特斯拉 (TSLA) 2016 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Tesla Motors Incorporated third-quarter 2016 financial results Q&A conference call.

女士們、先生們，大家好，歡迎參加特斯拉汽車公司 2016 年第三季財務業績問答電話會議。

(Operator Instructions)

（操作員指示）

I would now like to introduce your host for today's conference, Mr. Jeff Evanson. Sir, you may begin.

現在，我想介紹今天會議的主持人傑夫·埃文森先生。先生，請開始。

Thank you, Chanel, and good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to Tesla's third-quarter 2016 Q&A webcast. I'm joined today by Elon Musk, JB Straubel, Jason Wheeler, and Jon McNeill.

謝謝Chanel，大家下午好！歡迎收聽特斯拉2016年第三季問答網路直播。今天與我一起參加直播的還有伊隆馬斯克、JB史特勞貝爾、傑森惠勒和喬恩麥克尼爾。

Our Q3 results are announced in the update letter at the same link as this webcast, and during our call today we will make -- we'll discuss our business outlook and make forward-looking statements. These 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 filings with the SEC. We will start today's call with some brief comments by Elon and Jason, followed by your questions and answers.

我們的第三季業績將在與本次網路直播相同連結的更新函中公佈。在今天的電話會議上，我們將討論我們的業務前景並做出前瞻性陳述。這些陳述是基於我們截至今天的預測和預期。由於許多風險和不確定因素，包括我們最近向美國證券交易委員會提交的文件中提及的風險和不確定因素，實際事件或結果可能與此有重大差異。今天的電話會議將以埃隆和傑森的簡短評論開始，之後是大家的問答環節。

During the Q&A please try to limit yourselves to one question and one follow up. And so if you want to log into the Q&A queue, please do so now by pressing star one. And Elon, I'll pass it over to you.

在問答環節，請盡量只提出一個問題並進行一次後續跟進。如果您想加入問答隊列，請立即按星號。伊隆，我把問題交給您。

Thank you. My comments will be brief because I think it's really -- what I would have to say is captured in the earnings letter. Obviously the main thing is that we are able to have our best quarter ever, achieve full GAAP profitability, and moreover I think we are headed to have a great fourth quarter as well.

謝謝。我的評論會很簡短，因為我想說的其實都寫在財報裡了。顯然，最重要的是我們能夠創造有史以來最好的季度業績，實現完全的GAAP盈利，而且我認為我們第四季度的表現也會非常出色。

One of the criticisms I've seen out there is that perhaps Q3 was at the expense of Q4. This is not true, and we currently believe that Q4 will be profitable, excluding non-cash stock-based expenses. I think there is actually a chance that we will be -- there is a chance that will be profitable even including stock and non-cash stock-based expenses. It's just a chance. It's not a promise, but I think we've got a shot at actually being profitable, even taking stock-based expenses into account.

我看到的批評之一是，第三季的業績或許是以犧牲第四季的表現為代價的。這並非事實，我們目前認為，扣除非現金的股票支出後，第四季將實現盈利。我認為，即使包含股票支出和非現金的股票支出，我們仍然有機會獲利。這只是一個機會。這不是承諾，但我認為即使考慮到股票支出，我們也有機會實現盈利。

So it's very exciting. I think we're very proud of the Tesla team for executing so well on Q3 and going into Q4 and beyond. So it has been great. Definitely one of the best moments ever in Tesla, I think. Jason?

所以這非常令人興奮。我們為特斯拉團隊在第三季以及第四季及之後的出色表現感到非常自豪。這真是太棒了。我認為這絕對是特斯拉歷史上最美好的時刻之一。傑森？

Thanks, Elon. Just a couple points I wanted to hit on real quickly before we jump into Q&A. One is I just want to point out the prudent financial management that we have been able to accomplish over the last several quarters. An example here is back in 2015 we were spending $400 million a quarter on CapEx.

謝謝，埃隆。在進入問答環節之前，我想快速談幾點。首先，我想指出我們在過去幾季實現了審慎的財務管理。例如，2015年我們每季的資本支出高達4億美元。

We have averaged about $250 million a quarter in 2016. That will change as Model 3 start to ramp up in Q4, but we're focusing on make sure that every dollar we spend is in its highest and best use.

2016 年，我們平均每季花費約 2.5 億美元。隨著 Model 3 在第四季度開始加速成長，這種情況將會改變，但我們專注於確保我們花費的每一美元都得到最大、最佳的利用。

From a gross margin perspective, if you look at automotive gross margin and you exclude ZEV credit revenue, we had 140 basis point improvement quarter over quarter. Lots of different factors there. One, obviously the increase in volume helps on the labor and overhead front.

從毛利率的角度來看，如果算上汽車業務的毛利率，並剔除零排放汽車積分收入，我們的季度毛利率比上季提高了140個基點。這其中有很多不同的因素。首先，銷售量的成長顯然有助於降低人工成本和管理成本。

Secondly, our reliability continues to get better and better. Big change in Model X over the last 12 months, as we highlighted in the letter, and continued improvements in batteries and drive units across both vehicles. Another source of gross margin improvement is supplier sourcing and the wind down of our commitments on prototype parts for Model X.

其次，我們的可靠性持續提升。正如我們在信中所強調的那樣，Model X 在過去 12 個月中發生了巨大變化，兩款車型的電池和驅動單元也持續改進。毛利率提升的另一個因素是供應商採購以及我們對 Model X 原型零件承諾的逐步減少。

Third point on financial management, you can see our OpEx is growing sub-linear to revenue. The operating leverage that we've been talking about through the course of the year is starting to kick in. To put some real numbers around that, GAAP revenue was up 81% quarter over quarter, 145% year over year, and yet GAAP OpEx was only up 7% quarter over quarter and 33% year over year.

關於財務管理的第三點，您可以看到我們的營運支出與收入呈現亞線性成長。我們今年一直在談論的營運槓桿開始發揮作用。具體來說，GAAP 營收季增 81%，年增 145%，但 GAAP 營運支出較上季僅成長 7%，較去年同期成長 33%。

The second thing I want to talk for just a couple of minutes about is what we have done to the capital structure and our sources of liquidity. As you may have read in the letter, we paid down $600 million in debt within the quarter. Most notably $422 million of conversions on our 2018 converts, derisking the balance sheet in the future.

第二件事我想花幾分鐘談談我們對資本結構和流動性來源所做的調整。正如您可能在信中讀到的，我們在本季償還了6億美元的債務。最值得注意的是，我們在2018年轉換了4.22億美元的債務，從而降低了未來資產負債表的風險。

In addition to that, we were able to sign a $300 million warehouse line, which gives us more leasing capacity at great terms. The terms on that vehicle are less than 2%.

除此之外，我們還簽署了一項價值3億美元的倉儲合同，這讓我們能夠以優惠的條件獲得更多的租賃能力。該合約的利率不到2%。

Also we managed to get an 80% increase with our largest North America leasing partner in the quarter, and we're also on task to sign up a new leasing partner in Q4. Generally I would just like to point out that our access to capital markets and our sources of liquidity is a strong as it's ever been.

此外，我們與北美最大租賃合作夥伴的合作在本季度實現了80%的成長，並且我們還計劃在第四季度簽約一家新的租賃合作夥伴。總的來說，我想指出的是，我們進入資本市場的管道和流動性來源一如既往地強勁。

Just to highlight one element of what Jason is saying, our vehicle gross margin increased Q2 to Q3. One of the other things I've seen out there is that somehow we achieved these numbers as a result of widespread discounting; that is absolutely false.

再強調Jason所說的一點，我們的汽車毛利率在第二季到第三季有所成長。我看到的另一個說法是，我們之所以能取得這些數字，是因為我們大範圍的折扣；這絕對是錯誤的。

The discounts, there were a few discounts, but they were few and far between and that has been absolutely shut down to zero. So you can see that in the fact that the vehicle profitability increased, even excluding ZEV credits from Q2 to Q3.

折扣確實有一些，但數量很少，而且已經完全降到了零。所以，從第二季度到第三季度，即使不計零排放汽車積分，汽車獲利能力仍然有所提升，這可以從這裡看出。

All right, Chanel, I think we're ready for the first question.

好的，香奈兒，我想我們已經準備好回答第一個問題了。

Colin Langan, UBS.

瑞銀集團的科林·蘭根 (Colin Langan)。

Great. Thanks for taking my question. It looks like a very strong free cash flow quarter, but when I look through the balance sheet there seems to be a pretty large increase in accounts payable and accrued liabilities that seems to have helped.

太好了。感謝您回答我的問題。本季的自由現金流看起來非常強勁，但我查看資產負債表時發現，應付帳款和應計負債似乎大幅增加，這似乎也起到了一定作用。

How should we think about that going into Q4? Does some of that unwind? Were there any changes to higher terms in the quarter, or is that just consistent with the ramp in production?

我們該如何看待第四季的情況？其中一部分會消失嗎？本季的更高條款有任何變化嗎？還是僅僅與產量成長一致？

Sure. Great question; this is Jason. So there was definitely an increase in payables, and I think that will start to unwind a little bit in Q4. A lot of that is natural. If you look at production I believe it increased 37% quarter over quarter. So there is naturally going to be more parts coming into the factory.

當然。好問題，我是傑森。所以應付帳款肯定增加了，我認為第四季會開始有所回落。這很大程度上是正常的。如果你看一下產量，我認為它比去年同期成長了37%。所以自然會有更多零件進入工廠。

So I think some of that is just in the course of business. The other thing that I think is worth pointing out on the cash flow statement is receivables. We had a lot of deliveries right at the end of the quarter, so we were not able to collect all of our receivables. We ended up with a fairly large receivable balance on cars that were delivered in that last 10 days or so.

所以我認為其中一些只是在業務過程中發生的。我認為現金流量表上值得指出的另一件事是應收帳款。我們在本季末有很多交付，所以我們無法收回所有應收帳款。最後，我們在過去10天左右交付的汽車的應收帳款餘額相當大。

Yes. Definitely also with emphasizing that, it's a first approximation you expect payables to increase by 37% if production does. And you have to net out against receivables, and when you do that I think it is not really a material situation.

