Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

[EVNow]

If a reporter is dinged for writing a factual story about a bad event, this type of measure would rate them as negative. In this political climate, it's dangerous to approach things this way.

I think some people are needlessly defending journalists writing bad takes on Tesla because of the attack they are under from Trump. But the comparison is invalid.

With Trump there are a lot of factual things you can check. Then there are ideological drivers.

With Tesla - there is nothing like that. The company story is remarkable, the growth is remarkable - and Tesla just had two profitable quarters. Yet the tone of the articles continue to be negative on the whole - EVEN as many of them claim they want to see climate change addressed.

I don't know how the articles are rated, but there is definitely some judgement involved - so it can be somewhat subjective. We do know some reporters are more negative than others - so we should be able to quantify that in some way.

 

[elasalle]

You know what I hate about this list (and have shared with Clean Technica)? If you pick any news topic ... Tesla, government, whatever, there is going to be good news and negative news. If a reporter is dinged for writing a factual story about a bad event, this type of measure would rate them as negative. In this political climate, it's dangerous to approach things this way.

That's different than fluff pieces vs. negatively biased. I know a lot of people don't see the difference, but you can't measure if a news org is biased or not using this method. It leads to some very bad behavior.[/QUOTE]

btw, I didn't need the list, to conclude that she is negatively biased - thats based on reading her articles. ~ cheers.

 

[JRP3]

When you can tell your boss at a huge multinational to bugger off, let me know. She’s under pressure to write according to her editors demands. Likely under pressure to fish for information online. If you have insight into port 80, like just happened, you can help her write positive stories. Sometimes it’s better to help someone be better then to damn them for their faults.

If in fact she is under pressure to spin negative Tesla articles then there is no point in trying to provide positive information since it will be ignored or spun negative. On the other hand if she has choice in the way she writes her articles then there is no excuse for what she's been doing. In either case she can't pretend she's unbiased, whatever the reason.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

You know what I hate about this list (and have shared with Clean Technica)? If you pick any news topic ... Tesla, government, whatever, there is going to be good news and negative news. If a reporter is dinged for writing a factual story about a bad event, this type of measure would rate them as negative. In this political climate, it's dangerous to approach things this way.

That's different than fluff pieces vs. negatively biased. I know a lot of people don't see the difference, but you can't measure if a news org is biased or not using this method. It leads to some very bad behavior.

In fairness to CleanTechnica, the (vast) majority of false and misleading reporting on Tesla(and, indeed, the majority of reporting period) in recent times has been sharply negative. Any positive news is either suppressed or downplayed, usually by couching it in a negative(Tesla posted a profit, but can they do it again?), and any potential negatives or rumors of negatives are signal boosted. Publications from Bloomberg to Washington Post continue to refer to Tesla as a “cash burning company” in nearly every article about them, despite 2 straight quarters of both profit and (highly) positive cash flow.

I agree that false and misleading positive articles should also be called out, but they don’t really exist in any significant number.

 

[GeoX750]

New to this long thread, but any discussion of the articles I have seen about weak demand for the Model 3 in the US, EU and China ?

Pretty worried that the Model Y will be another 1+ years and Tesla may have some real troubles before sales can ramp again.

 

[KarenRei]

You know what I hate about this list (and have shared with Clean Technica)? If you pick any news topic ... Tesla, government, whatever, there is going to be good news and negative news. If a reporter is dinged for writing a factual story about a bad event, this type of measure would rate them as negative. In this political climate, it's dangerous to approach things this way.

That's different than fluff pieces vs. negatively biased. I know a lot of people don't see the difference, but you can't measure if a news org is biased or not using this method. It leads to some very bad behavior.

So, in your view, in a period when Tesla has grown exponentially, now makes an order of magnitude more EVs than anyone else, now makes more than half of the world's EV battery capacity, world's largest EV manufacturer, highest-rated car in the US, lowest NHTSA combined probability of injury in history, only EV manufacturer to be sustainably profitable on EVs (by far the highest EV profit margins), and has now been profitable for two quarters in a row, with nearly a billion dollars in quarterly free cash flow.... warrants a 2-to-1 negative-to-positive ratio?

Please elaborate on why you feel so.

 

[DurandalAI]

I agree that false and misleading positive articles should also be called out, but they don’t really exist in any significant number.

Not too much in the way of articles, but plenty on twitter. Unfortunately I have to give some gentle course correction to some on Twitter who use over-enthusiastic numbers or simply pull things out of their rear ends. It doesn't make us look good when false information is posted, whether good or bad. Just the facts maam, just the facts.

 

[KarenRei]

New to this long thread, but any discussion of the articles I have seen about weak demand for the Model 3 in the US, EU and China ?

Pretty worried that the Model Y will be another 1+ years and Tesla may have some real troubles before sales can ramp again.

Please spend more time reading the thread so that we don't have to reiterate everything. Hint: January is always by far a seasonal low, Tesla made it a policy to pull US sales forward to November and December to maximize the tax credit, and is now focused almost exclusively on manufacturing cars for the EU and Chinese markets, with at any given moment around 7 ships en route to around the world, and with so much demand that UK orders won't open for another two months, and eastern Europe and Iceland don't even have a timeline yet.

Or was that enough of a summary for you?

 

[Sudre]

I guess another way to look at demand is to ask yourself why is Tesla filling up as many boats as they can to ship cars overseas if there is no demand over there?

