特斯拉 (TSLA) 2017 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Tesla Inc. Fourth Quarter 2017 Financial Results Q&A Conference Call. (Operator Instructions) I would now like to turn the call over to Senior Director of Investor Relations, Mr. Martin Viecha. Please go ahead, sir.

女士們、先生們，大家好，歡迎來到特斯拉公司。2017 年第四季財務業績問答電話會議。（操作員指示）現在，我想將電話轉給投資者關係高級總監 Martin Viecha 先生。先生，請繼續。

Thank you, Andrew, and good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to Tesla's Fourth Quarter 2017 Q&A Webcast. I'm joined today by Elon Musk, J.B. Straubel, Deepak Ahuja and Doug Field is on the line.

謝謝你，安德魯，大家下午好。歡迎收聽特斯拉 2017 年第四季問答網路直播。今天與我一起參加的是 Elon Musk、J.B. Straubel、Deepak Ahuja，還有 Doug Field 在線。

Our 4Q results were announced at about 1 p.m. Pacific Time in the update letter we published at the same link as this webcast. During this call, we will discuss our business outlook and make forward-looking statements. These comments 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. (Operator Instructions)

我們的第四季業績在下午 1 點左右公佈。我們在與該網絡廣播相同的連結中發布了更新信，其中提到了太平洋時間。在本次電話會議中，我們將討論我們的業務前景並做出前瞻性陳述。這些評論是基於我們今天的預測和期望。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。（操作員指示）

Before we jump to Q&A, Elon would like to have some opening remarks. Elon?

在我們進入問答環節之前，伊隆想先講幾句開場白。埃隆？

Right, thank you. So 2017 was also a big year for Tesla. We launched the Model 3, which was our first mass production vehicle, and it's a huge step change for Tesla. A lot of challenges but I think we made tremendous progress on that front.

好的，謝謝。因此，2017 年對特斯拉來說也是重要的一年。我們推出了 Model 3，這是我們的第一款量產車，對特斯拉來說是一個巨大的進步。雖然面臨很多挑戰，但我認為我們在這方面取得了巨大進展。

We also designed and installed and got into operation the world's largest battery in Australia, the largest battery by a significant margin. And that battery is exceeding its performance targets significantly. We also unveiled the Tesla Semi, which is a super heavy-duty truck, maximum load semi truck, and the next-gen Roadster, which we believe will exceed gasoline sports cars on every dimension.

我們還在澳洲設計、安裝並投入運作了世界上最大的電池，這是迄今為止最大的電池。而且該電池的性能已大大超出其目標。我們還推出了特斯拉 Semi，這是一款超重型卡車、最大載重半掛卡車，以及下一代 Roadster，我們相信它將在各個方面超越汽油跑車。

And we also achieved record production and deliveries of Model S and X. And overall, I think, while there were challenges associated with Model 3 ramp at the -- we were in a deeper level of hell than we expected. So a few levels deeper than we'd like to be but swiftly exiting, I think. And so it's really, I think, on balance, a phenomenal year. And I'd like to thank everyone at Tesla, who should be very proud of the work they've done. This is incredibly difficult. I'd like to thank everyone for their hard work and contribution to 2017 being a really good year for Tesla.

我們也創造了 Model S 和 X 的生產和交付記錄。總的來說，我認為，雖然 Model 3 的生產遇到了一些挑戰，但我們所處的困境比我們預想的還要深。因此，我認為，比我們想要的深度要深幾個層次，但可以迅速退出。所以我認為，總的來說，這確實是非凡的一年。我要感謝特斯拉的每一個人，他們應該為自己所做的工作感到非常自豪。這實在是太困難了。我要感謝大家的辛勤工作和貢獻，2017 年對特斯拉來說是非常好的一年。

I also want to thank our suppliers, particularly those involved in Model 3, as they've shared the vertical struggle we've had in ramping our production, and they've really burned the midnight oil, spent weekends and taking a lot of risks and suffered alongside us in the challenges associated with the ramp. So I'd like to thank them for supporting us through this difficult time with Model 3.

我還要感謝我們的供應商，特別是那些參與 Model 3 生產的供應商，因為他們和我們一樣，在提高產量的過程中經歷了許多困難，他們真的熬夜加班，利用周末時間，承擔了很多風險，和我們一起應對了提高產量帶來的挑戰。所以我要感謝他們在 Model 3 困難時期給予我們的支持。

As well, our customers and Model 3 reservation holders, you're going to love your cars, and we are working to get them to you as quickly as we possibly can. As for Model 3 production, we continue to make significant progress every day, and we are targeting a weekly production rate of 2,500 vehicles by the end of March and 5,000 by the end of Q2.

此外，我們的客戶和 Model 3 預訂持有者，你們一定會喜歡你們的車，我們正在努力盡快將它們送到你們手中。至於 Model 3 的生產，我們每天都在取得重大進展，我們的目標是到 3 月底每週生產 2,500 輛汽車，到第二季末每週生產 5,000 輛汽車。

And as what's been -- or you've seen in the letter, the quarter-over-quarter production of Model 3 is rising exponentially. So I hope we'll -- that people think that if we can send a Roadster to the asteroid belt, we can probably solve Model 3 production. It's just a matter of time. So -- and really the error bars on the timing are really quite small in the grand scheme of things.

正如您在信中看到的，Model 3 的季度產量呈指數級增長。所以我希望人們會認為，如果我們可以將 Roadster 送到小行星帶，我們可能就能解決 Model 3 的生產問題。這只是時間問題。所以 — — 從整體來看，時間上的誤差確實非常小。

So it's -- 2018 is likely to be a very big year for us. At some point in 2018, we expect to begin generating positive quarterly operating income on a sustained basis, operating 5,000 a week of Model 3 production. And I am cautiously optimistic that we will be GAAP profitable. It's not certain, but it's -- I'm cautiously optimistic that we will actually be GAAP profitable with no asterisk.

所以 2018 年對我們來說可能是非常重要的一年。我們預計在 2018 年的某個時候，開始持續產生正的季度營業收入，每週生產 5,000 輛 Model 3。我謹慎樂觀地認為我們將實現 GAAP 獲利。雖然不確定，但我謹慎樂觀地認為，我們實際上將實現 GAAP 盈利，而且沒有任何星號。

Thank you, Elon. Andrew, let's go to the first question.

謝謝你，埃隆。安德魯，我們來討論第一個問題。

I'm showing we have a question from the line of Rod Lache with Deutsche Bank.

我的意思是，德意志銀行的 Rod Lache 向我們提出了一個問題。

Congratulations on the launch yesterday. Wanted to just ask a couple of questions. One is just to get a little bit more color from you on Model 3, what the production run rate is at the moment. Maybe if you can just provide us with a little bit more color on where the challenges are at this point? On the last call, you talked about, I think, 2 of the 4 zones at Gigafactory that were still kind of an issue in manual operation. Have those been resolved? And once you get to 2,500, is the ramp to 5,000 -- does that just merely involve increasing line speeds?

祝賀昨天的發布。只想問幾個問題。一是想向您多透露一些有關 Model 3 的信息，目前的生產運行率是多少。或許您可以向我們詳細介紹一下目前面臨的挑戰是什麼？我認為，在上次通話中，您談到了 Gigafactory 的 4 個區域中的 2 個在手動操作方面仍然存在問題。這些問題解決了嗎？一旦達到 2,500，是否會增加到 5,000 - 這是否僅涉及提高線路速度？

Sure. I'll try to give as much color as possible. I am reminded of -- I think it may have been Churchill's line about sausage. If you like sausage and respect the law, you should watch neither being made. And just to me, that is true of a production ramp. So I wouldn't read too much into the day-to-day battles of this or that, but I'll give you the color, but don't like -- don't read too much into it. So yes, there are 4 zones in module production. Module production is fundamentally the limiting factor on Model 3 output, which is ironic since battery modules really should be the thing we're best at. And I think in part, we were probably a little overconfident, a little complacent in thinking about this is something we know and understand and put a lot of attention on other things, not -- and just got too comfortable with our ability to do battery modules because we've been doing that since the start of the company. And of the 4 zones, 2 of them, which is subcontracted to -- the production system is subcontracted to other companies, flat out, didn't work, it turns out. Like I mean, we were promised they would work, and it just didn't work. So we had to do what would normally be maybe an 18-month development cycle for a production system of that scale and complexity and tried to do that in basically 6 months, maybe a little -- 6 to 9 months. And we've tackled that on multiple levels, so we have a design that is nearing completion for a new automated system for zone 1 and 2. That is being led by a Tesla ground team. It's an excellent design. All the other work that they've done has been -- has performed to spec. And we expect a single Tesla ground line to be equivalent to 3, if not 4, of the current lines that we have and be smaller, which is, for me, kind of amazing. And then we have what we call a semiautomatic line, which is a series of small automated stations manned by people. And they've actually been remarkably effective. It has sort of renewed my faith in humanity that the rapid evolution of progress and the ability of people to adapt rapidly has -- is quite remarkable. Our semiautomatic -- our sort of semi-manual, semiautomatic line is exceeding all 3 of the automatic lines right now. So -- and that is something that we're able to scale quite rapidly. I mean, J.B., is there additional color you'd like to add on that?

