Model 3万众期待，但一位基金经理认为它将让特斯拉破产

最多再过两年，特斯拉汽车公司就要推出经济型电动车Model 3，它的客户早在翘首期盼。但是，尽管这款新车造势很好，但一位优秀的对冲基金经理去说，Model 3会遭遇惨败。他甚至认为，Model 3可能让特斯拉破产。另一句话说，他认为特斯拉的股价将归零。

对冲基金Stanphyl Capital Partners的创始人马克•斯皮格尔（Mark Spiegel）说，Model 3可能来不及问世就把特斯拉搞破产。特斯拉的CEO伊隆•马斯克承诺，这款车的售价将低至3.5万美元。

在上周的一次投资者会议上，斯皮格尔展示了一份15页的演示文稿，解释他为何在看空特斯拉。他还说，如果考虑负债因素，这家公司的价值应该为负。《财富》杂志拿到了他在今年11月给投资者的信。他在信中说：“我一直认为，特斯拉是当前最大的公司股票泡沫。”

在斯皮格尔周二上午做完演讲后，这个“泡沫”小了一些，至当天收盘时，特斯拉的股价下跌超过3%，而大盘上涨。这个会议不对媒体开放，他的演讲内容直到周四才公开，特斯拉股价当日又跌了4%。

斯皮格尔的Stnaphyl Captial管理着900万美元，比起大牌对冲基金，这一规模可谓微不足道。不过，该基金自斯皮格尔在5年前创办以来，资产已经翻番，今年至11月创造的收益接近35%。

近来，已经有不只一位对冲基金经理公开看空特斯拉。Kynikos Associates的投资人吉姆•查诺斯（Jim Chanos）曾因做空安然赚得盆满钵满，他在9月透露，正在做空特斯拉，认定这家公司必死无疑，尤其是在完成与SolarCity的争议并购之后。特斯拉的股价自他讲话以来下跌了25%左右。

公司的现金流失过快，车主使用自驾驶功能导致车祸，与SolarCity的合并存在利益冲突（马斯克是SolarCity董事长，与公司CEO是表兄弟），这些是人们批评特斯拉的主要内容，但斯皮格尔关注的是另一个问题。

他在上周二的会议说，能让投资者相信特斯拉的估值的“真正原因”，是其售价3.5万美元“大众型”汽车Model 3的前景。相比公司的价格至少高出一倍的其他车型，这款车要便宜很多。但斯皮格尔判断：“这个价格绝不会出现。”因为这个价位将给公司带来“巨亏”。他估计，亏损几乎相当于客户的购买价。

他是这样算出来的：

• 在最近一个季度，特斯拉意外实现2,200万美元的利润，这是多年来头一次。但盈利情况的大幅好转主要是因为政府对电动汽车的一次性补贴。没有政府补贴，特斯拉在三季度实际亏损1.17亿美元，相当每台车亏损4,710美元。

• 斯皮格尔计算，每台特斯拉汽车的制造成本为81,000美元。销售这些汽车目前能实现盈利。但它们的平均价格是105,900美元，这位价位只有为数不多的高收入家庭买得起。

• Model 3售价低至3.5万美元，特斯拉要想实现盈利，必须将生产成本降低一半以上。

• 特斯拉上哪去省这些钱？公司没有明说，但斯皮格尔估计，公司可以采用它花了50亿美元盖起来的巨型电池工厂生产的新型电池，省下6,000美元；在Model 3上使用较便宜的零部件，比如以钢件代铝件，再省下5,000美元；想办法提高生产效率，比如采用自动化程度更高的生产线，还可以省下5,000美元。当前汽车成本为81,000美元，省下这些费用后，成本仍然高达65,000美元，远高于特斯拉计划销售的价格。斯皮格尔假定，马斯克还有其他方法可以节省成本，但他认为，最多也只能有1.5万美元的节省空间，这也只能使Model 3的价格降到5万以下，最低可以到4.8万美元。

