Tesla Model 3 Not Competing For North American Car Of The Year Award (Update)

SEP 19 2017 BY ERIC LOVEDAY 123

Tesla Model 3

Tesla Model 3

Tesla’s decision paves the way for a non-electric car to take home the win.

We aren’t thrilled by Tesla’s odd choice to excuse itself, and the Model 3, from competing for the 2018 North American Car of the Year award (NACTOY).   As reported by the Detroit News, the automaker’s apparent reasoning seems far from being completely straight-forward – at least to us.

But even more upsetting is that the withdrawal of the Model 3 from the running means that the only remaining semifinalists in the “car” (all categories, as a matter of fact) category are a ton of non-electric cars, which means that unlike last year when the Chevrolet Bolt took home the crown, this year an electric car won’t be able to carry the torch and pull off a repeat.

Update (6:10 PM ET):  The Detroit News has updated its story on the behest of Tesla.  InsideEVs has learned that Tesla had not “withdrawn” the Model 3 from the competition, but rather it declined to enter the much in-demand EV for the NACTOY award – due to its focus on many other events/happenings already on its plate today.

However, with vehicles like the Hyundai IONIQ in the running, there’s still a chance that a line/family of cars (including a plug-in version) could represent. But we won’t see a standalone electric win this year.

*The new 2018 Nissan LEAF arrives too late to the party be in the running this year.

As for Tesla’s reason for withdrawing the Model 3 from NACTOY running, the Detroit News says the automaker stated that it’s

“…focused on scaling up production and could not have a car available for jury testing.”

If The Hyundai IONIQ Happens To Win, Then BY Connection The IONIQ Electric Would Also Win, Since It’s Grouped Into The Greater IONIQ Family/Line

Not even one single car could be spared? That doesn’t seem possible.  We can probably put this firmly in the “we don’t want early copies of the Model 3 to be in 3rd party hands just yet”, as has been the case for any review of the car since it launched in late July – or perhaps some functionalities/software issues have yet to be smoothed out/updated, and Tesla just didn’t want to deal with those types of PR headaches.  Who can tell for sure?

Anyway, here’s the list of 2018 NACTOY semifinalists, as assembled by the Detroit News.

Car

  • 2018 Alfa Romeo Giulia
  • 2018 Audi A5 Sportback
  • 2017 BMW 5-series
  • 2018 Honda Accord
  • 2017 Hyundai Ioniq
  • 2018 Kia Rio
  • 2018 Kia Stinger
  • 2018 Lexus LC500
  • 2017 Porsche Panamera
  • 2018 Subaru Impreza
  • 2018 Toyota Camry

Utility

  • 2018 Alfa Romeo Stelvio
  • 2018 Audi Q5/S5
  • 2018 BMW X3
  • 2018 Buick Enclave
  • 2018 Chevrolet Equinox
  • 2018 Chevrolet Traverse
  • 2018 Honda Odyssey
  • 2017 Jeep Compass
  • 2017 Kia Niro
  • 2018 Land Rover Discovery
  • 2017 Mazda CX-5
  • 2018 Subaru Crosstrek
  • 2018 VW Atlas
  • 2018 VW Tiguan
  • 2018 Volvo XC60

Truck

  • 2018 Chevrolet Colorado ZR2
  • 2018 Ford Expedition
  • 2018 Lincoln Navigator

Source: Detroit News

Categories: Tesla

Tags:

Leave a Reply

123 Comments on "Tesla Model 3 Not Competing For North American Car Of The Year Award (Update)"

newest oldest most voted

Tesla does not pay to advertise their cars. The odds are great that they would not make the top honors, but some product of a company that spends major money on advertising would beat them out. Financial support would be very, very hard to overcome.

I think you’re reading too much into it.

Tesla has gobs of pre-orders. They’ll be better served by having an entry for the 2019 contest, when they work out all the kinks they’ll have from their first mass-market car.

@Mint said: “Tesla has gobs of pre-orders. They’ll be better served by having an entry for the 2019 contest…”
——–

It’s exactly this.

~512,000 paid reservation holders
+
~765,000 currently very high-interest (2nd wave reservations in-play)
=
1,277,000

… so I agree with @Mint that Tesla Model 3 winning “Car of The Year” would be a good thing next year but a net negative for Tesla win it this year.

Tesla made a smart call here.

CDAVIS: where are you getting those numbers?

