International School of

Management




Dynamic Strategic Management
A Classical Comprehensive SWOT Analysis of
the Scenario Faced by Tesla


Anteneh Getachew Kebede
February 2014


1

Table of Contents

1. Historical Background of Green Technology .................................................................................. 1
2. Tesla's Historical Background and Business Strategy ................................................................... 2
3. External Environmental Analysis ...................................................................................................... 4
4. Industry Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 6
4.2 Buyer Power ...................................................................................................................................... 7
4.3 Supplier Power .................................................................................................................................. 8
4.4 Treat of Entry ................................................................................................................................... 8
4.5 Treat of Substitutes ........................................................................................................................... 9
5. Internal Environment Analysis ........................................................................................................ 11
5.1 Key Resources ................................................................................................................................. 11
5.2 Capabilities ..................................................................................................................................... 13
5.3 Value Chain Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 17
6. Core Competencies .......................................................................................................................... 19
7. Competitive Advantage .................................................................................................................... 20
8. Strategic Competitiveness ............................................................................................................... 20
9. SWOT Analysis: ................................................................................................................................ 21
9.1 Internal Strength ............................................................................................................................... 21
9.2 Internal Weakness ........................................................................................................................... 22
9.3 External Opportunities.................................................................................................................... 22
9.4 External Threats .............................................................................................................................. 23
10 Strategy Implication ..................................................................................................................... 23
Reference ................................................................................................................................................... 25








1

1. Historical Background of Green Technology
According to Bellis (2014) green technology is the long as well as short term impact of new
inventions on the environment. This technology has the purpose of making our planet green. The
same author pointed out that energy efficiency, recycling concerns for safety and health and
renewable resources, among others are what environmentally friendly innovations in energy
technology is all about.
Due to advocacies of clean and unpolluted world environment by money interested groups and
political parties one of the pollutants like CO2 emission has been criticized all over the world.
"The CO2 emission has become a bigger and bigger problem around the world today. Its hard to
open a newspaper without reading about the polar ice is melting or that its getting warmer"
(Lehman, 2009, p. 6). According to the Boston Consulting Group ( as cited in Philipp & Haiss,
2010) "the causal correlation between CO
2
emissions and global warming is now widely
accepted by a solid majority of the scientific community. The significant damage caused by
global warming and the intense public awareness of this topic make the challenge of reducing
CO
2
emissions the major force currently driving development of alternative concepts for
automotive propulsion"(P.9). One of the most pollutant industries is the transportation sector.
Karamitsios (2013, p.6) holds that " the transportation sector has contributed significantly to the
increase of CO2 emissions worldwide". This is due to heavy reliance of the sector on fossil fuel
technologies (Karamitsios, 2013).
In order to expand the use of non pollutant alternative vehicles many governments like the U.S.
federal government has established various incentives and regulations that urge new
entrepreneurs and corporate entrepreneurs to invest in the green-technology vehicle market. An
important incentive for new technologies was stipulated in 2007 by U.S. government by enacting
2

the Energy Independence and Security Act, formulated by the Congress, which forced the
automobile manufacturers to achieve a limit of 35 mpg by 2020 (Karamitsios, 2013).
The same author identified that, various programs that provide financial back-ups to car
consumers has also been devised by the U.S. government.
These incentives involve:
Loans for the promotion of battery research and other green-technology development for
vehicles.
Support for electric vehicle (EV) battery charging station implementation.
The EV purchasing by the federal government (pp. 22-23).
Emanating from the governmental regulations and incentive programs on environmental
pollution different manufacturers started to come up with environmentally friendly technologies
in their operations. One among others is the Electric Vehicles (EVs) which are often described as
the most feasible solution (Karamitsios, 2013).
2. Tesla's Historical Background and Business Strategy
One of the major green technology vehicle market is the introduction of EV. Tesla Motors Inc. is
among the EV manufacturers in the US. This US company " is an automotive company, which
was established in 2003 by a group of Silicon Valley engineers who wanted to develop electric
vehicles" (Musk, 2006 as cited in Karamitsios, 2003, p. 16). More specifically The company,
Tesla Motors Inc., is a brainchild of Martin Eberhard, Marc Tarpanning (both Eberhard and
Tarpanning are cofounders of the electronic book company NuvoMedia) and Elon Musk
(founder of PayPal). Sergey Brin and Larry Page (the founders of Google) are investors. This
just gives a perspective of the forces, both financial and the knowledge, which are behind the
company. The company was established in the summer of 2003 (Lehman, 2009, p. 29).
3

