
A Grain of Salt - dwaxe
https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/grain-of-salt
======
franciscop
Some of Edward Niedermayer recently written article titles in bloomberg [1]:

\- Worker Discontent Makes Tesla a Union Target

\- Tesla Needs More Than Elon Musk

\- Tesla Will Get Trampled by the Mass Market

\- Tesla's Radical Update Is Just More of the Same

\- Tesla Has to Start Acting Like a Car Company

\- Tesla Stock Shifts Into 'Insane Mode' [negative]

\- The Empire Strikes Back at Tesla

\- Why Tesla Has a Target on Its Back

\- ...

And the original cited in teslamotors.com:

[http://dailykanban.com/2016/06/tesla-suspension-breakage-
not...](http://dailykanban.com/2016/06/tesla-suspension-breakage-not-crime-
coverup/)

It seems that yes, we should take a grain of salt and a lot more. There's
definitely something fishy going on here.

[1]
[http://www.bloomberg.com/view/contributors/ARwBOWvU7QI/edwar...](http://www.bloomberg.com/view/contributors/ARwBOWvU7QI/edward-
niedermeyer)

~~~
bedhead
Thank you for posting. Reminds me of the NYT article that bashed Amazon and
Bezos a while back. Didn't take much digging to conclude the
author/organization has a preconceived bias against the subject.

~~~
fluxquanta
>Didn't take much digging to conclude the author/organization has a
preconceived bias against the subject.

Doesn't every journalist when reporting on any newsworthy item? Everybody has
their biases, and they'll naturally come out in reporting. There is no "fair
and balanced", it's just a matter of what extent these biases are hidden in
the work.

I think the onus is on us, the consumers of this media, to take every piece as
only part of the whole truth, and make up our own minds about the subject.

~~~
jontas
You are surely correct, however, I think there is a difference between a
reporter recognizing their own biases (to the extent they are able) and
striving to write objective, fair pieces that are properly sourced, fact
checked, and give both sides a fair hearing.

It is impossible to completely escape one's own unconscious biases but this
particular example is a blog post written by someone in an obvious attempt to
put forward a personal (or business) agenda.

~~~
true_religion
If you are a reporter who has identified a bad company, how are you supposed
to investigate them publicly without writing articles about how 'bad' they
are?

Writing a string or articles about the same topic, shouldn't instantly mean
you get extra scrutiny. That scrutiny should be on everyone, since sometimes
the most biased are those who care the least to write and have done the least
groundwork.

------
djaychela
OK, not as tech as many on here, but I've spent the last 25 years as an
amateur mechanic, and spent 10 preparing and driving my own rally car, right
up to World Rally Championship level, as well as having owned more cars than
most people have had hot dinners, and fixed even more than that (sadly!)

The balljoint in question has failed because the rubber boot on it has failed,
allowing water/dirt in, and it's rusted out from there. This is nothing
specific to Tesla, it can happen on any car - I've seen it on quite a few FWD
cars, but never to this degree (total failure) - they will go on for a LONG
time with play in them, and take a LOT of abuse before failing.

To have failed in this manner, it would have needed to go un-noticed for some
considerable time - I've had ones which have had a year of abuse in extreme
circumstances and still been nowhere near as bad as this, so I think you have
to ask about the servicing that had been done on this car - whether or not it
had been inspected. In addition, this would have had significant play in it
for some time, leading to noise which would be noticeable to most drivers when
on the road, and easily noticed during any kind of worthwhile inspection (such
as the MOT in the UK) - not sure if the state in question has a mandatory
inspection?

Yes, being on a dirt road could have exacerbated the problem, but it's not
something that a "normal" car can't take - you'd be amazed the amount of
physical abuse a mechanically-standard car can take on rough gravel roads at
speed.

Components such as this are usually sourced from sub-contractors, who produce
them by the thousands/millions without issue, does anyone know if Tesla makes
these themselves? Seems unlikely to me.

