Tesla Semi Reveal Pushed Back To November 16

1 month ago by Eric Loveday 113

Tesla Semi

Tesla’s semi truck to be fully revealed on November 16.

Tesla won’t reveal its much-anticipated semi until November 16 now.

That’s a couple weeks later than the October 26 date found on the recent “Save The Date” emails sent out by Tesla. And it’s nearly two months behind the originally promised September 28th date:

Why the delay? According to Tesla CEO Elon Musk, the automaker has more important issues to attend to, like Model 3 production bottlenecks and hell, as well as increasing battery cell production for energy storage system being sent to Puerto Rico and other areas affected by tragedies. Here’s Musk’s Tweet on the matter:

Additionally, we’ve found out that Tesla is offering to pay any travel/accommodation expenses caused by the delay of the semi reveal.

Tags: , , , ,

113 responses to "Tesla Semi Reveal Pushed Back To November 16"

  1. TVOR says:

    Increase battery production for Puerto Rico? I’m not buying that excuse. Why isn’t battery production already at maximum production speed? Elon has had the Gigafactory set to 11 from the get go.

    1. TVOR says:

      See my comment below in response to Bruce Saunders. The Wall Street Journal says the Model 3 production bottle neck is due to Tesla having to build major portions of the Model 3 BY HAND.

      From the Wall Street Journal:
      “Unknown to analysts, investors and the hundreds of thousands of customers who signed up to buy it, as recently as early September major portions of the Model 3 were still being banged out by hand, away from the automated production line, according to people familiar with the matter.”

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/behind-teslas-production-delays-parts-of-model-3-were-being-made-by-hand-1507321057

      1. Cavaron says:

        If the quirks of the production process aren’t worked out, what use would it have to set up the automated production line WITH the quirks?

        Perfect the process first, then let it be repeated in 1000 times the speed by robots day and night.

        1. Dr Gez says:

          the issue is at the July event they said they were moving to mass production with the s curve. This was to have been sorted out BEFORE. Stop defending Elon – they misled. I’m still a reservation holder but I can also be questioning.

          1. Cavaron says:

            Defending? Yeah… well… Tesla communicated something about “production hell” and “ambitious delivery targets” from the start, didn’t they? I mean, I wished them a successful quick scale up, but looking back at the Roadster, Model S and Model X – it always took them a little more time. So no real surprise there. Don’t become a victim by your own wishful thinking.

            In the end, all scale ups worked out. So cheer up.

            1. Four Electrics says:

              Tesla–optimistic until the very end. When do we get to the hubris admission? Earlier than with the X, or later?

              1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                When do we get the admission that your anti-Tesla FUD is full of lies and half-truths at least 98% of the time?

                Answer: Never.

                1. Steve says:

                  Haha, this is a classic Tesla apologists comment. When faced with facts and critical comments you don’t argue the facts you attack the person.

                  Nice going.

                  1. Nick says:

                    Yea! What did four electrics ever do to deserve such a response? They’ve been nothing but forth right here on Inside EVs. 🙄

      2. unlucky says:

        That’s not at all unusual at all for a car at this level of production development.

        What is unusual is that Tesla announced the car for sale at the level of production development it was at (i.e. very, very early). There’s no shame in building parts of the car by hand in early production development. It allows you to at least practice the other steps of production so you can keep improving the process on those.

        The real fault on Tesla is in pretending you could skip a lot of stages of production development and just announce the car anyway.

        And there’s a little bit of “fool me twice” (three times really) on some Tesla fans not being more skeptical about Musk’s schedules given Tesla’s past history.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Many or most of the better informed Usual Suspects here on InsideEVs were predicting TM3 production for 2017 at significantly less than the 100,000-200,000 that Tesla originally stated as its goal. Some of us, including (if memory serves) Nix, Jay Cole, and myself, were giving a ballpark guess of ~20,000.

          So, while there may have been a couple of overly enthusiastic Tesla fans, and one “EV nut” (under diverse screen names), who claimed Tesla would hit that 100,000 or better, I think it’s fair to say the consensus (as much as there ever is a consensus) was that Tesla would, as usual, have delays in ramping up production of a new model.

          Of course, now that’s no longer a prediction… it’s an established fact.

          * * * * *

          An Electrek article reported:

          Among the early production issues, Tesla had to replace battery packs on Model 3 produced in July due to corrections on welds and it also had to replace ground terminal bolts on Model 3 produced in August. (source below)

          My guess is the WSJ is reporting on these same issues, but sadly the WSJ chose to describe this with an extreme anti-Tesla bias, describing it as “major portions of the Model 3 were still being banged out by hand”.

          Well, it’s certainly true that the battery pack is a “major portion” of the car, and if they had to re-do some of the welds, then I suppose if you were to stretch the truth like a lawyer in court, you might go so far as describing it that way.

          But at best it’s very misleading, and certainly seems to be a symptom of the WSJ’s ongoing strong anti-EV bias.

          1. unlucky says:

            Well, I would just say that one shouldn’t conflate hand-built with poor quality. A hand-built pack should be as good as a machine welded one.

            But no question having to hand-built packs is going to slow down production. So I think mentioning it is salient and reasonable when talking about production rates. IMO.

            If this is the case (I can’t read the WSJ article, paywalled).

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              You’re being pretty fast and loose with your terminology, Unlucky. And your very strong anti-Tesla bias is on full display here.

              Redoing some welds on the battery pack by hand, because the production line wasn’t doing those right, is very far away from the battery pack being entirely built by hand!

              1. unlucky says:

                You went out of your way to attack me. Why?

                I said there was nothing wrong with how Tesla was doing it and you still feel like you have have to attack me.

                Since there is nothing wrong with a hand-built pack, there is no negative implication to me calling the pack hand-built.

                1. Pull_Me_Right_Here says:

                  Pu-Pu is a very angry, impolite, childlike and belligerent poster that attacks anyone he/she thinks isn’t on the Tesla Cheerleading squad. It would be surprising if he/she was over 15 or 16 years old, really. Expect this anti-social behavior to get markedly worse as he/she is proven wrong about “fool cells”- it will be fun to watch. Whoever or whatever Pu-Pu is, he/she has a boatload of free time to hang out on these threads all day every day. Hilarious, really.

          2. Spider-Dan says:

            The Electrek quote you provided said (emphasis added), “Among the early production issues, Tesla had to replace battery packs on Model 3 produced in July due to corrections on welds and it also had to replace ground terminal bolts on Model 3 produced in August.” That sentence does not indicate that the ONLY problems were welds and bolts, but rather that those were AMONG the problems.

            I specifically remember you objecting to the characterization of “hand-built” Model 3s, and yet when a WSJ article comes out supporting that description, you dismiss it out of hand.

