Kevin's "data"

[Kevin Sharpe]

So you think his previous anti EV article had no bearing on his mindset? I'm not positive he purposely set out to fail, but he certainly did a number of things to make sure it happened, some of which fly in the face of common sense.

I respect your opinion but do not agree with it... sorry!

Hopefully they will ignore this ridiculous statement.

I'm not sure what you think is ridiculous.... do you have any idea which stock holders are most prevalent in these threads or the external campaigns against the NYT and Mr Broder? Undertake some basic research because it's enlightening...

You have a view contrary to most of us here regarding Tesla, which is fine, but don't be surprised when few agree with you.

I have a good idea of how much support exists but am not surprised that little is expressed on TMC... that's part of my criticism of what's happened to the forum.

 

[Doug_G]

do you have any idea which stock holders are most prevalent in these threads or the external campaigns against the NYT and Mr Broder? Undertake some basic research because it's enlightening...

Cite your sources.

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

Cite your sources.

I paid for the research and you are free to do the same :smile:

 

[SteveG3]

Kevin I see your concern re stockholders posting. if I were here strictly as an enthusiast, I'd probably have concerns too.

that being said, I am a shareholder. this was a byproduct of my interest in EVs. of course I think I am objective (don't we all?), but I have added one of those taglines for the bottom of my posts which includes my financial interest in Tesla.

support.... like many people outside of TMC (and a few brave members who are prepared to speak out) "I do not believe Mr. Broder hoped the drive would end badly. I am convinced that he took on the test drive in good faith, and told the story as he experienced it."

IMO this has become a witch hunt against Mr Broder and reflects a growing trend within TMC to represent the extreme views of people who hold stock in the company. This was a great place to hang out but has become increasingly unbalanced and IMO deserves a thorough review of standards by the site owner and moderators.

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

that being said, I am a shareholder. this was a byproduct of my interest in EVs. of course I think I am objective (don't we all?), but I have added one of those taglines for the bottom of my posts which includes my financial interest in Tesla.

I think that is an honest and transparent approach which I commend... I wish you the best of luck with your investment!

 

[SteveG3]

thanks Kevin. hopefully my next Tesla investment will be a Gen3.

 

[ElSupreme]

I paid for the research and you are free to do the same :smile:

What would be the point of keeping that research to yourself? What do you have to lose by posting it? What do you have to gain by keeping it?

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

thanks Kevin. hopefully my next Tesla investment will be a Gen3.

Yeh, that will be an interesting car and potentially huge in Europe :smile:

 

[Doug_G]

I paid for the research and you are free to do the same :smile:

Does your data tell you whether I am a shareholder? Personally, I find your comment offensive, as it is a sweeping allegation of conflict of interest and bias on the part of this community. If you are not willing to back up your assertion with data, then I would respectfully suggest that you refrain from making such statements.

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

Does your data tell you whether I am a shareholder? Personally, I find your comment offensive, as it is a sweeping allegation of conflict of interest and bias on the part of this community. If you are not willing to back up your assertion with data, then I would respectfully suggest that you refrain from making such statements.

I'm not going to share the data at this time... as I said, anyone is free to undertake the same research if they *really* care about the potential for conflict of interest. I have asked TMC to review their policy on this because IMO this is an important issue. We are now way OT and I suggest you start another thread if you wish to discuss the potential issues of undisclosed stock ownership on TMC.

 

[Doug_G]

I'm not going to share the data at this time... as I said, anyone is free to undertake the same research if they *really* care about the potential for conflict of interest. I have asked TMC to review their policy on this because IMO this is an important issue. We are now way OT and I suggest you start another thread if you wish to discuss the potential issues of undisclosed stock ownership on TMC.

I didn't ask you to share the data, I asked you to not make unsubstantiated allegations.

Full disclosure: I have no financial stake in Tesla Motors whatsoever. I have bought a couple of Tesla vehicles.

Personally, I'd appreciate a retraction. I do NOT appreciate being painted with a broad sweeping brush.

 

[dsm363]

I'm not going to share the data at this time... as I said, anyone is free to undertake the same research if they *really* care about the potential for conflict of interest. I have asked TMC to review their policy on this because IMO this is an important issue. We are now way OT and I suggest you start another thread if you wish to discuss the potential issues of undisclosed stock ownership on TMC.

Do you have business interests that conflict with your backing of certain EV related charging programs in England? Do you financially benefit in any way from pushing EVs?

At what level of stock in Tesla do you consider someone potentially corrupt or that they are posting just to sway the stock price. Is it 10 shares, maybe 100 shares? Do you truly think any one poster here has enough influence to move the needle at all?

 

[Al Sherman]

I went out to run some errands and now this thread is up. Who started this thread?

 

[NigelM]

Who started this thread?

It's an Off Topic carve-out from the NYT thread.

 

[Al Sherman]

It's an Off Topic carve-out from the NYT thread.

