Tesla is coming off its most successful quarter in company history. The Q3 delivery guidance saw Tesla deliver over 241,000 vehicles for the first time in company history, with production at a slightly lower rate than that. However, despite the bullish outlook for Tesla from a retail investor standpoint, analysts and media continue to miss the mark on the company, believing in their breakdowns that the automaker’s growth story will begin to stagnate. However, Tesla is averting several crises simultaneously, including parts shortages and opening new facilities.

The consistently baffling thing to me as a journalist and reporter that has covered the sector for over two years is that analysts continue to sit on a hill, ready to die on it. Just because they have been outspoken when writing notes regarding their negative outlooks on Tesla stock or deliveries, they are unwilling to admit their wrongs, for the most part. Tesla has continued a growth story that is one of the most impressive in perhaps the long and storied history of the automotive industry.

I’m not an analyst. I did work in finance before I ventured into writing for a career, but I am in no way an analyst or seasoned investor of any kind. However, I do recognize that there are obvious shortcomings in the descriptions of Tesla by some analysts, unwilling to give credit where credit is due. Tesla has been the only car company on Earth that has been able to avert the semiconductor shortage through in-house measures and efforts. Tesla’s software team absolutely killed it with the development and production of microcontrollers that would assist with the company’s efforts to avoid a production stoppage. Yet, despite all of this effort and hard work and dedication by Tesla’s highly talented team of engineers, there is relatively no credit given by analysts apart from Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas, who was baffled at the company’s ability to avoid the chip shortage.

‘How did Tesla find chips?’ Morgan Stanley breaks down impressive Q3 delivery performance

Meanwhile, other automakers like Ford, who have adopted EVs partially with their release of the Mustang Mach-E and eventual releases of the F-150 Lightning and E-Transit van, are experiencing drops in deliveries. Ford had a 23% drop in pickup truck deliveries, despite the F-150 being the most popular truck in the U.S. market. While SUV sales did rise 3.4% compared to Q2, the drop in pickup trucks is evidently a result of the chip shortage, as many manufactured but incomplete pickups sit in lots surrounding the company’s production facilities waiting for chips.

I don’t know this for a fact, but I feel as if mainstream media outlets would be singing the praises of companies like Ford, Chevy, GMC, or Honda if these companies were able to produce chips on their own and avoid the semiconductor issues. I do not necessarily like being accusatory of other media outlets, and I do not like going out of my way to believe that journalists have some kind of inside agenda. I believe all of us have a duty to remain fair and balanced and unbiased. But let’s be honest here, Tesla is not getting the attention or the credit it deserves. The semiconductor shortage is plaguing so many industries, and Tesla is averting it completely, somehow.

Companies are declining while Tesla has already reported eight consecutive profitable quarters, going for its ninth. We will find out if Tesla was profitable in Q3 next week during the Earnings Call on October 20th. However, the ability to conduct such consistent growth through deliveries in somewhat incredible, and I truly believe analysts are doing themselves and their clients a huge disservice by ignoring or avoiding such a tremendous growth story during such a trying time. Many of them will live to regret their decisions, whether it’s paid inside interests or a personal vendetta.

I think there is a reason many analysts with bullish Tesla outlooks are ranked so highly on TipRanks, while those who continue a bearish outlook are ranked tremendously low.

A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.

I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!

-Joey

The post OPINION: Analysts miss the mark on Tesla following Q3 Delivery Guidance appeared first on TESLARATI.

Earlier this week, NTSB Chief Jennifer Homendy made some disparaging comments regarding Tesla’s use of “Full Self-Driving” to explain its semi-autonomous driving suite. The remarks from Homendy show that Tesla may not have a fair chance when it ultimately comes to proving the effectiveness of its FSD program, especially considering agency officials, who should remain impartial, are already making misdirected comments regarding the name of the suite.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Homendy commented on the company’s use of the phrase “Full Self-Driving.” While Tesla’s FSD suite is admittedly not capable of Level 5 autonomy, the idea for the program is to eventually roll out a fully autonomous driving program for those who choose to invest in the company’s software. However, instead of focusing on the program’s effectiveness and commending Tesla, arguably the leader in self-driving developments, Homendy concentrates on the terminology.

Homendy said Tesla’s use of the term “Full Self-Driving” was “misleading and irresponsible,” despite the company confirming with each driver who buys the capability that the program is not yet fully autonomous. Drivers are explicitly told to remain vigilant and keep their hands on the wheel at all times. It is a requirement to use Autopilot or FSD, and failure to do so can result in being locked in “Autopilot jail” for the duration of your trip. Nobody wants that.

However, despite the way some media outlets and others describe Tesla’s FSD program, the company’s semi-autonomous driving functionalities are extraordinarily safe and among the most complex on the market. Tesla is one of the few companies attempting to solve the riddle that is self-driving, and the only to my knowledge that has chosen not to use LiDAR in its efforts. Additionally, Tesla ditched radar just a few months ago in the Model Y and Model 3, meaning cameras are the only infrastructure the company plans to use to keep its cars moving. Several drivers have reported improvements due to the lack of radar.

These comments regarding FSD and Autopilot are simple: The terminology is not the focus; the facts are. The truth is, Tesla Autopilot recorded one of its safest quarters, according to the most recently released statistics that outlined an accident occurring on Autopilot just once every 4.19 million miles. The national average is 484,000 miles, the NHTSA says.

It isn’t to say that things don’t happen. Accidents on Autopilot and FSD do occur, and the NHTSA is currently probing twelve incidents that have shown Autopilot to be active during an accident. While the conditions and situations vary in each accident, several have already been proven to be the result of driver negligence, including a few that had drivers operating a vehicle without a license or under the influence of alcohol. Now, remind me: When a BMW driver is drunk and crashes into someone, do we blame BMW? I’ll let that rhetorical question sink in.