Regarding the strategy of the company as pointed out by its current CEO Elton Musk in 2006, is
"The starting point is a high performance sports car, but the long term vision is to build cars
of all kinds, including low cost family vehicles" (Hamilton, 2006 as cited in Karamitsios,
2013, p. 16).
The same author further classified "The overall strategy of Tesla can be summed up in three
steps. The first step was to introduce the Roadster model to the market and consequently
establish a keystone for EVs. In continuation, in 2012 the new Model S was introduced to the
market and it is targeted at middle to upper-middle class consumers. Finally, by 2014 Tesla plans
to produce and market a new model named Model X " (p. 16 ).
When we see the growing trend in revenue of the company in 2007 it was $ 0.07million and
jumped to 116.74million in 2010 (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.).
Tesla's revenue in 2011 and 2012 was $204.24million and 413.26million respectively (Journal,
2014). This is an indication that there is a possibility for a new car company like Tesla to become
successful new electric manufacturing company in an already well developed auto industry. This
success can exemplified by the companies first profit record in 2013 on revenues of $561.8
million (Mclvor, 2012). In the same year the company produce a record breaking number of cars
which put the company's shares to be more than $100 mark for the first time. On top of that a
blue print in the success of the organization can be witnessed by the company's ability to pay its
a nearly half billion-dollar loan to the Department of Energy nine years earlier (Hall, 2013). This
ability of the company comes from the successful sale of its new shares in the stock market
(Kershiner, 2013).



4

3. External Environmental Analysis
Although there are many environmental analysis models, the SLEPT approach of Doole and
Lowe (2008) will be followed to analyze the socio/cultural, legal, economical, political, and
technological dimensions of Tesla.
Socio Cultural

Generally there is increasing awareness of environmental health by people in different parts of
the world. Emanating from this awareness, environmentally conscious people are currently using
public transportation, biking, and walking. Such pattern of increasing environmental awareness
leads to increasing interest in green transportation which will have a positive condition for Tesla.
(Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.). Despite the positive impact of environmental
awareness currently the interest for EVs seems to be slipping. Refinements in auto carbon
emission and performance in addition to the high price for EVs among others are the reasons
(Hall, 2013)
Legal

Governments in different parts of the world are stipulating laws in carbon emissions regulations,
and regulations increase price of gas autos. These governmental moves are a clear indication for
the need of alternative technologies like electric vehicles (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, &
Elliott, n.d.).
In August 2009, President Obama announced a $2.4 billion grant program designed to create an
electric vehicle battery industry in the United States (Bullis, 2012).
Economic
Looking at the Economical environment it is characterized by rising fuel prices, increasing
demand for green transportation, increasing dependency like U.S. very dependent on foreign oil.
5

and U.S. auto imports outnumber exports. These conditions are Causing shift toward green
transportation (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.).
Political
Looking the US government move for $7,500 tax credit for EV purchases and the movement to
reduce foreign oil imports resulted in increasing purchase of EVs (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams,
& Elliott, n.d.)
Technological
Technologically there are advancements to reduce price of building an EV., EV battery lifespan
increasing, and strategic alliances allow firms to combine competitive advantages. These will
enable lower prices and higher quality product (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.).
In addition to the SLEPT analysis it is worth considering the demographic, global and natural
environmental factors in order for having a comprehensive understanding of the general
environment.
Demographic

Demographically, there are growing market segments for green technology and increasing
demand for green products. This will have positive impact for the EV market (Aulicino,
Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.)
Global
Globalization and international alliances that result in Economies of scale will lower cost of
green technologies (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.).






6

Physical
Physically, there are increasing demand for autos, increasing need for environmental protection
and increasing need for green technologies. Which have their positive impact for the
development of EVs (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.).
4. Industry Analysis
To analyze the EV industry Michael Porters Five Forces Model will be used as analytical
framework. For Porter (1979) the five Forces are competitive rivalry, buyer power, supplier
power, treat of entry, and treat of substitutes.
4.1 Competitive Rivalry
According to (Lehman, 2009, p. 42) "Since there arent that many EV manufactures on the
market yet, the competitive force exerted by rivals are low. This scenario can change fast. Many
car manufactures are thinking of making EVs. Even though the entry barriers are very high,
there are still car manufactures that got a lot of the same technology to manufacture EVs. The big
difference, and also the key to EVs, is the batteries and the electric engine". With regard to the
battery technology the competitive rivalry could be tough in the future for Tesla since lithium-
sulfide batteries are believed to have more ability in storing energy than lithium-ion ones (Bullis,
2012).
The other challenge as predicted by Lehman (2009) is "the batteries need to be able to hold a lot
of energy as well as being recharged fast. The electric engine has been on the market for a long
time and the technology can be bought from many different manufactures. It is of course
important to get an engine with high performance and which is able to use the power as well as
possible" (p. 42).
In order to look at the competitive landscape of the EV industry Karamitsios (2013) listed out
the direct and indirect competitors of Tesla as illustrated in the following matrix:
7

