By on August 20, 2015

 

Tesla’s second stock offering netted the automaker $738 million in cash for its Gigafactory, Model 3 development, and dealer and service upgrades, Bloomberg is reporting.

Banks exercised their options to buy more stock than the initial $500 million estimate, with underwriters Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs buying more than 2 million of the available 3.1 million shares. Tesla CEO Elon Musk said he would be interested in buying $20 million worth of shares in the offering.

(Before the stock offering, the banking arms of Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs loaned Musk a combined $475 million, to which Musk pays market rate and is separate from their investment divisions, according to the offering.)

Shares of Tesla were down more than 3 percent in Thursday trading to $245.

The second offering is aimed at helping the company invest in capital projects that have sapped the company of cash. Its massive battery factory in Nevada, dubbed Gigafactory, and development costs for its lower-priced sedan, the Model 3, have cost the company money, Musk said.

After the company reported substantial losses in the second quarter of 2015, analysts calculated that Tesla lost around $4,000 on each car it sold.

Despite that, a Morgan Stanley analyst said Tesla stock could be massively undervalued, in part, because the company could develop an autonomous ride-sharing business with its electric cars.

Tesla is preparing to ship to dealers its Model X, which is the company’s third vehicle.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

10 Comments on “Tesla’s Second Stock Sale Nets $738M for Automaker...”


  • avatar

    These guys are simply killing me. I need that stock to hit $300/share…just for one day… SCOTTRADE AUTOSELL FTW

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      It’s likely to do so, either after the Model X ships, but especially after the Model 3 is revealed/teased in March. Then Model 3s will ship two years later….

  • avatar
    stuki

    At $4K loss/car, $738M is another 200K Teslas. Which, at 10K subsidies/car, is a cool $2Billion taken out of taxpayers pockets… Free money for bankster trash, working as intended…

    • 0 avatar
      RideHeight

      “Free money for bankster trash, working as intended…”

      The biggest problem with growing up a working-class mushroom is your little insular world gives you no clue whatever as to the existence of people like “bankster trash”, how much money they can make or how you might possibly by dint of obsessive effort become one.

      I prefer to curse the ignorance in which I was cocooned rather than highly remunerated people. What man or woman wouldn’t grab that if they could?

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Next contestant, please.

  • avatar
    brandloyalty

    “At $4K loss/car, $738M is another 200K Teslas. Which, at 10K subsidies/car, is a cool $2Billion taken out of taxpayers pockets… Free money for bankster trash, working as intended…”

    In an attempt to keep “The Truth about Cars” seem less like a backwater of ignorance, I respond to the above comment with this link:

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/18/fossil-fuel-companies-getting-10m-a-minute-in-subsidies-says-imf?CMP=share_btn_fb

    • 0 avatar
      stingray65

      Your Guardian link is pure communist propaganda. Fossil fuels don’t get subsidies, they have created our entire quality of life. Without cheap oil, gas, and coal we would be all be subsistence farmers dying of disease or exhaustion by age 40, just like people did in the pre-industrial age. Government budgets would be even bigger disasters than they are already without all the revenue brought in by carbon-sourced energy taxes, energy section corporate taxes, and income taxes from all the people that have a job because of cheap fuel. No tax bucks from Exxon would also certainly mean no subsidy bucks for Tesla or Solyndra.

    • 0 avatar
      Master Baiter

      I read the Guardian link. What a steaming pile. They consider “subsidies” polluters not paying the true cost of fossil fuels for things like local pollution and global warming. No mention of the benefits of cheap energy. As if cooking over burning cow dung is preferable to having a local coal-fired power plant.

    • 0 avatar
      stuki

      And participants in the illegal drugs trade get a massive implied subsidy, simply on account of its illegality. We should therefore, well indoctrinateds that we are, also subsidize serial killers…. To the tune of, say $10K, per student per school shooting.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • 28-Cars-Later: Sort of, but if events follow the Soviet collapse model the “young leader to lead reforms who...
  • SCE to AUX: RTGs are awesome, if you only need 200 watts that can dwindle to 50 in 40 years. But hey, the Voyagers...
  • LectroByte: It depends on the tires. I think the one Motor Trend tested was limited to 131 mph by the electronics,...
  • slavuta: Does “build back better” rings like “perestroika” to you?
  • SCE to AUX: Perhaps it is all of those things. Supply chain problems likely forced MB to look at alternate suppliers,...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber