Elon & Twitter

[sunwarriors]

Looks like Twitter revenue is going into a nose-dive. Certainly that's no surprise.

Twitter revenues fall 40pc as 500 advertisers desert Elon Musk
(The link below updates regularly, so please croll down)

Oil giant Harbour Energy blames windfall tax as it cuts hundreds of jobs

Britain’s largest North Sea producer has blamed the new windfall tax as it prepares to cut hundreds of jobs and shift attention to outside of the UK.

www.telegraph.co.uk

I wonder if Siddharth Rao will be fired now if he actually blamed it on Elon Musk taking over Twitter (vs. other possible things).

 

[bkp_duke]

Counterpoint to the "Elon is killing Tesla's Brand" argument:

Tesla up 19 spots in 2023 World's Top 25 Most Valuable Brands rankings

Tesla is currently ranked 9th among the World's Top 25 Most Valuable Brands. The company was previously ranked 28th.

www.teslarati.com

 

[JRP3]

Counterpoint to the "Elon is killing Tesla's Brand" argument:

Tesla up 19 spots in 2023 World's Top 25 Most Valuable Brands rankings

Tesla is currently ranked 9th among the World's Top 25 Most Valuable Brands. The company was previously ranked 28th.

www.teslarati.com

“Other brands may be getting into gear to compete with the pre-eminent EV producer, but the public still sees Tesla as significantly more innovative and sustainable in Brand Finance’s Global Brand Equity Monitor study, a fact that outweighs the latest headlines about Tesla’s mercurial CEO,” Brand Finance noted in its report.

How high would the brand ranking be without Elon's blunders last year? That ranking does not disprove the negative influence he's had on the brand in the last year.

 

[bkp_duke]

How high would the brand ranking be without Elon's blunders last year? That ranking does not disprove the negative influence he's had on the brand in the last year.

Knew you would ask that, because it's a question that cannot objectively be answered.

What is a fact, despite that argument, is Tesla's brand ranking soared upward.

 

[JRP3]

Knew you would ask that, because it's a question that cannot objectively be answered.

What is a fact, despite that argument, is Tesla's brand ranking soared upward.

You presented the increase as evidence that Elon hasn't hurt the brand. Other rankings suggest the opposite.

 

[bkp_duke]

You presented the increase as evidence that Elon hasn't hurt the brand. Other rankings suggest the opposite.

No, I presented as a COUNTERPOINT to the incessant "Elon is destroying the brand" that permeates this thread. There is a difference.

The point is even if he's caused brand damage, the brand is still zooming upward in popularity by what I posted. Contrary to what a significantly biased group here would have everyone believe.

 

[advocate8]

Knew you would ask that, because it's a question that cannot objectively be answered.

What is a fact, despite that argument, is Tesla's brand ranking soared upward.

It’s not at all clear this is pertinent to any discussion of Elon and Twitter.
First, the “study" is based on data collected “over a three to four month period” last year. It doesn’t say what that period was. If it was in the first three quarters of the year or so, it tells us nothing about the impact or lack thereof of the Twitter debacle.
The true force of that didn’t hit until the last two months of the year, after the deal was over and he started the big moves.

On a lesser note, it appears to be international data. That could get pretty messy depending on where they surveyed, especially when combined with the possibility all or much of it was done before the Twitter deal was even under way let alone finalized.

Lastly, their definition of brand ranking and value are subjective gibberish. It’s THEIR definition, not necessarily what readers would expect from the headline.

 

[ElectricIAC]

It’s not at all clear this is pertinent to any discussion of Elon and Twitter.
First, the “study" is based on data collected “over a three to four month period” last year. It doesn’t say what that period was. If it was in the first three quarters of the year or so, it tells us nothing about the impact or lack thereof of the Twitter debacle.
The true force of that didn’t hit until the last two months of the year, after the deal was over and he started the big moves.

On a lesser note, it appears to be international data. That could get pretty messy depending on where they surveyed, especially when combined with the possibility all or much of it was done before the Twitter deal was even under way let alone finalized.

Lastly, their definition of brand ranking and value are subjective gibberish. It’s THEIR definition, not necessarily what readers would expect from the headline.

And they say I’m the one that works at Auntie Ann’s.

As for me, I trust what I see first hand. And first hand, the price drops have not been good for me with half a dozen lost sales opportunities directly attributed to Tesla with the latest price drop.

 

[STS-134]

Knew you would ask that, because it's a question that cannot objectively be answered.