This award is more BS than anything else, with not much merit. It’s one of those “look at me” awards . With rite amount of money I think anyone can buy one . I don’t put much stock in these Phony Awards.It only gives the media something to Yak about .

GM seems to tout their all of their prestigious Awards in their advertising. I don’t know many car buyers that make their purchase decisions based solely on buying “Car of the Year”. But, buying an EV with 200 mi. range, that is available today, for a non-premium price, is definitely worthy of some kind of accolade. Just the fact that GM beat the 2019 Nissan Leaf to the 200 mi. range bench mark, almost a full two years ahead of schedule, in what seemed to be Nissans ICE OEM EV Leadership advantage.

Nissan needs the Bronze Star award for their 2018 Lack Luster 40kWh Leaf. 2018 Hyundai Ionic EV gets the Silver Medallion for getting everything right. Of course the Tesla 2018 Model 3 gets the win, without any Bling or podium fanfare.

Yes, GM does indeed tout that award, plastering it all over dealers here in Ontario which don’t even have a Bolt to test drive, and were given limited allocation for the year. So customers are just

Here we are almost a year after production started, and GM can’t be bothered to build more Bolts for a large market 230 miles from the plant.

My prediction is the 2018 Leaf will globally outsell the Bolt/Ampera-E by at least a factor of two. Either GM or LG isn’t interested in high volume at this price.

30Ku per year compliance car.
Not surprised.
SUVs and pickups are way more profitable.

Hyundai got almost everything right with the IONIQ EV. The one thing they omitted was actually making the car. They’re going to offer/sell perhaps 500 this year.

You think so? It’s the same price as the 2018 Leaf, but has less range, power, and space.

Yeah, it’s got the efficiency crown, but it’s basically obsolete half a year after launching.

Hmmm, there are a lot of people very interested in buying the Ioniq Electric, and Hyundai is scrambling to increase production. That’s pretty good for an “obsolete” car.

Sure, 0-60 in 8.1 or 8.6 seconds is pretty poor performance compared to other BEVs. But it doesn’t suffer by comparison to “economy” gasmobiles.

And while it’s not a 200+ mile BEV, it is a 100+ mile BEV, which beats the range of any non-Tesla BEV older than a year. 110 or 125 miles isn’t enough for everyone, but it’s enough for a lot of people.

yup. Prius was much slower, sold millions.

http://www.zeroto60times.com/body-style/green/

Or, they don’t want to win, because they’re anti-selling the Model 3.

Anti Selling! Exactly! Why have another 250,000 people waiting prematurely? They are still coming in faster than they can build them, PLUS, the still have over 450,000 reservations in back of incoming reservations!

Hard to be sure of your theory if they don’t enter.

They do advertise on my facebook page. Unless facebook give them free ads, they do spend on advertising.

Googling [tesla facebook ads], I see no indication that Tesla is using paid Internet ads. Instead, what I see is stories about Tesla’s fan video ads contest. Perhaps you’re seeing links to those based on what you have “liked”.

Of course, this doesn’t prove your assertion is wrong. But it does cause me to be skeptical.

North American Car and Truck of the Year (unlike other “awards”) does not charge car makers an advertising fee.

But yea, I don’t think Tesla really wants to play the awards game that much. Especially when they are STILL busy anti-selling the Model 3 as hard as they can, and probably will for the next 6 months or longer.

Hmmm i think your analysis about the UI/features/software not being complete seems likely. Especially if they need to provide the vehicle soon.

Fans would know features are coming with OTA updates. But when submitted for an award, a glitchy or feature incomplete vehicle would likely hurt their chances to win.

And when making a vehicle this historically important, not winning would be bad PR! 🙂

Would go perfect with their anti-sell the 3 strategy though.

Then produce a finish product instead that false delivery date cars.

They aren’t fake. They may go to employees, but those employees are paying for them. A Tesla in a customers garage is like a living organism. It is complete when delivered, but it can grow and adapt with new features added over time. 😉

Like buying a game console at launch. Only about half the features are initially available. Things such as backward compatibility and non-game media content are rolled out over the following weeks. It is pretty much the norm for hardware releases in tech.

But they review console and video games before they get updates. Sorry but I’m not buyong it

It’s pretty much lose/lose for Tesla. If the 3 won, that’d just increase demand for a product they currently have a backlog of 1-2 years for AND it would take the spotlight away from the S and X.

If the 3 lost (especially to an ICE-mobile), it would be a huge PR (not to mention stock) hit.