            Setting aside whatever bias WSJ may or may not have, 220 cars in 2 months looks a lot more like hand-built results than it does production line results… especially when this is the same production line that was supposed to be making between 4000 and 7500 M3s/week in 2017 according to Elon.

            If Tesla’s “production line” can only manage 24 cars per week, Elon was being extremely dishonest when he held the Model 3 launch party, because the M3 production process was not even remotely close to ready.

      3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “From the Wall Street Journal:
        ‘Unknown to analysts, investors and the hundreds of thousands of customers who signed up to buy it, as recently as early September major portions of the Model 3 were still being banged out by hand, away from the automated production line, according to people familiar with the matter’.”

        Really, “major portions” of the cars? O_o

        Just how stupid do they think we are? The Wall Street Journal has a marked and well-established anti-EV bias, and that bias showing pretty strongly here.

        This is nothing but the latest anti-Tesla FUD. Shame on the WSJ for repeating such B.S.

    2. Tommy J says:

      > Increase battery production for Puerto Rico? I’m not buying that excuse. Why isn’t battery production already at maximum production speed? Elon has had the Gigafactory set to 11 from the get go.

      Actually, no. Gigafactory wasn’t meant to go reach (originally) planned full production until 2018, and then they also promised to reach 100 GWh by 2020:

      https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/01/in-2020-tesla-gigafactory-will-produce.html

      This is why they can still “focus on increased battery production” right now.

      1. TVOR says:

        Actually no, Tesla is already building the Gigafactory at full speed to reach (originally) planned full production capacity as fast/soon as possible. Tesla is production constrained with regards to its battery manufacturing. To suggest that Tesla is doggin’ it when it comes to building the Gigafactory and bringing more battery production capacity on line is Ludicrous, if not complete BS.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          “Tesla is production constrained with regards to its battery manufacturing.”

          Tesla was so constrained, until fairly recently. But Elon said the Gigafactory was not in the “critical path” of producing the TM3, which means he anticipated that Gigafactory production would stay ahead of what is needed for TM3 production as it’s ramped up, never forming a bottleneck. And with TM3 production falling behind, at least temporarily, it seems even less likely to happen.

          So far as I know, that’s still true.

  2. JR says:

    2 month is nothing, no problem

    1. Alan says:

      For the Semi or Model 3 ? !

  3. Bruce Sanders says:

    Something is very wrong at Tesla. There just seem to be to many excuses (really, Puerto Rico battery production?) and not enough real information. Tell me that Musk doesn’t know moment to moment what the status of Model 3 production is. Could they really not be using the automated production line at this moment? At the very least, shouldn’t the Tesla investment community be made aware if any major problems exist?

    If you are a Tesla stockholder, you may wish to research your position…now.

    1. Alan says:

      Be careful saying things like that on here,

      The “Go Tesla” Cheerleader’s will be on your case !

      1. Dr Gez says:

        Be careful…they have deleted my posts for anything slightly anti Tesla. There is censorship here. Can you imagine the number of articles laughing at, mocking GM if they only built 260 of target 1500 cars? Remember when they shut the line down due to Spark sales that the site was almost orgasmic about how no one wants to buy a Bolt and only Tesla can sell EVS. Such a major editorial bias. If it was found out GM was building parts by hand there would be 10 or more articles ridiculing them. And nothing now when Tesla has clearly lied and misled. And I bet everyone falls for the Puerto Rico excuse and that is just Elon using a tragedy to divert attention. With those type of ethics Elon should go back to advising trump.

        Ready to delete and censor my post…

        1. TVOR says:

          They just moved Bruce’s post to the bottom of the comments by changing the posting time. Time-shifting comments is one step below deleting and censoring them.

          1. Bruce Sanders says:

            You are correct…I just noticed that. My original post was just after 8am this morning. It now reads 8:27am. That is very strange to say the least.

            Just read the Journal article. If any portion of that article is true, then this is much worst than I thought. Time will tell. I do hope Mr. Musk and Telsa are successful, but perhaps too much is happening at once.

            1. Jay Cole says:

              Dr Gez,

              We don’t delete “anything slightly anti Tesla” (there is plenty of that in the comments here, or really in any Tesla story discussion), we moderate for being slanderous, outright offensive, or repeated/C&P posts on multiple threads.

              You if you had a post deleted, you can be assured went too far in some way. The last thing we want to do is spend time moderating, so we don’t do anymore than we have to.

              TVOR,

              As for shifting in this thread, I can’t speak to that at all. Your position is that we intentionally moved your “super positive” Tesla post to the top over Bruce’s? Seems pretty unlikely…not saying it didn’t move, or got caught in the cache/time-stamped incorrectly, but no one came into the thread and decided your post should be at the top, or Bruce’s should be third.

              With that said, it is time to wear the “big boy” pants, or I will moderate. That is all you have to do. Not going to have us slagged here over insinuations of actions not taken, or something we didn’t intentionally do.

              Discussion over. I suggest everyone just leaves that as the last word and just moves along…or you will see what moderating looks like. /fair warning given

              1. Dr Gez says:

                The post I am referencing was at the end of July or early August where I made a comment that this site should be called insideTesla and not insideevs.
                The site at the time was posting several articles a day on every little Tesla thing and everything was coming up roses. The other manufacturers were not getting any articles or if they were they were being articles that were negative. How this and other sites handled the Bolt production shut down and overall the criticism of the Bolt are surprising. Other manufacturers were making announcements and every announcement was being reported in relation to Model 3 and how it would be inferior. There was no recognition that the Model 3 may not be for all and other EVs could be just as good in potential. All I wanted was a balanced approach to all manufacturers since I am an EV enthusiast and not just a Tesla fan. When that post got deleted then I realized that the site seemed to be more of a Tesla promotional site than an EV site so when I read articles here now I need to read it like it was Fox News and figure out the facts only and ignore the unbalanced commentary in the articles.

                In the end Tesla can make great cars – I am going to buy one. But others can make great cars too. So when others make mistakes they get highlighted here – the same should apply to Tesla. Or don’t report on any negatives for all. If we want the EVs to become adopted mainstream all manufacturers need to be supported and praised for trying.

                It’s gotten a bit better on the site but maybe there should be some articles about what Tesla is not doing right? The 220 delivery for Q3 was a major miss and it did not get anywhere the same headline grabbing ridicule that GM got for the Bolt shutdown and inventory levels.

                1. Jay Cole says:

                  I pretty well known for a couple things:

                  Being fairly level headed – I always take the time to consider and explain things clearly when asked, or to clarify a situation in a clear and calm fashion. I am not given to overreact to a situation, or to speak in a way to agitate a thread.