As has been said elsewhere here, if this had happened on a Ford Focus, no-one
would give a monkey's, it's only because it's a Tesla and this guy has an axe
to grind.

~~~
Unklejoe
[In addition, this would have had significant play in it for some time,
leading to noise which would be noticeable to most drivers when on the road,
and easily noticed during any kind of worthwhile inspection (such as the MOT
in the UK) - not sure if the state in question has a mandatory inspection?]

True. I've had to replace a few lower control arms on various cars due to
loose ball joints. In all of the cases, the car made terrible sounds during
normal driving long before the ball joint was actually loose enough to pop
out.

It was always very evident that something in the wheel was loose.

Of course, anything can happen...

[Components such as this are usually sourced from sub-contractors, who produce
them by the thousands/millions without issue, does anyone know if Tesla makes
these themselves? Seems unlikely to me.]

I agree. I doubt that Tesla is making their own ball joints. It seems like to
much NRE considering there are tons of off-the-shelf options available.

------
hbhakhra
"Recently, a Model S was in a very high speed accident in Germany that caused
it to fly 82 feet through the air, an event that would likely be fatal in
vehicles not designed to the level of safety of a Tesla. All five occupants
were able to exit the vehicle under their own power and had no life-
threatening injuries."

That is a pretty impressive feat for a car. Also, the voluntary recalls are an
interesting case because to me they did something positive in doing a recall
before any injury happened. When the news of the recall broke though, people
were complaining about the recalls. Part of the problem is that any
announcement by Tesla makes the news round while a similar recall by Toyota or
anther company, that would affect many more people, wouldn't get a tenth of
the attention.

~~~
PinguTS
Sorry, but this part of the blog article is completely PR BS.

This car was speeding but not "very high speed". The car crashed into a field.
This is flat. Every other comparable car like Mercedes E class, Audi A6, Volvo
S60, … would have provided the same level of safety.

Here the original reporting with images:
[http://www.tz.de/muenchen/region/schwerer-unfall-
icking-18-j...](http://www.tz.de/muenchen/region/schwerer-unfall-
icking-18-jaehrige-rast-tesla-acker-6373238.html)

~~~
Mchl
What exactly is the difference between 'speeding' and 'very high speed'?

~~~
PinguTS
Speeding = you are to fast according to the allowed speed

High speed = anything above 130 km/h (about 80 mph; because that is the
recommend speed on an Autobahn)

Very high speed = anything above 250 km/h (about 155 mph; because that is
where normally the limiter kicks in)

Just, yesterday morning I drove my self at about 200 km/h (124 mph) because I
was in hurry, because I had some unexpected road-construction work before.

This was an 18 year old girl, who just had her driving license (18 is the
minimum legal age for driving here in Germany; 17 with governed driving by an
adult)

Here an comparable accident who lifted for 40m (131ft) and crashed in a field
with some rollover and it does not look that different from that Tesla
accident: [http://www.swp.de/heidenheim/lokales/polizeibericht/Auto-
lan...](http://www.swp.de/heidenheim/lokales/polizeibericht/Auto-landet-nach-
Ueberholvorgang-im-Acker;art1180840,3824196)

BTW: Are there any international news on how the safety cell of this BMW
protected this 51 year old guy?

~~~
clamprecht
How would you classify Formula 1 cars' speeds? (320 km/h or 200 mph)

~~~
MikeTLive
plaid?

------
biokoda
Crazy how Tesla as an entire company is scrutinized for car incidents that no
one would even remotely care about if it was any other car manufacturer. If
this guy had a range rover, or even some other electric car this would be a
nonstory.

~~~
legulere
It's the same as with Apple. If you put out so much marketing about how your
products are perfect every little flaw will be hyped just as much as you hype
the positive traits.

~~~
simonh
Apple's actual marketing budget is famously modest compared to their
competitors. I believe their spending has increased in the last couple of
years though.

[http://www.cultofmac.com/252918/apples-advertising-budget-
is...](http://www.cultofmac.com/252918/apples-advertising-budget-is-tiny-
compared-to-microsoft-samsungs/)

~~~
georgespencer
Their marketing budget is $2bn. About 0.85% of revenue.

~~~
simonh
And people have been saying exactly the same things about Apple back when
their marketing budget was a tenth of that. The amount of marketing Apple puts
out just isn't relevant to this issue.