Of course Elon forced himself into this corner when he made those “deliveries” of Model 3s back in July. If he hadn’t done that, the 3 likely would have been a ready candidate and probable shoe-in winner for NACOTY 2019.

Every car but one loses every year. It’s hard to see how not winning is a huge PR hit.

Tesla takes orders for cars. Winning certainly would not be a negative. They just tack more orders on. Heck, they only sell electric cars, any electric car winning is good for them. To sell more cars they need the market to transition to EVs and EVs winning these mass-market awards helps make that happen.

It would be a positive for Tesla for the Model 3 to win. Maybe not as positive as if they had cars on hand to sell. But still a positive.

Is there any evidence out there that these employees really did pay for them outside of Elon’s twitter feed?

Yes. Both Elon and Tesla’s CFO talked about employees actually paying for the cars in Tesla’s Q2 2017 quarterly conference call to stock analysts. If they made a mistake in that call, they would be required to issue a correction. And outright lying to investors in the call would have been an SEC violation.

So yes, we actually officially know they paid.

Do you have any actual evidence of anything otherwise?

No kidding, right??! It is painfully obvious that the Model 3 has yet to be released. It is in pre-production testing like all other companies do. The only difference being Elon has convinced employees and investors to actually pay for the pre-production cars rather than foot the bill themselves as is traditionally done.

The Tesla dog and pony show “release” party was nothing more than a PR stunt to save face and maintain enthusiasm amongst the faithful. Going into “production hell” in reality is actually setting up an assembly line that can produce in volume. The actual release of the Model 3 will be in 2018. In 2018 they will compete for COTY.

Have they paid for them?

How can we even be sure of that?

Their employees and investors are driving them. I’m not even sure they bought them or have registered them.

It is pretty clear that the car isn’t really done yet. This wouldn’t be any kind of huge negative except that they are pretending it is.

If there is proof that they didn’t pay anything, I am more than willing to change my opinion. But I doubt that they would lie about this.

If they miss their planned delivery dates to actual customers by late Oct/Nov that would be an indicator of a bigger delay.

But at the moment, I think it is primarily incomplete software/features, possibly anti-selling and the lack of the lower end model. If they could deliver a model for review in November or December, they almost certainly would.

Tesla never said they paid anything. No need to lie. They say cars are “handed over”. They don’t say “sold”, not even at other events.

Sometimes they say “delivered”. For example they say deliveries will be prioritized to employees first.

Both Elon and Tesla’s CFO talked about employees actually paying for the cars in Tesla’s Q2 2017 quarterly conference call to stock analysts. If they made a mistake in that call, they would be required to issue a correction. And outright lying to investors in the call would have been an SEC violation.

So yes, we actually officially know they paid.

Do you have any actual evidence of anything otherwise? If not, why do you keep repeatedly making this same claim, even though you’ve been told multiple times about the conference call?

unlucky said:

“Have they paid for them?

“How can we even be sure of that?”

It’s called evidence and reasoning.

Too bad that doesn’t seem to work for you. Perhaps you think the Earth might be flat, too.

This is true as well. They do not want to hurt S and X sales before production has ramped up.

But isn’t the award announced in January? That would seem like a pretty good time to say it is NACOTY and production will be much higher by then. So perhaps it is a mix of both, but UI and feature tweaks seem most likely to me.

High efficiency cars don’t win awards if they’re boring, not even “green car award”. Therefore, I doubt Ioniq will win. Absent TM3, I predict Kia Stinger.

Bolt and Volt won. No excuses

Bolt and Volt are not boring. If they performed like Ioniq, I doubt they would’ve won.

^^ this.

I think there is a market for the Hyundai Ioniq Electric, perhaps a comparatively sizable one, but it’s not cutting-edge in any way, and it’s not going to get car reviewers excited.

This makes business sense.
They’ll be losing money, in many decisions, in order to speed production to meet demand. Spurring demand, in that case, via uncertain press efforts, without raising the purchase price, would be foolish. There will be ample press about the car once it’s being delivered in some volume.

I agree tesla does not want to increase model 3 demand but they do want to increase S and X demand today.

in fact, it is known that MS sales HAS gone down in the last 3-4 months or so.
MX has not, but that only makes sense.
And yes, a tesla sales person told me that.
But, not a big deal.

But they also tell me that what they hear is that production is scaling up.

It may well be that the Model S has finally reached the limits of its demand, or rather the demand without Tesla spending a significant amount of money on mass advertising.