Of course, Homendy has a Constitutional right to say whatever is on her mind. It is perfectly reasonable to be skeptical of self-driving systems. I’ll admit, the first time I experienced one, I was not a fan, but it wasn’t because I didn’t trust it. It was because I was familiar with controlling a vehicle and not having it manage things for me. However, just like anything else, I adjusted and got used to the idea, eventually becoming accustomed to the new feelings and sensations of having my car assist me in navigating to my destination.

To me, it is simply unfortunate for an NTSB official to claim that Tesla “has clearly misled numerous people to misuse and abuse technology.” One, because it isn’t possible, two, because it would be a massive liability for the company, and three, because Tesla has never maintained that its cars can drive themselves. Tesla has never claimed that its cars can drive themselves, nor has Tesla ever advised a driver to attempt a fully autonomous trek to a destination.

The numerous safety features and additions to the FSD suite have only solidified Tesla’s position as one of the safest car companies out there. With in-cabin cameras to test driver attentiveness and numerous other safety thresholds that drivers must respond to with the correct behaviors, Tesla’s FSD suite and its Autopilot program are among the safest around. It isn’t favorable for NTSB head Homendy to comment in this way, especially as it seems to be detrimental to not only Tesla’s attempts to achieve Level 5 autonomy but the entire self-driving effort as a whole.

A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.

I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!

-Joey

The post Does Tesla have a fair chance after NTSB Chief comments? appeared first on TESLARATI.

Tesla vehicle reviews are probably one of the most worthless things to read, in my own opinion, especially if they’re coming from a large group or entity with interests that anyone can trace through the money. Earlier this week, Edmunds put up a scathing review of the Model S Plaid, calling it “a waste of money” and saying it was nothing more than a marketing tool to make an aging vehicle relevant once again. Despite these words, which caught the attention of many readers within the first 48 hours, the Edmunds driver couldn’t wipe the large, shining smile from his face as he felt the instant torque of the vehicle take off like a rollercoaster.

For something that is such a waste, it sure provided a lot of enjoyment to the Edmunds staff. Of course, vehicle performance is not necessarily a baseline for whether an automobile is “good” or not. If a car is fast, people will like it because fast cars are just fun to be in, whether you’re a driver or a passenger. However, reviews on electric cars, Teslas in specific, do not get a fair shake, and it’s not necessarily anyone’s fault, per se. Instead, I see it as an opportunity for people to put their opinions out there without speaking in generalities or thinking their point of view is a fact. Of course, you could say the same about this newsletter.

For me, the comprehension of electric cars, Teslas in specific, needs to be examined by someone seasoned and completely understanding what is going on under the hood (I use that term loosely, now) because without the basic comprehension of what you’re driving, you really are not qualified to speak on it. Additionally, whether something is a “waste of money” really comes down to the consumer. If you’re buying a Model S Plaid for the performance statistics, you’re getting the fastest car in the world for millions of dollars less than its competitors. Sure, if you’re buying it for range and a daily driver, it could be considered a “waste” as the Long Range variant is likely a better option. However, some people realize they won’t have their money forever, and the additional $40,000 cost is simply arbitrary in their point of view.

For me, there are just too many factors as to why reviews are pointless when it comes to certain cars, especially with fast ones. I will discuss a few of them here, and I look forward to hearing your point of view with the others.

Credit: Tesla

Internal Interests

Tesla fans are quick to point out when a product gets a negative review or any sort of pushback. Many of them claim inside interests without really doing their own due diligence, claiming that some entities have their pockets lined with oil money or anything else the mind can grasp. Sometimes, however, they’re not far off. CarMax purchased Edmunds back in April, which means that the company is no longer independent and is owned by a large company with ties with Chrysler, Mitsubishi, Toyota, and Nissan.

It is always important to see what interests some entities have when they speak about a car or any product, for that matter. Simply enough, people with the ability to put their name on an article or a video and put it out there for millions of people to digest have a responsibility to remain partial. It doesn’t always work that way.

Opinionated Points on Features

This is one of my biggest points. Edmunds was quick to dismiss the usefulness of the Yoke, claiming that “the Yoke was a Joke.” Yes, they really wrote that on Twitter.

The Tesla Model S Plaid is nothing more than a marketing exercise designed to draw attention to an aging car. Also, the yoke is a joke. Our full review of the fastest car we’ve ever tested: https://t.co/f1SkdDmRhI pic.twitter.com/A1UUKWODEV

— Edmunds (@edmunds) September 7, 2021

The thing is, I have monitored the Yoke since it was going to be included in the Model S, and while I have spoken to numerous government agencies and Tesla employees about the Yoke, the wheel is really personal preference. The car is obviously built for performance, and performance vehicles, especially open-wheeled cars, like F1 series vehicles, use a Yoke for complete control at high speeds. It is likely Tesla didn’t go with the Yoke for this reason, but it may have included it as a hint toward a steering wheel-less cockpit in the future. That’s my idea, anyway, especially as the company surges toward autonomy.

I have NEVER come across a single person who has disliked driving the Yoke for what it’s worth.

Of course, a review does include some personal preference, and that’s expected. However, to slash a vehicle in this way that is likely the most advanced car on the market in terms of software, performance, and technology in this way smells of too much opinion, for me. Stick to the facts, is it a good car? Is it functional? Does it do what the automaker said it would do?