Product Major players (or
upcoming)
Competitiveness
EV manufactures Think, GM Volt Direct
Hybrid cars Toyota Prius, Lexus, Fisker Direct
Conventional cars GM, Crystler, VW, Porsche Indirect
Source : (Karamitsios, 2013)

4.2 Buyer Power
Regarding the bargaining power of buyers Lehman (2009, p.45) summarized the situation as
follows " Even though the customers are the ones who bring the money, their bargaining power
is still low". The same author identified the EV market has small market niche characterized
by customers who are very rich and concerned more about green technology to save the
environment. Real competitive EV in this market has been realized by Tesla Motors which is one
of the few automakers to do that. Such automakers like Tesla have been identified as competitive
because of their ability to fulfill the requirements of driving range, design, speed and acceleration
as balanced mix in the EV market. For Lehman (2009) the bargaining power of customers will
significantly increase from where it was in the past (low bargaining power) if the EV industry is
going to grow in an increasing rate. The same trend has been speculated by Aulicino, Waratuke,
Williams, and Elliott (n.d.) looking at the long term success of Tesla as group buyers are its
target, Tesla will far high bargaining power from these group buyers. Accordingly "it is
important for Tesla motors to be able to adapt to a higher demand from the customers. If Tesla
Motors want be an exclusive they have to expect the customers to become more demanding as
this market turns from being a niche market into a real market. This is just like Porsche or Ferrari
customers who have a higher expectation to the product than a normal car a customer has"
(Lehman, 2009, p. 45).

8

4.3 Supplier Power
One of the suppliers of Tesla are Battery Companies. As Tesla buys Li - ion cells from many
suppliers, these companies are characterized by low bargaining Power. The other supplier is
Chassis/Engineering (Lotus) which is known for its high bargaining power emanating from
exclusive partnership and no clear alternative for current market. Previously suppliers of
Transmission like Magna had high bargaining power but now as Tesla started in-house
production their bargaining power has failed. As Tesla develops motors, power electronics, etc.
using AC's tech. the bargaining power of Sotira body panels has diminished. Finally suppliers:
Lotus Chassis and Borgwarner Parts has high and low bargaining power respectively
(Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.).
4.4 Treat of Entry
For (Lehman, 2009), "the complementors of the EV industry are the power industry as well as
the oil industry. The power industry has a great interest in the EV becoming a success this will
sell more power. On the other hand is the oil industry not that interested in this new vehicle.
This will affect one of their main sources of income" (p. 44).
The potential new entrants and their respective power as indicated by Aulicino, Waratuke,
Williams, and Elliott, (n.d.) is that new entrants with similar technologies has low power. On the
other hand new entrants with disruptive technologies have high power, these include: Large
mass-market manufacturers (Chevrolet, GM, Toyota), Luxury performance sports cars (BMW,
Porsche, Mercedes), other boutique manufacturers (Italians and Aston Martin). Besides that
Tesla is also facing some challenges from the currently coming none fossil fuel technologies like
hydrogen and natural gas (Hall, 2013).
The challenges mentioned above are further exacerbated by factors like strategic shift towards
gasoline electric hybrids; the promising believes for fuel cells than battery electric cars; and the
9

obvious short comings i.e. driving range, cost and recharging time of electric vehicles is putting
them not to become a natural replacement for the conventional cars (Shirouzu, Kubota, &
Lienert, 2013).
The same author held that the difficult apparent reality of the market for electronic vehicles and
the declining demand that they are facing is forcing companies like Nissan to make strategic shift
from more green EV investments into hybrids (Shirouzu, Kubota, & Lienert, 2013).
4.5 Treat of Substitutes
According to Lehman (2009) "The other force which is very strong is the substitute products.
The largest industry is the car industry, but other alternative vehicles like the hybrid car are also
substitutes. Most people still choose to buy a normal car, which of cause makes the car industry
the largest competitor. It is because of the substitute products that the competitive force all
together is high and still makes the industry less attractive. Firm in the industry should at all time
pay attention to the competitive force, since it can change at all time" (p.46).
More specifically as pointed out by Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, and Elliott (n.d.) hybrids
(plug-in and otherwise), Toyota FT-HS, BMW 1 and 3 series (mild hybrids), small performance
turbo diesels, small non-hybrid sports cars, Mazda Miata, BMW Z4 and Honda S2000 are some
of the substitute for Tesla. The same authors show the extent and magnitude of the bargaining
powers of its specific substitutes as follows: Tesla faces high bargaining power for its $110,000
Roadster from BMW and Mercedes. The same situation revels in its competition with Toyota
and Honda which compute with $50,000 Model S.
On top of the aforementioned situation the following are some of the major indications for the
increasing treat of substitutes for Tesla's EVs: First there is a continues development on solar cell
design and car power supply requirements like heater or air-conditioning (Bellis, 2014). Second
there is a strategic shift by automotive executives in Asia, Europe, and North America to new
10

