浏览: 日期:2020-06-10

1. Introduction 
To maximize shareholder value, the company engaged in the practice of financial risk control and increased the value of the company if it was done and created for value of our shareholders by implication. Value-added generated by two sources as follows: (1) to minimize taxes of the costs of financial distress (2) to minimize the possibility of the company that may be forced to give up a positive project because of its lack of internally generated funds to do so. Opposite to maximize shareholder value, it is the management of risk aversion hypothesis that the manager will seek to maximize their own personal well-being. This means that the management staff at the time, engaged in financial risk control for practices at the expense of shareholders. Especially when the shareholders of interests are not exactly the same managers who may pursue risk management strategies, and it is changed in their personal wealth, interest rates, commodity prices or the value of foreign currency cash. These steps can be taken, regardless of the wealth of the shareholders of the consequences of those decisions. Therefore, whether to maximize shareholders’ value or financial risk control for driving the participation of force in risk management practices that must be followed. Financial risk arises from the uncertainty in a given counterparty's ability to meet its obligations. More types of opponents and expanding various forms of obligations means that the financial risk control has arrived to the forefront of risk control activities in the service industry companies. One of the most important forms of these practices is related to financial risk control, especially for the companies in the automotive industry (Bodnar, 2005).
Tesla Motors, as a Silicon Valley company, possesses design, production and sale of electric vehicles and electric vehicle power components. Tesla Motors is a publicly traded company, which has been widespread concern in the stock exchange. Tesla in the automotive industry is the second model of the Tesla Roadster and the first all-electric sports car. Its s-type is all-electric luxury sedan. Although still expensive, it is basically a cheaper sports car. Tesla also sells electric power components, including lithium-ion battery pack, and the other carmakers are Daimler and Toyota. It is envisioned as an independent car manufacturer that is special for Tesla with the final quality of the production of all-electric vehicles at affordable ordinary consumers (Glaum, 2007). 
The purpose of this study is to provide some of the answers in this regard. More specifically, its goal is to reveal the state of financial risk control for Tesla Motors in the automotive industry.
2. Main Body 
2.1 Tools for financial risk control
With the tips in some cases through regulatory tasks, other financial institutions have been looking for new means to measure and control its financial risk. Adding fuel to the fire carried out a series of related activities, it involves the rapid pace of product innovation, further financial institutions to diversify into new geographic and product markets area, as well as an enhanced credit intermediation rate. The effect has been that we have witnessed the development of more sophisticated financial risk measurement and management methods. It has been the introduction of more complex hedging method. Even more interesting, especially interested in, it has been the development of the model that can be used to migrate to measure financial risk at the portfolio level, and it can also be used to allocate the capital. These can be broadly divided into two types; proprietary financial risk control models and the vendor's sales model. Despite the nature of their general application, it is almost universally quite complex. As clear reasons, there is not enough information you can get about the ability for the former category of these models. However, some of the details are generally the latter category. This category includes financial risk control models as follows. 
First, for JP Morgan sales, its financial risk control is one of the first model portfolios and developed for the assessment of financial risk. It incorporates a method for evaluating changes in counterparty financial quality of the portfolio's value-at-risk generated. It establishes a risk profile for each counterparty portfolio and combined with the volatility of individual instruments to model the volatility of the total portfolio. The loan loss reserve sets methods to make it assess the risk capital illiquid loans environment. Therefore, the method may be better suited for a company whose loan portfolio of retail and institutional rather than those bonds (Fatemi, 2009). In addition, as a loan pricing corporation, KMV portfolio manager measures the risk and return characteristics of the portfolio, and allows users to explore personal assets at risk to change the incremental effect. It also provides a large combination of changes to assess the potential changes and inspection of the tactical and strategic effect. It can be a valuable tool to determine the allocation of the total capital requirements and economic capital (Luck, 2011). Finally, McKinsey Company financial risk concept is achieved in default, and the financial risk control is estimated in specific countries and industries. It uses the default rates of speculation into national and industry-specific global macroeconomic development. It then maps these price cumulative probabilities of migration by country and industry (Howton, 2010).
This brief description of these models have shown that increasing the complex of financial risk control has been caused by the same set of complex design models to measure and manage the risk. Then it is to provide a picture of financial results for Tesla Motors in the United States using these models as above.
