly through us are treated the same in our GAAP and non-GAAP financial information.

股東信函包括 GAAP 和非 GAAP 財務業績，以及兩者之間的對賬。我們的非 GAAP 措施將遞延收入和交付的汽車的相關費用加回，現金已經或即將被收取。這些非公認會計原則的結果也排除了基於股票的薪酬和非現金利息費用。與直接通過我們租賃的汽車相關的收入和成本在我們的 GAAP 和非 GAAP 財務信息中的處理方式相同。

During our call, we will be discussing our business outlook and making other forward-looking statements, which are based on our predictions and expectations as of today. Actual events or results could differ materially due to a number of risks and uncertainties, including those mentioned in our most recent 10-Q filed with the SEC.

在我們的電話會議中，我們將討論我們的業務前景並做出其他前瞻性陳述，這些陳述基於我們今天的預測和預期。由於許多風險和不確定性，包括我們最近向美國證券交易委員會提交的 10-Q 中提到的風險和不確定性，實際事件或結果可能存在重大差異。

Now, Patrick, if we could assemble the queue and have our first question, please.

現在，Patrick，請讓我們集合隊列並提出我們的第一個問題。

(Operator Instructions)

（操作員說明）

Andrea James, Dougherty & Company.

安德里亞詹姆斯，多爾蒂公司。

Hi, thanks for taking my questions and congratulations on the rocket launch. Just quickly, can you help me get to a free cash flow figure? It looks like you are going to do in $1.5 billion in CapEx, but what is going to be the operating cash flow to offset that?

您好，感謝您回答我的問題並祝賀火箭發射。快點，你能幫我得到一個自由現金流的數字嗎？看起來您將在資本支出中投入 15 億美元，但要抵消這一點的運營現金流將是多少？

We will have clearly significant -- Deepak here, hi Andrea -- we will have significant positive operating cash flow, obviously as our volume growth and our gross margin continues to improve. We will also have some cash used on our direct leasing program. Our expectation is that we will establish a shopping warehouse line for leasing cars and that will continue to grow and fund a big portion of our leasing funding required. So overall, we feel pretty comfortable where we are in terms of how 2015 looks from a cash burn perspective.

我們將有明顯的意義——這裡是迪帕克，嗨，安德里亞——我們將擁有顯著的正經營現金流，顯然隨著我們的銷量增長和毛利率繼續提高。我們還將有一些現金用於我們的直接租賃計劃。我們的期望是，我們將建立一個用於租賃汽車的購物倉庫線，並將繼續增長並為我們所需的大部分租賃資金提供資金。所以總的來說，從現金消耗的角度來看，我們對 2015 年的現狀感到非常自在。

Maybe about $1 billion? Is that about in line, cash burn?

也許大約 10 億美元？這是排隊，燒錢嗎？

It should be less than that, considering that we will have a lease warehouse line which continues to expand.

考慮到我們將擁有一個不斷擴大的租賃倉庫線，它應該少於那個。

Got it. Then another point, it looks like you expanded your residual value guarantee into extra markets late last year. Then I saw last week you are giving free home charging to folks in China.

知道了。還有一點，您似乎在去年年底將剩餘價值保證擴展到了其他市場。然後我上週看到你正在向中國的人們免費提供家庭充電。

So my question is, it looks like you have really pretty good demand, global wait times are increasing. So why continue to give incentives to buy the cars if demand is so high?

所以我的問題是，看起來你的需求非常好，全球等待時間正在增加。那麼，如果需求如此之高，為什麼還要繼續激勵人們購買汽車呢？

Fundamentally, in China, we want to make sure we are not creating any hurdles or issues that create a negative customer experience. Charging installation, given the varied regulations and challenges there, has been a difficult customer experience, and we want to overcoming that by providing a [trade].

從根本上說，在中國，我們希望確保我們不會製造任何會造成負面客戶體驗的障礙或問題。鑑於那裡的各種法規和挑戰，充電安裝一直是艱難的客戶體驗，我們希望通過提供 [交易] 來克服這一點。

Yes, but this is also something that's considered standard in China. If you are buying an i3 or a Leaf or something, that is just considered the standard thing, so we are just matching what competitors do.

是的，但這在中國也被認為是標準的。如果您要購買 i3 或 Leaf 或其他東西，那隻是被認為是標準的東西，所以我們只是在匹配競爭對手的做法。

But this whole China thing has been blown way out of proportion. We didn't execute people well on China last year, but it didn't really matter. People don't quite get that.

但是這整個中國的事情已經被誇大了。去年我們在中國沒有很好地執行人，但這並不重要。人們不太明白這一點。

It's not like there were all these extra cars we could have produces, and if only we had a bunch more customers in China, we could have sold some of those cars. We had -- we were production constrained. I wish we weren't, but we were. We look forward to getting demand constrained in the future.

並不是說我們可以生產所有這些額外的汽車，如果我們在中國有更多的客戶，我們就可以賣掉一些汽車。我們有 - 我們受到生產限制。我希望我們不是，但我們是。我們期待未來的需求受到限制。

Essentially, it didn't matter whether we, meaning to the Company as a whole, whether we sold a lot of cars in China or a small number of a cars in China. We would have to steal volume that would have headed to the to US or Europe and sent it to China. So it wasn't a high priority for the Company because it wasn't a constraining factor.

從本質上講，對於整個公司而言，我們是在中國銷售大量汽車還是在中國銷售少量汽車並不重要。我們將不得不竊取本應運往美國或歐洲的數量並將其發送到中國。因此，這對公司來說不是一個高優先級，因為它不是一個限制因素。

Obviously in the long-term, we do want to succeed in China and make sure we're doing a good job. ' Just like the rest of the world, China wants to have the best product and we think the Model S is the best car in the world and that has been indicated by a multiple outside assessments. I'm pretty sure that people in China want the best car in the world. So that's something we've got to make sure we lay the right foundation for, for future growth.

顯然，從長遠來看，我們確實希望在中國取得成功，並確保我們做得很好。 ' 就像世界其他地方一樣，中國希望擁有最好的產品，我們認為 Model S 是世界上最好的汽車，這已被多項外部評估所表明。我很確定中國人想要世界上最好的汽車。因此，我們必須確保為未來的增長奠定正確的基礎。

But it was essentially irrelevant for last year. That's an important point.

但這與去年基本無關。這是很重要的一點。

The biggest issue, which we are still fighting to address, is the perception that it is difficult to charge your car in China. This is false. It is not difficult to charge your car in China. Unfortunately, this sounds brain-dead, but our sales term was telling people that it was difficult to charge in China, even though this is not true. That is pretty silly.

我們仍在努力解決的最大問題是，人們認為在中國很難為您的汽車充電。這是錯誤的。在中國給汽車充電並不難。不幸的是，這聽起來很腦殘，但我們的銷售術語告訴人們在中國很難收費，儘管事實並非如此。這很愚蠢。

I put the guy who was in charge of the Supercharger roll out in China, who was doing an awesome job, an engineer, basically, he's no sales person, in charge of China to make sure that charging is super easy and excellent. He's not a marketing guy or a sales guy, he's an engineer and an operations guy and he's going to just make sure that people have -- that customers are trying to have a fantastic experience. And then, just like in other countries, those customers become our sales force and the product sales growth by word-of-mouth.

我把負責 Supercharger 推出的那個人放在中國，他的工作非常出色，是一名工程師，基本上，他不是銷售人員，負責中國，以確保充電超級簡單和出色。他不是營銷人員或銷售人員，他是工程師和運營人員，他將確保人們擁有——客戶正在努力獲得美妙的體驗。然後，就像在其他國家一樣，這些客戶成為我們的銷售人員，產品銷售通過口碑增長。

Is this a Company philosophy? Because it seems like you are putting engineers in charge of customer service, even globally, with Jerome. Is customer service an engineering problem?

這是公司的理念嗎？因為看起來你讓工程師負責客戶服務，甚至是全球範圍內的 Jerome。客戶服務是工程問題嗎？

If you have got people that are good at creative problem solving, then they will be good at creative problem solving. I tend to view, it's my own bias, but most things, since I'm an engineer, I view things as an engineering problem, but not everything is an engineering problem.

如果你的人擅長創造性地解決問題，那麼他們就會擅長創造性地解決問題。我傾向於認為，這是我自己的偏見，但大多數事情，因為我是一名工程師，我將事情視為工程問題，但並非所有事情都是工程問題。

But it is -- you have got to design the system and sometimes those systems are in the form of a car or it's a charging thing or it is the way that you communicate with prospective customers. It's just creative double solving, so what you're looking for at the head of it is a creative problem solver who just cares about getting it right. That is what we're doing. I am confident that by the end of this year, that we will be in really good shape in China.

但它是——你必須設計系統，有時這些系統是汽車的形式，或者是充電的東西，或者是你與潛在客戶溝通的方式。這只是創造性的雙重解決，所以你在它的頭部尋找的是一個創造性的問題解決者，他只關心把它做好。這就是我們正在做的事情。我有信心，到今年年底，我們在中國的狀態會非常好。

Yes, I'm pretty optimistic about it. I don't think there is some unique missing issue in China. If you look at sales in Hong Kong, our sales in Hong Kong are excellent. But we don't have that misperception of charging issue in Hong Kong. And everybody lives in apartment building, as well, so it's not like it is super easy to get local charging. I'm confident that just as we've seen high demand in every other part of the world, that will see it in China, as well.

是的，我對此相當樂觀。我不認為中國有什麼獨特的缺失問題。如果你看香港的銷售情況，我們在香港的銷售情況非常好。但我們對香港的收費問題沒有這種誤解。而且每個人也都住在公寓樓裡，所以要獲得本地充電並不是一件容易的事。我相信，正如我們在世界其他地方看到的高需求一樣，中國也會看到這種情況。

And just to the point -- thank you for the clarity on China. Just to my point of the residual value guarantee, is that something you plan on keeping? Why keep it? What are your thoughts about that?

直截了當——感謝您對中國的澄清。就我的剩餘價值保證而言，您打算保留它嗎？為什麼要保留它？你對此有什麼看法？

That's a good question. I've actually debated that, should we keep it or shouldn't we keep it, because it is moot. The residual value guarantee matches what other premium sedans as -- see after a three-year time period, but our actual residual values are substantially above that. So it never actually matters. We are not paying out residual value guarantees because the car is worth more than the residual value.

