Your help needed: "FOR" Votes for 2015 TSLA Prop 3 and 4

[TSLA Pilot]

TSLA Pilot:

Please tell us how much GHG will be saved with your proposal and how much this will cost Tesla.

If you cannot respond to this question with two numbers and how you arrived at these numbers then please don't bother with your volumes of BS.

A company cannot exist on principle alone.

You don't happen to work in the faux leather industry do you?

Sorry, as we don't buy automotive interior materials or animal skins by the railcar, and don't work in the industry either, we can't answer your two questions with specific info. (Full disclosure: I have seen plenty of brains blown out of sentient cows at an aboittoir, and we have watched the short video of standard industry practices here: Meat.org | The Website the Meat Industry Doesn't Want You to See
.)

In an attempt to address your concerns, I'll repeat two items so you'll have a better idea of why Tesla will certainly be making this change at some point in the future anyway; we just want them to do it earlier rather than later, as is prudent given their leadership position in the auto/energy industries.

**************************************
Livestock a major threat to environment
Remedies urgently needed

29 November 2006, Rome - Which causes more greenhouse gas emissions, rearing cattle or driving cars?

Surprise!

According to a new report published by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, the livestock sector generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport. It is also a major source of land and water degradation.


*****************************************

As for the cost issue, please rest assured that the price of a non-leather vs. leather interior is barely noticeable difference in the cost of a Model S or X or 3, but the environmental cost is huge. This is our only planet--this is it. Are those few dollars either way (as in more OR less) a topic worthy of our time?


*****************************************
[Tesla Interior Materials Buyer--Here's a sample script to bring the salespeople running to your office: "Please bring us samples of your most environmentally-friendly, leather-like seat materials, something even BETTER than MB-Tex, and be here by Wednesday at 1:00 p.m. Oh, and be sure to bring a full report on the lifecycle GHG cost of your product--HUGE bonus points if it uses any recycled material!"]

 

[Kalud]

Odd that you would state this with nothing to back it up:

IMHO Tesla would have a serious demand issue.

When Lexus, MBZ and other brands are replacing animal skins with environmentally-friendly non-animal materials that are quite "leather-like," and sales are going up quite nicely, I can't find how your opinion has a factual basis here.

Recommend you personally stop by their dealerships and look at them for a better informed opinion.

Even better: revisit them on the used car lot in a few years and see how they look after years of use.

I'm sorry, I disagree. I won't shop by their gas guzzling dealership anytime soon, not interested.

By the way, I think you stated at least 100 times the bucket analogy with the "...but drills holes in 80 or 90% of them". I'm pretty sure its more like 99.9%

Also stated above:

Removing all leather product all at once in that market segment is unrealistic and would be counterproductive at this stage.

Recommend you read the proposal suggestion of a graduated phase-in so it won't be "all at once." Plus the reason Tesla exists is to reduce GHG's; why keep adding them? Especially exasperating: Why punish high-information buyers?

I'd like more options added, like Alcantara, but I'm strongly against the phase out of dead cow seats. Perhaps Tesla could add a baby seal option... (its a joke, don't panic!)

 

[TSLA Pilot]

Personally I quite like my dead cow seats in all three Model S I've purchased.

Not sure why you would have felt you would have had support from me on this. You won't find an animal rights proponent in me, and I've openly expressed that viewpoint elsewhere on this forum in the past.

I'd strongly suggest that next time you present a shareholder proposal that you take a different approach.

Personally I quite like my dead cow seats in all three Model S I've purchased.

Curious as to why: Would you mind expanding on where that comes from? Looks? Feel?

Not sure why you would have felt you would have had support from me on this. You won't find an animal rights proponent in me, and I've openly expressed that viewpoint elsewhere on this forum in the past.

Because you've put many dozens of PV kW power generation on (and around) your own home, and you have a your own massive Tesla home battery storage device, hand-built by you. That leads us to believe you might have an environmental bent and care about GHG emissions. Did we get that wrong?

 

[dsm363]

Again, your issue is with the beef industry. As long as people are still consuming beef there will be leather available for seats. Do you really believe that if Tesla and every other car maker stopped using leather that no one in the US would suddenly eat beef anymore?

 

[bonnie]

Challenges to those lifelong-held assumptions are seen as a threat and/or cause internal conflict, conscious or otherwise (cognitive dissonance); feelings are hurt.

And thus, many on this thread clasp to an unsupportable, illogical position not because they can provide reasoned facts to the contrary . . . but because they don't like the messenger's "style."

I'm completely fascinated by how you process information. Truly. You assume that people are disagreeing with you because we don't like your style? Ummm, no.