Cars are made to be tested individually

The most logical way to know if a car is for you is to drive it yourself. You should never go off of someone else’s opinion completely. It makes no sense to do this. If cars were meant to be bought off of the basis of someone else’s experience, nobody would drive PT Cruisers (they’re horribly ugly), and everyone would drive what someone else wanted them to drive. Let’s not forget: Cars, while a meaningful portion of life because they get us to work, events, and anywhere we need to go, are supposed to be enjoyable and fun. Not one person on this Earth wants to drive a car they hate if they don’t have to. Hell, when my Dad bought me a 2003 Taurus in college because my Jetta died, I hated it. It was like driving a boat. I was embarrassed by the putrid blue color. I hated the seats, the stereo, and in the winter, I had to keep one hand on the driver’s door because the latch wouldn’t work, and the part was on backorder. There is nothing like driving on the interstate to get to class on time and holding the door shut for dear life, hoping you don’t roll out. I had no other choice, I was a broke college kid, and it was a car that got me from Point A to Point B. But I will never again drive a car I hate.

The thing is, someone I went to high school with loved their 2003 Taurus. They talked about its powerful V6 engine and its fine leather interior. It was a car they enjoyed. I am sure it was a nice car, I didn’t like it.

This goes to my point: Just because someone else hates it and thinks it is a pile of junk doesn’t mean it actually is. It’s just an opinion. Do you want to know if a car is good or not? Drive it yourself and tell your friends what you thought of it. Your opinion of the car won’t change theirs.

I will say this: It is important to have these pieces of literature to show us the negative portions of a car. Like if the software isn’t great, or the touchscreen is not very responsive, or if the center console doesn’t move properly. Those are understandable pieces of criticism, but none of them are opinionated. If the software isn’t great, people will see that. It might keep them from buying a car prematurely.

With all of that being said, there is plenty of evidence to suggest the Plaid Model S is a great vehicle, and there is other evidence that suggests Tesla has things to work on. Whichever side of the ball you’re on, believe in your opinion, but be open to other’s points as well. Additionally, make the final decision about a car on your own time, don’t go off of someone else’s words. That’s how you end up with something that you really do not enjoy driving.

A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.

I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!

The post Tesla vehicle reviews are pointless…Here’s why appeared first on TESLARATI.

For years, Indian citizens have pleaded with Tesla CEO Elon Musk about the possibility of the electric automaker building and delivering cars in the country. India, a large landmass that 1.366 billion people call home, has less than 1% of its 30 million cars being of an electric nature, the most sustainable way to operate a vehicle. However, Tesla aims to change that with an imminent entrance into India’s market. The problem is, Tesla’s road in India may end before it even begins, which would be a massive blow to the company and its supporters in the country, as Tesla fans have waited several years for any indication that the car company would finally make an appearance in their section of the world. But, strict regulations and inside political interests are halting the possibility, and it has people wondering whether the world’s leading electric car company will ever make it to the Indian automotive market.

Many of you who read Teslarati on a daily basis know that we have been tracking the situation in India since the early days. In fact, one of my first articles of 2021, while I was recovering from COVID-19 in January, was about the potential that Tesla had in India’s markets. Additionally, it seemed that some potential customers would be ready to order their first all-electric cars from the Silicon Valley-based electric car company by the time Q2 rolled around. However, these pieces of outlook from Musk were not met because the Indian government has shut down any attempt Tesla has made toward getting their products in the country without the hefty import duties. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem as if they will be going away soon, either, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has heavily supported the idea of local manufacturing efforts, will not be forced to leave his post or enter another election until 2024.

While local manufacturing is something Americans take a lot of pride in, especially with cars, there are undoubtedly advantages to building things domestically. First, companies must hire workers in the country that the business is stationed in. Next, the increase of manufacturing jobs not only improves the American economy, but it also provides job security for the millions of employees that are on assembly lines 40 hours (or more) a week. There are a lot of strengths in manufacturing things locally, but there is also room for foreign entities to bring their products into a market, especially if they can benefit a foreign economy like it does a domestic one.

Musk with Modi in 2015

This is something Tesla argued in its proposal letter to the Indian government a few weeks ago when it requested a reduction in import duties. The increase in Tesla imports would actually assist the country in developing a charging infrastructure, which would supply jobs to the energy sector and provide cleaner transportation options in a country where the climate and environment struggle heavily with smog and emissions. Additionally, Tesla would need a dedicated Service Center in several locations as India is a large country. Not to mention, showrooms would also provide some employment opportunities.

Musk has said that Tesla will not bring a Gigafactory to India without some sort of data that would support healthy demand, something that is obviously needed to justify building a near-billion dollar production plant in India. Doing this through imports is a tremendous idea, but 60% import taxes on sub-$40k vehicles, and 100% duties on $40,000 and up vehicles just will not get this done. Plain and simple. There needs to be some movement on the Indian government’s end.

However, the Indian politicians fail to realize that the economic and environmental advantages to having EVs in the country will be a better move long term. Instead, they fail to budge or even consider reducing import duties of any kind, at least to this point, which appears to discourage Tesla’s requests to enter the market. It would be a shame if no solution can be reached after this problem because I believe that the environmental impacts alone will be something that not only the Indian people will enjoy, but the people of the world will begin to see eventually. As the air begins to clear and the smog disperses, there could be a relative ease on the strong relationship with gas and oil India has. Sustainable energy could make its way to India within the next few years, and Tesla could see the potential for its biggest Gigafactory yet in India.

Think about the economic benefits a large-scale production facility could provide. Not only would it produce well-paying jobs, but it would also create a lot of them.

There are so many benefits for both Tesla and India if a deal can be worked out. But can it? In my opinion, Tesla may be better off delaying the India operation for another few years, when a fresh administration and new ideas can be thrown around about Tesla entering the market. It seems, for now, there won’t be much of a possibility, and Tesla may be better off expanding its efforts in the UK or elsewhere.