是的。當然，也要強調的是，如果產量增加，你預期應付款項將增加37%，這只是初步估計。你必須扣除應收帳款，而當你這樣做的時候，我認為情況並不那麼嚴重。

And we are actively looking to increase terms with suppliers, and I think as our production has been more predictable our suppliers have been much more open to that conversation.

我們正在積極尋求與供應商達成更好的協議，我認為，隨著我們的生產變得更加可預測，我們的供應商對這種對話也更加開放。

In fact -- thanks for making that point, Jason. I think it's worth emphasizing that for Model 3, but the Model 3 system is designed so that -- the whole manufacturing supply chain system is designed so that the faster Model 3 production grows the faster Tesla's cash balance grows. So the terms that we're getting from suppliers are significantly better, almost 60 days. As we've had to about 40 or 45 days for S and X, and the Model 3 production and logistics is way faster.

事實上——謝謝你提出這一點，傑森。我認為對於 Model 3 來說，這一點值得強調，但 Model 3 系統的設計概念是——整個製造供應鏈系統的設計理念是，Model 3 的產量成長越快，特斯拉的現金餘額成長就越快。因此，我們從供應商獲得的條款明顯更優惠，幾乎是 60 天。而 Model S 和 X 的交付週期大約是 40 到 45 天，而 Model 3 的生產和物流速度要快得多。

The car spends much less time in the factory, and we're working on ways to expedite delivery of the vehicles to the end customer, which we can do when we have scale. We don't have to just wait for a ship to go somewhere.

汽車在工廠裡待的時間大大縮短，我們正在研究如何加快將車輛交付給最終客戶，只要我們具備規模，就能做到這一點。我們不必只是等待船到某個地方。

We can fill up the whole ship and just have the ship go anywhere we want. So the net effect is that instead of growth being a capital consumer, growth is a capital producer.

我們可以把整艘船都裝滿，然後讓它開到我們想去的地方。因此，最終的結果是，成長不再是資本的消耗者，而是資本的生產者。

Got it. And so the other question I had is, your guiding to profit in Q4 without ZEV credit. It actually sounds like without even the stock comp possibly, yet production is about flat, Model X (inaudible) is going to get a little worse, OpEx guidance implies that's up sequentially. So what are the key drivers that are actually going to get you to profitability? Because I think if you take out the ZEV credit it would've probably been still a loss in this quarter.

明白了。我的另一個問題是，您給出的第四季度獲利預測，不包括零排放汽車積分。聽起來好像即使不考慮庫存補償，產量也基本持平，而Model X（聽不清楚）的狀況會略有惡化，營運支出預測暗示其環比增長。那麼，哪些關鍵驅動因素能夠真正推動您獲利呢？因為我認為，即使扣除零排放汽車積分，本季可能仍會虧損。

We expect gross margin to increase, and that's a huge factor. (inaudible) We're using very few prototype parts, or low-volume selling parts, and we're not paying for crazy amounts of expediting, and there are a bunch of design improvements, design cost downs that actually are value neutral to the customer or in some cases actually it costs slightly better. And we have the P100. One of the things that the 100 kilowatt hour car [pack] was only in limited production towards the end of last quarter, and it will be a pretty significant portion of this quarter. So, yes.

我們預期毛利率會上升，這是一個重要因素。 （聽不清楚）我們使用的原型零件或小批量銷售的零件很少，而且我們不會為瘋狂的加急支付費用，而且我們進行了大量設計改進，降低了設計成本，這些改進實際上對客戶的價值沒有影響，在某些情況下，成本實際上會略有降低。我們還有P100。上個季度末，100千瓦時汽車[電池組]的產量有限，而它將在本季度佔據相當大的份額。所以，是的。

One additional thing is that reliability of the cars continues to get better, so our warranty costs start decreasing as well. And that's a really -- that's a key driver for us, not only from the cost side but from the demand side where we're creating demand in market given the reliability of the vehicles.

另外，汽車的可靠性不斷提高，所以我們的保固成本也開始下降。這對我們來說真的是一個關鍵驅動力，不僅從成本方面，也從需求方面，我們正在憑藉車輛的可靠性創造市場需求。

The reliability improvement is massive.

可靠性的提高是巨大的。

It is. So the visits to service for Model X through the course of the year have declined 92%, which is just a fantastic result both from the manufacturing side, and the vehicle reliability teams have been working hard to achieve that, and we're going to continue to approve against that.

是的。所以，Model X 全年的維修次數下降了 92%，這對製造方來說是一個非常棒的結果，車輛可靠性團隊也一直在努力實現這一目標，我們將繼續批准這項計畫。

Chanel, let's go to the next question, please.

香奈兒，請我們進入下一個問題。

Brian Johnson, Barclays.

巴克萊銀行的布萊恩·約翰遜。

Good afternoon. I just want to go in a little bit on the regulatory credits. A couple things, first clearly with your delivery numbers the California and the other CARB states are buying more Teslas, yet last quarter you talked about the value of those plummeting and we shouldn't really expect much.

午安.我想簡單談談監理積分。有幾點要說明。首先，從您提供的交付數據來看，加州和其他加州空氣資源委員會（CARB）各州購買的特斯拉汽車數量明顯增加，但上個季度您提到這些汽車的價值大幅下降，我們不應該期待太多。

So, obviously you are generating more, but a couple questions. What's happened in the marketplace for those credits? And I know even under GAAP you don't list that as a balance sheet asset, but if we were to think about the quarterly generation of credits as well as the credits on your -- in effect in your car bank that could be monetized in the future. How would we think about this?

所以，顯然你們產生的積分更多了，但我有幾個問題。這些積分在市場上的情況如何？我知道，即使在公認會計準則下，你們也不會將其列為資產負債表資產，但如果我們考慮季度產生的積分，以及你們汽車銀行裡未來可以貨幣化的積分，我們會如何看待這個問題？

Unfortunately, as I've said on record before the CARB, their credit mandate is incredibly weak and needs to be fixed. And when you have a weak mandate obviously the value of those credits decline considerably.

不幸的是，正如我在加州空氣資源委員會（CARB）面前公開表示的那樣，他們的信用額度要求極其薄弱，需要改進。而當要求薄弱時，這些信用額度的價值顯然會大幅下降。

There are some quarters where we simply cannot even find a buyer for credits, and then when we can find a buyer it's typically at $0.50 on the dollar for the ZEV credit. So -- and then obviously the ZEV credit is only applied to roughly half of our market in the US, maybe slightly above half.

有些時候，我們根本找不到信用額度的買家，即使找到了買家，通常也只能以0.50美元的價格購買零排放汽車信用額度。所以，顯然，零排放汽車信用額度只適用於我們在美國大約一半的市場，可能略高於一半。

It doesn't apply to Asia or Europe or Canada or Mexico or anywhere else. So it's fair, and I think CARB really should be doing more, it's unfortunate that they are not. And then I need to maybe write a longer blog piece going through this, but Tesla is sometimes criticized for relying on tax credits and that kind of thing, people really misunderstand this.

這不適用於亞洲、歐洲、加拿大、墨西哥或其他任何地方。所以這很公平，我認為加州空氣資源委員會（CARB）確實應該做得更多，可惜他們沒有這樣做。然後我可能需要寫一篇更長的部落格文章來詳細闡述這一點，但特斯拉有時會因為依賴稅收抵免之類的政策而受到批評，人們真的誤解了這一點。

What matters is what does Tesla receive relative to its competitors, not what does Tesla receive in the absolute. But our competitors maybe worth noting maybe you would consider those to be a risk or something that is problematic for us, our competitors monetize ZEV credits at a hundred cents on the dollar.

重要的是特斯拉相對於其競爭對手所獲得的收益，而不是特斯拉的絕對收益。但我們的競爭對手或許值得關注——或許你會認為他們對我們來說是一種風險或問題——我們的競爭對手以百分之百的價格將零排放汽車積分貨幣化。

We monetize them at $0.50 on the dollar where we can get it. That means if you have, let's say, it depends on the scenario but if you have three ZEV credits for an EV they would essentially be worth $5,000 each. So that would be $15,000. So when say, Jim or somebody sells an EV they get $15,000. But when Tesla sells an EV we get half that.

我們以每1美元0.50美元的價格將其貨幣化。這意味著，如果你擁有，比如說，這取決於具體情況，但如果你擁有3個電動車零排放車積分，每個積分的價值基本上是5000美元。也就是15000美元。所以，比如說，當吉姆或其他人賣出一輛電動車時，他們可以得到15,000美元。但當特斯拉賣出一輛電動車時，我們只能得到這個數字的一半。

Right, they have an internal market.

是的，他們有一個內部市場。

It's not we who are being subsidized but our competitors. Now the interesting thing is that there is a limit to our disadvantage. Because for them the credit thing is so weak, it only goes so far. It only applies to certain states.

獲得補貼的不是我們，而是我們的競爭對手。有趣的是，我們的劣勢是有限的。因為對他們來說，信貸條件非常薄弱，所以補貼有限。這只適用於某些州。

So what you will see our competitors do is they will limit their production and they will only sell in ZEV states, or almost entirely in ZEV states. That doesn't scale. That will take them to maybe 40,000 or 50,000 units a year best case, but not -- but we're talking about doing 500,000 units a year.

所以你會看到我們的競爭對手會限制產量，只在零排放州銷售，或幾乎只在零排放州銷售。這無法實現規模化。這最多只能讓他們每年生產4萬到5萬輛，但我們說的是每年50萬輛。

Which means at high volume we no longer suffer the disadvantage of the credit regime. This is wholly misunderstood.

這意味著，在交易量大的時候，我們不再遭受信貸制度的不利影響。這完全是誤解。

Does that help, Brian?