What is a fact, despite that argument, is Tesla's brand ranking soared upward.

Nothing in that article can be objectively answered because the numbers aren't even based on objective criteria. Brand Valuation Methodology | Brandirectory Not all companies even license their brand to others so how is it even possible to know what the value of their brand is by trying to calculate what they'd pay to license it to themselves? Something like market cap is easy to calculate and is entirely objective by royalty relief is not.

 

[bkp_duke]

Nothing in that article can be objectively answered because the numbers aren't even based on objective criteria. Brand Valuation Methodology | Brandirectory Not all companies even license their brand to others so how is it even possible to know what the value of their brand is by trying to calculate what they'd pay to license it to themselves? Something like market cap is easy to calculate and is entirely objective by royalty relief is not.

LoL. So people can post "surveys" and other things here saying Elon's destroying the brand, but when something is a counterpoint to that it's garbage.

Gotcha. Bias much?

 

[bkp_duke]

It’s not at all clear this is pertinent to any discussion of Elon and Twitter.
First, the “study" is based on data collected “over a three to four month period” last year. It doesn’t say what that period was. If it was in the first three quarters of the year or so, it tells us nothing about the impact or lack thereof of the Twitter debacle.
The true force of that didn’t hit until the last two months of the year, after the deal was over and he started the big moves.

On a lesser note, it appears to be international data. That could get pretty messy depending on where they surveyed, especially when combined with the possibility all or much of it was done before the Twitter deal was even under way let alone finalized.

Lastly, their definition of brand ranking and value are subjective gibberish. It’s THEIR definition, not necessarily what readers would expect from the headline.

I think you miss the larger point I'm trying to make here:
There are a lot of people in this thread that say Elon's destroying the brand. But things against that (this survey aside) like largest number of sales in a quarter EVER (when every other major auto manuf saw declining sales) are supposed to be ignored.

My point: there is a LOT of bias here. A lot of Elon hate. And people are not even attempting to have an open mind about things.


My 0.02: I think Elon has damaged the brand. That's pretty obvious. But the degree is pretty small (again, my opinion - but I'm trying to see both sides of the data here). In the marketplace, the consumer has a pretty short memory (*cough* dieselgate *cough*). If something like FSD came along and worked as advertised (NOT to debate here - take it to FSD threads - just using it as an example) - most people would not care anymore about Twitter and Elon. Are there people that have been "distanced for life" from Tesla because of Elon? Yes. But that number I would put forth is not nearly as large as people here want us to believe. Not with sales increasing 44% YoY during a recession, when every other auto manuf saw at best staying flat, and most saw sharp declines of up to 20%.


You all are welcome to be biased, it's a free country. You just aren't doing yourselves any favors if you don't recognize your own bias and at least entertain that you might not be correct to the same degree you think you are.

 

[indysurfer]

Anecdotal only - but many of my co-workers who are big diesel and pick-up truck fans are now interested in Tesla because of Elon. Also helps when I give them test rides in my Y.

If people truly care about the "mission" of transitioning the transportation industry to electric, we should be thrilled that Elon is converting folks on the Right side of the political spectrum to consider EV adoption. America is still a 50/50 country ideologically. There are many more moderate people in the center who don't let politics affect their buying decisions. If that angers folks on the extreme Left or Right - so be it. There are not enough of them to truly move the needle. They just make alot of noise.

 

[ohmman]

I think Elon has damaged the brand. That's pretty obvious. But the degree is pretty small (again, my opinion - but I'm trying to see both sides of the data here).

I have a similar read on it. I think if the recent Twitter stuff happened when there were only 50,000 Teslas on the road it would have been much more detrimental. But at this point, if the concern is that the brand message has changed, that concern is heavily diluted by the number of cars on the road which are (theoretically) espousing the former brand message.

I do think continued public forays into culture war nonsense will continue to erode brand support, though I doubt he could say enough to entirely tank Tesla at this point. He's welcome to do what he wants, of course. I'm not a TSLA shareholder outside of index funds and never have been, so I also don't have any real financial anxiety tied to this. Just as an interested observer, it seems like the Twitter purchase and turn to being vocal on politics was probably not his greatest move. But people get bored doing the same thing all the time, I guess.

 

[JRP3]

My point: there is a LOT of bias here.