Hey! Maybe Tesla should put a 3rd model into production… 😉

GM had plenty of Bolts available to media for reviews and awards testing last year. And the first Bolt wasn’t delivered until December. Tesla “delivered” the first Model 3s 2 months ago, but they don’t have a single car to let the media take for a spin due to “scaling up production”? LAME.

Wade’s theory above is most likely what is going on. Can’t let reviewers review an unfinished car!

No I think it’s more about not increasing publicity which increases demand for model 3. There are many Americans that don’t know about EVs today LOL believe me.

They are there to make money. If you can produce get out of the game you build another factory

Huh? Who are they? Can or Can’t? Hard to grasp your pitch!

If you assume the 3 would win this year, it really doesn’t even help Tesla’s sales. The production is booked for the next 12 months with preorders. All it might do it take demand away from S and X.

By pulling from this year’s running, they can have it win the award next year when production is ramped and all variants are released (AWD and Perf models) also. It would also win the award right as the tax credit is almost fully expired.

I think this is just Tesla trying to manipulate the timing to have the biggest increase on sales.

Imagine the egg on Tesla’s face if the Model 3 LOST the award…to a gasser no less. The PR (and stock price) hit would be significant. Especially when the often-compared Bolt wiped the floor with all other competitors and won the award last year.

You think there would be any fall out from that on Tesla? I think it’d reflect more on the contest itself if a gasser won while great EVs were in the running.

It’s a combination of that uncertainty and unfinished nature of it, and the fact that it’s a one-time entry.

Given the reservation backlog, there’s nothing to gain and everything to lose.

The Model X didn’t win and it hasn’t stopped Tesla. My comment was on in the case of it winning.

We may never know now.

The egg would be on the face of the folks at North American Car of the Year, not Tesla.

I find this meme that you’re a “loser” if you don’t get first place in a contest with several entrants, to be mean-spirited and not a little arrogant. It’s a sad reflection on our society that this meme is so widespread.

Do you think an Olympic athlete who wins a Bronze or Silver medal is “loser”? Well, I do not!

I don’t think the Model 3 would be eligible next year, since the car started production THIS year (and was already technically “Delivered” to customers).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Trend_Car_of_the_Year#Criteria

They have 5 years. Requires entry or upgrades.

There’s also the AWD and performance versions. Those shouldn’t be held up by any current production challenges. So, they should be able to put a better entry in.

I think you linked to motor trend car of the year instead of North American car of the year by mistake.

I am pretty sure Tesla can submit for next year since they didn’t compete this year. But they cannot have the same vehicle compete two years in a row without major changes. So waiting is better for them – they will want to present the Model 3 when it can make the best showing.

They can enter the base version next year or the AWD version. Neither is available this year for sale.

(yet)

“this year an electric car won’t be able to carry the torch and pull off a repeat.”

This suggests that getting the award is more important to EV enthusiasts than it is to Tesla. Which I think is about right.

Patience, Grasshopper. EVs, in the near future, will not only be the only vehicles getting these awards; they’ll be the only vehicles UP for these awards. Give it about ten years.

“This suggests that getting the award is more important to EV enthusiasts than it is to Tesla. Which I think is about right.”

Yeah. Getting a lot of awards is an indication of how well the car is received by the public, not vice versa. The Model S got an amazing number of “Best car of the year” ratings, and a surprising number of “Best car ever made” reviews. That is reflected in how well the MS has sold and is selling in its market segment.

Contrariwise, some expected the Model X to outsell the MS, because a few CUVs and SUVs outsell the best-selling sedans, in the U.S. market. However, the MX reviews have been much less enthusiastic. And the MX hasn’t outsold the MS, not overall and not in most quarters. Again, I don’t think the lower sales level of the MX (as compared to the MS) is a reflection of the more tepid reviews; rather, the reviews were less enthusiastic for the same reasons why a lesser number of buyers have chosen the MX.

The real reason is probably that there is something about the model3 we don’t know yet – and that something is not allowed to leak yet. Same reason why youtube owner ‘reviews’ or even public comments are not yet allowed.

Maybe S&X need to catch up on some feature X and once that happens they can really honestly show the 3.

As the article proposed: “we don’t want early copies of the Model 3 to be in 3rd party hands just yet”.

This is really it. I’m becoming annoyed and alarmed that Tesla is trying to control the message on a *production* vehicle. Who does that?

If it’s not a prototype or research vehicle, then it should be fair game.