這有幫助嗎，布萊恩？

Yes, just a quick follow up on Cap A credits. Were there any?

是的，我只是想快速跟進 Cap A 的學分。有嗎？

Say again, Brian?

再說一遍，布萊恩？

Just a follow up. Were there GHG or other Cap A credits? And how did they compare to prior quotas?

補充一下。有溫室氣體或其他A類限額嗎？與之前的配額相比如何？

Those are mouse nuts.

這些都是老鼠堅果。

Okay. Thanks.

好的。謝謝。

Let's go to the next question, please.

請讓我們進入下一個問題。

Colin Rusch, Oppenheimer.

奧本海默的科林·拉什。

Thanks so much. Can we just look at the shipment numbers? So a quarter ago you were guiding to roughly 80,000 vehicles a year, and now three months later we're down at 75,000. Can you just walk us through the factors that are impacting that lower shipment number, or delivery number I should say?

非常感謝。我們可以看看出貨量數據嗎？一個季度前，您預計年產量約為8萬輛，而三個月後就下降到了7.5萬輛。能具體說說導致出貨量（或交貨量）下降的因素有哪些嗎？

I think this was really gone over in last quarter's call, is that we had problems getting to rates in the first half of the year. Rate being an average of roughly 2,000 cars a week. Just a lot of things broken in our production system. I personally probably took a year off my life or more camping out at the frigging factory solving that along with a number of other members of Tesla team.

我想上個季度的電話會議已經詳細討論了這個問題，那就是我們在上半年的生產力方面遇到了問題。當時的平均週產量大約是2000輛。我們的生產系統有很多問題。我和特斯拉團隊的其他一些成員一起，在工廠待了大概一年甚至更久才解決這個問題。

We went through bloody hell in the first half of this year. We got out of that basically around mid-June, and then the result is achieving a weekly production target of roughly 2,000 cars a week.

今年上半年我們經歷了地獄般的煎熬。大約在六月中旬，我們基本上擺脫了困境，最終實現了每週約2000輛的生產目標。

Okay, maybe I can take that offline. So then the second question for me is really about absorption. With nearly 40% increase in deliveries can you break out the impact in gross margin to absorption? It would seem that, that would be a meaningful number at this point.

好的，也許我可以離線討論這個問題。那麼我的第二個問題其實是關於吸收率的。交付量成長了近40%，您能否具體說明吸收率對毛利率的影響？目前看來，這是一個有意義的數字。

What are you talking about?

你在說什麼？

Factory absorption.

工廠吸收。

Do you mean fixed costs versus -- ?

您的意思是固定成本與--？

Yes, fixed costs on the factory and how that flows through the depreciation line.

是的，工廠的固定成本以及它如何流經折舊線。

The way to think about that is, I think Elon actually just covered it in his last answer, we had capacitized the factory and had the factory essentially produce many more cars in the first half of the year, and we fell short of that. And now we're at the rate that we had planned to be at early in the year, so our absorption is about what we'd expect it to be. And I think what you're seeing now from an absorption perspective as it's related to gross margin is a good steady-state rate.

對此的思考方式是，我認為伊隆實際上在他上次的回答中已經提到了這一點，我們已經充分發揮了工廠的產能，使得工廠在上半年生產了更多汽車，但我們沒有達到預期目標。現在我們的產能已經達到了年初的計劃，所以我們的吸收量與我們預期的差不多。我認為，從吸收量的角度來看，由於它與毛利率相關，所以你現在看到的是一個良好的穩定狀態的吸收量。

Okay, I was just looking for a quarter-over-quarter number in terms of the contribution margin.

好的，我只是在尋找貢獻利潤率的季度環比數字。

We typically don't break down all the different factors within gross margin.

我們通常不會分解毛利率內的所有不同因素。

Okay. Thanks a lot.

好的。非常感謝。

Ryan Brinkman, JPMorgan.

摩根大通的瑞安·布林克曼。

Great. Thanks for taking my question. Can you talk about the drivers of the substantially less than expected capital expenditures in the quarter and the reduction to the full-year CapEx guide? Should we think about this as being more about the push out or delay of certain activities that give rise to CapEx, or is it more that you were on schedule with those activities but doing them in a thriftier way or some sort of combination of these factors?

太好了。感謝您回答我的問題。您能否談談本季資本支出大幅低於預期以及全年資本支出指南下調的原因？我們應該將其視為某些導致資本支出的活動的推遲，還是因為這些活動按計劃進行，但以更節儉的方式進行，或者是這些因素的某種組合？

One of the things that we found is way better with the 3 program than X is, is that our equipment suppliers are willing to work with us on payment terms, and we've been able to backend load and in fact post production load a huge amount of the CapEx. So that just turned out a lot better than we expected, but we're not taking any action that would cause the Model 3 timeline to be extended in any way.

我們發現，Model 3 專案比 X 專案好得多的一點是，我們的設備供應商願意與我們在付款條件上合作，而且我們能夠承擔後端負荷，實際上在後期生產中也承擔了大量的資本支出。所以，結果比我們預期的要好得多，但我們不會採取任何可能導致 Model 3 時間表以任何方式延長的行動。

Okay, great.

好的，太好了。

We're still highly confident of reaching volume production in the second half of next year.

我們仍然非常有信心在明年下半年實現量產。

If I might chime into that a tiny bit as well, we also are continuing to improve the capital efficiency per unit of the production lines, and especially over the last few months. We've put a huge amount of engineering attention into really focusing on that problem and we're seeing results, and I think we will continue to see incremental improvements all the way from things like the battery cells all the way up to the vehicle itself.

如果我可以稍微補充一下的話，我們也持續提高生產線單位資本效率，尤其是在過去的幾個月。我們投入了大量的工程精力來真正解決這個問題，我們已經看到了成效。我認為，我們將繼續看到從電池單元到整車本身的持續改進。

Okay, and then the follow up to that is just in regards to the amended F4 that you filed a couple of weeks back, there was some changed language in there from Tesla is currently planning to raise additional funds by the end of the year to, now stating that you expect adequate liquidity through at least the end of year, I think it says. So what was the primary change would you say? Does it relate to this CapEx issue that we're talking about here, or to higher earnings or to another factor?

好的，接下來是關於您幾週前提交的修訂版F4報表，其中有一些措辭上的改動，從特斯拉目前計劃在年底前籌集更多資金，到現在表示您預計至少到年底將擁有充足的流動性，我想這是有說明的。那麼您認為主要的改變是什麼？它與我們在這裡討論的資本支出問題有關，還是與更高的收益或其他因素有關？

I think it covers all of the above. We've gotten really good at capital efficiency. JB, who was just speaking, has done a great job of that up at the Gigafactory in particular.

我認為它涵蓋了以上所有方面。我們在資本效率方面做得非常好。剛才發言的JB在這方面做得尤其出色，尤其是在超級工廠。

And I think we're just executing very well. We met our internal targets for Q3, so -- and you see what happened on the cash flow statement. So I think it's operational execution as well as capital efficiency.

我認為我們的執行力非常好。我們實現了第三季的內部目標，所以——你看看現金流量表上的情況。所以我認為這不僅關乎營運執行，也關乎資本效率。

Great. Thanks a lot.

太好了。非常感謝。

One thing that's worth mentioning, and certainly I would take this with a grain of salt, sometimes I will say things which I think are speculation or my best guess, but they are not -- [different] from a promise. Our current financial plan does not require any capital risk for Model 3 at all.

有一件事值得一提，當然我對此持保留態度，有時我會說一些我認為是猜測或最佳猜測的事情，但它們與承諾不同。我們目前的財務計畫根本不需要為 Model 3 承擔任何資本風險。

Now that's different from saying whether we should raise capital or not to account for uncertainty to have a larger buffer and to derisk the business. And then, we also feel pretty good having examined the SolarCity financials that it looks like SolarCity will actually be at least neutral, but perhaps a cash contributor in the fourth quarter in a small way.

這不同於討論我們是否應該籌集資金來應對不確定性，從而擁有更大的緩衝空間並降低業務風險。此外，在研究了SolarCity的財務狀況後，我們也感到相當樂觀，SolarCity的財務狀況至少會保持中性，但或許在第四季帶來少量現金貢獻。

But again, do not take this to the bank, that's not a promise this is like -- this is what appears to be the case. Contingent upon shareholder approval, we expect SolarCity to be somewhere between neutral and a cash contributor in the fourth quarter. And yes, things are looking good.

不過，我再說一遍，別太過自信，這可不是個承諾──情況看起來就是這樣。如果獲得股東批准，我們預計SolarCity第四季的獲利水準將在中性到現金貢獻之間徘徊。是的，情況看起來不錯。

It's not to say that there is going to be some darkness ahead, but they look really quite good right now. It seems like we probably won't want to do a capital raise even in Q1. I'm not saying we won't, but probably not. And it's overall looking quite promising.

這並不是說未來會有些黑暗，只是現在看起來確實相當不錯。看來我們連第一季都不想融資了。我不是說我們不會，只是可能不會。而且整體來說，前景還是相當光明的。

The other thing I would just add on top of that is I would just go back to some of the comments I made at the beginning of the call about our other sources of liquidity. I mean the capital markets are open to us, and as our asset base grows our ability to monetize those assets increases.

除此之外，我還想補充一點，我先回顧一下我在電話會議開始時關於我們其他流動性來源的一些評論。我的意思是，資本市場對我們開放，隨著我們資產基礎的成長，我們將這些資產貨幣化的能力也正在增強。

We've got our AVL line, we've got the $300 million warehouse line. So we've got those things, and we've also been able to line up a bunch of incremental capacity on the leasing side for the rest of the quarter as well. So that's definitely a piece of it.

我們有AVL生產線，也有3億美元的倉儲生產線。所以，我們擁有了這些，而且我們還在本季度剩餘時間內，在租賃方面安排了大量增量產能。所以，這絕對是其中的一部分。

Very helpful. Thank you.

非常有幫助。謝謝。

Emmanuel Rosner, CLSA.