With that being said, I would love to hear how you feel about this issue. Is Tesla wasting its time trying to get things going in India? Should it try again in a few years? Do you feel progress can be made? Why or why not? If not India, then where should Tesla consider a new Gigafactory?

A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.

I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!

The post Why Tesla’s road in India may end before it even starts appeared first on TESLARATI.

Earlier this week, former Nikola CEO Trevor Milton was indicted on two counts of securities fraud and one count of wire fraud, after misleading investors about the financial condition and basically every facet of Nikola’s operation. The indictments come after months of silence from Milton, who has basically disappeared into thin air following his resigning as Nikola’s CEO. The announcement of Milton’s charges, which were carried out by the U.S. Attorney Southern District of New York’s office, will set precedent for CEOs moving forward, especially for those who have announced major breakthroughs in electric vehicle technology without releasing any relevant products.

For the last 13 years, Tesla has combated companies and automakers that have set forth a path to dethrone the electric car entity from its post as the best EV maker in the world. However, Tesla has never been even remotely challenged by an all-electric car company that has been established in recent memory. Most likely, this is due to Tesla’s domination of the electric vehicle sector in nearly every category, including battery tech, software, vehicle design, and autonomy.

Nikola founder Trevor Milton indicted on three counts of fraud

This has not stopped CEOs of other automakers from making outlandish claims with their vehicles, and Milton was just one of many. Since the 2018 lawsuit that Nikola filed against Tesla for allegedly taking design ideas from the Nikola One and implementing them into the Tesla Semi, it seems Milton has been the only CEO to actually convince some people that their product is meaningful and groundbreaking, despite not having much of a product at all. Considering Nikola admittedly misled shareholders about the capabilities of its all-electric commercial vehicle, there should be a hint to the CEOs of the companies that do and will exist in the future: don’t lie about your product, and don’t incite shareholders to believe something that is true.

This point should be common sense and should be evidently clear, but it is something that should set other CEOs of emerging automakers to tread carefully with their words and claims. Taking advantage of a highly marketable and quickly growing EV sector requires a strategic entrance into the market. Lying about the capabilities of what your vehicles might be able to do in the future, simply is not a great move. Over time, things may be established and successful with the dedication and hard work of teams of engineers and others. But until that day, it may be best to stop claiming things about the product, and simply release some kind of evidence that the company is not “an intricate fraud,” as Hindenburg Research called it.

When companies can effectively manufacture a product worth value and prove to people, especially shareholders, that they are for real about entering the sector, there is a significant amount of respect that heads toward the entity that came through. Skepticism is a commonly displayed trait, especially in the electric vehicle sector, because so many companies have come and gone, setting up their own expectations that are quite lofty, only to come short. This inevitably leaves many EV enthusiasts, especially Tesla owners and fans, feeling let down for what could eventually come.

Without a doubt, there will be some people that will inevitably take advantage of excited investors who are passionate about the possibility of sustainable energy and transportation. Based on the allegations set forth by the U.S. Department of Justice against Milton, he is one of those individuals and this statement could be proven in a federal courtroom in the coming months. “The one thing fraudsters have in common – they’re liars, cheaters, and thieves,” Inspector-in-Charge Phillip R. Bartlett said. He added that if an investment opportunity seems too good to be true, it probably is.

A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.

I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!

-Joey

On behalf of the entire Teslarati team, we’re working hard behind the scenes on bringing you more personalized members benefits, and can’t thank you enough for your continued support!

The post Trevor Milton’s indictment should set precedent for other CEOs appeared first on TESLARATI.

Earlier this week, there was plenty of talk about the Revel taxi fleet in New York City, comprised of 50 Tesla Model Y all-electric crossovers that would contribute to the ride-sharing services that the Big Apple has long been accustomed to over the past century. As the automotive sector has transitioned to a more sustainable look and feel, taxi companies are also putting their hand in the cookie jar, adding sustainable vehicles to their fleets, and taking gas-powered machines off the road.

Revel is an independent company attempting to make this happen. The company has 50 Model Y taxis ready to take on the streets of Manhattan and the other boroughs of New York. However, reports circulated earlier this week that the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission blocked this possibility overwhelmingly with a five-to-one vote.

New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission: A Giant Game of Telephone

While the reports from various media outlets, including our own, highlighted the spectacle, which seemed to be an incredible chance of corruption, there was actually a huge misunderstanding. New York City TLC’s Deputy Chief of Public Affairs, Allan Fromberg, took some time out of a busy Thursday to talk to me, clarifying the situation that has been misconstrued since its original report.

Tesla Model Y taxi fleet successfully blocked by NY commission

After getting in touch with Mr. Fromberg on Thursday, we talked about the initial reports. “The whole narrative that Revel would have to buy 50 gas cars to then convert to EVs is just a giant game of telephone. In fact, for Revel to bring on its 50 BEVs, they would have to replace 50 existing, already-licensed vehicles, and not new vehicles.”

Initial reports indicated that TLC Commissioner Aloysee Heredia Jarmoszuk stated that congestion was why Revel wasn’t granted licenses. In fact, this is true. Revel was never required to purchase 50 gas vehicles, which didn’t make much sense from the get-go. In my initial communication to Mr. Fromberg, I stated that the contradictory nature of the TLC’s implied decision to block Revel’s Model Y fleet because of congestion, but then suggest 50 additional gas-powered vehicles needed to be purchased didn’t make much sense.

Fromberg agreed and said that this misconception was due to the aggregation of media reports looking to push out this controversial angle of the story quickly.

Mr. Fromberg then explained what the vote on Tuesday evening entailed, straight from the TLC Commissioner’s mouth.

