特斯拉 (TSLA) 2017 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Tesla First Quarter 2017 Financial Results Q&A Call. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to your host, Mr. Jeff Evanson. Mr. Evanson, you may begin.

女士們、先生們，大家好，歡迎參加特斯拉 2017 年第一季財務業績問答電話會議。（操作員指示）提醒一下，本次會議正在錄音。現在我想將電話轉給主持人傑夫·埃文森先生。埃文森先生，您可以開始。

Thank you, Sherry, and good afternoon, everyone. I'm joined today by Elon Musk, J.B. Straubel, Deepak Ahuja, Jon McNeill and Lyndon Rive. And today on our webcast, we'll discuss our Q1 results that are announced in the update letter at the same link as this webcast. And during our call, we will discuss our business outlook, make some forward-looking statements. These are all 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.

謝謝你，雪莉，大家下午好。今天與我一起參加的還有 Elon Musk、J.B. Straubel、Deepak Ahuja、Jon McNeill 和 Lyndon Rive。今天，在我們的網路廣播中，我們將討論在與該網路廣播相同的連結中的更新信中公佈的第一季業績。在電話會議中，我們將討論我們的業務前景，並做出一些前瞻性的陳述。這些都是基於我們今天的預測和預期。由於多種風險和不確定因素，包括我們最近向美國證券交易委員會提交的文件中提到的風險和不確定因素，實際事件或結果可能存在重大差異。

We'll start today's call with some brief remarks from Elon, and then we'll jump right into Q&A. (Operator Instructions)

今天的電話會議我們將以埃隆的一些簡短演講開始，然後直接進入問答環節。（操作員指示）

And with that, I'll turn it over to you, Elon.

現在，我將把話題交給你，伊隆。

Thanks. So yes, welcome to the call. And I'd like to welcome Deepak Ahuja back to Tesla as CFO. And yes, it's -- welcome back.

謝謝。是的，歡迎來電。我歡迎 Deepak Ahuja 重返特斯拉擔任財務長。是的，歡迎回來。

Thank you, Elon. Appreciate that, and I'm really excited to be back.

謝謝你，埃隆。非常感謝，我非常高興能夠回來。

Cool. All right. So yes, we'll just go right into Q&A. Overall, I'm very proud of Tesla for our accomplishments in the first quarter. And I think second quarter's going to be great, too. And yes, so overall, I think we're executing well, and I'm feeling quite optimistic about the future.

涼爽的。好的。是的，我們將直接進入問答環節。總的來說，我為特斯拉在第一季的成就感到非常自豪。我認為第二季也會很棒。是的，總的來說，我認為我們執行得很好，我對未來感到非常樂觀。

All right. Sherry, let's have the first question, please.

好的。雪莉，請我們先問第一個問題。

Our first question comes from Alex Potter with Piper Jaffray.

我們的第一個問題來自 Piper Jaffray 的 Alex Potter。

There's been a fair amount of debate recently, both amongst investors, I think, but also within the supply chain about the segments within the transportation ecosystem that will sort of forever be off-limits to Tesla because of physical limitations of electric drivetrain, specifically as it relates to weight and energy density and things of that nature. Presumably, you'd disagree, but I'd be interested in hearing maybe why you disagree. Why you think Tesla can compete in those segments whereas other people think diesel or fuel cells or other options would be better?

最近，無論是在投資者中，還是在供應鏈內部，都存在著相當多的爭論，爭論的焦點是交通生態系統中的某些部分將永遠禁止特斯拉進入，因為電動傳動系統的物理限制，特別是在重量和能量密度等方面。想必你會不同意，但我很想聽聽你為什麼不同意。為什麼您認為特斯拉可以在這些領域競爭，而其他人卻認為柴油或燃料電池或其他選擇會更好？

Are you thinking of things like heavy trucking?

您是否考慮過重型卡車運輸之類的事情？

For instance, yes. That's -- I mean, I guess, different people draw the line in different areas, but as an example, yes.

例如，是的。那是——我的意思是，我想，不同的人在不同的領域劃清界限，但作為一個例子，是的。

Yes. I mean I'm not sure -- I'm absolutely confident that the electric car trains will -- electric vehicles will occupy everything without exception. And I don't want to jump the gun on the Tesla semi-truck announcement we're unveiling later this year, but it's -- I think it's going to be a cool product and will defy people's expectations on what an electric truck can do. So I really do not see any segment of transport that will not be electric. In fact, I'm highly confident that all transport will go fully electric, with the ironic exception of rockets, yes. [If you know your] way around Newton's third law.

是的。我的意思是我不確定——但我絕對相信電動車列車將——電動車將毫無例外地佔據一切。我不想搶先宣布我們將在今年稍後推出特斯拉半掛卡車，但我認為這將是一款很酷的產品，並且會超越人們對電動卡車功能的預期。因此，我確實認為所有交通運輸領域都不存在非電動化的。事實上，我非常有信心，所有交通工具都將完全電動化，但諷刺的是，火箭除外。[如果你知道]牛頓第三定律。

Right. Okay. And then I guess maybe one Model 3 question here. I know it's maybe early days, is there in a way to gauge sort of what you think the trim and option uptake is going to look like on the Model 3 just to give folks an idea on what the pricing and margin profile might look like.

正確的。好的。然後我想這裡也許有一個關於 Model 3 的問題。我知道現在可能還為時過早，有沒有辦法衡量一下您認為 Model 3 的裝飾和選項情況會是什麼樣的，以便讓人們了解定價和利潤狀況。

I mean, it's really guesswork at this point. But if it were to be comparable to what we see with, say, Model S or with other vehicles in the market. It's something like a 20% to 30% increment over the (inaudible) would be the typical average. Jon, do you have any...

我的意思是，目前這真的只是猜測。但如果它與我們在市場上看到的 Model S 或其他車輛相媲美的話。這大約是比（聽不清楚）典型的平均值增加 20% 到 30% 左右。喬恩，你有什麼…

Yes, I think that's right. And that's -- we experience a little bit higher than that in Model S. And Model S in comparison to Model 3 has more range, has more power, has more cargo, et cetera. And we'll be introducing at the start of production, I think we'll be announcing our vehicle -- as we get closer to the start of production what these vehicle stacks will be, but I think 20% is a fair number to use.

是的，我認為是這樣。這就是 — — 我們體驗到的效能比 Model S 高一點。與 Model 3 相比，Model S 擁有更大的行駛里程、更強勁的動力、更大的貨物容量等等。我們將在生產開始時進行介紹，我想我們將宣布我們的車輛 - 隨著我們越來越接近開始生產，這些車輛堆疊將是什麼，但我認為 20％ 是一個合理的數字。

Yes, actually, just to reemphasize that, I might repeat this a few times on the call. We want to be super clear that Model 3 is not version 3 of our car. The Model 3 is essentially a smaller, more affordable version of the Model S with fewer features. But the Model S and the Model 3 will be at the same level of technology. And if you were to -- if you were to put a version on, say, what -- I would say probably on version 4 of Model S, and Model 3 will also be version 4. If you make it like the essentially a first -- when Model S first came out, it was rear-wheel drive. And then we had Dual Motor all-wheel drive, we had initial Hardware 1 Autopilot and then Hardware 2 Autopilot, and there was a facial refresh. There have been roughly 4 versions of Model S, and we're on the fourth version. Model 3 will also be version 4. It's a little confusing because one's a letter and the other's a number. And Model 3 was supposed to be called the Model E, but then Ford threatened to sue us. And then I thought we're being all clever by calling it the Model 3, but actually the joke's on me because it caused confusion in the marketplace. So we're doing our best to clear up that confusion so people do not think that Model 3 is somehow superior to Model S. Actually, Model S will be better than Model 3 as it should be because it's a more expensive car. We're going to be -- sound like a broken record on this front, and the messaging might get a little annoying, but we really have to be emphatic to clear up an error, which I think is my responsibility, in naming something that inherently would cause confusion with marketing.

是的，實際上，為了再次強調這一點，我可能會在電話中重複幾次。我們想非常清楚地表明，Model 3 不是我們汽車的第三個版本。Model 3 本質上是 Model S 的較小版本，價格更便宜，功能也更少。但 Model S 和 Model 3 將處於同一技術水平。如果你要 — — 如果你要把一個版本放在上面，比如說，什麼 — — 我會說可能是 Model S 的第 4 版，而 Model 3 也將是第 4 版。如果你把它看作本質上的第一個 — — 當 Model S 首次推出時，它是後輪驅動。然後我們有了雙馬達全輪驅動，我們有了初始硬體 1 自動駕駛儀，然後是硬體 2 自動駕駛儀，並且進行了臉部刷新。Model S 大概有 4 個版本，我們現在是第 4 個版本。Model 3 也將是版本 4。這有點令人困惑，因為一個是字母，另一個是數字。Model 3 原本應該被稱為 Model E，但福特卻威脅要起訴我們。然後我認為我們很聰明，把它叫做 Model 3，但實際上這是我的笑話，因為它造成了市場的混亂。因此，我們正在盡力消除這種混淆，以便人們不會認為 Model 3 在某種程度上優於 Model S。實際上，Model S 應該比 Model 3 更好，因為它是一款更昂貴的汽車。在這一點上，我們聽起來像是在重複老話，而且訊息傳遞可能會有點煩人，但我們真的必須強調澄清一個錯誤，我認為這是我的責任，因為我所命名的東西本質上會引起與行銷的混淆。

Our next question comes from Toni Sacconaghi with Bernstein.

我們的下一個問題來自伯恩斯坦的托尼·薩科納吉。

I was wondering if you could maybe give us an update qualitatively or quantitatively on how investors should think about battery costs. I think your last public statement was that Tesla's battery cost early last year was under $190 per kilowatt hour. If we look at how Powerwall 2, there's been significant improvement in cost per kilowatt and in density. But I think if we try and do the math on Powerwall 2, we'd still come up with a number that's reasonably high. So maybe can help us -- I think in the past, Elon, you've said that you hope to get to $100 per kilowatt hour by 2020. And I recognize that's aspirational. But maybe you can help us a little bit frame how we should think about battery cost today, what kind of improvement you're seeing from -- or expect to see with 2170 batteries in vehicles going forward.

我想知道您是否可以從定性或定量的角度向我們介紹投資者應該如何看待電池成本。我認為您上次公開聲明是特斯拉去年年初的電池成本低於每千瓦時 190 美元。如果我們看看 Powerwall 2，就會發現每千瓦的成本和密度都有了顯著的改善。但我認為，如果我們嘗試對 Powerwall 2 進行計算，我們仍然會得出一個相當高的數字。所以也許可以幫助我們——我想，埃隆，你過去曾說過，你希望到 2020 年達到每千瓦時 100 美元。我認識到這是一個理想的情況。但也許您可以幫助我們稍微構思一下我​​們今天應該如何看待電池成本，您看到了什麼樣的改進——或者預計在未來的車輛中使用 2170 電池會帶來什麼樣的改進。

I mean, regarding numbers for cost (inaudible) [are close how competitive] is the information except that we do expect to see significant improvements year-over-year as much as improving the core chemistry of the cell, reducing essentially the cell mass that is inactive and, of course, mass economies of scale and vertical integration at the Gigafactory. These will all take time to bear fruit, but there will be significant time. With the Powerwall, the -- there are a bunch of other costs in the Powerwall that are more than just the battery cost. So you've got the -- you have the cell cost, and you have -- and you get the cell into a module, you've got all the cooling systems, the control systems, the safety stuff that prevents a runaway, the enclosure, the modem to communicate to the Internet and then (inaudible) would be the power electronics to take the power from the cells and eventually convert that to the AC or DC power of the house keys. J.B., is there something you'd like to add to that?

我的意思是，關於成本數字（聽不清楚）[接近競爭力]的信息，除了我們確實希望看到逐年顯著的改進，以及改善電池的核心化學性質，從本質上減少不活躍的電池質量，當然還有超級工廠的規模經濟和垂直整合。這些都需要時間才能取得成果，但將會是相當長的時間。對於 Powerwall 來說，Powerwall 中除了電池成本之外還有許多其他成本。所以，您已經知道了電池成本，並且將電池放入模組中，您還得到了所有的冷卻系統、控制系統、防止失控的安全裝置、外殼、用於與互聯網通信的調製解調器，然後（聽不清楚）是電力電子設備從電池中獲取電能，最終將其轉換為房門鑰匙的交流電或直流電。J.B.，您還有什麼要補充的嗎？

No. That's a great description. It's a fully integrated product. It's a system, not just a bunch of cells. So when you -- if you're maybe trying to calculate dollar per kilowatt or the cost of the Powerwall, I think you'd find it's extremely competitive against other home energy storage systems. We believe the best. But there is a lot of other hardware in there that's all included, all wrapped together in the Powerwall price, so you don't have to piecemeal the system in your house.

不。這是一個很棒的描述。它是一個完全整合的產品。它是一個系統，而不僅僅是一堆細胞。因此，如果您試圖計算每千瓦的美元金額或 Powerwall 的成本，我認為您會發現它與其他家庭儲能係統相比極具競爭力。我們相信最好的。但其中還有很多其他硬件，它們都包含在 Powerwall 價格中，因此您不必在家中逐一拆解系統。

Right. But we're quite confident that the Powerwall is the highest quality product and actually at the lowest cost of anything in the market. So that is a good product. And I feel good, feel pretty happy with it.

正確的。但我們非常有信心，Powerwall 是品質最高的產品，而且實際上價格是市場上所有產品中最低的。所以這是一個好產品。我感覺很好，非常高興。

And some of the improvement trajectory that you saw from Powerwall 1 to Powerwall 2, part of that is made possible by the migration to 2170 cells made at Gigafactory, not all of it but a large part of it. So that is something we're pleased with and feel it's going well.

您從 Powerwall 1 到 Powerwall 2 看到的一些改進軌跡，部分是透過遷移到 Gigafactory 生產的 2170 個電池實現的，雖然不是全部，但很大一部分是這樣。所以我們對此感到高興並且覺得一切都很順利。

Okay. I was wondering also your customer deposits, and I recognize there's a lot in that, declined for the second straight quarter. And at least by my math, it appears as though Tesla's new car inventory has increased substantially over the last couple of quarters, maybe 3,500 units or about 50%, even though sort of production and deliveries have been relatively constant. I'm wondering if you are seeing incremental demand pressure on Model X. And particularly Model S, Elon, you underscored that there was confusion in the marketplace. And are these the metrics that are suggesting to you that there's some confusion in the marketplace? Are you seeing cancellations? Because at least optically, it looks like the book-to-bill is less than 1 on S and X.

好的。我還想知道您的客戶存款情況，我認識到其中有很多，連續第二個季度下降。至少根據我的計算，儘管生產和交付量相對穩定，但特斯拉的新車庫存在過去幾季似乎大幅增加，大概增加了 3,500 輛，約 50%。我想知道您是否看到了對 Model X 和 Model S 的增量需求壓力，埃隆，您強調了市場存在混亂。這些指標是否顯示市場存在一些混亂？您看到取消了嗎？因為至少從視覺上看，S 和 X 上的訂單出貨比似乎小於 1。

Yes. Deepak here, a couple of questions that you had. Firstly, just to clarify, (inaudible) weekly inventory (inaudible) very slightly from end of Q4 to end of Q1. And the -- and we are using some of that in different ways, and Jon can explain that further. And also to your other question on customer deposits, what I'm seeing is that we had an artificial backlog in our customer deposits of Model Xs. And as our production of Model Xs has stabilized and as our mix of Model S has increased relative to X, we have cleared that. So it's nothing unusual from what I'm seeing there. And Jon, do you want to add on the...

是的。我是 Deepak，我有幾個問題想問您。首先，需要澄清的是，（聽不清楚）每週庫存（聽不清楚）從第四季末到第一季末略有下降。而且 — — 我們正在以不同的方式使用其中的一些內容，喬恩可以進一步解釋這一點。另外關於您關於客戶存款的另一個問題，我發現我們的 Model X 客戶存款有人為積壓。隨著我們的 Model X 產量趨於穩定，以及 Model S 的車型組合相對於 X 有所增加，我們已經解決了這個問題。所以從我所看到的情況來看，這沒什麼不尋常的。喬恩，你想補充一下嗎…

That's right. The increase in inventories is about split in 2. One is we increased Model X test drive vehicles by about 1,000 over the past quarter. We had prioritized deliveries as we ramped up Model X production and prioritized getting cars to customers first and to our store second. Our stores have finally gotten their test drive fleets, and that's what you see in terms of the half of the unit volume increase. The second half is in our service loaners. So as our installed fleet has gone up, we need -- we wanted to make sure that our owners were getting a service loaner, and we'll continually increase that, and you'll see that over time. That's not a one-time event. You'll see as we continue to deliver this level of cars per quarter that we will increase the service loaner fleet proportionally so that we've got the ability to offer a Tesla to our customers.

這是正確的。庫存的增加大概分為兩部分，一是過去一個季度我們增加了大約 1,000 輛 Model X 試駕車。在增加 Model X 產量的同時，我們也優先考慮了交付，並優先將汽車送到客戶手中，然後再送到我們的商店。我們的商店終於獲得了試駕車隊，這就是您所看到的單位數量增加的一半。下半部是我們的服務借用者。因此，隨著我們安裝的車隊規模不斷擴大，我們需要——我們希望確保我們的車主能夠獲得服務借用，並且我們會不斷增加這一比例，隨著時間的推移，您會看到這一點。這不是一次性事件。您會看到，隨著我們每季繼續交付這種水平的汽車，我們將相應增加服務借用車隊，以便我們有能力向客戶提供特斯拉。

Yes. And in fact, this'll take us a few months to fully deploy, but our policy for service loaners is that the service loaner fleet will be the very best version of a Tesla that is available. So if you have a Model X that comes in for service, the service loaner you will get will be the absolute fully loaded state-of-the-art P100D Ludicrous, best Model X that we have. The same for the Model S. So it will be the kind of thing where you hope that service takes a long time because you have the absolute top-of-the-line Tesla as a service loaner.

是的。事實上，我們需要幾個月的時間才能完全部署，但我們對服務借用者的政策是，服務借用車隊將是現有特斯拉的最佳版本。因此，如果您有一輛 Model X 需要維修，您將獲得的服務借用車將是絕對滿載的最先進的 P100D Ludicrous，也是我們最好的 Model X。Model S 也是一樣。因此，你會希望服務需要很長時間，因為你擁有絕對頂級的特斯拉作為服務借用者。

So Elon, just to clarify, the confusion that you believe exists between potentially Model 3 and Model S, that's not being inferred from order patterns? That's being inferred more qualitatively from what you're learning in showrooms? Or how do you make that assessment of the problem?

那麼 Elon，我只是想澄清一下，您認為 Model 3 和 Model S 之間存在的混淆不是從訂單模式推斷出來的嗎？這是根據您在展場中了解到的情況更定性的推論嗎？或者您如何對這個問題做出評估？

There are no -- we have seen some impact of Model S orders as a function of people being confused that Model 3 is the upgrade to Model S. Now we took action to correct that about a month ago, but that message has not filtered down to all of our customers. So there's still a lot of people who are under the impression that Model 3 is the upgrade from Model S. But in fact, the one upgrade is just by the latest Model S. That's the actual upgrade. Not -- like saying -- thinking that the upgrade path from an Audi A6 is an Audi A4. It's not. So yes, so it's just a question of correcting that misconception, which I'm confident we'll be able to do in the next several weeks.

沒有——我們已經看到 Model S 訂單受到一些影響，因為人們混淆了 Model 3 是 Model S 的升級版。大約一個月前，我們採取了行動來糾正這個問題，但這個訊息並沒有傳達給我們所有的客戶。因此，仍有許多人認為 Model 3 是 Model S 的升級版。但事實上，唯一的升級就是最新 Model S。這才是真正的升級。並不是說——認為奧迪 A6 的升級路徑是奧迪 A4。它不是。是的，這只是一個糾正錯誤觀念的問題，我相信我們能夠在接下來的幾週內做到這一點。

Our next question comes from Colin Langan with UBS.

我們的下一個問題來自瑞銀的 Colin Langan。

You've talked about in the past reinventing the machine that makes the machine. And now that we're getting a little bit closer to the Model 3 launch, any additional color on what steps in automation you're doing for the Model 3? And any rough order of magnitude of how much more automated the Model 3 would be versus the traditional production line?

您過去曾談到重新發明製造機器的機器。現在距離 Model 3 的發布已經越來越近了，您能透露一下 Model 3 在自動化方面採取了哪些措施嗎？與傳統生產線相比，Model 3 的自動化程度大概是多少？

Yes. So with Model 3, I think would be roughly comparable with the best high-volume vehicle production lines in the world, better in some respects, a little worse than others, but roughly comparable. And then with some further iteration, I think it will probably be a little bit better than the next-best automotive production line. Then where things will really be a step change I think beyond any other automated actually will be the Model Y factory. And this is both a function of designing the product to be easy to manufacture and easy to automate as well as designing the factory itself. So Model Y is where I think it really becomes a step change, but Model 3 is going to be at or probably slightly better than I think the next best automotive (inaudible), that's pretty (inaudible). And then Model Y will be -- there'll be nothing close to it, I think.

是的。因此，我認為 Model 3 大致可以與世界上最好的大批量汽車生產線相媲美，在某些方面更好，在其他方面稍差，但大致相當。然後經過進一步的迭代，我認為它可能會比第二好的汽車生產線更好一點。那麼，我認為，真正實現跨越式變化的將是 Model Y 工廠，超越任何其他自動化工廠。這既是設計易於製造和易於自動化的產品的功能，也是設計工廠本身的功能。所以我認為 Model Y 確實實現了重大變革，但我認為 Model 3 將會達到或可能略優於下一個最佳車款（聽不清楚），這非常（聽不清楚）。然後 Model Y 將會——我認為沒有什麼能與之相比。

Maybe just to add as a relative benchmark, against the S and the X, the Model 3 is vastly more automated. And perhaps it's not the best benchmark for you looking forward, it's perhaps 3 to 4x more automated than an S or an X, and much more simpler to build.

也許只是為了增加一個相對基準，與 S 和 X 相比，Model 3 的自動化程度要高得多。也許它不是您展望未來的最佳基準，但它的自動化程度可能比 S 或 X 高 3 到 4 倍，而且建造起來也簡單得多。

Is that 1/5 of the hours per car?

每輛車需要 1/5 小時嗎？

Yes.

是的。

So. It's 5x the volume, but the same hours per car.

所以。運輸量是原來的 5 倍，但每輛車的運輸時間相同。

Got it. And as a follow-up, any color on -- you've announce the doubling of the Supercharger network and increasing your dealers. I mean, how should we think about that over the next few years? Is that doubling going to be enough? Or how do you see the network needing to expand going forward?

知道了。作為後續行動，無論顏色如何——您都宣布將超級充電網路規模擴大一倍並增加經銷商數量。我的意思是，在接下來的幾年裡我們應該如何考慮這個問題？增加一倍就夠了嗎？或者您認為未來網路需要如何擴展？

Well, it's exciting that Supercharger network substantially hit that number just recently, and you can see the growth plan on our website. That's going to continue to increase dramatically. Jon, do you want to speak to service?

