The Blue Owl
Endangerous Herbivore
Yeah, that's what he wants you to think, isn' it. That he can predict the future. But in fact there is a very simple explanation: jhm is John Lovallo!!
-
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
doggusfluffy
Closed
jhm
Well-Known Member
Preemptive FUD prediction for the day:
FUD logic: If Tesla claims to have a range anxiety solution, then it is an admission that range anxiety is a serious problem limiting demand. Moreover, Tesla's "solution" won't go nearly far enough. Thus, Tesla remains demand constrained owing to range anxiety.
Response: Tesla Model S owners know the freedom of driving a truly long range electric vehicle, and Tesla continues to innovate to enhance this experience. Range anxiety is a thing of the past.
Bonus points for finding FUD specimens with this line of attack.
FUD logic: If Tesla claims to have a range anxiety solution, then it is an admission that range anxiety is a serious problem limiting demand. Moreover, Tesla's "solution" won't go nearly far enough. Thus, Tesla remains demand constrained owing to range anxiety.
Response: Tesla Model S owners know the freedom of driving a truly long range electric vehicle, and Tesla continues to innovate to enhance this experience. Range anxiety is a thing of the past.
Bonus points for finding FUD specimens with this line of attack.
It's interesting to see how some news outlets are mis-reporting Elon's Tweet.
- CNN asserts that Elon Musk said Tesla Model S will go farther on a charge. Hmm, that's one way to read it, but it's not what he said.
- DCInno has a good article (sounds like the author's been reading TMC), which includes an odd line: "Concerns about battery life are part of why Tesla has been building supercharging stations at great speed all over the country." This almost qualifies for James's bonus point award.
- TechCrunch makes the following assertion, which I'll put in the "hype" column: "This update could either be a way more intelligently manage the existing power available to Tesla S vehicles to significantly extend range, but it seems more like it will offer some improved way to deal with the existing limitations on car battery tech."
- The Register wins the negative-spin title award with its otherwise pretty tame article: Musk: 'Tesla's electric Model S cars will be less crap soon. I PROMISE'
- Investor's Business Daily gives a clean few paragraphs about the tweet, but then regurgitates all the negative spin it could find about the company at the bottom of the article.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
... And this is Elon's own fault...
(Great summary of articles posted on the subject BTW)
NigelM
Recovering Member
I do think that range anxiety exists with many people; Elon's reference to it rather implies that he thinks it exists also. I don't know if you own a Tesla but even after 4 years driving mine the first questions I get talking to folks are still along the lines of "How far can you go till you have to charge?", "Where do you plug in?", "How long does it take to charge?"....I answer all the questions and folks are usually won around, I long ago lost count of how many people I referred to Tesla to buy cars; however, the fact remains that range is a perceived issue, hence "range anxiety".
By definition therefore, range anxiety does limit demand which is why Tesla is addressing the subject; that's not FUD. If Elon thinks range anxiety isn't an issue he wouldn't be addressing it would he?
jhm
Well-Known Member
Great run down. Several bonus points!
It looks like our propaganda risk could be to hype up the tweet for now, so that people have stupidly high expecations, then knock the stock down when hyped up expectations are not met. Wasn't that what happened with the D?
So the FUD logic I outlined may be held back a few days. The essence of that FUD is to exaggerate range anxiety by putting it back on Tesla as some sort of defect of the car, and not merely as a misperception of consumers unfamiliar with new technology. So they will let it hype for a few days, then attack the unveiled solution as inadequate.
Hype can be just as dangerous as FUD.
quite the bunch of stuff, only remarkable in packing in about 4 or 5 misleading implications over a broad range of topics in a rather short article.
Tesla Motors Needs Strong Q1 Sales to Survive (NASDAQ: TSLA) - 24/7 Wall St.
Tesla Motors Needs Strong Q1 Sales to Survive (NASDAQ: TSLA) - 24/7 Wall St.
jhm
Well-Known Member
Wow, this article gets so much wrong. Apparently 24/7 Wall St. lacks budget for fact checkers. It even confuses the Model 3 with Model X as the "promised" vehicle that won't come out till summer. One one level this could be taken as amateurish ignorance, but the author wants to lecture Tesla on what it is supposed to do in Q1.
