2 million users maybe left Twitter. How many joined? It is similar for Tesla. Some percent are no longer customers, how many were gained? Hard to say.
I agree that it is hard, close to unknowable, to exactly determine how much the current non-vehicle related issues impact buying decisions on a macro level.
However, what about a thought experiment?
Situation 1 - How conceivable is it that an individual with moderately to strongly held sociopolitical beliefs might choose to take their high dollar, environmentally conscious vehicle purchase elsewhere, given that there are other options currently?
I know personally considered maybe not getting a Tesla due to the other "noise". In my case, I just went with a logic based decision and decided to get the best car I could for my money. For me, that ended up being the Y. A car purchase, however, is frequently very emotionally-driven. Further, we have lots of anecdotal (of limited use, granted) evidence of people avoiding the brand due to the "noise" issue, representing possible brand damange.
Situation 2 - Now, on the other side, consider someone who is a fan of the CEO's more recent vocal sociopolitical statements and gestures. Perhaps they are more likely to support the brand, but lets consider that they might not have the climate/environmental motivation to go electric. How likely is it that the CEO's more recent political stances would be THE determining factor to buy a Tesla vehicle? It may nudge them in that direction, but is it likely, right now, to move them out of a big fancy Denali to a Model Y/X? Will they decide to wait for the Cybertruck, for which we do not have a current reliable release date beyond "maybe this year"?
In my opinion, (yes, fully calling attention that this is hard to objectively support), I think that
IF there is likely to be a effect on brand reputation and uptake based on the very, very visible CEO's recent stances, then it is much more likely that that is brand reputation damage / decreased sales.
How likely is it that these effects
ARE taking place? I don't know, I cannot quantify that. However, it does not seem quite so INCONCEIVABLE that this will be coming into play affecting sales, even if just by a small amount, going forward for the time being.
Now, given all of that (IF the more likely effect is brand damage, AND IF the current behavior is affecting brand), then HOW MUCH of an impact will/could this have? Again, very difficult to quantify.
Given the general level of disengagement in day-to-day politics among the folks, that are, let's say, in the middle 50% of the population, I don't think their decisions will be affected much. IF there is an effect, I think that it might be small, but measurable. Enough to have an impact? I don't know.
The thing is though..... why?
There's a reason that most businesses tend to stay out of hot button issues publicly. There's little upside. You're probably more likely to cause a loss in sales, than make an appreciable gain.
IF the CEO's intention is to truly make an impact on the long term survivability of the human race, it would seem prudent to only take actions that would
increase the uptake of their clean ZEVs. Why even BOTHER getting very publicly and visibly engaged on such visceral issues?
Sure, go ahead and fret, personally about the "woke mind virus". Go ahead and take actions in your personal life to fight it, I guess. Start a dark money PAC, whatever. You can have this impact with out the potential of hurting your only
consumer facing business.
As an investor, I know I'd rather have a publicly politically neutral leader for a business, rather than one that invites potential downside.