The easiest way to alleviate that annoyance and alarm, would be to quit reading articles about Tesla

When I hear this, “could not have a car available for jury testing.”, I think this…

🙂

This award is B.S. and the industry knows it. The current winner is the Chevy Bolt!!! Hardly even on sale last year and very expensive… not selling well.

Tesla giving them the finger sends a clear signal that they need to re-jig what this award is about. It shouldn’t be an orgy between advertising budgets and dealerships. It needs to be a genuine attempt to figure out what is the best car for the North American market that year.

And as many have said, winning this award won’t sell extra cars. Tesla got the award in 2013 I think and that probably somewhat helped to solidify the reputation of the fledgling company and increase orders back then. But the company’s products have handled that ever since. Exemplary products do not need marketing or advertising. Ergo… no car awards needed.

Sorry that the journalists need the manufacturer to submit a car! Maybe they should change their rules.

The Bolt is the 5th best-selling EV in 2017, and it only reached 50-state availability recently. I’d say that’s pretty good.

Can’t wait to see what you say when the Model 3 becomes not only the top selling EV, but the top selling sedan of any kind in its price range.

@kbm3: I have a reservation for a Model 3, so my concerns are tied to my wallet.

But the fact is that the Bolt is selling pretty well, and it’s backed by a company that released it on time, and which didn’t try to clam up reviews of the car after it was in production.

The TM3 will either make or break Tesla, and I’m not sure which way it will go.

A winner of this award should be able to compete with the best in its segment. The model S did beat or did compete in its segment. (Depends on the segment definition you prefer.)
For the GM-Bolt that are the Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla. It does not look like the Bolt is competing.

I think you’ve overlooked the fact the Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla have gas engines and cost $10,000-$15,000 less based on MSRP, and still about $5000 less after rebates and discounts.

EVs are not mainstream yet. Saying the Bolt should have competed in sales with the Honda Civic is just ridiculous.

The Bolt’s closest ICE competition is the Golf GTI. And in North America, the Bolt is outselling the GTI.

It’s the fifth best selling plug-in. It’s the 3rd best selling EV. Only the Model S and Model X have outsold it.

“This award is B.S. and the industry knows it. The current winner is the Chevy Bolt!!! Hardly even on sale last year and very expensive… not selling well.”

If you care about an EV future then you should be applauding a Bolt win. If Tesla hadn’t withdrawn and had won, you’d be singing a different tune.

“Tesla giving them the finger sends a clear signal that they need to re-jig what this award is about. It shouldn’t be an orgy between advertising budgets and dealerships.”

Is that the message you think this is sending? Then why did they not just say that?

The company never has issues speaking out against systems that are rigged against them.

“This award is B.S. and the industry knows it”

Sounds like sour grapes.

“If I don’t win, it must be rigged”…

Easy Hillary!
You Rigged it as far as you could, but it still left you wondering ‘What Happened?’

Really? So it’s not “rigged” that the candidate with fewer overall votes won?

Well if you have an electric vehicle in Florida and solar panels on your roof and a hurricane knocks out the electric grid. Florida Power and Light consumers using there roof top solar panels to charge there electric vehicle and home were told it’s illegal to not use the grid. When you have a hurricane that knocks out the grid the utility and the utility can’t provide you power. The utility prevents you from using your roof top solar to power your home. The utility has Florida politicians in the pocket and hold Florida residents hostage.

It’s essentially illegal in Florida to have an entirely off-grid home. You must have service.

However, it’s _not_ illegal to have the ability to operate off-grid. There are Tesla owners in Florida who have able to charge their cars with the grid down.

I read an article today written by a James Billington that said Florida Power and Light stated that it’s illegal to use roof top solar to power your home if the grid is down.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/social-media
This is the article I read I hope this is the correct link.

What they are refering to is if the Solar is Grid Connected.

If your house has 2 separate cicuits, you just change which receptacles you plug in to! No Sick or Dead Birds at all! (Ill Eagle).

Sorry here’s the link ibtimes.co.uk/sunshine-state-bans-solar-power-floridas-hurricane-irma-victims-furious-electric-company-1639956

Thanks

Here are the Net Metering guidelines:
https://www.fpl.com/clean-energy/net-metering/guidelines.html

They imply that for operation when the grid is down, you’d need to have a system with a DC-coupled battery as well as an appropriate inverter.

And a transfer switch.

Despite the sensational articles out there most residential solar installations are not capable of operating without the grid. And they aren’t capable of separating from the grid, so even if they did operate they would back power the grid which is dangerous and wouldn’t actually work (your neighbors would overload your system).