當然。我會盡力提供盡可能多的顏色。我想起了——我認為這可能是邱吉爾關於香腸的一句話。如果您喜歡香腸並且尊重法律，那麼您應該觀看這兩種食品的製作過程。就我而言，這對於產量提升確實如此。所以我不會過度解讀日常的爭鬥，但我會給你一些色彩，但不要過度解讀。是的，模組生產有 4 個區域。模組生產從根本上來說是 Model 3 產量的限制因素，這很諷刺，因為電池模組應該是我們最擅長的。我認為，在某種程度上，我們可能有點過於自信，有點自滿，認為這是我們所了解和理解的事情，而把很多注意力放在了其他事情上，而不是——而且我們對自己製造電池模組的能力過於滿意，因為自從公司成立之初我們就一直在做這件事。而在這 4 個區域中，有 2 個區域被分包給──生產系統被分包給其他公司，結果根本就沒有發揮作用。我的意思是，我們被承諾它們會起作用，但根本不起作用。因此，我們必須完成通常需要 18 個月的開發週期才能完成的規模和複雜程度的生產系統，並嘗試在 6 個月內完成，也許只需要 6 到 9 個月。我們從多個層面解決了這個問題，所以我們針對 1 區和 2 區的新自動化系統的設計已經接近完成。這項工作由特斯拉地面團隊領導。這是一個出色的設計。他們所做的所有其他工作都已按照規格完成。我們預計一條特斯拉接地線相當於我們目前擁有的 3 條（甚至 4 條）接地線，而且更小，對我來說，這有點令人驚奇。然後我們有了所謂的半自動生產線，它是一系列由人工操作的小型自動化站。而且這些措施確實非常有效。這在某種程度上重新讓我對人類有了信心，人類的進步和快速適應的能力是相當了不起的。我們的半自動——半手動、半自動生產線現在已經超過了所有 3 條自動生產線。所以——這是我們能夠相當迅速地擴展的事情。我的意思是，J.B.，您想添加其他顏色嗎？

Sure, that's a great summary of it. I think much has been made about the manual production of modules. That's really not very accurate. These are, as Elon said, semiauto lines where we have people there moving materials perhaps between the machines that are actually performing the operations. But there is still a degree of automation doing the operation.

當然，這是一個很好的總結。我認為關於模組的手工生產已經做了很多工作。這確實不太準確。正如埃隆所說，這些都是半自動生產線，我們在那裡安排人員在實際執行操作的機器之間移動物料。但該操作仍具有一定程度的自動化。

Right. It's not artisanal.

正確的。這不是手工製作的。

Exactly. And this is what has been ramping quite effectively in the last -- in the first half -- the first part of this year. So we're continuing to expand that, the semiauto lines, and that is effectively bridging the gap as we redesign the full automation and bring that online.

確切地。而這正是今年上半年，也就是上半年，一直以來非常有效的成長點。因此，我們將繼續擴大半自動生產線，並在我們重新設計全自動化系統並使其上線時有效地彌補差距。

Yes. And it's pretty -- it's a small thing. So actually, I think it's probably worth providing some tours for investors that are interested, so you can actually see it first-hand. I think a lot of it is like if you see it first-hand, you will understand exactly what's going on. And so I think let's arrange for some new tours for investors that are interested because I think you can really get a feel for what it is. Otherwise, it's just some words that are kind of hard to put -- hard to imagine.

是的。而且它很漂亮——它是一件小東西。因此實際上，我認為為有興趣的投資者提供一些參觀機會可能是值得的，這樣你就可以親眼看到。我認為很多事情就像如果你親眼看到一樣，你就會明白到底發生了什麼事。因此，我認為我們應該為有興趣的投資者安排一些新的旅遊，因為我認為您可以真正了解它。否則，這只是一些難以表達、難以想像的詞語。

I also just want to add, I think it's fair to say that this maybe degree of complacency that happened at the end of last year has been pretty thoroughly replaced by an intense focus from a huge portion of the Tesla team. And there are a lot of different initiatives and teams, whole teams, targeted at this area. So as Elon opened with, it's not a question of if we will get to the production rate, it's just a question of the matter of time.

我還想補充一點，我認為可以公平地說，去年年底出現的這種程度的自滿情緒已經完全被特斯拉團隊很大一部分人的高度關注所取代。有很多不同的計劃和團隊，整個團隊都針對這個領域。因此，正如伊隆一開始所說的，問題不在於我們是否能達到生產力，而只是時間問題。

Yes, absolutely.

是的，絕對是。

If I could just clarify, what's the run rate now with semiautomation? And when are you expecting the fully automated line to come on?

如果我可以澄清的話，現在半自動化的運作率是多少？您預計全自動生產線何時投入使用？

Well, it's probably a level of granularity that is not productive to dive into in terms of exactly what is coming from which operation. But we do expect the new automated lines to be landing and starting out at the Gigafactory in just the next -- well, the landing in sight within this quarter.

好吧，就究竟什麼來自哪個操作而言，深入研究這個粒度等級可能沒有什麼意義。但我們確實預計新的自動化生產線將在下一季內在 Gigafactory 落地並投入使用——嗯，預計在本季內落地。

Yes, expect the new automated lines to arrive next month, in March. And then it's already -- it's been -- it's working in Germany so that's going to tracked -- going to be disassembled, brought out to the Gigafactory and reassembled and then go into operation at the Gigafactory. It's not of question whether it works or not. It's just a question of disassembly, transport and reassembly. So that's kind of -- yes. So we expect to alleviate that constraint. That -- with alleviating that constraint, that's what gets us to the roughly 2,000 to 2,500 unit per week production rate. The next constraint would be material conveyance at our Fremont vehicle plant. And that's a very sophisticated automated parts conveyance system. We think it's probably the most sophisticated in the world or at least we're not aware of one that is more so. And the software for that is quite complex. So that would be the next constraint on production to get to 5,000, is the conveyance system in Fremont. So that also appears to be on track. So we feel like the error bars around the unit volume predictions are getting smaller with each passing week.

是的，預計新的自動化生產線將於下個月（三月）到達。然後它已經——它已經——它在德國運行，所以它將被跟踪——將被拆卸，運送到超級工廠並重新組裝，然後在超級工廠運作。它是否有效是毫無疑問的。這只是一個拆卸、運輸和重新組裝的問題。所以這有點——是的。因此我們希望減輕這種限制。透過緩解這項限制，我們可以達到每週約 2,000 到 2,500 個單位的生產力。下一個限制因素是弗里蒙特汽車廠的材料運輸。這是一個非常複雜的自動化零件輸送系統。我們認為它可能是世界上最複雜的，或者至少我們不知道有比它更複雜的。而且用於該目的的軟體相當複雜。因此，產量達到 5,000 的下一個限制因素是弗里蒙特的運輸系統。看來一切進展順利。因此，我們感覺到單位產量預測的誤差每週都在變小。

And our next question comes from the line of 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。

I also want to add my congrats for the launch yesterday. The twin Falcon landing was probably the sickest thing I've ever seen in my life. First question is for Deepak. Deepak, a question for you. Given the negative trade cycle, your negative working cap, some of the modeling analysts are doing kind of simulating when you get to 2,500 or 5,000 or maybe somewhere in between that, that some of the arrangements you made with your suppliers who have been very helpful, that you might temporarily run enough negative working cap to even have operating cash flow exceed CapEx. Is that something that's possible? Or again, I know there's execution behind that clearly, but is that something out of the question or barely even?

我還想對昨天的發布表示祝賀。雙隼號著陸可能是我一生中見過的最令人驚奇的事。第一個問題是問 Deepak 的。迪帕克，問你一個問題。考慮到負面貿易週期、負工作上限，一些建模分析師正在進行模擬，當您達到 2,500 或 5,000 或介於兩者之間的某個值時，您與供應商達成的一些安排非常有幫助，您可能會暫時運行足夠的負工作上限，甚至使經營現金流超過資本支出。這可能嗎？或者說，我知道這背後顯然有執行力，但這是不可能的，或幾乎是不可能的嗎？

I think we got to look at it from a full quarter perspective. The negative working cycle is amplified by the rate at which we ramp our production. Given our present plans of getting to 5,000 by end of Q2, it's a fairly gradual -- it's exponential from where we started, but it's not going to create a situation where our cash flow from operations will exceed CapEx.

我認為我們必須從整個季度的角度來看待這個問題。隨著我們提高產量的速度，負面工作週期被放大了。鑑於我們目前的計劃是到第二季度末達到 5,000 個，這是一個相當漸進的過程 - 從我們開始時它是指數級的，但它不會造成我們的運營現金流超過資本支出的情況。

And just as a follow-up, Elon, your kind of compensation -- long-term compensation plan obviously got a lot of attention and raised some questions, however long term from now, on succession. Just want to ask, do you see your successor as CEO of Tesla someone currently within the company right now or from outside the company? Kind of how do you see that?

埃隆，作為後續問題，你的薪酬——長期薪酬計劃顯然引起了很多關注，並引發了一些問題，無論從現在起是長期的繼任問題。只是想問一下，您認為繼任特斯拉執行長的人選是公司內部人員還是公司外部人員？您怎麼看這一點？

I mean, there's no actual search going on or there's not even -- or passive -- active or passive search going on for a new CEO because I expect to remain CEO for the foreseeable future. But at some point, if there's somebody really spectacular inside or outside the company who could take on that role and who'd want to have that title and that role, that would be fine with me. And I would focus on product development, which is designing and engineering, which is what I like doing best. So -- but there are no plans to make change at the time.

我的意思是，目前還沒有進行實際的搜尋，甚至沒有主動或被動地尋找新任首席執行官，因為我希望在可預見的未來繼續擔任首席執行官。但到了某個時候，如果公司內部或外部有某個真正傑出的人可以擔任這個職位，並且願意擁有這個頭銜和這個職位，那我很樂意。我會專注於產品開發，也就是設計和工程，這是我最喜歡做的事情。所以——但目前沒有做出改變的計畫。

Our next question comes from the line of Tyler Frank with Baird.