這是個好問題。實際上，我已經辯論過，我們應該保留它還是不應該保留它，因為它沒有實際意義。殘值保證與其他高檔轎車相匹配——三年後看到的，但我們的實際殘值遠高於此。所以它從來都不重要。我們不支付殘值保證，因為汽車的價值高於殘值。

It does mess up our accounting because we have to treat it like a pseudo-lease. On the other hand, if we withdrew it, then does that mean -- would people take that as a lack of confidence in our product. They might. They might misconstrued as such. Even though it is moot and it doesn't really matter, it's just there to provide confidence to customers.

它確實弄亂了我們的會計，因為我們必須將其視為偽租賃。另一方面，如果我們撤回它，那是否意味著——人們會認為這是對我們的產品缺乏信心。他們可能。他們可能會這樣誤解。儘管它沒有實際意義並且並不重要，但它只是為了給客戶提供信心。

So we will probably keep even though it makes our financials look worse than they really are. It's important because we do get some criticism about GAAP versus non-GAAP, as though when we do non-GAAP, we're actually trying to people into thinking something is better than it is. But actually that's not true. The way the accounting rules currently work don't give a correct picture and we're trying to give a more correct picture of non-GAAP, not a less correct picture.

因此，即使它使我們的財務狀況看起來比實際情況更糟，我們也可能會保留。這很重要，因為我們確實收到了一些關於 GAAP 與非 GAAP 的批評，就好像當我們使用非 GAAP 時，我們實際上是在試圖讓人們認為某些東西比實際情況更好。但實際上這不是真的。會計規則目前的運作方式並沒有給出正確的畫面，我們正試圖給出一個更正確的非 GAAP 畫面，而不是一個不太正確的畫面。

The difference between -- as you can see from our gross margin, GAAP and non-GAAP are basically the same. So when we -- for revenue -- the difference between GAAP and non-GAAP, it comes down to just two things, those residual value guarantees, where we, as we just talked about, it's moot. But because it's a pseudo-lease, we have to recognize the revenue over time, even though we got the cash immediately.

從我們的毛利率可以看出，GAAP 和非 GAAP 之間的區別基本相同。因此，當我們 - 就收入而言 - GAAP 和非 GAAP 之間的差異時，它歸結為兩件事，即殘值保證，正如我們剛剛談到的那樣，這是沒有實際意義的。但是因為它是一個偽租賃，我們必須隨著時間的推移確認收入，即使我們立即得到了現金。

So our cash flow -- non-GAAP is an accurate representation of cash flow, which is what really, really matters. Then even in non-GAAP, we don't -- for leases that we do internally, they actually aren't covered in non-GAAP.

所以我們的現金流——非公認會計原則是現金流的準確表示，這才是真正重要的。然後，即使在非 GAAP 中，我們也不 - 對於我們在內部進行的租賃，它們實際上並未包含在非 GAAP 中。

In receipts, the full cash upfront, so it's aligned with our cash flow.

在收據中，預付全額現金，因此與我們的現金流一致。

Exactly. Exactly. It's aligned with cash flow.

確切地。確切地。它與現金流一致。

Whereas in some other auto companies, the moment they sell the car to a dealership, we understand, they recognize the revenue even though a financing entity might lease that car and so they don't have the cash flows, but they have a GAAP in revenue. So in some sense our non-GAAP revenue is pretty clean and it lines up well with our cash flow.

而在其他一些汽車公司中，當他們將汽車出售給經銷商時，我們理解，即使融資實體可能租賃該汽車，他們也會確認收入，因此他們沒有現金流，但他們有 GAAP收入。因此，從某種意義上說，我們的非公認會計原則收入非常乾淨，並且與我們的現金流非常吻合。

This is a really important to emphasize because it might be -- are we perhaps exaggerated our revenues relative to how other car companies might representing the revenues. What Deepak just is a very good point. What the other companies will do is they will sell their cars to the dealer groups, but then they will then turn around and refinance those same cars. So they are sending it to the laundromat, is basically what they are doing.

強調這一點非常重要，因為它可能是 - 相對於其他汽車公司可能代表收入的方式，我們是否誇大了我們的收入。 Deepak 的觀點非常好。其他公司會做的是將他們的汽車賣給經銷商集團，然後他們會轉身為這些汽車再融資。所以他們把它送到洗衣店，基本上就是他們正在做的事情。

In our case, since we are not sending it to a laundromat, it is actually more correct. Because if we do a lease, it's all internal and we're not trying to send it through some third party where actually the risk is still assumed by the parent car company.

在我們的例子中，由於我們沒有將它發送到洗衣店，它實際上更正確。因為如果我們進行租賃，這都是內部的，我們不會試圖通過某個第三方發送它，實際上風險仍然由母汽車公司承擔。

Even for leases that we do ourselves, we can securitize those leases whenever we want. We can take those leases, funnel them, put them into a secure station program or just get a warehouse loan to recover the capital.

即使對於我們自己進行的租賃，我們也可以隨時將這些租賃證券化。我們可以接受這些租約，將它們集中起來，將它們放入一個安全的車站計劃中，或者只是獲得一筆倉庫貸款來收回資本。

The reason we're using our existing capital is just basically sense because we have got a big bank balance that is earning 0.1%, or basically nothing, actually minus whatever the inflation rate is. So it makes more sense for us to put that capital to work with consumer leases and earn 2% to 3%. That basically what it amounts to. But whenever we want to recover that capital, we can do so through a warehouse [landlord] securitization.

我們使用現有資本的原因基本上是有道理的，因為我們有一大筆銀行餘額，收入為 0.1%，或者基本上沒有，實際上減去了通貨膨脹率。因此，對我們來說，將這筆資金用於消費者租賃並賺取 2% 到 3% 更有意義。這基本上是什麼意思。但是，每當我們想收回這筆資金時，我們都可以通過倉庫 [房東] 證券化來做到這一點。

Thank you for taking my questions.

謝謝你接受我的問題。

Our financials are better than they appear, not worse. That's really the key point.

我們的財務狀況比看起來好，而不是更糟。這才是真正的關鍵。

Brian Johnson, Barclays.

巴克萊銀行的布萊恩·約翰遜。

Yes, good evening. Want to explore a bit where you see the trajectory of CapEx and OpEx? You gave some guidance for next year, but as we think ahead to the Gigafactory, and as we think ahead to the Gen III launch, how do you see those trends going over the next several years?

是的，晚上好。想探索一下您看到 CapEx 和 OpEx 軌蹟的地方嗎？您為明年提供了一些指導，但是當我們對 Gigafactory 的展望以及對 Gen III 發布的展望時，您如何看待這些趨勢在未來幾年的發展？

We are going to spend staggering amounts of money on CapEx, for good reasons and with a great ROI. It's important not to look at the CapEx in isolation because that CapEx is obviously being done for a reason in order to capture a substantial future revenue flow.

我們將在資本支出上花費驚人的資金，原因很充分，而且投資回報率很高。重要的是不要孤立地看待資本支出，因為資本支出顯然是為了獲取大量未來收入流而進行的。

I am just saying the back-of-the-envelope -- if you make certain assumptions, and I emphasize these are just certain assumptions, I am not saying they are true or that they will occur, but I'd bet that they do occur, personally, but just my personal opinion.

我只是說粗略的——如果你做出某些假設，我強調這些只是某些假設，我並不是說它們是正確的或它們會發生，但我敢打賭它們會發生發生，個人，但只是我的個人意見。

If you take this year's revenue, around $6 billion or thereabouts, and if we are able to maintain a 30% growth rate for 10 years, add to your 10% profitability number, and have a 20 PE, our market cap would basically be the same as Apple's is today. That's going to require a bit of -- on the order of $700 billion -- obviously, getting that rolling requires some significant CapEx. But I am hopeful that we can do this without any significant dilution to the Company, maybe minor dilution but nothing serious.

如果你拿今年的收入，大概60億美元左右，如果我們能夠保持10年30%的增長率，再加上你10%的盈利數字，並且有20倍的PE，我們的市值基本上是就像今天的蘋果一樣。這將需要一點——大約 7000 億美元——顯然，要實現這一目標需要一些可觀的資本支出。但我希望我們可以在不對公司造成任何重大稀釋的情況下做到這一點，也許是輕微稀釋，但不嚴重。

And how about in terms of operating expense? Do you have a target for reported margins versus thinking about your remarks in the second press conference [at Verguna], where margins would be if you would stop growing? Is there a difference between the margins on a non-GAAP basis we would actually see versus what they would be if you weren't making those kind of investments?

那麼在運營費用方面呢？您是否有報告利潤率的目標，而不是考慮您在 [Verguna] 的第二次新聞發布會上的言論，如果您停止增長，利潤率會在哪裡？我們實際看到的非公認會計原則基礎上的利潤率與您不進行此類投資時的利潤率之間是否存在差異？

You mean profit margins as opposed to gross margin?

你的意思是利潤率而不是毛利率？

Yes, the operating margin?

是的，營業利潤率？

We could easily get to 10% to 15%. Probably if we push it -- somewhere between 10% and 15%. Because some of that gross margin that this year will probably -- by the end of the year -- be somewhere around 30%, so if 20 of those points go to fixed costs and R&D and whatnot, and then there's at least 10 leftover for profitability. We are expecting to be non-GAAP profitable.

我們可以輕鬆達到 10% 到 15%。如果我們推動它，可能會在 10% 到 15% 之間。因為今年的一些毛利率可能——到今年年底——在 30% 左右，所以如果其中 20 個點用於固定成本和研發等等，那麼至少還有 10 個用於盈利能力。我們預計非 GAAP 盈利。

And we have been non-GAAP profitable for two years now, 2013 and 2014.

而且我們在 2013 年和 2014 年兩年來一直在非 GAAP 盈利。

I'd like to emphasize that doesn't mean (expletive) profitable, it means really profitable (laughter).

我想強調的是，這並不意味著（咒罵）有利可圖，它意味著真正有利可圖（笑聲）。

It's difficult to parse your question, Brian, in terms of separating OpEx between a fast-growing Company like Tesla versus steady-state. Clearly we want to invest in the future, but we want to do it efficiently, and we are going to focus on being efficient with our OpEx fundamentally this year.

很難解析你的問題，布賴恩，將運營支出劃分為像特斯拉這樣快速發展的公司與穩定狀態的公司。顯然，我們希望投資於未來，但我們希望有效地做到這一點，而且我們將在今年從根本上專注於提高運營支出的效率。

We are. That is a key thing. The simple math of headcount requires this.