Oh... wait. I forgot. They are dumping the cars in the middle of the ocean and all the empty parking lots in the US are full so they are shipping them to empty parking lots overseas. /s

 

[AudubonB]

Paging all TESLAQs:
How can I invest in US parking lots? I see great potential here!

 

[TSLA_Hopeful]

Yes you have ... but you've always been respectful and willing to discuss things, rather than just troll. Props to you. I'm good with disagreement, but ugh, some people ...

Hey Bonnie, with all due respect, I do think your friendship with Dana biases your opinion of her. I don't doubt she's not a bad person, but both her incentives and personal agenda come clearly through her writing.

I went to Northwestern, and I've interacted with lots of "top" journalists students, who would tell other students frequently that they were at the best school. The journalists that I've met usually had a haughty attitude, with above-average intelligence. It lead to a group who thought they were smarter than everyone else, but in reality were not.

I see that frequently with Dana's writing. I'm not saying she's the only one, but her writing often paints Tesla as a completely failing entity, and contains a lot of extremes. In real life, things aren't usually as good as the evangelists say, nor as bad as the doubters say. It's partly due to the incentive structure for journalists (did you know that Bloomberg journalists' bonuses are determined by number of clicks), but Dana's articles have a few traits:
1) Clearly meant to attract clicks
2) Written with language that is extreme
3) In both her writing and her interviews on TV, she has an air of smugness.

I understand that you feel differently, but I think that's how the majority of us feel. Her articles have good points, but her delivery is extreme and not journalistic.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Not too much in the way of articles, but plenty on twitter. Unfortunately I have to give some gentle course correction to some on Twitter who use over-enthusiastic numbers or simply pull things out of their rear ends. It doesn't make us look good when false information is posted, whether good or bad. Just the facts maam, just the facts.

Twitter is just everybody and their mom. I don’t expect it to be a bastion of truth. I’d hope we would hold journalists to higher standards.

 

[Curt Renz]

If in fact she is under pressure to spin negative Tesla articles then there is no point in trying to provide positive information since it will be ignored or spun negative. On the other hand if she has choice in the way she writes her articles then there is no excuse for what she's been doing. In either case she can't pretend she's unbiased, whatever the reason.

An old saying regarding the news media: "If it bleeds, it leads". If something goes as planned, that's not considered as newsworthy as when something has gone awry.

However, that should apply more to non-financial news. Good financial news should really be given more consideration; investors demand it. When I was in TV financial news, we felt it our duty to not shy away from good news to only present the bad. Unfortunately in this era of internet clicks, pressures on even financial reporters often force them to focus on negatives. Editors and producers consider those more "scoopy" and click-bait.

 

[JRP3]

But if you want Dana to hate Tesla, troll her all the time and give her grief even when she writes positive articles.

Exactly.

That hardly speaks to a lack of bias if some internet trolls change the way she reports on stories. She's getting push back because her reporting style has changed, not vice versa.

 

[Tslynk67]

ARK have a bit about Tesla and Maxwell in their latest newsletter: ARK Disrupt | Issue 160: Tesla, Bitcoin, Mobile Payments, & Spotify

 

[TSLA_Hopeful]

Bloomberg has an extremely cancerous compensation structure:
Bloomberg News Pays Reporters More If Their Stories Move Markets

 

[trentbridge]

New to this long thread, but any discussion of the articles I have seen about weak demand for the Model 3 in the US, EU and China ?

Pretty worried that the Model Y will be another 1+ years and Tesla may have some real troubles before sales can ramp again.

Let's not forget that the chief data point for the bear camp is a spreadsheet in German that tracks the number of invoices issued per country that may equate to the overall demand for the Model 3. It is a remarkable attempt to gauge the demand but it is obvious that many folks, especially non-German speaking nationals, are not comfortable exposing their order on this platform. Basically one country has updated regularly. Of the 1200 responses, 500 have been from Germany - 41% - showing that 23% of the Model 3s are going to Germany . Note for comparison sake that Germany only took 7% of the Model S and X sold in 2018 in Europe (excluding UK). Funny that the desire to get a Tesla has suddenly blossomed or perhaps the statistics are skewed.

There has been ZERO French orders reported since January 7th - over a month ago. There have been ZERO Swedish orders reported since January 6th and yet the bears are convinced that this data point is a genuine sign of lack of demand.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

An old saying regarding the news media: "If it bleeds, it leads". If something goes as planned, that's not considered as newsworthy as when something has gone awry.

However, that should apply more to non-financial news. Good financial news should really be given more consideration; investors demand it. When I was in TV financial news, we felt it our duty to not shy away from good news and only present the bad. Unfortunately in this era of internet clicks, pressures on even financial reporters often force them to focus on negatives.

And yet, I recall that time when real, verified industrial sabotage(!) of Tesla’s factory was uncovered and the total reporting on it was an offhand mention in the middle of a New York Times article on another subject.

It’s hard to imagine a more meaty and interesting negative story re:Tesla, and yet, radio silence. Of course, that would reinforce the idea of Tesla being under attack rather than that just being some fever dream of crazy Musk...

 

[saniflash]

SEC Filing | Tesla, Inc.

we get these a lot in the last few days

 

[elasalle]

*Walter Bloomberg on Twitter
SUSQUEHANNA ADVISORS GROUP REPORTS PASSIVE STAKE OF 5.3 PCT IN TESLA INC AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2018 - SEC FILING