Gotchya. Thank You.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

It's an Off Topic carve-out from the NYT thread.

They should have carved more, because I have no idea what started it, but it seems to be something about many of us being biased because we are stockholders.

I became a stockholder well after joining this forum as a strong advocate for the car.

In fact, I started coming TMC in June after realizing sometime in May that a car that I had assumed (per press reports) to be pure vaporware was about to go into full production. I did extensive research on the car, and became excited about its capabilities (and impending "realness"). In fact, I started the Model S Performance vs BMW M5 thread at the end of June, based on my enthusiasm for the car and its performance.

In the interest of full disclosure, I made similar arguments in threads across the internet and deployed information developed here at TMC to bolster my arguments. I sent e-mails to editors at Automobile Magazine, Motortrend and others suggesting they do a comparison with the M5, along with links to the discussion thread we had here. I have no clue whether they read those e-mails, but Automobile Magazine eventually posted a drag race video between the two cars, which I found thrilling to watch and re-emphasized to me how great of a car this was.

In late August I purchased a substantial (for me) amount of stock in the company, and announced that in the investors thread. At various times since then I have made clear I am an investor. I would not be an investor if I did not believe in the car and I do not feel that there is any ethical requirement to disclose I am an investor unless I am giving someone investment advice. Tens of millions of people own stock either directly, or through mutual funds, in a host of public companies. It would be ludicrous to expect them to disclose their financial interest in order to participate in any given discussion.

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

Do you have business interests that conflict with your backing of certain EV related charging programs in England?

During the two year period from January 2011 to December 2012 I donated almost 500,000 GBP to the UK Registered Charity, Zero Carbon World, to support it's work in the renewable energy and electric vehicle sectors. As a trustee of the charity I was one of three unpaid people managing this and other donations that the charity received. All UK registered charities have their accounts independently audited and reviewed by a government body the Charity Commission. All Zero Carbon World filings are up to date.

At no point during this time did I have any business interests in the EV or renewable sectors that in anyway conflicted with the work of Zero Carbon World (which would be a criminal offence in the UK).

I'm fully committed to the concept of transparency and have always used my own identity here and in other forums. Indeed until very recently my signature even included my cell number amongst all my other contact details.

I'm extremely proud of the work that Zero Carbon World has undertaken. This includes the donation of almost 600 Charging Stations to hotels, tourist attractions, and charities in the UK.

Do you financially benefit in any way from pushing EVs?

During the two year period from January 2011 to December 2012 I received no financial benefit whatsoever from my work in the EV or renewable sectors.

In January 2013 I took the decision to start a new company that would develop and sell Charging Stations because I was dismayed at the high prices in the industry. Having taken that decision I stood down as a Trustee of Zero Carbon World and was invited to become the Patron. As Patron I have no day to day responsibilities within the charity and my role is simply an honorary one. I intend to support Zero Carbon World and other charities through the financial donations that I make. Zero Carbon World is currently recruiting a CEO, additional trustees, and intends to increase it's staff from four to ten. To date I have received no financial benefit from the new company and given that we will not release products until Q3 I don't expect to see any in 2013.

At what level of stock in Tesla do you consider someone potentially corrupt or that they are posting just to sway the stock price.

IMO any stock ownership in Tesla or interest in any EV company should be disclosed as a matter of policy when the potential for conflict exists.

Over the last few days I've been horrified to read some disgraceful comments from some members of TMC against Mr Broder and Ms Sullivan. The hypocrisy from some members calling out Mr Broder for having an anti-EV history while not disclosing stock ownership in Tesla is extraordinary and IMO should be challenged.

 

[Al Sherman]

I just can't get my head around this. Can someone help me? This is the Tesla Motors Club Forum. The vast majority of the people here believe passionately in the company and the car. Why would it surprise anyone that some of us invested in Tesla? This just seems silly to me. Almost bizzare. I own Tesla stock. I've sold enough to pay for my Model S. What I have left is less than 1/10th of a percent of my portfolio. I've called out Broder and Sullivan and continue to do so. My integrity is intact. Totally uncompromised. I just don't see the connection, or the point. There isn't some vast shareholder conspiracy afoot that can move the share price of a stock with an average daily volume of over a million shares. Certainly not on this forum. That's just silly. This isn't insider trading. We're just shareholders and customers who are loyal to the product and the company.
Anybody want to take a stab at clearing this up for me?

 

[dsm363]

I could understand if someone here was running for head of the Department of Energy and this was a senate confirmation hearing but really, this is a Tesla chat forum.
Should we disclose our voting history when we talk about issues related to politics or our political affiliation? How about if we are NY Times subscribers or not when we attack the article? I think you're taking it too far here. I'm all for transparency but sometimes just criticizing an article on the facts should be enough.

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

I'm all for transparency

What does that actually mean? You choose to post with an anonymous user name and with no details in your About Me page. How exactly is that "transparent"?