我們是。這是一個關鍵的事情。人數的簡單數學需要這個。

We are basically a little over 10,000 people and aiming for somewhere over 55,000 cars this year, just to get to 0.5 million cars a year, if we do not improve our productivity per person, we would need, call it, 100,000 people. I'm not sure where we would park. Clearly, there needs to be dramatic improvements in productivity, which are underway.

我們基本上有 10,000 多人，今年的目標是超過 55,000 輛汽車，每年達到 50 萬輛汽車，如果我們不提高人均生產力，我們將需要 100,000 人。我不確定我們會在哪裡停車。顯然，生產力需要顯著提高，而這正在進行中。

Right, when you said 10% was that 10% while still growing to the million of cars target you talked about in 2025, or that is 10% when you get to the millions of cars target?

對，當你說 10% 是那個 10% 時仍然增長到你在 2025 年談到的百萬輛汽車的目標，或者當你達到百萬輛汽車的目標時是 10%？

At a certain point, we'll actually be able to maintain 10% profitability despite nutty growth, because you just run out of ways to spend money. It's like Apple. They're just running out of ways to spend money. They spend money like it's water over there and they still can't spend enough it.

在某個時候，我們實際上將能夠保持 10% 的盈利能力，儘管增長非常快，因為你只是沒有辦法花錢了。這就像蘋果。他們只是沒有辦法花錢了。他們花錢就像那裡的水一樣，但他們仍然無法花足夠的錢。

For us, we are a single vehicle platform Company at this point, so our engineering expenses have their ebbs and flows, so that has an impact. But as we grow, we become a portfolio of vehicle platforms, even with nutty growth, we can get to a very good operating margin.

對我們來說，我們現在是一家單一的車輛平台公司，所以我們的工程費用有起有落，所以產生了影響。但隨著我們的成長，我們成為了汽車平台的組合，即使增長迅速，我們也可以獲得非常好的營業利潤率。

And as I was pointing this, we doing this -- and it's mentioned in the letter -- but this massive infrastructure expansion, really massive, setting up service centers worldwide, creating a ubiquitous Supercharger network worldwide, logistics across all these countries, going with customs and the unique elements of each country. We're massively increasing the scope and scale of Tesla in order to lay a foundation for future growth.

正如我所指出的，我們正在這樣做——這在信中提到——但是這種大規模的基礎設施擴張，非常大規模，在全球範圍內建立服務中心，在全球範圍內創建一個無處不在的增壓器網絡，在所有這些國家進行物流，風俗習慣和每個國家的獨特元素。我們正在大規模擴大特斯拉的範圍和規模，以便為未來的增長奠定基礎。

Okay, great. Just final question, more for Deepak. When does CapEx flow into depreciation and gross margin? What time frames for the CapEx, in terms of depreciable life spans are you assuming on things like Gigafactory, factory tooling and so forth?

好，太棒了。只是最後一個問題，更多關於 Deepak 的問題。資本支出何時流入折舊和毛利率？就可折舊壽命而言，您在 Gigafactory、工廠工具等方面假設資本支出的時間框架是多少？

To answer your first question, when assets are put to use for production and delivery of cars, that's when depreciation kicks off. So a lot of our spend this year is on production capacity expansion and Model X tooling. Those assets were -- saw depreciation when Model X starts producing.

要回答您的第一個問題，當資產用於生產和交付汽車時，就會開始折舊。所以今年我們的很多支出都花在了產能擴張和 Model X 模具上。這些資產在 Model X 開始生產時出現了貶值。

The Gigafactory assets, clearly, will go into -- will be depreciated when we start producing cells that are being used for production and our revenue growth. And the life of -- the depreciation life depends on the kind of asset. It can vary from five years for tooling to longer if it's equipment and if it's facility then it could be 15 years to 30 years. We follow the generally accepted principles there in our expected life of use to come up with those figures.

顯然，當我們開始生產用於生產和收入增長的電池時，Gigafactory 的資產將會貶值。折舊年限取決於資產的種類。如果是設備，則可能需要 5 年，如果是設備，則可能需要 15 年到 30 年。我們在預期的使用壽命中遵循普遍接受的原則來得出這些數字。

Okay, great. Okay, thanks.

好，太棒了。好的謝謝。

Adam Jonas, Morgan Stanley.

亞當喬納斯，摩根士丹利。

First back to China, do you have any concerns about your ability to pursue business in China on terms that protect your interests? What I mean is I look at the German manufacturers, they don't seem to have any problem with 50%/50% JV structures or with local partners and not having control and selling through franchises. Are you able to -- are those terms that you are comfortable doing business with in China?

首先回到中國，您對自己在中國開展業務的能力是否有任何顧慮，以保護您的利益？我的意思是我看看德國製造商，他們似乎對 50%/50% 的合資企業結構或當地合作夥伴沒有任何問題，並且沒有通過特許經營權進行控制和銷售。您是否能夠 - 您願意在中國開展業務嗎？

We're definitely going to want to have local manufacturing or get some among of local R&D, as well, in the future in China. It's not going to make a ton of sense in the long-term to the be building a huge number of cars in California and shipping them to China. But right now, we are still at the early stages, so it's difficult to say exactly what's happens in the future.

我們肯定會希望在未來在中國擁有本地製造或在本地研發中獲得一些。從長遠來看，在加利福尼亞製造大量汽車並將它們運往中國是沒有意義的。但現在，我們仍處於早期階段，因此很難確切地說未來會發生什麼。

Our goals in the short-term in China are just very straightforward, which is just to build out our service and Supercharger infrastructure and just get the basic foundational elements there. We're not going through dealers, as we don't go through dealers anywhere in the world. Our activities in China are currently [home sensitive around] and it depends on what the evolving landscape is in China in the long term as to whether, where, and how a JV would have to be set up.

我們在中國的短期目標非常簡單，就是建立我們的服務和增壓器基礎設施，並在那裡獲得基本的基礎元素。我們不通過經銷商，因為我們不通過世界任何地方的經銷商。我們在中國的活動目前[國內敏感]，這取決於中國長期發展的格局是否、在哪里以及如何建立合資企業。

Elon, just on the patents. It's been eight months since you opened up the patents for competitors to use. Any takers of any significant technology?

Elon，就專利而言。自從您將專利開放給競爭對手使用以來已經八個月了。任何重要技術的接受者？

I'm not aware of any. Are you surprised there hasn't been more? And is this just a function of -- is it hubris and pride of your competitors or is it they just don't have the intellectual capabilities or software engineering depth to contextualize what you have to offer?

我不知道。你對沒有更多感到驚訝嗎？這僅僅是一個功能——是你的競爭對手的狂妄和自豪，還是他們只是沒有智力能力或軟件工程深度來將你所提供的內容情境化？

I'm quite sure that they will be -- and that actually may factor into our currently [like to use] our patents. Just important -- remember the design cycle. From the point at which you can use intellectual property, you've got to incorporate into the design, that design has got get -- you've got to do detailed engineering and design, you've got to tool things up, and then you have to go to production. Probably the first time you see companies -- anyone using our IP, it would be about three years after we announced.

我很確定他們會——這實際上可能會影響我們目前[喜歡使用]我們的專利。重要的是——記住設計週期。從您可以使用知識產權的那一刻起，您必須將其融入設計，該設計必須得到 - 您必須進行詳細的工程和設計，您必須進行工具化，然後你必須去生產。可能是您第一次看到公司——任何使用我們 IP 的人，大約是在我們宣布之後三年。

Okay. And finally, Elon, you mentioned, you said staggering amounts or obscene of money on CapEx. Companies that usually have those spending ambitions at this point in the growth phase also have pretty developed relationships with capital markets to help fund that growth. You are yourself, and your Enterprise has done that quite successfully.

好的。最後，埃隆，你提到，你說資本支出的數額驚人或淫穢。通常在增長階段的這個階段有這些支出雄心的公司也與資本市場建立了相當發達的關係，以幫助為增長提供資金。您就是您自己，您的企業已經非常成功地做到了這一點。

Any heuristics you can leave us with, as people contemplate more cash burn being necessary to fund great things and great projects that will ultimately pay off. But any rules of thumb, or the minimum levels of liquidity, or the things you would look at to decide whether you need to refill the capital tank? Thanks.

您可以留給我們的任何啟發式方法，因為人們認為需要更多的現金消耗來資助最終將獲得回報的偉大事物和偉大項目。但是有什麼經驗法則，或者最低流動性水平，或者你會看什麼來決定你是否需要補充資金罐？謝謝。

We don't have any plans for raising money right now. We can get to it, the creative element that I described earlier with really minimal dilution. It's really going to be very much -- [oveling] amount of it would come from operating cash flow. I feel generally pretty good about it, about getting to that level with only minor to moderate dilution.

我們目前沒有任何籌款計劃。我們可以做到這一點，我之前描述的創意元素幾乎沒有稀釋。這真的會非常多 - [ovaling] 數量將來自運營現金流。我總體上感覺很好，只需輕微到中度稀釋就可以達到這個水平。

The only reason we would raise money is -- and I'm not saying, we really don't have any plans to raise money, but the only reason I mentioned we would do it earlier is just to have a bigger cash cushion in case there's a big downturn in the economy or something like that.

我們籌集資金的唯一原因是——我並不是說，我們真的沒有任何籌集資金的計劃，但我之前提到我們會這樣做的唯一原因是為了有更大的現金緩衝以防萬一經濟出現大幅下滑或類似情況。

Thanks very much.

非常感謝。

John Lovallo, Bank of America.

美國銀行的約翰·洛瓦洛。

Hey guys. Thanks for taking the call.

大家好。感謝您接聽電話。

First question is cash burn continues to be pretty aggressive here. The question is, if demand is as strong as you guys are saying, and really the issue is on the supply side, why wouldn't you raise prices in all regions to at least offset the FX headwinds?

第一個問題是現金消耗在這裡仍然非常激進。問題是，如果需求像你們所說的那樣強勁，而問題確實出在供應方面，為什麼不提高所有地區的價格以至少抵消外匯逆風？

The reason I'm asking this, if you have more demand than you can handle, this won't hurt deliveries, it should also clearly benefit cash flow and investors and it will also support the residual values for your current owners, so it sounds like a win-win all around. Can you just address that please?

我問這個的原因是，如果你的需求超出了你的承受能力，這不會影響交付，它也應該明顯有利於現金流和投資者，它也會支持你當前所有者的剩餘價值，所以聽起來就像一個雙贏的周圍。你能解決這個問題嗎？

I actually think that car is expensive as it is. It's not a cheap car. For a huge number of our customers, it's the most expensive car they've ever bought. They didn't think they would ever buy a car that costs $100,000.