里昂證券的 Emmanuel Rosner。

Good afternoon. I have a couple of questions on your recent announcement around autonomous driving. So the first one is on hardware and then the second one on the software.

午安.關於你們最近發布的自動駕駛公告，我有幾個問題想問。第一個問題是關於硬體的，第二個問題是關於軟體的。

On hardware, it seems like at least from the outside where we're sitting, it seems like just recently you were indicating you will be deemphasizing the vision approach to ADAS and autonomous driving, and now it seems the latest hardware seems largely based on vision. So was curious how -- what was the thought process there?

在硬體方面，至少從我們目前所處的外部來看，您最近似乎表示將淡化ADAS和自動駕駛中視覺方法的重要性，而現在看來，最新的硬體似乎主要基於視覺。所以，我很好奇您當時是怎麼想的？

And still within hardware, how did you acquire confidence that the hardware you're putting in cars today will still be adequate to take you all the way to full atonomy when it is only based -- I mean largely based on vision?

仍然在硬體方面，當硬體僅僅基於——我的意思是很大程度上基於視覺——時，您如何獲得信心，相信您今天安裝在汽車上的硬體仍然足以讓您一路走向完全的自動化？

First of all, I would separate what Tesla says from say some supplier of ours issuing (expletive). The blog that I wrote was very clear that radar is moving from a supplemental to also a primary sensor. It's not to the exclusion of vision, but it's also a primary sensor. Vision is still the main thing.

首先，我要區分特斯拉的說法和我們某些供應商的說法（髒話）。我之前寫的部落格非常明確地指出，雷達正在從輔助感測器轉變為主要感測器。它並非要取代視覺感測器，但它仍然是主要感測器。視覺仍然是主要感測器。

But radar, instead of merely being like a crosscheck against vision is really when done well, and we're very confident at this point that it can be done this way, can be a primary sensor such that you can take actions based on radar information. You can also take actions based on just vision alone, much as a person might take action based on whether you hear something or you see something, but you don't need to both hear it and see it.

但是，雷達不僅僅是視覺的交叉檢驗，如果做得好，它還可以成為主要的感測器，讓我們能夠根據雷達資訊採取行動。我們目前非常有信心，雷達可以做到這一點。你也可以僅根據視覺採取行動，就像一個人可能根據聽到或看到的東西採取行動一樣，但你不需要同時聽到和看到。

So we feel highly confident that the 8 camera solution with 12 ultrasonics and a forward radar and the computing power that we now have on board is capable of full autonomy at a [simply] greater than a human. There are obviously skeptics out there; well I suggest that they do not bet against us.

因此，我們非常有信心，我們現有的8個攝影機、12個超音波感測器、一個前置雷達以及運算能力，能夠實現完全自動駕駛，其速度遠超人類。當然，也有一些持懷疑態度的人；我建議他們不要跟我們打賭。

Okay. And then on the software side, I guess a lot of the players involved in developing autonomous solutions seem to think that a big input for autonomous driving, especially high levels of autonomy, serve a live updated map. What are -- there was not a lot of new information on the most recent announcement on this. What are Tesla's plans for this part of the solution?

好的。那麼在軟體方面，我想很多參與開發自動駕駛解決方案的參與者似​​乎認為，自動駕駛，尤其是高水準自動駕駛，其重要投入應該服務於即時更新的地圖。關於這方面的最新公告並沒有太多新資訊。特斯拉對這部分解決方案有什麼計畫？

You mean --?

你的意思是 - ？

I think we're getting into technical questions that are not really related to this quarter, so we will have to pass.

我認為我們正在討論與本季不太相關的技術問題，所以我們必須通過。

Stay tuned for product announcements as they come out.

請繼續關注即將發布的產品公告。

Got it.

知道了。

Okay. Thanks, Emmanuel.

好的。謝謝，Emmanuel。

John Murphy, Bank of America Merrill Lynch

約翰‧墨菲，美銀美林

Good afternoon. Just a somewhat of a redundant follow-up question here, but I really just want to make sure I get this right. As you're looking at R&D and CapEx, those are two items that as we're looking at a very significant product launch next year are running at very low levels.

午安.這有點重複，我只是想確認一下我的回答是否正確。至於研發和資本支出，由於我們明年將推出一款非常重要的產品，這兩個項目的支出目前處於非常低的水平。

I'm just curious, as you are talking about this, do you think that -- well I mean, no, they're not that low, but relative to what we would expect ahead of a product launch. Do you think that R&D at absolute levels can stay here and support the Model 3 launch and everything else you are working on?

我只是好奇，既然你談到了這一點，你認為——嗯，我的意思是，沒有那麼低，只是相對於我們在產品發布前的預期而言。你認為絕對水準的研發能夠維持現狀，並支援Model 3的發布以及你們正在進行的其他所有專案嗎？

Or will that need to go up? And then also similarly, this CapEx number of $1 billion plus in the fourth quarter really is a significant step up. Is that really just too high a number and you really are running significantly lower than this, 2.25% lower than $1.8 billion, maybe something significantly lower, and really finding a massive amount of efficiency here? I'm just really trying to understand what these levels are going to be because they are very impressive to date.

或者說需要增加嗎？同樣，第四季超過10億美元的資本支出確實是一個顯著的成長。這個數字真的太高了嗎？你們的營運水準真的比這個低很多嗎？比18億美元低2.25%，甚至更低，真的能帶來巨大的效率提升嗎？我真的想知道這些水平最終會達到什麼水平，因為到目前為止，這些水平都非常令人印象深刻。

I can take the R&D piece. I imagine that R&D will continue to go up.

我可以承擔研發部分。我預計研發費用還會繼續上漲。

Not in giant ways. Moderate increases in R&D are to be expected, but not some big step change.

不會大幅增加。預計研發投入會適度增加，但不會有太大的改變。

Exactly. On the SG&A side that is where we're really finding a lot of operating leverage. On the capital front, again, I think there's just continued opportunities for us to optimize this. There's a whole new paradigm of thinking that we're going through, and it's breaking through conventional norms such as to add a step change in capacity you have to have had a step change in capital.

沒錯。在銷售、一般及行政費用方面，我們發現了很大的營運槓桿。在資本方面，我認為我們仍然有持續優化的機會。我們正在經歷一種全新的思維模式，它打破了傳統的常規，例如，要逐步增加產能，就必須逐步增加資本。

That is not true. You can always optimize things. You can make things move faster. It could be more efficient, you can use floor space better. So I think it's some of this thinking which Elon has talked a lot about that is really getting baked into our capital plans.

事實並非如此。你總是可以優化的。你可以讓事情進展得更快，效率更高，可以更好地利用場地空間。所以我認為，埃隆經常談到的一些想法已經真正融入我們的資本計畫中。

Maybe it's seems low relative to the traditional industry, but I guess if we're comparing to what we've done in our past, and even if we just look at the --

也許相對於傳統行業來說，這個數字似乎較低，但我想，如果我們與過去所做的事情進行比較，即使我們只看——

It looks like a lot of money to us.

對我們來說這似乎是一大筆錢。

The S program was actually quite a lot lower R&D and lower CapEx than this. It feels like a huge amount of money.

S項目的研發費用和資本支出實際上比這低得多。感覺就像是一筆巨款。

But I mean you really are running at a run rate that is half of what you, or less than half of what you originally were talking about for the year on a run rate basis. I'm just trying to understand if that's something that is more realistic, or we should expect a real big step up in the fourth quarter.

但我的意思是，您實際的營運率只有您最初預期的全年營運率的一半，甚至不到一半。我只是想了解一下，這是否更現實，或者我們應該預期第四季會有真正的大幅成長。

If you go back to actually our guidance at the beginning of the -- on the OpEx side, I believe our initial guidance was 25% year over year, and we bumped that up to 30% year over year. But there is --

如果你回顧我們年初的指引——在營運支出方面，我相信我們最初的指引是同比增長25%，而我們後來將其提高到了同比增長30%。但是——

I'm sorry, I mean on CapEx.

抱歉，我的意思是資本支出。

On CapEx our original guidance at the beginning of the year was $1.5 billion. And then when we made the initial announcement to bring forward production of 500,000 vehicles into 2018, then we bumped it up. And I think now we're just getting smarter about that and that's why we brought that guidance back down in the letter this quarter.

關於資本支出，我們年初的初始預期是15億美元。後來，當我們最初宣布將50萬輛汽車的生產提前到2018年時，我們又提高了這個數字。我認為現在我們對此更加了解了，所以在本季度的信函中我們又下調了這一預期。

We're probably just too conservative on how our capital projections. It's turned out to be we can do this with less capital than anticipated.

我們的資本預測可能過於保守了。事實證明，我們用比預期更少的資金就能做到這一點。

Just one follow up on mix. These 100 kilowatt hour models, it sounds like in some ways you may have underestimated the high end of the market, which is a good thing. As we think about that as a percent of mix going forward, do you really think there's a tremendous opportunity for that to be a material part of the mix?

關於產品組合，我只想問一個問題。這些100千瓦時的型號，聽起來你可能在某種程度上低估了高端市場，這是一件好事。當我們考慮將其作為未來產品組合的一部分時，你真的認為它有很大機會成為產品組合的重要組成部分嗎？

Yes. Right now there are three things that are top priorities for me. Obviously, Model 3, achieving our rate at schedule in Model 3 -- rate at schedule and cost on Model 3 is top. Then it's advancing the autopilot software, autopilot to self-driving software, and then it's the 100 kilowatt hour, trying to ramp up the 100 kilowatt hour production rates.

是的。目前對我來說有三件事是首要任務。顯然，Model 3，實現我們的計劃生產力——Model 3 的計劃生產力和成本是最重要的。然後是改進自動駕駛軟體，從自動駕駛到自動駕駛軟體，最後是 100 千瓦時電池，努力提高 100 千瓦時電池的生產率。

I receive daily updates on the 100 kilowatt hour production. After this call I'm probably going to be on the 100 kilowatt hour production line, because the demand is high and we just need to satisfy that demand.

