Why so many people are so desperate for Tesla and Musk to fail | RenewEconomy

Why so many people are so desperate for Tesla and Musk to fail

Attacks against Elon Musk and Tesla becoming more intense, and nasty – from short-sellers, ideologues, climate deniers, and incumbent industries. They all have a lot to lose.

Elon Musk at announcement of the Tesla big battery in South Australia.

It seems that Elon Musk’s detractors – and they are legion – have decided that it may be now or never if they have a chance of stopping the founder and CEO of Tesla in his tracks.

Tesla has become one of the world’s most recognisable brands, and a marketing and a Google search phenomenon, because of the extraordinary drive and vision of the company’s founder. But it has also become the most “shorted” stock in the world.

And Musk is under renewed attack, led by investors who have made an $11 billion bet that Tesla will fail and its stock will fall dramatically. The company is struggling with production issues for its new Model 3 electric vehicle, and the detractors smell blood.

These are what are known in financial markets as “short-sellers”.  Most people invest in stocks because they want the company to succeed and the value of shares to grow, and/or so they can tap into a steady dividend stream.

Short-sellers want the opposite. They are betting on failure. And they are not patient people. “I’m rooting for the stock to go down,” says Carson Block, a well-known short seller from Muddy Waters Capital.

Many of these short-sellers seem to be outraged at Tesla’s market valuation, which peaked at more than $US50 billion.

Internet companies like Amazon, Facebook and Google had similarly vertiginous valuations before they turned a profit, but Tesla has had the front to achieve this in the presence of an incumbent industry. And they are not happy.

Tesla’s market cap growth over the past 7 years. Source: Tesla document.

And for some, the bet has been so big that it has become bitterly personal.

One of the most notorious short sellers is Mark Spiegel, the founder of Stanphyl Capital Partners, which appears to have bet the house on Tesla failing.

That hasn’t worked out so well to date, because Tesla’s stock went up spectacularly rather than down last year, forcing Stanphyl to report a sharp plunge (20 per cent) in the value of its portfolio.

If Tesla doesn’t fail anytime soon, then Stanphyl’s hedge fund position, and Spiegel’s business, may well be stuffed.

Which is maybe why Spiegel has become such a zealot at conferences and on his Twitter account, repeatedly labelling Musk “Subsidy Fraud-Boy”, and gleefully retweeting any reported cancellation of an order for a Model 3 EV.

Nasty stuff. But Spiegel’s going to want to be busy – there’s another 450,000 or so orders for the Model 3 still on Tesla’s books. That’s a lot of tweeting.

Jim Chanos, from Kynikos, is probably the most famous short-seller in the world, having picked the right time to sell Enron way back when, and he, too, is shorting Tesla.

But Chanos has struggled with technology in the past. Back in 2011, as I wrote at the time, Chanos decided to short the two then most prominent solar and wind energy stocks, First Solar and Vestas, declaring that wind and solar were nothing but “hot air”.

His view of Tesla appears to be based on a similarly skeptical view about electric vehicles and renewables. Chanos dismisses supporters of Tesla as a “cult”.

And this is where the criticism of Musk and Tesla becomes blurred between financial self interest, ideology, and techno-phobia.

An Australian hedge fund manager, Jacob Mitchell, from Antipodes Global, this week added his name to Tesla short sellers, arguing that he couldn’t see how Musk could beat the incumbents on EVs.

Mitchell also dismissed energy storage – despite the obvious success of the Tesla big battery – as something from the future, at least a decade away, and entirely dependent on government handouts.

Really? This guy apparently manages $14 billion of other people’s money. Maybe they should ask him to tread carefully when it comes to decisions about energy and technology investments.

The skepticism and ignorance dives deep, and sometimes reaches the point of denial. The New York Times this week published an astonishing piece by Bret Stephens, the controversial climate denier and fossil fuel apologist. (Read this last link, it’s great).

Stephens dubbed Musk the “Donald Trump of Silicon Valley”, but mostly Stephens doesn’t like new technology, saying that EVs won’t match petrol and diesel cars “for decades” because of disadvantages in energy density, cost, infrastructure and transportability.

That level of denial extends to politicians, even government ministers. Here in Australia, a relatively small investment in what is, nevertheless, the world’s biggest lithium-ion battery, has been panned by conservatives, who have gone into meltdown over the project.