2.2 Financial risk control for Tesla Motors 
Income for the second quarter of 2011 was $ 28.4 million, which is a 36% increase than in the previous quarterly report. The gross profit margin increased to 22%, including 19% from the previous quarter and 8% from the second quarter of 2010. The net loss for the quarter to $ 29.5 million, compared to the previous quarter to $ 38.5 million. It is reported that higher gross margins and stable top-line growth are driven by the best quarter since the third quarter of 2009, with new sports car orders and growing power activities. It is shown that people can drive the beautifully designed and high-performance electric cars, and it stressed Tesla's technology leadership. With respect to the S-type development, it can make its components and vehicle production for facilities in Tesla Motors (Dolde, 2005). However, there are certain risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially from those projected. Following important factors, it could cause actual results and different material with these forward-looking statements: consumers are willing to adopt electric vehicles and Tesla's electric vehicles, especially Tesla's ability to draw down of facilities related to the risk of the U.S. department of energy. Tesla is able to execute its planned development, production and marketing and sales of the planning mode trumpet electric car, in order to reduce the cost of full control and management of its business and competition in the automotive market generally and the alternative fuel vehicle market, especially by establishing, maintaining and strengthening the brand. Although Tesla Motors has its cutting-edge technology, and many of its competitors have several generations for people, and be able to achieve production efficiency of facilities, the Tesla Motors can only fall over itself at this point. In addition, they also have a comprehensive network of services and strong customer loyalty. According to these data, Tesla Motors’s financial position seems relatively stable, but its future health is heavily dependent on the successful model of S. As of now, they have a loan facility of up to $ 465 million and have raised about $ 480 million dollars in funds from the stock issue. Start in December this year to repay the loan, which may have a direct impact on mobility. Management believes that it will meet the needs of working capital, cash inflow generated in the case of sales shortage of the Model S, and there is always the possibility of another stock issue, although this is not a desirable option (Mian, 2009).
3 Discussion 
From the above analysis, it can be quite easily seen that other companies in the automotive industry use or intend to use the internal financial risk control model. Interestingly, with only one exception, Tesla Motors use its own proprietary models financial risk control and can also use the supplier sales model. Therefore, it is used for financial risk control, through an internal model and proprietary one, but also to be done so. The most widely used models on the market are the second type between the proprietary models, but others are not widely used. In addition, it seems wider for the use of these non-models trading than their trading bonds.
4 Conclusion
In this paper, it can be found that Tesla Motors in the automotive industry determines the financial risk control by taking advantage of models as above. Nearly half of the models surveyed are able to deal with the financial risk. Surprisingly, only a small number of the models are used for proprietary or vendor sales risk model. Interestingly, those who use their own internal models also use the vendor's sales model. Overall, it is a wide application of these models for financial risk control.
5 References 
Bodnar, G. (2005). How corporations use derivatives. Financial Management, 24, 104-25.
Dolde, W. (2005). Hedging, leverage and primitive risk. Journal of Financial Engineering, 6, 187-216.
Fatemi, A. (2009). Risk management practices in German firms. Managerial Finance, 26, 114-30.
Glaum, M. (2007). The management of foreign exchange risk in UK multinationals: an empirical investigation. Accounting and Business Research, 21, 3-13.
Howton, S. (2010). Currency and interest-rate derivatives use in US firms. Financial Management, 27, 111-21.
Luck, W. (2011). Elemente eines risiko-managementsystems. Der Betrieb, 51, 8-14.
Mian, S. (2009). Evidence on corporate hedging policy. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 6, 419-39.
首先,摩根大通的销售,其财务风险控制是金融风险评估和开发的第一款车型组合。它集成了一个方法,用于评估交易对手的金融投资组合的价值在风险产生质量的变化。它建立了一个各交易对手的投资组合的风险状况,并结合个别工具的波动模型的总投资组合的波动性。贷款损失准备金设置的方法,使评估非流动性贷款的风险资本环境。因此,该方法可能更适合散户及机构投资者,而不是那些债券(法特米,2009),其贷款组合的公司。此外,由于贷款定价公司,KMV公司的投资组合经理衡量风险和收益特征的投资组合,并允许用户探索个人资产风险,改变增量效果。它还提供了一个大的变化相结合的战略和战术的效果,以评估潜在的变化和检查。它可以是一个有价值的工具来确定分配的总资本要求和经济资本(运气,2011)。最后,麦肯锡公司财务风险的概念,实现在默认情况下,估计在特定的国家和行业的财务风险控制。它采用炒作成国家和特定行业的全球宏观经济发展的违约率。然后迁移这些价格的累积概率映射国家和行业(Howton 2010)。
Dolde,W.(2005)。对冲,杠杆和原始风险。 [金融工程,6,187-216。
运气好的话,W.(2011)。菁元素risiko eines managementsystems。明镜Betrieb,51,8-14。