Tesla Claims Bogus NYT Article Lost Them $100 Million In Orders

Tesla Motors Inc's top brass, including Chief Executive Elon Musk, this week are considering a strategy to recoup market value and boost demand after a critical review of the automaker's Model S sedan in New York Times this month.

Musk says that Tesla has lost about $100 million in sales and canceled orders due to the Times story, which said the sedan ran out of battery power sooner than promised during a chilly winter test drive from Washington D.C. to Boston.

"We have seen a few hundred cancellations that are due to the NYT piece and slightly lowered demand in the U.S. Northeast region," Musk told Reuters in an email.

To lose $100 million in car sales, assuming a $100,000 price per vehicle, Tesla would have to sell 1,000 fewer cars than expected.

Read Article

enthusiastx11 - 2/26/2013 1:04:19 PM

+2 Boost

correction: quality/technology bugs cost them $100MM. furthermore, they lost a ton of orders in the 4th quarter when 'buyers' didn't move forward and asked for their deposit back. this was revealed to wall street BEFORE the nyt article ever came out.

of course, bugs are to be expected in a brand new car company with a brand new concept. that's just normal and people should expect it.

let's see how tesla does beyond 'early adopters.' hope it works out for them.

Tritonx - 2/26/2013 2:31:36 PM

+2 Boost

Reuters article incorrectly added the "in orders" phrase to Musk's quote, which was “It probably affected us to the tune of tens of millions, to the order of $100 million, so it’s not trivial…I would say that refers more to the valuation of the company. It wasn’t as though there were 1,000 cancellations just due to The New York Times article. There were probably a few hundred.”

JRobUSC - 2/26/2013 5:40:24 PM

+2 Boost

The only thing I want to know (and ironically the one thing I haven't seen any magazines talk about) is what is the range of the Model S when people drive it like an actual car? All the magazines wax poetic about it doing 0-60 in 4.1s and the 1/4 mile in 12.5. And hey, that's great. Or they talk about the range when you're hypermiling. Also great. But what happens when you combine those two? No one talks about both things simultaneously, the car gets praise for the performance on one hand AND for the range on the other, but you can't actually have both. To hit the range targets you have to drive 55mph in a 70mph zone in perfect weather with no stereo, climate control, lights, wipers, etc. In a normal competitor (M5, E63, RS6/7) you can just stop for gas when you need to. You can't do that in the Model S. Why would I buy a $100k vehicle with those performance credentials if I have to drive the car like my grandmother in order to get anywhere? The performance is pointless if you can't ever use it.