Credit: AAP Image

The country’s Treasurer, Scott Morrison (pictured above marvelling at a lump of coal he brought in to the House of Representatives), dismisses the Tesla battery as being about as useful as the Big Banana or the Big Prawn, a reference to two garish sculptures that stand as tacky signatures to the local industries of the towns that host them.

The country’s resources minister, Matt Canavan, dismissed the battery as the “Kim Kardashian” of the energy industry. Canavan supports coal, and thinks Australia should dig up more of it and build more coal-fired generators.

Even the federal energy minister, Josh Frydenberg has been dismissive, saying it could only power the state for a few minutes – a breathtakingly narrow and stupid remark that has only been trumped by those further to right, horrified by its success.

See The case against Tesla and battery storage just hit peak stupid and Coal lobby hits peak denial on battery storage and renewables.

It should be noted, of course, that the Tesla big battery at Hornsdale in South Australia has not just been successful– delivering services at unprecedented speed and accuracy, piercing gas cartel bubbles and lowering prices – it is also changing the way that grid owners and operators are thinking about the future.

And it is locked in yet more battles with the fossil fuel industry about access to markets and market rules, again threatening their incumbency.

Some hit out at Musk because they like to be provocative, and for the publicity.

Erin Biba is a journalist who has been trying to attract attention since she mocked Musk on Twitter in February for sending his “giant dick into space” (in reference to the successful test of the world’s biggest rocket, and the inclusion of a Tesla Roadster).

She wrote a long article in the Daily Beast this week complaining about the way she was treated by Musk’s supporters on Twitter. Inevitably, it sparked yet more reaction.

Clicks, yes. Gratifying, no. But such polemics have a ready-made audience. Right wing groups backed by conservative public relations specialists and Trump insiders, in turn funded by fossil fuel interests, have launched Twitter campaigns against his business.

So what is really bothering these people?

Well, Musk’s ambition is writ large on Tesla’s website.

“The goal of Tesla is to accelerate world’s transition to sustainable energy,” it says.

And Musk himself usually goes a lot further than this, calling for a “revolt” against fossil fuels, and calling for the removal of $5 trillion of fossil fuel subsidies that is slowing the transition down, which he says could be done in 15-20 years.

That is a scary scenario for both ideologues and incumbents. Musk, and Tesla, threaten to disrupt not one, but three trillion-dollar industries and turn them upside down – auto, electricity, and transport fuels.

Which explains why everyone from the far right, through to car salesmen, property managers, big investors, fossils fuel giants, coal generators, conservative politicians and commentators, and Big Oil do not want him to succeed.

They grudgingly admit that the clean energy transition is coming, they just don’t like the speed with which Musk is bringing it.

So, that’s why the next few months are so important. If Tesla continues to struggle with the production issues with the Model 3, then it could become vulnerable to those short-sellers and naysayers, particularly if it has to go to market for more funds.

If the issues are resolved, and Tesla is delivering profits by the end of the year, then Tesla the company – and the energy transition – will likely be unstoppable, and mighty quick.

And that would leave a few hedge fund managers like Spiegel a long, long way short, and with nothing much to do but moan and Tweet their anger and frustration.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

  1. handbaskets'r'us 2 years ago

    Apart from selling aggressively short -and a few nasty tweets, there’s otherwise not a lot they can do.
    Musk has kept Spacex privately owned, so people can’t mess with it.
    The knockers have a few months of denialism left.
    It looks very much like Model 3 production has overcome delays and hurdles.
    Then there’s the Semi…
    It makes for great edge-of-seat watching!

    • Carl Raymond S 2 years ago

      For a look into the future, I recommend grab some popcorn and line up a few of the more recent youtube videos by ‘hyperchange’, the clever kid who got in on Musk’s recent earnings call.
      I like that he picks conservative estimates. e.g. 22 thousand model 3’s for the current quarter. He picked this number two weeks ago – I’m pretty sure it’s already on the low side. Anyway, he conservatively projects forward to 2024. Turn the sound down a notch to compensate for his US hyper excitement, and enjoy.

      • MaxG 2 years ago

        Thanks for sharing; while it is a forecast, it makes sense.

        • Carl Raymond S 2 years ago

          Here’s the thing.