我實際上認為這輛車很貴。這不是一輛便宜的車。對於我們的大量客戶來說，這是他們買過的最昂貴的汽車。他們認為他們永遠不會購買價值 100,000 美元的汽車。

So I'm reluctant to raise that price, as we start running into fundamental affordability limits. As it is, we are expecting to be significantly -- have significant positive cash flow in the latter half of the year. So yes, there will be short-term debt but it's going to be quite positive at the end of the year and then going into 2016, even more so.

所以我不願意提高這個價格，因為我們開始遇到基本的負擔能力限制。事實上，我們預計今年下半年會有顯著的正現金流。所以是的，會有短期債務，但在今年年底會非常積極，然後進入 2016 年，甚至更是如此。

And that's completely linked to a major product launch, especially in the automotive industry, you have to invest in the CapEx for manufacturing capacity and then the cash flow comes through when you launch.

這與主要產品的發布完全相關，尤其是在汽車行業，您必須投資資本支出以提高製造能力，然後在發佈時產生現金流。

Just to be clear on that, when you say you're going to be cash flow positive by the end of the year, that is after CapEx?

只是要明確一點，當你說你將在今年年底前實現正現金流時，那是在資本支出之後？

Yes, that is our expectation. We've got to here focus on the long term. This is a short-term issue in terms of timing of CapEx versus revenue.

是的，這是我們的期望。我們必須在這里關注長期。就資本支出與收入的時間安排而言，這是一個短期問題。

But to answer your question, yes, even in the face of significant CapEx, we expect to be cash flow positive in Q4.

但要回答你的問題，是的，即使面對巨大的資本支出，我們預計第四季度的現金流量也會為正。

In Q4, okay.

在第四季度，好的。

It will happen somewhere in late Q3, but it will be reflected most clearly in Q4.

它會在第三季度末的某個地方發生，但在第四季度會最清楚地反映出來。

And it is linked with the volume production of Model X.

並且與Model X的量產掛鉤。

Exactly, we have got to get Model X -- because we have a ton of CapEx related to Model X. And we also have also invested in a bunch of things that actually, our volume numbers that are really better associated with Model III. So that our $0.25 billion paint shop upgrade is intended to be able to handle 10,000 cars a week.

確切地說，我們必須得到 Model X——因為我們有大量與 Model X 相關的資本支出。而且我們還投資了很多東西，實際上，我們的數量與 Model III 的關聯性更好。因此，我們耗資 2.5 億美元的噴漆車間升級計劃旨在每周處理 10,000 輛汽車。

Okay. Thanks.

好的。謝謝。

The next question, there has been a lot of discussions about persistent drivetrain issues. We've heard everything from different customers from persistent humming noise to complete failures. The question is, how pervasive is the drivetrain issue?

下一個問題，已經有很多關於持久性傳動系統問題的討論。我們從不同的客戶那裡聽到了從持續的嗡嗡聲到完全失敗的一切。問題是，傳動系統問題有多普遍？

What is the cost to replace the drivetrain? I was a little surprised to see that the warranty reserves would not move up quarter-over-quarter?

更換傳動系統的成本是多少？看到保修準備金沒有環比增長，我有點驚訝？

There's a lot of noise on the forums, but it's not quite as bad as people make -- certainly, for most people, they don't experience any drivetrain issue at all. But there was a period of time, basically for a month or two about a year ago, where -- this is getting into the weeds -- the application of grease on the spline of the motor was incorrect. And that caused the spline to wear out and the strip the spline on the drag in on the motor.

論壇上有很多噪音，但並不像人們所說的那麼糟糕——當然，對於大多數人來說，他們根本沒有遇到任何動力傳動系統問題。但是有一段時間，基本上是大約一年前的一兩個月，其中 - 這已經進入雜草 - 在電機的花鍵上塗抹潤滑脂是不正確的。這導致花鍵磨損並在電機上拖入花鍵。

That particularly effected sports, and unfortunately, it happened to coincide with when a whole batch of cars headed for Norway. So unfortunately, it disproportionately affected Norwegian customers, which we've taken great pains to try to address. Essentially what it amounted to fix that [sure] for example, is just to you've got to pull the drive unit and then send it to get remanufactured where we replace the rotor.

這尤其影響了體育運動，不幸的是，這恰好與整批汽車開往挪威的時候不謀而合。所以不幸的是，它嚴重影響了挪威客戶，我們已經竭盡全力試圖解決這個問題。例如，基本上要解決這個問題 [當然] 就是您必須拉動驅動單元，然後將其發送到我們更換轉子的地方進行再製造。

And maybe to the warranty, this is JB, to the warranty reserve question, we've actually improved quite a bit a lot in our efficiency at repairing the drive unit. So it might be swapped for a given customer, but that unit doesn't get trashed, it gets repaired. The elements that need to get repaired are increasingly narrow and we're really targeting them quite directly. Even the rotor can be repaired at this point.

也許對於保修，這是JB，對於保修儲備問題，我們實際上在維修驅動單元的效率方面提高了很多。因此，它可能會被交換給給定的客戶，但該單元不會被丟棄，它會被修復。需要修復的元素越來越窄，我們確實非常直接地針對它們。此時甚至可以修復轉子。

There was a differential clunk that was causing a differential clunk, which can actually be fixed with a two-part shim in the service center. So we were able to figure out a service center fix to address that, without even dropping the drive unit.

有一個差速器碰撞導致差速器碰撞，實際上可以在服務中心用一個兩部分的墊片來修復。因此，我們能夠找到一個服務中心的解決方案來解決這個問題，甚至無需丟棄驅動單元。

All of the new units being built today, of course get all these fixes proactively. As we learn, the new product improves.

今天正在建造的所有新單元，當然都會主動進行所有這些修復。正如我們所了解的，新產品有所改進。

That's helpful. Finally, Elon I just wanted to ask you about your comment about GAAP profitability not being reached until 2020. I know that you guys say that the non-GAAP is the way to think about it and I'm not disagreeing with that here.

這很有幫助。最後，埃隆，我只是想問你關於 2020 年才能達到 GAAP 盈利能力的評論。我知道你們說非 GAAP 是考慮它的方式，我在這裡並不反對。

But what I'm suggesting is if there's not going to be GAAP profitability until 2020, and we walked down from The Street's consensus non-GAAP number to a GAAP number by adding back stock comp, adding back non-cash interest expense and making an assumption on the leasing, my estimates would suggest that Street estimates are 30% to 60% too high because the GAAP component of that non-GAAP number would need to be eliminated. If you guys could just help me think about if that math is incorrect, and more importantly, what is the path to profitability for Tesla?

但我的建議是，如果要到 2020 年才能實現 GAAP 盈利能力，那麼我們通過增加股票補償、增加非現金利息費用並進行關於租賃的假設，我的估計表明 Street 的估計值太高了 30% 到 60%，因為需要消除非 GAAP 數字的 GAAP 部分。如果你們能幫我想想這個數學是否不正確，更重要的是，特斯拉的盈利之路是什麼？

People read too much into my comment. I was asked, when do I think Tesla will have full-year GAAP profitability. Then you get into the residual value guarantee question, like do we continue doing that or do we not continue doing that because about one-half of cars are financed. So that basically chops our revenue in half in a lot of cases.

人們對我的評論讀得太多了。有人問我，我認為特斯拉什麼時候才能實現全年 GAAP 盈利。然後你會進入剩餘價值保證問題，比如我們是否繼續這樣做，或者我們是否繼續這樣做，因為大約有一半的汽車得到了融資。因此，在很多情況下，這基本上會使我們的收入減半。

Leasing, as well.

租賃也一樣。

And then leasing. So if leasing and residual value guarantee are one-half the cars, that would basically naturally affect the revenue recognition.

然後出租。所以如果租賃和殘值擔保是汽車的二分之一，那基本上自然會影響收入的確認。

And then is it -- if it is a quarter basis or is it a full year. That's why I said, okay, probably 2020 it's the full year and it's GAAP. What that actually means is that Tesla's free cash flow is incredible in 2020, is able to overwhelm even the non-GAAP stuff. People didn't understand that what I said was an extremely optimistic not a pessimistic statement.

然後是它 - 如果它是一個季度還是一整年。這就是為什麼我說，好吧，可能 2020 年是全年，它是 GAAP。這實際上意味著特斯拉的自由現金流在 2020 年令人難以置信，甚至能夠壓倒非 GAAP 的東西。人們不明白我所說的是一種極其樂觀而不是悲觀的說法。

Okay, thank you guys.

好的，謝謝各位。

Ben Kallo, Robert W. Baird.

本·卡洛，羅伯特·W·貝爾德。

Thanks for taking my question. A couple different ones, first a lower-level one.

感謝您提出我的問題。幾個不同的，首先是較低級別的。

As far as the X goes in timing, could you just talk about, I know you reiterated deliveries in Q3 and just your confidence level around that. One of the questions we get a lot is if we extend that to the Gen III and your 2017 time frame. Can you just talk about the work you are doing there and how confident you are in getting to that timeline?

就 X 的時間安排而言，您能否談談，我知道您重申了第三季度的交付情況以及您對此的信心水平。我們經常遇到的問題之一是，如果我們將其擴展到第三代和您的 2017 年時間框架。你能談談你在那裡所做的工作以及你對達到那個時間表的信心嗎？

Yes, that's a fair criticism -- entire criticism. This feels -- this paradox here is we are halfway there at any given point. But really at this -- the X design is done.

是的，這是一個公平的批評——整個批評。這感覺——這裡的悖論是我們在任何給定的點上都到了一半。但實際上，X 設計已經完成。

It's just a question of tooling and supply chain at this point, and in making sure, as we do the ramp-up on X, that our quality is excellent. It doesn't do any good to -- obviously, we want to make sure we have a really great experience. We don't want to have them have any issues or problems.

在這一點上，這只是工具和供應鏈的問題，並且在確保我們在 X 上進行升級時，我們的質量非常出色。這對 - 顯然，我們想確保我們有一個非常棒的體驗沒有任何好處。我們不希望他們有任何問題或問題。

But it's really, at this point like I said, it's just tooling and supply chains and we're trying to make that go as fast as possible. We are highly confident of delivering our first customer cars this summer and then spooling up to significant volume in Q4.