                  Always being true to my word:

                  “Discussion over. I suggest everyone just leaves that as the last word and just moves along…or you will see what moderating looks like. /fair warning given”

                  …so you backed me into a bit of corner. Unfortunately, this means you have to take the rest of the month off.

                  With that said, I appreciate your attention to detail in replying … its too bad it wasn’t in another thread after I asked you to kindly step back, or in an email to myself directly.

                  I think from your explanation of why that post was removed, it was warranted – we aren’t going to be called “Fox News”, “InsideTesla”, biased, or a Tesla promotional site – that is just not accurate, and regardless we aren’t going to let you come into our house and soil the furniture, any more than you would let us break into your house and insult your kids because we didn’t like something about them.

                  If you actually look at how we handled the Bolt production thing, we did it properly, and probably more moderately/in context than any other site on the Internet.

                  And speaking to the time frame you references about us having too much Tesla coverage – “July or early August”, that was the live launch of the Tesla Model 3 (July 29th)…so yes, I suspect there was a ton of coverage over that model (there was also a ton of coverage when the Bolt EV launched on the Bolt, and a ton of coverage on the 2018 LEAF early last month when it launched, etc).

                  That is just how it works, if something is “new”, it will get covered the most…Tesla likes to put out a lot of “new”, and do it a lot. Traditional OEMs like to hold all the cards to themselves, being as secretive as possible (outside of the VW future-tense PR machine) until…wapoosh, it is all out on the table at one time (again, think new LEAF …nothing for years, then everything).

                  We don’t control how that sort of thing works…if GM CEO Mary Barra decides tomorrow she wants to take to Twitter everyday and give out little tidbits of info, and GM’s PR department makes a press release on plug-ins every other day – then there is going to be a ton of GM plug-in coverage.

                  Again, I will re-iterate, this discussion has reached its conclusion in this thread. /double fair warning

                  1. SJC says:

                    There is a phrase about “absolute power”.

              2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                Jay Cole said:

                “Discussion over. I suggest everyone just leaves that as the last word and just moves along…”

                Okay, but I hope you won’t mind if I request a clarification: What is a “C & P” post?

                1. Jay Cole says:

                  Copy & Paste, (=

      2. Bruce Sanders says:

        I’m not against Tesla, and very much admire Musk. I just feel he is getting himself into a position that he may not be able to work his way out of. Very impressed with Tesla and Musk regarding this article:
        https://cleantechnica.com/2017/10/06/future-shock-faster-get-better-says-teslas-musk/

        1. floydboy says:

          He’s always managed to get himself out of situations before. I trust he’ll get himself out of this one. Just a blip. When the next one comes along, the naysayers will jump on that bandwagon. So, on we go!

      3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “The ‘Go Tesla’ Cheerleader’s will be on your case!”

        So if I, a resident of Kansas City, sit in a Royals baseball stadium seat and yell “Go Royals!”, that makes me a cheerleader? No, it just makes me a fan. The cheerleaders are the ones out there on the field waving pom-poms and doing handstands.

        I can tell the difference between a Tesla fan and a Tesla cheerleader. For example, a Tesla cheerleader never criticizes Tesla, as I do when I think they deserve it.

        Too bad you seem to be blind to the difference.

        1. Will says:

          Push you are not a cheerleader but nox, real.ffud are definitely

    2. TVOR says:

      Bruce asked: “Could they really not be using the automated production line at this moment?”

      Yes, really. Major portions of the Model 3 are being built by hand. At the Fremont factory it’s hand-building production hell! What happened to the alien dreadknought Elon?

      From the Wall Street Journal:
      “Unknown to analysts, investors and the hundreds of thousands of customers who signed up to buy it, as recently as early September major portions of the Model 3 were still being banged out by hand, away from the automated production line, according to people familiar with the matter.”

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/behind-teslas-production-delays-parts-of-model-3-were-being-made-by-hand-1507321057

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “Yes, really.”

        No, of course not. I seriously doubt anyone repeating that FUD here is actually clueless enough to believe his own lies. If their intelligence was low enough to actually believe that, then they wouldn’t be able to construct a grammatically correct English sentence.

    3. ROFLOL says:

      …and finally give those poor Tesla shorters a break?

      ROFLOL!

  4. Bruce Sanders says:

    Attn: Moderator

    Why was the post time on my original post changed?

  5. Bruce Sanders says:

    From autoblog.com:

    In response to a Tesla customer asking if he would get his car delivered this year, Musk tweeted, “December will be a big month, so probably, but it is impossible to be certain right now.”

  6. Terawatt says:

    I don’t understand how it might even possibly be the case that the company isn’t using, and won’t be using until late 2018, a real production line. For the time being, I think those rumours must be wrong, simply because it can’t be legal to operate a public company keeping facts as significant as those from the investors. And obviously if the investors were told, everyone would know very shortly after.

    But even if these rumours are entirely made up, it’s very clear that Tesla continues to tell everyone they expect to achieve this or that until it is absolutely certain that they can’t. Perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised – Elon has after all said outright that he thinks setting very aggressive timelines is crucial to move forward as quickly as possible.

    But it’s a high-risk strategy. Sooner or later not just investors, but customers, get fed up with broken promises. I hope things are sorted soon, but fear what could happen if they do not. Things are set up now for potentially a quite spectacular collapse. If reservation holders begin cancelling in significant numbers, others may cancel just for fear of losing their deposit if Tesla goes belly-up. And if Tesla refuses to comment on the number of new reservations and cancellations, again people may cancel to be on the safe side, at least if the stock gets a beating.

    I don’t know about others, but I certainly know I would get a bit nervous for my deposit if the stock suddenly deflated. With the 2019 LEAF NISMO probably being a good alternative I’m not sure it’s worth the risk anymore. Especially knowing the “late 2018” estimate for TM3 delivery was based on ramp-up assumptions that they’ve already made a mockery of. I doubt anyone still believes Tesla will make 5,000 M3s in the last week, or any week, of this year.

    And for me at least this kind of thing continuing to happen destroys the main selling point Tesla has. I’m drawn to Tesla because it feels like here’s a company that has real integrity. But then why aren’t they more forthcoming about things that don’t go to plan? Why did we hear nothing from Tesla in all of August or September about the ramp-up? Only after the legally required disclosure of the quarterly numbers did Tesla publicly acknowledge that there are difficulties at all, and even then they offered little details and no good explanation.

    I’m not going to act on an impulse, but right now Tesla certainly feels a lot less endearing to me. And it’s not because of the problems sticking to the timeline, but rather what can only be described as less than honest behaviour. Be open. Speak truth. Some customers will still be angry, many will be disappointed, but most will understand and appreciate the honesty. Investors will get worried if people stop loving Tesla, not if the timeline doesn’t hold.