The author follows a standard FUD tactic which is to make up some nonsensical objective that Tesla is supposed to hit. This author says Tesla must sell 12,000 cars this quarter or else. The author does not provide any rationale for why 12,000 is a critical number to hit. It is not what Tesla has guided, nor is it instrumental for hitting some other goal like X among of net profit. The author seemly pulls it out of thin air.
We might call this FUD technique something like, fake criteria. Any author that does not understand the difference between the Model X and Model 3 is too ignorant to be telling Tesla what made up numbers they are supposed to hit, or else.
my recollection is that all of the FUD based Business Insider "articles" the past few weeks (and there were many) were from the same writer, Matthew DeBord. Maybe we can keep track of this. Today he came out with the article linked below. I wonder if DeBord's article was part of the talk Elon was addressing in his tweet today. IIRC DeBord took everything John Lovallo wrote the past several weeks at face value, but framed everything Adam Jonas said as coming from ~a starry-eyed Tesla optimist among starry-eyed optimists. I'm about 90% sure I'm remembering this correctly.
There's just one weird thing about Elon Musk's 'range anxiety' tweet - Yahoo Finance
the theme of which got mentioned in this Forbes article,
The Tesla Anxiety Caused By Elon Musk's 'Range Anxiety' Tweet - Forbes
There's just one weird thing about Elon Musk's 'range anxiety' tweet - Yahoo Finance
the theme of which got mentioned in this Forbes article,
The Tesla Anxiety Caused By Elon Musk's 'Range Anxiety' Tweet - Forbes
Tesla's biggest problem is that it's selling the wrong car - Yahoo Finance
Matthew DeBord's biggest problem is that he's writing the wrong article.
jhm
Well-Known Member
Range anxiety, whenever you're near;
Range anxiety, it's you that I fear.
My car's afraid to roam, it's stalled before,
But then you charge my core;
My car starts to soar once more.
Range anxiety, it's always the same;
Range anxiety, it's you that I blame.
It's very clear to me I've got to plug in;
Range anxiety, you win.
Apologies to Mel Brooks
Range anxiety, it's you that I fear.
My car's afraid to roam, it's stalled before,
But then you charge my core;
My car starts to soar once more.
Range anxiety, it's always the same;
Range anxiety, it's you that I blame.
It's very clear to me I've got to plug in;
Range anxiety, you win.
Apologies to Mel Brooks
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Yeah that was a poor excuse for an article. Premise: "SUVs outsell sedans, people want SUVs, people love Tesla and EVsand Tesla is in high demand, Tesla is coming out with an SUV (so far he's getting it right but then...) BUT IS IT TOO LATE?" Too late as opposed to what other car maker that has brought and electric SUV to market? (Rhetoric question)
jhm
Well-Known Member
An Open Letter to Tesla, From Your Friendly Local Car Dealers Car and Driver.
So full of holes, it's not even funny.
So full of holes, it's not even funny.
Matthew seems to be in daily negative spin mode. Today's special: False dichotomy where either driverless cars like Google's survive (no private ownership, small pods) or cars like where Tesla is heading (cars that look like cars we know, owned privately, with autonomous capability). All of this to put out the message that with Tesla you're taking a chance on which one of two scenarios wins. On so many levels I find this to be a distortion of reality to try to foment FUD. Thanks to Elon for "false dichotomy" phrase I heard him use on another topic.
There are 2 competing ideas for the car of the future — and only 1 can win - Yahoo Finance
Anton Wahlman makes his way back to "thestreet.com" which had not published anything of his for many months.
His FUD today is constructed by creating the false expectation that Tesla must deliver more than 1,500 cars to Norway in March to reach Q1 guidance, then warning that Tesla's registrations through the middle of the month are off pace for his fabricated goal. This is all within the larger context of distorting the importance of near term deliveries to Tesla's valuation.
Sorry, the page you requested could not be found - TheStreet
His FUD today is constructed by creating the false expectation that Tesla must deliver more than 1,500 cars to Norway in March to reach Q1 guidance, then warning that Tesla's registrations through the middle of the month are off pace for his fabricated goal. This is all within the larger context of distorting the importance of near term deliveries to Tesla's valuation.
Sorry, the page you requested could not be found - TheStreet
Similar threads