我每天都會收到100千瓦時產量的更新。打完這通電話後，我可能就會去100千瓦時的生產線了，因為需求量很大，我們只要滿足這個需求就行了。

It seems like that almost might be more important as far as profitability and cash flow in the near term than the Model 3.

就短期獲利能力和現金流而言，這似乎比 Model 3 更為重要。

Definitely in the near term. (laughter) That's 100% certain.

短期內一定會。 （笑聲）這是 100% 肯定的。

But even over time. But okay. Thank you.

但即使隨著時間的推移。不過好的。謝謝你。

It's a very big deal. Seven days a week I get an update on the 100 kilowatt hour progress on the production ramp of that.

這是一件非常重要的事。每週七天，我都能收到關於這100千瓦時產能爬坡進度的最新消息。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Ben Kallo, Baird.

本卡洛，貝爾德。

If I can ask a question about SolarCity, one of the things when I cover SolarCity, and you bought Silevo, my initial reaction was to be negative on it. And one of the things I've worried about with the transaction if you acquired or merging is the Buffalo deal and it just being a cash cow.

如果我可以問一個關於SolarCity的問題，我報道SolarCity的時候，你們收購了Silevo，我最初的反應是持負面態度。而我擔心的是，如果你們收購或合併Buffalo，它就成了搖錢樹。

And so, I was relieved when I saw Panasonic step in. Can you talk anymore about that? And then maybe in the same question I saw this -- the slide deck yesterday about how their business model is changing from lease to more cash sales or loan sales.

所以，當我看到松下介入時，我鬆了一口氣。能再詳細談談嗎？也許在同一個問題中，我看到了昨天的幻燈片，關於他們的商業模式如何從租賃轉變為更多的現金銷售或貸款銷售。

What do you expect going forward, and maybe that's Jason, from a cash flow basis? I know you said Q4 or they had said that, but can this be cash accretive to the business next year? Thanks. And I have one follow up.

Jason，請問您從現金流角度對未來有什麼預期？我知道您說的是第四季度，或者他們也這麼說過，但這能為明年的業務帶來現金增值嗎？謝謝。我還有一個後續問題。

I think, I expect SolarCity to be approximately cash neutral, all things considered, next year. Yes. It does depend on how fast we ramp up production in Buffalo. And by the way, I think previously in your question you said cash cow, I think maybe you meant to say cash vacuum.

我認為，考慮到所有因素，我預計SolarCity明年的現金流將基本保持中性。是的。這取決於我們在布法羅的產能提升速度。順便說一句，你之前的問題裡提到了“現金牛”，我想你的意思可能是“現金真空”。

In your questions, that's not what I'm saying it is. We do think it's important to have tight control over the production of the solar panels in order to really -- in order to have a beautiful solar roof product, we've got to be able to iterate rapidly and have them made exactly the way we want them so that you have very high efficiency sales at the lowest cost. That's our objective.

至於你的問題，我的意思並非如此。我們確實認為，嚴格控制太陽能板的生產至關重要，這樣才能真正打造出美觀的太陽能屋頂產品。我們必須能夠快速迭代，並以我們想要的方式生產，這樣才能以最低的成本實現高效的銷售。這就是我們的目標。

Just as we've been able to achieve that in partnership with Panasonic on the battery front; we have the best cell at the lowest price. That's a really good place to be and we're confident we can achieve that same outcome in solar. And while also creating a solar roof product that is better than a normal roof, looks better than a normal roof.

正如我們與松下在電池領域合作所取得的成就一樣，我們以最低的價格提供最好的電池。這確實是一個不錯的成績，我們相信在太陽能領域也能取得同樣的成果。同時，我們也能打造出比一般屋頂更好、更美觀的太陽能屋頂產品。

The [marker of C5 kit], as I mentioned before, if somebody has just installed a roof and the house is new, it's not going to make sense for them to go reroof the house. It makes more sense to have something that is -- solar panels that are added to the roof. But both someone that is building a house or where the roof is nearing its expiry date, then the solar roof is the right option.

正如我之前提到的，如果有人剛裝好屋頂，而且房子是新建的，那麼重新裝修屋頂就沒什麼意義了。安裝太陽能電池板之類的東西更合理。但無論是正在蓋房子的人，還是屋頂即將報廢的人，太陽能屋頂都是正確的選擇。

So the nice thing is you don't really cannibalize one from the other, they are two separate markets. And I think you will be quite pleasantly surprised by what we debut on Friday. It's exceeded my expectation. I don't want to jump the gun on that. You should really see what we unveil on Friday. I think it's really great.

所以好處是，你不會真正蠶食彼此的市場份額，這是兩個獨立的市場。我想你們會對我們週五的首發產品感到非常驚喜。它超出了我的預期。我不想操之過急。你們真的應該看看我們週五發布的產品。我覺得它真的很棒。

And then one more, maybe big picture and I will probably get made fun of this for asking, but stakeholders -- I've watched the work you're doing with SpaceX, and the statement you said about the reason you want to make money is for your work on interplanetary transport. How do you judge a Tesla shareholder versus a Tesla car holder? How do you delineate between where you give value versus the different stakeholders in the whole group there?

再問一個問題，也許我會被嘲笑，但利害關係人——我觀察了你在SpaceX的工作，你說你想賺錢是為了星際運輸。你如何區分特斯拉股東和特斯拉汽車持有者？你如何區分你賦予價值的領域和整個團體的不同利害關係人？

I don't really think about it like that. It's really just we want to make products that people love and then make enough money up from that to be able to develop new product, and that's it. Really it's just -- there's so few products, how many products can you buy that you really love? It's so rare.

我其實不這麼想。我們只是想做人們喜歡的產品，然後賺到足夠的錢來開發新產品，僅此而已。說實話－產品太少了，你能買到多少真正喜歡的產品呢？太稀缺了。

I think if you do something like that people will buy them. They will pay a premium for something that they love, of course. Then I think it ends up being a good outcome for shareholders because the whole purpose of any company existing is to make compelling products and services. Sometimes people lose sight of why companies should even exist.

我認為如果你做這樣的事情，人們就會買。他們當然會為自己喜歡的東西支付溢價。我認為這最終對股東來說是一個好結果，因為任何公司存在的全部目的都是提供引人注目的產品和服務。有時人們甚至會忘記公司存在的意義。

For example, would you scale back the growth of SolarCity, even though it's the greater good for the environment to be more cash flow positive, I guess is a good way to look at it.

例如，你會縮減 SolarCity 的成長規模嗎？儘管這對環境更有利，可以帶來更多的現金流，但我想這是一個很好的看待它的方式。

I don't think -- we have to look at this in long term, and if SolarCity is moving lots of money then that is not good for the long term. Investors will not support such a situation. So I think there may be some intermediate slowdowns, but this is actually with an eye towards ultimately moving way faster.

我認為，我們必須從長遠角度來考慮這個問題。如果SolarCity大量轉移資金，那麼從長遠來看，這並非好事。投資者不會支持這種情況。所以我認為中期可能會出現一些放緩，但這實際上是為了最終加快發展速度。

Got it. Thank you.

明白了。謝謝。

James Albertine, Consumer Edge.

詹姆斯‧阿爾伯丁 (James Albertine)，《消費者優勢》。

Great. Thank you and good afternoon. I wanted to ask a question if I may on battery costs, and particularly just an update on the Gigafactory and the impact of the Gigafactory on battery costs. It seems as we're getting closer to the opening that while there is some improvement going on in the background in terms of efficiencies of the battery cell production process and the trade secrets that you're working on between generation to generation of cell production, that at least 30% benefit from the Gigafactory. How should that filter into the model, of let's say over the course of the next six to eight months, between now and maybe when you start to talk more about Model 3 production? Thanks.

太好了。謝謝，下午好。我想問一個關於電池成本的問題，特別是關於超級工廠的最新情況以及它對電池成本的影響。隨著我們越來越接近開幕，似乎在電池單元生產流程效率以及你們在一代又一代電池生產過程中所掌握的商業機密方面，幕後正在取得一些進展，但至少有30%的收益受益於超級工廠。那麼，從現在到您開始更多地談論Model 3生產之前，這些收益應該如何滲透到模型中？比方說，在未來6到8個月內，也就是從現在開始，到您開始多談Model 3生產的時候。謝謝。

Well, I'm not sure we want to give a detailed glide slope on this, but we're still very confident on the progress against the milestones we talked about previously. We're still confident that we'll have the best cell cost in the world when we start production, and I think those are really the most important metrics. In long term we see ongoing opportunities to keep driving that down as we add innovation into the manufacturing process and keep increasing scale.

嗯，我不確定我們是否想給出一個詳細的下滑曲線，但我們對之前提到的里程碑進展仍然非常有信心。我們仍然相信，一旦開始量產，我們的電池成本將達到全球最優，我認為這是最重要的指標。從長遠來看，隨著我們在製造流程中不斷創新並不斷擴大規模，我們看到持續降低成本的機會。

And just to confirm when you're still expecting to begin production on the Gigafactory itself, and then just a quick product question. As it relates to what you've done with the Model S and the 100 kilowatt battery pack, thinking about a fully loaded optimized Model 3, which obviously is a smaller vehicle, is there a potential to see range? Again, this not a price sensitive question, but at the high end of the Model 3 side, is there a potential to see range extend significantly further than what we're seeing with the S and X? Thanks.

我只是想確認一下，超級工廠預計何時會投產，然後想問一個關於產品的簡短問題。關於您對 Model S 和 100 千瓦電池組的改進，考慮到滿載優化的 Model 3（顯然體積更小），續航里程是否有可能提升？再說一次，這個問題與價格無關，但就高端 Model 3 而言，續航里程是否有可能比 S 和 X 顯著提升？謝謝。

Well maybe to your first question, we're still generally on track, as we stated, with the Gigafactory schedule and production. There's equipment being installed and being commissioned as we speak.