If you installed a system that can be grid isolated I’m sure you can operate it when the power is out. But most people simply didn’t do so because of the expense.

Thre ways to do this: Auto Transfer Switch; Manual Transfer Switch with an Auto Grid Isolation Breaker; and Skip the Grid: Wire in a completely separate power master and distribution breaker box, add critical or fully duplicated wiring as needed!

There are ways to do this. But then you need an inverter which can operate without the grid. And most people don’t have that either. And since a cloud can come by at any time you really have to install batteries to have a usable system too. And you think of the sun as up all day but your solar installation is producing far less power before 11A or after 4P than it is near solar noon.

All this is possible. But it adds more expense. And so most solar installations don’t have this stuff and can’t operate without the grid.

There were a few Floridians that used solar power to power there homes after Hurricane Iram. Florida Power and Light should not be lobbying politicians to make this illegal. I thought Rep were pro choice.

That must depend on how the electrical layot is. .. or else there is no logic. It is logical that they want to protect their workers, so they can trust that the power is actually off – while working. It a person decides to have a twin loop solar system with the option to store their own power, and use that – and have the ability to disconnect the grid connection, I see no problem with that. To be on the safe side, that switch should have a SIM card, and the utility company could turn off the grid connection OTA. This function could be integrated in a smart meter – depending on how the electrical layout of the building is designed and planned. I have a cabin with a fairly large capasity solar cell roof. It used to be off grid, and I wanted to be able to have enough electricity to watch TV, use the computers, have normal lights in the cabin and so on. When there was more cabins in the area, a grid was build, and I paid to be connected too (since it also included fiber for TV and internet). Since I work much in… Read more »

As much as everyone wants to believe the M3 will be Tesla’s first on-time and initially reliable vehicle, it just isn’t. They made the initial M3 deliveries so that they wouldn’t be skewered by the markets and could make their bond sale at low rates. Now they’re scrambling to get the bugs out and finalize the car.

I’m sure Tesla will get the M3 out the door, but either the timeframe needs to slip, or they’ll be shipping incomplete/unreliable units. I can’t imagine they want bad initial reviews, so shipping late seems more likely. Let’s hope the markets aren’t too riled by it.

Repeating this Big Lie doesn’t make it true, no matter how many times it’s repeated.

Tesla started the Model S production slowly, and slowly ramped up during the first few months. They did the same with the Model X.

Now, Tesla bashers and haters are calling “foul” over Tesla doing exactly the same with the Model 3 — except Tesla has for the first time clamped down a lid on posts to social media about problems with early production models.

Well, guys and gals, when it comes to tallying up Tesla’s revenue at the end of the quarter, none of Tesla’s accountants is going to be paying any attention to the nattering nabobs whining that those sales “don’t count” just because Tesla has an embargo on early TM3 buyers posting about it to social media.

I don’t think those who own the company — that is, Tesla’s stockholders — are gonna care much, either.

P.S. — Those who think TM3 production is going slower than Tesla planned, don’t know what they’re talking about. Tesla predicted a slow ramp up for the first 2-3 months, as they “S-curve” they published shows. Again, just like the earth months of Model S and Model X production.

“…Tesla has for the first time clamped down a lid on posts to social media about problems with early production models”

I don’t understand how you’re OK with that. Tesla’s behavior is basically unAmerican on this point, by trying to regulate free speech on a *production* car.

An NDA can apply for pre-production products, but not something the public can buy.

As a TM3 reservation holder, I’m grouchy about this. If this game is still being played when my car is allegedly ready in the December-Feb timeframe, I won’t buy it.

The Chevy Colorado is an interesting truck in that it’s 3/4 size of a “full” American pickup (and is, accordingly, the same size as a “full” American pickup from 30 years ago). It punches above its weight, especially in towing.

Still, on what planet is the Colorado “new” because they increased the ground clearance? That’s pure badge engineering.

Couldn’t have put it better myself: ” “we don’t want early copies of the Model 3 to be in 3rd party hands just yet”

Also, I believe Tesla does not want to have the Model 3 win with it’s $35K MSRP…I’d take a Vegas bet the $35K base will increase (whether the smaller battery or RWD disappear) in 2018…

lol.
It is very doubtful that more than a few is buying the base version.

Serial anti tesla troll thomas

Tesla fears the competition ???

So Tesla is still only selling to employees, and Tesla cannot provide a single car for review.