2018 Legislation: The Taxi Cab “Cap”

Ms. Jarmoszuk said:

“First and foremost, no one and no entity has been blocked. The public meeting/vote was neither about electric vehicles nor about any particular company nor about car models. Rather, the public meeting was about vehicle licenses, which are presently capped since the market is saturated and distressed, with low performance as a result of the pandemic and previous market stressors. Presently, there are nearly 100K vehicle licenses, which is too large a supply for current passenger demand. The public meeting was about ensuring mechanisms to properly manage applications for new/additional licenses against current ridership numbers/needs.”

This is actually in reference to series of five pieces of legislation that were passed in 2018. According to the New York City Office of the Mayo, on August 14th, 2018, Mayor Bill de Blasio signed the following pieces:

144-B: Requiring the TLC to stop issuing for-hire vehicle licenses for 12 months, to study congestion and various aspects of the industry, and after the study, allows the TLC to establish vehicle utilization standards and regulate the number of for-hire vehicle licenses;

634-B: Waiving licensing fees for accessible taxi-cabs and for-hire vehicles;

838-C: Pertaining to the licensing and regulation of high-volume for-hire vehicle services;

890-B: Directs the TLC to establish rules to provide minimum payments to high-volume for-hire vehicle drivers;

958-A: Reducing penalties for unauthorized street hails.

Really, 144-B, 634-B, 838-C, and 890-B are the four pieces that are relevant to this story. In 2018, 144-B halted the licensing of any additional “For-Hire” vehicles, meaning taxis or ride-hailing vehicles. Simply put, there was an incredible number of vehicles on the streets of New York, and congestion was becoming a real issue there. The “cap” limit on the number of vehicles was enforced in 2018 and was set to last one year. Mr. Fromberg informed me that this legislation has been extended and renewed several times and is still effective to this day. Therefore, the City still will not license any additional vehicles. When one fails or loses its license, a new vehicle takes its place.

There are several other reasons for this, including fair wages for drivers and affordability for taxi companies. But, unfortunately, drivers were suffering and still are due to the COVID-19 pandemic. While many of the economic negativities are finally beginning to subside, 2020 was an ugly year for the NYC taxi sector. Many drivers weren’t making enough money to afford loan payments on medallions. Unfortunately, some of these drivers took their own lives, and it is an absolute tragedy that this occurred.

With that being said, taxi drivers are hard-working, and they deserve to make enough money to feed their families. In the 2018 passing of these legislative pieces, De Blasio said, “We’re putting hardworking New Yorkers ahead of corporations. We are taking immediate action for the benefit of more than 100,000 hard-working New Yorkers who deserve a fair wage and halting the flood of new cars, grinding our streets to a halt.” The changes increased take-home pay for drivers by approximately 20 percent on average — more than $6,000 per year.

With all of that being said, New York City is operating with a substantial number of taxis, and the TLC has granted nearly 100,000 vehicle licenses. Before any more vehicles can obtain one of these licenses, some of the current vehicles must lose their licenses through expiration or vehicle removal in a company’s fleet. When 50 licenses open up, Revel will have the ability to obtain them, giving the company full rights to operate as a ride-sharing service, just as it aims to do.

To Mr. Fromberg’s knowledge, there would be no cost for Revel to go through the normal administrative procedure to obtain the licenses.

Revel’s Response: EV Taxis are a necessity to NYC

Revel CEO Frank Reig is under the impression that the TLC is operating under “shortsighted bureaucracy and entrenched interests,” according to a Tweet from Wednesday night.

After the Tuesday hearing, Reig said:

“At today’s hearing, the Taxi and Limousine Commission offered no evidence or analysis to support ending the EV exemption. The Commissioners sat through almost 3 hours of testimony on all sides yet asked zero questions and spent zero time deliberating before making a policy decision with profound consequences. The TLC never intended to consider what drivers and New Yorkers had to say, and only cared about jamming through this vote on Primary Day with as little scrutiny as possible. This decision doesn’t change the fact that New York City needs an alternative to the predatory leasing system that exploits drivers and pollutes our environment, and Revel is exploring ways to accomplish that.” 

Revel told Teslarati earlier today that it is aware that the TLC is not recommending the purchase of 50 gas-powered cars. The company is also aware that the TLC has capped the number of licenses it would issue. In order to encourage the adoption of electric cars, Revel spokespeople said that additional licenses would be given to wheelchair-accessible vehicles and EVs. A few hundred EVs have been added to the NYC Taxi fleet in the past two years, but these cars only account for .5% of the total number of For-Hire vehicles on NYC’s streets.

Tesla Model 3 wins hearts as famed NYC Taxi, picks up where Nissan Leaf couldn’t

This rule is brought up every six months and was last addressed and subsequently renewed in February. That means that it was due for review in August. However, the TLC brought the issue to light early and revoked the rule. The TLC says that if Reval wants to operate a rideshare service with its fleet of 50 Model Ys, they will have to obtain the licenses from displaced and no-longer-active taxis in the city.

Revel states that it would take two to three additional vehicles off of the street because the company will hire TLC-licensed drivers, who will no longer lease gas-powered vehicles. In addition, revel owns the vehicles, and different drivers will use the same car through different shifts, which could become a long-term advantage for the TLC as fewer cars will be on the street.

This would also line up with the Legislature items 634-B and 890-B, which would alleviate short-term leases and provide drivers with guaranteed wages, benefits, and vacation time.

The Bottom Line

The issue is this: Congestion is a real issue in the city. And while EVs only making up .5% of the total taxi fleet in the Big Apple, there is evidently no room for more vehicles, of any kind, in the City. Over time, the concentration of EV Taxis in the City that Never Sleeps will surely rise, but the existing vehicles need to be removed from the licensing pool before Revel can unleash its 50 all-electric Model Y taxis.

To summarize it easily, Fromberg said: “The TLC is fully committed to a 100% electrified future, just not at the cost of additional congestion.”

