-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Articles re Tesla—Fact or Fiction?
- Thread starter Robert.Boston
- Start date
that note sure feels like what I find in the comments sections of Tesla articles (and in cases like WSJ, Barrons, MarketWatch, most of Business Insider, etc., in the articles themselves).
- - - Updated - - -
yup, if it wasn't clear enough already, WSJ is actively trying to tar Tesla. Good news this week has been revealing... it kind of separates the sensationalist negativity we've seen from the propaganda negativity. The sensationalist, isn't for or against Tesla (or journalism), they just merely try to create story lines they think will get clicks, and are okay with it being positive re Tesla. The propaganda driven takes the good news and tries to portray it negatively; i.e. WSJ "Upgrade Slower Selling Version" title, and suggestion that Tesla is scrambling to "catch up" on 55K goal for the year, despite the being ahead of the curve for this year's sales Elon laid out in early February.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Commented on the article:
Elon Musk’s Tesla circus is a true ‘bonfire of the vanities’ - The Globe and Mail
Tried to set the geezer straight.
CALGARYARSENAL
Member
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
pz1975
Active Member
I am ashamed as a Canadian that that article was published in the Globe and Mail. When I was younger the Globe was considered the highest quality newspaper in the country. Amazing how far it must have fallen to print such garbage. I wrote a letter to them explaining as such. I doubt it will make any difference, but it felt good to do so.
Elon Musk’s Tesla circus is a true ‘bonfire of the vanities’ - The Globe and Mail
Elon Musk’s Tesla circus is a true ‘bonfire of the vanities’ - The Globe and Mail
Most of those ridiculous comments from anarchist David Stockman were widely disseminated in the media well over a month ago. That was following the article he wrote for Casey Research run by Doug Casey who is described in Wikipedia as libertarian and anarcho-capitalist. The Globe and Mail auto industry reporter Jeremy Cato finally got around to regurgitating Stockman's outrageous nonsense today, while adding his own ill-conceived, biased and spiteful opinions. That publication appears to be another one that favors companies that advertise in it. Non-advertisers are left wide open for unscrupulous attacks, for which the writers and editors can excuse themselves by claiming absence of malice.
Cato's claim that 1400 cars should not be counted as Q1 deliveries is ludicrous. Every quarter there are cars produced that are delivered in the next quarter. Musk explained in early February that 1400 cars produced in December were part of his outlook for 9500 deliveries in Q1. Something similar will be true regarding cars produced in Q1 and delivered in Q2. Yet Cato in essence calls Musk a liar. Cato is the one who must explain his conduct, not Musk.
Last edited:
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
I believe I was able to engage with the author in the comments section. He goes by the username Jbc22.
Johan,
I'd like to thank you for your efforts. Imo this needs to be done with greater frequency to check FUD attempts!
Adrien
I think it`s perfectly logical, Curt. It should not be counted for Q4 because, well, it wasn't delivered back than and it shouldn't be counted for Q1 either because it was "just" some leftover from Q4. So that`s 1400 cars that were delivered to customers, have been paid for, but Tesla should not report them in either quarter. That`s how you properly do GAAP, haven`t you heard? /s
EldestOyster
Member
Yes, and now we can wait for articles like, "Tesla Secretly delivers 1000+ Cars: What Are They Hiding?"
Well done, Johan. Now Jeremy Cato (jbc22) in a comment is railing about government benefits to Tesla Motors. He seems unaware that the government bailed General Motors and Chrysler from bankruptcy, while allowing the same tax rebates to their electric car buyers and participation in the same loan program that Tesla has paid off while the others have not. Government subsidies to oil companies are similarly ignored. Yet he insists what's important is that facts are facts. For some unexplained reason his facts are very selective. He apparently wants to make no pretense of being an unbiased reporter. The direction in which the financial news industry has fallen since I retired is shameful.
Last edited:
Moderator's Note
A group of posts discussing the Q1 delivery numbers is now over here: 2015 Q1 Discussion thread for Delivery numbers, Earnings Report and Conference Call - Page 15
A group of posts discussing the Q1 delivery numbers is now over here: 2015 Q1 Discussion thread for Delivery numbers, Earnings Report and Conference Call - Page 15
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
EldestOyster
Member
It's a shame; it seemed like such a good idea. Tell ya what: I'll buy your stock for 45 cents on the dollar, so you don't lose all your money :wink:
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Johan, thanks for writing author Douglas McIntyre, who happens to be the CEO of his publication. It prompted me to do the same.
Here's his contact info: [email protected], cell phone 917-865-2143
Below is the complete thread of our emails which began about two hours ago. The oldest comments are posted first. There has been no reply from McIntyre to my final comment made over 100 minutes ago.
From Curt Renz:
Dear Mr. McIntyre:
I’m a retired financial newsman and am aghast at the poor quality and advocacy nature of some reporting today. Did you at least contact the company while researching your article “Tesla Struggles to Sell Out P85D Supercar”?
Would you please provide the source of your comment, “However, Tesla Motors Inc., the world’s preeminent electric car company, cannot find enough customers for its new supercar P85D.” Are you aware that the company is working hard to produce cars quickly enough to eliminate waiting times, yet there is still a large backlog? Long waits discourage some potential buyers, so the company is trying to correct the situation.
What is meant by this? “Cars are still available in May, when the newest Tesla is launched.” That’s still a considerable wait, unlike the case for buying a car made by a more established manufacturer. Meanwhile, Tesla prioritizes production to accommodate relatively quick delivery for buyers of the most expensive models like the P85D. If by newest Tesla you mean the 70D, that is for buyers in a much lower price range than the P85D. If you mean the Model X, that is an SUV due out much later this year for those who prefer that rather than a sedan.
Do you have anything to support the following speculation, or is it simply your desire to spread unfounded fear, uncertainty and doubt? “Tesla may not sell tens of thousands in the next several years. Based on its current, tepid reception, even that figure might be hard to attain.”
What motivated you to write what appears to be such an opinionated, one-sided and baseless article? Are you or your friends short the stock? Was it designed to get the attention of algobots? Or was it simply shameless click bait?
Why is there no comment section at the end of the article to allow for disputation?
Regards,
Curt Renz
From Douglas McIntyre:
You can still get the car in May. No wait
From Curt Renz:
That’s still a wait. Apparently you did not read past my first two sentences.
From Douglas McIntyre:
I see why you're retired, based on your analysis
From Curt Renz:
I’m 69. Explain your comment about my analysis.
Last edited:
Similar threads