嗯，關於你的第一個問題，正如我們之前所說，超級工廠的計劃和生產總體上仍在按計劃進行。目前，設備正在安裝和調試中。

There is a fairly extensive process of bringing that equipment online, starting up pilot production, validating the pilot production. So that is exactly what we're in the middle of and continuing to ramp up through the end of this year. So we feel good about where that's at and we feel that we are definitely on schedule for production for Model 3.

從設備上線、試生產啟動到驗證試生產，整個過程相當繁瑣。這正是我們目前正處於的階段，並將持續提升產能直到今年底。我們對目前的進展感到滿意，我們確信 Model 3 的生產進度絕對在按計劃進行。

Great. Thank you.

太好了，謝謝。

Adam Jones, Morgan Stanley.

摩根士丹利的亞當瓊斯。

Just one question about the autopilot software development. As you are putting the hardware and the software and learning capabilities in the entire suite of incremental production you're going to have lots and lots of very rich data that is going to be brought to you for analysis and processing and learning.

關於自動駕駛軟體開發，我只想問一個問題。當你把硬體、軟體和學習功能整合到整個增量生產套件中時，你將會獲得大量非常豐富的數據，這些數據將被提供給你的分析、處理和學習。

And the question is when, Elon, would you say would be the earliest reasonable opportunity for you, and perhaps backed by the scientific community and your own community in your Company, to make the case, to make a strong case to the regulators with the empirical data as you get it and analyze it of the safety of the vehicles, even if not in a fully autonomous application, but even in a semi-autonomous so that you can bring more visibility and transparency to the urgent need to address the spiraling death and injury on our roads? Thanks.

問題是，埃隆，您認為什麼時候才是您最早的合理機會？或許在科學界和您公司內部的支持下，您可以利用您獲得的經驗數據，向監管機構提出強有力的論據，並分析車輛的安全性。即使不是完全自動駕駛，即使是半自動駕駛，您也能為解決道路上不斷上升的死亡和受傷問題帶來更多的可見度和透明度。謝謝。

I should say we do work actually very closely on a daily basis, and have for a long time, with NHTSA and other regulatory agencies around the world really at a very detailed level. So they're certainly aware of the nitty-gritty, and as I've said before, we already see a significant improvement in safety with semi-autonomous features.

應該說，我們確實每天都與美國國家公路交通安全管理局（NHTSA）以及世界各地的其他監管機構保持著非常密切的合作，而且這種合作已經持續了很長時間。所以他們當然了解這些細節，而且正如我之前所說，我們已經看到半自動駕駛功能在安全性方面取得了顯著提升。

And what lessons about the outside is -- are early the cases where the version one of autopilot actually liked to mitigate the accident. So that the impact velocity went from being potentially fatal or severe injury to customer stepped out and walked away.

外部經驗教訓是——早期的案例表明，自動駕駛儀第一版實際上傾向於減輕事故。因此，撞擊速度不會造成致命或嚴重傷害，而是會讓乘客安全離開。

There are many of those which provides a much more statistically significant sample set than fatalities. Because fatalities are extremely rare, and you need really 1 billion miles or more to try to achieve a statistically significant conclusion on fatalities.

其中有許多數據比死亡人數提供了更具統計意義的樣本集。因為死亡人數極為罕見，你需要10億英里或更多的里程才能得出具有統計意義的死亡人數結論。

But as our fleet grows, and it's growing rapidly, the number of semi-autonomous miles grows to the point where I think we are now starting to approach 1.5 million, almost 1.5 million miles per day of autopilot through all kinds of road conditions and weather throughout the world. The more time that goes by the more miles we accumulate, the stronger the argument gets, but the confidence interval tighten and it becomes clearer and clearer. So I'm really quite optimistic about where things are and where they're headed on that front. I think they are headed to a good place.

但隨著我們車隊規模的擴大（而且增長速度很快），半自動駕駛里程數也隨之增長，我認為我們現在的自動駕駛里程數已接近每天150萬英里，幾乎每天在世界各地各種路況和天氣條件下都能行駛150萬英里。隨著時間的推移，我們累積的里程數也越來越多，論點也越來越有力，但信賴區間也越來越窄，最終結論也越來越清晰。因此，我對目前的狀況以及未來發展方向非常樂觀。我認為它們正朝著好的方向發展。

Okay. Thanks.

好的。謝謝。

Jeff Osborne, Cowen and Company.

傑夫奧斯本，考恩公司。

Good afternoon. Just two questions on my end. One, how do we think about the cadence of CapEx? Should it in 2017, should it persist at a continued rate in the first half of 2017 up into the Model 3 launch at a similar run rate as you're seeing here Q4? Or what's the thought process there?

午安.我只想問兩個問題。第一，我們如何看待資本支出的節奏？應該在2017年，還是應該在2017年上半年以類似的速度持續投入，直到Model 3上市，就像你在第四季看到的一樣？或者說，你們的思路是怎麼樣的？

You will see a ramp up in Q2, in Q1 and Q2 as you would expect as we get closer to production. And then a lot of the payments come after we start productions in Q3, Q4. And there will be obviously expenditures on new vehicle development.

正如您所預期的，隨著我們接近量產，第二季、第一季和第二季的支出都會有所成長。之後，許多款項會在第三季和第四季開始量產後支付。當然，新車開發方面也會有支出。

Expect it to ramp up a fair bit over time, but I stand by what I said earlier which is currently if we did not go out and raise a bunch of money, our current plan says we don't need to raise any money. It gets a little scary in terms of how much capital we have in the bank relative to our sales volume, but currently it's raised capital it's something it's nice to have, not a necessity.

預計隨著時間的推移，銷售額會大幅增長，但我堅持之前的說法，如果我們不出去籌集大量資金，根據我們目前的計劃，我們不需要籌集任何資金。考慮到我們銀行帳戶中的資金相對於銷售額的比例，這有點令人擔憂，但目前籌集到的資金只是錦上添花，並非必需品。

And maybe it's a smart move to derisk things and all that. So just looking at the bigger picture, taking into account also that we're designing the 3 program to be a cash generator, that the faster the 3 grows the stronger our cash position. I don't think you need to worry too much about CapEx being a dilutive event or something like that.

或許降低風險之類的做法是明智之舉。所以，從更大角度來看，考慮到我們設計3號專案的目的是為了產生現金，3號專案成長越快，我們的現金狀況就越強。我認為你不必太擔心資本支出會稀釋我們的股權之類的。

Just so it's clear, what Elon is talking about is a step up from our Q3 levels, not a step up from Q4.

需要明確的是，埃隆所說的是我們第三季度水準的提升，而不是第四季水準的提升。

Do you care to throw a number out there for CapEx for 2017 at this point, or do you think of it flattish but front-end loaded on 2017 versus 2016? Too early to say?

現在想透露一下2017年的資本支出數字嗎？還是您認為2017年的資本支出與2016年持平，但前期支出會增加？現在下結論還為時過早嗎？

Higher in 2017 than 2016 for sure.

2017 年肯定比 2016 年高。

Then, around CapEx as well, any thoughts on partner commitments to Gigafactory? What's the trend there? And then also I might have missed it, but what's the reservation count for Model 3? I missed that in the release if it was there.

那麼，關於資本支出，您對合作夥伴對超級工廠的承諾有什麼看法？那裡的趨勢是什麼？另外，我可能錯過了，Model 3 的預訂數量是多少？如果發布會上有的話，我錯過了。

We see very strong supplier commitments on Model 3. We don't see any deficit in supply commitments there. They're very strong. This is the most interesting vehicle program, maybe the most interesting product program in the world. And so suppliers really want to be a part of something like this.

我們看到供應商對 Model 3 的承諾非常堅定。我們沒有看到任何供應承諾方面的不足。他們的承諾非常堅定。這是世界上最有趣的汽車項目，也許是世界上最有趣的產品項目。所以供應商們非常想參與其中。

As for the 3 deposit number, this is not something we comment on and not something that is a figure of merit in any way. We do no promotion of Model 3, we don't advertise, but we don't advertise in general, but we don't -- how often do you see me mentioning a Model 3? I think people sometimes forget that all we did for the Model 3 was a half hour webcast. There's no advertising, no guerrilla marketing campaign.

至於3個訂金的數字，我們不評論，也不以任何方式作為衡量標準。我們不推廣Model 3，也不做廣告，但我們一般不做廣告，但我們不會──你多久會看到我提到Model 3一次？我想人們有時會忘記，我們為Model 3做的只是一個半小時​​的網路直播。沒有廣告，也沒有遊擊式行銷活動。

We sent out a few tweets like hey, there's going to be a webcast, and a lot of people decided they wanted to place a deposit for the car, which is cool. But we didn't want to get people too distracted from today's product in favor of tomorrow's product. And then when somebody comes into our store to buy a Model 3, we say well why don't you buy a Model S or an X instead?

我們發了幾條推文，例如“嘿，要進行網路直播了”，很多人決定要預付定金，這很酷。但我們不想讓人們太專注於今天的產品而去關註明天的產品。然後，當有人來我們店裡買 Model 3 時，我們會說，那你為什麼不買 Model S 或 X 呢？

So we anti-sell the 3. Still a lot of people ordered the 3, but whatever. Plus the 3, we're basically sold out the first year of production. So a good 12 months of production or thereabouts. So what's the point of trying to sell the 13th month of production? Very little to be had there in doing so.

所以我們反對銷售3。雖然仍然有很多人訂購了3，但無論如何。加上3，我們基本上第一年的產量就賣光了。也就是說，我們差不多賣了12個月的產量。那麼，試圖賣出第13個月的產量有什麼意義呢？這樣做幾乎沒有什麼意義。

Perfect. Thanks so much for all the details. I appreciate it.

太好了！非常感謝你提供的所有細節。我非常感激。

David Tamberrino, Goldman Sachs.

大衛‧坦貝裡諾，高盛。

Thank you. Just want to circle back on a couple of things said earlier. First on the autopilot, you mentioned that you worked very closely with NHTSA.