我們的下一個問題來自貝爾德的泰勒·弗蘭克 (Tyler Frank)。

I guess, Elon, bigger picture and looking out a few years, you had mentioned a couple of quarters ago that the 1 million car target for 2020 was still there and that you would need to introduce the Model Y by then. How do we connect from where we are today to getting to 1 million units a year? And what should we look for this year in terms of ramping production or building a facility for the Model Y?

我想，埃隆，從更大的角度來看，展望幾年，幾個季度前你曾提到，2020 年 100 萬輛汽車的目標仍然存在，而你需要在那時推出 Model Y。我們如何從現在的水準達到每年 100 萬台的產量？那麼，今年我們在提高 Model Y 產量或建造工廠方面該注意什麼呢？

We are going to make some capital investments towards the end of this year related to Model Y. I don't exactly count on those, but I think we've got a good plan. I'm pretty excited about the -- how we're designing Model Y. It's really taking a lot of lessons learned from Model 3 and saying how do we design this thing to be easier to manufacture instead of how to manufacture, more difficult really. So I think it's going to be -- I really think it's going to be pretty great and pretty scalable for Model Y. But we are going to, as you suspect, need to make some capital investments in the second half of this year, really late, late Q3, Q4 for Model Y. And -- but I think we want to wait until -- wait probably 3 to 6 months before announcing any further plans on production location and the details associated with that.

我們將在今年年底對 Model Y 進行一些資本投資。我並不完全指望這些，但我認為我們有一個很好的計劃。我對我們設計 Model Y 的方式感到非常興奮。我們確實從 Model 3 中學到了很多教訓，並告訴我們如何設計這個東西使其更容易製造，而不是如何製造，這實際上更困難。所以我認為這將會是——我真的認為這對於 Model Y 來說將會非常棒並且具有相當好的可擴展性。但是，正如你所猜測的，我們需要在今年下半年進行一些資本投資，很晚的時候，在第三季末、第四季為 Model Y 進行投資。而且——但我認為我們想等到——大概等 3 到 6 個月再宣布有關生產地點的任何進一步計劃以及與此相關的細節。

Is that 1 million unit target still in play?

100 萬台的目標還能達成嗎？

Yes.

是的。

Perfect. And then just one quick follow-up. How should we think about the Tesla Semi and investments needed there? And what are you guys thinking you can hit from an annual run rate in the next, let's say, 2 to 4 years?

完美的。然後只需快速跟進一次。我們該如何看待特斯拉 Semi 及其所需的投資？你們認為未來 2 到 4 年內年運行率能達到多少？

Well, a great difference between 2 and 4 years. Tesla -- I've said I think a few years ago, I think Tesla is going to kind of grow at an average of roughly 50% a year, which is a crazy average growth rate for a company manufacturing complex products at scale. So 2 versus 4 is a huge difference. But if you say like -- and it's much easier to predict, especially, this production, because they look like an S curve, where you have an initial exponential, which -- the exponential appears -- it seems people naturally tends to extrapolate on a straight-line basis. An exponential always appears -- the predictions are conservative in the beginning, and then the exponential takes off, and then it becomes linear, and then it becomes logarithmic. So it's easier to predict -- far easier to predict the endpoint or the steady state of the S-curve than anywhere on that exponential -- or log curve. So if you say 4 years, I think 100,000 units a year is a reasonable expectation. Maybe more but that's the right -- roughly the right number, I think.

嗯，2年和4年之間差異很大。特斯拉——我幾年前就說過，我認為特斯拉每年的平均成長率將達到約 50%，對於一家大規模生產複雜產品的公司來說，這是一個瘋狂的平均成長率。因此 2 和 4 之間的差異非常大。但如果你說像——而且它更容易預測，特別是這個產量，因為它們看起來像一條 S 曲線，其中有一個初始指數，指數出現——似乎人們自然傾向於以直線為基礎進行推斷。總是會出現一個指數－一開始的預測是保守的，然後指數開始上升，然後變成線性的，然後變成對數的。因此，預測 S 曲線的終點或穩定狀態比預測指數或對數曲線上的任何地方都容易得多。所以如果你說 4 年，我認為每年 10 萬台是一個合理的預期。可能更多，但我認為這是正確的——大致正確的數字。

For the Tesla Semi?

對於特斯拉半掛卡車來說？

Yes. I think we might be able to exceed the specs that we unveiled last year too, which is pretty exciting. I know there's, like, speculation that we might not meet them, but I think we're going to exceed them. So -- and I made this comment before. It's like -- feels like I gloss over these comments, but I really take these to heart. The competitive strength of Tesla long term is not going to be the car. It's going to be the factory. We're going to productize the factory. And really this is the lesson that is kind of obvious in history because the Model T wasn't a product. It was River Rouge. The Model T is a very simple car. Anybody could have made that car, but not anyone could make River Rouge. And that's really what would be Tesla's long-term competitive advantage. We'll have a great lineup of great products, great design, great engineering the product itself in the vehicles and autonomy and all that sort of stuff. But the factory is going to be the product that has the long-term sustained competitive advantage, in my opinion.

是的。我認為我們也許能夠超越去年公佈的規格，這非常令人興奮。我知道有人猜測我們可能無法達到這些目標，但我認為我們會超越這些目標。所以——我之前就發表過這個評論。就像——感覺我掩飾了這些評論，但我真的把它們放在心上。特斯拉的長期競爭優勢不會是汽車。它將成為一個工廠。我們要將工廠產品化。事實上，這是歷史上顯而易見的教訓，因為 T 型車並不是產品。那是紅色河流。T 型車是一款非常簡單的車款。任何人都可以製造那輛車，但不是任何人都可以製造 River Rouge。這才是特斯拉真正的長期競爭優勢。我們將擁有一系列優秀的產品、優秀的設計、優秀的工程，包括車輛產品本身、自主性等等。但我認為，工廠將成為具有長期持續競爭優勢的產品。

And our next question comes from the line of David Tamberrino with Goldman Sachs.

我們的下一個問題來自高盛的大衛‧坦伯里諾 (David Tamberrino)。

Elon, on your autonomous vehicle strategy, why do you believe that your current hardware set of only camera plus radar is going to be able to get you to fully validated autonomous vehicle system? Most every competitor noted that they need the redundancy from LIDAR hardware given the robustness of the 3D point cloud and the data it's generated. What are they missing in their software stack and their algorithms that Tesla's able to obtain from just a camera plus radar? Further, what would be your response if the regulatory bodies require that level of redundancy and that's really needed from an incremental LIDAR hardware?

伊隆，關於您的自動駕駛汽車策略，為什麼您認為目前僅有攝影機和雷達的硬體組合能夠讓您獲得完全驗證的自動駕駛汽車系統？幾乎每個競爭對手都指出，考慮到 3D 點雲及其產生的數據的穩健性，他們需要來自 LIDAR 硬體的冗餘。他們的軟體堆疊和演算法中缺少什麼，而特斯拉僅透過攝影機和雷達就能獲得這些？此外，如果監管機構要求這種程度的冗餘，而且增量式光達硬體確實需要這種程度的冗餘，您會作何反應？

Yes. Well, first of all, I should say there's actually a 3-sensor systems test. There are cameras, redundant forward cameras. There are -- there's the forward radar, and there's -- there are the ultrasonics for near field. So a third is also -- a third set is also important for near field stuff just as it is for humans. But I think it's pretty obvious that the road system is geared towards passive optical. We have to solve passive optical image recognition extremely well in order to be able to drive in any given environment and a changing environment. We must solve passive optical image recognition. We must solve it extremely well. At the point at which we have solved it extremely well, what is the point in having active optical, meaning LIDAR, which does not -- which cannot read signs? It's just giving you -- in my view, it is a crutch that will drive companies to a local maximum, that we'll find very difficult to get out of. If you take the hard path of a sophisticated neural net that's capable of advanced image recognition, then I think you'll achieve the goal maximum. And we combine that with increasingly sophisticated radar, and if you're going to pick active photon generator, doing so in 400 to 700-nanometer wavelength is pretty silly since you're getting that passively. You would want your active photon generation in the radar frequencies of approximately around 4 millimeters because that is occlusion penetrating. And you can essentially see through snow or rain, dust, fog, anything. So it's just -- I find it quite puzzling that companies would choose to do an active photon system in the wrong wavelength. They're going to get a whole bunch of expensive equipment, most of which makes the car sort of expensive, ugly and unnecessary, and I think they will find themselves at a competitive disadvantage. Now perhaps I am wrong, in which case I'll look like a fool. But I am quite certain that I'm not.

是的。嗯，首先，我應該說實際上有一個 3 感測器系統測試。有攝像頭，冗餘前置攝像頭。有前向雷達，還有近場超音波雷達。因此第三組對於近場物體也很重要，就像對人類一樣。但我認為很明顯的是，道路系統是面向無源光學的。我們必須非常好地解決被動光學影像辨識問題，以便能夠在任何給定環境和變化的環境中駕駛。我們必須解決被動光學影像辨識。我們必須非常好地解決這個問題。當我們已經非常好地解決了這個問題時，使用主動光學系統（即無法讀取標誌的雷射雷達）還有什麼意義呢？它只是給你——在我看來，它是一個拐杖，將推動公司達到局部最大值，我們會發現很難擺脫它。如果您選擇一條能夠進行高級影像識別的複雜神經網路的艱難道路，那麼我認為您將最大程度地實現目標。我們將其與日益複雜的雷達結合，如果你要選擇主動光子產生器，那麼在 400 到 700 奈米波長下這樣做是相當愚蠢的，因為你是以被動方式獲得它的。您可能希望主動光子產生的雷達頻率約為 4 毫米，因為這具有遮蔽穿透能力。而且基本上你可以透過雪、雨、灰塵、霧氣等看到任何東西。所以，我發現公司選擇在錯誤的波長下進行主動光子系統是相當令人費解的。他們將獲得一大堆昂貴的設備，其中大部分會使汽車變得昂貴、醜陋和不必要，我認為他們會發現自己處於競爭劣勢。現在我可能錯了，在這種情況下我看起來就像一個傻瓜。但我確信我不是。

Okay. And as a follow-up, if I may, can we talk about the trajectory for the Model S and X margins? 3Q '17, I think the company was saying you're in the low 20% range. I think you took another step down per the report today, so I'm assuming it's probably at 20%. What's the path to recovery from here? And can you frame us through how you're going to get to that margin expansion?

