Tesla Meets the Auto RegulatorsThe feds have opened a safety investigation into the Model S fires. Elon Musk should be worried. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304465604579222051067101342
Yes behind a paywall. Didn't get to read it but the gist is something I've been worried about. From years in commercial aviation I'm dubious about involving government agencies. They say the 2 biggest lies in aviation are: 1. FAA: "Where here to help." and 2. Airline: "We're glad to have you."
If you're going to play in a regulated industry, you can't ignore the regulators. Just like a good marketing person understands their audience, a company needs to understand the regulatory landscape and how to work with the various worldwide government agencies that set/enforce the rules That doesn't mean agreeing with everything an agency says and does. It means understanding what motivates them, what pressures they are under, etc. And then working with them.
Moderator note - Please remember the TOS allows 'fair use' quotes, but not complete reproduction of copyrighted material. Thanks.
I worry that once you get NHTSA involved, they'll make it their business to tell Tesla how to run theirs. So far they've been pretty hands off Tesla and EVs. But they're likely to justify their time by becoming more involved long term in more areas than Tesla would like.
I'm curious, why would you say that? Do you know of other scenarios where the NHTSA has meddled in another business' affairs beyond what their mandate dictates?
google link to get around paywall for those interested: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC0QqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304465604579222051067101342.html&ei=LTaWUrnGEILroASv4oHwAg&usg=AFQjCNGp36oBUJd9q6uIxpr1Uvjgb4i0FQ&bvm=bv.57155469,d.cGU
It seems a lot of people on there are under the impression that Tesla hasn't paid its loan off to the government yet. Example:
Yes, the WSJ has no shortage of moron readers. Its editorial page has always been to the right of Genghis Kahn but since Rupert Murdoch bought it the entire paper, which used to be decent, has become a rag.
The point of the article is that he may live to rue that day. The opinion piece of no fan of the NHTSA and is warning Tesla that the results of the investigation could hurt Tesla. A lot. Regardless of the facts on the ground.
Here is the germane quote (fair use, I hope): GM pickups with side-mounted gas tanks in the 1980s were necessarily more fire-prone in side collisions, yet the truck's overall safety record was exemplary and the vehicle fully complied with federal fuel-system safety standards. That didn't stop the feds from eventually ruling the trucks defective, in response to over-the-top media and interest-group allegations against the company. There comes a point when hysteria trumps reason.
I remember talking to my wife about this at the time. She said she would refuse to ride in one of those trucks. I could not convince her that their safety record showed they were safe overall; she just knew they were unsafe "in one area" so she didn't want to ride in one. (I talked to her about it again yesterday, and now she has a much better view of it). Our brains are not very good at comprehending the math for rare events; we tend to make decisions based on the emotional impact of single events or anecdotes. Showing a fire on TV tends to stick with people long after they've forgotten the statistics that were presented along with it. (This may have been particularly true for my wife, who had seen four people burn to death in a gas station fire). This is why faking a fire, as was done for the GM trucks - or even just repeatedly showing a fire that is no way unusual, as has been done for Tesla - causes a serious problem. The public may "demand" a solution to a non-existent problem...or lose faith in an agency that doesn't "do something".