alternative energy sources like hydrogen. Finally the move by Nissan to follow its rival Toyota in
changing its power generation for the next big green-tech innovation of hydrogen to electricity
and the new alliances of Toyota and BMW to develop hydrogen powered fuel cell cars are the
major indicators of aggravated treat for new technology (Shirouzu, Kubota, & Lienert, 2013).
To substantiate the analysis of the five forces to look at the industrial environment of EVs, the
three types of competitors namely Immediate, Impending and invisible competitors of Tesla are
concisely summarized by Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott (n.d.) in the following
illustration:
Competitor Environment
Immediate Competitors
Think, Aptera, Fisker, Coda, Zap Direct competitors in EV market
BMW, Mercedes, Ferrari Luxury brands, comparable prices
Toyota Hybrids successful but not completely green
Smart Successful but not intended for luxury or enjoyment
Impending
Ford, GM, Hyundai, Honda, Etc. Potential competitors but also potential customers as Tesla
contracts to produce EV components to other manufacturers.

Invisible
As EV industry grows, more competitors will enter market
New startups will appear
Disruptive technologies will appear
Source: (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.)









11

5. Internal Environment Analysis

5.1 Key Resources
One of the key resources that Tesla possess is the culture of innovation that the company is
identified with from its inception. This culture put Tesla in a position to posses various patents
for EV components. This is best noticed by Tesla's ability to get over 140 patents awarded and
over 240 Patents Pending (Witt, 2013).
The other crucial resource of the company is associated with its award winning Chief Executive
Officer and Product Architect of Tesla Motors, Mr. Elon Musk is Chairman of the Board. He has
served as CEO since October 2008 and as Chairman of the board of directors since April 2004.
Mr. Musk has also served as Chief Executive Officer, Chief Technology Officer of Space
Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX), which is a company that developing and
launching advanced rockets for satellite and eventually human transportation, since May 2002.
Mr. Musk has also served as non-executive Chairman and principal shareholder of Solar City, a
leading provider of solar power systems in the United States, since July 2006.
Thanks to the contribution of its CEO, Tesla has earned worldwide recognitions for its
achievements in its successful operations to be the first EV company in the world among others.
The following are some of its awards:
Automobile Magazine's 2013 Car of the Year, a unanimous decision.
Motor Trend 2013 Car of the Year, also a unanimous decision.
Popular Science's Auto Grand Award Winner Best of What's New list 2012.
Time Magazine Best 25 Inventions of the Year 2012 award.
Yahoo! Autos 2013 Car of the Year.
CNET Tech Car of the Year for 2012
Green Car Reports' Best Car To Buy 2013
12

2013 AutoGuide.com Reader's Choice Car of the Year
Natural Resources Canada 2013 EcoENERGY for Vehicles Awards in the full-size
category (Tesla Motors Model S, n.d.).
Tesla had its initial public offering (IPO) on July 2010 and is now treaded on the NASDAQ
exchange as TESLA (Boyke, Cheng, Clevers, Schroeder, & Strupp, 2010)
In addition to the aforementioned crucial resources as of 03 October 2013,Tesla has operated a
network of 42 stores and galleries in the United States and Canada (Tesla Motors Inc. profile,
n.d.). Beyond that Tesla has more than 4,000 Employees worldwide (Tesla Motors, Inc. Profile,
n.d.).
looking at the illustrations: Annex-I (Summarized Financial Statements) Annex-II (Stock Price
History), and Annex-III (Financial Ratios vs Industry Averages) the financial condition of the
organization can be briefly summarized as follows:
Not yet achieved significant profitability.
Stock price is expected to rise to $70 per share from the current $25.
Strength of its stock price is due to expectations of future earnings or acquisition by a
larger firm.
Tesla has acquired significant assets valued over $400 million.

R&D has been a large expense for Tesla, and may not decrease even after roll out of the
Model S. (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.)
Concerning the operational facilities of Tesla, it manufactures the Model S at the Tesla Factory
in Fremont, California. For the European market, Tesla is assembling and distributing the Model
S from its European Distribution Center in Tilburg, the Netherlands (Tesla Motors,Inc. Model S
n.d.).
13