嗯，令人興奮的是，Supercharger 網路最近大幅達到了這個數字，您可以在我們的網站上看到成長計劃。這一數字也將繼續大幅增加。喬恩，你想和客服通話嗎？

Yes. Service locations are what you see increasing in the shareholder letter. But you should probably think about service capacity in 2 ways now. One of the things we've discovered as we've deployed more advanced service techniques into our centers is that a super majority of the cars that we repair don't require a lift. That frees us from brick-and-mortar service. And we've added substantially now to our mobile service capability starting first experimenting in the Bay Area and in some of our major markets, and we'll be rolling that out throughout the year. And so we're creating service capacity in 2 ways -- mobile service and fixed service operations. But fixed service operations are becoming much, much more efficient.

是的。您在股東信中看到的是服務地點不斷增加。但您現在可能應該從兩個方面考慮服務容量。隨著我們在中心部署更先進的服務技術，我們發現，我們維修的絕大多數汽車不需要升降機。這讓我們擺脫了實體服務的束縛。現在，我們已經大幅增強了我們的行動服務能力，首先在灣區和一些主要市場進行試驗，並將全年推廣這項服務。因此，我們透過兩種方式創造服務容量——行動服務和固定服務營運。但固定服務營運正變得越來越有效率。

Much higher throughput.

吞吐量更高。

Absolutely, much higher throughput per worker, more throughput per square foot across really every metric.

絕對的，每個工人的產量更高，每平方英尺的產量在各個指標上都更高。

Our next question comes from Adam Jonas with Morgan Stanley.

我們的下一個問題來自摩根士丹利的亞當喬納斯。

Elon, first question's is on CFIUS and Tencent. So after acquiring this 5% passive stake in the company, I'm thinking given the highly sensitive nature of your proprietary tech and computer vision, AI, robotics, et cetera, and all the related infrastructure, I would imagine that the Commission for Foreign Investment in the United States and the Pentagon might be concerned at the idea of a Chinese or a potentially Chinese state-backed company going any further than a small passive stake. Am I watching too many Cold War movies here? Or is there potential for some sensitivity on the grounds of national security?

埃隆，第一個問題是關於 CFIUS 和騰訊的。因此，在收購該公司 5% 的被動股權後，考慮到您的專有技術和電腦視覺、人工智慧、機器人技術等以及所有相關基礎設施的高度敏感性，我認為美國外國投資委員會和五角大廈可能會擔心一家中國公司或一家可能由中國政府支持的公司會進一步收購少量被動股權。我在這裡看了太多冷戰電影嗎？或者是否存在因國家安全而產生的某些敏感性？

Well, I think 5% is not that big of a deal. I mean they're not present at board meetings. They don't have any insight into Tesla that's not public.

嗯，我認為 5% 沒什麼大不了的。我的意思是他們沒有出席董事會會議。他們對特斯拉沒有任何未公開的了解。

Yes. As Elon said, this is a passive investment. And it doesn't require CFIUS clearance from that point of view. Again, they don't have any access to confidential information or board materials, so it's just a belief and the support of what they think Tesla can achieve.

是的。正如埃隆所說，這是一項被動投資。從這個角度來看，它不需要 CFIUS 的批准。再說一次，他們無法接觸任何機密資訊或董事會資料，所以這只是一種信念，以及對特斯拉能夠實現的目標的支持。

Okay. And just as a follow-up, Apple has enough net cash, I think, to buy Tesla like more than 3x over. Is there anything that Apple does or has, besides having more money than they know what to do with, that could be helpful in Tesla's mission to accelerate the transition to shared autonomy in sustainable transport? Could they be the type of firm you could partner with? And could you -- is this something you could talk to Tim about?

好的。另外，我認為蘋果擁有足夠的淨現金，可以以 3 倍以上的價格收購特斯拉。除了擁有多到不知該如何花的錢之外，蘋果還有什麼可以做或擁有的，可以幫助特斯拉加速永續交通共享自主轉型的使命嗎？他們是您可以合作的公司類型嗎？您能和蒂姆談談這件事嗎？

Yes. I don't think they want to have that conversation. I don't believe -- there's not been any indication that they do. But obviously, Apple's company makes some great product. And yes, I mean, I use their phone and their laptop, it's cool.

是的。我認為他們不想進行這樣的談話。我不相信——沒有任何跡象表明他們會這麼做。但顯然，蘋果公司生產了一些很棒的產品。是的，我的意思是，我使用他們的手機和筆記型電腦，這很酷。

I mean, do you think of them more a competitor than potential partner? Is that unfair?

我的意思是，您是否認為他們是競爭對手而不是潛在合作夥伴？這不公平嗎？

I mean, I don't know what they're going to do on the car front. Yes, it's not clear.

我的意思是，我不知道他們在汽車方面會做什麼。是的，不清楚。

Our next question comes from Tyler Frank with Robert Baird.

我們的下一個問題來自羅伯特貝爾德 (Robert Baird) 的泰勒弗蘭克 (Tyler Frank)。

Can you walk me through what your capital needs are for the Model 3 just to get to production and then to ramp production throughout this year and next year? And then how confident are you that you might be able to hit that 100,000-unit production target for the Model 3 in this year? And then I have a follow-up after that.

您能否介紹一下 Model 3 的資本需求，以便在今年和明年開始生產並提高產量？那麼，您對今年能夠實現 Model 3 10 萬輛的生產目標有多大信心？然後我也會進行後續跟進。

I don't think we have indicated the -- we have just said in the letter, we'll achieve 5,000 per week at some point this year and 10,000 at some point next year. So we haven't clarified on that. So...

我認為我們沒有表明——我們只是在信中說過，我們將在今年某個時候實現每週 5,000 人，明年某個時候實現每週 10,000 人。所以我們還沒有澄清這一點。所以...

Yes. The trick with the -- when you've got a whole new product and a whole new factory is I don't predict exactly what the -- what that initial S-curve look -- initial push in the S-curve looks like, it's extremely difficult. In every way, the production starts off slowly and then you gradually eliminate the constraints and eventually it starts taking off exponentially. But because of that sort of initial slow ramp that then goes exponentially -- it's more changed in where that lands in the quarter, it can have quite a big impact on total volume. It's a lot easier to predict where the upper flat portion of the S-curve is likely to be, but predicting the rapidly changing portion of the S-curve is just, I think, not within the ability of anyone to predict with accuracy.

是的。訣竅在於——當你擁有一款全新的產品和一座全新的工廠時，我無法準確預測初始的 S 曲線是什麼樣子——S 曲線的初始推動力是什麼樣子，這極其困難。無論從哪方面看，生產都是從緩慢開始的，然後逐漸消除限制，最終開始呈指數級增長。但由於這種最初緩慢的增長隨後呈指數級增長——它在本季度發生的變化更大，因此會對總量產生相當大的影響。預測 S 曲線上部平坦部分可能位於何處要容易得多，但我認為，預測 S 曲線快速變化的部分不在任何人的能力範圍內，無法準確預測。

Got it. And then can you just run us through what the capital needs are sort of to hit that 10,000-unit per week goal as well as where the battery factory stands in terms of its current capacity versus its expected total capacity and what time line is to get to that total capacity mark?

知道了。然後，您能否向我們介紹一下實現每週 10,000 台的目標所需的資金，以及電池工廠的當前產能與預期總產能的狀況，以及達到該總產能目標的時間線？

Well, we feel pretty good overall about the capital needs and our ability to fund that to achieve that 10,000 per week capacity and...

嗯，我們對資本需求以及為實現每週 10,000 個產能提供資金的能力總體上感覺相當良好...

With internal...

帶有內部...

Yes, with internal -- right, exactly, with our own resources and the cash that we generate from our business as we ramp up Model 3 volumes. And overall, and J.B. can speak up more to that in terms of the cell capacity, that's all lined up to come in -- come online just ahead of our needs on the vehicle side as well as on the energy storage side.

是的，利用內部資源——沒錯，就是利用我們自己的資源以及我們在增加 Model 3 產量時從業務中產生的現金。總體而言，J.B. 可以在電池容量方面多說一些，這些電池都已準備就緒，可以滿足我們在車輛方面以及能源儲存方面的需求。

And we initially forecast about 35 gigawatt hours of cell capacity and 50 gigawatt hours of pack capacity, and we anticipate to surpass that cell capacity in 2018. So that's going well. And with the increasing improvements in the production density and speed at the Gigafactory, we actually ultimately believe, and I think we've said this before, that we can fit substantially more capacity than the 35 gigawatt hours at Gigafactory 1. So...

我們最初預測電池容量約為 35 千兆瓦時，電池組容量約為 50 千兆瓦時，我們預計 2018 年電池容量將超過這一數字。一切進展順利。隨著超級工廠生產密度和速度的不斷提高，我們實際上最終相信，而且我想我們之前也說過，我們可以生產出比超級工廠 1 的 35 千兆瓦時更大的產能。所以…

Yes. And we've said publicly that we think cell capacity at Gigafactory 1 is likely to exceed 100 gigawatt hours over time.

是的。我們已經公開表示，我們認為 Gigafactory 1 的電池產能很可能隨著時間的推移超過 100 千兆瓦時。

So the end stage of 35 is really sort of a passing point at this stage and will continue on from there.

因此，35 的結束階段實際上是現階段的轉捩點，並將從那裡繼續下去。

Yes, yes.

是的，是的。

Right. Okay. And then Elon, you had previously pulled out a target of 1 million cars per year by 2020. Do you still think that's achievable? And what needs to take place in order to get there?

正確的。好的。然後埃隆，你之前曾提出到 2020 年每年生產 100 萬輛汽車的目標。您還認為這是可以實現的嗎？為了達成這個目標需要做些什麼呢？

Yes, I do. I think we need to come up with the Model Y sometime in 2020 or, aspirationally, late 2019. And then I think that 1 million units is quite likely -- combined, yes. Maybe more.

是的，我願意。我認為我們需要在 2020 年的某個時候，或者最好是在 2019 年底推出 Model Y。然後我認為 100 萬台是很有可能的——合計的話，是的。或許更多。

Our next question comes from David Tamberrino with Goldman Sachs.

我們的下一個問題來自高盛的 David Tamberrino。

I wanted to first just ask about the order rate for the S and the X in the quarter and also get some color around your deliveries from a regional perspective. I believe there was an expiration of an electric vehicle tax credit in Hong Kong. I'm just wondering if that created any pull forward or incremental demand in the quarter and if there's any air pocket to orders and deliveries for the second quarter, seeing that you maintained your 47,000 to 50,000 1H delivery guidance.

我想先詢問本季 S 和 X 的訂單率，並從區域角度了解你們的交付情況。我認為香港的電動車稅收抵免已經到期。我只是想知道，這是否會在本季度產生任何提前或增量需求，以及第二季度的訂單和交付量是否存在任何空洞，因為您維持了 47,000 至 50,000 的 1H 交付指導。

Yes. I mean, there was some pull forward demand in Hong Kong, that's 1 city on earth. So the (inaudible) impact our ability to achieve our delivery target for Q2.

是的。我的意思是，香港有一些提前的需求，那是地球上第一個城市。因此（聽不清楚）影響了我們實現第二季交付目標的能力。

And the order rate growth for the quarter?

本季的訂單率成長情況如何？

Well, the -- I think we feel pretty good about achieving the sort of the 100k, roughly 100k, total for the year for S and X, combined. That's where we kind of want to be. The manufacturing system at the supply chain is all sort of set up for that level. We continue to be surprised by how sort of, frankly, naive people are -- a lot of you are about production and supply chain. It's as though -- it sounds like an easy way to increase production, it's truly not. You can't -- at any given production system, you design it for optimal output and then you aim to improve efficiency, reliability, quality and so forth at that output. So the S and X system, as I said last year, was designed for 100,000 units. And initially to get to that rate, we have to use a lot of overtime, a lot of expediting, and that affected our gross margin on the car. And now we're sort of at steady-state with the kind of the top part of that S-curve that we're targeting. And so now our focus for S and X is improving production efficiency, continuing to improve quality and...