------
voiper1
Hmm. [http://cdn.dailykanban.com/wp-
content/uploads/2016/06/TeslaG...](http://cdn.dailykanban.com/wp-
content/uploads/2016/06/TeslaGoodwill.jpg) (via
[https://yro.slashdot.org/story/16/06/09/2122208/tesla-
suspen...](https://yro.slashdot.org/story/16/06/09/2122208/tesla-suspension-
breakage-its-not-the-crime-its-the-coverup))

On it's surface, that definitely looks like a full NDA: "don't speak of this"
(IANAL)

However, I can see Tesla's interpretation/spin: "It just means: we aren't
admitting liability, don't sue us for this, and don't say we paid for part of
the repairs" \-- which doesn't include "don't report a safety issue". Still,
it seems rather strongly worded for that...

~~~
emn13
That agreement is completely unreasonable.

"In accepting the Goodwill, you hereby release and discharge Tesla and related
persons or entities from any and all claims or damages arising out of or in
any way connected with any claims or incidents leading or related to our
provision of the Goodwill." (etc, with similar language concerning talking
about incidents.)

in other words: we'll fix your car for you, but only if you keep quiet about a
broadly and unclearly defined set of events, oh, and only if you agree not to
hold us accountable for any wrongdoing on our part that's in any way "related
or leading to" this agreement.

That's absurd, and shameful, especially the excessively broad scope of the
incidents and the fact that even actual wrongdoing by Tesla is protected.

~~~
tigershark
In other words: you should read more carefully whatever you quote given that
the meaning is pretty clear. There is nothing in your quote about keeping
quiet and, most importantly, if you don't want to accept the _free_ repair you
can still _pay_. It's really incredible how people pretend to have everything
for free, and even when they can actually have it for free they manage to find
a reason to complain. I have never __ever __seen any other car manufacturer
paying for the suspensions repairs on a out-of-warranty 100k car.

~~~
trhway
> have never ever seen any other car manufacturer paying for the suspensions
> repairs on a out-of-warranty 100k car.

It happens a lot. You could have just Googled. Manufacturer would pay for the
repair, warranty or no warranty, if there was a defect. For example almost all
of those 690000 cars were out-of-warranty at the time of the recall:

[http://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/toyota-
recalls-690-000...](http://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/toyota-
recalls-690-000-vehicles-suspension-glitch-n214121)

Tesla using NDA to prevent such situation is so childish. I hope Musk would
fire that a-hole who came up with the idea (i really hope it wasn't Musk
itself).

Simple Google search brings this by the way, so there are definitely issues:

[https://forums.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/model-s-pulls-
le...](https://forums.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/model-s-pulls-left-please-
read)

What important here is that it is not the issues itself that are main risk to
the company - after all it is a young car company - it is how the company
reacts to them, and such rotten actions like NDA is a really bad style which
would cost a lot in the long run. `

~~~
tigershark
Your example is completely unrelated. This was not a recognised defect. If you
really think that every car manufacturer does it then it should be trivial for
you to find some source where a single car was repaired for free after 100k km
for something that was not a recognised defect. You have plenty of time to
prove your thesis.

~~~
nl
_repaired for free after 100k km for something that was not a recognised
defect_

Not entirely sure what your definition of "not a recognised defect" is if the
Tesla fixes aren't one. Nevertheless, many manufactures do similar things:

 _Chrysler minivan owners may notice that the front wheel bearings on models
from 2008 to 2010 are subject to premature wear, so dealers will replace them
for free during a vehicle’s first five years or 90,000 miles._

 _Honda, however, and its upscale Acura division stand out with a half-dozen
or more. Because CR’s survey data show that Honda and Acura vehicles, in
general, are among the most reliable on the road, the company’s high number of
service campaigns suggests it’s been unusually generous to customers_

[http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/11/get-
your...](http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/11/get-your-car-
fixed-for-almost-free/index.htm)

------
NeutronBoy
> With respect to the car that is discussed in the blog post that led to
> yesterday’s news (more on the blog post below), the suspension ball joint
> experienced very abnormal rust. We haven’t seen this on any other car,
> suggesting a very unusual use case. The car had over 70,000 miles on it and
> its owner lives down such a long dirt road that it required two tow trucks
> to retrieve the car. (One to get the car to the highway and one to get it
> from the highway to the service center.) When we got the car, it was caked
> in dirt.

I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt in this post, but a dirty
car has nothing to do with a rusty ball joint. Dirt doesn't cause rust. It
means, as they note, the owner lives on a dirt road. The two tow-trucks line
is such a red-herring - nothing to do with the issue at hand.