I’m not sure what more clear evidence one would require to conclude that the Model 3 isn’t finished (i.e. ready for public retail), and that the “release” was for show.

But as always, come into the comments and you can hear many saying that this is Great News For Tesla.

Spider-Dan said:

“So Tesla is still only selling to employees, and Tesla cannot provide a single car for review.”

Logical fallacy; assuming facts not in evidence.

We only know that Tesla chose not to submit a car this year for the contest. You characterizing this as Tesla “cannot”, merely shows your anti-Tesla bias.

“I’m not sure what more clear evidence one would require to conclude that the Model 3 isn’t finished (i.e. ready for public retail), and that the “release” was for show.”

As many comments in this very discussion have pointed out, Tesla wouldn’t get much advantage out of winning the award this year. They can’t increase sales of the Model 3 over the next year or two; production will be sold out.

Frankly, it would be stupid of Tesla not to wait to submit this car to the contest, until a later year. Thankfully, Tesla isn’t stupid.

I’m not sure what more clear evidence one would require to conclude that every comment here suggesting or asserting that Tesla should have entered this contest this year, is at best ignoring the reality of the situation, and at worst it’s outright Tesla bashing.

You have succumbed to the common mistake of treating refundable $1000 deposits as $40,000 sales.

Tesla has sold less than 100 Model 3s. Awards – like the North American Car of the Year – will help to convert those reservations into actual sales.

“We only know that Tesla chose not to submit a car this year for the contest. You characterizing this as Tesla “cannot”, merely shows your anti-Tesla bias.”

Is that sorta like quitting 5 minutes before you know you’re about to get fired?

The Model 3 – the Saturday-Night-Live of the automotive world. Fun to watch, but young, undisciplined, Not Ready for Prime Time.

Well, according to Tesla’s chart, the production is taking off starting 1/2 way through September. So seeing as this is the nineteenth, production, if the chart holds, must have already really taken off.

You can tell by the opinions of several commenters that many here want to see MANY sales, and soon. So, late october, according to the chart, should see almost an unbelievable amounts of sales… Should be interesting to see.

Yep… There’s definitely a hidden reason. I suspect Tesla does not need any additional advertising on a car they can’t even fill demand on right now. But that alone can’t account for the reason. I suspect, as others have said, there is something about the car that is “not ready” yet… whether that something is good or bad remains to be seen.

Well actually, tesla is using these to transport heroin in from Mexico.
And after the first shipment, they then drive to Devil’s tower and pick up REAL aliens (greys) and deliver them around the nation to control CONgress critter’s minds.

Hey, if you are going for conspiracies, make them great.

You left out the real reason Tesla has an embargo on social media posts from Model 3 owners: Tesla doesn’t want them to talk about how the are being used to transport tanks of chemicals to airports, where the liquid is injected into aviation fuel, so the airliners will leave chemtrails which poison our atmosphere. 😉

Pedantic nitpick: It’s “Devils Tower”, not “Devil’s Tower”.

There’s something funny going on with this car.

It’s only sold to employees. EPA information on the car (which must be available before the car is offered for sale) is not available.

Now they won’t loan out cars for reviewers to evaluate them.

It really seems like these cars aren’t actually for sale yet. But what is the actual status of them?

It’ll be interesting to discover what was behind the odd launch of this car when we later know more of the circumstances.

That’s what happens when you try and count pre-production beta test units as “real deliveries” as a dog and pony show for shareholders.

I mean who ever heard of customers having to sign NDAs in order to buy a “production ready” car?

“It really seems like these cars aren’t actually for sale yet. But what is the actual status of them?”

We keep telling you, Unlucky, it’s a conspiracy to make you think that the car isn’t actually being sold to real customers, and to make you think that the money Tesla gets paid for those cars “doesn’t count” because dollars paid to a company by its employees, or employees of an associated company (SpaceX), are somehow different than other dollars.

And it’s working!
😀 😀 😀

It isn’t being sold to real customers and I’m not even to whether the money “counts” or not, I’m not even sure anyone paid anything for these cars. Honestly, it wouldn’t even make sense for them to take money for the cars. It’s just more hassle to sell the car and then negotiate for access with the employee-owner than telling the employee to just use this car and if we want it back later to test it or fix it we’ll just swap you for another.

As to money paid from employee money of course it’s different. If money from employees counts the same as everyone then companies could just book revenue by paying their employees money and having them buy products from the company.