    1. Dr Gez says:

      The only time Tesla really needs to get concerned is when investors start turning on them. Right now there are articles out there stating how the anti Tesla analysts are surprised that this has not occurred yet. I still think they will be successful in the end but Elon needs start being very careful over his statements. I am starting to see the anti Tesla analyst views where Elon is criticized for always promising the future but not delivering the present – the smoke and mirrors argument. If they are still building by hand some parts (or they were after the July handover event) he needs to come out and tell his investors. Everything was presented in July as that all was up and running and bugs need to be worked out on the line – not that the line was not ready yet. These July handover cars were truly prototype and not production. For a public company this matters.

      1. unlucky says:

        Yep. Legal or no, you don’t get punished until your investors sue you. And as long as the stock stays high the investors won’t be suing them. You can get away with a lot as long as your investors see more value in watching your stock increase in value than trying to extract money through the courts.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “These July handover cars were truly prototype and not production.”

        Ah, the favorite new conspiracy theory of Tesla bashers. They must love it a lot; they’ve been copy-and-pasting it repeatedly here on InsideEVs!

        * * * * *

        For those who either have not been following Tesla since the days of the Roadster, or who have short memories, here is a brief summary:

        2008: After repeated delays, Tesla starts delivering its new Roadster to customers, despite the car having a non-working transmission. The cars are sold with a promise to install the new drivetrain later when it has been fully developed. Some, or perhaps many, analysts call Tesla brilliant for this innovative approach to avoiding yet another delay in selling the car.

        2012: After repeated delays, Tesla starts delivering Model S’s as soon as they start rolling off the assembly line, without spending the months of test driving by its employees that more established auto makers use to eliminate early production problems. The inevitable and expected reports of early problems are mostly ignored due to the overwhelming number of staggeringly positive reviews of the car.

        2015: After repeated delays, Tesla starts delivering Model X’s, again forgoing any extended test period after start of production. The inevitable and expected reports of early production problems are amplified and repeated all over the Internet, with Tesla bashers and haters making this out to be something unexpected or new from Tesla. This FUD campaign has some success among those who are not aware of the company’s history. This grumbling is not very dampened by reviews rather more mixed, and less positive, than Model S reviews.

        2017: After an aggressive development schedule, Tesla starts production of the Model 3 on time, and in fact sooner than a previously announced target date, while restricting sales to employees of the company (and of SpaceX), who are required to sign NDAs, so Tesla can avoid the sort of online grumbling that plagued early Model X production. Tesla bashers, frustrated over not being able to crow about another delay from Tesla, respond by pretending that Tesla immediately selling the cars as soon as they roll off the assembly line is somehow different than how Tesla has always conducted business, and make up ridiculous conspiracy theories to claim that the sales “aren’t real” or “don’t count”.

        In summary: Tesla hasn’t changed how it conducts its business. What has changed is how successful Tesla bashers are at portraying, in an increasingly negative fashion, Tesla’s rather different approach to making and selling cars.

        Thank goodness Tesla isn’t letting the nattering nabobs of negativism slow up the company’s growth — no matter how hard the Tesla haters try!

        Go Tesla!

        1. unlucky says:

          There’s no question they were prototypes. No matter how they were built it is crystal clear that the development of the production processes for the car were not at the level any other company considers production-level.

          They were prototypes. Certainly.

          1. Will says:

            Those were prototypes. Cars built on the line and mass produce are production builds which the 3 was not. No wonder the NDA is effect for those cars

            1. unlucky says:

              Even prototypes can be built on a line. Prototype is a level of development, not a method of production.

              It’s clear the level of production development is comparable to what other companies would consider prototypes. These are prototypes.

              I can’t speak to any one that was built just yesterday, we don’t have any kind of real data on those yet. But it’s clear from what happened to the earlier ones what their situation was.

    2. Alan says:

      Personally, I don’t think it is a major problem ATM because of a lack of available product from competitors, the closer it gets to others bringing EV’s to market in numbers at affordable prices is when it could start to be an issue of people cancelling and going elsewhere.

    3. DJ says:

      Why exactly would they be required to disclose such information? How many companies have gone bankrupt as a result of last minute notice of major issues? If you think everyone knew about the whole Enron fiasco they would have held on to their stocks.

      It isn’t a surprise the Tesla semi date is bein pushed (again). Tesla is notorious for claiming big news and then postponing it a few times and then after it’s out there taking their sweet ass time to actually getting to it, Powerwalls (1 & 2), Solar Roof, Semi, do I really need to go on. They play the hype machine really well and the usual suspects keep lapping it up.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “Why exactly would they be required to disclose such information?”

        Because of pretty clear SEC rules about announcing materially important info when it’s relevant to the performance of a publicly owned company. For example, Elon Musk was following those rules when he corrected his misstatement about “nearly 500,000 Model 3 reservations”, noting that the actual number was ~455,000.

        “How many companies have gone bankrupt as a result of last minute notice of major issues?”

        Pretty much, none of them. They went bankrupt because of those major issues, not because they illegally withheld materially important info and reported it only at the last minute!

        “If you think everyone knew about the whole Enron fiasco they would have held on to their stocks.”

        The Enron execs who did know what was going on, and quietly sold out their stock holdings while not warning even their own employees about the impending collapse of the company, were criminals conspiring in a major cover-up. That’s why a few of them were prosecuted as the criminals which they were, and one or two actually went to jail.

        Suggesting that Tesla is involved in a similar cover-up… well, we had already identified you as a serial anti-Tesla troll, so this contemptible and libelous insinuation from you isn’t surprising.

        This craven, lying insinuation is also one we’ve been regularly seeing from Tesla haters for years.

        Fortunately, in the real world, Tesla keeps confounding analysts, keeps growing by leaps and bounds every year!

        Here are some actual facts to counter DJ’s FUD:

        Tesla’s annual automobile sales totals:
        2012: 2650
        2013: 22,300
        2014: 31,655 (+41.95%)
        2015: 50,580 (+59.8%)
        2016: 76,230 (+50.7%)

        Go Tesla!

    4. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “I don’t understand how it might even possibly be the case that the company isn’t using, and won’t be using until late 2018, a real production line.”

      This is such obvious B.S. that it both amazes and appalls me that the WSJ would report such a thing. Yes, I do understand they have a well-established anti-EV bias, but I thought the WSJ’s journalistic standards were better than that.

      Someone in a comment a few weeks ago said he had previously taken a tour of the Fremont assembly plant, and he was told that at the time that the Model 3 production line would be finished in a week… so obviously it was mostly finished at that time.

      The idea that Tesla has built the Model 3 production line, but isn’t using it, or is only using small parts of it… That’s both crazy and stupid. Tesla had already built hundreds of pre-production Model 3’s, and surely at least parts of those cars were built on the incomplete production line. So why would Tesla quit using it after it was finished?

