I was quite disheartened to hear about the catastrophic fire at Gruber Motors that singlehandedly destroyed 30 Roadsters, along with a plethora of irreplaceable Roadster components. Immediately, I felt compassion for Gruber Motors and all of the Roadster Owners that had entrusted their precious vehicles to them. Gruber Motors has been at the forefront of anything Tesla and is the self-proclaimed leader in Roadster technology, offering "advanced engineering services". How then, could such a mishap occur not once, but twice? Furthermore, if something like this could befall an "expert", what does the future hold for just regular car folk? These and many other questions came to mind and I decided to encapsulate my thoughts in this thread to capture the sentiment of the community as a whole. In specific, I wondered.....
1) What happened?
Gruber Motors is responsible for the destruction of the most Tesla Roadsters in the world. When the first fire occurred in 2017, it could've been dismissed as an anomaly, with the thought that nobody is perfect and that everyone makes mistakes. Still, it was rather disconcerting to see this transpire at the home of a company that professes that their "Roadster expertise is particularly unparalleled". (Certainly, the number of Roadsters they've destroyed has been particularly unparalleled.).
2) Just how bad was this?
With the most recent fire, it seems that lightning has struck twice. Are you kidding me? The expert in the field just permanently obliterated 2% of the entire population of Roadsters in the country? To put that into perspective, a 2% destruction rate would equate to killing over 6.6 million people in the U.S. If you're an expert in the field, this can't happen, ever. For it to happen twice, it would really make me question just how much of an "expert" you are.
In one of the threads, someone opined, "think of all the Roadsters that he saved". Sure, so let's say that you're a medical doctor and you service many patients over the years. Then, in 2017, you make a mistake and 6 people die as a result of your actions. Four years later, you accidentally kill another 30 patients. Do the years of service tending to patients mitigate the damage caused by two separate major blunders? Would you want to use that doctor again?
3) How could this possibly happen?
We're talking about a company that is dedicated to a life of vehicles, specializing in electrical technology. We're talking about a company that has already experienced a tragic incident just a few years ago. Would you not expect precautions to be set in place to never let this happen again? As a business owner, I would've been extremely embarrassed to have suffered the first fire. To have a second, even more calamitous event? I'd probably start thinking about a significant life change. At the very least, you would expect that controls would be put in place to limit the damage under the worst circumstances. Instead, the result was 5x worse. If you're an expert, you've got to know the volatility of the materials that you're working with. If you don't have the proper protocol in place to prevent such occurrences, then that's simply irresponsible.
4) Gross negligence or Intentional misconduct?
Is it really possible for an electronics expert to suffer 2 separate fiascoes of this magnitude? It is certainly in the realm of possibility, although it seems unlikely. But, if not an accident, what would be the motivation behind any type of intentional misconduct? Is there a possibility that an outsider set the building on fire? Is it possible that there were gains to be had from insurance? It would certainly be premature to imply that Gruber had any premeditation in this, but many owners that I spoke to expressed suspicion at the nature of the fire. One thing is for sure: the totality of the fire completely annihilated any potential evidence within the compound.
5) Why do Gruber's subsequent actions strike me as odd?
I have never witnessed anyone so calm in the aftermath of a diasaster. It's simply "business as usual". As an outsider, it would be tough to differentiate between Gruber getting a parking ticket versus burning down over $4 million of property. Then, to top it off, the company posts a video of the destruction, for YouTube clicks. Is that really something that you want to publicize and post at this time? Does it feel like bad form to populate all the websites with a video showcasing the deaths of all the affected owners babies? Seems like, "Oopsie, my bad. Well, may as well post it up and get some views, No sweat; the insurance will take care of everything and I'll just use one of my other 6 buildings." Does that appear a little too nonchalant to anyone else?
1) What happened?
Gruber Motors is responsible for the destruction of the most Tesla Roadsters in the world. When the first fire occurred in 2017, it could've been dismissed as an anomaly, with the thought that nobody is perfect and that everyone makes mistakes. Still, it was rather disconcerting to see this transpire at the home of a company that professes that their "Roadster expertise is particularly unparalleled". (Certainly, the number of Roadsters they've destroyed has been particularly unparalleled.).
2) Just how bad was this?
With the most recent fire, it seems that lightning has struck twice. Are you kidding me? The expert in the field just permanently obliterated 2% of the entire population of Roadsters in the country? To put that into perspective, a 2% destruction rate would equate to killing over 6.6 million people in the U.S. If you're an expert in the field, this can't happen, ever. For it to happen twice, it would really make me question just how much of an "expert" you are.
In one of the threads, someone opined, "think of all the Roadsters that he saved". Sure, so let's say that you're a medical doctor and you service many patients over the years. Then, in 2017, you make a mistake and 6 people die as a result of your actions. Four years later, you accidentally kill another 30 patients. Do the years of service tending to patients mitigate the damage caused by two separate major blunders? Would you want to use that doctor again?
3) How could this possibly happen?
We're talking about a company that is dedicated to a life of vehicles, specializing in electrical technology. We're talking about a company that has already experienced a tragic incident just a few years ago. Would you not expect precautions to be set in place to never let this happen again? As a business owner, I would've been extremely embarrassed to have suffered the first fire. To have a second, even more calamitous event? I'd probably start thinking about a significant life change. At the very least, you would expect that controls would be put in place to limit the damage under the worst circumstances. Instead, the result was 5x worse. If you're an expert, you've got to know the volatility of the materials that you're working with. If you don't have the proper protocol in place to prevent such occurrences, then that's simply irresponsible.
4) Gross negligence or Intentional misconduct?
Is it really possible for an electronics expert to suffer 2 separate fiascoes of this magnitude? It is certainly in the realm of possibility, although it seems unlikely. But, if not an accident, what would be the motivation behind any type of intentional misconduct? Is there a possibility that an outsider set the building on fire? Is it possible that there were gains to be had from insurance? It would certainly be premature to imply that Gruber had any premeditation in this, but many owners that I spoke to expressed suspicion at the nature of the fire. One thing is for sure: the totality of the fire completely annihilated any potential evidence within the compound.
5) Why do Gruber's subsequent actions strike me as odd?
I have never witnessed anyone so calm in the aftermath of a diasaster. It's simply "business as usual". As an outsider, it would be tough to differentiate between Gruber getting a parking ticket versus burning down over $4 million of property. Then, to top it off, the company posts a video of the destruction, for YouTube clicks. Is that really something that you want to publicize and post at this time? Does it feel like bad form to populate all the websites with a video showcasing the deaths of all the affected owners babies? Seems like, "Oopsie, my bad. Well, may as well post it up and get some views, No sweat; the insurance will take care of everything and I'll just use one of my other 6 buildings." Does that appear a little too nonchalant to anyone else?