…Oh wait, companies DID do that before the .com crash! And hence that’s why you really do need to keep track of what’s happening here and I’m trying to do so. I’m not ashamed of it. Fool me once, shame on you…

yeah, its not like Henry Ford paid his ppl decently so that they could afford to buy ford vehicles.
Shessh.

You astro-turfers must LOVE their paycheck from the kock bros.

I don’t seem to remember a time when Henry Ford was selling vehicles ONLY to his employees.

General release is sometime in October. We are now 2/3rds the way through September.

You only have about a month to keep whining like crazy about this topic before being proven wrong. I suggest whining about it in conspiratorial ways at least 5-10 times a day for the next month while you still can.

Go ahead, get it all out in one big cry while you still can. Time is running out.

It looks like you are already well on your way…

They have too many reservations. If they won, which they would, there will be even more orders. They have 2 years worth of cars to catch up on!

They also missed the “cut off” for Motor Trend “best driver’s car” award as well as Motor Trend car of the year review if they don’t have cars for review by now.

Regardless of what the reason is, whether it is “anti-selling” or cars not fully ready, the fact remains that they aren’t ready for “full release” yet despite few early “sales” to internal people.

I guess 2018 Camry/Volvo XC60/Colorado will win.

So the “North American Car” of the year will be either a Japanese, Korean or German vehicle then, as Tesla was the only “American Car” in the finalists. Perhaps they also wanted it to be fair play, to not give the critics the claim of “being chosen just because they are the only US entry” in the car segment. Besides, the 2018 production is sold out anyway, so no additional publicity needed.

My guess based on the list would be Camry wins the car of the year. Expedition wins the Truck of the year.

Utility is a bit harder. My bet would be between the Traverse, Atlas and XC60.

I dunno, is this one of those “You have to pay to be considered, and you have to pay even more if you win and you want to use that in your advertising” fake awards?

If it is, then it’s hardly a surprise that Tesla doesn’t want to “pay to play”.

If that’s not the case, if this is a real award that auto makers don’t have to pay a fee to compete for, then I would guess the reason is, as the article suggests, that Tesla isn’t ready to loan a Tesla Model 3 to anyone who hasn’t signed an NDA.

I’ve never heard anything about this being a ‘pay to play’ award. Tesla just declined to make a car available for them to test.

Considering how closely they’ve kept the car under wraps so far, I’d say there’s something to the idea that it’s not quite ready for release to the general public and to the media for testing.

Otherwise I imagine it would have been no problem to supply them with a car … why wouldn’t Tesla want that feather in their crown? Maybe next year.

“…why wouldn’t Tesla want that feather in their crown? Maybe next year.”

Because that feather in Tesla’s cap, or jewel in its crown, wouldn’t help it sell even one unit of TM3 over the next two years or so, since it will take at least that long for Tesla to work thru the reservation list.

Far better, from Tesla’s perspective, to wait a year or two before competing for this award. Then it might actually provide a boost to sales.

Reservations are not sales.

Pushy — No, they don’t charge a fee for companies to use their awards in advertising. So whatever their reason is, it isn’t because they aren’t willing to pay for the award. I don’t know myself, but here are my top wild-arse guesses: 1) Tesla isn’t 100% done with the TM3 220 mile base model yet, and that is the version they want the car magazines to review. They don’t want their big press release to be of the TM3 310 version they are currently selling. Tesla has been very clear that the TM3 220 won’t be ready until later in October, so we already know it isn’t done yet. 2) Going in the opposite direction, maybe Tesla has more options on the way that they haven’t finished yet, and that’s the version they want to go to press with. (Elon has already mentioned previously that the AWD version could be done before the end of 2017) 3) Tesla is anti-selling all Model 3’s, just like they are currently anti-selling them on their website. 4) Tesla wants the 2019 award, not the 2018 award, because they can actually use that to sell TM3’s at that point. They can’t do anything… Read more »

After reading all the comments here, I think your reason #3 is sufficient to explain why Tesla chose not to compete for the award this year. We know that Tesla is “anti-selling” the Tesla Model 3, and doing so rather strongly. Competing for the award this year — instead of waiting a year or two — would be directly contrary to that policy.

…er, make that your reasons #3 and #4. I replied too soon.

As always, Nix, thanks for your thoughtful comments and insightful analysis.

Perhaps Tesla is telling NACOTY that they are not worth much as an award.

I have to say that I like that Tesla is keeping their eye on production and scale-up. Basically, they are saying that that the customers matter more.