      It’s also crazy to think Tesla would go to the expense of building cars mostly by hand. There’s just no way to avoid losing tons of money that way. Fixing a limited number of early production problems by hand, sure. We can be sure that legacy auto makers do that, too, for their early production cars.

      As I’ve already suggested, what is both rational and reasonable to think is that Tesla is producing the Model 3 on its newly built production line, but then some of those cars are moved out of the factory, to another site, to fix certain problems… such as the ones reported by Electrek.

      This is the same way any other auto maker would handle such a problem with mass produced cars. Again, the Tesla bashers are trying to portray Tesla using a normal business practice as if Tesla is doing something wrong or strange just because Tesla is doing it.

      To Hades with the bashers and haters — Go Tesla!

  7. CDAVIS says:

    Tesla Motors has since March 2016 said production of Model 3 will not start until late 2017… looking at my calendar “late 2017” ends Dec 31, 2017.

    Seems to me some of the negative comments here a are a result of some well known TSLA Shorts going in full panic mode as they should be. Also understandably there are many Model 3 reservation holders chomping at the bit to get their Model 3 and they get agitated when they read news that Tesla is working on production “bottle necks”… and they get equally agitated when there is no update news… so Tesla can’t win there.

    Tesla has been very transparent on Model 3 status.

    “Model 3 production is scheduled to begin in late 2017.”
    source Tesla Motors March 21, 2016):
    https://www.tesla.com/blog/reserving-model-3

    “Production begins in the US, with the Long Range Battery
    Customer deliveries begin in late October”
    source (Tesla.com Model 3 Informational Page):https://www.tesla.com/model3

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “Seems to me some of the negative comments here a are a result of some well known TSLA Shorts going in full panic mode as they should be.”

      It’s been established beyond any reasonable doubt that at least some of those who only post to InsideEVs to make EV-bashing and Tesla-bashing comments, are “short” investors in Tesla stock.

      The question is just how many of them are. It’s very rare for any of them to admit to it. So far as I’ve noticed, only “tftf” and Mark B. Spiegel have actually admitted to it.

  8. John says:

    Wait a minute:
    Its HAND crafted !
    They will sell for a lot more!

    1. Mister G says:

      American hand crafted
      Make America great LOL

  9. William Ames says:

    Tesla is doubling down on its Model 3 “Production Hell”. This is business as usual for a new model launch, from a car manufacturer that has only 2 ( not counting the discontinued Roadster) previous successful model production ramp ups.

    This one is taking its time, because Tesla is getting it right, by learning all the quirks before they go full tilt on volume production. Tesla is smart to take its time, with all of the little pesky details, and then pump out the serious volume numbers when the line is running smoothly.

    The dearly departed Tom Petty presciently sang, “The waiting is the hardest part”.

    I’m willing to wait for the 2020 Tesla Model Y, so I am wondering why all the Trolls and their WSJ naysayers, are swarming over this Tesla non-event?

    1. Alan says:

      That’s true, It was a fair bet that by bypassing the manufacturing prototype stage and going straight to production that it was going to throw up a few issues, that’s why all othe other OEM’s do it.

      Those that were not expecting this to happen were well wide of the mark.

    2. DJ says:

      Let’s not kid ourselves. This is taking time because they didn’t go through the normal build process. Most people said it was gonna bite them in the butt and it appears it has. It isn’t really a big deal. They obviously did it to claim they met some date earlier than they would have otherwise. Something which I think is BS but whatever. Realistically I don’t see how either way the normal consumer would have their car earlier or later so there isn’t really any impact to them.

      1. floydboy says:

        No, don’t kid yourself that your statement is anything other than WAGing. Since I highly doubt DJ is privy to the inner workings of Tesla, I going to reserve judgement until a more plausible, level headed source of info comes along.

        1. TVOR says:

          In other words, you’re going to bury your head in the sand. Spoken like a true Tesla apologist. Got it.

      2. unlucky says:

        Agreed. It’s obviously the case. Why is the only real question. Shipping a few cars early only to have to fix them means even the meager income you book from the cars is offset.

        They should have waited until the car was ready. I cannot see how doing it this way helped them. It just seems like stinkin’ thinkin’.

    3. Jason says:

      Want the original release date something like 2019 or 2020, but because of the overwhelming number of reservations they bought the release date forward a year or so? If that is the car, then it really is no surprise if it has gone a bit South of expectations. No doubt they’ll get back on track, No-one wants to lose min $9bil turn over potential!

    4. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “I am wondering why all the Trolls and their WSJ naysayers, are swarming over this Tesla non-event?”

      1. Tesla’s stock is often the most shorted stock of all! So sadly there is a lot of short “interest”, as it’s termed, in Tesla.

      2. Shorters were no doubt anticipating that Model 3 production would be delayed in entering production, as all three of Tesla’s previous models were. No doubt it was quite a shock to them when production actually started on time, especially given the aggressively advanced date!

      3. Tesla’s stock price recently (maybe 2-3 weeks ago) hit an all-time high, and over the past few days it has headed back up again. So those “caught with their shorts in a squeeze” are pretty desperate about how much money they’re losing, and thus have even more of a motive than usual to try to post negative things about Tesla online.

      (I’m not a stock investor myself, but there was no way to participate heavily for years on TheEEStory forum without having some of the endless discussions of stock investments rub off on me.)

  10. Chris O says:

    Curious…I wonder how the truck unveiling and Model 3 production problems are related. Maybe the prototype truck isn’t fully operational yet with all engineers on Model 3 duty? More likely is that Tesla just doesn’t want the event to be overshadowed by Model 3 production problems. A new product is just less impressive if you have yet to show that you can produce your previous product in serious numbers.

    1. TVOR says:

      Why does the Tesla semi truck have to be fully operational at the unveiling/reveal? Tesla didn’t have an operational prototype when they unveiled the Tesla solar roof shingles on that Hollywood backlot. Why should the Tesla semi truck reveal be any different?

      1. Chris O says:

        Sigh, it was predictable that the usual crowd of Tesla haters/shorters/trolls like yourself would dote on this story even whining about how some of their anti Tesla fud didn’t make it high enough on the comment list.

        Go away troll.

        1. TVOR says:

          Sigh, it was predictable that the usual crowd of Tesla fanbois/cult-members/shills/concern-trolls like yourself would whine and ravenously try to do damage control with nothing but name calling and ad-hominem/personal attacks. You didn’t even bother to address any of the points I made in my comment.

          Go away troll.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            TVOR trolled:

            “Go away troll.”

            This thing where a troll like you tries to label someone else a troll: Not working for you, nor the other trolls that try it either.