好的。作為後續問題，如果可以的話，我們可以談談 Model S 和 X 利潤率的軌跡嗎？2017 年第三季度，我認為公司表示您的利潤率處於 20% 的低點。我認為根據今天的報告，你又下降了一步，所以我假設它可能是 20%。從現在開始復甦的路徑是什麼？您能否向我們介紹如何實現利潤率的提升？

We feel very good about the recovery of S and X gross margin to -- in 2018 to a level which we have seen in the past. And it's a combination of a variety of things. It's increasing the mix of the larger batteries, the higher option content. And then also we have a very good and a robust manufacturing cost reduction road map. We will achieve a lot of manufacturing efficiencies which continue to occur on S and X, so we feel really good about it.

我們對 S 和 X 毛利率在 2018 年恢復到過去的水平感到非常高興。它是多種事物的組合。它正在增加更大電池的混合度和更高的選項內容。而且我們還有一個非常好的、強大的製造成本降低路線圖。我們將實現大量製造效率的提高，這將繼續在 S 和 X 上實現，因此我們對此感到非常高興。

Yes. I mean, we -- our internal plan, whether we meet this or not, I don't know. But I think we will. Our internal plan calls for turnaround of 30% to 32% cash gross margin on S and X by the end of the year and probably 25%, maybe 26% GAAP gross margin on S and X towards the end of this year. And then Model 3, maybe not by the end of this year but not far behind it.

是的。我的意思是，我們的內部計劃是否能實現這個目標，我不知道。但我認為我們會的。我們的內部計劃是，到今年年底，S 和 X 的現金毛利率將回升至 30% 至 32%，到今年年底，S 和 X 的 GAAP 毛利率可能將達到 25%，甚至 26%。然後是 Model 3，也許不會在今年底推出，但也不會太遠。

Right. And just as Elon said, internal road map and internal plans, things sometimes get delayed, they don't work out exactly. But I think you get a sense that we feel really good about the improvement that's ahead.

正確的。正如埃隆所說，內部路線圖和內部計劃有時會被推遲，無法順利進行。但我想你會感覺到我們對未來的改善感到非常高興。

Yes, we have a clear path to that goal.

是的，我們有一條清晰的路徑來實現這一目標。

Our next question comes from the line of Romit Shah with Nomura.

我們的下一個問題來自野村證券的 Romit Shah。

It sounds like from the letter that you could do more than 100k S and X in '18 but you're constrained by the 18650s. And I'm just curious, what would it take to see the 2170 cells in these vehicles?

從信中聽來，你可以在 18 年生產超過 100k S 和 X，但受到 18650 的限制。我只是好奇，要看到這些車輛中的 2170 電池需要什麼？

Well, this is J.B. It's something we've, of course, contemplated, but it's quite a large change to the architecture of the module and the battery pack overall. And while the 18650 supply is somewhat of a cap at about 100k units per year, even just a few months ago, we didn't feel that expanding and making some long-term bets on expanding that supply with Panasonic in Japan was really the right risk. It's something we could consider, but right now, we're pretty happy with that balance, and it matches our other production capabilities and our other investments.

嗯，這是 J.B。當然，這是我們考慮過的事情，但這對模組和整個電池組的架構來說是一個相當大的改變。儘管 18650 的供應量在某種程度上限制在每年 10 萬台左右，但就在幾個月前，我們並不認為與日本松下一起擴大供應量並進行長期押注是真正正確的風險。這是我們可以考慮的事情，但目前，我們對這種平衡非常滿意，它與我們的其他生產能力和其他投資相符。

Yes, it's also like -- for any given complex manufactured item, in order to go past the target capacity, you really need to move the whole supply chain in cadence. So you really have to then shift everything to say, okay, if you want to make 20% more S and X, everyone has to make 20% more, there have to be investments in new lines or it's going to require overtime, which negatively affects gross margins. We [didn't] design the manufacturing machine for it [to break], and then you'd have to redesign the machine or go redline. And so I think we feel pretty good about the 100k a year for S and X, and we want to focus on just improving the efficiency of production and the gross margin of the group.

是的，這也就像——對於任何給定的複雜製造產品，為了超越目標產能，您確實需要有節奏地移動整個供應鏈。所以你真的必須改變一切，比如說，如果你想讓 S 和 X 多產 20%，那麼每個人都必須多產 20%，就必須投資新生產線，否則就需要加班，這會對毛利率產生負面影響。我們設計的製造機器不會讓它故障，然後你就必須重新設計機器或走紅線。因此，我認為我們對 S 和 X 每年 10 萬美元的收入感到非常滿意，我們希望專注於提高生產效率和集團的毛利率。

Okay. Yes, makes sense...

好的。是的，有道理…

[Keeping, of course,] the Model 3. I mean, that's really where the majority of the effort is.

[當然是保留] Model 3。我的意思是，這確實是我們付出大部分努力的地方。

Okay. The other thing you guys mentioned was upcoming autonomous coast-to-coast drive, which we're really looking forward to. Could you give a little bit more color on time frame, when something like that would be available for customers?

好的。你們提到的另一件事是即將推出的自動駕駛橫跨美國東西海岸的駕駛，我們對此非常期待。您能否提供更多有關時間框架的詳細信息，以了解何時可以為客戶提供類似產品？

Yes. So we actually -- I've been meaning to address this but -- because obviously, I missed the mark on that front. Our focus is very much on Model 3 production, so everything else kind of took a second place to that. But the -- we could have done the coast-to-coast drive, but it would have required too much specialized code to effectively game it or make it somewhat brittle in that it would work for one particular route but not be a general solution. So [although] you would be able to repeat it, but just not any other route, which is not really a true solution. I am pretty excited about how much progress we're making on the neural net front. And it's a little -- it's also one of the things that's kind of exponential, where the progress doesn't seem like -- it doesn't seem like much progress, it doesn't seem like much progress, then suddenly, wow. That's been my observation generally with AI stuff. And you look at, say, something like what people at DeepMind did with AlphaGo. It went from not being able to beat even a pretty good Go player to something that could beat the European champion, then it could beat the world champion, then it could thrash the world champion, then it could thrash everyone simultaneously. Then they made AlphaZero, which could thrash AlphaGo, where it's just winning against itself, was better than all the world's human experts. It's kind of going to be like that for self-driving. It will seem like, well, this is a lame driver, lame driver, like, okay, that's a pretty good driver, like, holy cow, that driver is good. It will be like that. I mean, timing-wise, I think we can probably do a coast-to-coast drive in 3 months, 6 months at the upside.

是的。所以我們實際上——我一直想解決這個問題，但是——因為很明顯，我在這方面沒有達到目標。我們的重點是 Model 3 的生產，因此其他一切都排在了第二位。但是——我們本來可以完成橫跨東西海岸的駕駛，但是這需要太多專門的代碼才能有效地進行遊戲，或者使它變得有些脆弱，因為它只適用於一條特定的路線，但不是一個通用的解決方案。因此，雖然您可以重複它，但不能通過任何其他途徑，這並不是真正的解決方案。我對我們在神經網路方面的進展感到非常興奮。這有點像——這也是一種指數級的進步，進步看起來並不像——進步並不大，進步並不大，然後突然間，哇。這是我對人工智慧的一般觀察。你可以看看 DeepMind 的研究人員對 AlphaGo 所做的事情。它從無法打敗甚至一個相當優秀的圍棋選手，到可以打敗歐洲冠軍，然後可以打敗世界冠軍，然後可以擊敗世界冠軍，然後可以同時擊敗所有人。然後他們製造了 AlphaZero，它可以擊敗 AlphaGo，而 AlphaGo 只是戰勝了自己，比世界上所有人類專家都更優秀。自動駕駛汽車也類似這樣的情況。看起來，嗯，這是一個蹩腳的司機，蹩腳的司機，就像，好吧，這是一個相當不錯的司機，就像，天哪，那個司機真好。會是那樣的。我的意思是，從時間上來說，我認為我們大概可以在 3 個月內，最多 6 個月內完成一次橫跨美國東西海岸的旅行。

And then is it available for customers immediately? Or is there a lag?

那麼它可以立即供客戶使用嗎？或存在滯後？

Yes, that would be something that's available for customers. [We currently have done it, do tests on it].

是的，這將是可供客戶使用的東西。[我們目前已經完成了，並對其進行了測試]。

Our next question comes from the line of 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 (Ryan Brinkman)。

As you put solutions in place one by one to unclog Model 3 production bottlenecks in Fremont or at the battery module line in Reno, are you finding that the ultimate solution is more or less expensive to implement than your original plans, which called for a 25% gross margin on the vehicle? Do you feel any differently now about the cost to manufacture the Model 3 or its gross margin potential versus prior to the start of production last July?