但實際上，就像我說的那樣，這只是工具和供應鏈，我們正在努力讓它盡可能快地進行。我們非常有信心在今年夏天交付我們的第一輛客戶汽車，然後在第四季度達到可觀的銷量。

With respect to Model III, we definitely -- we don't want the delays that affected the X to affect the Model III. We are really -- we are being quite contentious about this. There are things that we could do with the Model III platform that are really adventurous, but with schedule at risk.

關於 Model III，我們絕對不希望影響 X 的延遲影響 Model III。我們真的 - 我們對此頗有爭議。我們可以使用 Model III 平台做一些非常冒險的事情，但會面臨進度風險。

So what we're going to do is we're going to have something that is going to be an amazing car but it won't be the most adventurous version of the Model III to begin with. But we will have then have the more different version of the Model III on the Model III platform following the initial version, so that we can stay on track for Model III.

所以我們要做的是我們將擁有一輛令人驚嘆的汽車，但它不會是 Model III 一開始就最具冒險精神的版本。但是我們將在最初的版本之後在 Model III 平台上擁有更多不同版本的 Model III，這樣我們就可以在 Model III 的軌道上繼續前進。

We got quite adventurous with the X and we don't want to be -- that would be too risky, given the Gigafactory and everything has to happen on time. We're not going to go super crazy with the design of the initial version of the III. I do feel confident that we can make that happen in the second half of 2017 as long as we stick to those principles.

我們對 X 非常冒險，我們不想這樣做——這太冒險了，因為 Gigafactory 和一切都必須按時發生。我們不會對 III 初始版本的設計過於瘋狂。我相信只要我們堅持這些原則，我們就能在 2017 年下半年實現這一目標。

Great. And a question on innovation and releasing new features.

偉大的。還有一個關於創新和發布新功能的問題。

What did you learn from the dual motor as far as the timing of new releases and how that impacts demand and how you do that going forward? I know you guys are constantly innovating on the car, but does that disrupt demand at all and how do you do that, that you don't specifically do in the model years big advances?

您從雙電機中學到了什麼新版本的時間以及它如何影響需求以及您如何做到這一點？我知道你們一直在對汽車進行創新，但這是否會擾亂需求？你們是如何做到的，你們在車型年沒有特別做大進步？

This is a problem that we struggle with. It's really tricky because we basically have one car with variations. This would be much easier if we had different cars.

這是我們一直在努力解決的問題。這真的很棘手，因為我們基本上只有一輛有變化的汽車。如果我們有不同的汽車，這會容易得多。

It's tough for us to announce way in advanced if there's going to be some new version of the car because then we are worried about starting the interim sales while people wait to see what it is. So it's a real tricky thing.

如果會有一些新版本的汽車，我們很難提前宣布，因為那時我們擔心在人們等著看它是什麼的時候開始臨時銷售。所以這是一件非常棘手的事情。

Then we also -- it's difficult to forecast the exact demand, since we haven't told people about the car, we really have to guess, like how many people want to the P85D? We have no idea. It's got a lot, it's got really a lot.

然後我們也 - 很難預測確切的需求，因為我們沒有告訴人們這輛車，我們真的不得不猜測，比如有多少人想要 P85D？我們不知道。它有很多，它真的有很多。

Then, it's, uh oh, we have too much demand for the P85D and now we've got to figure out how to do that. And then how many people are going to pick the next-general seat? As it turns out, also a lot, so we couldn't make enough seats. I would love to figure out how to be less stupid about this in the future.

然後，呃，哦，我們對 P85D 的需求太多了，現在我們必須弄清楚如何做到這一點。那麼有多少人會選擇下一個將軍席位呢？事實證明，也很多，所以我們沒有足夠的座位。我很想弄清楚將來如何在這方面不那麼愚蠢。

One thing in particular that we are working toward is to be sure that we're really ready to meet the production demands at a much higher percentage mix as we announce something new or an innovative new feature. That is definitely a lesson we learned.

我們正在努力做的一件事是確保我們真的準備好以更高的百分比組合滿足生產需求，因為我們宣布了一些新的或創新的新功能。這絕對是我們吸取的教訓。

Yes, agreed.

是的，同意了。

Great, and my last one is on the storage side of the business. Can you just talk about any developments there?

太好了，我的最後一個是在業務的存儲方面。你能談談那裡的任何發展嗎？

We've heard some utilities looking for RFPs for utility-scale products. Are you guys at a position where you can start bidding on those RFPs or entering those RFPs? Just give us an update there? Thanks, guys.

我們聽說一些公用事業公司正在尋找公用事業規模產品的 RFP。你們是否處於可以開始對這些 RFP 進行投標或輸入這些 RFP 的位置？只是在那裡給我們一個更新？多謝你們。

You mean for stationary storage?

你的意思是固定存儲？

Yes, stationary storage?

是的，固定存儲？

For basically dry battery packs. We're bidding on a lot of RFPs already. Do you want to [ever on this, JB?

對於基本上是乾電池組。我們已經在競標很多 RFP。你想[永遠在這個，JB？

I don't want to go into a super amount of detail on this, but you are correct. Of course, there's a lot of interest and a lot of utilities are working in the space and we're talking to almost all of them. It's early stage of stuff and a lot of these projects are very far out since the procurement cycle for utilities is so long, but this is a business that's certainly gaining an increasing amount of our attention.

我不想詳細說明這一點，但你是對的。當然，人們對此很感興趣，很多公用事業公司正在這個領域工作，我們幾乎都在與他們交談。由於公用事業的採購週期如此之長，因此這些項目中的許多項目都處於早期階段，但這是一項肯定會引起我們越來越多關注的業務。

What we're going to do -- we're going to unveil some of the Tesla home battery or consumer battery that will be for use in people's houses or businesses, fairly soon. We have the design done, and it should start going into production probably in about six months or so. We're trying to figure out a date to have the product unveiling, but it's probably in the next month or two.

我們將要做的——我們將很快推出一些特斯拉家用電池或消費電池，這些電池將用於人們的房屋或企業。我們已經完成了設計，它應該會在大約六個月左右開始投入生產。我們正在努力確定產品發布的日期，但可能是在接下來的一兩個月內。

And it's really great. I am really excited about it.

它真的很棒。我真的很興奮。

Thanks, guys.

多謝你們。

Ryan Brinkman, JPMorgan.

瑞安·布林克曼，摩根大通。

Hi. Thanks for taking my question.

你好。感謝您提出我的問題。

Can you give us a sense for what you think your gross margin would have been in the quarter if not for the 1,400 deliveries were pushed into 1Q?

如果不是第一季度交付了 1,400 件產品，您能否告訴我們您認為本季度的毛利率會是多少？

Actually, maybe better I say this, there were a bunch of things that coincided because we had a whole bunch of expedited shipping because even to make those numbers, we had massive overtime, massive extra shipping. And then the euro was also falling. If those things hadn't occurred, it would be somewhere in the order of 28%, somewhere around there.

實際上，也許我這麼說更好，有很多事情是同時發生的，因為我們有一大堆加急運輸，因為即使要達到這些數字，我們也有大量的加班，大量的額外運輸。然後歐元也在下跌。如果這些事情沒有發生，它會在 28% 左右，大約在某個地方。

Okay. That's helpful. Last question, I'll be quick.

好的。這很有幫助。最後一個問題，我會很快的。

Is there any additional color you can give us on just the cadence of sales and production throughout 2015 -- beyond -- I am curious why the deliveries are expected to be flat in 1Q versus 4Q, given that they should benefit from the push-out of those holiday deliveries? And why production is forecast down sequentially, given that the full year is guided up so much?

關於整個 2015 年的銷售和生產節奏，您是否可以給我們提供任何其他顏色 - 超出 - 我很好奇為什麼預計第一季度與第四季度的交付量將持平，因為它們應該會從推出中受益那些假期交貨？考慮到全年的增長幅度如此之大，為什麼預測產量會連續下降？

Beyond 1Q, what can you tell us in terms of when you expect the implied inflection to occur, in 2Q or 3Q? What the catalyst is for that? Whether it's a capacity bump up again or Model X or something like that?

除了 1Q，你能告訴我們什麼時候你預計隱含的拐點會在 2Q 或 3Q 發生？催化劑是什麼？無論是容量再次提升還是 Model X 或類似的東西？

Just to clarify, that estimated 28%, that's 28% excluding ZEV credits, so if you added ZEV credit to the top line, it would 29% or 30% or something like that. In terms of production from Q4 to Q1 being relatively flat, there's a couple reasons for that.

澄清一下，估計為 28%，即不包括 ZEV 積分的 28%，所以如果您將 ZEV 積分添加到頂線，它將是 29% 或 30% 或類似的值。就第四季度到第一季度的生產相對平穩而言，有幾個原因。

There are actually two fewer weeks of production in Q1 versus Q4. One is because we had to give -- we wanted to, and certainly so, gave people the first week of January off because they had been working over Christmas and New Year's and Thanksgiving in a lot of cases. So just to give people a break, we didn't operate the factory in the first week of January and also gave us time to do some equipment upgrades. And then there is also one fewer production week in Q1, so it's basically minus two weeks.

與第四季度相比，第一季度的生產實際上少了兩週。一個是因為我們必須給予——我們想而且當然是這樣，讓人們在一月份的第一周休假，因為他們在很多情況下都在聖誕節、新年和感恩節工作。所以只是為了讓人們休息一下，我們在一月份的第一周沒有運營工廠，也給了我們時間做一些設備升級。然後第一季度的生產周也減少了一個，所以基本上是負兩週。

In Q1, we are focused on productivity improvement and laying a groundwork for higher volume in the remainder of the year. But obviously, you could do the math. It does mean there is going to be a fairly big scale-up as you get towards the end of the year.

在第一季度，我們專注於提高生產力，並為今年剩餘時間的更高產量奠定基礎。但顯然，你可以做數學。這確實意味著隨著您接近年底，將會有相當大的規模擴大。

And we had over 10,000 orders on hand so it's not a demand issue to be delivering the guidance number. We had a lot a cars in transit, thus we are, again, adjusting our global mix of deliveries.

我們手頭有超過 10,000 個訂單，因此提供指導數字不是需求問題。我們有很多汽車在運輸途中，因此我們再次調整我們的全球交付組合。

A lot of cars in transit. It's crazy.

很多車在過境。這很瘋狂。

Thank you.

謝謝你。

Patrick Archambault, Goldman Sachs.

帕特里克·阿爾尚博，高盛。

Thank you. Good evening.