          Tesla have a gigafactory. Not just a cell making gigafactory but a pack making gigafactory. The cells it makes are the best and the cheapest, because everything happens in one place and it happens on the largest scale. The packs it makes are the best, because for Tesla it’s the third iteration, after Roadster, S/X.

          With the best thermal management, Tesla have been able to reduce expensive Cobalt use to a fraction. The thermal management also means their packs last the long lifetime of the cars. Thermal management appears to work best with small cylindrical cells. Fast charging also appears to work best with small cylindrical cells. Others such as Nissan and GM are using prismatic cells. The Leaf’s cells have not lasted. The Bolt cannot be fast charged (at supercharger speed).

          Imagine being in the unfortunate position of an ICEV maker. Every dollar they invest in EVs reduces their profitability. The EVs steal sales from the ICE cars. EVs largely don’t need parts or maintenance – a traditional revenue stream they rely on. The faster they ramp electrics, the faster their sunk capital in ICEVs is wasted.

          The much ballyhooed story is that competition for Tesla is coming on fast. Really? Where will they all get cells? Who is designing and making the packs? Will those packs be as good or as cheap as Tesla’s? It’s possible they will be as good (as Tesla’s are now), but it’s highly unlikely they will be as cheap, and it’s going to take years. Tesla got there through sheer determination and it still took years. I don’t see that desire anywhere else.

          That’s why I feel the Hyperchange forecast is conservative. Tesla have no roadblocks. For the others, it’s roadblocks at every turn.

      • riley222 2 years ago

        While I’m backing Musk, this guy hyperchange reminded me of the underpants gnomes ability to ramp.


        • jeffhre 2 years ago

          I get the feeling REDACTED and in addition REDACTED therefore, you really don’t get it!

          • riley222 2 years ago

            Huh, I guess not. Try a red, it clears the mind, for a while, long as you don’t have tooo much .

          • jeffhre 2 years ago

            Ooohhhh, I get it!

          • rob 2 years ago


          • jeffhre 2 years ago

            Snicker, haha, HAAAA!

      • Carl Raymond S 2 years ago

        Suspicious of that $75K rev/car? I was. Here’s what that requires in terms of ASP for the last column. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/145c36c1833e7917ba59f691fcbe58ca4e1fd4303f757ef1ec90328b865affca.png

    • dcdttu 2 years ago

      The nerd’s Superbowl, for sure.

  2. john 2 years ago

    Correct me if I am wrong but is not Tesla the most Shorted after Amazon.
    Well Amazon worked out well it worked on the idea of spend heaps and expand now it is perhaps the best performing company on the net.
    While Tesla is yes on the net but more so it is a Technology Company and I feel will even out perform Amazon.
    No other company has such a demand for product in HISTORY.
    This is compelling evidence that the company has a product that is DEMANDED by consumers.
    As to the poor deluded Short Sellers I wish them luck as I hope they have made a bet to offset the losses they will make against Tesla.

    • MrMauricio 2 years ago

      Gotta allow for 100 years of fossil fuel incumbency and the deep tentacles from it reaching into government,administration and the investment community.There’s massive drag and inertia right through the economy.HOWEVER disruption is usually rapid-and leaves many in its wake.Hopefully denier short sellers are going one of those groups. Ordinary people need to look REAL hard at where their pension funds have money invested!!!

      • Greg 2 years ago

        Horse and carts had two thousand plus years of incumbency but were replaced within two decades. Why should ICEV be more resistant than H&C?

    • Carl Raymond S 2 years ago

      Well, Facebook got into trouble and stocks lumped into the ‘tech’ basket all took a dive. That’s when I bought my first shares ever – TSLA. While yes, they are tech, it’s pretty obvious they are not an Internet stock. There needs to be a distinction between bricks and clicks.
      I would categorise Tesla as ‘cleantech’. Time also for a distinction between clean energy stocks and old energy stocks. How useless to hear on the evening news that energy stocks are up or down. What we need to hear is that renewables are up and fossils are down.

  3. Joe 2 years ago

    The more the naysayers want to go at the Elon the more the Elon know’s that he’s on the right track. Of course the short sellers are an ‘unhappy’ mob at the moment. If you want to gamble then be prepared for the worst. They’ve made a bet and they are watching on as they lose their moolah.