Consider that maybe people are bringing up your style because yes, we DO care about emissions, we have all done things in our personal life to reduce those emissions, and we feel that your style may be obscuring the message.

Many people, myself included, have said 'this is not the right time in Tesla's history'. Most of us support a vegan option (not exclusive, however). Those things have been said. But you think we're hung up on your style and are incapable of critical thought because we happen to disagree with you ... intwisting.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

I'm sorry, I disagree. I won't shop by their gas guzzling dealership anytime soon, not interested.

I was insufficiently clear I'm afraid. The Lexus/MBZ dealer visit is to simply check out their INTERIORS and compare to the status quo at Tesla. One is far better for the environment, and one is far worse. By exposing you to the "other" option, NOT to buy the car but to simply to see how great the interior COULD be in a Tesla, you'd be more likely to vote for the less-GHG option.

By the way, I think you stated at least 100 times the bucket analogy with the "...but drills holes in 80 or 90% of them". I'm pretty sure its more like 99.9%

And we've explained why, or so I thought.

Tesla PUNISHES high-information voters that want a low- or no-GHG/cruelty-free interior by removing or blocking: Next Gen Seats, Fog Lamps, Cornering Lights, Interior Lighting (such as being able to see in the trunk!?!), Illuminated Door Handles, and more (and even heated seats in the early months of the MS!). The punishment continues by forcing seats that, according to Elon himself, "suck."

Do you see how that would lead to so many non-textile Model S's?

Props 3 and 4 will not succeed as long as too many voters remain uninformed of the stunning options available in low- or no-GHG interiors.

PLEASE STOP BY YOUR LOCAL MBZ AND LEXUS DEALERS AND CHECK THEM OUT. (But don't buy any!)
We'll need every vote if we're to make more low- or no-GHG Teslas sooner rather than later.

Thank you.

 

[LargeHamCollider]

TSLA Pilot, stop thread bumping, go evangelize some other demographic.

 

[wk057]

Personally I quite like my dead cow seats in all three Model S I've purchased.

Curious as to why: Would you mind expanding on where that comes from? Looks? Feel?

Not sure why you would have felt you would have had support from me on this. You won't find an animal rights proponent in me, and I've openly expressed that viewpoint elsewhere on this forum in the past.

Because you've put many dozens of PV kW power generation on (and around) your own home, and you have a your own massive Tesla home battery storage device, hand-built by you. That leads us to believe you might have an environmental bent and care about GHG emissions. Did we get that wrong?

Definitely a better more natural feel than any synthetic alternatives.

While I'm all for reducing emissions in principle, financially crippling one of the only companies in the world truly dedicated to such a goal by removing a high end option favored by nearly all buyers would certainly be contrary to such a goal. I've been to the factory and seen that leather dominated over textile options. Even informal polling on this site in delivery tracking threads suggests the same.

I'm not convinced that even if somehow Tesla survived the massive drop in demand that would stem from implementation of your proposals that emissions would even be reduced at all anyway. You've done a lot of arm waving but have admitted you've done no research on this and have no numbers.

We're investors. Show us the numbers. If they're good for the company, then sure, lets go for it. Since there is no conceivable way for this to help investors, and you've not presented any information supporting that it will, you're not going to find many on your side.

If by some fluke these proposals were to pass I would have to immediately drop TSLA from my portfolio because the company would be doomed to fail.

 

[pz1975]

I can't wait for this thread to be closed. It's like a car crash - I can't help myself reading it even though it is so painful to look at. Again, TSLA Pilot, it is your STYLE of writing that is turning everyone off (even those who agree with you), NOT the CONTENT. Your STYLE reminds me of the emails that fill my spam folder trying to convince me, among other things, that vaccines cause autism, 9-11 was a conspiracy and the pharmaceutical industry pays off doctors to prescribe their drugs. Please tell again the analogy of the lifeboat - we obviously are not smart enough to have understood it the first 5 times.

 

[efusco]

TSLA Pilot: It amazes me how condescending you come across about an issue you obviously feel very strongly about. The style of your arguments (equivalent to an adult talking to 12 year-olds) is very ineffective and I am sure has turned more people away from your point of view than towards.

It is this! Unbelievable.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

To answer your question:

First, how about because we're with Elon on stopping our self-induced extinction event? Even if WE transition to bus travel (although there's no public transport in our city), the reality is that in the US and most other spread-out yet advanced first world societies, there is a STRONG preference for non-public transport. (And that's why Elon is making cars and SUV's, not a bus, perhaps?) Also, even if we HAD bus service here, using it would actually ADD to our GHG's--yes, ADD to our GHG's--because we power our MS (and the whole house) via our 7.44 kW SolarCity PV system that's sitting on the roof.