謝謝你。晚上好。

I just wanted to follow-up actually just on some of the comments you made about being less adventurous for the Model III relative to the X and playing at a little bit safer. Can you just give us a sense of what some of these characteristics and features are that you might have, at one point, been considering for the initial version that may be put in place for a later model upgrade?

實際上，我只是想跟進您對 Model III 相對於 X 的冒險性和玩起來更安全的一些評論。您能否讓我們了解一下您可能曾經考慮過的初始版本有哪些特性和功能，這些初始版本可能會為以後的模型升級而準備就緒？

We can't tell you that. Come on.

我們不能告訴你。來吧。

With the X, we had the falcon wing door, which is the first double-actuating gull-wing door, basically, or we call it falcon wing door. Getting that right and make sure it works really well isn't a gimmick but is a fundamental improvement in utility and aesthetics for the cars. It's extremely difficult. There's a reason that other people haven't done this.

對於 X，我們有獵鷹翼門，這是第一款雙驅動鷗翼門，基本上，或者我們稱之為獵鷹翼門。做到這一點並確保它運行良好並不是一個噱頭，而是對汽車實用性和美觀性的根本改進。這是極其困難的。其他人沒有這樣做是有原因的。

Then the second row seats on the Model X are a piece of sculptural beauty. They are amazing. They are the nicest second row seats you have ever seen in any car ever. That actually might have been harder than the door.

然後 Model X 上的第二排座椅是一件雕塑之美。他們是了不起的。它們是您在任何汽車中見過的最好的第二排座椅。這實際上可能比門還難。

There are some other things about the X that people don't know about yet, but those weren't driving schedule, which will be second row seats and the door.

關於X還有一些人們還不知道的其他事情，但那些不是駕駛時間表，這將是第二排座椅和車門。

Then going to Model III, I don't think we want to have, particularly at super-high volume, something that for this feature we lose one year of production. That's -- it would make more sense to just go with something that we know people are going to love, that's going to be incredibly beautiful and functional and amazing car. And then innovate in more avant-garde directions on that platforms with future iterations where we are not -- we can then put aside any schedule and volume concerns.

然後是 Model III，我認為我們不想擁有，特別是在超大批量時，我們會因為這個功能而失去一年的生產時間。那就是——選擇我們知道人們會喜歡的東西會更有意義，這將是一輛非常漂亮、實用且令人驚嘆的汽車。然後在這些平台上朝著更前衛的方向進行創新，並在我們沒有的未來迭代中進行——然後我們可以擱置任何時間表和數量問題。

Understood. Certainly looking forward to seeing the X.

明白了。當然期待看到X。

Have you guys said when -- is there going to be any advanced showing of it at any auto shows or anything, some of the more advanced prototype ahead of the launch that we should be looking forward to?

你們有沒有說什麼時候 - 在任何車展或任何東西上會有任何高級展示，在發布之前我們應該期待一些更高級的原型？

Because there are these different features that I mentioned, I'm being intentionally obtuse, we're not going to show it until it gets delivered.

因為我提到了這些不同的功能，所以我故意變得遲鈍，在它交付之前我們不會展示它。

Interesting. Okay, okay.

有趣的。好吧好吧。

Switching gears a little bit, back on China, just on orders. I understand that deliveries have been significantly impacted by a number of the issues that you've described, but how have orders been trending in China?

稍微改變一下，回到中國，只是根據訂單。據我了解，您所描述的一些問題嚴重影響了交付，但中國的訂單趨勢如何？

Especially now that you've made some replacements on the Management side? You seem to have a solution well in hand that is being implemented to address some of the concerns, whether they justified or not. How have you seen the Model S order book track pre and post those issues?

尤其是現在您已經在管理方面進行了一些替換？您似乎有一個正在實施的解決方案來解決一些問題，無論它們是否合理。您如何看待 Model S 訂單簿跟踪這些問題前後的情況？

Tom has only been in charge for a short period of time, but the trend is positive already. We see it improving every week.

湯姆只掌管了很短的時間，但趨勢已經是積極的。我們每週都看到它在改善。

There's some elementary things that we were missing before, like maps and directions, so the car didn't have maps and directions in China, which is important. Now it does. And we don't have the on-board music player working, which we will have soon. There's a lot of functionality that's just getting added over the software upgrades that are pretty helpful.

我們之前缺少一些基本的東西，比如地圖和方向，所以這輛車在中國沒有地圖和方向，這很重要。現在確實如此。而且我們沒有內置音樂播放器，我們很快就會有。在軟件升級中添加了很多非常有用的功能。

So yes, the trend is positive. I don't have any significant concerns about it right now.

所以是的，趨勢是積極的。我現在對此沒有任何重大擔憂。

It had been -- some had reported that orders had been coming in somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 a day, which obviously point to a pretty good annual run rate. Is that at least the order of magnitude that you were trending at and that you can get back to in the shorter-term?

曾經——一些人報告說，每天大約有 100 個訂單，這顯然表明年運行率相當不錯。這至少是您趨勢的數量級並且您可以在短期內恢復嗎？

The problem with last year was that we had a whole bunch of speculators that basically plan to buy large numbers of the cars and then resell them at a higher price, which is not something we allow. So it gave an inflated sense of demand in the beginning. It wasn't real.

去年的問題是，我們有一大群投機者，他們基本上計劃購買大量汽車，然後以更高的價格轉售，這是我們不允許的。因此，它在一開始就給人一種膨脹的需求感。這不是真的。

I don't think we were at 100 a day at any time. That would sound like 50,000-plus cars just in China alone demand at annualized rate. I don't know what the source is.

我不認為我們在任何時候都達到每天 100 人。這聽起來像僅在中國就有 50,000 多輛汽車的年化需求。我不知道來源是什麼。

Okay, that's helpful color though. Last one for me is just more of an accounting clarification.

好吧，那是有用的顏色。對我來說，最後一個只是更多的會計澄清。

In one of the pages, you talk about direct leasing impacting -- reducing both non-GAAP and GAAP profitability. We understand why it reduces GAAP profitability, we've actually addressed that a lot in this call, but non-GAAP, I was just wondering why that would be impacted?

在其中一頁中，您談到了直接租賃的影響——降低了非 GAAP 和 GAAP 的盈利能力。我們理解為什麼它會降低 GAAP 盈利能力，我們實際上已經在這次電話會議中解決了很多問題，但非 GAAP，我只是想知道為什麼會受到影響？

Yes, because we still hold titles to the car and we haven't collected full cash on the car. And so we don't recognize those direct lease cars even in our non-GAAP financials. Pretty simple.

是的，因為我們仍然擁有這輛車的所有權，而且我們還沒有收到這輛車的全部現金。因此，即使在我們的非公認會計原則財務報表中，我們也不承認這些直接租賃汽車。很簡單。

Understood. Thanks a lot guys.

明白了。非常感謝你們。

But as I mentioned, we can always free up that cash by securitizing our internal leases or by getting a warehouse loan facility. So the important point is that our -- what I would consider our real revenue is actually higher than our non-GAAP revenue because of the internal leases.

但正如我所提到的，我們總是可以通過將我們的內部租賃證券化或獲得倉庫貸款工具來釋放這些現金。所以重要的一點是，由於內部租賃，我認為我們的實際收入實際上高於我們的非公認會計原則收入。

Got it. Okay. Great. Thanks a lot guys.

知道了。好的。偉大的。非常感謝你們。

Vehicles delivered to customers is really the key metric that I focus on. We don't give people a car unless they pay for it, so they paid for it somehow, and the average price per car is pretty obvious. That is really the key number.

交付給客戶的車輛確實是我關注的關鍵指標。我們不給人們一輛車，除非他們付錢，所以他們以某種方式付錢，每輛車的平均價格很明顯。這確實是關鍵數字。

All right. Thank you.

好的。謝謝你。

Rod Lache, Deutsche Bank.

德意志銀行的羅德·拉什。

I apologize if this has been answered. I'd had some phone problems here.

如果這已得到答复，我深表歉意。我在這裡遇到了一些電話問題。

But I was hoping you might be able to help us with what you see as the run rate of sales for Model S right now and that bridge to 55,000? Should we look at the 40,000 deliveries, or maybe it's 46,000 if you annualized what you did and add in the delayed Model D? Is that a run rate? And then to get from here to 55,000, where is China now, what does it need to be, and what actually are you including for the Model X this year?

但我希望你能幫助我們了解你所看到的 Model S 目前的銷售率以及通往 55,000 輛的橋樑？我們是否應該查看 40,000 次交付，或者如果您將所做的年度化並添加延遲的 Model D，則可能是 46,000 次？那是運行速度嗎？然後從這裡增加到 55,000 輛，中國現在在哪裡，它需要成為什麼，以及今年 Model X 的實際包括什麼？

Even if our sales in China were zero this year, zero, I am still confident we can do the 55,000 cars. They won't be zero.

即使我們今年在中國的銷量為零，零，我仍然有信心我們可以做到55,000輛。他們不會是零。

As far as what the mix is between S and X, it's really tricky. I wish I could tell you with accuracy but it really depends on how the production goes with the X when we start up this summer. Even small changes in that ramp can have quite a dramatic effect on X production.

至於 S 和 X 之間的混合，這真的很棘手。我希望我能準確地告訴你，但這真的取決於我們今年夏天開始時 X 的生產情況。即使該斜坡的微小變化也會對 X 生產產生相當大的影響。

Actually for the calendar year, because it is -- long-term makes no difference.

實際上對於日曆年，因為它是 - 長期沒有區別。

Exactly. And you could be like -- if we are producing I would say 800 Xs a week, and several weeks is several thousand cars. So it's really tricky to predict it from -- It'd much easier predict next year, assuming people like the car, that is where you start to see -- I don't know -- 40,000, 30,000, 40,000 leased, 50,000, call it 30,000 to 50,000 Xs next year.

確切地。你可能會想——如果我們生產的話，我會說每週生產 800 輛 X，而幾週就是幾千輛汽車。所以預測它真的很棘手 - 明年更容易預測，假設人們喜歡這輛車，這就是你開始看到的地方 - 我不知道 - 40,000、30,000、40,000 租賃、50,000，明年稱之為 30,000 到 50,000 Xs。

Okay. Clearly up until now, as you've pointed out, you have been able to hit all these numbers without any advertising and marketing?

好的。很明顯，到目前為止，正如您所指出的，您已經能夠在沒有任何廣告和營銷的情況下達到所有這些數字？

And no endorsements and no discounts.