          2. Chris O says:

            Whining about “ad hominem attacks”, fanatical anti Tesla postings including many links …so familiar…let me guess: Sven is back….Sigh…

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “Curious…I wonder how the truck unveiling and Model 3 production problems are related. Maybe the prototype truck isn’t fully operational yet with all engineers on Model 3 duty?”

      Of course as outsiders looking in we can only guess. But my guess is that the Model 3 production problems probably have not diverted many of the engineers/mechanics working on the Tesla Semi, because Tesla would have fully anticipated a lot of problems with the start of actual production of a new model.

      My guess is this: Tesla has some “B teams” that it assigns to secondary projects. Some of those were assigned to the BEV Semi tractor project, which I think is a concept vehicle / technology demonstrator, and thus not a “front burner” project. But recently, Tesla offered to help with the Puerto Rico recovery, and that has almost certainly pulled some of the “B team” engineers and mechanics away. Perhaps some of those pulled away were taken off the BEV Semi tractor project, and reassigned to the Puerto Rico project.

      Again, just my guess.

  11. BenG says:

    Musk made the point over a year ago that a production hold-up on one of any of thousands of parts can prevent mass production from moving forward. Clearly Tesla has a couple such parts holding up Model 3 production right now, and they are working over-time to try to fix it.

    Who knows exactly how far they have to go to solve the issues and ramp to mass production of all parts and the full Model 3? I’d give them a month at least before they substantially speed up.

    None of this should be too unexpected. Tesla and Musk have been upfront that their production goals like 1500 built in September were aspirational and could be held up by as little as one part with a problem. Anyone who expected perfection and 1500 built in September wasn’t reading carefully or was being overly optimistic.

    1. floydboy says:

      Of course he made those points, but if you think the ‘knock em down’ crowd, who throw shade at the slightest hint of trouble, were actually listening, you’d be very mistaken.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “Musk made the point over a year ago that a production hold-up on one of any of thousands of parts can prevent mass production from moving forward. Clearly Tesla has a couple such parts holding up Model 3 production right now…”

      Well, Electrek reported problems with the welds on the battery pack, and “ground terminal bolts”. The bolts might (or might not) be a problem with supplied parts, but the welding problem sounds like a problem with Tesla’s own assembly procedures.

      Tesla might want to blame all delays on issues with supplier parts, but that’s largely spin. Even if there is a problem with the parts supplied by a vendor, the fault may be with Tesla not providing sufficient development time, or not providing sufficiently detailed instructions, to the supplier. For example, a large part of the early problems with the Model X falcon-wing door actuators was caused by Tesla’s tardiness in soliciting bids from suppliers.

      Let’s not forget that the timeline for getting the Model 3 into production was aggressively advanced by Tesla. It was almost inevitable that this would cause problems.

  12. Stimpacker says:

    WSJ is so anti EV, especially Tesla that I stopped my subscription years ago. Some of their anti EV logic is just plain ridiculous.

    So WSJ claims Model 3’s are hand built, what’s the big deal? Who is going to cancel their order? If you’re an investor, you decide if this makes you inclined to sell.

    Don’t get all these “Elin is lying” nonsense. It’s only a $1K deposit, not your left nut.

  13. ffbj says:

    It’s a Tempest in a Teapot.
    Detractors will jump on any delay.

  14. Will says:

    Since Tesla Truck was going to help them get a capital funds cash since they are burning up cash and have not produce the sufficient model 3s to gain revenue what is Elon game plan now???

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      As I recall, Elon said the BEV semi tractor was going to be offered to fleet owners, to gauge interest. That sounds very much like a concept vehicle / technology demonstrator, not anything that’s likely to be put into production soon. Tesla isn’t a startup company anymore, so certainly doesn’t need startup money for R&D on the BEV semi tractor.

      Also, Tesla recently expanded its line of credit, so the capital expenditures for ramping up Model 3 and Gigafactory 1 production should be pretty well covered.

      So, I don’t know where you’re getting your info from. Your comment reads to me like just another anti-Tesla “concern troll” post. Apologies if you’re not actually trying to bash Tesla here, but your post reads like you are.

      1. Will says:

        Push I’m not trying bash tesla. The launch was to get credit, which every industry analyst knows so what does Elon next plan if the truck can’t be demo. You said he is not start up anymore

  15. CCIE says:

    I can’t imagine why they’re would be putting any significant resources into anything besides getting the M3 into mass production.

    The semi just seem like a distraction at this point. Plus, we can’t even get true fast charging (0-80% < 10mins) for the small batteries cars use. So, how are they going to fast charge the huge battery in a semi? Build a new network of Super-Duper-Chargers?

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      BEV charging speeds are limited by the need not to overheat individual cells. Larger battery packs can be charged at higher power simply because they have more cells; each cell can be charged just as fast, regardless of how many or how few cells are in the entire pack.

      Yes, BEV semi tractors will need a “super-duper” BEV Supercharger. But I don’t expect Tesla to build more than a couple of such chargers, just for demonstrating the use of its BEV semi tractor.

      Keep in mind Elon’s comments about offering the tractor to fleet operators, and letting each one decide whether or not Tesla’s semi tractor fits with their business operations. I expect that if Tesla does actually put the tractor into production (which won’t be very soon), it will also leave it up to the fleet operators to install “super-duper” chargers for them, where it makes sense to position those to support their fleets. Tesla might well offer to build those chargers for a fee, just as Tesla has sold privately owned Superchargers.

      But I don’t think it would make any sense for Tesla to pay to build out a large network of BEV truck stops to charge the trucks. The market and the economics are very different than for passenger cars sold to the general public.

  16. Bill Howland says:

    I have to admit I was rather surprised at Musk’s “Production Hell” comment. Perhaps he was laying the groundwork for Model 3 troubles so that there would not be criticism as there was with the poor fit and finish of the initial “X” models (I assume current “X”‘s are ok in that regard – I’d be interested to see what some recent “X” owners say regarding the quality of their cars, objectively).

    This kind of issue is why I’m less than enthused about the CT6 PHEV Caddy being made in China. Chinese quality lately is much better, but I’m still skeptical regarding a $75,000 product. (I’d assume “X” buyers would use even a better magnifying glass on their purchases since they spent even more.).

    My 2014 ELR’s fit and finish was absolutely flawless: On the inside jam there was a Sticker “PROUDLY made by UAW LOCAL….”.

    The union members who assembled my car REALLY tried to take extra care with the car. This is the first new car I’ve ever owned that initially had absolutely no issues.

    As others have said, Musk and Company have been down this road of ‘unexpected problems’ with every vehicle they have released, to the point where “unexpected problems” are now expected. If he fixes the “3” problems as fast as the “X”‘s, in a year it won’t be an issue. But I also agree statements to date have been somewhat less than satisfying, and apparently production vehicles have yet to be released, as many others have surmised.

