Whose Brand Is MORE Damaged By The NY Times/Tesla Fiasco? NYT? Tesla?

For those who actually care about either the NYT and/or Tesla, Tesla will come out with an even stronger positive reputation than it's already built for itself. More and more owner testimonials were revealed through this process, not to mention the integrity of Tesla's performance claims.

To clarify, the reason I said "For those who actually care…" is because I don't think this situation will draw any new potential buyers to Tesla then those who were already considering the car. It'll draw a few but not alot. So, it may solidify the decision of current, potential buyers.

If this rubbish american journalism caues one person not to buy a electric car, it has endangered our survival. The author of this piece and his family should be jailed, and the NYT closed down for publishing untruths.

The government in america does much more to subsidsize gasoline/fossil/carbon fuels. american auto companies purchased all the public transit and junked it to force more people to buy cars.

@1CarSmart1,

The junking of the public transit system occurred nearly 100 years ago and while a travesty to be certain, is not relevant to practices at this moment in time. EV is heavily subsidized, far more so than gasoline powered cars were when they came out. However, I would agree that GM, Toyota, Hyundai, are as heavily subsidized as any vehicle manufacturer. Of course, government subsidy isn't always a bad thing. The fact is, electric cars are not any better for the environment than fossil fuel powered vehicles. Some studies even suggest that keeping a high MPG fossil fuel vehicle running in good condition is better for the environment than purchasing a Prius or Tesla. As it stands, there is not magic bullet that will solve our energy and environmental problems.

Wasn't it the NYT that the Bush pt. II administration used to out a CIA operative?

90%+ of the media in the Unite States is owned by large, corporate masters.

Tesla's financial report due at the end of today will overshadow the NYT fiasco. At the end of the day it does not matter what some loser journalist with a grudge against EVs has to say about them, it matters whether Tesla is winning customers, making products fast enough, and eventually making money to repay debts and reinvest in making even better products. The Model S owners and associates who took the two-day trip to prove Broder's allegations wrong spoke loud and clear.

The financial report is out and Tesla missed earnings yet again. The company continues to fail to turn a profit and is massively in the red at this point. Hopefully they come out with an affordable model (~$30,000) for daily drivers that gets 200 miles to a charge. If they can do that, then the car will make sense for commuters and people will purchase in bulk. If they keep making $90,000 cars designed as eco-bragging rights vehicles then they are doomed to failure. My wife commutes about 20 miles each way in a day and then has to drive from hospital to clinic about three times a week. So she needs a car that can comfortably do 100 miles between trips home so there is no worry. If they did that on an electric car that was around $25,000 or so, we might consider it. Of course, those cars actually pollute quite a lot considering most of our energy comes from coal and it is the number one producer of CO2. On second thought, I'll stick with our 35 mpg Jetta that is now nearly 8 years old and runs like the day it was first purchased. By not wasting energy on a new car every four years (or a new battery as in an electric) we are actually doing more for the environment than anyone who buys a prius or Tesla.

Yeah the results were disappointing, but not disastrous.

Not everyone agrees that Tesla should make affordable cars. It is not required for a car company to stay in business -- look at the luxury/exotic brands for example. One of the criticisms to Tesla (and all EV makers) is that they try to portrait their cars as capable of doing everything. This is not the case for any car, not just EVs.

It is true that holding a car as long as it is financially viable to maintain it is environmentally more responsible than buying a new "greener" one every 3-4 years.

vdiv,

I understand your point regarding affordable versus luxury, but the fact is that most luxury car makers don't do well if they don't also produce value models. I'm not talking about a $15,000 econobox, but they do need to get the price down if they plan to make the company anything more than a novelty.

I also agree that no car is capable of everything. My point is more that Tesla needs an affordable commuter model. At 200 miles, their battery is more than enough for most commuters, but the price is way out of line. I can't see too many people buying one of these at $60,000+ just to have to buy a new battery in 5 years time at $10,000-$20,000 a pop. Even the wealthy aren't going to find this to be anything more than a novelty item for bragging and little more. Besides, batteries are not good for the environment.

In fact, if we all drove one it would be an ecological disaster. Something else needs to be done, the problem is no one knows what it is. Tesla has made great strides, but I don't think the company is viable and I don't think that EVs will be viable for a long time to come. Basic physics is what is holding these cars back.

It is also the case the Musk is not telling the full truth. It seems that the review was at least partially accurate in that the battery on the S was dead when the flatbed arrived. It may also suggest that max-charging the battery is not a simple accomplishment. The reviewer offers a point-by-point rebuttal where he explains that despite repeated calls to Tesla, he was given conflicting or confusing information about how to supercharge the batteries.

There is also an interesting report I will quote here that states: "One of the noteworthy nuggets in Broder’s defense: When he asked for the data collected during the trip (for fact-checking purposes), he was told that Tesla had “typical diagnostic information,” but didn’t store exact car routes due to privacy issues. However, the data magically appeared when Musk needed to validate his tirade."

I think the truth is likely somewhere in the middle. I doubt the Tesla performs really well in the cold. After all, no battery does really well in the cold. I also doubt that the NYTs report is 100% accurate. We will see though as more and more people buy the car.

Check out this report:

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2013/02/elon-musks-data-doesnt-back-his-claims-new-york-times-fakery/62149/#.UR1EzExE-1M.twitter

Interesting article LJ745. Thanks for the link. Indeed it seems that both Broder and Tesla messed up on this one.

That was my take on the whole fiasco. It seems that Tesla is just as much to blame as Broder and that Musk should have stepped up to the plate and been forthright. He isn't exactly a level-headed individual though from what I have been told. Just another accidental billionaire who was in the right place at the time to take advantage of what other people knew how to do. Now he is trying to do it again, but lightning seldom strikes twice in the same place. Only Steven Jobs has been lucky enough (and I'll admit savvy enough) to stumble into a good situation more than once. Musk is a jerk and it shows in how he has approached these fiasco. Electric car buyers aren't expecting a miracle, but when the CEO of the company starts spreading lies, it should be a warning sign that the car might not be everything it is said to be.

Tesla buyers are smart and rich.

This means they probably aren't NYT readers (zombies), and are likely aware of the story behind the story.

What makes you think they are either smart or rich?

The NYT has absolutely no credibility with thinking people. Pseudo economists - pseudo auto journalists - pseudo politicians - pseudo intellectuals.

lol. really? thanks for the update. pray tell, what publications do you read? and exactly which newspaper has MORE credibility with you, the great american intelligentsia?

Isn't EVERY one who publishes a book these days a NYT best seller? That says a lot about the NYT as a whole right there.

seriously? you're comparing an esteemed 150 year old institution with a brand new car company. gee, i can't imagine which brand is more fragile.

Tesla reports 100's of sale cancellations as a result of the irresponsible and harmful New York Slimes newspaper article.

The New York Slimes is a disgrace and insult to anyone foolish enough to still read it.