Finally, to ensure long distance drive for its customers Tesla is building the fastest and most
comprehensive international network of charging stations (Witt, 2013). Accordingly, in 2012
Tesla Motors began building a network of 480-volt fast charging supercharger stations in order
to facilitate the Model S sedans to make long distance trips. In June 2013 Tesla announced that
all existing stations in the supercharger network, and all new stations, would become Tesla
stations, and have facilities to support under-two-minute battery pack swaps for the Tesla Model
S, and for all future Tesla models (Tesla Motors, Inc. Model S, n.d.).
5.2 Capabilities
Tesla Motor Company has the following capabilities in addition to the above mentioned valuable
resources:
Design skills used to make quality products
Concerning the design skills necessary in making quality products MacKensie (2013) has
described Tesla's capability as follows: The first advantage of Model S is that it provides
packaging opportunities resulted from the compact EV powertrain. In addition to that the cabin is
identified by the same author to be roomy, though the raked roofline force on rear seat head
room. "With no engine up front, the "hood" covers a useful luggage space, and the rear hatch
opens to a cavernous load area that gets even bigger when you fold the rear seats flat. Total load
capacity is 63.4 cubic feet, not that far shy of the 63.7 cubic-feet in a Chevy Equinox, and despite
its rakish looks, the Model S is the first hatchback in the world to offer third-row seating". In
addition to these Tesla designed and established its own system because it excels in both
hardware and software engineering capability" (MacKensie, 2013, para. 3). On top of that Tesla
designed its Model S to allow fast battery swapping, and this feature has facilitated the
assembling process (Tesla Motors, Inc. Model S, n.d.)

14

Engineering Excellence
Looking Tesla from engineering excellence, the Model S body is light, thanks to its all-
aluminum construction, yet strong and stiff. The front and rear suspension are also mostly
aluminum. At the rear are extruded rear suspension links that provide the strength of forgings at
much lower cost, while up front are hollow-cast front knuckles that weigh 25 percent less than a
conventional knuckle of similar strength. The electric motor sits between the rear wheels,
contributing greatly to the 47/53-percent front/rear weight distribution (MacKensie, 2013).
R&D of EV Powertrain Components
Being an innovation leader is a great advantage when trying to position a company in an
upcoming market like the EV market. But there are also a number of hazards when being so. The
main innovation at Tesla Motors is their battery pack, which is a combination of their own
innovations and parts from collaboration partners. (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.)
Cooperate With Partner Firms to Achieve Synergies
As illustrated by the Karamitsios (2013, p.16) "Tesla Motors has set up partnerships with many
firms. Firstly, some of its supplier alliances are Lotus Cars and Panasonic. Also, the R&D
departments of Tesla Motors and Panasonic cooperate for the developing of more efficient
batteries. Finally, Tesla Motors cooperates with some OEM manufacturers like Toyota and
Daimler".The types of Tesla Motors partnerships according to Holmberg (as cited in
Karamitsios, 2013, p.18) are listed as follow:
15


Source: Holmberg, 2011 (as cited in Karamitsios, 2013, p.18)
16

Efficiency
For MacKensie (2013),... (Efficiency, para. 4) the efficiency aspect of Tesla has been described
as follows "The best energy consumption figure we've returned is 118 mpg-e for a 212-mile run
from the eastern fringe of the Los Angeles sprawl to Las Vegas, Nevada. For the 313 miles of
road loops during the COTY evaluation, where the car was driven at normal speeds by all the
judges with the air-conditioning running, it averaged 74.5 mpg-e. Impressive numbers, especially
considering the 4766-pound Tesla Model S Signature Performance version will nail 60 mph in
4.0 seconds and the quarter in 12.4 seconds at 112.5 mph, with a top speed of 133 mph"
(MacKensie, 2013, para. 4)
Safety
Tesla Motors has been identified by the same author as top ranking because the Model S is a
very stable platform and the car is quick and responsive during high traffic. The advantage of its
stability control and anti-lock braking systems and the usual complement of passive safety
devices has been identified as typical characteristics of the car with respect to its safety
precaution measures. In addition to that MacKensie (2013)... (Safety, para. 5)... held that "clever
engineering such as the double octagon extrusions front and rear, and the immensely strong roof
structure, is working to protect you. Tesla claims the Model S outperforms federal crash
standards, having been impact-tested at 50 mph (the mandatory standard is 35 mph) and
exceeding the roof crush requirement by a factor of 2".
Value
As compared to Mercedes-Benz E-Class, BMW 5 Series, and Audi A6 the 40-kW-hr Model S is
competitive at price of $58,570 (before a federal tax credit of $7,500). looking at "a loaded 85-
kW-hr signature performance series, like the $106,900 (before tax credit) car Tesla founder Elon
Musk drives, is priced right on BMW M5 and the Mercedes CLS63 AMG -- cars of similar
17