A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.

I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!

-Joey

On behalf of the entire Teslarati team, we’re working hard behind the scenes on bringing you more personalized members benefits, and can’t thank you enough for your continued support!

The post A Giant Game of Telephone: The Revel Tesla Model Y Taxi Situation Explained appeared first on TESLARATI.

Tesla has tapped a new type of automotive glass from supplier AGP for the Plaid Model S, invoking the thought that everything, even the finest details of the vehicle, was considered a possible improvement for the company’s rebirth of the all-electric, flagship sedan.

Many months ago, Teslarati stumbled across a list of Tesla’s suppliers through international connections. These suppliers were shipping massive volumes of whatever product they were giving to Tesla on cargo ships, and we noticed that there was a company called AGP that was shipping windshields and other automotive glasses to the company’s Fremont Factory.

It turns out that AGP has been providing Tesla with automotive glass for several years. Back in 2016, AGP provided glass for the Model X’s panoramic roof and windshields. However, Tesla utilized AGC Automotive’s windshields for its cars, according to Investopedia.

AGP is a Peru-based company that specializes in all types of automotive glass, but what they’ve done for Tesla is especially interesting. The company has been in business for 50 years, but just like everything else, it changes, and the automotive industry is no different. As electric vehicles have become more mainstream, technologies surrounding the development of these new, sustainable automobiles are popping up left and right. AGP’s eGlass for electric and autonomous vehicles is no different.

Now, AGP says on its website that it collaborates “closely with the companies that are leading the new wave of the electric and autonomous vehicles of tomorrow.” When I first stumbled across AGP many months ago on the cargo ship list for Tesla, there was no indication that there was an official partnership, so I looked into it a tad further. I reached out to AGP and received a response that thanked me for my inquiry but refused to confirm or deny whether it was in any sort of professional relationship with Tesla. Ironically, AGP gave the answer we needed, because responding to me was all I needed to know.

Many may ask, “What’s the significance of what glass Tesla is using on its cars?” There are plenty of automotive glass suppliers out there that are worth their weight in gold, providing high-quality windshields and windows for vehicles on the road. Of course, consumers are going to want something that is relatively high quality, because nothing is worse than driving behind a tractor-trailer on the Interstate, just to have a chip or small crack on your windshield from something as tiny as a pebble. While strength is undoubtedly a need for all windshields, EVs require a slightly different bit of development.

One of the biggest focuses for EVs is their drag coefficient. Why is it so important? Because aerodynamics are crucial to the performance, range, and effectiveness of electric vehicles. As high-quality, long-range batteries are hard to come by in the EV sector, manufacturers look for every advantage they can get to achieve robust range ratings. While Tesla is the leader in EV range figures, the company is still looking for ways to get all of its vehicles to or near the 400-mile threshold.

Aerodynamics are a great way to do that. And Tesla undoubtedly worked extremely hard to achieve the best-in-class drag coefficient of .208, beating out the Lucid Air’s impressive .21 coefficient.

We knew aerodynamics was going to be a big part of the Plaid Model S when it was spotted at the Nürburgring two years ago. The vehicle was sporting a large spoiler, a huge rear diffuser, and the new eGlass from AGP is just another addition to Tesla’s attempts to make the Plaid Model S the most aerodynamic vehicle in its lineup.

A blue Tesla Model S Plaid unit with new aeros attacks the Nurburgring. (Photo: Stefan Baldauf/Auto Motor Uund Sport)

We finally confirmed that AGP was providing the highly aerodynamic and EV-specific automotive glass to the Model S Plaid thanks to Tesla Raj, who took a picture of the manufacturer’s sticker on the window of the all-electric sedan at Tesla’s Delivery Event on June 10th. This all confirmed Teslarati’s discovery of AGP in its supplier list several months ago and also confirmed that the two companies had a partnership, despite AGP’s unwillingness to provide a comment (which we understood why!)

New window manufacturer? pic.twitter.com/m4gjhkl7kR

— Tesla Raj (@tesla_raj) June 11, 2021

It makes me think about what Elon Musk may have needed to work on for the final week of Plaid development. When he had announced that the event was going to be delayed a week due to “tweaks,” I wondered whether it was software or hardware. While it was likely a software fix that needed to be addressed, it could have been related to the drag coefficient, which Tesla proudly displayed at the Plaid Event on the 10th. Nevertheless, the vehicle has finally been released to pre-orderers, and the fastest production car that has ever run the 1/4-mile drag is here, and it’s taking down anything in its path.

A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.

I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!

-Joey

The post Tesla taps new glass supplier for Plaid Model S appeared first on TESLARATI.

Tesla’s strong financial spreadsheet that has culminated in seven consecutive quarters of profitability has launched the electric car company into a more stable fiscal situation. For years, especially in my early days at Teslarati, I can remember the big narrative being Tesla’s Quarter-over-Quarter growth, but the fact that profitability wasn’t achieved very often made the company one of the more risky investments at the time.

Since then, Tesla has managed to work out a profitable quarter seven times in a row. Unbelievably, the company that has only been mass-producing vehicles since Summer 2017 is already a shoo-in for money-making quarters, at least that’s what it seems like. There never seems to be a glimmer of doubt when it comes to Tesla reporting strong financials. But, it became clear earlier this week that Tesla, despite having such strong financials quarter after quarter, isn’t willing to spend money on things that owners and customers don’t use. The company’s phase-out of the passenger lumbar support feature in the Model 3 and Model Y is a prime example of the way Tesla is simplifying its vehicles to improve profitability and margins, making their cars even more of a money-making machine than they were previously.