Why do you choose to live somewhere that forces you to have a car?

How much CO2-equivalent do the leather seats in 1 Tesla Model S generate?
How much CO2-equivalent does a Tesla Model S generate per mile compared to other BEVs?

 

[MarkR]

I would also like to see premium non-leather OPTIONS, but agree that now isn't the time for this fight. I'm fearful that you would nudge Tesla toward appealing only to vegans and animal activists! As a stockholder and environmentalist, that would be absurd.

 

[eepic]

A. We're knee-deep in water in our one and only lifeboat.

B. Tesla builds a GREAT bucket, but drills holes in 80 or 90% of them.

C. Props 3 and 4 suggest Tesla to stop drilling those holes.

D. We need your "FOR" votes.

Please join us.

Thx.

I think you're insisting on your opinion, then refusing to consider other facts and details in the matter. Perhaps if I correct your analogy to reflect what you're proposing, it may make it more relatable for you.

We're on a giant boat (again, GHG is the water leaking into it). Tesla is making 100 amazing buckets/day and trying to ramp this up as quickly as possible. Your proposal would be comparable to insisting a water-repellent coating is applied to the buckets that would increase water-scooping effectiveness. Qualitatively, we all agree the coating would probably be beneficial.

However, it only increases effectiveness of each bucket by 0.001% and requires pulling people currently designing and manufacturing the buckets to mixing and applying this coating, reducing production to 60 buckets/day. So you're basically making an equivalent to 60.00006 buckets a day impact, instead of 100.

So if you are optimizing for maximum water-scoopage (GHG reduction) it would be a net negative to implement this idea at this point in time. Perhaps in the future it could make sense, but not right now.

 

[Kalud]

I'm sorry, I disagree. I won't shop by their gas guzzling dealership anytime soon, not interested.

I was insufficiently clear I'm afraid. The Lexus/MBZ dealer visit is to simply check out their INTERIORS and compare to the status quo at Tesla. One is far better for the environment, and one is far worse. By exposing you to the "other" option, NOT to buy the car but to simply to see how great the interior COULD be in a Tesla, you'd be more likely to vote for the less-GHG option.

By the way, I think you stated at least 100 times the bucket analogy with the "...but drills holes in 80 or 90% of them". I'm pretty sure its more like 99.9%

And we've explained why, or so I thought.

Tesla PUNISHES high-information voters that want a low- or no-GHG/cruelty-free interior by removing or blocking: Next Gen Seats, Fog Lamps, Cornering Lights, Interior Lighting (such as being able to see in the trunk!?!), Illuminated Door Handles, and more (and even heated seats in the early months of the MS!). The punishment continues by forcing seats that, according to Elon himself, "suck."

Do you see how that would lead to so many non-textile Model S's?

Props 3 and 4 will not succeed as long as too many voters remain uninformed of the stunning options available in low- or no-GHG interiors.

PLEASE STOP BY YOUR LOCAL MBZ AND LEXUS DEALERS AND CHECK THEM OUT. (But don't buy any!)
We'll need every vote if we're to make more low- or no-GHG Teslas sooner rather than later.

Thank you.

I know I waste my time again, but... I won't visit them, you fail to understand (or fail to listen) that I'm pro new seating options. I a huge fan of the Alcantara BMW seats that were not available when I ordered my previous car. I went with the Coral Red Leather option that was stunning and that I loved so much. I said already and will say it again, I would like to see MORE seating options, but leather should stay available. Even my own work desk is in real leather, and I love it. Heck, they could make a exclusive super sport Alcantara seat even more expensive then the new next-gen seats that most P85D owners would want and maybe reduce the ordering rate of leather next-gen seats...

So no, I won't visit my local gas guzzling dealers, I know that there are other options, yes options that could be selected (and I wish are added in due time).

With that being said, I already voted against your proposal because I disagree in limiting the options. I would rather add options.

You're welcome.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

Bonnie wrote:

But you think we're hung up on your style and are incapable of critical thought because we happen to disagree with you ... intwisting.

Not trying to be a pill here, honest, but where is the "critical thought?"

Seriously.

The "against" argument is overflowing with feelings and opinions and reflects a massive dearth of hyperlinks to legitimate websites, because there are none that would support that position.

We're at pages and pages of opinion-loaded comments about what people sit on in their Tesla with some going so far as to predict the demise of Tesla Motors(!) if the Proposals 3 and 4 are adopted. (I hope someone from MBZ, Lexus, BMW, et al, is reading this thread so they can save their growing businesses which are, apparently, actually about to implode and go bankrupt as they install non-leather interiors.)