performance, remember. Tesla buyers likely don't need to watch their pennies, but the
calculation's worth doing all the same: At an average of 74.5 mpg-e, the Model S costs about 6
cents a mile to run, based on California's 13 cents per kW-hr" (MacKensie, 2013, para. 6).
Performance of I ntended Function
Regarding the performance of intended function the same author pointed out that "The Model S
will easily handle 200 miles of mixed city, suburban, and freeway driving without any
hypermiling techniques. For the typical daily diet of commuting and short trips (the average
American drives about 40 miles a day), the Model S is a compelling proposition" (MacKensie,
2013, para. 7).
5.3 Value Chain Analysis
Suppliers
According to Hall (2013) Tesla changed its purchasing practice to strategic global commodity
organization from its tactical decentralized entity. However; there is no enough procurement
synergy in Tesla's operation with sister companies like SpaceX.
The same author maintained the speed and flexibility of the company by citing the following
from the Procurement Officer speech " Were telling our suppliers that both parties need to think
proactively and work hard at significantly reducing tooling lead-times," he adds, " making sure
theyre able and willing to put together engineering support teams for us willing to work with the
speed and flexibility were asking for" (Hall, 2013, Building Its Own Supply Chain, para. 13).
Finally the relationship of Tesla with its suppliers has been described by Peter Carlsson as
follows: " I think the suppliers who were early adopters and who were really willing to take a bit
of a risk and bet on us, probably have a profile that fits us a little bit better than a more
conservative type. Were the risk takers" (Hall, 2013, Building Its Own Supply Chain, para. 16).

18


Marketing & Sales
Tesla uses unique procurement for its model S infotainment system designed by the company
from the ground up. In addition to that as it has been stated by Tesla's Chief Procurement
Officer Peter Carlsson they are approaching their biggest market and are becoming very close in
their development, in other words they can drive, design and implement the technology
concurrently in speedy manner (Hall, 2013). On the other hand the target market of Tesla's
Roadster has been very small because of the high cost associated with the Roadster Model.
However, there is shortage of supply for the Model S because there is high demand from
customers that even resulted in a five-month waiting list when we looking at specific cases
Model S market in Norway (Tesla Motors, Inc. Model S, n.d.).
In 2013 Tesla build about 20 retail stores in order to accommodate its plan for increased Model S
production (Hall, 2013). The sales practice of the company has been further explained by (Tesla
Motors, n.d.) as follows: "Sales during 2013 totaled about 18,000 units, allowing the Model S to
rank as the third top selling plug-in electric car in the U.S. in 2013, after the Chevrolet Volt
(23,094) and the Nissan Leaf (22,610). Also in 2013, the Model S was the top selling car in the
full-size luxury sedan category, ahead of the Mercedes-Benz S-Class (13,303), the top selling car
in the category in 2012, and also surpassing the BMW 7 Series (10,932), Lexus LS (10,727),
Audi A8 (6,300) and Porsche Panamera (5,421). As of December 2013, about 20,600 units have
been delivered in the U.S. since the Model S inception in June 2012" (Tesla Motors, Inc. n.d.,
Sales & Markets, North America, para. 5).
Regarding the sales strategy of the company it follows similar style to Apple. This is because
they are following the same type of stores that are "both aesthetically pleasing and allow for the
firm to create a unique buying experience. Teslas stores change the entire car buying experience
19

and take away the incentive of both the buyer and seller to compete on price. Furthermore,
Teslas stores allow the firm to achieve operating efficiencies as well as capture sales and
services revenues that typical automobile manufacturers do not" (Schwartz & Xia, 2013, p. 3).
Repair Service
Tesla is pioneering a new approach to vehicle servicing that we believe will revolutionize the
customer experience. An announcement about this will be forthcoming shortly. A complete
inspection, tire alignment, new brake pads, hardware upgrades, and miscellaneous other
maintenance items as needed are among the repair services (Tesla Motors Model S, n.d., Vehicle
warranty & maintenance, para. 1).
6. Core Competencies
R&D of EV Powertrain Components
Tesla is known for its superior battery technology as compared to the other manufacturer's in the
industry. This competency of Tesla emanates from long years of research and development in
order to realize the very idea of its foundation which is "based on its believe that the same Li-ion
technology used in laptops could be used to create fully electric vehicle that is not only eco-
friendly but also attractive and fun to drive" (Boyke, Cheng, Clevers, Schroeder, & Strupp, 2010,
p. 3).
Ability to Envision the Growth of the EV
This is envisioned by its chairman, product architect and CEO Elon Musk. This person is the real
chapmen and symbol of the brand of the company. Due to his long vision, ability to create
strategic partnership, primary shareholder and his ability to secure DOE loan enable the company
to become successful electric vehicle manufacturer (Boyke, Cheng, Clevers, Schroeder, &
Strupp, 2010).

20

7. Competitive Advantage
Proprietary EV Powertrain Component Patents
Tesla has over 140 patents awarded and over 240 Patents Pending (Witt, 2013). Many of Tesla's
patents were in the United States, Britain, and Canada, but many other patents were approved in
countries around the globe. Many inventions developed by Tesla were not put into patent
protection (Tesla Motors, Inc. Patents, 2014).
Design skills Used to Make Quality Products
The companies competitive differentiation comes from its ability to deliver the most
environmentally responsible vehicles on the market having all quality dimensions and benefits of
a premium car: speed, handling, comfort, and fun (Boyke, Cheng, Clevers, Schroeder, & Strupp,
2010).
8. Strategic Competitiveness
Starting from the very establishment of the company the strategic competitiveness of the
company is based on its excellence in R&D. Such a commitment of the company can be clearly
understood by looking at its financial statements. From the very beginning till present the highest
expense of the company is R&D (Journal, 2014).
Annual Financials for Tesla Motors Inc. R&D
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
53.71M 19.28M 93M 208.98M 273.98M
Source: (Journal, 2014) FactSet Fundamentals.