當您逐一實施解決方案以解決弗里蒙特或裡諾電池模組生產線的 Model 3 生產瓶頸時，您是否發現最終解決方案的實施成本比您最初的計劃（要求車輛毛利率為 25%）更高還是更低？與去年 7 月開始生產之前相比，您現在對製造 Model 3 的成本或毛利率潛力的看法有什麼不同嗎？

I think we feel good about that. I think we're probably able to exceed that next year, probably. Like, our understanding of manufacturing has improved dramatically. We can think of a huge number of ways to make it far better, far more efficient. I'm really excited about how much we're learning about manufacturing. That's why I said I think the long-term strength of Tesla will be the manufacturing plant, essentially productizing the Gigafactory, which is like the world's biggest product basically, like, make a nuclear aircraft carrier look pretty small by comparison.

我想我們對此感覺很好。我認為我們明年可能就能超越這個目標，也許吧。例如，我們對製造業的理解已經有了顯著的提升。我們可以想出無數種方法來使其變得更好、更有效率。我對於我們學習到的有關製造業的知識感到非常興奮。這就是為什麼我說我認為特斯拉的長期優勢在於製造工廠，本質上是將超級工廠產品化，這基本上是世界上最大的產品，相比之下，一艘核動力航空母艦就顯得很小了。

Yes. Maybe just to add to that, I mean, the products bill of materials cost and the embedded labor cost is -- I think, that's where there's opportunities. And we are simplifying and we're finding ways to improve the design incrementally as we go through the ramp. If there is some small increases in CapEx, that doesn't directly -- it will be overwhelmed by the improvements in simplicity and some cost savings in the product itself.

是的。也許只是補充一點，我的意思是，產品物料清單成本和嵌入式勞動力成本是 - 我認為，這就是機會所在。我們正在簡化設計，並在流程中尋找逐步改進設計的方法。如果資本支出有一些小幅增加，那並不會直接增加——它將被產品本身的簡單性改進和一些成本節約所淹沒。

Yes, I think the bottom line is we feel really optimistic about the long-term potential for gross margin on Model 3 and especially on Model Y.

是的，我認為最重要的是我們對 Model 3 和 Model Y 的長期毛利率潛力感到非常樂觀。

Yes. We haven't seen anything that particularly changes our view.

是的。我們還沒有看到任何特別改變我們觀點的事情。

That's very helpful. And then just for -- yes, and then for my follow-up. I see the guidance in the letter about the quarterly operating income turning positive at some point in 2018. That's great. I'm just curious what your thoughts are with regard to when you also might generate free cash flow. Is that less of a medium-term focus as you prefer to invest operating cash flows from the Model 3 into the Semi truck, Roadster and Model Y?

這非常有幫助。然後只是為了 — — 是的，然後是為了我的後續行動。我看到信中關於季度營業收入將在 2018 年某個時候轉為正值的指導。那太棒了。我只是好奇您對何時可能產生自由現金流有何想法。由於您更願意將 Model 3 的營運現金流投資到 Semi 卡車、Roadster 和 Model Y，這是否不是您的中期重點？

Yes. We could be positive cash flow, I think pretty significant positive cash flow probably in like third quarter, which is like 4, 5 months from now. But we think it makes sense to invest in Model Y and -- yes.

是的。我們可能會有正現金流，我認為相當可觀的正現金流可能出現在第三季度，也就是從現在起的 4、5 個月後。但我們認為投資 Model Y 是有意義的——是的。

Future growth of our energy products, Model 3, future growth of that so...

我們的能源產品、Model 3 的未來成長，等等的未來成長…

Yes, the opportunities we see are -- we see really good opportunities there.

是的，我們看到的機會是——我們在那裡看到了非常好的機會。

Yes. It makes good business case and business sense to invest.

是的。這是一項具有良好商業案例和投資意義的商業活動。

Yes. Silver bullets for me, in fact, can't emphasize enough. And what I find sort of interesting is that our competitors -- well, the car industry thinks they're really good at manufacturing. And they're actually -- they are quite good at manufacturing, but they just don't realize just how much potential there is for improvement. It's way more than they think. I went through this math, I think, on a prior earnings call, but like it sounds like some of the -- the fastest car factories produce a car maybe every 25 seconds. It sounds fast. But if you think about a 5-meter long car including gap, a 4.5-meter car with 0.5 meter gap or something, that's only 0.2 meters per second. Like grandma with a walker can beat the speed of the fastest production line on earth. So really not that fast. Walking speed is 1 meter per second, so 5x faster than the fastest production line on earth. Why? It should at least be jogging speed. I mean, in the limit, companies should start caring about the aero drag in the factory, which -- that's maybe around 20 or 30 miles an hour or "30 kilometers an hour, 40 kilometers an hour." It's like stuff should be moving at that speed.

是的。事實上，對我來說，銀彈的重要性怎麼強調也不為過。我發現有趣的是，我們的競爭對手——汽車業認為他們非常擅長製造。事實上，他們在製造業方面相當擅長，但他們只是沒有意識到還有多少改進的潛力。這比他們想像的要多得多。我想我在之前的收益電話會議上已經計算過這個問題，但聽起來好像一些最快的汽車工廠可能每 25 秒生產一輛車。聽起來很快。但如果你考慮一輛 5 米長的汽車（包括間隙），一輛 4.5 米長的汽車（包括間隙）有 0.5 米，那速度只有每秒 0.2 米。就像一個用助行器的老奶奶可以打敗地球上最快的生產線的速度。所以其實沒那麼快。行走速度為每秒 1 米，比地球上最快的生產線快 5 倍。為什麼？至少應該是慢跑的速度。我的意思是，在極限情況下，公司應該開始關注工廠內的空氣阻力，大概是每小時 20 或 30 英里，或「每小時 30 公里，每小時 40 公里」。就好像物體應該要以這樣的速度移動一樣。

And our next question comes from the line of 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。

You commented in the shareholder letter that capital expenditures for 2018 were expected to be a bit higher than 2017. I'm wondering if you could tell us what exactly is in that, call it, roughly $3.5 billion. Are you going to get to full like 10,000 car per week capacity? Is that in the $3.5 billion? What will Gigafactory production be? And in the slightly more than $3.4 billion, is that also including the investments, Elon, that you mentioned on Model Y? So where exactly is this level of capital spending going to take us in 2018? And I have a follow-up, please.

您在致股東的信中表示，預計 2018 年的資本支出將略高於 2017 年。我想知道您是否可以告訴我們其中的具體金額，大約是 35 億美元。你們每週的運輸能力可以達到 10,000 輛汽車嗎？這筆錢是在 35 億美元之內嗎？Gigafactory 的產量將會是多少？伊隆，這略高於 34 億美元的投資是否也包括您提到的對 Model Y 的投資？那麼，2018 年這種水準的資本支出究竟會為我們帶來什麼影響呢？我還有一個後續問題，請回答。

Sure, I mean, our biggest -- at a very high-level sort of breakdown, our biggest investment is obviously in the Model 3. And that includes completion of the payments that we still have to make on the capacity we are putting in place now as well as significant investment in -- or required upfront for the next phase of Model 3 production to 10,000-plus per week. So that's, I would say, overall more than 50%, really more than 50% is Model 3. And the rest is all the many other things we talked about, whether it's energy storage, whether it's...

當然，我的意思是，我們最大的意思——從非常高層次的細分來看，我們最大的投資顯然是在 Model 3 上。這包括完成我們目前投入的產能的付款，以及對 Model 3 下一階段每週產量超過 10,000 輛所需的大量投資——或者說前期投資。所以我想說，總體來說，超過 50%，實際上超過 50% 是 Model 3。其餘的都是我們討論過的許多其他東西，無論是能量存儲，還是...

Primarily Y and energy storage.

主要是Y和能量儲存。

Right. And then our infrastructure spend, superchargers, stores, service centers. We want to significantly increase the service capacity, want to significantly increase our supercharging capacity. So all of those pieces then add up to the total spend.

正確的。然後是我們的基礎設施支出、增壓器、商店、服務中心。我們希望大幅提高服務能力，希望大幅提高我們的增壓能力。所以所有這些部分加起來就是總支出。

Yes. The -- just to give you some sort of flavor for our optimism on Model Y, I think. Model Y, I think, we might aim for something like maybe capacity of 1 million units a year, something like that, just for Model Y alone. And I think we'll be able to do that for CapEx that is less than the Model 3 CapEx at the $0.5 million. So probably -- I think we can probably improve CapEx by a factor of 2. It's not a promise, but that's my gut feel on Model Y CapEx, just to give you a flavor for my level of optimism on improvements on the manufacturing front.

是的。我認為，這只是為了讓您感受到我們對 Model Y 的樂觀態度。Model Y，我認為，我們可能將目標定為每年 100 萬輛的產能，僅針對 Model Y 而言。我認為我們能夠以低於 Model 3 50 萬美元的資本支出來實現這一目標。所以可能——我認為我們可以將資本支出提高 2 倍。這不是承諾，但這是對 Model Y 資本支出的直覺，只是為了讓您了解我對製造方面改進的樂觀程度。

That's helpful. And just so is the $3.5 billion and the greater than 50% to Model 3, is that going to complete all the required equipment to get us to 10,000 a week at the end of the year? Or are we still going to have incremental capital expenditures? And then separately, on my second question around Model 3 gross margins, I think you had said that you expected them to be breakeven this quarter. Obviously, volume was lower, and so you didn't get there. But for next quarter, you're suggesting that they're going to be negative again despite the fact that I think Q1 volumes are much higher than what you would have anticipated originally for Q4 when you thought that margins would be breakeven. So can you help reconcile the apparent enthusiasm you have about the gross margin trajectory with the fact that your guidance around gross margins in the near term actually appears more cautious than it was guided at the time?

這很有幫助。那麼，35 億美元和超過 50% 的資金將用於 Model 3，這是否足以完成所有必要的設備，使我們在年底達到每週 10,000 輛的產量？或者我們仍將增加資本支出？然後，關於我的第二個問題，關於 Model 3 的毛利率，我想您曾說過，您預計本季它將實現收支平衡。顯然，音量較低，所以你沒有到達那裡。但對於下個季度，您暗示利潤率將再次為負值，儘管我認為第一季的銷量遠高於您最初預期的第四季度的銷量（當時您認為利潤率將實現盈虧平衡）。那麼，您能否解釋一下，您對毛利率走勢表現出的明顯熱情與您對短期毛利率的指導實際上比當時的指導更為謹慎這一事實？

Can you hear us?

你聽得到我們說話嗎？

Yes, I can hear you.

是的，我聽得到你的聲音。

Yes, no worries. Yes, to sort of finish off your first part of the question, no, we will still have further investments in the 10,000 per week capacity of the Model 3 happening next year as all of that will be concluded next year. There's always a lag in our cash outflow while we continue to test the equipment and verify it. So that'll continue in '18 -- in '19. And then in terms of the Model 3 gross margins, our expectations earlier were of a much steeper ramp than what we are projecting here. We were targeting, as you well know at one point, hitting 5,000 by the end of '17. And now that's 6 months later. So -- but that's slower ramp. We just know we'll have inefficiencies. We have the full capacity, so the depreciation of all that equipment and the operating costs are hitting while we're not producing as many cars. It's actually pretty simple. And it's only temporary. It doesn't imply anything fundamental.

是的，不用擔心。是的，為了回答你問題的第一部分，我們明年仍會對 Model 3 每週 10,000 輛的產能進行進一步投資，因為所有這些都將在明年完成。當我們繼續測試和驗證設備時，我們的現金流出總是存在滯後。所以這種情況將在 2018 年和 2019 年繼續下去。就 Model 3 的毛利率而言，我們先前的預期比我們在此預測的要高得多。如您所知，我們的目標是到 2017 年底達到 5,000。現在已經過去六個月了。所以 — — 但那是較慢的坡度。我們只是知道我們會效率低。我們的產能已經達到最大，因此，當我們生產的汽車數量減少時，所有設備的折舊和營運成本都會受到影響。事實上這非常簡單。而且這只是暫時的。它並不暗示任何根本的東西。

Yes, exactly. The problem is like when you've got a machine where most of that machine, I mean that overall production and supply chain machine, is at a 5,000-unit capacity but then 10% or 15% of it isn't, then you got this massive load on a small -- on a way smaller production volume. Then as that production volume -- as you fix that remaining 10% or 15% of the production machine, you're able to get to that target production, and then things improve dramatically. It's sort of like having a car that's operating at a fraction of its -- let's use a gas-themed analogy. We've got a 4-cylinder car operating on 1 cylinder. It's like, okay, it's not so great, one full -- or suppose it is -- machines were -- it's just like a big machine essentially, yes.

是的，確實如此。問題是，當你有一台機器，其中大部分機器（我的意思是整個生產和供應鏈機器）的產能是 5,000 台，但其中 10% 或 15% 的產能不足，那麼你就會在小規模——小得多的生產量上承受如此大的負荷。然後，隨著生產量的提高——當您修復剩餘的 10% 或 15% 的生產機器時，您就能夠達到目標產量，然後情況就會顯著改善。這有點像一輛只以原有動力運行的汽車——讓我們用汽油來打個比方。我們有一輛 4 缸汽車，採用 1 缸引擎運轉。就像，好吧，它不是那麼好，一台完整的——或者假設它是——機器——它本質上就像一台大機器，是的。

Our next question comes from the line of Philippe Houchois with Jefferies.

我們的下一個問題來自 Jefferies 的 Philippe Houchois。

I have a slightly -- nonrelated to earnings about the electric truck, the Semi. In the past, Mr. Musk, you have spoken about supercapacitors as a way of generating energy and/or storing energy. And particularly in the application of heavy trucks, I would expect that the surge of energy in slowing down or braking in the truck would be too much for a battery to absorb. Are you considering supercapacitors as an application for the Semi? Or what is your kind of general thought on that technology, and the implications to make that industrially viable?

我有一些與電動卡車 Semi 的收益無關的事情。馬斯克先生，您過去曾談到超級電容器是一種產生能量和/或儲存能量的方式。特別是在重型卡車的應用中，我預計卡車減速或煞車時產生的能量激增對於電池來說太大，無法吸收。您是否考慮將超級電容器作為 Semi 的應用？或者您對該技術有何整體看法，以及該技術對於工業可行性有何影響？

Yes. I mean, ages ago, I was going through basically applied physics and computer science degree, a Ph. D. in capacitors. So I'm a big fan of capacitors. I just don't think -- I think that the lithium ion chemistry is so good at this point that capacitors will not be needed. There's a certain power-to-energy ratio, and once you have a huge amount of energy, which is needed for range, then you automatically have the power you need for absorbing -- for being able to do rapid acceleration and braking.

是的。我的意思是，很久以前，我基本上在攻讀應用物理學和電腦科學學位，也就是博士學位。D.在電容器中。所以我非常喜歡電容器。我只是不認為——我認為目前鋰離子化學性能非常好，因此不需要電容器。存在一定的功率能量比，一旦你擁有行駛所需的大量能量，那麼你就會自然而然地擁有吸收能量所需的能量——能夠快速加速和煞車。

Yes. It's maybe not intuitive, this is J.B., but the power-to-energy demand on the battery in the heavy truck is actually generally less than in our sort of performance vehicles. It's definitely less also, in most cases, than even the high rate of discharge energy products. So as Elon said, you have a lot of energy, so you end up with a lot of power, actually more than you need.

是的。這可能不是直觀的，這是 J.B.，但重型卡車對電池的功率能量需求實際上通常低於我們的性能車輛。在大多數情況下，它肯定也比高放電率的能量產品少。正如伊隆所說，你擁有很多能量，所以你最終會擁有很多力量，實際上比你需要的還要多。

Yes. And the way that chemistry works is that you're able to actually extract, for short periods of time, extract very high power from lithium ion cells as you sort of have ion migration right on the surface. And then the sustained power for lithium ion is conservatively less than the power over, say, the course of several seconds or minute. But the several seconds power for lithium ion is remarkably good because you're essentially using ion migration from the outer surface. It's like if you have a parking lot, all the cars in the front of the parking lot can just exit. But once you start getting cars from deep in the parking lot, it takes a while for them to wind their way out.

是的。化學原理是，由於離子在表面遷移，你可以在短時間內從鋰離子電池中提取非常高的能量。然後，鋰離子的持續功率保守地小於幾秒鐘或幾分鐘內的功率。但鋰離子的幾秒鐘功率非常好，因為你基本上利用了外表面的離子遷移。就像你有一個停車場，停車場前面的所有汽車都可以直接駛出。但是，一旦你開始從停車場深處駛出汽車，它們就需要一段時間才能駛出。

Our next question comes from the line of 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'd like to talk, follow-up a little bit on the first question around some of the manufacturing roadblocks as well as the comment about building a machine to build the machine, which I believe was the title of a 1990 MIT book about Toyota. Could you maybe give us some more discussion really on the managerial culture, the process level, how you would benchmark yourself, for example, against the Toyota factory, which seems to be able to launch new product in about 3 or 4 months, to ramp up? Or at the other extreme, because I know Mr. Field came from there, kind of what Foxconn does in its goal to replace humans? But in particular, talk about the managerial processes, not so much the robots you're putting into place.

是的。我想談談，關於第一個問題的一些製造障礙以及關於製造機器來製造機器的評論，我相信這是 1990 年麻省理工學院關於豐田的一本書的標題。您能否就管理文化、流程水平等問題與我們進行更深入的討論，例如，您如何與豐田工廠進行比較？豐田工廠似乎能夠在 3 到 4 個月內推出新產品，從而提高產能？或者另一個極端，因為我知道菲爾德先生來自那裡，這有點像富士康在取代人類的目標中所做的那樣？但具體來說，要談管理流程，而不是你所採用的機器人。

Well, I'm pretty sure Toyota cannot ramp up any of their products in 3 months. In fact, I'm 100% certain about that. Deepak spent many years at Ford before joining Tesla.

嗯，我很確定豐田無法在三個月內提高任何產品的產量。事實上，我對此百分之百確定。在加入特斯拉之前，迪帕克曾在福特工作多年。

Yes. I mean, generally, companies including Toyota take anywhere from 6 months to a year when they come up with an all new product.

是的。我的意思是，一般來說，包括豐田在內的公司推出一款全新產品需要 6 個月到一年的時間。

And all new is like that's -- there's still -- it's not really -- the amount of technology that changes, not that much.

而所有新事物都是這樣的——仍然存在——實際上並沒有——技術的變化量並沒有那麼多。

It's a major platform so it's not all new as a Model S or an X that we've done. So it is longer.

它是一個主要的平台，所以它並不像我們製造的 Model S 或 X 那樣全新。所以它更長。

Right. There aren't fundamental new technologies.

正確的。不存在根本性的新技術。

Okay. But within that then, what are the differences though in the way you're going to be managing the factory?

好的。但是在那之內，您管理工廠的方式有什麼不同嗎？

The most fundamental difference is thinking about the factory as -- really as a product, as a quite vertically integrated product.

最根本的差異是將工廠視為一種產品，一種垂直整合的產品。

It's treating it as more of an engineering and a technical problem as well instead of just a...

它將其視為工程和技術問題，而不僅僅是...

Right, which is the Toyota production system.

對，這就是豐田生產系統。

Yes -- we don't think so.

是的——我們不這麼認為。

I think that generally, it's treated more as an optimized operational problem, being extremely lean and really managing the flows of materials and the supply chain. They're great at it, but this is, I think, a different approach, looking at it really from deep technical lens in terms of automation, robotics, process.

我認為，一般來說，它更多地被視為一個優化的營運問題，極其精簡並真正管理材料流和供應鏈。他們在這方面很出色，但我認為這是一種不同的方法，真正從自動化、機器人、流程等深層技術角度來看待它。

Yes. Imagine like if the Model S was -- or the way you design a Model S, design your factory like it's a car. You still have a lot of workers. You still have a lot of people. I mean, just like with Model S, say, we have a large service organization. There's scheduled maintenance. There are things that break. There are crashes that need to be repaired. There are technology upgrades. But you don't actually ship people with the Model S. That would be weird. That's not like hanging people in the car. So you have -- we expect that the Tesla factory has people -- a lot of people around the factory but very few people in it.

是的。想像一下，如果 Model S 是——或者你設計 Model S 的方式，將你的工廠設計得像一輛車一樣。你們還有很多工人。你們還有很多人呢。我的意思是，就像 Model S 一樣，我們有一個大型的服務組織。有定期維護。有些東西會損壞。存在需要修復的崩潰。有技術升級。但實際上你並沒有用 Model S 運送乘客。那就很奇怪了。這不像是把人吊在車裡。所以你有——我們預計特斯拉工廠裡有人——工廠周圍有很多人，但工廠裡的人很少。

I also think that the degree with which we have -- this is Doug. The degree with which we have product development and manufacturing development integrated is unique. And Model 3 already is a dramatically simpler car to build than the Model S. And even many people in operations who have worked their career in volume manufacturers say the Model 3 is a huge step forward from anything that they've built. So as we go forward, Elon mentioned Model Y, a big part of our manufacturing capability is going to come from how simple we make our products.

我也認為，我們所擁有的程度——這就是道格。我們的產品開發和製造開發的整合程度是獨一無二的。與 Model S 相比，Model 3 的製造已經簡單得多。甚至許多曾在量產汽車製造商工作的營運人員也表示，Model 3 比他們之前製造的任何產品都前進了一大步。因此，隨著我們不斷前進，埃隆提到了 Model Y，我們的製造能力很大一部分將來自於我們製造產品的簡易程度。

And how do you manage the people in the interim?

在這段期間您如何管理這些人？

Yes, it's actually (inaudible) thing. It came from -- you have Apple and then Ford -- Ford and then Apple.

是的，這實際上是（聽不清楚）的事情。它來自——先有蘋果，然後是福特——福特，然後是蘋果。

Yes, the model at Foxconn was very different where very quick product ramps and very high scale was achieved through manual processing of also what is fundamentally a product whose simplicity is orders of magnitude below ours. And iPad is less complicated than our center screen in many ways. So it's a very different order of magnitude in terms of the kind of product you're building, and it's extremely manual because that is the way that you have to ramp very quickly and then end the life of our product and bring up a new one.

是的，富士康的模式非常不同，其透過手動處理實現了非常快速的產品提升和非常高的規模，而且從根本上來說，產品的簡單性比我們的低幾個數量級。而且 iPad 在很多方面都比我們的中心螢幕簡單。因此，就您所建立的產品類型而言，這是一個非常不同的數量級，而且它極其手動，因為您必須透過這種方式快速提升產品，然後結束產品的生命週期並推出新產品。

Actually, one thing we forgot mention is Jon McNeill, who is heading up our sales and service group, is departing the company. We wish him well in his future career. And going forward, I will be having the sales and service report directly to me. There are no plans to search for a replacement.

實際上，我們忘記提到的一件事是，負責我們銷售和服務團隊的 Jon McNeill 即將離開公司。我們祝福他未來的職業生涯一切順利。今後，銷售和服務部門將直接向我報告。目前還沒有尋找替代者的計劃。

Our next question comes from the line of 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。

Shockingly, I want to follow up on the production of the Model 3, so it seems like that's going to remain a hot topic here. Do you have enough experience with production of the Model 3 outside of the issues you're facing in the Gigafactory that you're confident once those problems are solved, you can get up and running? Or is there sort of a contingency here that once you get that worked out, you'll be ramping up in 3 months, and there might be some other hurdles that are discovered? I'm just trying to understand if there are some -- any incremental kinks that might come in the production process as you ramp up. And then also as we think about the step from 5,000 to 10,000, is that something that can be done inside the Fremont factory? It sounds like you're confident that your density is much higher than what even Toyota and GM were producing out there potentially on capacity. But just curious on those 2 [things].

令人震驚的是，我想跟進 Model 3 的生產情況，所以這似乎仍將是一個熱門話題。除了超級工廠面臨的問題之外，您是否有足夠的 Model 3 生產經驗，以至於您有信心一旦這些問題得到解決，您就可以啟動並運行？或者是否存在某種意外情況，一旦你解決了這個問題，你將在 3 個月內加速發展，並可能發現一些其他障礙？我只是想知道在生產過程中是否存在一些可能出現的增量問題。然後，當我們考慮從 5,000 到 10,000 的步驟時，這可以在弗里蒙特工廠內部完成嗎？聽起來您很有信心，您的密度甚至比豐田和通用汽車的潛在產能要高得多。但只是對這兩件事感到好奇。

Yes. There's really -- there are only 2 things that I'm aware of that are constraints in production of any significance: the module being the most significant; and then the parts conveyance, basically, the automated conveyance system that brings parts to the lines. The way the Fremont factory is set up is that there's actually, on the ground floor, we actually created 2 levels. The bottom level is all parts conveyance, so parts coming from the warehouse where the parts are sort of automatically sorted and then are transferred through an automated conveyance system all the way to the line on the conveyance system being on the ground floor and then raised up to the line, which is actually on kind of an artificial mezzanine. And I think we can get 10,000 vehicles a week out of Fremont without a significant -- without creating really any new buildings of significance in the existing space. We will need to bring up the south paint shop, which is what we actually were using for S and X paint, and so we upgraded north paint to do S, X and 3. But with relatively small CapEx, way less than we spent on north paint, we're comfortable we can bring south paint up to achieve the approximately 600,000 vehicles per year rate to combined 100,000 S and X, 500,000 3, which would be 20% to 30% more than Toyota and GM produced in the same facilities. And we're a lot more vertically integrated as well.

是的。確實有——據我所知，只有兩件事會對生產產生重大限制：模組是最重要的；然後是零件輸送，基本上就是將零件運送到生產線的自動輸送系統。弗里蒙特工廠的建設方式是，在一樓，我們實際上創建了 2 個樓層。底層是所有零件的運輸，零件來自倉庫，在那裡零件被自動分類，然後透過自動運輸系統一直轉移到位於底層的運輸系統上的生產線，然後上升到生產線上，這實際上是一種人工夾層。我認為，我們每周可以從弗里蒙特運出 10,000 輛汽車，而無需在現有空間建造任何重要的新建築。我們需要恢復南面的噴漆車間，實際上我們用它來噴漆 S 和 X，所以我們升級了北面的噴漆車間來噴漆 S、X 和 3。但由於資本支出相對較小，遠低於我們在北面噴漆上的支出，我們有信心可以恢復南面的噴漆車間，實現每年約 60 萬輛汽車的生產能力，共生產 10 萬輛 S 和 X 車型，50 萬輛 3 車型，這將比豐田和通用汽車在同一工廠的產量高出 20% 到 30%。而且我們的垂直整合程度也更高了。

Literally and figuratively, right?

從字面上和比喻上來說都是如此，對嗎？

Yes, [exactly].

是的，[確實如此]。

Just as we think about that though, Elon, is that sort of an asymptotic limit in that plant? Or based on what you're really talking about, could you get more out of that plant? Or as we look at the Model Y and there's million units capacity, we're definitively looking at a new facility?

正如我們所想的，埃隆，這是工廠的漸近極限嗎？或者根據您真正談論的內容，您能從該工廠獲得更多收益嗎？或者，當我們考慮 Model Y 並且其產能達到百萬輛時，我們肯定會考慮新建一個工廠？

I'm pretty excited about the Model Y stuff, and I think I want to present that in a more cohesive fashion. And it's probably not the next earnings call but call it 6 months from now. But I'm really excited about the Model Y manufacturing and the design manufacturing. Like essentially, how do we design out all the pain that we're currently going through? We do not want to experience it again. It's just really a lot of pain. The pain level is extremely high. I mean, I was in the factory -- I was in the Gigafactory on Thanksgiving Day as were many other Tesla people. It's like it's hardcore, okay? Seven days a week, don't have a vacation. So we don't want to repeat that.

我對 Model Y 的產品感到非常興奮，我想以更具凝聚力的方式呈現它。這可能不是下一次收益電話會議，而是六個月後的事。但我對 Model Y 的製造和設計製造感到非常興奮。就像本質上，我們如何設計出目前正在經歷的所有痛苦？我們不想再經歷一次。這確實很痛苦。疼痛程度極高。我的意思是，感恩節那天我在工廠——我在超級工廠，和許多其他特斯拉員工一樣。這就像是硬核的，好嗎？一周七天，沒有假日。所以我們不想再重複這樣的事情。

The material flow delivery Elon mentioned as we develop very high density and velocity lines, the limit starts to become how we get material to that line. We'll solve that for the Model 3 line. But eventually, within Fremont, the limit to production may be how many trucks we can get in, how quickly, of material, in order to build cars.

埃隆提到的材料流交付，隨著我們開發出非常高密度和速度的生產線，限制開始變成我們如何將材料運送到該生產線。我們將為 Model 3 系列解決這個問題。但最終，在弗里蒙特，生產的限制可能是我們可以裝入多少輛卡車，以及多快生產出用於製造汽車的材料。

You'd use the Hyperloop for that.