To recap: One option hastens our pace to a "very bad outcome that may lead to an extinction level event" and the other option doesn't.

In a rational world, there would be no debate.

Color me "profoundly confused" that the otherwise intelligent, thoughtful people on this forum would spew such much vitriol-filled and/or mocking material, vs. actually sharing whatever facts the "against" side can generate.

In closing, the chemical equations are clear and concise, and the modeling based on those equations appears robust to those that study this for a living.

To my knowledge, none of the computer models or chemistry equations has an input variable labeled "Opinions" or "Feelings."

This much angst on such a simple, clear choice does not lift the spirit.

 

[dsm363]

You link Tesla's choice of leather seats with the end of the world. Others disagree. That is one small drop in a very large ocean.

If you were truly this passionate about emissions then you'd be lobbying the other car makes at their shareholder meetings to stop ICE production in 3 years. Unrealistic? You bet and so is eliminating leather in 3 years and thinking that would improve Tesla sales.

That said this discussion is like boxing a glacier and going nowhere.

 

[SteveG3]

12. There are no luxury cars where you have faux leather options but no real leather options.

Untrue.

There are many awaiting your inspection at your local MBZ, Lexus, Infiniti, BMW dealer (and, if you are in a non-US market, at your local Audi dealership too). Recommend you stop by and check them out . . . like we have.

2013 BMW M135i - Interior and Engine [1080p HD] - YouTube

Tesla Pilot, I am trying to focus on the substance of your argument, but I repeatedly have asked you to respond to a point I've not yet seen you directly address.

Are you saying these automakers (Lexus, Mercedes, BMW, Infiiniti) have models they offer that do not include a leather seat option?

As I mentioned before, I looked at the Mercedes website for the model you referred to in your first post and it had leather seats available as an option. If I'm misunderstanding this, and these other manufacturers sell models that do not offer leather as an option, I think that would make your proposal more interesting. Do you know of such options, or is my impression correct that none of these brands have made the decision to exclude leather as an option?

I really hope we can have a constructive discussion about what changes Tesla might be able to make along a continuum of addressing your concerns.

 

[wk057]

Bonnie wrote:

But you think we're hung up on your style and are incapable of critical thought because we happen to disagree with you ... intwisting.

Not trying to be a pill here, honest, but where is the "critical thought?"

Seriously.

The "against" argument is overflowing with feelings and opinions and reflects a massive dearth of hyperlinks to legitimate websites, because there are none that would support that position.

We're at pages and pages of opinion-loaded comments about what people sit on in their Tesla with some going so far as to predict the demise of Tesla Motors(!) if the Proposals 3 and 4 are adopted. (I hope someone from MBZ, Lexus, BMW, et al, is reading this thread so they can save their growing businesses which are, apparently, actually about to implode and go bankrupt as they install non-leather interiors.)

To recap: One option hastens our pace to a "very bad outcome that may lead to an extinction level event" and the other option doesn't.

In a rational world, there would be no debate.

Color me "profoundly confused" that the otherwise intelligent, thoughtful people on this forum would spew such much vitriol-filled and/or mocking material, vs. actually sharing whatever facts the "against" side can generate.

In closing, the chemical equations are clear and concise, and the modeling based on those equations appears robust to those that study this for a living.

To my knowledge, none of the computer models or chemistry equations has an input variable labeled "Opinions" or "Feelings."

This much angst on such a simple, clear choice does not lift the spirit.

This still looks like arm flailing to me. I see zero numbers in this post (or any of your posts) that support your view.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

I a huge fan of the Alcantara BMW seats that were not available when I ordered my previous car. I went with the Coral Red Leather option that was stunning and that I loved so much. I said already and will say it again, I would like to see MORE seating options, but leather should stay available. Even my own work desk is in real leather, and I love it.

A leather desk!?!

We are really, really overdue for massive GHG taxes. With CO2 ppm over at 400+ and still climbing, I wonder if we'll be able to recover in time?

********************************

UN FAO:

Livestock a major threat to environment
Remedies urgently needed

29 November 2006, Rome - Which causes more greenhouse gas emissions, rearing cattle or driving cars?

Surprise!

According to a new report published by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, the livestock sector generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport. It is also a major source of land and water degradation.

Says Henning Steinfeld, Chief of FAO’s Livestock Information and Policy Branch and senior author of the report: “Livestock are one of the most significant contributors to today’s most serious environmental problems. Urgent action is required to remedy the situation.”


******************************************************

You drive a Tesla and own the stock. You really need to watch this; it should change your life:

Do the Math - The Movie - YouTube

 

[dsm363]

Why don't you actually address people's questions instead of recycling (usually a good thing) the same links and arguments.