嗯，我認為我們對今年 S 和 X 合計實現 10 萬（大約 10 萬）的目標感到非常滿意。這正是我們想要的。供應鏈中的製造系統都是針對該等級所設定的。坦白說，我們繼續對人們的天真感到驚訝——你們中的許多人只關心生產和供應鏈。這聽起來像是一種提高產量的簡單方法，但事實並非如此。你不能——在任何給定的生產系統中，你設計它是為了獲得最佳輸出，然後你的目標是提高該輸出的效率、可靠性、品質等等。因此，正如我去年所說，S 和 X 系統是為 100,000 個單位設計的。最初為了達到這個速度，我們必須加班很多，加快生產速度，這影響了我們汽車的毛利率。現在我們處於穩定狀態，處於我們所瞄準的 S 曲線的頂部。因此，現在我們對 S 和 X 的關注點是提高生產效率、繼續提高品質和…

Material cost.

材料成本。

Yes, material cost and so forth, to sort of -- and to get the right amount of gross margin for S and X to go to the 30% level that we've been aspiring to for a while.

是的，材料成本等等，以使 S 和 X 的毛利率達到我們一直追求的 30% 的水平。

Understood, that's on the production side. My question was just on the what the order rates and demand was looking like from what you're seeing on your customer base. Historically, you've given or provided a very helpful color on what the year-over-year or quarter-over-quarter order growth rate has been on the S and the X, and I think it's a meaningful metric for what demand looks like for those vehicles and for your products. But that's okay, understood.

明白，這是生產方面的事。我的問題是從您看到的客戶群來看訂單率和需求是什麼樣的。從歷史上看，您已經提供了非常有用的信息，表明了 S 和 X 的同比或環比訂單增長率，我認為這是衡量這些車輛和您的產品需求的一個有意義的指標。不過沒關係，我明白。

I don't think it's meaningful. We're going to produce 100,000 units approximately, so all that matters is there's demand. Is there going to be demand for 100,000 units? I believe there will be. And there is.

我覺得這沒什麼意義。我們將生產約 10 萬台，因此重要的是有需求。10 萬台的需求量會是嗎？我相信會有的。確實有。

And there certainly sufficient demand for the guidance we've given for the first half.

我們給予的上半年指導確實有足夠的需求。

Yes.

是的。

Understood. And just on the SolarCity side, it looked like a pretty good gross margin quarter. I wanted to understand how much of that was from the shift further into the cash loan versus the PPA lease? And how much was that? Or was it more associated with the ramping of the Gigafactory and production of the cells?

明白了。僅從 SolarCity 方面來看，本季的毛利率看起來相當不錯。我想了解其中有多少是由於進一步轉向現金貸款而不是 PPA 租賃？那多少錢？或者它與超級工廠的擴張和電池的生產更相關？

It was primarily seasonality. We had (inaudible) production happen in the Northern Hemisphere in some of the PPA leases and how we recognize revenue. And also it was we had some $14 million sale of energy credits that helped us. And the credit sale is a sale that happen every quarter, but we have the full quarter of it, which we didn't have in our half quarter of SolarCity sales -- financials in our Tesla income statement.

這主要是季節性因素。我們在北半球的一些 PPA 租賃中進行（聽不清楚）生產以及我們如何確認收入。此外，我們還出售了價值約 1,400 萬美元的能源信用額，這對我們很有幫助。信用銷售是每季都會發生的銷售，但我們擁有整個季度的信用銷售，而 SolarCity 銷售的半個季度中沒有信用銷售——財務數據體現在我們的特斯拉損益表中。

And plus, we've seen an increase in cash and earnings that improved the margin as well.

此外，我們也看到現金和收益的增加，從而提高了利潤率。

Yes, that does help the margin as well, yes.

是的，這也有助於提高利潤率。

I'm sorry to ask one more but that was a bit inaudible. Could you repeat that, Lyndon?

很抱歉我再問一個問題，但我聽不清楚。林登，你能再說一次嗎？

Yes, we've actually seen an increase in the Tesla line business.

是的，我們確實看到特斯拉產品線業務有所成長。

We're going to get the majority of the cash and loan by the end of the year.

我們將在今年年底前獲得大部分現金和貸款。

Correct.

正確的。

So just to be clear, for (inaudible) activity, we'd like it to get to the majority of the cash and loan by the end of the year.

因此，需要明確的是，對於（聽不清楚）活動，我們希望它能在年底前獲得大部分現金和貸款。

And we expect the Solar margins to stay very healthy for the rest of the year and grow over time.

我們預計太陽能利潤率在今年剩餘時間內將保持非常健康的水平，並且會隨著時間的推移而成長。

Our next question comes from Martin Viecha with Redburn.

我們的下一個問題來自 Redburn 的 Martin Viecha。

This is Martin from Redburn. I wanted to ask about the pep talk that you had a few days ago, where you talked about level 5 maybe in the next 2 years. And I was wondering that it's probably going to change radically the design of the car inside and whether you foresee this in the next 2 years that the interior design would change quite dramatically.

我是雷德伯恩的馬丁。我想問一下您幾天前的那次鼓舞人心的談話，您在談話中談到了可能在未來兩年內達到 5 級。我想知道它是否會從根本上改變汽車內部的設計，以及您是否預見到未來兩年內裝設計將發生巨大變化。

I don't think the -- we're going to see a dramatic change in interior design. There may be an option where you have club seating instead of everyone facing forward, but I wouldn't call that radical, just turning seats around. And I'm not sure how much people obviously would want to do that. I mean, the sensor hardware and compute power required for at least to have a 4 to a level 5 autonomy has been in every Tesla producer since October of last year approximately. So it's a matter of upgrading the software and looking to level 5. And if it does turn out that we need to upgrade the compute power, it's designed to be easy to upgrade, basically access through the glove box and plug in a more powerful computer. So we don't think it will be but if it is, that's pretty easy to do. So the important thing to appreciate is that the sensor hardware and wiring harnesses necessary for autonomy which is essentially having the 8 cameras, the radar and ultrasonics, that's in place. So that with each passing release, the car's autonomy level will improve. We had a bit of a dip, obviously, because of the unexpectedly rapid transition away from Mobileye, where we'd expected to have the Mobileye chip on the board as we transitioned but Mobileye refused to allow that. So then we had to basically recreate all the Mobileye functionality in about 6 months which we did.

我不認為我們將會看到室內設計發生巨大的變化。可能還有一種選擇，就是讓每個人都面朝前方，而不是像以前那樣，採用俱樂部座位，但我不會認為這太激進，只是調換座位而已。我不確定有多少人願意這麼做。我的意思是，自去年 10 月左右以來，每家特斯拉生產商都已經配備了實現 4 級到 5 級自動駕駛所需的至少感測器硬體和運算能力。因此，這是一個升級軟體並期待達到 5 級的問題。如果我們確實需要升級運算能力，它的設計很容易升級，基本上可以透過手套箱存取並插入更強大的電腦。所以我們不認為會發生這種情況，但如果發生，那也很容易做到。因此，需要重視的重要一點是自主駕駛所需的感測器硬體和線束，基本上包括 8 個攝影機、雷達和超音波。這樣，隨著每次版本的發布，汽車的自主性水平就會提高。顯然，我們遇到了一些困難，這是因為出乎意料地快速地從 Mobileye 轉型，我們原本希望在轉型過程中將 Mobileye 晶片安裝在主機板上，但 Mobileye 拒絕允許這樣做。因此，我們必須在大約 6 個月的時間內重新建立所有 Mobileye 功能，我們做到了。

Okay. And then the other follow-up question that I had was on the Model Y. You mentioned that the Model 3 production line will be probably as fast or a bit faster than the fastest production line in the world, and Model Y will be the genuine step change. Does that mean that the Model Y will be made on a different platform than the Model 3?

好的。然後我的另一個後續問題是關於 Model Y 的問題。您提到 Model 3 的生產線速度可能與世界上最快的生產線一樣快或稍快一些，而 Model Y 將是真正的跨越式變化。這是否意味著 Model Y 將採用與 Model 3 不同的平台？

It will be, yes, different platform. Just one example, but the wiring harness on Model S is about 3 kilometers in length. The wiring harness on Model 3 is 1.5 kilometers in length. The wiring harness on Model Y will be 100 meters. And that's a redundant wiring harness. So really, wiring harness is basically a flex harness with a high bit rate bus, so you can put everything on a higher bit rate bus that doesn't -- a CAN bus where you -- your data rate isn't necessarily constrained. And we will also have make changes to the vestigial voltage, so that not everything is 12 volts, which is a pretty absurd number, really, it's wrong for everything.

是的，這將是不同的平台。舉一個例子，但 Model S 上的線束長度約為 3 公里。Model 3 上的線束長達 1.5 公里。Model Y 上的線束將長達 100 公尺。這是一個冗餘線束。因此，實際上，線束基本上是一種具有高位元速率匯流排的柔性線束，因此您可以將所有內容放在更高位元率的總線上，而 CAN 總線則不會對您的資料速率進行限制。我們還必須對殘留電壓進行一些改變，這樣就不會所有東西都是 12 伏，這是一個相當荒謬的數字，實際上，它對所有東西來說都是錯誤的。

Our next question comes from Brian Johnson with Barclays.

我們的下一個問題來自巴克萊銀行的布萊恩·約翰遜。

Yes, I have a couple questions. A housekeeping one and then sort of kind of where are you kind of a question for Elon. On the housekeeping, your order delivery announcements at the end of the quarter, you used to make delivery announcements -- you used to talk about deliveries to end customers. This quarter, it was just deliveries to customers. Is there any change in distribution channel, potentially using resellers in some markets that that's meant to communicate?

是的，我有幾個問題。先問一個家事，然後問 Elon，你在哪裡。在日常管理方面，您在季度末發布訂單交付公告時，通常會發布交付公告 - 您通常會談論向最終客戶交付的情況。本季度，僅向客戶進行交付。分銷通路是否有任何變化，可能在某些市場使用經銷商來進行溝通？

No. It is the same thing. It's consistent. We are delivering to individual customers.

不。這是同樣的事情。它是一致的。我們正在向個人客戶提供送貨服務。

Okay. Second, a couple of years ago, when the stock was at $200, in an answer to one of my questions, Elon, you outlined a scenario where you could get to $700 billion in market cap, that's about where Apple was at the time. We're 2 years later, you're obviously close to the Model 3 launch. How are you looking at that?

好的。第二，幾年前，當蘋果股價為 200 美元時，埃隆，在回答我的一個問題時，您概述了蘋果市值可以達到 7000 億美元的情景，這大約就是蘋果當時的市值。兩年過去了，顯然距離 Model 3 的發布已經很近了。您對此有何看法？

Well, now -- I mean I want to preface this by -- of course, I could be completely delusional but I think I see a clear path to that outcome.

好吧，現在——我的意思是我想先這樣說——當然，我可能完全是妄想，但我認為我看到了一條通往這一結果的清晰道路。

Okay. And anything else in terms of other businesses or volume or still pretty much on that track?

好的。在其他業務或業務量方面還有其他情況嗎？或仍在按計劃進行嗎？

The set of steps necessary to achieve that outcome seems pretty obvious and heavily involve Tesla getting incredibly good at the machine that builds the machine -- which involves, by the way, a tremendous amount of software. This is -- it's not just a bunch of robots sort of sitting there, it's the programming of the robots and how they interact. And it's far more complex than the software in the car. I mean, I think this is just going to be a very difficult thing for other manufacturers to copy. I probably wouldn't know what to do if I were in that position.

