On Tesla's earnings call, no one wanted to talk about … Tesla's earnings
If you happened to glance at Tesla's second-quarter earnings report Wednesday night, you might not be surprised that the company's stock was getting pummeled on Wall Street Thursday morning. Put simply: sales are in freefall, profits have been shrinking for three straight quarters and the US government is about to cut off a crucial revenue stream.
But if you just listened in on the company's call with analysts, you would have no idea why. For an earnings call, there was zero talk of, um, earnings. And the overall message from Tesla's top brass seemed to be: We are a robotics and AI company, and, someday soon, it's going to be awesome.
For now, many bullish analysts — especially those whom the company called on during the conference call — are on board with CEO Elon Musk's vision of Tesla as an AI and robotics company first and an organization that builds and sells cars that people purchase and drive themselves second. But Thursday's selloff suggests that Musk's 'hey, look over here!' comms strategy is getting harder for Wall Street to swallow.
ICYMI: CEO Elon Musk did acknowledge in response to one question that Tesla was in a 'weird transition period' and 'could have a few rough quarters' ahead because of the loss of a $7,500 tax credit for US EV buyers starting in October and the vanishing market for regulatory credit sales, which has driven a significant portion of Tesla's profits for years.
But over the course of an hourlong call, Musk barely mentioned Tesla's core business — selling cars, which, as my colleague Chris Isidore reports, isn't going great.
Musk kept his gaze firmly on the far horizon, skipping over the fact that demand is cratering for the things Tesla actually sells right now, while touting dreams of a still largely hypothetical future where the company would build and sell more than a million humanoid robots. And for the most part, the analysts who were called on to ask questions followed suit, opting not to dwell on the declining financials of the world's most valuable automaker.
Analysts' questions largely focused on robotaxis, Tesla's 'Full Self Driving' software, the Optimus robot and other products that are, again, still largely unrealized as viable consumer products.
'The company offered remarkably little detail on some of the most important factors' — like its mysterious new lower-priced model —'making our outlook lean more on imagination than realistic targets,' said Truist's William Stein, who has a hold rating on Tesla, in a note after the call.
Even Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities, known as Tesla's biggest cheerleader on Wall Street, said Tesla management's performance was a letdown.
'I wouldn't say it was a conference call that should be put in the Hall of Fame,' Ives told CNN on Thursday, while underscoring he is still bullish on Tesla's robotics future with Musk at the helm. 'Communication on the call was less than stellar in terms of details, and I think that definitely played into the selloff that we're seeing.'
Tesla shares (TSLA) fell more than 8% Thursday.
For Tesla's detractors, Musk's opaque responses confirmed what they've long seen as an overvalued company that's banking on hype.
'The stock price no longer rests on selling cars. It hinges almost entirely on the promise of a robot-driven, self-driving future… one that continues to recede on contact with reality,' said analyst Gordon L. Johnson, one of Tesla's biggest critics on Wall Street, in a note. 'The key to convincing the market that you're not just a car company is to avoid discussing your car business… If you're trying to justify a trillion-dollar valuation while your core business stagnates, it helps to keep the details as fuzzy as the timeline for your next 'miracle product.''
But to a certain extent, this is who Musk is and who he has always been. The focus, he believes, shouldn't be on what Tesla is doing now. It should always be on what Tesla is going to do, someday.
Someday soon, Tesla is going to build and sell an inexpensive car. Someday soon, Tesla is going to build and sell hundreds of thousands, if not more than a million, Cybertrucks. Someday soon, Tesla is going to build and sell a car that drives itself, from coast to coast.
Someday soon, Tesla is going to be an AI and robotics company.