而且沒有代言，也沒有折扣。

Right. To get--?

正確的。要得到 - ？

We haven't paid anyone to pretend that they like our car. Very important point.

我們沒有付錢讓任何人假裝他們喜歡我們的車。非常重要的一點。

And no franchise dealers and all of these things that people had said that you might need to do, you have been able to do it without any of them. But I'm just curious about longer-term, to get to the volume objective that you are looking for this year and beyond, are all of those in your view achievable while avoiding the franchise dealer model? While holding back on advertising and marketing, and while in some cases even raising prices, for example, in Europe to adjust for currency? Are any of those impediments to the demand objectives that you have and would you modify the strategy in any way to achieve these fine numbers?

沒有特許經銷商以及人們所說的所有這些你可能需要做的事情，你已經能夠在沒有他們的情況下做到這一點。但我只是對長期感到好奇，為了達到您今年及以後尋找的銷量目標，您認為在避免特許經銷商模式的同時，所有這些目標都可以實現嗎？在抑制廣告和營銷的同時，在某些情況下甚至提高價格，例如在歐洲調整貨幣？您的需求目標是否存在任何障礙，您是否會以任何方式修改策略以實現這些精細數字？

We're going to be okay on the demand side for this year. Maybe something changes next year, but we been the okay and I don't think we'll have to do a bunch of advertising or throw in the towel with the dealers or anything like that this year. Or discount the cars or anything like that.

今年的需求方面我們會好起來的。也許明年會發生一些變化，但我們還好，我認為今年我們不必做一堆廣告或與經銷商認輸或類似的事情。或者打折汽車或類似的東西。

In fact, I do want to emphasize that whenever you see a celebrity or some prominent person driving our car, they all paid full retail. There was no discount. We didn't give them the car. They are buying the car and they are driving it because they really believe in the car not because someone paid them to pretend that they do. So I've going to give credit for the people that have bought the car.

事實上，我確實想強調的是，每當您看到名人或名人駕駛我們的汽車時，他們都支付了全額零售。沒有折扣。我們沒有給他們車。他們購買汽車並駕駛它是因為他們真的相信汽車，而不是因為有人付錢讓他們假裝他們相信。所以我要讚揚那些買了這輛車的人。

I do have a secret weapon on the demand side that probably start to deploy this year for demand generation. We'll see how that goes. It isn't totally necessary, but it could be pretty interesting and a good weapon against the dealers.

我在需求方面確實有一個秘密武器，今年可能開始部署以產生需求。我們會看看情況如何。這不是完全必要的，但它可能非常有趣，並且是對抗經銷商的好武器。

Okay. Just one last question I had, you mentioned in your letter that the margin was pressured half by revenue and half by cost factors. The FX part of this was pretty clear. There was a comment in here about deferred autopilot revenue. Can you maybe explain, maybe just elaborate a little bit on what you meant actually in that description of the margin variance?

好的。我的最後一個問題是，您在信中提到，利潤率一半受到收入壓力，一半受到成本因素壓力。這其中的 FX 部分非常清楚。這裡有一條關於遞延自動駕駛收入的評論。您能否解釋一下，也許只是詳細說明一下您在保證金差異的描述中的實際含義？

That particular one, Rod, we announced several features that the autopilot functionality or hardware will deliver. Those features, although the hardware is in the car, some of them will get activated with software releases later this year. So based on the (inaudible) aspect of revenue for accounting, we had to defer some of that revenue into 2015. It's as simple as that.

那個特別的人，羅德，我們宣布了自動駕駛儀功能或硬件將提供的幾項功能。這些功能，雖然硬件在車裡，但其中一些功能將在今年晚些時候通過軟件發布激活。因此，基於會計收入的（聽不清）方面，我們不得不將部分收入推遲到 2015 年。就這麼簡單。

Okay, and that variance was versus the 28% original objective or is that versus -- what was that comparison against?

好的，這個差異與 28% 的原始目標相比，或者是與 - 與什麼進行比較？

That was -- yes, it's part of that because we had to figure out the accounting for it, work through the whole thing. As we deferred a significant amount there, that had an impact to our otherwise delivered car gross margin, that would have been--

那是 - 是的，這是其中的一部分，因為我們必須弄清楚它的會計，完成整個事情。由於我們在那裡推遲了大量資金，這對我們以其他方式交付的汽車毛利率產生了影響，那將是——

It's on the order of 0.5% or something like that.

它大約為 0.5% 或類似的量級。

Yes, that's right.

是的，這是正確的。

Maybe 0.5% to 0.7% or something. But most of that deferral will be taken care of this quarter with the software release next month, which will add a bunch more functionality to the car. Right now, I'm very excited about the software release we have planned for next month. There's a bunch of features in it that are going to possibly affect the entire fleet and then of course we will add more autopilot capability.

也許是 0.5% 到 0.7% 之類的。但大部分延期將在本季度通過下個月的軟件發布來解決，這將為汽車增加更多功能。現在，我對我們計劃在下個月發布的軟件感到非常興奮。其中有很多功能可能會影響整個機隊，然後我們當然會添加更多的自動駕駛功能。

That should be something.

那應該是什麼。

Yes. It's a really, really good release.

是的。這是一個非常非常好的版本。

Thank you.

謝謝你。

Patrick, before we go to the next questioner, I just want to do a time check with you, Elon. We're coming up on the hour mark, we have several more questioners in the queue.

帕特里克，在我們去下一個提問者之前，我只想和你做一個時間檢查，埃隆。我們即將到達小時標記，我們還有幾個提問者在排隊。

We can keep going.

我們可以繼續前進。

Okay. All right, Patrick.

好的。好吧，帕特里克。

By 5:30, call gets [canceled].

到 5:30，通話被 [取消]。

Dan Galves, Credit Suisse.

丹·加爾維斯，瑞士信貸。

Thanks. Good evening. I just had a question on the delivery guidance.

謝謝。晚上好。我只是對交付指南有疑問。

If you adjust that for additional in-transit vehicles, I'm just trying to get a sense of whether you feel like that's your best guess on your max production for 2015? Because my sense, coming into the year around 1,000 a week is you could produce a lot more than that. So I'm just getting a sense of what part of that is demand constrained and what part of is production constrained?

如果您針對額外的運輸車輛進行調整，我只是想了解您是否覺得這是您對 2015 年最大產量的最佳猜測？因為我的感覺是，進入一周大約 1,000 個的一年，你可以生產比這更多的東西。所以我只是了解其中哪一部分是需求受限的，哪一部分是生產受限的？

We are going to try to do a little better than the 55,000 number. So we're saying 55,000-plus, but we are going to try to do a little better than that.

我們將嘗試比 55,000 這個數字做得更好一些。所以我們說的是 55,000 多個，但我們會嘗試做得比這更好一些。

But it is, as I mentioned earlier, it's really dependent on how the X ramp goes, that, that can quite a -- if it happens -- depending on how long it takes to spool out that could affect the delivered number quite significantly. Also when we say delivered, you've got to also factor in that there's a lot of cars on ships.

但是，正如我之前提到的，它實際上取決於 X 斜坡的運行方式，這在很大程度上——如果發生的話——取決於滑出需要多長時間，這可能會顯著影響交付的數量。此外，當我們說交付時，您還必須考慮到船上有很多汽車。

Correct, there's a gap between production and delivery time. And then we need to consider, there could be a disruption during launch of X and so when you are looking at the broad number of 55,000 over the year, there are things we need to consider through the year what happens.

正確，生產和交貨時間之間存在差距。然後我們需要考慮，在 X 的發布期間可能會出現中斷，因此當您查看一年中 55,000 的廣泛數字時，我們需要考慮全年發生的事情。

55,000 is a number that we're pretty comfortable with achieving on deliveries. I was necessarily making a conscious decision to focus on productivity this quarter, not just on ramping production.

55,000 是一個我們很樂意在交付時實現的數字。我必須有意識地決定本季度專注於生產力，而不僅僅是提高產量。

Production stability.

生產穩定性。

Yes, production stability. In order to get that efficiency, we need to be building it from a foundation for future growth. If we're just in helter-skelter production ramp, just trying to grow production numbers, it's really hard to get the productivity and fix the foundational elements.

是的，生產穩定性。為了獲得這種效率，我們需要為未來的增長奠定基礎。如果我們只是在匆忙的生產階段，只是試圖增加產量，那麼很難獲得生產力並修復基本要素。

So the conscious decision this quarter to say, okay, but we've got to improve our core productivity. We are running out of parking spaces (inaudible). Our Fremont plant is pretty big and it's hard to park so we need to get these productivity improvements in place so we can grow our production volume without proportionately growing headcount.

所以本季度有意識地決定說，好吧，但我們必須提高我們的核心生產力。我們的停車位快用完了（聽不清）。我們的弗里蒙特工廠很大，而且很難停車，所以我們需要在適當的地方提高生產力，這樣我們就可以在不成比例地增加員工人數的情況下增加產量。

That makes a lot of sense. And then just one housekeeping question.

這很有意義。然後只是一個家政問題。

You put the chart at the beginning of the shareholder letter with a revenue guidance for 2015. Is there anything in there for trade-in sales, for used car salesman, and do you have any sense of what type of drag on gross margin sale of trade-ins will be?

你把圖表放在股東信的開頭，並附上 2015 年的收入指導。裡面有沒有以舊換新銷售、二手車銷售員的東西，你知道什麼類型的拖累毛利率銷售以舊換新會？

There is a small amount of that. We are just getting into that business now and our goal is certainly not to make that same kind of money on our used cars.

有一小部分。我們現在才剛剛涉足這項業務，我們的目標當然不是在我們的二手車上賺同樣的錢。

But used cars will also affect the capital. We don't have any capital in them, really. So you have a turnaround in capital that's all -- so it's actually the used car margin is actually, its ROI base is extremely good.

但二手車也會影響到資本。我們在他們身上沒有任何資本，真的。所以你有一個資本周轉 - 所以實際上是二手車利潤率，它的投資回報率基礎非常好。

And the dealers, too, make a lot more gross margin on used cars than new cars. That's not our intention, but the ROI is really good for us.

經銷商在二手車上的毛利率也比新車高得多。這不是我們的意圖，但投資回報率對我們來說真的很好。

We're going to separate that out so we can see new car gross margin versus used car, service, and other things.