要實現這一結果所需的一系列步驟似乎非常明顯，並且很大程度上涉及特斯拉在製造機器方面的出色表現——順便說一句，這涉及大量的軟體。這不僅僅是一堆機器人坐在那裡，而是機器人的編程以及它們如何互動。而且它比汽車裡的軟體複雜得多。我的意思是，我認為這對其他製造商來說將是一件很難複製的事情。如果我處於那個位置，我可能不知道該怎麼做。

Okay. And just one quick question: Why pick-up trucks? Why semis before pick-up trucks?

好的。只問一個簡單的問題：為什麼是皮卡車？為什麼半掛車比皮卡先出現？

Well, they're not going to be that widely separated in time. And part of it is we do want to show that electric transport can do even the most heavy-duty things in the world. So it's -- I think it's pretty obvious that we can do a pick-up truck. But it's not obvious to a lot of people that we can do a heavy-duty semi. And so just being able to kind of hit the corners of the box of capability. It's a helpful thing to do. Yes.

嗯，它們在時間上不會相差那麼遠。其中一部分原因是我們確實想證明電動交通工具可以完成世界上最繁重的工作。所以——我認為我們可以生產皮卡車是顯而易見的。但很多人並不清楚我們能夠製造重型半掛卡車。因此，我們只是能夠觸及能力範圍的各個角落。這是一件很有幫助的事。是的。

Maybe I'll add a point. But a disproportionate amount of petroleum is actually burned by a small number of trucks just because of the high utilization, the high miles per vehicle, and it really lends itself, I think, well to electrification.

也許我應該補充一點。但實際上，由於利用率高、每輛車行駛里程長，少數卡車會燃燒不成比例的石油，我認為這非常適合電氣化。

Yes, exactly. Every semi -- I mean, there's probably 10x as much [hydrocondensate] for a semi as for a pickup truck.

是的，確實如此。每輛半拖車——我的意思是，一輛半拖車中的氫凝物含量可能是一輛皮卡車的 10 倍。

Our next question comes from Rod Lache with Deutsche Bank.

我們的下一個問題來自德意志銀行的羅德·拉赫 (Rod Lache)。

A couple remaining questions. Just one is, since the Model 3 is maybe 2 or 3 months away, could you just give us a sense of what some of the most critical outstanding items are that are going to gate the commercial launch timing? And now that there are actual physical test vehicles on the road, are there any significant changes happening?

還有幾個問題。只有一個問題，由於 Model 3 可能還要 2 或 3 個月才會上市，您能否向我們介紹一下，哪些最關鍵的未完成事項將決定其商業發布的時間？現在實際的物理測試車輛已經上路，是否發生了重大變化？

Well, actually it seems to be -- we're not really seeing any significant change that needs to occur with Model 3. So it's coming in as expected, as the design continuation has predicted, it's getting pretty close to the bull's-eye, and I'm not aware of anything that would affect our prior statements about volume target.

嗯，實際上看起來是這樣——我們並沒有真正看到 Model 3 需要任何重大變化。所以它的到來正如預期的那樣，正如設計延續所預測的那樣，它已經非常接近目標了，我不知道有什麼事情會影響我們之前關於產量目標的聲明。

So there's nothing outstanding vis-à-vis tooling, deliveries or things like that, that you're still viewing as a critical item with some uncertainty?

那麼，就工具、交付或諸如此類的事情而言，沒有什麼突出的事情，您仍然將其視為具有一些不確定性的關鍵項目？

There's plenty of things with uncertainty, but I don't know anything that would prevent us from starting firstly in July, and exceeding 5,000 units per week by the end of the year. There may be some cost up there, I just don't know of what that is today.

有很多事情不確定，但我不知道有什麼會阻止我們從 7 月開始生產，並在年底前實現每週產量超過 5,000 台的目標。那裡可能有一些成本，我只是不知道今天是多少。

Got it. Just switching gears to China. Obviously, domestic production is presumably very important to your success in that region. China recently suggested that they may relax the rules for foreign ownership or that they intend to relax the rules for foreign ownership. And I was wondering if you could just update us on where you stand vis-à-vis the growth plans there? And are the rules for ownership, is that one of the gating factors?

知道了。只是把話題轉向中國。顯然，國內生產對於您在該地區的成功可能非常重要。中國最近表示，他們可能會放寬外資所有權的規定，或是打算放寬外資所有權的規定。我想知道您是否可以向我們介紹一下您在那裡制定的成長計劃的現狀？所有權規則是限制因素之一嗎？

I don't think this is quite the right timing to make any announcements on that front. But I would expect us to define our plans more clearly by the middle of year with respect to China production. I would -- I think it's good timing that -- I mean the China rule changes are good timing.

我認為現在還不是就此發表任何聲明的最佳時機。但我希望我們能在年中更明確地制定有關中國生產的計畫。我認為時機很好——我的意思是中國規則的改變時機很好。

Got it. And just lastly, unless there's a pretty huge Q2 for CapEx, it appears that you're tracking at less than that $2 billion number that you had articulated of capital spending prelaunch of Model 3. Is that a function of savings, contractual timing or is that capacity issue? Just some thoughts on how we should be thinking about the capital spending relative to your prior targets.

知道了。最後，除非第二季的資本支出非常巨大，否則看起來你們追蹤的資本支出將低於你們在 Model 3 發布前所述的 20 億美元。這是由於成本節省、合約時間安排，還是產能問題？這只是一些關於我們應該如何考慮相對於您之前的目標的資本支出的想法。

Yes, it's not too far from it, Rod, and we are -- we have significant CapEx in Q2, and it's done in a big lump sum or a little big peak given how much equipment is being installed and then tested. Often, our CapEx payments happen -- and a big chunk of the funding payments happen after the equipment is installed, it's tested and then we have fairly good customer payment terms. In many cases, it's 90 days. And so it's just a matter of that process and timing and saying that we feel very comfortable in terms of how that is happening, the spend and the installation, and we're all getting this for Model 3.

是的，距離這個數字並不太遠，羅德，我們在第二季度有大量的資本支出，而且考慮到有多少設備正在安裝和測試，這些支出是一次性完成的，或者說是一個比較大的峰值。通常，我們的資本支出付款——大部分資金付款發生在設備安裝、測試之後，然後我們有相當好的客戶付款條件。在許多情況下，這個期限是 90 天。所以這只是一個過程和時間的問題，我們對事情的進展、花費和安裝感到非常滿意，我們都將為 Model 3 實現這一點。

I mean, if anyone comes on a tour of the factory, it's really insane how much equipment is arriving and getting installed and being brought online, it's really -- and I'm used to seeing a lot of intense equipment. It blows my mind. Like, wow. And I think you'd also get kind of a visual sense for the improvement in manufacturing technology between S and X and 3. So you just go, and look at it, it's like yup, that's obviously better.

我的意思是，如果有人來參觀工廠，就會發現有這麼多設備正在抵達、安裝和投入使用，這真是令人難以置信，而且我已經習慣了看到這麼多密集的設備。這讓我大吃一驚。哇哦。而且我認為你也會從視覺上感受到 S、X 和 3 之間製造技術的進步。所以你只要去看一眼，就會覺得，是的，這顯然更好。

Our next question comes from Colin Rusch with Oppenheimer.

我們的下一個問題來自奧本海默公司的科林·拉什。

Can you give us an update on the volume of cathode and anode that's been produced and shipped from the Gigafactory at this point?

您能否向我們介紹一下目前超級工廠生產和運輸的陰極和陽極的數量？

(inaudible) but it's a lot. I mean, it's -- yes, vast amount. Are you alluding to materials -- potential material supply constraints or I'm not sure what you're getting at.

（聽不清楚）但數量很多。我的意思是——是的，數量龐大。您指的是材料－潛在的材料供應限制嗎？或者我不確定您指的是什麼。

Yes, I'm just trying to get a sense of the ramp at this point on the cathode and the anode in -- at the Gigafactory.

是的，我只是想了解超級工廠中陰極和陽極此時的坡度。

I mean it's ramping very (inaudible) we're not really seeing anything (inaudible).

我的意思是它正在非常（聽不清楚）我們實際上沒有看到任何東西（聽不清楚）。

Yes and I completely agree. And we're basically tracking slightly ahead of where we need to be on vehicles but that's sort of as was planned. We don't want to be too far ahead or else we'd have a pretty massive inventory issue showing up. So we run it in batches and we run at high rates and then pause and validate the throughput. But yes, it's where we expect it to be.

是的，我完全同意。我們基本上是在稍微提前追蹤我們需要的車輛位置，但這有點像是計劃好的。我們不想走太遠，否則就會出現相當嚴重的庫存問題。因此，我們分批運行它，並以高速率運行，然後暫停並驗證吞吐量。但確實，它就在我們期望的位置。

Okay. That's super helpful. And then just shifting...

好的。這非常有幫助。然後就轉移了...

Right. And I'd like to express a note of appreciation to (inaudible) parts that are just working really well and they're doing great stuff.

正確的。我想對那些運作良好、做得很棒的部分（聽不清楚）表示感謝。

Okay. And then shifting gears to the purchase accounting adjustments related to SolarCity. Can we just get a sense of the nature of that? It looked like you were going to go through a series of complex assessments over the course of the year with the SolarCity acquisition. Just wanted to understand what that $100 million charge was. And how we should think about those decisions getting made going forward.

好的。然後轉向與 SolarCity 相關的購買會計調整。我們能了解一下它的本質嗎？看起來你們將在收購 SolarCity 的一年內經歷一系列複雜的評估。只是想了解那 1 億美元的費用是多少。以及我們應該如何看待未來所做的這些決定。

I'm not sure what the -- yes, the $100 million is the change quarter-over-quarter that you're referring to. And in Q4 -- and this is arcane purchase accounting. Note, there was a gain on our purchase of SolarCity and that was not there in Q1 and there were some revaluation of assets at SolarCity that was linked to that purchase. And net of that was a $100 million walk.

我不確定——是的，1 億美元是您所指的季度環比變化。在第四季——這是神秘的採購會計。請注意，我們收購 SolarCity 時獲得了收益，但第一季並沒有實現，而且 SolarCity 的一些資產重估與此次收購有關。扣除這筆費用後，步行距離為 1 億美元。

Our next question comes from Ryan Brinkman with JPMorgan.

我們的下一個問題來自摩根大通的瑞安·布林克曼。

What do you think are likely to prove the biggest challenges or bottlenecks in ramping production to 5,000 vehicles per week by some point in 2017? And how confident are you in your ability to overcome those challenges? And then the shareholder letter also mentions a run rate of I think 10,000 or approaching 10,000 per week in 2018, which would maybe seem to indicate some kind of an annual run rate of 500,000 or so Model 3s. And then given you're also tracking kind of 100,000 Ss and Xs. Do think that type of production can be handled out of the Fremont facility or does your plan assume production in another facility as well?

您認為在 2017 年某個時候將產量提高到每週 5,000 輛汽車的過程中可能面臨的最大挑戰或瓶頸是什麼？您對自己克服這些挑戰的能力有多少信心？然後，股東信中還提到，我認為 2018 年的運行率為每週 10,000 輛或接近 10,000 輛，這似乎表明每年的運行率為 500,000 輛左右的 Model 3。然後假設您還追蹤了 100,000 個 S 和 X。您是否認為這種類型的生產可以在弗里蒙特工廠進行，或者您的計劃是否也假設在另一個工廠進行生產？

Yes. The -- yes, all of that production is intended to be out of the Gigafactory 1 and Fremont. So yes, we believe that can all be handled here. And far as specific constraints on Model 3, I just don't know of anything that really stands out. We've gone to great pains with the Model 3 to design it for manufacturing and to not have all sorts of bells and whistles and special features that, like, for example, like, with X. X became kind of like a technology bandwagon of every cool thing you can imagine all at once. It's like everything all at once. That was a terrible strategy. You really want to start off simple and add things over time. But that was some hubris and real overconfident there. So with Model 3 it's the opposite. We've designed it to be easy to make. We've got I think a much better supply chain in place where we've got the A team from the A suppliers. We didn't have that for the Model X or the S. And as far as we know, there are no issues. So that strategy appears to be paying off but there could be something that we've missed that we just don't know about right now.