謝謝。我只想回顧一下之前提到的幾點。首先，關於自動駕駛儀，您提到您與美國國家公路交通安全管理局（NHTSA）合作非常密切。

I'm wondering what your take is on the push from the recent document, the Federal Autonomous Vehicles Policy, that really is looking for data sharing among OEMs? I think you're probably clearly in the lead with vehicles on the road and miles per day of data that you are aggregating, wondering what your take is on potentially opening that up and sharing with some of your competitors?

我想知道您對最近發布的《聯邦自動駕駛汽車政策》有何看法？該政策實際上旨在推動汽車製造商之間的數據共享。我認為您在收集道路上車輛行駛里程和每日行駛里程數據方面可能處於領先地位。您對開放這些數據並與競爭對手分享有何看法？

We'd be happy to share information with our competitors that would help improve safety. Happy to do so.

我們很樂意與競爭對手分享有助於提高安全性的信息。我們很樂意這樣做。

Interesting. Then the second one is really just on the cost side, you think about a traditional OEM and their supplier relationships, there's typically annual price downs ranging in the 1% to 3% range, sometimes more for more commoditized products. And you're very vertically integrated. I wonder how you think about internal price downs and gaining economies of scale for the Model 3 and what you're really looking to achieve from an operational efficiency standpoint on an annual basis with the parts that you have going into your vehicles?

有意思。那麼第二個問題其實只是成本方面的問題。想想傳統的汽車製造商和他們的供應商關係，通常每年的價格下降幅度在1%到3%之間，對於更商品化的產品，降幅有時更大。而且你們的垂直整​​合程度很高。我想知道您如何看待Model 3的內部價格下降和規模經濟效應？從營運效率的角度來看，您真正希望透過車輛零件的年度營運效率來實現什麼目標？

Model 3 efficiency as a whole, that really is a quantum change in productivity, like really crazy. I mentioned this before, but as we go to high volumes what really matters is the factory.

Model 3 的整體效率確實帶來了生產力的量子變革，簡直太瘋狂了。我之前提到過，但隨著產量的提升，真正重要的是工廠。

The machine that designs the machine. The machine that creates the machine is -- becomes actually of greater significance, much greater significance than the machine itself.

設計機器的機器，製造機器的機器——實際上變得比機器本身更重要，更重要。

That's where we have most of our engineering team working on. So our internal code name for the factory machine that builds the machine is the Alien Dreadnought. The point at which our factory looks like an alien dreadnought, then we know it's probably right.

我們的工程團隊大部分都在那裡工作。所以我們製造這台機器的工廠機器的內部代號是「外星無畏艦」。只要我們的工廠看起來像一艘外星無畏艦，我們就知道它可能是正確的。

So we think with Model 3 will be Alien Dreadnought version 0.5 approximately. Then it will take us about another year or so, I don't know, summer 2018 to actually get to Alien Dreadnought version 1.

所以我們認為 Model 3 大概會是 Alien Dreadnought 0.5 版。然後大概要一年左右，具體時間我不確定，大概是 2018 年夏天，才能真正推出 Alien Dreadnought 1 版。

I'm a little bit hazy on quantifying crazy, is there any rule of thumb that you can point to with what you're looking to achieve, at least in terms of bringing the cost down from a component level from the S to the 3, not even thinking about the X given the increasing complexity that was involved with the vehicle?

我對量化瘋狂有點模糊，您能指出有什麼經驗法則來表明您想要實現的目標嗎，至少在將成本從 S 的組件級別降低到 3 方面，甚至不考慮 X，因為與車輛相關的複雜性正在增加？

It's a rough approximation. We think it could be about half.

這是一個粗略的估計。我們認為大概是一半。

Okay.

好的。

It's not like everything is half, some things are way less than half the cost and some things are more than half the cost, but on average about half.

並不是所有東西都是一半，有些東西的成本遠低於一半，有些東西的成本超過一半，但平均而言大約是一半。

Predominantly internally sourced?

主要來自內部？

Well, it depends on how you consider the value chain, but yes, I guess arguably it's the majority internally sourced. But there's still a huge number of suppliers. The thing that happens when you're -- once you start making almost all major subsystems internally, your supplier count actually grows dramatically. You have far more suppliers, not far fewer, but they're at the component level not at the major subsystem level.

嗯，這取決於你如何看待價值鏈，不過，我認為可以說大部分都是內部採購的。但供應商的數量仍然很大。一旦你開始內部生產幾乎所有主要的子系統，你的供應商數量實際上就會急劇增長。供應商的數量會大幅增加，而不是減少，但他們只在零件層面，而不是在主要的子系統層面。

Just one thing I'd add to that too, regardless of sourcing supplier, the way to think about cost, and this goes all the way back to first principles; what's the value of the commodities in the part? What does it cost to reasonably turn those commodities into a usable part? What's reasonable labor and overhead? And that's how we think about all material cost decisions, internal or external.

我還要補充一點，無論採購供應商是誰，成本的考量都應回歸到基本原則：零件中商品的價值是多少？將這些商品合理地轉化為可用零件的成本是多少？合理的人工和間接費用是多少？這就是我們思考所有材料成本決策（無論是內部或外部）的方式。

Our long-term aspiration for the machine that builds the machine, the factory dreadnought thing, is the long-term aspiration is limited physics. I'd maybe call it limited physics manufacturing.

我們對製造機器的機器，對工廠無畏艦的長期願景，是有限物理。我或許可以稱之為有限物理製造。

We should be moving on to the next question.

我們應該繼續討論下一個問題。

Joseph Spak, RBC Capital Markets.

加拿大皇家銀行資本市場 (RBC Capital Markets) 的 Joseph Spak。

Thanks. I wanted to ask a question on the leasing. I know you pointed out that the percent of vehicles that are subject to the RVG this period I think declined by 4 points. And I don't know whether this was coincidental or not, but it looks like the direct lease percentage also went up by about 4 points. As you dwindle down the RVGs, are you planning that the ultimately straight is somewhere in that low to mid-30% range?

謝謝。我想問一個關於租賃的問題。我知道您指出，這段時間內受RVG約束的車輛比例我認為下降了4個百分點。我不知道這是否是巧合，但看起來直接租賃的比例也上升了大約4個百分點。隨著RVG的減少，您是否計劃最終直接租賃的比例保持在30%左右？

There's a bunch of different levers here. So one that is worth pointing out and we haven't talked a lot about is we've put out some very compelling loan products in the marketplace.

這裡有很多不同的槓桿。值得一提的是，我們之前很少談到的是，我們在市場上推出了一些非常有吸引力的貸款產品。

We're working with partners.

我們正在與合作夥伴合作。

Different partners; through partners. So of course we always want to continue to do that, and we're always looking for ways where we can provide compelling and useful financing programs for our consumers. Whether they lease through a partner, whether that is a loan through a partner, or whether we leverage our own balance sheet in the case of a direct lease, we'll do that too.

透過合作夥伴，我們與不同的合作夥伴合作。當然，我們希望繼續這樣做，並且一直在尋找為消費者提供有吸引力且實用的融資方案的方法。無論他們是透過合作夥伴租賃，還是透過合作夥伴貸款，或者我們利用自身資產負債表進行直接租賃，我們都會這樣做。

Really it's about the consumer experience, and if we can use other folk's capital for that, great. If we use our capital for it, that is fine too and we're willing to make those decisions.

這真的關乎消費者體驗，如果我們能利用其他人的資本來做這件事，那就太好了。如果我們用自己的資本來做這件事，那也很好，我們願意做出這樣的決定。

Okay. And then just back on autonomous, maybe to ask Adam's question a little bit different way, Elon, you talked about a cross-country trip in 2017, but in terms of turning it on for the consumer, I think in the past you said you need about 6 billion miles travel for regulatory approval. If I just do some crude math, based on your delivery time line that seems like at some point in 2018 you'll get there, maybe it's a year or so later if you believe consensus deliveries. But if you put aside the regulatory issues, is that roughly the timeframe you think it's ready for the consumer?

好的。然後回到自動駕駛汽車的問題上，或許換個角度來問亞當的問題，埃隆，你在2017年談到了一次跨國旅行，但說到面向消費者推出這款車，我記得你過去說過，需要大約60億英里的里程才能獲得監管部門的批准。如果我粗略地算一下，根據你的交貨時間表，似乎在2018年的某個時候就能實現，但如果你相信大家一致認為的交付量，那可能還要再等一年左右。但如果拋開監管問題，你認為這個時間大概是它準備好面對消費者的時間範圍嗎？

I think the timeframe that we think it is ready and then the timeframe that regulators will approve, you've got to present the data to them, they've got to think about it, and they've got to render a verdict and that can sometimes be a long process. And it can vary quite a bit by jurisdiction.

我認為，我們認為準備就緒的時間框架，以及監管機構批准的時間框架，你必須向他們提交數據，他們必須考慮，並做出裁決，這有時可能是一個漫長的過程。而且，不同司法管轄區的情況可能存在很大差異。

I think we may see some jurisdictions giving the okay a lot sooner than others. But when you think about the global average fatalities, it's somewhere around 60 -- one fatality every 60 million miles on a global basis.

我認為我們可能會看到一些司法管轄區比其他司法管轄區更快批准。但考慮到全球平均死亡人數，全球平均每6000萬英里就有一人死亡。

So if you are at 6 billion miles you're 100 times the -- what the fatalities per mile. You really start to get quite statistically significant at that point. And it can make quite a strong argument I believe at that point that it would be morally wrong not to allow autonomous driving.

所以，如果里程達到60億英里，那麼每英里的死亡人數就是100倍。從這個角度來看，統計意義就變得相當顯著了。我相信，到那時，這就能有力地證明，不允許自動駕駛在道德上是錯誤的。

Thank you.

謝謝。

We're coming up on the hour mark. We have one other analyst on the call, and then we have some journalists we definitely want to hear from as well. So let's -- you want to go a little bit over an hour here, Elon?