我們將把它分開，這樣我們就可以看到新車毛利率與二手車、服務和其他東西的對比。

Which brings up a good point that, as we said towards the end of our shareholder letter, starting for 2015 financials, we're going to show our income statements slightly differently, where automotive revenues and cost of good sold is truly new car sales. And then we have services in other section of the income statement that has all of these other things including trade-ins.

這帶來了一個很好的觀點，正如我們在股東信函末尾所說的那樣，從 2015 年財務開始，我們將顯示我們的損益表略有不同，其中汽車收入和商品銷售成本是真正的新車銷售。然後我們在損益表的其他部分提供服務，包括以舊換新。

We'll break it out so that you can see clearly what's new Model S gross margin, what's used, what's other things.

我們會將其分解，以便您清楚地看到 Model S 的新毛利率是什麼，使用了什麼，還有什麼其他的東西。

That's very appreciated Thanks.

非常感謝謝謝。

Trip Chowdhry, Global Equities Research.

Trip Chowdhry，全球股票研究。

Thank you. Two quick questions.

謝謝你。兩個快速的問題。

We see a lot of similarities between Apple and Tesla, both companies go for perfection, performance, and design, but we don't see Apple making a $30 iPhone. I was just wondering, instead of focusing on Model III, and we just focus on say Model S and Model X, but make them even better? We just focus on increasing the range to say 400 miles, 450 miles?

我們看到蘋果和特斯拉之間有很多相似之處，兩家公司都追求完美、性能和設計，但我們沒有看到蘋果生產 30 美元的 iPhone。我只是想知道，我們不是專注於 Model III，而是專注於 Model S 和 Model X，但讓它們變得更好？我們只是專注於將範圍擴大到 400 英里，450 英里？

You already have the Roadster, which is like 400 miles now. That would make (multiple speakers)

您已經擁有 Roadster，現在大約 400 英里。這將使（多位發言者）

Not quite 400 miles just yet. The Roadsters are more like 360 but close to 400 miles with the upgrade. Capable of doing LA to San Francisco.

還不到400英里。 Roadsters更像是360，但升級後接近400英里。能夠從洛杉磯到舊金山。

But the goal at Tesla from the beginning has always been to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport and to make electric cars happen much faster than would otherwise be the case. In order to do that, we would have to make lots of cars and we would need to make them a heck of a lot more affordable than the S and the X are today. Even with the Model III, though, it is a mass market premium car. It's not -- it still premium, but it's mass market premium, and it's at $35,000, it's above average price.

但特斯拉的目標從一開始就一直是加速可持續交通的出現，並讓電動汽車的發展速度比其他情況快得多。為了做到這一點，我們必須製造很多汽車，而且我們需要讓它們比今天的 S 和 X 便宜得多。不過，即使是 Model III，它也是一款大眾市場的高檔汽車。它不是——它仍然是溢價，但它是大眾市場溢價，它是 35,000 美元，高於平均價格。

It's also not an either/or decision. We definitely will keep making S and the X better and will keep improving that platform, really, as much as the technology will allow. We'll go in both those directions.

這也不是一個非此即彼的決定。我們肯定會繼續讓 S 和 X 變得更好，並且會繼續改進這個平台，真的，在技術允許的範圍內。我們會朝這兩個方向走。

Perfect, thank you.

完美，謝謝。

Andrew Fung, CLSA.

安德魯·馮，里昂證券。

Thanks for taking my question. The Gigafactory seems to be making some good progress in terms of construction. Could you provide an update on how the development of the battery supply chain is progressing? And perhaps any notable challenges or perhaps positive surprises that have occurred with that process?

感謝您提出我的問題。 Gigafactory 似乎在建設方面取得了一些不錯的進展。您能否提供有關電池供應鏈發展的最新進展？也許在這個過程中出現了任何顯著的挑戰或積極的驚喜？

Sure, I can take that one. This is JB.

當然，我可以拿那個。這是JB。

So far we've been pretty pleased with the supply chain developments. We're spending a lot of time visiting more and more of the supply chain partners and understanding and learning about all those different markets. That learning is progressing quickly and we're getting a much more clear picture of exactly how we will achieve the cost reductions we have talked about.

到目前為止，我們對供應鏈的發展非常滿意。我們花費大量時間訪問越來越多的供應鏈合作夥伴，了解和了解所有這些不同的市場。這種學習進展很快，我們正在更清楚地了解我們將如何實現我們所討論的成本降低。

I don't want to go into too many specifics on exactly what we have learned in which places. But I would say there is a lot -- maybe more incremental positivity on some of the commodities and some of the ways that we can secure and procure pricing on some of the larger commodity prices that go into the cell.

我不想詳細說明我們在哪些地方學到了什麼。但我想說有很多——也許對一些大宗商品有更多的增量積極性，以及我們可以確保和獲得進入單元格的一些較大商品價格的定價的一些方法。

Great. Any sense of when you guys may announce additional either suppliers or partners for the Gigafactory?

偉大的。知道你們什麼時候可以宣布 Gigafactory 的其他供應商或合作夥伴嗎？

We want to be a little bit cautious about doing that too soon. There's obviously a lot of work going on in discussion with all of those partners, but we want to be careful to make sure that all the agreements and decision on where that partnership is headed is very clear. So we will wait until it's really done and ready to announce.

我們希望對過早這樣做有點謹慎。顯然，與所有這些合作夥伴的討論正在進行大量工作，但我們要小心確保所有關於該合作夥伴關係的協議和決定都非常明確。所以我們將等到它真正完成並準備好宣布。

Great, thank you.

太好了謝謝。

Andrea James, Dougherty & Company.

安德里亞詹姆斯，多爾蒂公司。

Thanks for taking my follow-up. Why did you guys promise the Roadster 3.0 this year?

感謝您接受我的跟進。為什麼你們今年承諾推出Roadster 3.0？

It's just a long-standing obligation we have. It's not something that economically is a win for us, but it's just an obligation to our early adopters of Tesla. We said we'd provide a significant upgrade to the Roadster and that's what we're doing.

這只是我們長期承擔的義務。這對我們來說不是經濟上的勝利，但這只是我們對特斯拉的早期採用者的義務。我們說過我們將對 Roadster 進行重大升級，這就是我們正在做的事情。

It's okay. It's not a big thing one way or the other. It's slightly economically just [agitated] for Tesla.

沒關係。無論哪種方式，這都不是一件大事。對特斯拉來說，這在經濟上只是[激動]。

If I read through on the range communication on the Roadster 3.0 and I just apply that same range gain to the Model S, I get a 350- to 400-mile range on the Model S by, say, 2017. Is that right -- is all of the gains there translatable?

如果我通讀 Roadster 3.0 上的距離通信，然後將相同的距離增益應用到 Model S 上，那麼到 2017 年，Model S 的續航里程將達到 350 到 400 英里。是嗎——那裡的所有收益都可以翻譯嗎？

It's difficult to put an exact time on it. 2017, probably not in 2017. At some point, yes. I don't know whether that's 2017.

很難確定確切的時間。 2017 年，可能不是 2017 年。在某個時候，是的。不知道是不是2017年。

It's not 2017. It might be, say, 2019 or 2020 or something like that. It's more the varying model. We can make the Model S go 400 miles today if we wanted to by just increasing the pack size.

這不是 2017 年。可能是 2019 年或 2020 年或類似的時間。它更多的是不同的模型。如果我們想通過增加包裝尺寸來讓 Model S 今天行駛 400 英里。

Right, at the same pack cost, say give it, $22,000 pack would be 400-mile range in the next couple of years, but it seems that's a bit too aggressive?

對，在相同的包裝成本下，假設它，22,000 美元的包裝在未來幾年內將是 400 英里的射程，但這似乎有點過於激進？

The next couple years would be too aggressive. If you go five years out, that might be the case.

接下來的幾年將過於激進。如果你出去五年，情況可能就是這樣。

That's not a prediction. That's just speculation. I'd say it's not two years, but it might be five years.

這不是預測。這只是猜測。我會說這不是兩年，但可能是五年。

And I feel like we should just generally ask your thoughts on oil, although it's a pretty broad question, so maybe just general thoughts on oil, but then more pointedly what it does to the residual value of the cars? And also maybe the corresponding offset with lifting the value of the ZEV credits as more gas guzzling cars are sold? I don't know. There you go?

我覺得我們應該一般性地詢問您對石油的看法，雖然這是一個相當廣泛的問題，所以也許只是對石油的一般看法，但更明確地說，它對汽車的剩餘價值有什麼影響？隨著更多耗油汽車的銷售，ZEV 積分的價值可能相應抵消？我不知道。你去嗎？

As far as oil is concerned, I'm not an expert on the oil business, but obviously fracking has naturally increased the available reserves worldwide. Fracking is also more expensive than standard oil drilling, so there's a cost of doing it that sets a floor on fracking, but it's really anyone's guess as to what happens with oil prices long-term.

就石油而言，我不是石油行業的專家，但顯然水力壓裂法自然地增加了全球的可用儲量。水力壓裂也比標準石油鑽探更昂貴，因此它的成本為水力壓裂奠定了基礎，但對於長期油價會發生什麼，這真的是任何人的猜測。

Demand is certainly going to increase, how will the supply, grow to match that? But for sure, oil companies are going to be scaling back their investments in new oil fields massively with the low price of oil today, so I would expect that.

需求肯定會增加，供應將如何增長以匹配呢？但可以肯定的是，石油公司將在當今油價低迷的情況下大規模縮減對新油田的投資，所以我預計會這樣。

But as it translates to the impact on demand for your vehicles and then also the residual value of those vehicles?

但當它轉化為對您的車輛需求的影響以及這些車輛的剩餘價值？

It certainly has some effect, but I wouldn't say -- it's not a dramatic effect. I call it a moderate effect. It's not changing any of my projections. Put it that way.

它當然有一些效果，但我不會說——這不是一個戲劇性的效果。我稱之為中等效果。它不會改變我的任何預測。這麼說吧。

Thank you.

謝謝你。

Thank you. This ends our Q&A session today. I'll turn it back to Management for closing remarks.

謝謝你。今天的問答環節到此結束。我將把它轉回管理層以結束髮言。

Thank you, everyone, for joining us a few hours later. Obviously, that was important to get the launch off. Thank you and good night.

謝謝大家，幾個小時後加入我們。顯然，這對於啟動發射很重要。謝謝，晚安。

Ladies and gentlemen, thanks for participating in today's program. This concludes the program. You may all disconnect.

女士們，先生們，感謝您參加今天的節目。程序到此結束。你們都可以斷開連接。