是的。是的，所有這些生產都將在 Gigafactory 1 和弗里蒙特進行。是的，我們相信這一切都可以在這裡處理。至於 Model 3 的具體限制，我只是不知道有什麼真正突出的地方。我們在設計 Model 3 時煞費苦心，力求將其製造出來，並且去除各種花哨的裝飾和特殊功能，例如 X。 X 就像是一種科技潮流，裡面囊括了你能想像到的所有酷炫的東西。就像所有事情都同時發生一樣。那是一個糟糕的策略。您確實希望從簡單的開始，然後隨著時間的推移添加東西。但那確實有些傲慢和過度自信。但 Model 3 的情況則相反。我們將其設計得易於製作。我認為我們已經擁有了更好的供應鏈，我們擁有來自 A 級供應商的 A 級團隊。Model X 和 Model S 都沒有出現這種情況。而且據我們所知，沒有問題。因此，該策略似乎正在取得成效，但可能還有一些我們尚未知道的遺漏之處。

Okay. And you mentioned production in the Gigafactory. I know you're doing some component assembly there for the Model 3. But given that it is on track to be the world's largest factory or maybe even the world's largest building, is it such a stretch to think that you might be able to produce vehicles in that facility?

好的。您提到了超級工廠的生產。我知道你們在那裡組裝 Model 3 的一些零件。但考慮到它有望成為世界上最大的工廠，甚至是世界上最大的建築，你們認為能夠在那裡生產汽車，這太誇張了嗎？

Look, just in terms of making battery cells, modules, packs, motors and power-tronics, just on that basis -- and, of course, the Powerwall, the Powerpack. On that basis alone it is effectively the largest building in the world of any kind. I mean, you could fit 3 Pentagons, more than 3 Pentagons in the building. 4 Pentagons? I don't know, a lot. And just in the [gear] factory. It's really difficult to appreciate the magnitude of the structure unless you actually visit it. But (inaudible).

你看，就製造電池單元、模組、電池組、引擎和動力電子設備而言，僅在此基礎上——當然還有 Powerwall、Powerpack。僅從這一點來看，它實際上就是世界上最大的建築。我的意思是，你可以在建築物中容納 3 個五邊形，甚至 3 個以上的五邊形。4 個五邊形？我不知道，很多。就在[齒輪]工廠裡。除非你親自參觀，否則很難體會到其建築的宏偉。但是（聽不清楚）。

Our next question comes from John Murphy with Bank of America.

我們的下一個問題來自美國銀行的約翰·墨菲。

I just wanted to follow up on the CapEx topic. I mean, you guys did kind of fade down your expectation for CapEx ahead of -- or in conjunction with a Model 3 launch from $2 billion to $2.5 billion to $2 billion and then the spend this quarter was relatively low, at least relative to what the run rate implied. I'm just curious, is there some level of capital efficiency that you're coming across? And I mean, and could you be possibly be significantly below this $2 billion number ahead of the launch or into the launch?

我只是想跟進資本支出主題。我的意思是，你們確實降低了對 Model 3 發布前或發布期間的資本支出預期，從 20 億美元下調至 25 億美元，再下調至 20 億美元，因此本季度的支出相對較低，至少相對於運行率所暗示的水平而言。我只是好奇，您是否遇到過某種程度的資本效率？我的意思是，在發射前或發射過程中，你的投資金額有可能遠低於這個 20 億美元嗎？

We're always trying to be capital efficient. That is the underlying theme of every step we take. And clearly, some of that is part of it. But I think overall would be -- again, because of this massive scale of payments, whether it's last week of June or first week of July, how many (inaudible) we end up paying, it's hard to be precise. It's almost like an S-curve of capital spend that we're going through here. So I don't think it's any indication of anything else except timing at the highest level -- beyond the capital efficiency that we are continually working on.

我們始終致力於提高資本效率。這是我們每一步行動的根本主題。顯然，其中有些是其中的一部分。但我認為總體而言——由於付款規模巨大，無論是 6 月的最後一周還是 7 月的第一周，我們最終支付了多少（聽不清楚），很難準確計算。這幾乎就像我們正在經歷的資本支出的 S 曲線。因此，我認為這除了表明最高層次的時機之外，沒有任何其他跡象——除了我們正在不斷努力提高的資本效率。

Okay. And then a second question, I mean, residuals seem to keep performing better than you were expecting. Is there any opportunity to potentially lower monthly lease payments to drive higher unit volume demand going forward?

好的。然後是第二個問題，我的意思是，殘差的表現似乎一直比你預期的還要好。是否有機會降低每月租賃付款以推動未來更高的單位數量需求？

Actually, I think one of the traps that the auto industry has gotten into, into the past is having unrealistic residuals and then finding that they're upside-down typically when a recession came along. We want to be very cautious about falling into that trap. So yes, we're -- yes, we don't want to do that. And sort of really, an advantage that our cars have that cars in the past have not had, no other car has, is that the software keeps getting better. So functionality, we keep adding more and more functionality to the car even though the hardware stayed the same. If the model S -- if you bought a Model S 4 years ago, it's way better than when you brought it and that really makes a difference for residuals.

實際上，我認為汽車產業過去陷入的一個陷阱是擁有不切實際的殘值，然後在經濟衰退來臨時發現它們通常是顛倒的。我們要非常小心，以免落入這個陷阱。是的，我們——是的，我們不想這樣做。我們的汽車確實具有一個優勢，過去的汽車、其他汽車都沒有這個優勢，那就是軟體在不斷改進。因此，儘管硬體保持不變，但我們仍在不斷為汽車添加越來越多的功能。如果是 Model S——如果你 4 年前購買了 Model S，那麼它現在比你剛買的時候要好得多，這對殘值來說確實有很大影響。

Our next question comes from James Albertine with Consumer Edge.

我們的下一個問題來自 Consumer Edge 的 James Albertine。

On the semi trucks, just very quickly if I could ask, is the attractiveness of that sort of vertical that you could sell sort of in bulk to fewer customers, so more vehicles per customer? And given your partnerships in the past, would you envision partnering with a manufacturer on that side of the business? Or would this be more akin to your sort of go it alone strategy on the auto side?

關於半掛卡車，請問這種垂直銷售方式的吸引力在於，您可以大量銷售給更少的客戶，從而為每個客戶銷售更多車輛？鑑於您過去的合作關係，您是否考慮與該業務領域的製造商合作？或者這更類似於您在汽車方面採取的單獨行動策略？

We'll manufacture that ourselves. And most of that semi is actually made out of Model 3 parts, by the way. It's Model 3 -- it's actually using a bunch of Model 3 motors. Probably revealing too much about the future of it. But so we're able to use a very high volume vehicle and then combine several motors to have something that I think is actually going to have a very good gross margin, like it's -- that's just not something that any other -- it's like you can't do that with a traditional truck. So effectively it allows us to have a very compelling product that has a low unit cost.

我們將自己生產。順便說一句，這輛半拖車的大部分實際上是由 Model 3 零件製成的。它是 Model 3——它實際上使用了許多 Model 3 引擎。可能透露了太多有關它的未來的資訊。但是，我們能夠使用產量非常大的車輛，然後結合多個發動機，從而獲得我認為實際上會有非常好的毛利率的產品，這是其他任何車輛都無法做到的，傳統卡車是做不到這一點的。因此，它實際上使我們能夠生產出具有較低單位成本的非常引人注目的產品。

Yes, the incremental complexity of building that is much less than it might seem.

是的，建置的增量複雜性比看起來的要小得多。

Yes, exactly.

是的，確實如此。

In terms of all the (inaudible)

就所有（聽不清楚）而言

Yes, exactly.

是的，確實如此。

And are we right to think about that though, as a contractual sort of opportunity, right? I mean, you go to sort of a handful of fleet operators and you could sell sort of more vehicles per customer. Is that the right way to think about it?

但是，我們是否可以將其視為一種契約機會，對嗎？我的意思是，你去找幾個車隊營運商，你就可以向每個客戶銷售更多的車輛。這是正確的思考方式嗎？

That is how it would occur, yes. So it's essentially much more of a straightforward economic decision for the operators. They just look at it as a cost per ton per mile [economy]. And it's like if it's better, they'll just buy a huge number. And if it's worse, they won't buy hardly any. And we're confident it'll be better.

是的，事情就是這樣發生的。因此，對於營運商來說，這本質上是一個更直接的經濟決策。他們只是將其視為每噸每英里的成本[經濟]。就好像如果它更好，他們就會購買大量的。如果情況更糟，他們幾乎不會購買任何東西。我們相信它會變得更好。

Okay. Great. And then if I just may follow-up on the demand questions that were sort of asked earlier. Wondering as you're getting more used vehicles back into the pipeline, is there any data to support that you're using those vehicles to attract a potentially new customer to the brand? Or alternatively, is there data that would suggest that perhaps could be cannibalizing some of the newer vehicles? But sorry to dwell on demand, but I just wanted to see if there was anything, given now we're a few years on, and you're getting a lot of vehicles back off-lease presumably, if there's any indication there one way or the other.

好的。偉大的。然後，我可以繼續回答之前提出的需求問題嗎？想知道當您將更多二手車重新投入銷售時，是否有數據來支持您正在使用這些車輛來吸引潛在的新客戶？或者，是否有數據表明這也許會蠶食一些較新的車輛？但很抱歉一直在談論需求，但我只是想看看是否有任何跡象，考慮到現在已經過去了幾年，而且你大概會收回很多租賃車輛，是否有任何跡象表明存在這種或那種跡象。

I think it's still early days, they're still at relatively low numbers. But the indication is that we're introducing a new customer to Tesla at those lower price points.

我認為現在還為時過早，數量還相對較低。但有跡象表明，我們正在以較低的價格向特斯拉引入新客戶。

Yes, exactly. The demand actually increases really exponentially as price drops. The -- at one point when we looked at it, I think we were looking at the right number, but the demand at the Model 3 price point appeared to be somewhere between 30x and 70x higher than at the Model S price point. Well, I mean, you look at it like, so there's 100,000 premium sedans sold in the U.S. every year. I think we're about 1/3 of that. But there are 17 million vehicles in total sold, so premium sedans are like nothing. Less than 1% of the market. 0.5%.

是的，確實如此。隨著價格下降，需求實際上呈指數級增長。當我們查看它時，我認為我們看到的是正確的數字，但 Model 3 價位的需求似乎比 Model S 價位高出 30 倍到 70 倍。嗯，我的意思是，你看一下，美國每年售出 10 萬輛高檔轎車。我認為我們大約是這個數字的三分之一。但汽車總銷量已達 1700 萬輛，因此高檔轎車就無所謂了。市佔率不到1%。0.5%。

So a 7 Series customer for -- your brand new and a 5 series customer for your sort of used, is maybe the right way to think about it? Is that fair?

那麼，7 系列的客戶——您的全新車型，以及 5 系列的客戶——您的二手車型，也許是正確的思考方式？這樣公平嗎？

Or a 3 series customer for the used as well. Yes.

或也是二手 3 系列的客戶。是的。

But it is interesting to consider that the magnitude of -- this is really maybe underappreciated. Like consider 17 million cars and trucks sold in the U.S. per year. Of which only 100,000 are premium sedans. And we have a 1/3 market share. If we can replicate that in other segments, the results are obvious.

但有趣的是，考慮到這一點的重要性也許真的被低估了。假設美國每年銷售 1700 萬輛汽車和卡車。其中高檔轎車僅10萬輛。我們擁有1/3的市場佔有率。如果我們能夠將其複製到其他領域，結果將是顯而易見的。

Okay. Before we go on to the next question, I want to do just a time check here. We're at the hour mark. We have 5 more analysts that want to ask questions. Do you want to go on for a little bit longer, Elon?