  4. yahoo2 2 years ago

    I think the short sellers are caught in a bind, to short a stock certain criteria need to be met.
    the stock price needs to be high so there is room for a dip
    interest rates on holding a short need to be low- they are very low now.

    the shares need to be liquid, so you can buy stock back and wash the position out- Tesla is 16 million shares a day traded liquid.
    there are very few stocks that meet all the criteria so Tesla is their best/worse choice. My prediction was most would fold their positions when Tesla got to 4650 model 3’s per week. That seems to be less than 8 weeks away.

    My opinion is calling some of the anti renewables characters stupid or morons is letting them off the hook too easy. They know full well what they are doing, it is entirely a deliberate and considered act and should be called out for what it is.

    • dcdttu 2 years ago

      They’re literally betting against a clean future, on purpose, for personal gain.

      • jeffhre 2 years ago

        What’s wrong with that? We don’t jail the suicidal – they are scheduled for counseling.

        But the people who are building the massive machinery that is killing us, and then denying that they are, while asking investors and politicians to continue support – what about them? Its an internecine mess with the protagonists in denial and the supporters gearing up knowing or not, for mass suicide.

        • dcdttu 2 years ago

          I’m sorry, what??

          • jeffhre 2 years ago

            Sometimes I give a hint about sarcasm with the internal inconsistency of the post. Though I extremely rarely use the /s notation as a cheat.

  5. Robin_Harrison 2 years ago

    Judging by Musk’s usual MO the probably imminent 5-10k per week M3s and 2 quarters of profit are likely to be merely proof of concept prior to explosive growth. Not surprisingly the shorts, many with a well-funded and huge vested interest in Tesla failing, are clinging to all that’s left for them.
    When in danger or in doubt,
    Run in circles, scream and shout.
    Break out the popcorn, this is going to be good.

  6. Rob G 2 years ago

    Short sellers deserve nothing less than losing their bets. I hope Elon makes it hurt.

    • ilovetesla 2 years ago

      just wait for a year or so, those spineless creatures will just vanish

  7. Radbug 2 years ago

    “Production Issues”. Toyota took thirty years, after Deming came to Tokyo to explain the benefits of Running Statistics, to resolve its “production issues”. It’s called Kaizen, or continuous improvement. As Toyota says, “a thousand small improvements create one big improvement.” It’s a culture of quality, something you don’t acquire overnight. Total Quality Management is an entire academic discipline. Ironically, or perhaps not, Musk bought the Freemont plant, the plant with which Toyota wiped the floor with GM’s Saturn plant, a contest between GM’s robotics-driven quality and Toyota’s process management-driven quality. The Freemont plant delivered the same quality outcomes as the Saturn plant, at a fraction of the cost. “Quality is my life!” Don’t build cars if this state of mind doesn’t apply to you!

  8. Daroid Ungais 87 2 years ago

    Falcon heavy is not the “world’s biggest ever rocket”! It i the biggest in existence today. Saturn V could put over twice as much into LEO. Other large rockets have been built — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_orbital_launch_systems

    • Jim Roth 2 years ago

      True, but Saturn was vastly more expensive than Falcon Heavy.

  9. Daroid Ungais 87 2 years ago

    > “… Josh Frydenberg has been dismissive, saying it could only power the state for a few minutes – a breathtakingly stupid remark …”

    But that’s true. People always say things like “… only need to cover less than 1% of the land mass with PV to power the entire world …”. Frydenberg would think such remarks are breathtakingly stupid.

    • neroden 2 years ago

      Frydenberg’s statement is breathtakingly stupid because it’s not intended to power the entire state for more than a few minutes. There is no situtation under which there is zero wind, zero solar, and zero hydro across the entire state for more than a few minutes. That’s simply not what it’s purpose is.

      • Daroid Ungais 87 2 years ago

        It’s not stupid. It’s clever rhetoric. Dismissing it mockingly as “breathtakingly stupid” won’t lead to a win.

      • JonathanMaddox 2 years ago

        SA has zero hydro all the time. Some pumped hydro storage is in the works, but it’s not built yet.

        There are absolutely times when there’s no solar and no wind electricity being produced for more than just a few minutes. And during those minutes or hours, the Hornsdale Power Reserve cannot deliver enough *power* to cover all the state’s demand, even at 3am.

        Solar, wind and The Battery are great, but let’s not make claims for them that are larger than reality.

        • Calamity_Jean 2 years ago

          OTOH, The Battery doesn’t need to power the whole state. SA still has some legacy FF (coal and gas) power plants, doesn’t it? And has interconnections to other states, right? HPR only needs to cover shortfalls when one or two sources of power drop out, until power can be imported from elsewhere or a new generator started.

          As renewables take over from coal and gas, of course more batteries will be needed.

          • JonathanMaddox 2 years ago

            No coal-fired power stations are left in South Australia (the last one closed in 2016). It has quite a lot of gas generation, with one very large older gas-fired steam plant (for many years the largest single consumer of gas in Australia), and newer combined-cycle and open-cycle. There are two interconnections to Victoria, one AC near the coast and one DC much further north, near the Murray River, but none to any other state.

            So yes indeed: the HPR does not need to carry SA’s demand in the absence of other generation. It is part of a much larger system.

    • Ren Stimpy 2 years ago

      “it could only power the state for a few minutes”

      OK let’s scrap the entire fucking market, where generators which are all small parts of the whole system commit to bid ‘some’ supply. Let’s now fob that useless shit off and go with “Daroid Ungais 87’s” better system of fuck knows what! Shall we?

  10. Ken Dyer 2 years ago

    Don’t you just love hedge fund speculators and financial market gamblers? They obviously have backed the wrong horse in Tesla.

    • Ren Stimpy 2 years ago

      They backed every other horse except Winx in all of its races.

  11. Raffi256 2 years ago

    Short selling is such a garbage tactic, doesn’t matter what company it is.

    • Ren Stimpy 2 years ago

      If it spurs on the real innovators and builders like Musky to prove the short sellers wrong (and hopefully send them broke) it probably has some purpose.

  12. MaxG 2 years ago

    Well, it is all human nature, some bet on cockroaches, others on stocks, other sell their mother, other bet on your demise. Jealousy can ferment into hate. There is no reason in a true hater. True haters are sick people.
    If you are in business you better have a thick skin; I do hope Musk has the stamina to beat them all. I certainly wish him well… while the short sellers can go to hell — even rhymes :))

    • Ken 2 years ago

      Funny Max 🙂
      Nice to read first up in the morning :))
      Well said and nice rhyme.

  13. Discovery1 2 years ago

    Thanks for the Article. Explains why there is so much negative news targeting Tesla and Elon happening at the moment.

  14. dcdttu 2 years ago

    Passively shorting a company is one thing. Actively shorting a clean future by posting lies and slander is another. These guys are a great example of the worst traits of humanity.

    • nakedChimp 2 years ago

      On the other hand they are a prime example for nature – trying/testing EVERY possible option – evolution takes care of this, don’t worry.

    • jeffhre 2 years ago

      Whats the best way to win a huge bet? Calling the winner is hard work and sometimes defies the odds. So big betters make sure they know who the loser is…by any means necessary.

      • dcdttu 2 years ago

        Yea. You’d think those that gamble would want to bet on the future of the planet and help that outcome by any means necessary.

  15. Mark B. Spiegel 2 years ago

    Hi, it’s me… Funny article you wrote here! I just want to correct two things: my fund was down 12.4% last year (not “20%”) and has compounded 9.9% net annually since inception in mid 2011. Also, TSLA is nearly 30% off its all-time high, and is at the same price now it was back in September 2014.

    Now back to your regularly scheduled financial illiteracy. (I apologize in advance, but I’m afraid I won’t be checking back in for additional comments.)

    • Ken 2 years ago

      Errrrrr,, good fuckn’ riddance !!!
      Bye bye to one of earths parasites :))

    • Giles 2 years ago

      Thanks for the clarification. I was relying on an Institutional Investor article that said fund was down 20% in year through to August. https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b15130kn8zz0x7/elon-musk-versus-the-haters#%2F.WdVDkK3Mx-V
      Guess you recovered some ground in next few months.

    • PeterA 2 years ago

      @RenewEconomy: Good to know he only corrected you on the magnitude of the losses his company made shorting Tesla! Only lost 12.4% when the market is rocketing up!

      Ergo it must mean that Stanphyl really will go bust if Tesla doesn’t drop into the toilet soon!

      Luckily he won’t come back and read this comment, so I don’t need to address him directly!

    • Jim Roth 2 years ago

      The S&P had a 22 percent return in 2017. You say your fund was DOWN 12.7 percent? If I were you I would hide quietly in a corner for a few years and hope investors have a short memory.

    • Barri Mundee 2 years ago

      I think you will be on the wrong side of history on this one Mark.

    • Barri Mundee 2 years ago

      You are a financial parasite too Mark.

    • riley222 2 years ago

      Definitely hero or goat territory. I’m rooting for Musk, and for Stormy in another arena.

    • neroden 2 years ago

      Wow, the loser himself. Has done worse than the S&P 500. Has done worse than anyone who bought Tesla over time at average prices (rather than ATHs).

  16. Raglan Electric Bikes 2 years ago

    Hi Giles,
    Sadly I’m one of those who now wants Tesla to fail and I used to be an evangelist.
    I have no stock interest and I’m someone who passionately believes we need to take drastic action to prevent climate change.
    Unfortunately I’ve been a customer of theirs for a year now and every interaction has been painful. I love their mission. I hate their corporate attitude and customer service. They deserve to fail if they can’t get these basics right.

    • JonathanMaddox 2 years ago

      Pity. 🙁

  17. Ken Fabian 2 years ago

    The leaders of one of the most parasitic practices of the most parasitic industries in the world are opposed to clean energy? And the same people support the continuation of the free ride fossil fuels (and the vehicles that use them) get with their external (climate) costs that is bigger than all subsidies for RE. I’ve been following the climate and energy debates for a while now – and none of this surprises me.

    I’m not convinced about Musk and Mars but when it comes to massively expanding the energy storage sector (stationary and transport) it is something who’s time has come – bigger and more thoughtful investors than these shortsighted, shortchanging, shortselling parasites can see it clearly.

  18. shango 2 years ago

    Go Elon…sounds like theres another vulture banker waiting for you to drop. Investors in failed investments are usually the same ones that pick it up after all the hard ground works done. Dirty dog bastards.

  19. James Newbold 2 years ago

    This is a bad take.
    Lots of progressives and environmentalists dislike Musk and for good reason.
    One reason is his ridiculous fantasy that we should try and colonise other planets because we can’t save Earth.
    Another is his abuse of worker’s rights in his factories. He has been union-busting and short-selling workers his entire career.

    I think things like the battery in South Australia are great.

    But we should be investing in public transport rather than electric vehicles which currently are worse for the environment than my 2007 Toyota Prius.
    Governments should be making renewable energy investments rather than letting private owners profit off trying to saving the planet.

    • rob 2 years ago

      Hey small “bolt” or volt……. as a proud South Australian I am very proud of “our worlds biggest battery” ! For the first time ever south Australia in the last 3 months recorded. ie jan to march has been a net exporter of energy, mostly due to our massive wind resources ……with solar quickly catching up…….we are well over the 50% renewable energy now and by 2020 will be at least 75% total renewable energy.(electrical) and the TESLA BIG BATTERY has had a massive impact on prices! The Gas and Coal industry are furious! Go little S.A. Go…. by the way we have a small population but huge land mass!

    • neroden 2 years ago

      You have fallen for some of the lies.

      First, EVs are much better for the environment than your 2007 Toyota Prius.

      Proof, from the Union of Concerned Scientists:

      Second, Musk has outright called for a union election at Fremont. He has said that he isn’t against unions in general but is specifically against the UAW. The workers at Fremont are also against the UAW, because it cut a deal to close NUMMI (which became Fremont) in order to protect Detroit jobs.

    • nakedChimp 2 years ago

      “One reason is his ridiculous fantasy that we should try and colonise other planets because we can’t save Earth. ”

      Wrong mate.
      This part is to be able to keep humanity alive should anything happen to our only spaceship – Earth.

      Colonizing Mars is not about ‘fleeing’ once we screwed up Earth.
      It’s for the slim case that we run into a pandemic super-virus or some asteroid we can’t deflect.

      And you know why that is the truth?
      Even a screwed up Earth is way more hospitable for humans than Mars (or any other body in the solar system) will ever be for the next 100.000 years.
      Let that sink in.

      PS: this tells you something about Musk and his motives and why Tesla/SpaceX does what they do and how they do it.
      All his enterprises are not there to make mere profits, profits for him and most of his cohort are just a means to a greater good.

  20. MaxDamage007 2 years ago

    Wow this article is soooo wrong on so many fronts, as are the comments. Tesla have released a car and basically sold it as a self driving car with all their tweets, videos, and photos. Unfortunately it keeps crashing in this autopilot mode and in several cases people have died. Tesla have hoovered up billions in taxpayers money to sell cars to the rich and bailed out an almost bankrupt Solar City using shares. Normally a company would go bust and you buy it for buttons afterwards, but heh Musk had family about to lose their shirts if it went bust. You have no idea, and you have no idea clearly that many other companies exist and are doing this without all the bravado

    • Abel Adamski 2 years ago

      Duhh, 400 ICE fires per day – how many reported
      How many auto fatalities per day, or how many per million miles traveled broken up by manufacturer.

      Guess you just want the world and the US to be screwed up by the consequences of AGW, get off on losing everything you value just to keep a few rich dudes in caviar building ICE cars and pumping oil and gas and digging coal

      • MaxDamage007 2 years ago

        Irrelevant, this is about Autopilot and how it was sold. Also on fires it is about rotten vehicle design, as you have to search for the handle if in the back to get out as in the Model S it is under the carpet, and the Model X it is behind a speaker grill. Loads of companies are doing EVs by the way

        • rob 2 years ago

          Seems you are the sort of person that has no shares to “SHORT the market but are a product of the vile and useless edumication system in america (small a used with purpose) . “One of the little trumpies I guess!” lol

        • Nick Kemp 2 years ago

          “Irrelevant, this is about Autopilot and how it was sold.”

          All cars are sold with safety features etc which sometimes don’t keep drivers alive. That a Tesla feature may sometimes fail should surprise no one and doesn’t deserve any greater scrutiny than failures in ICE cars

    • rob 2 years ago

      And you are a .ickhead!

  21. Abel Adamski 2 years ago

    One well worth reading/watching
    Helps you understand the haters and attackers

  22. Dr. Dean Dauger 2 years ago

    UAW and other unions aren’t really “far right”, are they? Nevertheless, unions should also be added to the list of those upset at disruption by Tesla. UAW, like the dealerships, see Tesla (easier-to-build EVs, automation) as a threat to their business model. They too are making desperate moves, like attack ads, disinformation, and frivolous lawsuits, against Tesla this year.

    Other than leaving out the UAW, this article is excellent.

  23. Tom V 2 years ago

    I’m a little confused here. On one hard the article paints conservatives as the enemies of renewables but then references a renewable critic Bret Stephens saying Musk is the “Donald Trump of Silicon Valley”. And then we see one of the biggest champions of the left the UAW coming after Musk in a big way because TESLA isn’t unionizing. I don’t see the Conservationism -vs- Liberalism paradigm being all the useful to understand what is going on here. Instead I think a globalist -vs- nationalist lens works much better to define the sides.

    Musk has repeatedly said he hates logistics cost so mfg in country is always his preference hence China being the location of the next gigafactory with Europe not far behind. As to Trump, the US has never seen a politician so focused on deregulating. Anyone who followed the Gigfactory 1 selection process knows Musk picked Nevada not because they offered the most money but rather the least amount of paperwork. When Elon complained about Chinese laws requiring join ownership of any business being started by a foreign entity, Trump stepped in and fixed it.

    While Trump and Elon obviously have very different bases I think they are both nationalist at heart and could therefore work very well together.


  24. iamspinoza 2 years ago

    I think many people here are wrongly conflating Tesla with the renewables industry. Renewables is inevitable, as are EVs and BESS. This does not mean we cannot legitimately critique Tesla as a business. We would be doing a disservice to the industry not to recognise the difference.

    We should be careful not to lump in all Tesla critics as coal-lovers, and it is natural that analysts who are bearish on Tesla will short the stock. That doesn’t mean that we should discount all their analysis. Conversely, many of you may like Tesla and so have Tesla stock — does that mean we should ignore everything you’re saying?

Comments are closed.

Get up to 3 quotes from pre-vetted solar (and battery) installers.