• 特斯拉只说Model 3最低售价是3.5万美元，但马斯克预计，算上客户可能添加的各种升级和功能，平均售价将为4.3万美元。按照这个价格和上面估出的4.8亿美元最低价计算，特斯拉每卖一掉Model 3，就会亏损5,000美元。

明显的解决办法，就是特斯拉必须提高Model 3售价。斯皮格尔认为，每部裸车的价格至少应为5万美元，这比公司目前承诺的价格高出了43%。他对《财富》说：“如果马斯克宣称3.5万美元的价格是基础价，而公司交付的每台车都都比这个价格高得多，我不会奇怪。”

特斯拉不只一次提高它承诺的价格。2012年，特斯拉开始交付Model S高档电动车的最早订单，基础价是5.74万美元。仅仅过了5个月，特斯拉就将价格提高到5.99万美元。又过了4个月，特斯拉取消了最低配的Model S，新车售价提高了1万多美元，达6.9万美元，比它最初用来吸引客户的低价高出了20%。

但对于“大众市场型”的Model，为避免亏损而提价无异于判特斯拉死刑。斯皮格尔预计，如果特斯拉到时候将价格抬到5万美元，与那时市面上其他很多电动车比，就不再具有竞争优势了。很多分析师预计，Model 3要到明年底才开始发货，大部分订单在2018年底之前都无法完成交付。

如果Model 3售价达到5万美元，Model 3的价格将比通用汽车公司的Chevy Bolt高出33%。Chevy Bolt已经在一些经销商那里有售，已经比Model 3早一年甚至两年上市，价格却只有37,495美元。

Model 3的价格超高，马斯克的经济型电动车之梦就越渺茫。斯皮格尔认为，没有主流市场的需求，特斯拉的未来不容乐观。

特斯拉未做出及时回应。 （财富中文网）

译者：天逸

Tesla Motors customers are lining up to wait as much as two years to own the company’s eagerly anticipated cheaper electric car, the Model 3. But while the new car has created a lot of buzz for Tesla , one high-performing hedge fund manger says the Model 3 will end up being a total wreck for the company. In fact, he says it will likely put Tesla out of business. Put another way: His price target for Tesla’s stock: $0.

Mark Spiegel, founder of hedge fund Stanphyl Capital Partners, says the Model 3—which Tesla CEO Elon Musk has promised to sell for as little as $35,000—may put Tesla on a path to bankruptcy before it even comes out.

Speaking at the Robin Hood Investors Conference this week, Spiegel laid out his case in a 152-slidepresentation on why he is shorting, i.e. betting against, Tesla stock. Factor in the debt, and he thinks the car company is worth less than zero. “I continue to believe that it’s the market’s biggest single-company stock bubble,” Spiegel elaborated in his November letter to investors, obtained byFortune.

That so-called bubble deflated a bit after Spiegel’s presentation Tuesday morning, with Tesla stock falling more than 3% by the end of the day, while the broader market rose. Tesla shares fell another 4% Thursday after Spiegel’s presentation from the conference (which was closed to the media) was shared publicly.

Spiegel’s Stanphyl Capital manages $9 million. While that’s tiny in comparison to other hedge funds whose managers also presented at Robin Hood, from Jeff Smith’s Starboard Value to David Einhorn’s Greenlight Capital, Stanphyl’s assets have quintupled since Spiegel launched the fund about five years ago. This year, the fund has returned nearly 35% through November.

It isn’t the first time that a hedge fund short-seller has publicly attacked Tesla recently. Jim Chanos, the Kynikos Associates investor who lucratively shorted Enron before its scandalous demise, said in September that he is also shorting Tesla, believing the company is doomed, particularly after its controversial merger with SolarCity   is completed. Tesla’s stock price is down about 25% in 2016 so far.

But while other Tesla critics have emphasized the company’s rapid cash bleed; recent controversy over crashes seemingly related to drivers’ use of its autopilot feature; and conflicts of interest with SolarCity, of which Musk is chairman and his cousin is CEO, Spiegel focused on a different problem for Tesla.