On May 31st, a tweet from @Ryanth3nerd showed his discontent for Tesla’s removal of the lumbar support option on the passenger’s seat. It was noticed by a Model Y owner on Reddit initially that the lumbar support option was removed from the side of the seat, only leaving the reclining option and seat adjustment levers for passenger adjustment.

“I really don’t like the direction @tesla is going raising prices of vehicles but removing features like lumbar for the Model Y. On top of rumors of FSD increase to $14k without any real added features to FSD unless you’re a beta tester,” the tweet said.

It is true that Model 3 and Model Y prices alike have increased in the past several months. This is likely due to the semiconductor or microcontroller shortage that has plagued much of the automotive industry for the past few quarters. Additionally, Musk said raw material costs are also affecting Tesla’s prices.

According to Musk, Tesla had a good reason for phasing out the lumbar support module, and it had to do with data usage logs that showed the lumbar support wasn’t utilized by passengers very often. In fact, it was used so infrequently that Tesla decided to scrap the module altogether in the 3 and Y.

“Moving lumbar was removed only in front passenger seat of 3/Y (obv not there in rear seats). Logs showed almost no usage. Not worth cost/mass for everyone when almost never used. Prices increasing due to major supply chain price pressure industry-wide. Raw materials especially.”

Moving lumbar was removed only in front passenger seat of 3/Y (obv not there in rear seats). Logs showed almost no usage. Not worth cost/mass for everyone when almost never used.

Prices increasing due to major supply chain price pressure industry-wide. Raw materials especially.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 31, 2021

Now, while this is a good point for Tesla to use as justification for their seat modification decisions, there are a few things that sort of confused me about the decision. First off, once a seat is adjusted, I think very few people want to change it. I know that when I get into a friend’s car, I rarely adjust the seat because that is probably the way their significant other prefers the seat to be set. As a driver in my own car, I know that I have only adjusted my seat on two or three occasions since I got it. Very rarely does it move, because the adjustments I made when I bought it were how I felt it was most comfortable, so I didn’t move it.

I think there could have been some confusion about whether the lumbar support is actually used, or whether it is a “set and forget” type of reasoning. I think many people find the way they like their seat, and it rarely changes over the course of the ownership experience.

While I doubt too many people will not buy a Tesla because they can’t adjust lumbar support, I think that there are some people who will look at it as a real disadvantage because there are plenty of people who need to utilize it for comfortability, especially if they have back problems. Nevertheless, it could be a temporary removal if enough people raise concerns to Musk via Twitter.

The biggest lesson here seems to be that Tesla’s use of data and analytics gives the company an extreme advantage when it comes to saving money on even the most trivial of parts. While Tesla will save some money from its recent decision to not equip Model 3 and Model Y cars with radar, the lumbar support removal also summarizes the company’s mission to take out what is not needed. Teslas are already so minimalistic as it is, and many people enjoy the lack of knobs and buttons on the interior. However, this is one knob that many owners may not be happy not having, but it remains to be seen if it saves Tesla’s enough money to justify keeping the feature left out from its two mass-market vehicles. -JK-

A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.

I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!

-Joey

The post Despite Tesla’s strong financials, every penny still counts appeared first on TESLARATI.

Tesla’s recent decision to scrap Radar in favor of a Camera-based approach for Autopilot and Full Self-Driving aligned with the company’s plans and statements over the past few Earnings Calls. For CEO Elon Musk, the goal has been to get away from radar and depend on camera systems for Tesla’s self-driving plan, but some owners are not convinced of the decision. Over the past few days, I have received several emails and Tweets about the decision, with some owners still not completely confident in the vision-based approach Tesla will take.

During the Q1 2021 Earnings Call just a few months back, Elon Musk made it clear Tesla would be switching to a Camera-based system for AP and FSD. Comparing the cameras to human eyes, Musk’s explanation made a lot of sense.

Musk said:

“When your vision works, it works better than the best human because it’s like having eight cameras, it’s like having eyes in the back of your head, beside your head, and has three eyes of different focal distances looking forward. This is — and processing it at a speed that is superhuman. There’s no question in my mind that with a pure vision solution, we can make a car that is dramatically safer than the average person.”

Tesla Model 3, Model Y builds in May 2021 will no longer equip radar

Now, the thing is, eyes, while great for seeing things that are in the clear, are highly effective, and it makes a lot of sense to try and use this sort of approach for self-driving because it is how humans have driven for years. But when humans are confronted with low visibility and severe weather on the road, the confidence goes down, and many drivers adjust by traveling at lower speeds. Some even pull over and wait for the weather to subside, a move that is rare for many but some simply do not like driving in bad weather.

This is where radar comes in handy because it can identify and locate objects and how far they are away from the vehicle in the event of low visibility on the road, which is something that the human eyes, or cameras, simply cannot do.

An email from an Australian reader seemed to narrow in this point even further. A man named Peter emailed me and stated that his Model 3 recently identified a truck that was ahead of him but concealed in an opaque, white mist several car links ahead of his vehicle. “I assumed that visualization was created as a result of radar. In those conditions, the message multiple cameras blocked or obstructed appeared and the autopilot screamed and handed over,” Peter said.

Unless I’m in fog on I-5 and can’t see the massive collision ahead…. I’d like to understand the workaround to this. pic.twitter.com/sQXB63yWlv

— Rome Strach (@romn8tr) May 28, 2021

He then added, “On multiple other occasions I’ve noted on the visualization screen an unsighted vehicle obstructed by an SUV ahead of me.”

Without radar, the recognition of these vehicles would not be possible, so it brings some concerns to drivers who have utilized the radar system in vehicles to gain confidence in their surroundings.