    1. William says:

      “Expect the unexpected” is going to be the new “Production Hell” sidebar. The reservation holders and waiters of Model 3 production and delivery, should have been forewarned as this is ordinary/ business as usual for Tesla going back to before/during Roadster production.

    2. TVOR says:

      You’d be wrong to assume that there are no fit and finish issues on current production Model X cars. In addition to sloppy/unfinished assembly and missing paint, those dreaded falcon-wing doors are often misaligned or just don’t fit properly. The result is that upon delivery inspection, the customer opens the FW doors and rips the trim off the car in the showroom. It’s as if Tesla has absolutely no quality control tests at the factory or the QC team just doesn’t care. Somehow, a Model S with a HUGE crack in the A-pillar made it through QC inspection at the factory and new delivery prep at the Tesla store without a single Tesla employee noticing or batting an eyelash.

      Long term, many owners report that the FW doors rub the paint off right down to bear aluminum. Tesla has no solution for these I’ll-fitting doors except for constantly repainting the rubbed-off area with touch-up paint every couple of months. Also, the plastic covers in the FW door hinges make a loud snapping/popping noise either because they’re improperly assembled or their poor design needs lubrication that really should have been applied at the factory.

      There is a thread on Tesla Motors Club that is a “Checklist” for the Model X of known issues to look for and document before taking delivery of the car. It’s a very, very long checklist.

      Here are some links from Tesla Motors Club of the issues that I mentioned above:

      Recent Model X build quality:
      https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/recent-model-x-build-quality.74331/page-6

      Model X FW door snapping/popping & rubbing-against/ripping-off trim (see comments #14 to 19 for door rubbing issues & pics):
      https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/driver-side-falcon-wing-door-hinge-snapping-when-opening.77686/

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        You copied and pasted that laundry list of anecdotal complaints from another Tesla basher, didn’t you? I rather doubt you researched that yourself.

        In a way, the growing number of online anecdotal complaints are a positive sign for Tesla. Given that every model of car produces a few “lemons”, the growing number of complaints that you can find archived shows that Tesla’s production is growing.

        But as for how pleased or displeased the average buyer of a Tesla car is, let us not forget that Tesla has the highest customer satisfaction rating of any auto maker, or at least the highest of those surveyed by Consumer Reports.

        That is, more Tesla car owners say they would buy the car again if given the chance; more than any other auto maker whose customers were surveyed.

        Go Tesla!

  17. Jason says:

    It would be hard to believe that the exact same teams of people are working on the Model 3 as the Tesla Semi, likewise if there is a Model S refresh in the works or the Model Y.

    Either the Semi is real/ready to show, or it isn’t. Delaying the event several times just makes it look like it isn’t real. Regardless of Model 3 ramp, the Semi reveal could take the spotlight off those issues.

    More likely Tesla has over reached its resource capacity and is now paying that price with delays.

    Elon Musk does seem to be the sort of person who shoots from the hip and worries about the consequences later.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “Delaying the event several times just makes it look like it isn’t real.”

      I think what it shows is that it’s a back-burner project; a concept vehicle / technology demonstrator, not a production-intent prototype. And that’s exactly what I’ve been saying for some months if not years, so personally I don’t find the delays all that surprising. This is almost certainly a low-priority thing for Tesla, and as such it will be about the first thing to get “bumped” if Tesla finds itself busier than expected.

  18. unlucky says:

    Good move. Honestly, shouldn’t even have a date.

    Tesla has to concentrate on Model 3 right now. Every resource they can. Laser focus. The only thing that should come close in priority is Model Y.

    Everything else has to come second. Model 3 is the overwhelming core of your business, you have to execute on it.

    Don’t even schedule semi-truck events until this stuff has been ironed out for a month or two.

  19. Nix says:

    Turns out the WSJ story that was referenced earlier in the comments isn’t exactly accurate. Tesla has issued a statement debunking it:

    “This reporting is fundamentally wrong and misleading. We are still in the beginning of our production ramp, but every Model 3 is being built on the Model 3 production line, which is fully installed, powered on, producing vehicles, and increasing in automation every day. However, every vehicle manufacturing line in the world has both manual and automated processes, including the Model S and Model X line today. Contrary to the Journal’s reporting, this is not some revelation. As we’ve always acknowledged, it will take time to fine-tune the line for higher volumes, but as we have also said, there are no fundamental issues with Model 3 production or its supply chain, and we are confident in addressing the manufacturing bottleneck issues in the near-term. We are simply working through the S-curve of production that we drew out for the world to see at our launch event in July. There’s a reason it’s called production hell.”

    1. unlucky says:

      While I do agree that it’s strange to imply (or state) that Tesla doesn’t even have a real production line when you are speaking of a subassembly. “production line” in virtually all cases (including this one) refers to final assembly. This is done on a moving line where you install parts and subassemblies from other work.

      There is no reason you cannot have a final assembly line that is fully functioning and installing hand-built parts. Oh sure, you don’t want that if you are looking to have high production, but it doesn’t mean you don’t have a real line.

      Beyond that, I would point out Tesla’s statement is completely self-serving, misleading and essentially dishonest. It is all but a lie. They are behind on production and it isn’t by choice. Stating that you are just working through issues and reiterating the S curve is just distracting from the fact that you’re not working through the issues at the rate you expected to. Things are not fine. They may be fine soon and things not being fine now doesn’t mean that any vehicle is built wrong (or inherently flawed) due to these issues. So long-term there is not necessarily an impact beyond worse availability. But note that worse availability is significant, especially the shortfall Tesla has displayed.

      This statement, as written, has Musk’s handiwork all over it. It’s time to move past the S curve. There’s no reason ramp up ever has to be in an S curve, and stating the shape of the ramp up at all is to gloss over that the part where the ramp starts to bend up can not only be delayed but also bend up more slowly. It may not look like an S, time to stop leaning on that as a fait accompli and just reiterate you are doing all you can and still expect to progress, just on a new schedule.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “Beyond that, I would point out Tesla’s statement is completely self-serving, misleading and essentially dishonest. It is all but a lie.”

        Or maybe that’s you showing your anti-Tesla bias.

        It seems entirely reasonable and logical to believe that Elon is putting far less positive spin on the situation than the WSJ put negative spin on it. What Elon says actually makes sense, even if it’s likely a bit biased.

        What the WSJ said is simply not believable, period. Opinion and spin aside, it’s almost certainly wrong on its basic facts.

        1. TVOR says:

          You’re the most biased commentor on InsideEVs. Your pro-Tesla bias knows no bounds.

        2. unlucky says:

          Even if Musk were putting less positive spin on than the WSJ using that still doesn’t mean I have to like it. If the statement is spun, I’m going to mention it. And I did.