There is, including those who dismiss the evidence showing brand damage. It's worthwhile to question the survey methods used and the results in all cases. Tesla sales last year came in far lower than projections. There are many reasons for that but to claim that the reduced growth which did happen somehow counters the potential longer lasting damage created mostly later in the year had no negative effect is not supported by failing to meet projections.

 

[bkp_duke]

There is, including those who dismiss the evidence showing brand damage. It's worthwhile to question the survey methods used and the results in all cases. Tesla sales last year came in far lower than projections. There are many reasons for that but to claim that the reduced growth which did happen somehow counters the potential longer lasting damage created mostly later in the year had no negative effect is not supported by failing to meet projections.

That's fine, that questioning is valid. But you have to acknowledge YOUR OWN bias when you don't want to lay those questions down to data that supports your bias.

That's my point.

 

[ElectricIAC]

There is, including those who dismiss the evidence showing brand damage. It's worthwhile to question the survey methods used and the results in all cases. Tesla sales last year came in far lower than projections. There are many reasons for that but to claim that the reduced growth which did happen somehow counters the potential longer lasting damage created mostly later in the year had no negative effect is not supported by failing to meet projections.

The waters are murky at best.

I have no doubt that a certain segment of the politically engaged hates what EM does at any time of day but there’s too many negative factors at play that affected the industry as a whole to say without a shadow of a doubt that his antics are 100% dead on balls what made sales dip.

Confirmation bias? What do I know, I just sling metal for nickels on the profit.

 

[STS-134]

LoL. So people can post "surveys" and other things here saying Elon's destroying the brand, but when something is a counterpoint to that it's garbage.

Gotcha. Bias much?

You didn't consider the possibility that Elon could be simultaneously destroying the brand AND that the brand could be incredibly valuable at the same time. These two things are not mutually exclusive. Do you honestly think that Tesla is taking just as many orders as they would be taking if Elon would have just shut up and gotten back to selling cars and rockets?

 

[bkp_duke]

You didn't consider the possibility that Elon could be simultaneously destroying the brand AND that the brand could be incredibly valuable at the same time. These two things are not mutually exclusive. Do you honestly think that Tesla is taking just as many orders as they would be taking if Elon would have just shut up and gotten back to selling cars and rockets?

No, not just incredibly valuable, but that link shows it INCREASING in value. They are different.

No, I don't think Tesla is taking as many order as if Elon had shut up. But the important part of that is HOW MANY have they lost? People in this thread act as if the sky is falling and Tesla is doomed. The 44% YoY growth in spite of Shanghai being offline for a month due to COVID lockdowns and despite essentially a world-wide recession pretty much to me screams that "most people don't care about Elon's politics when buying a car". Along those lines, I just did a 3 week international trip, talking to a lot of people, both locals and US citizens travelling. With some of them the topic of Tesla did come up, lots of them had questions about the cars (the usual, how long does it take to charge, how far can it go, etc.). Not a single one mentioned Elon or his politics.

I would say outside of the HYPERSENTIVE GROUP in this thread, Elon's politics just don't mean that much to the bulk of people out there. Sure, you have people (in this hypersensitive group) that won't buy because of it, but it appears really low. If it wasn't, we would not see the cars selling like hot-cakes after the price drop (which only brought things back to early 2021 levels - let's not kid ourselves, this is not a "fire sale").

 

[italian bread]

There’s something deeply ironic about a social media company that is not communicative. But par for course as Tesla owners have experienced.

Twitter says third-party apps broke “long-standing API rules,” won’t name rules​

Twitter has redefined and restricted its API many times before, but prior to Musk's ownership, the changes were communicated in advance, with ample time for developers to shift or, as often happened, make public complaints. Twitter's Dev team suggests that this time, the rules were already in place, but it has no comment on what they might be.

 

[STS-134]

If it wasn't, we would not see the cars selling like hot-cakes after the price drop (which only brought things back to early 2021 levels - let's not kid ourselves, this is not a "fire sale").

I think what you're seeing is that people have a certain amount of tolerance for buying stuff they don't believe in if the price is low enough. Another example would be an oil company that exploits child labor. How many people would buy their gasoline if their stations were clearly marked and everyone knew people who go to those stations are paying to support child labor. How many people would buy their gasoline if it was discounted by 30% compared to everyone else's? 50%? 70%? At some point, you start to get people buying, and the lower the price goes, the more people are willing to set aside values for a discount. The situation with Tesla is likely the same, and what we should be asking is how much more money would they be getting for each vehicle if Elon had shut up?