Now, in a somewhat comical response to concerns, Musk posted a Reddit response from u/YukonBurger, which stated that they worked with radar a lot and were “very, very happy” with Tesla’s decision. It basically explained that trying to jive radar and cameras together is extremely difficult, and there are instances where using your eyes is just a better option because you can see how far you are away from things. Interestingly, the post does admit that “radar is really only good for reduced visibility situations where lane-keeping will probably also be degraded enough to not be worth it.” It concluded by stating that vision is still quick enough to avoid accidents or vehicles in front of the car in a short period of time, the real issue comes from cars behind you.

Not sure who wrote this, but it’s accurate pic.twitter.com/gRvWxOJZ56

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 26, 2021

It seems that the real key to vision being a better approach comes down to the fact that, in clear conditions, it won’t have an issue identifying and removing itself from danger. Even in rainy conditions, where visibility isn’t necessarily bad, the vision approach is more advantageous than using radar.

The goal, ultimately, is to make the cars act as a human would, and humans don’t have radar. Instead, they compensate for reduced visibility with less dangerous driving. Slower speeds, more cautious navigation, and less frequent lane changes. Autopilot and FSD are already pretty timid and “shy” to begin with, it’s not like they’re out there driving like pissed-off teenagers.

I think that, while this move is somewhat worrisome for some drivers, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. This has been a part of the plan for some time, and I think that now it is becoming a reality, some are starting to put the pieces together that there won’t be any radar so visibility limitations could end up being problematic. I wouldn’t worry, because I believe the cars will adjust just as humans do, they will simply be more cautious and more courteous on the roads in these settings.

A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.

I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!

The post Tesla owners convey worries over radar loss for inclement weather appeared first on TESLARATI.

Before I wrote about electric cars for a living and considered myself an “EV enthusiast,” I knew that other electric cars existed. There’s a BMW i3 that I see on a daily basis on my daily commute to the gym, there’s a Chevy Bolt owner in my neighborhood, and there were a handful of Teslas around. Now, Teslas dominate my area, despite the fact that the company has never spent any money on advertising its products. I know I’ve seen Chevy Bolt and BMW i3 commercials on several occasions, but nobody talks about them.

From Elon Musk’s Twitter feed to rapper Yung Gravy’s hit single “Whip a Tesla,” there are plenty of ways Tesla has received the spotlight of the public eye through the years. Here are a few of the ones that I feel are the best example of how powerful Tesla’s PR machine is, even though it uses that money to continue developing its products.

1. The Tesla Model X “Dance”

While this one is extremely old and worn-out, it was usually the first thing I showed people who didn’t know what a Tesla is. It’s a flashy, flamboyant, fun Easter Egg that has the Model X dancing to the Trans Siberian Orchestra, and it’s an extremely annoying feature, according to several long-time Tesla owners who I keep in touch with. Despite its overuse by Tesla’s newcomers, it’s still a feature that spread throughout the internet like wildfire. It was a combination of inventiveness and Elon Musk’s bold sense of humor, and it undoubtedly gets the attention of many people who have no clue what is so special about Tesla vehicles.

Yeah, it might be old and outdated to some, but there’s no doubt it got the word out to some new Tesla followers. Rarely used in the wild anymore, it was recently used in China to attract college grads to consider working for the company.

This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.

2. Elon Musk’s Twitter Feed

From Tesla stock synopses to product release details, to updates to Tesla’s lineup, Elon Musk’s Twitter feed is a legendary PR tool for the automaker. It’s free to create a Twitter, and Elon Musk uses it for literally any reason he can. His over 55 million Twitter followers feast at nearly every Tweet he writes, and the main difference for me is the responses he receives.

Musk is a comical man, someone who holds a great sense of humor and a light-heartedness that only a few people in his stressful position would be able to display. While most professional athletes attract responses from fans and foes who are interested in the sport they play, Musk attracts attention from nearly everyone from every walk of life. While you can usually expect some to share their newest memes, looking for approval from the unequivocal Lord of Memes, most commonly there are questions from Tesla owners and fans who are interested in when the next big development will be released.

Musk gains around 1 million new followers every week, according to his profile on Social Blade, A million extra sets of eyes feast upon his Tweets every night, whether they deal with automotive or his other projects, or his recent dive into Cryptocurrency, they attract massive attention from everyone in every corner of the World.

3. The Cybertruck Broken Glass Episode

During the 2019 unveiling of the Tesla Cybertruck, a demonstration of the vehicle’s durability was underway. First, Tesla’s Cheif Designer Franz von Holzhausen slammed a sledgehammer into the driver’s side door of the all-electric pickup. With no dents, dings, or imperfections to be found, the next part of the demonstration would reveal the nearly impossible to break Cybertruck glass, and it would solidify Tesla’s nearly indestructible vehicle.

Except the glass broke.

And for weeks and weeks, and months even, video of the Cybertruck’s glass breaking plagued the internet. For most companies, it would have been an embarrassing episode of a PR nightmare that would need massive amounts of explaining. Instead, Tesla used it to expand the brand.

Yup. Sledgehammer impact on door cracked base of glass, which is why steel ball didn’t bounce off. Should have done steel ball on window, *then* sledgehammer the door. Next time …

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 25, 2019

Tesla created the Cybertruck glass shirt for its store, which simply had the dinged-up glass put on the front of a black t-shirt. Not shying away from the event, Tesla used the cards it was dealt, and it was really incredible how something that would derail a product unveiling for something that claimed to be so strong and robust was used to continue the public’s awareness of the Cybertruck.

Only Tesla.

There’s three of my favorite examples of Tesla’s PR brilliance. Of course, there are plenty more, including one that occurred last weekend with UFC Lightweight Beneil Dariush.

Be sure to let me know what your favorite examples of Tesla’s PR are!

I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!

The post Tesla’s Top 3 (accidental) PR campaigns that defy advertising logic appeared first on TESLARATI.