好的。在我們繼續討論下一個問題之前，我想在這裡做一個時間檢查。我們已經到了一小時了。我們還有 5 位分析師想要提問。伊隆，你還想再說一會兒嗎？

Yes, we can go a little longer.

是的，我們可以再走一會兒。

Our next question comes from Brad Erickson with Pacific Crest Securities.

我們的下一個問題來自 Pacific Crest Securities 的 Brad Erickson。

Elon, I think a couple years ago you'd said you could envision at some point stepping away from Tesla as CEO anyways towards the end of the decade as Model 3 kind of got up and running. As you were likely to be pursuing a lot of these adjacent opportunities, clearly a lot still there on the horizon. But now with some more of these opportunities being a part of Tesla's business, does that change your view of staying actively in place with Tesla longer into the future?

伊隆，我想幾年前你就說過，你可以想像在某個時候辭去特斯拉執行長的職務，無論如何，在 2020 年末，隨著 Model 3 的啟動和運行。由於您可能會追求許多此類相鄰的機會，因此顯然還有很多機會尚待發現。但是現在，隨著更多此類機會成為特斯拉業務的一部分，這是否會改變您對未來繼續積極參與特斯拉的看法？

Well, maybe I wasn't clear. I intend to be actively involved with Tesla for the rest of my life. Hopefully, stopping before I get too old -- or too crazy, I don't know. But essentially for as long as I can positively contribute to Tesla, I intend to be -- to have a significant involvement with Tesla. But that doesn't mean I should be CEO forever. It's like -- I think my main -- so it's like the most valuable thing I can contribute is kind of product design and technology, but that's my forte. That's what I like doing. And that's what I would imagine doing in the sort of very long term.

嗯，也許我沒表達清楚。我打算用我的餘生積極參與特斯拉事業。希望在我變得太老或太瘋狂之前停下來，我不知道。但本質上，只要我能為特斯拉做出積極貢獻，我就會積極參與特斯拉的工作。但這並不意味著我應該永遠擔任執行長。就像——我認為我的主要——所以我能貢獻的最有價值的東西就是產品設計和技術，但這是我的強項。這就是我喜歡做的事情。這就是我所想像的長期要做的事。

Our next question comes from Jeff Osborne with Cowen and Company.

我們的下一個問題來自 Cowen and Company 的 Jeff Osborne。

Just 2 questions. One, Elon, at the TED Talks, and I think a couple tweets, you had talked about adding 3 Gigafactories, just following up to Tyler Frank's question on CapEx needs. Can you just talk about what your ultimate vision of Tesla over the next few years? Model Y factory, truck factories, truck service centers, 3 Gigafactories, China schedule, is all of that going to be funded with internal cash? Or do you see partnerships funding, despite the low margins that the battery industry has? I'm just trying to get a sense of what your ultimate vision will cost.

僅 2 個問題。首先，伊隆，在 TED 演講中，我記得有幾條推文，你談到了增加 3 個超級工廠，這只是對泰勒·弗蘭克關於資本支出需求的問題的回應。您能談談您對特斯拉未來幾年的最終願景嗎？Model Y 工廠、卡車工廠、卡車服務中心、3 家超級工廠、中國計劃，所有這些都將用內部現金資助嗎？或者您認為儘管電池行業的利潤率很低，但仍會獲得合作夥伴的資助？我只是想知道你的最終願景需要花多少錢。

Right. Incremental dilution along the way. It's hard to say. I mean, I'm sure there will be some funding rounds that happen in the future. It's kind of a trade-off between how fast do we want to grow versus -- like, we can grow slower with no dilution, really. For sure, we could grow at a moderate pace with no dilution. We could grow at a fast pace with some dilution. Or we can grow at a very fast pace with a high level of dilution.

正確的。在此過程中逐漸稀釋。這很難說。我的意思是，我確信未來會發生一些融資。這是一種權衡，即我們想要增長多快，還是我們可以在不稀釋的情況下緩慢增長。當然，我們可以以適度的速度增長而不會被稀釋。透過一定的稀釋，我們可以快速成長。或者我們可以在高度稀釋的情況下快速成長。

10x growth in 3 years sounds pretty fast me but maybe not to you.

三年內成長 10 倍對我來說聽起來很快，但對你來說可能並非如此。

Well, yes, but you have to look and say going from -- when we went from the Roadster to the Model S, we went from making around 500 units a year to making 20,000 units a year. So that's a hell of a good growth, up by a factor of 40.

嗯，是的，但你必須看一下——當我們從 Roadster 轉向 Model S 時，我們的年產量從 500 輛增加到 20,000 輛。所以，這是一個非常好的成長，成長了 40 倍。

Got it. Maybe just out of the interest of time, the second question I had is just on -- it would be helpful given that there's hundreds of thousands of people that have put a deposit on the Model 3, can you just update us on what the cumulative U.S. vehicles sold that you have relative to 200,000 number to get that $7,500 tax credit? You mentioned elasticity of demand at certain price points, but certainly there's a large contingent of people that put a deposit that unfortunately won't get the benefit. So it would be nice just to be able to track that metric, so as the 3 launches in the coming months we can see which folks will get that. And what the impact of demand is for those that don't.

知道了。也許只是出於時間原因，我的第二個問題是——考慮到有數十萬人已經為 Model 3 支付了定金，您能否向我們更新一下您在美國累計銷售的汽車數量（相對於 20 萬輛）來獲得 7,500 美元的稅收抵免？您提到了在某些價格點上的需求彈性，但肯定有很多人支付了定金，但不幸的是卻無法獲得收益。因此，能夠追蹤該指標就很好了，這樣隨著未來幾個月內 3 次發布，我們就可以知道哪些人會得到它。對於那些不這麼做的人來說，需求會產生什麼影響？

I think most people are going to be able to get it that have put down a deposit. And it's just -- it's a physical problem. Yes. It's sort of the credit rolls off. It just -- it's not like a complete close. It rolls off over time. And we are prioritizing U.S. production, which also helps us with keeping things simple so there's -- we're not making many versions of the car for many different countries. Yes, and so I mean, I think provided somebody is -- I don't know. My guess is probably most people that have put down a deposit will be able to get the full tax credit.

我認為大多數支付了定金的人都能夠得到它。這只是身體問題。是的。這就像是功勞滾滾一樣。這只是——這並不像是一個完全的結束。它會隨著時間而消失。我們優先考慮美國的生產，這也有助於我們保持簡單，因此我們不會為不同的國家生產不同版本的汽車。是的，所以我的意思是，我認為只要有人——我不知道。我猜想大多數支付了訂金的人都能夠獲得全額稅收抵免。

Is there a way you could just give us what the cumulative numbers so far in the U.S. quarter to date -- or sorry, inception to date?

您能否告訴我們美國本季迄今的累積數字——或者抱歉，自成立以來的數字？

No. Here's the problem. If we do that, then people run off and make all sorts of conclusions based on that, that really have -- that are not predictive of the future. Because there are no -- you can't test drive a Model 3. If you come into our stores and you want to buy a Model 3, we try to get you to buy a Model S or X instead. We anti-sell the Model 3. But I mean, that's -- reservations continue to climb week after week. No advertising, anti-selling, nothing to test drive, still grows every week.

不。問題就在這裡。如果我們這樣做，那麼人們就會據此得出各種結論，而這些結論實際上並不能預測未來。因為沒有——你不能試駕 Model 3。如果你來到我們的商店並想購買 Model 3，我們會盡量讓你購買 Model S 或 X。我們反對銷售 Model 3。但我的意思是，預訂量每週都在持續攀升。沒有廣告、沒有反銷售、無需試駕，每週仍在成長。

And maybe we'll try clarifying that under the present regime, the income -- the tax credits on the car continue even after we hit the 200,000 limit, and they continue to sell in quarters but at a slightly lower depleting scale. So it's going to be beneficial for customers even beyond the 200,000 mark.

也許我們應該嘗試澄清，在現行製度下，即使在達到 20 萬輛的限額之後，汽車的收入——稅收抵免仍會繼續，而且它們會繼續按季度銷售，但消耗規模會略低。因此，即使對於超過 20 萬名的客戶來說，這也將是有利的。

Yes, absolutely. And I should perhaps touch again on this whole notion of -- like, [ODS] has done all these sort of entertaining articles, like Tesla survived because of, like, government subsidies and tax credits, drives me crazy. Here's what those fools don't realize. If Tesla is not alone in the car industry that -- all those things would be material if we were the only car company in existence. We are not. There are many car companies. What matters is whether we have a relative advantage in the market. And in fact, the incentives give us a relative disadvantage. This is (inaudible) in spite of the incentives, not because of them. And -- but these incentives have limited lifetime and they're limited scale -- like, for example, the federal tax credit. And then the -- that caps out at the 200k. The carb credits, which the carb rules are woefully weak. We can sell -- there are some quarters where we can't even sell carb credits. And when we can, it's maybe $0.50 on the dollar, or something like that. Whereas the other car companies get to fully absorb the value of the carb credit. So, for example, gives GM roughly -- I count a $7,000 to $10,000 advantage over Tesla for the Chevy Volt. That's why like (inaudible) well, GM appears to be losing $10,000 a car on the Volt. No, they're not. They're making it up in carb credits. But they get the full retail value of the carb credit whereas we get the wholesale value when we're lucky. But the carb credits only -- are only effective at a production rate of about 20,000 to 30,000 vehicles a year. So that's why you'll see, mark my words, it's not going to be any higher than that for the Chevy Volt. That's the 25,000 -- on the order of 25,000 units a year or 1/10th of our initial production rate for the Model 3 or 1/20th of what the Model 3 will be next year. So Tesla's competitive advantage improves as the incentives go away. This is -- it continues to be something that is not well understood. And for that they don't -- I'll also mention that -- the Nevada tax credits, which for the Gigafactory, it makes it sound like we got a $1.3 billion check from the state of Nevada. We did not. Those tax credits are made up -- the vast majority of it is just sales and use tax abatement on equipment in the Gigafactory. Taxes that otherwise wouldn't been there because there was just a bunch of rocks there before. And you don't get a lot of taxes from rocks. So that's why it is essentially a no-lose proposition for the state. And in order for us to actually earn $1.3 billion in tax credits for the Gigafactory we have to generate, over the course of 20 years, about $100 billion in output from the Gigafactory. So yes, it's worth about like 1%. And don't want to look a gift horse in the mouth and we appreciate it and that's nice. But this is obviously -- 1% is not the difference between success and failure for the factory. And -- but a lot of articles write it in the past tense, "Tesla received $1.3 billion." No, we haven't. We did not receive that. It's only 1% of that, great, we'll take it. But I -- looking at the bank now, I just don't see it there. That's because it's just sales and use tax abatement over 20 years. But the key takeaway is that as Tesla's competitive advantage improves with scale, it doesn't get worse.