          They should stop using this particular spin. It isn’t helping them out anymore. Being more specific as your own scheduled become less and less clear is not a good idea, you can paint yourself into a corner.

          Tesla is mishandling this. And I said so. And I’m not going to walk away from it.

      2. Nix says:

        So what you are saying is that the accusations in the WSJ story were clearly false. But to make up for it, you’ve decided to make up some of your own claims without any sources at all out of thin air.

        Got it.

        1. unlucky says:

          I have no idea what you are talking about. If you want to pick on me, stick to the facts. What did I say wrong about the statement? What did I say wrong about the “S curve”?

          An “S curve” 14 months long is an S. An “S curve” 2 months long is also an S. For Tesla to just repeat the “S curve” thing is to distract from the issue of what the actual ramp rate and progress will be.

          And I reiterate, there is no reason the ramp must look like an S anyway.

          1. Nix says:

            If you don’t know what I’m talking about then clearly you haven’t actually read the WSJ story.

            1. unlucky says:

              Long before you opined that perhaps I haven’t read it I mentioned above that I have not read it. It’s paywalled.

  20. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    Ah, I wondered if Tesla’s Puerto Rico rebuilding project was going to divert some of the same team which I guessed was working on the BEV semi project, which I still believe is only a concept vehicle / technology demonstrator. Both of those projects would seem to be something Tesla would be working on as a sideline. Their main engineering teams are almost certainly busy working on fixing Model 3 production issues and developing the Model Y.

  21. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    Go over to the Seeking Alpha website, and read all the Tesla-related blog posts (the site will sort those out for you, if you want), and the comments to those blog posts.

    Note that about 75-80% of the blog posts are pure Tesla-bashing, extremely biased against Tesla, without even the pretense of objectivity. Note that the comments have, if anything, an even higher ratio of basher to cheerleader bias. (There are very few neutral posts at Seeking Alpha.)

    Do that for several months, as I did; do it until you can recognize dishonest, untrue or at best half-true Tesla bashing comments very quickly.

    Now, notice that some of those who make dozens of anti-Tesla bashing posts on Seeking Alpha almost every single day, also post very similar comments here on InsideEVs, under the same or similar user names. Also, note how often “new” user names pop up here on InsideEVs; users who do nothing but copy and paste exactly the same sort of Tesla bashing comments seen on Seeking Alpha, often saying the same things word for word.

    Maybe you can make yourself believe all this is a coincidence; that it’s not an orchestrated campaign of Tesla bashing on the part of these short-sellers, these FUDsters, these Tesla haters.

    Personally, I can’t.

    Let’s be very clear: The majority of Tesla hater and anti-Tesla “concern troll” posts here on InsideEVs are not people expressing an honest opinion. FUD is a disinformation campaign; a deliberate campaign by people who join together with the intent to — in this case — damage the public reputation of the one company doing far more than any other to advance the EV revolution. Tesla is also doing far more than any other company to end our addiction to burning fossil fuels.

    Personally, I think that’s a cause worth fighting for. And I don’t need to be motivated by greed and attempts to manipulate stock prices, as the majority of the anti-Tesla FUDsters and haters are.

    Go Tesla!

  22. Ben says:

    The big topic in my opinion is, Musk using a disaster trying to make his company look like an angle, which stops/slows down its current development to help Puerto Rico, instead of admitting an own mistake. Musk seems to not being able to admit something and this will be a problem for every company he wants to lead. Everyone working in a large company will know that Tesla Semi development and Powerwall production will be two independent divisions, were workforce can not replace each other. As well capacity to build one hundred Powerwalls should be tiny compared to all other operations.

    His Puerto Rico statement is of bad ethics and puts his reputation at risk.

    1. CDAVIS says:

      @Ben said: “…His Puerto Rico statement is of bad ethics and puts his reputation at risk.”
      ———-

      @Ben, So what have you done to help out with the disaster fallen Puerto Rico? …Other than being critical of others’ efforts.

      A large portion of Puerto Rico remains without electrical power.

      I think it’s fantastic that Tesla Energy is redirecting resources towards helping Puerto Rico recover from the extensive damage Hurricane Irma inflicted on the island’s elecric power grid.

      Musk directly tweeted a help offer on behalf of Tesla Energy and Puerto Rico Governor Ricardo Rossello directly responded requesting that Tesla Energy contact him to explore how Tesla Energy could assist the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority get back online… perhaps with a better more modern power plant.

      Whatever public relations thumps-up Tesla benefits from the Tesla Energy offer is well earned and deserved as far as I’m concerned. It takes a gutter Tesla Short cynic to try and twist this into an anti-Tesla topic.

      1. Ben says:

        I am not critical of Tesla helping Puerto Rico. I am critical of Tesla using that tiny (today) help as an excuse why the Semi is late.

        Dont try to twist my words like Kellyanne Conway.

    2. Mister G says:

      Ben, Elon’s Puerto Rico move is brilliant because it provides an opportunity to build a renewable energy power grid from scratch to an island of 3 million people. C’MON MAN CONNECT THE DOTS

  23. Mister G says:

    GO TESLA GO DESTROY DIRTY GAS GUZZLERS I don’t mind waiting for model 3.

  24. Will says:

    Transport Evolve have a great video on this subject https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D-3hJbqzvPw

  25. Serial anti tesla troll thomas says:

    🙈

  26. Scott says:

    Musk with Space X, Solar City, Tesla energy, Tesla motor, Boring company, Mars, semi trucks, Model Y, etc. This man is a machine until his health fails. I hope not. People expecting too much out of one person that single-handedly started a major paradigm shift for the world. Take your time Mr. Musk!

  27. Get Real says:

    The real reason the WSJ story is a BS hit-piece (besides the fact that Murdoch-owned WSJ is not just anti-Tesla, but anti-EV and RE) is that it is really just copied and pasted from serial anti-Tesla troll and liar honest-Ed Niedermeyer of Daily Kanban:

    https://twitter.com/Tweetermeyer?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

    Niedermeyer the same fool that took the completely fabricated story of made-up Tesla suspensions failing and widely publicized it along with his equally untruthful hater Bertel Schitt:

    https://dailykanban.com/2016/06/tesla-suspension-breakage-not-crime-coverup/

    Also, the WSJ so-called “reporter” on this story is the equally lying Charley Grant.

    Here is Charley’s twitter echo chamber replete with a lovefest of serial anti-Tesla trolls and clowns like Bertel Schitt:

    https://twitter.com/CGrantWSJ?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

    these are the same FUDSTERs who are probably trolling here regularly under assumed usernames and they probably also spend a lot of time over at Seeking Liars too.

  28. TM says:

    Maybe it will get further pushed back to Q1?

Leave a Reply