21

9. SWOT Analysis:
Based on thorough analysis of the company's internal and external environmental situations, this
part includes the SWOT analysis that are believed to be very critical for the success of the
company and which will give hints on strategic implications.
9.1 I nternal Strength
First-mover in the EV industry - Tesla become the first EV company by introducing
Roadster which was the first federally-compliant highway EV.
Innovative corporate culture.

Strong R&D capabilities.
Has about 300 patents.
Enthusiastic investors due to the promising stock price of Tesla.
Young company that can start from scratch to build its own unique image.
Partnerships with manufacturers. like Toyota, Mercedes, Daimler and Panasonic have
provided the company the opportunity to support their battery technology research and
development.
Focus on design, performance and efficiency. Tesla is the only auto company that give the
same emphases on zero emissions, performance and aesthetics of the car.
Battery Technology: The company has superior battery technology to other auto makers in
the industry. Tesla has developed its own core technologythe batteries, the electric
motor, and the systems for controlling them.
Supplier of EV components: Tesla not only benefits from lower costs for its own cars, its
also been able to sell its technology to other automakers, providing a boost of revenue that
helped it survive in the time between producing its first car, the Roadster, and the current
Model S..
22

9.2 I nternal Weakness
Tesla is a new company pitted against established auto companies.
Tesla have limited production facility.
Teslas stock price is based on future expectations.
Possible supplier problems if demand increases drastically. .
Tesla Rangers mobile service crews may be ill suited to serve the high demand market
of mid-sized autos that Tesla intends to expand into.
Tesla has small number of employees compared to well established companies like
Toyota.
Delay in release of projected models.
Logistical disadvantages
Lack of brand name recognition
9.3 External Opportunities
Successful in European markets and sees great potential in Asian and Canadian markets.
Alliances with other manufacturers to obtain synergies in distribution and service.
Rising gas prices will increase the demand for EVs.
Government regulations and subsidies as well as economic incentives favor EVs over
gasoline autos.
There is optimism in the stock price of Tesla.
Speculations indicate there will be growth in the global EV market.
Innovative sales channel models
Sourcing suppliers in the realm of power distribution and high current or high power
electricity applications.
Theres also a strong case that improvements to the lithium-ion batteries that power the
current generation of electric vehicles may be enough.
23

9.4 External Threats
Problems of economic and financial crisis globally, may have trouble generating revenue
to get back their return on investment.
Competition! Automakers already have production and distribution systems, and may
have more ability to absorb losses.
The end of subsidies and tax credits.
Sleepy consumer reviews. .
The EV market is still small, worldwide due to expense.
Partnered firms may reverse engineer Teslas intellectual property.
Disruptive technologies from competing firms.
Despite massive investments in battery technology and vehicles, even the most ardent EV
adherents seem a bit ambivalent about the future of battery cars (Shirouzu, Kubota, &
Lienert, 2013).
The gradual tightening of global fuel-efficiency standards from 2020 on is forcing
automakers to assess their options, including the application of advanced technology
(Shirouzu, Kubota, & Lienert, 2013)
10 Strategy Implication

Tesla should apply creative promotional campaigns to further enhance its brand as the
first mover in the EV industry
Tesla should further capitalize on its innovative corporate culture and strong R&D
capabilities to reduce charging time for batteries and to increase the range that their EVs
can go in a single charge.
24

Tesla should negotiate with other established auto companies to minimize the
disadvantages that it faces like delay in the launch of new products and its low level of
brand recognitions.
Tesla should negotiate service agreements with companies like Toyota in order to tackle
problems of after sales service repairs which is challenging to be managed by Tesla
mobile service crews at times of expected high demand for mid-sized autos that Tesla
intends to expand into.
Tesla should expand its production capacity in order to cater the future expected high
demand by increasing its financial base both through sell of equities and debt financing.
Tesla should try to minimize possible supplier problems to accommodate the future
expected significant increase in demand through backward integration.
Through the application of conducive human resource management like the introduction
of well organized knowledge management it should try to attract knowledge workers
from different parts of the world.
Tesla should integrate its operational activities in such a way that it will be in a position
to develop additional models on the Model S powertrain and secure the EV niche in the
luxury vehicle market; at the same time it should commit resources to develop and
manufacture economy EVs.
If battery pack prices are going to fall in the future Tesla could eliminate Model S
160miles option and reduce the price of the 230 and 300miles options in order to further
enhance its competitive advantage.

