Missed It By That Much: Tesla Falls Short of Its 2016 Goal

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

2016 wasn’t just a disappointing year for celebrities.

After stating that it would place between 80,000 and 90,000 vehicles in the hands of adoring customers before year’s end, Tesla failed to clear the delivery bar it had set for itself. While production numbers crossed the threshold, 2016 deliveries fell short, numbering only 76,230.

Still, the electric automaker — which has set much loftier production goals for the near future — doesn’t seem too concerned.

In a press release, Tesla claimed that the lower-than-expected delivery number could be explained — at least in part — by the methodology surrounding its sales tallies.

“Our Q4 delivery count should be viewed as slightly conservative, as we only count a car as delivered if it is transferred to the customer and all paperwork is correct,” the company stated. “In total, about 2,750 vehicles missed being counted as deliveries in Q4 either due to last-minute delays in transport or because the customer was unable to physically take delivery.”

On paper, deliveries in the last quarter numbered 22,200 — lower than Q3’s 24,500 vehicles. Overall production was 24,882 vehicles in Q4 and 83,922 for the year. However, Tesla claims that demand remains strong, with record orders for the Model S and Model X recorded over the last three months. Interestingly, the Model X SUV’s share of the production pie grew compared to its sedan stablemate, perhaps proving that the utility vehicle craze transcends all propulsion types.

With the much-anticipated Model 3 scheduled to begin production at the end of this year, Tesla aims to hit a rate of 500,000 vehicles per year in 2018.

[Image: Tesla Motors]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
20 of 47 comments
  • -Nate -Nate on Jan 04, 2017

    "2016 deliveries fell short, numbering only 76,230.". . Shows how much _I_ know ~ . I think this is pretty good and they should be shouting it to the heavens considering all the hurdles . . 300 miles range is _minimum_ . . Not like I'll ever buy one even if I could afford it but the So. Cal. roads & Freeways are filling up with them . . -Nate

    • See 10 previous
    • Orenwolf Orenwolf on Jan 04, 2017

      @-Nate Mmm, bacon.

  • Orenwolf Orenwolf on Jan 04, 2017

    Nice to see that 1) *production* met estimates, and 2) sell-through numbers are transparent and actually represent end user deliveries. Now, can they hit their targets this year? And will they see a quality drop from their aggressive ramp-up?

    • See 1 previous
    • OldManPants OldManPants on Jan 06, 2017

      @SexCpotatoes Jeez.. picky, picky. Look at what the proto-Christians put up with.. meeting in leaky caves & catacombs, lousy food, cat toy status... did that stop them or their movement?

  • "In total, about 2,750 vehicles missed being counted as deliveries in Q4 either due to last-minute delays in transport or because the customer was unable to physically take delivery.” Don't get me wrong - 76K annual deliveries is certainly nothing to sneeze at, but... 2,750 missed deliveries in the last quarter? This would be a far more palatable number if it was in the (low) hundreds, not thousands. Shouldn't there be fewer bugs in the delivery process by now...?

    • See 2 previous
    • @indi500fan For the very first delivery, I'd still go with the Tesla 3. If the question is which manufacturer will deliver 10, 100, or 1000 vehicles first, well...

  • SCE to AUX SCE to AUX on Jan 04, 2017

    I read an estimate somewhere that Tesla's losses in Q4 will be staggering. They'll need to produce a lot of test-drive Model 3s for customers. I won't buy mine without driving one. And they need to address the question of service support centers. I won't be eager to drive an hour each way just to have the weatherstripping adjusted.

Next