您可以使用 Hyperloop 來實現這一點。

Yes. Actually, we are looking at building tunnels using The Boring Company or something because we have, for example, our seats production is at a separate building on Page. And we have a bunch of trucks moving seats back and forth between the primary Fremont production and the seat factory. And we actually get constrained on how many trucks can we dock at the -- dock and undock at the seat factory, which is only 0.5 mile or 1 mile away from the vehicle plant. So it'll be pretty easy to just have a tunnel, doing automated conveyance probably from seats to the factory. And there are, I mean, things we can do where we can build subsystems and then transport subsystems to Fremont. These things get increasingly difficult, but they're all doable. But I can see a path where we get to, say, 600,000 Model 3 production and 100,000 S and X, so maybe 700k. We should be like almost 50% more than GM and Toyota get out of the plant. I think that seems achievable.

是的。實際上，我們正在考慮使用 The Boring Company 或其他公司來建造隧道，因為我們的座椅生產是在 Page 的一棟單獨的建築物中完成的。我們有許多卡車在弗里蒙特主要生產地和座椅工廠之間來回運送座椅。實際上，我們受到限制，無法確定有多少卡車可以在座椅工廠停靠和卸下，而座椅工廠距離汽車廠只有 0.5 英里或 1 英里。因此，只需一條隧道，就可以輕鬆實現從座位到工廠的自動化運輸。我的意思是，我們可以做一些事情，我們可以建立子系統，然後將子系統傳輸到弗里蒙特。這些事情變得越來越困難，但都是可行的。但我可以看到一條路徑，我們能夠生產 60 萬輛 Model 3 和 10 萬輛 S 和 X，所以可能是 70 萬輛。我們的產量應該比通用汽車和豐田汽車高出近 50%。我認為這似乎是可以實現的。

Can I just sneak one in for Deepak? I apologize. You did a great job of working capital in the quarter. I mean, I think some of us might kind of throw stones and say it might not be repeatable. But you did it, you got the cash in the door. So it's done and it was -- you did some pretty good work here. How repeatable do you think the benefit from working capital is going forward? I mean, is this really just the benefit of negative working capital and as you ramp up, you'll get this cash inflow? And then also as we look at the customer deposits and the ZEV credits, those were 2, I think, apparently large cash inflows. I mean, how repeatable do you think those are in the future as well?

我可以偷偷放一個給 Deepak 嗎？我很抱歉。本季您在營運資金方面做得非常出色。我的意思是，我認為我們中的一些人可能會批評說這可能無法重複。但你做到了，你拿到了現金。所以它已經完成了——你在這裡做了一些非常好的工作。您認為營運資本帶來的收益在未來的可重複性如何？我的意思是，這真的只是負營運資本的好處嗎？隨著你的增加，你就會獲得現金流入嗎？然後，當我們查看客戶存款和 ZEV 信用額度時，我認為這兩個顯然是較大的現金流入。我的意思是，您認為這些在未來的可重複性如何？

Yes. Some of those are not repeatable. We significantly reduced the finished goods inventory of S and X in Q4, which will not repeat itself going forward. And that was a huge impact to our working capital. Customer deposits may not be as well, as you pointed out. However, the -- as the Model 3 ramp continues, the negative working capital needs for that, which essentially creates extra cash for us, will be repeatable. And we'll continue to keep very tight controls on our accounts receivables and everything else we do to manage cash to make sure we are being efficient.

是的。其中一些是不可重複的。我們在第四季大幅減少了 S 和 X 的成品庫存，這種情況今後不會再發生。這對我們的營運資金產生了巨大的影響。正如您所指出的，客戶存款可能不太好。然而，隨著 Model 3 產量持續成長，其產生的負營運資本需求（實際上為我們創造了額外現金）將會重複出現。我們將繼續嚴格控制應收帳款以及管理現金的其他一切工作，以確保我們的效率。

Thank you very much. Unfortunately, we're not going to be able to get to everybody, but maybe one last question, please.

非常感謝。不幸的是，我們無法聯繫到所有人，但請允許我問最後一個問題。

Our last question comes from the line of James Albertine with Consumer Edge.

我們的最後一個問題來自 Consumer Edge 的 James Albertine。

A topic that doesn't get asked, I think, a lot or as much as it should but we believe is maybe one of the reasons why the Model S and X demand remains so high after many years of production is sort of the over-the-air updateability of these vehicles. I'm just wondering, it had been several quarters ago kind of pre Model 3 questions we're hearing more about software you were rolling out to existing customers. Just wondering if you can give us some color on what level of uptake you're seeing. And I would imagine we're not seeing that in the upfront Model S and X margins, but potentially, there are some sort of -- those are vehicles that are earning assets for you in the future sort of customer ownership. So if you could kind of talk a little bit about what trends you're seeing there or elaborate a little bit on that, that would be helpful.

我認為，這個問題問得不多，但我們認為，這可能是為什麼 Model S 和 X 在生產多年後需求依然如此之高的原因之一，即這些車輛的無線可更新性。我只是想知道，這是幾個季度前在 Model 3 問題之前我們聽到的更多關於您向現有客戶推出的軟體的資訊。我只是想知道您是否可以告訴我們您所看到的吸收程度。我想我們不會在前期 Model S 和 X 利潤率中看到這一點，但潛在的是，這些車輛可以在未來的客戶所有權中為您賺取資產。因此，如果您可以稍微談談您所看到的趨勢或對此進行詳細說明，那將會很有幫助。

Yes. I think probably the biggest item is as we get the software right, people upgrading to full self-driving capability of S and X, and anything with Hardware 2, which is like the 8 cameras, more advanced op sights and improved compute capability, I think, will be capable of the full self-driving. The full self-driving -- the Hardware 2 set is also capable of doing an easy swap out of the computer. So if it turns out we need additional computing capability to meet the regulatory standards for self-driving -- particularly like we think with the current compute hardware, we can get to better than human. But the standard for regulators may be that you need to be 5x better than human or something like that. But we believe that is solvable purely with compute hardware. And it would be a relatively minor expense to do that. So I think probably that's the biggest opportunity.

是的。我認為可能最重要的事情是，當我們得到正確的軟體時，人們會將 S 和 X 升級到完全自動駕駛功能，而任何具有硬體 2 的東西，例如 8 個攝影機、更先進的操作瞄準器和改進的計算能力，我認為，將能夠實現完全自動駕駛。完全自動駕駛－硬體 2 套件還能夠輕鬆地與電腦進行交換。因此，如果事實證明我們需要額外的計算能力來滿足自動駕駛的監管標準——特別是像我們認為的那樣，使用當前的計算硬件，我們可以比人類做得更好。但監管者的標準可能是你需要比人類優秀 5 倍或類似的東西。但我們相信，僅透過計算硬體就可以解決這個問題。而且這樣做的花費相對較小。所以我認為這可能是最大的機會。

And along the same lines, not all customers pay for enhanced autopilot too, and as people hear more, we can see an uptick on that. But it's all around autopilot, to your point.

同樣，並非所有客戶都會為增強型自動駕駛儀付費，隨著人們了解得越來越多，我們可以看到這種情況增加。但正如你所說，一切都是自動駕駛。

Yes, exactly. And that -- some of the sort of semiautomated driving definitely doesn't require any hardware upgrades than that $5,000, that's essentially a software product with 0 cost -- 0 marginal cost and so it's 100% margin. And then where full self-driving is available, we can probably -- that's more than a $3,000 increment. It's maybe a $5,000 increment or something like that.

是的，確實如此。而且 — — 某種半自動駕駛肯定不需要任何超過 5,000 美元的硬體升級，這本質上是一種成本為 0 — — 邊際成本為 0 的軟體產品，因此利潤率為 100%。然後，當完全自動駕駛可用時，我們可能可以——這將增加 3,000 美元以上。這可能是 5,000 美元的加薪或類似的金額。

Is there any data you can provide us though today in terms of the percentage of consumers that are upgrading or opting in, just to get a sense of kind of the order of magnitude that, that -- what that business could look like over time?

但是，您今天能否向我們提供升級或選擇加入的消費者百分比的數據，以便我們了解該業務隨時間推移會呈現何種數量級？

Yes, well, not many people are opting in at this time.

是的，目前選擇加入的人並不多。

Well, the full self-driving system doesn't actually work. Essentially, people are buying an option on it working in the future. So that's a very [nice] thing, [that the prices] are very low. There's also the automation part, things that we expect to operate kind of a shared autonomy fleet, where it has like -- kind of like combination of Uber or Lyft and Airbnb, I guess, where you can opt to have your car enter a shared fleet or not, and then Tesla can also operate its own fleet in places where there's not enough people sharing their vehicles. So that's a pretty significant opportunity.

嗯，完全自動駕駛系統實際上不起作用。本質上，人們購買的是未來工作的選擇權。所以這是一件非常好的事情，價格非常低。還有自動化部分，我們預計將運營共享自動駕駛車隊，有點像 Uber 或 Lyft 和 Airbnb 的結合，你可以選擇讓你的車加入共享車隊或不加入，然後特斯拉也可以在沒有足夠多的人共享車輛的地方運營自己的車隊。這是一個非常重要的機會。

Okay. I think that's unfortunately all the time we have today. Appreciate all your great questions, and we look forward to talking to you in the next quarter. Thank you very much and goodbye.

好的。不幸的是，我認為我們今天只有這麼多時間了。感謝您提出的所有重要問題，我們期待在下個季度與您交談。非常感謝，再見。

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today's conference. This does conclude the program. You may all disconnect. Everyone, have a wonderful day.

女士們、先生們，感謝大家參加今天的會議。該計劃確實就此結束。你們都可以斷開連線。祝大家有美好的一天。