25

Reference
Aulicino, S., Waratuke, J., Williams, S., & Elliott, C. (n.d.). Tesla Motors case study.
Bellis, M. (2014). Introduction to Green Technology. Retrieved from http://
www.greeninventions.com
Bellis, M. (2014). Solar_Cars. Retrieved from inventors: http://inventors.about.com
Boyke, D., Cheng, J., Clevers, J., Schroeder, M., & Strupp, K. (2010, December 14). Tesla
tomorrow: The future of Tesla motors. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Bullis, K. (2012, October 2). Over capacity too many battery factories, too few electric cars.
Technology review.
Bullis, K. (2012, November 9). How improved batteries will make electric vehicles competitive.
Technology review.
Bullis, K. (2012, December 19). Two advances point toward a cheaper electric-car battery.
Bullis, K. (2013, April 4). Tesla's innovations in batteries give it an edge that Fisker, focused on
design,lack. Technology review: Why Tesla survived and Fisker won't.
Doole, I., & Lowe, R. (2008). International marketing strategy: Analysis, development and
implementation. Seng Lee Pres.
Hall, J. (2013, June 20). /electronics/articles/tesla-builds-supply-chain-own-image/. Retrieved
from http://www.mypurchasingcenter.com.
Karamitsios, A. (2013). Open Innovation in EVs: A Case Study of Tesla Motors. Master of
Science Thesis INDEK KTH Industrial Engineering and Management Industrial
Management. Stockholm: KTH Industrial Engineering and Management, Industrtial
Engineering.
Kershiner, I. (2013, May 26). Israeli venture meant to serve electric cars is ending its run. New
York Times.
Lehman, F. V. (2009). Collaboration with future competitors and partners beyond your current
industry : A case study on Tesla Motors. MSc. MIB Masters's Thesia. Copenhagen: Cand.
Merc. MIB Copenhagen Business School.
MacKensie, A. (2013, January). oftheyear/car/1301_2013_motor_trend_car_of_the_year_tes
a_model_s. Retrieved from http://www.motortrend.com.
26

Mclvor, A. (2012, December). Electric Vehicles: A New Industry (slowly) Emerges. Top Capital
www.topcapital.com.cn.
Philipp, S., & Haiss, P. (2010). Competitive warfare-The impact of electric cars on the oil and
refinery industry and their counter measures. 10th Global Conference on Business and
Economics. Rome.
Porter, M. (1979, March-April). Harvared business review. How competitive forces shape
strategy. The presidents and fellows of harvard college.
Schwartz, C., & Xia, C. (2013, April 18). Investment thesis. University of Oregon Investment
Group.
Shirouzu, N., Kubota, Y., & Lienert, P. (2013, February 04). Electric cars head toward another
dead end.
The Wall Street Journal (2014, February 13). Market Watch. Retrieved from
http://www.marketwatch.com
Tesla Motors,Inc. Patents (2014, February 10).Tesla Patents. Retrieved from
https://sites.google.com.
Tesla Motors, Inc. Model S (n.d.). Tesla Model S. Retrieved from Tesla Motors:
http://en.wikipedia.org
Tesla Motors, Inc. Profile (n.d.). Tesla Profile. Retrieved from http://www.teslamotors.com.
Witt, D. (2013). Tesla motors presentation.










27

Annexes
Annex- I Summarized Financial Statements
In Millions of USD
Year
ending
12/31/10
Year
ending
12/31/09
Year
ending
12/31/08
Year
ending
12/31/07
Total Revenue 116.74 111.94 14.74 0.07
Total Cost of Revenue 85.01 101.01 15.28 0.01
Gross Profit 31.73 10.94 -0.54 0.06

Selling/General/Admin. Expenses, Total 84.57 42.15 23.65 17.24
Research & Development 89.3 19.28 53.71 61.95
Total Operating Expense 263.58 163.84 93.25 80.01
Operating Income -146.84 -51.9 -78.5 -79.93
Other, Net -6.58 -1.45 -0.96 0.14
Income Before Tax -154.16 -55.71 -82.69 -78.05
Income After Tax -154.33 -55.74 -82.78 -78.16
Net Income -154.33 -55.74 -82.78 -78.16

Diluted Weighted Average Shares 50.72 7.02 6.65 3.44
Diluted EPS Excluding Extraordinary Items -3.04 -7.94 -12.46 -22.69
Dividends per Share 0 0 0 0
Diluted Normalized EPS -2.98 -7.81 -12.4 -22.54

Source: (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.).









28


Annex-II Stock Price History
Source: (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.).















29

Annex-III Financial Ratios vs Industry Averages

Source: (Aulicino, Waratuke, Williams, & Elliott, n.d.).