If it isn't one now, you're just focused on the wrong things. And if it isn't one tomorrow, then you just need to hear about what it's going to accomplish, someday soon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
2 hours ago
Australian court rejects X Corp.'s appeal in child safety case, orders legal costs
MELBOURNE, Australia -- An Australian appeals court on Thursday ruled against X Corp., rejecting a challenge to a safety watchdog's demands for details on how the Elon Musk -owned company was combating widespread child exploitation material on its platform. Three federal court judges unanimously rejected X's appeal against a federal court decision in October last year that the company was obliged to respond to a notice from eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant on child abuse material being shared on X, which is incorporated in Texas. The judges also ordered X to pay the commissioner's legal costs. Inman Grant's office describes itself as the world's first government agency dedicated to keeping people safe online. Inman Grant has driven world-first legislation that will ban Australian children younger than 16 from social media platforms including X from December. The federal court case goes back to early 2023, when Inman Grant asked some of the world's largest technology companies to report on what they were doing about child abuse material appearing on their platforms. A reporting notice, issued under Australia's Online Safety Act, was sent to Twitter Inc., incorporated in Delaware, in February that year. Twitter merged with X the following month. X arguments against complying with Inman Grant's order included that Twitter no longer existed as a legal entity and that X did not carry its predecessor's regulatory obligations in Australia. Inman Grant, a former Twitter employee, welcomed Thursday's ruling. 'This judgment confirms the obligations to comply with Australian regulations still apply, regardless of a foreign company's merger with another foreign company,' she said in a statement. She said her agency would continue enforcing the Online Safety Act and 'holding all tech companies to account without fear or favor, ensuring they comply with the laws of Australia.' 'Without meaningful transparency, we cannot hold technology companies accountable,' she said. X lawyer Justin Quill said he had not yet read the appeals court judges' reasons and could not comment on the possibility of a High Court appeal. The High Court only hears around 10% of appeal applications, so the federal court full-bench decision could be final in X's case. X's media office did not immediately respond to an email request for comment on Thursday. In 2023, Inman Grant's office fined X 610, 500 Australian dollars ($385,000) for failing to fully explain how it tackled child exploitation content. X's response was considered incomplete or misleading. X refused to pay and the penalty is the subject of a separate and ongoing federal court case.
Bloomberg
2 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Stock Futures Surge on Robust Big Tech Earnings
Good morning. Stock markets may get a boost from Microsoft and Meta earnings. British retailers warn food inflation will further rise. And ICYMI, take a look at Tesla's new venture: an American diner. Listen to the day's top stories. US and European stock futures climbed after strong results from Big Tech bolstered optimism that corporate profits remain resilient. Microsoft may open higher in the US on plans to invest more than $30 billion on AI data centers. Meta is also increasing AI spending —the stock soared 11% after-market.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Australian court rejects X Corp.'s appeal in child safety case, orders legal costs
MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — An Australian appeals court on Thursday ruled against X Corp., rejecting a challenge to a safety watchdog's demands for details on how the Elon Musk -owned company was combating widespread child exploitation material on its platform. Three federal court judges unanimously rejected X's appeal against a federal court decision in October last year that the company was obliged to respond to a notice from eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant on child abuse material being shared on X, which is incorporated in Texas. The judges also ordered X to pay the commissioner's legal costs. Inman Grant's office describes itself as the world's first government agency dedicated to keeping people safe online. Inman Grant has driven world-first legislation that will ban Australian children younger than 16 from social media platforms including X from December. The federal court case goes back to early 2023, when Inman Grant asked some of the world's largest technology companies to report on what they were doing about child abuse material appearing on their platforms. A reporting notice, issued under Australia's Online Safety Act, was sent to Twitter Inc., incorporated in Delaware, in February that year. Twitter merged with X the following month. X arguments against complying with Inman Grant's order included that Twitter no longer existed as a legal entity and that X did not carry its predecessor's regulatory obligations in Australia. Inman Grant, a former Twitter employee, welcomed Thursday's ruling. 'This judgment confirms the obligations to comply with Australian regulations still apply, regardless of a foreign company's merger with another foreign company,' she said in a statement. She said her agency would continue enforcing the Online Safety Act and 'holding all tech companies to account without fear or favor, ensuring they comply with the laws of Australia.' 'Without meaningful transparency, we cannot hold technology companies accountable,' she said. X lawyer Justin Quill said he had not yet read the appeals court judges' reasons and could not comment on the possibility of a High Court appeal. The High Court only hears around 10% of appeal applications, so the federal court full-bench decision could be final in X's case. X's media office did not immediately respond to an email request for comment on Thursday. In 2023, Inman Grant's office fined X 610, 500 Australian dollars ($385,000) for failing to fully explain how it tackled child exploitation content. X's response was considered incomplete or misleading. X refused to pay and the penalty is the subject of a separate and ongoing federal court case. Rod Mcguirk, The Associated Press Sign in to access your portfolio