是的，絕對是。我或許應該再談談這個概念——比如，[ODS] 發表了所有這些有趣的文章，例如特斯拉因為政府補貼和稅收抵免而生存下來，這讓我抓狂。那些傻瓜沒有意識到這一點。如果特斯拉不是汽車產業中唯一的汽車公司，那麼如果我們是唯一一家存在的汽車公司，那麼所有這些事情都將變得重要。我們不是。有很多汽車公司。重要的是我們是否在市場上有相對優勢。事實上，這些激勵措施為我們帶來了相對的劣勢。這是（聽不清楚）儘管有激勵措施，但並不是因為有激勵措施。但這些激勵措施的有效期限和規模都是有限的，例如聯邦稅收抵免。然後——上限是 20 萬。碳水化合物積分，即碳水化合物規則，非常薄弱。我們可以銷售—在某些地區我們甚至無法銷售碳水化合物信用。當我們可以的時候，可能是 0.50 美元，或類似的金額。而其他汽車公司則可以完全吸收碳信用的價值。舉例來說，我粗略估計通用汽車的雪佛蘭 Volt 比特斯拉的售價高出 7,000 到 10,000 美元。這就是為什麼（聽不清楚）通用汽車似乎在 Volt 上每輛車要損失 10,000 美元。不，不是。他們正在用碳水化合物積分來彌補。但是他們獲得了碳水化合物信用的全部零售價值，而我們幸運的話可以獲得批發價值。但碳水化合物積分僅在每年約 20,000 至 30,000 輛汽車的生產率下才有效。所以這就是為什麼你會看到，記住我的話，雪佛蘭 Volt 的價格不會比這個更高。這就是 25,000 輛——大約是每年 25,000 輛，或者說是我們 Model 3 初始生產率的十分之一，或者明年 Model 3 產量的二十分之一。因此，隨著激勵措施的消失，特斯拉的競爭優勢將會增強。這仍然是一個尚未被充分理解的問題。對於這一點，我還要提一下，他們沒有內華達州的稅收抵免，對於超級工廠來說，這聽起來就像我們從內華達州獲得了一張 13 億美元的支票。我們沒有。這些稅收抵免是虛構的——其中絕大部分只是超級工廠設備的銷售稅和使用稅減免。由於以前那裡只是一堆石頭，所以根本不會徵收稅金。而且你從岩石中賺不到很多稅。所以，這對國家來說本質上是一個雙贏的提議。為了讓我們真正為超級工廠賺取 13 億美元的稅收抵免，我們必須在 20 年內創造約 1,000 億美元的超級工廠。是的，它的價值約為 1%。我們不想對禮物吹毛求疵，我們對此表示感謝，這很好。但這顯然——1%並不是工廠成功與失敗的差別。但很多文章都用過去式來寫，「特斯拉獲得了 13 億美元。」不，我們沒有。我們沒有收到。這只是其中的 1%，太好了，我們會接受的。但是我現在看著這家銀行，卻沒看到它。這是因為這只是 20 年內的銷售稅和使用稅減免。但關鍵在於，隨著特斯拉規模的擴大，其競爭優勢不會變得更糟。

Our next question comes from Joseph Spak with RBC Capital Markets.

我們的下一個問題來自加拿大皇家銀行資本市場的約瑟夫‧斯帕克 (Joseph Spak)。

Just a quick one on service. By our math, if you look at the cumulative number of vehicles you've delivered and the amount of stores and service stations, it's a little bit over -- or something around 700 per I guess station. And I realize you're adding some more of these mobile units. But I just wanted to know bigger picture how you think about coverage in the more steady state or at least at 0.5 million unit rate. Like, what is the right level of coverage needed for the larger fleet?

只是關於服務的簡短介紹。根據我們的計算，如果你看一下你交付的車輛的累積數量以及商店和服務站的數量，這個數字略有增加——或者我猜每個站點大約有 700 輛。我知道您正在添加更多這樣的移動單元。但我只是想從更大角度了解您如何看待更穩定狀態下的覆蓋率，或至少 50 萬單位率的覆蓋率。例如，大型車隊需要什麼樣的適當覆蓋水平？

I think, rather than thinking about store or service center locations, we think about it in terms of mobile units and lifts. And so we are building larger service centers over time that have more lifts. So our initial service centers, it might have had 2 or 3 lifts. And we're building now service centers with 40 to 60, sometimes 80 lifts. And so there's a density within the service centers. But the mobile capability expands that quite greatly. So I think a lot of people do incorrect analysis to take cars in service divided by locations, because the locations varies so widely. But that's essentially how we're thinking about capacity and planning capacity. And as Deepak mentioned earlier, our throughputs and efficiency are getting much better over time, and we'll continue to improve those. So it's our goal to stay ahead of the installed base capacity so we're providing great service. But really the Model 3 has been designed for high reliability. And as Elon has said many times, the best service is no service at all.

我認為，我們不應該考慮商店或服務中心的位置，而應該從移動單元和升降機的角度來考慮。因此，我們正在逐步建造擁有更多電梯的更大的服務中心。因此，我們最初的服務中心可能有 2 到 3 部升降機。我們目前正在建造擁有 40 到 60 部、有時 80 部升降機的服務中心。因此服務中心的密度是比較大的。但移動能力大大擴展了這一點。所以我認為很多人對按地點劃分的在用車輛進行了錯誤的分析，因為地點差異很大。但這基本上就是我們對容量和規劃容量的看法。正如 Deepak 之前提到的，我們的吞吐量和效率隨著時間的推移變得越來越好，我們將繼續改進。因此，我們的目標是保持領先的安裝基礎容量，從而提供優質的服務。但實際上，Model 3 的設計著重於高可靠性。正如埃隆多次說過的那樣，最好的服務就是沒有服務。

Exactly. We're -- our aspiration would be we make 0 service revenue because the car never needs -- never breaks.

確切地。我們的願望是實現零服務收入，因為汽車永遠不需要維修，永遠不會故障。

Absolutely. And our service centers are sort of like the old Maytag Repairman. Yes.

絕對地。我們的服務中心有點像是老式的美泰格修理廠。是的。

Our next question comes from Rob Cihra with Guggenheim Partners.

下一個問題來自古根漢合夥公司的 Rob Cihra。

Two quick questions I guess if I could. One just on energy, your megawatt hours declined sequentially, which just seemed surprising thinking demand is well above supply still at this stage. So when we could expect any more meaningful ramp there? And then separately, on automotive, given that you seem to be in the mood to talk about future unveils, which is great, any chance I could push that by asking about the future urban transport bus? Not sure what you want to refer to it as. But the reason I ask is not -- is because that one seems a lot less about the product and more about just a completely different model for transportation and requiring full autonomy and that sort of thing. I mean, is that the kind of thing you're thinking 3 years now or 10 years now or anything in between?

如果可以的話我想問兩個簡單的問題。僅就能源而言，兆瓦時數連續下降，這似乎令人驚訝，因為現階段需求仍然遠高於供應。那我們什麼時候可以期待出現更有意義的成長呢？然後另外，關於汽車，鑑於您似乎有意談論未來的新事物，這很好，我是否可以通過詢問未來的城市交通巴士來推動這一話題？不確定您想將其稱為什麼。但我問這個問題的原因不是——因為這個問題似乎與產品關係不大，而只是一種完全不同的交通模式，需要完全自主等等。我的意思是，您現在考慮的是 3 年後、10 年後還是這段期間的事情嗎？

Sure. With respect to the battery stuff, it's a little lumpy right now because you're at a big installation in fourth quarter with Southern California Edison. And then we had a bit of a gap between the Powerwall 1 to Powerwall 2. So we should start to see that correcting in Q2 and Q3 and then particularly towards the end of this year, I would expect quite a dramatic ramp in storage deployment, like really dramatic.

當然。就電池方面而言，目前情況有點不穩定，因為你們在第四季度與南加州愛迪生公司合作進行一項大型安裝。然後我們發現 Powerwall 1 和 Powerwall 2 之間存在一些差距。因此，我們應該會在第二季和第三季開始看到這種修正，然後特別是到今年年底，我預計儲存部署將出現相當顯著的成長，非常顯著。

Yes, and it's worth pointing out that we do still have a significant backlog in Powerwall demand and then we're building capacity to address that and ramping it. We had a few challenges in parts of the supply chain as we've been ramping that throughout the quarter, the first quarter. But those are freeing up. And we're seeing the production rates improve week-on-week. But it's a -- yes, it's not indicative of demand. It's really our challenges of ramping the new products.

是的，值得指出的是，我們對 Powerwall 的需求仍然很大，我們正在建立產能來解決這個問題並增加產能。在整個第一季度，我們一直在增加供應鏈的力度，但在部分環節我們遇到了一些挑戰。但這些正在被釋放。我們看到生產力每週都在提高。但這是——是的，它並不代表需求。這確實是我們推出新產品時所面臨的挑戰。

Yes. Like I say I feel really good about quite dramatic quarter-over-quarter increases. I think with -- well, for every quarter I can imagine the future, it's going to be really dramatic increases in stationary storage output. It will grow faster than the car volume, and the car volume is growing pretty fast.

是的。就像我說的，我對季度環比大幅增長感到非常高興。我認為——我可以想像未來每季固定儲存產量都會大幅增加。它的成長速度將超過汽車銷售的成長速度，而且汽車銷售的成長速度相當快。

Okay, and the bus?

好的，公車呢？

On the bus, yes. Having given a bit more thought to it, I don't know if the bus thing -- if that's actually going to be something that makes sense in the shared, fully autonomous environment. Because it may -- if you have a share -- if it costs like very little, like it costs less than a bus ticket to have -- make use of a shared autonomy fleet to go wherever you want to point to point. Well, why wouldn't you just use that? So I don't know. I don't know if the bus thing -- it does helps with density to some degree. But then you -- I mean you could basically have something like a higher density Model X or something like that, that's got 10 or 12 seats in it. But would you want more than that? I don't know. And then when you factor tunnels in -- big round tunnels anyway -- yes, then the density -- urban density in traffic, and it can be fully alleviated with tunnels. Yes, it's more like the tunnel thing that we talked about that at TED and basically like the commentary afterwards was -- it was like the critics -- the most critical commentary was there's a group that thinks that the whole sort of automated tunnel with electric [scaping] -- like, well basically, like the tunnel thing, this group that says it's obvious, and there's a group that says it's impossible. And I would like those 2 groups to meet. It's been like sort of like there's a group that's like the flat earth society and the hollow globe society, I think they should meet too. Have a debate.

是的，在公車上。經過進一步思考，我不知道公車的事——在共享、完全自主的環境中是否真的有意義。因為它可能——如果你有份額——如果成本很低，例如比一張公車票還便宜——利用共享自主車隊去任何你想去的地方。那麼，為什麼不直接使用它呢？所以我不知道。我不知道公車是否在某種程度上有助於提高人口密度。但你——我的意思是你基本上可以擁有像更高密度的 Model X 或類似的東西，裡面有 10 或 12 個座位。但您還想要更多嗎？我不知道。然後，當你將隧道考慮進去時——不管怎樣，都是大型圓形隧道——是的，那麼密度——城市交通密度，可以通過隧道得到充分緩解。是的，這更像是我們在 TED 上談論的隧道問題，基本上就像之後的評論一樣——就像批評家一樣——最批判的評論是，有一群人認為整個帶有電動[scaping]的自動化隧道——就像，基本上，就像隧道問題一樣，這群人說這是顯而易見的，而還有一群人說這是不可能的。我希望這兩個團體能夠見面。這有點像是有一個類似地球平坦論學會和地球空心論學會的團體，我認為他們也應該見面。進行辯論。

Our final question comes from Charlie Anderson with Dougherty & Co.

我們的最後一個問題來自 Dougherty & Co. 的 Charlie Anderson。

I wonder, you mentioned the anti-selling before of the Model 3. Is there a level of production where you flip from anti-selling to selling?

我想知道，您之前提到過 Model 3 的反銷售。在生產過程中是否存在從反銷售轉為銷售的階段？

Well, I don't know, maybe later this year. Probably not for the next 6 to 9 months.

嗯，我不知道，也許今年晚些時候。未來 6 到 9 個月內可能不會。

All right. Thank you, everyone for joining us today. Have a great day.

好的。感謝大家今天的參與。祝你有美好的一天。

All right. Thanks.

好的。謝謝。

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's conference. Thank you for your participation. You may all disconnect and have a wonderful day.

女士們、先生們，今天的會議到此結束。感謝您的參與。大家可以斷開連線並度過美好的一天。