會議馬上就要進行一個小時了。電話會議裡還有一位分析師，還有一些記者也想聽聽他們的看法。所以，伊隆，你想讓我開會超過一個小時嗎？

Sure.

當然。

Chanel, let's have the next question, please.

香奈兒，請我們回答下一個問題。

Charlie Anderson, Dougherty and Company.

查理·安德森，Dougherty and Company。

Thank you. I'll just ask one question. There was a reference to the Tesla network and the ability to buy self-driving today. So I wonder, Elon, if you could talk maybe philosophically about how you are viewing Tesla network? Is it something that will generate income for Tesla to help develop future products, et cetera, at a reasonable gross margin? Or is it something that you'll use more for market share gain to help people offset the price of the car long term? Thanks.

謝謝。我只想問一個問題。之前提到了特斯拉網路和現在購買自動駕駛汽車的能力。所以，伊隆，您能否從哲學角度談談您如何看待特斯拉網路？它能為特斯拉創造收入，以合理的毛利率幫助開發未來產品等等嗎？還是您會更多地利用它來擴大市場份額，幫助人們長期抵消汽車價格的影響？謝謝。

Okay. I think it's a bit of both, really. This would be something that would be a significant offset on the cost of ownership of a car, and then a revenue generator for Tesla as well. Obviously the majority of the economics would go to the owner of the car.

好的。我認為兩者兼而有之。這將會顯著抵消汽車的擁有成本，同時也為特斯拉帶來收入。顯然，大部分經濟效益將歸於車主。

Sometimes it's been characterized as Tesla versus or Uber or Lyft or something like that. It's not Tesla versus Uber, it's the people versus Uber.

有時人們會把它描述成特斯拉與 Uber、Lyft 或類似的東西之間的對決。但這並不是特斯拉與 Uber 的對決，而是人與 Uber 的對決。

All right, Charlie?

還好嗎，查理？

Thanks so much.

非常感謝。

Daniel Sparks, The Motley Fool.

丹尼爾‧史帕克斯 (Daniel Sparks)，《The Motley Fool》。

Thanks for including us in the call. I just wanted to get a little perspective on, I noticed in the shareholder letter, the narrative kind of shifted. In Q2 you were saying that you're aiming toward volume production toward the end of 2017.

感謝您邀請我們參加電話會議。我只是想稍微了解一下，我注意到股東信中的敘述有所轉變。在第二季度，您曾表示，目標是在2017年底實現量產。

But now the letter is saying you're looking for volume deliveries in the second half of 2017. Am I just reading into this too much, or does that reflect a greater confidence on Management's part?

但現在信中說，你們希望在 2017 年下半年實現大量交付。我是不是過度解讀了，還是這反映了管理階層更強的信心？

I think our confidence has been practically the same. Obviously as time goes by there is some amount of the uncertainty is collapsed, and so I guess you could call that confidence. But yes, it's looking good for production volume second half of 2017.

我認為我們的信心幾乎保持不變。顯然，隨著時間的推移，不確定性會逐漸消失，所以你可以稱之為信心。不過，2017年下半年的產量前景看好。

As always, I really want to remind people that a car consists of several thousand unique items. We can only go as fast as the slowest item. And so what we're trying to do in advance of 3 production is to increase the scope of Tesla's internal capabilities so that we are internally capable of making almost anything.

一如既往，我真心想提醒大家，一輛車由數千個獨特的部件組成。我們的速度最終取決於最慢的部件。因此，在第三代車型投產之前，我們正努力提升特斯拉的內部產能，以便我們能夠自主生產幾乎所有車型。

Kind of like reserve troops. You don't know exactly where they will be needed, but it's a good idea to have them. And so that we can minimize the degree to which a single supplier can stop the entire production line.

有點像預備部隊。你不知道具體哪裡需要他們，但有他們總是好的。這樣我們就能最大限度地減少單一供應商導致整條生產線停工的程度。

Okay. Great. And then as Model S and Model X with higher levels of sales recently, high levels of deliveries, and as Model 3 approaches, do you feel confident in these levels as Model 3 approaches? I know that we haven't talked too much about 2017, but just speaking as far as trajectory for those deliveries go and how we could think about it?

好的。太好了。那麼，鑑於Model S和Model X最近的銷售和交付量都很高，而且Model 3也即將上市，您對Model 3的交付量有信心嗎？我知道我們之前沒有過多談論2017年的事情，但我想談談這些車型的交付軌跡以及我們對此的展望。

Another thing I really want to emphasize is the production ramp tends to look like -- is exponential. Ultimately it is an S-curve. An exponential goes to linear then goes to log. And it's very difficult to predict exactly where that beginning part of the exponential and the S-curve fits in between quarterly reporting.

我還想強調的是，產量成長往往呈指數級成長。最終呈現S形曲線。指數曲線先趨於線性，然後再趨於對數。很難準確預測指數曲線和S形曲線的起始部分在季度報告之間的位置。

A shift of even a few weeks one way or the other can have quite a dramatic effect on what it looks like in that quarter, but that's not indicative of the future. So we're telling you what we -- we're giving you the best assessment we have short of having a crystal ball.

即使只是幾週的細微變化，都可能對當季的業績產生巨大的影響，但這並不能預示未來。所以我們只能告訴你們——我們所能給予的最佳評估，即使沒有水晶球也無能為力。

I think things will look very good exiting 2017, but it will be complicated and bumpy and dealing with a lot of unexpected issues in the first -- at the beginning of Model 3 production in Q3, Q4. Q3 particularly is very uncertain because it is the beginning of an exponential. It gets pretty clear in Q4, then it starts to be really crisp in the Q1/Q2 timeframe of 2018.

我認為2017年結束後情況會很好，但初期會很複雜，充滿坎坷，需要處理很多意想不到的問題——比如在第三季度和第四季度Model 3投產初期。第三季尤其充滿不確定性，因為它是指數級成長的開端。第四季情況會變得相當明朗，然後在2018年第一季和第二季期間，情況會開始變得非常明朗。

All right, great. Thank you.

好的，太好了。謝謝。

Tim Higgins, WSJ.

提姆希金斯，《華爾街日報》。

Thanks for making time, I appreciate it. Just to go back to the capital issue, I hear you saying you don't need to raise capital this year, and I hear that you probably won't do it in the first quarter of next year, but what about next year in general? Should we look at that as a second half or first half event? You want to raise capital in the first half of next year, even if you don't need it?

感謝您抽出時間，我非常感激。回到資金問題上，我聽到您說今年不需要融資，我聽說您明年第一季可能不會融資，但明年整體情況如何？我們應該把這看成是下半年還是上半年的事情？即使您不需要，您也想在明年上半年融資嗎？

I think we cannot make -- actually I don't think it's legal for us to make specific predictions of certainty in respect to doing an equity raise or something like that. It's really exactly what I said before, which is our current projections, and this should probably be taken with a grain of salt, current predictions say we don't need to go out and raise a bunch of equity. There could be unexpected negative things that occur, there could be some global macros, economic slowdown that could be -- who knows what could happen. And so there may be value in derisking the business and just having higher capital reserves. We're not ready to make that decision yet.

我認為我們不能——實際上，我認為我們不應該就股權融資或類似的事情做出具體的、確定的預測。這其實就是我之前所說的，也就是我們目前的預測，但這可能應該持保留態度，目前的預測顯示我們不需要進行大量的股權融資。可能會發生意想不到的負面事件，可能會出現一些全球宏觀經濟、經濟放緩——誰知道會發生什麼。因此，降低業務風險並增加資本儲備可能是有價值的。我們還沒準備好做出這個決定。

Okay great. Thank you.

好的，太好了。謝謝。

Phil LeBeau, CNBC.

Phil LeBeau，CNBC。

Hello, Elon. Quick question, in your shareholder letter you mentioned that you are continuing to explore possibilities for expanding production to Asia and Europe. As you start to look at the production ramp and expanding your facilities in Fremont, do you have a timeframe for when you might make a decision in terms of, I think this is when we will probably make some kind of a decision about another production facility, whether it's in China, whether it's in Europe, wherever it might be somewhere beyond Fremont?

你好，艾隆。快速提問一下，你在致股東信中提到，你們正在繼續探索將生產擴展到亞洲和歐洲的可能性。當你開始考慮提升產量並擴大弗里蒙特的工廠時，你有沒有一個時間表來決定何時做出決定？我想，到那時我們可能會決定是否在其他地方設立生產工廠，無論是在中國、歐洲，或是弗里蒙特以外的任何地方？

Right now we're really focused on Gigafactory 1 and Model 3. We're spending very little time on facilities outside of Fremont, California and Sparks, Nevada. So it's really hard to say at this point except to say it's pretty obvious that long term you want to have your production close to your consumption so don't have massive logistics costs transporting cars halfway around the world.

目前我們真正專注於超級工廠1和Model 3。我們很少在加州弗里蒙特和內華達州斯帕克斯以外的工廠投入時間。所以現在很難說，但可以肯定的是，從長遠來看，我們希望產量接近消費量，這樣就不必承擔將汽車運往世界各地的巨大物流成本。

And yes, so that's -- I think we're probably not ready to talk about that now and we just don't have a fully formed idea now. Probably end up talking about that next year.

是的，所以……我覺得我們現在可能還沒準備好討論這個問題，我們還沒有一個完整的想法。可能要明年再談。

Great. Thank you.

太好了，謝謝。

I'm showing no further questions on the phone lines at this time.

目前我沒有在電話線上提出其他問題。

All right, thanks a lot, Chanel, and thank you everyone for joining us today.

好的，非常感謝，香奈兒，也感謝大家今天的參與。

Thanks, everyone.

謝謝大家。

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today's conference. This concludes today's program, you may all disconnect. Everyone have a great day.

女士們，先生們，感謝各位參加今天的會議。今天的節目到此結束，各位可以斷開連線了。祝大家有愉快的一天。