The prospect of a $35,000 “mass-market” Tesla Model 3—much more affordable compared to Tesla’s other vehicles, which cost at least twice as much—is the “real reason” investors have bought into Tesla’s stock, Spiegel said at the conference Tuesday. But “that will never happen,” asserts Spiegel. That’s because at that price Tesla would be selling the Model 3 at “a gigantic loss”—indeed, it could lose nearly as much on each car as the price customers are paying for it, Spiegel estimates.

Here’s how he got there, by the numbers:

• In Tesla’s latest quarter, it reported a $22 million surprise profit, its first in years. But much of the boost came from a one-off sale of government subsidy credits for electric vehicles that Tesla had been collecting. Without that, the company actually lost $117 million in the third quarter—ora loss of $4,710 per car.

• Each car Tesla currently sells costs $81,000 to build, Spiegel estimates. Those cars are currently profitable on their own (excluding leased cars and other unrelated company expenses)—but they sell at an average of $105,900, a price point that’s only affordable for a higher-income segment of consumers.

• In order to sell the Model 3 at as low a price as $35,000 and still make a profit, Tesla would have to cut its production costs by more than half.

• Where will Tesla find all those savings? The company hasn’t said specifically, but Spiegelestimates that it can cut about $6,000 off the $81,000-per-car cost by using its new batteries produced at its so-called gigafactory (which also cost $5 billion to build), another $5,000 by using cheaper parts for the Model 3—substituting steel for aluminum, for example—and $5,000 on top of that by finding ways to make its manufacturing more efficient (perhaps with greater automation). Still, that only brings the cost to build each Model 3 down to $65,000, much more than Tesla plans to sell it for. But Spiegel gives Musk some benefit of the doubt, and allows for what the investor calls a “cost savings fudge factor” that’s “extremely generous” and “probably undeserved” but which could knock off as much as $15,000 or so off the cost—bringing the cost per Model 3 down to just under $50,000, say $48,000 at the lowest.

• While Tesla has said the Model 3 will be available for as little as $35,000, Musk has predicted that the average sales price of the car will be $43,000, once customers add various upgrades and features. At that price and a minimum of $48,000 in costs per car, Tesla would lose at least $5,000 for every Model 3 it sells.

The obvious solution? Tesla needs to raise the price of the Model 3—to at least $50,000 for a bare-bones model, or 43% higher than the price currently promised, Spiegel predicts. “I wouldn’t be surprised if Musk claims a $35,000 base price but then never delivers any even CLOSE to that number,” Spiegel tells Fortune in an email.

It wouldn’t be the first time Tesla hiked the base price of one of its cars after promising it would be lower. When Tesla began delivering initial ordersof its Model S electric sedan in June 2012, it sold them at a base price of $57,400. Just five months later, however, Tesla raised the car’s starting price to $59,900. About four months after that, though, Tesla cancelled the lowest-end Model S version, making the car’s new starting price $10,000 higher, at $69,000—20% higher than the low price it initially teased.

Yet with the “mass-market” Model 3, selling the car for more could be just as fatal a sentence for Tesla as selling it at a loss. If Tesla raised the base price of the car to $50,000 or more, as Spiegel expects, the Model 3 would no longer be competitive with the many other electric cars that will be on the market by then—as the Model 3 won’t start shipping to customers until the end of next year, and likely not before the end of 2018 for most orders, analysts predict.

For example, at a price of $50,000, the Model 3 would be about 33% more expensive than the cheapest Chevy Bolt, an electric car from GM   that’s already on the market starting at $37,495 at select dealerships—more than a year (or two) earlier than the Model 3.

And the higher the price of the Model 3 goes, the more Musk’s dream of a cheap and affordable Tesla disappears. And without that mainstream demand, Spiegel thinks Tesla’s future doesn’t look so bright at all.

Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment.