RTrent, are you aware that here Tesla is recalling vehicles for dangerous faults, for the third time this month?? This time, more the 15,000 vehicles are affected:
What you're seeing is the tip of the iceberg. Its hard to keep track of the many Tesla recalls.
So far, this year, there have been 19 Tesla recalls in the United States. Not just advisories, but actual recalls.
Then there are the recalls. This week, Tesla +announced a recall of 321,000 Model 3 sedans and Model Y SUVs, owing to tail lights that “intermittently illuminate.” In plainer language, they go off when they’re not supposed to. That comes on the heels of another recall involving 30,000 Model X luxury sedans, whose passenger airbags had the potential to deploy in minor collisions, when they weren’t supposed to. Now, those aren’t killers on their own: Both can be solved fairly easily by software patches. But there have been 17 other recalls this year — a concerning record for a company that is requesting takedowns of videos showing Teslas running over child mannequins.
They have overcome their early quality control issues, and the auto industry could learn from them. However, at this point he really does more harm than good when he opens his mouth.
Disputable.
The 2022 Consumer Reports Reliabiity. Tesla is 27th out of 28. May as well buy a Yugo.
You are using selected data. Did you notice at CR when you were checking that Tesla is highest in owner satisfaction? I don't own one, but I know that there is a waiting list 18 months long to get one. but I am not here to debate whether you like the car or not, the point is that it is a very succesful company. And it is.
Your response doesn't make any sense to me. You stated that Tesla's are reliable. I said its disputable with a link showing why.
Why is that selective? Are you saying Consumer Reports is biased? That their data is selective? Or is it because I found data showing they're not reliable? Well, then show me data proofing they are. Considering their many recalls that may be a difficult hill to climb.
You writing they're reliable and responding maybe not, with a link from Consumer Reports. Instead of responding of reliability proof you go off with a tangent of "happy" owners. Its a senseless response.
What does "happy" have to do with reliability? You know who else is happy? The MAGA crowd who buy MAGA merchandise. They're very happy even though they bought mostly overpriced foreign made junk.
Those "happy" people have invested a lot in merchandise. Its bias, emotional not practical.
Half of the recalls issued in 2022 (January 1 through July 14) occurred between only four car companies. The top four companies for recalls this year include Ford Motor Company, Daimler Trucks North America, Mercedes-Benz USA and Forest River. During this period, a wide variety of safety-related recalls were issued by the NHTSA.
Ford: In addition to the air bag and bushing recalls mentioned above, a safety recall was issued in March 2022 due to engine oil leaking. This impacted an estimated 345,000 Ford vehicles, including certain 2020-2022 Escape and 2021-2022 Bronco Sport models equipped with 1.5 L engines. On the same date, another recall was issued for faulty brakes resulting from a software error. This affected an estimated 391,000 Ford vehicles and includes certain F-150, 2022 Maverick, Expedition, Lincoln Navigator, F-250, F-350, F-450 and F-550 models.
Mercedes-Benz: The most significant recall impacting Mercedes vehicles occurred in March 2022. The NHTSA issued a recall due to potential brake booster corrosion. Over 292,000 Mercedes vehicles were figured to be affected, mainly involving certain 2006-2012 ML-Class, GL-Class, and R-Class vehicles.
Daimler Trucks: Several recalls impacted Daimler Truck vehicles in 2022, including a fractured steering gear that could cause drivers to lose control. This recall affected almost 7,000 Daimler Trucks vehicles, including certain 2021-2022 Freightliner (FCCC) MT45, 2022-2023 Western Star 4900 and Freightliner Cascadia vehicles.
Forest River: A recall for several Forest River models was issued in April 2022 due to a gas leak and fire-risk concern. Over 99,000 Forest River vehicles were estimated to be impacted by the issue, involving more than 30 models.
All of this just points out that every company has recalls. Some are ordered, some are voluntary, some are major safety issues, and some are minor corrections.
You know I'm not defending Elon Musk, right? I'm simply pointing out that not everything he has done has been bad. I drive a Kia EV after driving a Leaf EV for 6 years. I don't think that any major car manufacturer would have moved into EV manufacturing as heavily as they have if they had not seen how well Teslas perform and sell. His direct to consumer sales model is leading some manufacturers, including Ford and GM, to look for ways to get around the stranglehold dealers have on state governments. That's good for the whole industry. His gigapress design and construction technique will also spread through the industry, leading to better cars of every type.
He is an egotistical rich doofus when it comes to Twitter. Thank God I've never been on the platform.
Percentage of vehicles recalled is a better comparison than total number of recalls, especially when comparing companies with very different totals for number sold.
All of this just points out that every company has recalls. Some are ordered, some are voluntary, some are major safety issues, and some are minor corrections.
The reason why Consumer Reports ranked Tesla low is not due to recalls, but shoddiness.
You're right that so far his company is successful. Who else manages an 18 month order waiting list with thousands paid upfront to get on that list.
Besides the hype for whom does it make sense to buy a Tesla? Mileage is limited. So, its best to buy a Tesla if your mileage is low therefore not requiring overnight level 2 charging. But if your mileage is low how much do you really save over using gasoline and how much do you help the environment?
I use $1000 of gasoline a year. The cost of Tesla is increased by about $20,000 because of batteries that may last 10 years. So, changing to Tesla would cost me 2,000 a year in battery cost compared to my current gasoline cost of 1,000. You also need to add the cost of electricity.
Some claim Tesla is maintenance free. Not really. Things like brake pads and rotors still need maintenance. Motors don't last forever. Ask anyone who has had to replace an alternator, a car's HVAC fan or a fuel pump. There are savings such a emission parts, radiator and its fluid but they usually last a long time. The real savings are oil changes but how often do you do that? My car requires 5,000 mile oil changes.
Percentage of vehicles recalled is a better comparison than total number of recalls, especially when comparing companies with very different totals for number sold.
I'm sure that makes the person who has had his vehicle recalled 10 times during the year feel better.
And now we’re back to different coloured checks (what we call ‘ticks’) for Twitter users. I haven’t read the ne2s properly, but if there’s limited moderation etc, who’s gonna ensure people are keeping to their purchased boundaries?
still talking about Tesla, here's an interesting thread where the author claims that Tesla's real focus is selling Emissions Credits to other car companies. As a result, other car companies can continue to produce high polluting vehicles. So, the net result is that Tesla has a lot less effect on reducing emissions than one might think.
Read the thread for the details.
Thread time. Here's the thing about @tesla. It's not a car company. Tesla is a company that has to make cars in order to sell its real product: Emissions Credits.
Let me explain. Back in 2012, the EPA put out new, strident emissions standards for new vehicles fleetwide. 1/
That's great. Tesla made 3.3 billion in profit last quarter. Probably $150 million of that came from credits. I have a 9kw solar array. Every year I sell about $1650 in renewable energy credits on the open market to companies that have not reached their emissions goals. Hopefully eventually those companies will invest in energy efficiency enough that they don't need my credits. Then they will fall in value. Until then should I not take the credits?
Here's my take on this. I'm big into solar and EVs. Musk deserves a lot of credit for creating Tesla and hiring good engineers. Their cars are innovative and some of the technology is groundbreaking.
Musk did not create or found Tesla.
Tesla was founded by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning in July, 2003. Tesla then received Series A funding from Musk (among several others) in 2004. Musk subsequently led several more rounds of financing.
That's great. Tesla made 3.3 billion in profit last quarter. Probably $150 million of that came from credits. I have a 9kw solar array. Every year I sell about $1650 in renewable energy credits on the open market to companies that have not reached their emissions goals. Hopefully eventually those companies will invest in energy efficiency enough that they don't need my credits. Then they will fall in value. Until then should I not take the credits?
No one is saying you shouldn't take the credits, though I kind of fail to see their environmental utility.
And from what I could find out, Tesla has made $5B over the last five years selling credits. That ain't chicken feed.
anyway, my point here is to offer a counter to paul's earlier comment about Musk and global warming and how he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. It's more complicated than that.
anyway, my point here is to offer a counter to paul's earlier comment about Musk and global warming and how he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. It's more complicated than that.
Absolutely correct. The electric vehicle market is not an Elon Musk creation, and its expansion is due as much or more to government actions (creating the credits which can then be sold) as anything he did.
And, like any good "libertarian", he is hip-deep in government-created opportunities which benefit himself.
Here's my take on this. I'm big into solar and EVs. Musk deserves a lot of credit for creating Tesla and hiring good engineers. Their cars are innovative and some of the technology is groundbreaking.
Musk did not create or found Tesla.
Tesla was founded by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning in July, 2003. Tesla then received Series A funding from Musk (among several others) in 2004. Musk subsequently led several more rounds of financing.
Okay, Musk had control of it by 2005. If you think that his involvement was not integral to the engineering success of the company, regardless of his many other faults, then you are just being petty and trying to force a narrative. There are a lot of people posting opinions about EVs in general on this thread who seem to be afraid of progress, and certainly don't own EVs or follow the engineering.
As someone who has been supportive of EV technology, and risked getting a Hybrid Honda Civic in late 2002 (it was a 2003, the first model year, and it did have some quirks), I still think Musk has drunk from the "Death Becomes Her" magic potion. I'm not sure mid-life Twitter will do well with acting-like-a-startup-CEO Musk. Twitter still seems alive, but could eventually ask Musk where the car is parked...
The WSJ ran an article that seems to envy that Musk is so rich, that he can afford to be an 'unfiltered' CEO (nice euphemism), even if that approach fails badly.
Is Elon Musk Your Boss’s Anger Translator? Many leaders who think the working world has gone soft in recent years envy the new Twitter chief’s unfiltered style and push for maximum effort from employees.
One envious CEO's desired management style is like a caricature of the 1950's:
“I run my business very much like Elon Musk,” says Mr. Arnold, 46. “I’m a right-way-is-the-only-way kind of guy.”
He adds that he has fired receptionists for failing to greet clients with a “good morning” and a cup of coffee.
Still, he says he was forced to acknowledge several years ago that his intensity was driving too many talented hires to quit within three months. Instead of issuing ultimatums, Mr. Arnold says he kept the bar high while softening his demeanor and taking more interest in employees’ personal lives—making sure they could get home in time for children’s concerts and soccer games, for instance."
The WSJ's conclusion:
"Alas, most bosses who admire Mr. Musk can’t get away with being as tough as the man himself. They will have to settle for living vicariously through his “hardcore” declarations."
---
I personally find that employee buy-in and retention helps make outputs so much better than threats and tired employees. While a startup can demand more time from a younger workforce, Twitter is way past the start-up phase.
Treating Twitter as a start-up could result in losses of those who reduced their start-up intensity as they, and the company, became more efficient. Losing these people means losing historical knowledge. This is likely to result in more frustration and faster burnout of those who remain. The desperation of employees with work visas may, or may not, be enough to save Twitter.
he's either a complete idiot or he's really trying to tank the company. To what end I don't know.
Musk "has sought to personally call chief executives of some brands that have curbed advertising in order to berate them...leading others to instead reduce their spend to the bare minimum required so as to avoid further confrontation with the billionaire"https://t.co/vg628JRd8N
Elon and Matt Taibbi, exposing the political corruption at Twitter before the takeover
In a one-word tweet afterward, you called Twitter “Liars” for telling the FEC that the Biden campaign didn’t ask it to review the NY Post articles. That was after Taibbi posted a Twitter email, labeled “More to review from the Biden team,” that listed five URLs for posted tweets.
Were you able to determine that those tweets were related to the Post articles?
“While Musk might be hoping we see documents showing Twitter’s (largely former) staffers nefariously deciding to act in a way that helped now-President Joe Biden, the communications mostly show a team debating how to finalize and communicate a difficult moderation decision.”
“While Musk might be hoping we see documents showing Twitter’s (largely former) staffers nefariously deciding to act in a way that helped now-President Joe Biden, the communications mostly show a team debating how to finalize and communicate a difficult moderation decision.”
11. This system wasn't balanced. It was based on contacts. Because Twitter was and is overwhelmingly staffed by people of one political orientation, there were more channels, more ways to complain, open to the left (well, Democrats) than the right. https://t.co/sa1uVRNhuHpic.twitter.com/K1xmqQ0TrD
Taibbi singles out a Democrat, Rep. Ro Khanna, for raising free-speech objections to Twitter’s decisions on the laptop story, apparently to no avail. According to OpenSecrets, which Taibbi links to, Khanna was the leading congressional recipient of donations from Twitter employees this election cycle ($18,400) and among the top House recipients ($2,861) in the previous one.
I've always had problems with identifying the employer of a donor. The assumption is that the donor somehow shares the political orientation of the employer or is donating to further the employer's interests, neither of which we know anything about.
What you're seeing is the tip of the iceberg. Its hard to keep track of the many Tesla recalls.
So far, this year, there have been 19 Tesla recalls in the United States. Not just advisories, but actual recalls.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/11/tesla-is-down-bad-right-now.html