~~~
throwaway2048
quite right, i live in a rural area and drive extensively on dirt roads every
day and have for decades across maybe a dozen+ vehicles, i have never had a
ball joint failure, nor have i heard of one.

~~~
saulrh
I bet that you chose all of your dozen-plus vehicles knowing that you'd be
driving extensively on dirt roads every day for the life of the car. I also
bet that if you tried it with a $70k luxury sedan it'd have a _major_
mechanical fault within a year traceable directly to it not being an off-road
vehicle.

~~~
throwaway2048
dirt road is not "off road", ive owned minvans, and compact cars that have had
no issues with suspension.

~~~
yetihehe
And I've seen broken suspension in 4x4 car driven for 3 years on 2km of dirt
road, then 20km normal paved roads. One sample is not enough.

------
schneidmaster
Since I've seen this mentioned a few times in the comments, it's worth noting:
Tesla did not expose the identity of the customer who had the suspension
problem. Edward Niedermayer is a blogger who uncovered a post on a car
forum[1] and then made hay out of it[2] causing some national media to report
about it. Tesla was merely commenting that this blogger has a pretty clear
anti-Tesla bias in his other writing. If anyone's responsible for exposing the
customer to scrutiny, it's Niedermayer (who linked to the semi-anonymous forum
post and turned it into a media story).

1: [https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/suspension-
problem-o...](https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/suspension-problem-on-
model-s.69204/)

2: [http://dailykanban.com/2016/06/tesla-suspension-breakage-
not...](http://dailykanban.com/2016/06/tesla-suspension-breakage-not-crime-
coverup/)

------
OliverJones
I have a first-generation Honda Insight. It's sixteen years old and still
going. At about 110K miles, the power pack failed, someplace in the Central
Valley of California.

Honda (I guess some zone office) had it towed 50 miles to the nearest
dealership, which happened to be in Bakersfield. They then replaced the power
pack without charging me for it.

Now, I knew I was an early adopter. I knew this could happen. I was prepared
to pay for it. And Honda decided to treat me like an early adopter. (They sent
the old power pack back to Japan; I suppose they wanted to inspect it.)

It never occurred to me to slag them in the media, or try to get a class
action suit going, or some such foolishness. I was stuck in "the desert" for a
few hours. But it might have made a good story. The media love stories about
design defects in cars, and the big car companies' coverups play right into
those stories. If it bleeds it leads.

These EVs don't need oil changes. So the temptation may be to treat them like
Soviet tanks and never maintain them. That seems a bad idea. They still have
rubber seals on ball joints. They still have pads on the disc brakes. All that
stuff is expendable, and needs to be looked at.

Tesla is right to debunk this "big story." One guy who could have been using a
20-year-old jalopy pickup truck experienced a typical failure and turned it
into his fifteen minutes of fame.

~~~
knorker
> They still have rubber seals on ball joints.

Do they? I seem to remember Musk saying they motor brake (picking up the power
to charge the batteries) to brake.

Maybe secondary brakes.

~~~
michael_h
Those two things are unrelated. The ball joint lets you position the wheels
(ie steer).

I would be monumentally shocked if Tesla didn't put rubber seals on the ball
joints.

~~~
gervase
You can judge for yourself[1] whether the joints are sealed with rubber or
not; it appears to me that they are.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgdKZMlzQog](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgdKZMlzQog)

------
usaphp
Looking at all the blog posts that blogger Edward Niedermeyer wrote on his
blog [1] I can't find a single positive thing he ever said about Tesla, it
looks like he has some obligation to just write all the negativity he can come
up with.

[1] -
[http://dailykanban.com/author/bjorn/](http://dailykanban.com/author/bjorn/)

------
steve19
NY Times says..

"The nation’s top auto safety regulator, the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, said on Thursday that at least some Tesla customers who
experienced suspension failures with Model S luxury cars were asked to sign
confidentiality agreements about the issue."

[http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/10/business/tesla-model-s-
nht...](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/10/business/tesla-model-s-nhtsa-
suspension-failure.html)

~~~
Cyph0n
They were asked to sign agreements _if_ they wanted a free repair from Tesla.
If these customers didn't want to sign the agreement, they could have just
paid for the repairs, so I don't see the issue here.

The fact that they felt the need to tell NHTSA about it is proof that the
agreement is a smart move on Tesla's part.

~~~
Vik1ng
You are making it sound like that's just fine.

Most people would sign something like that over spending thousands of dollars
for a repair. Just imagine it is the battery and they choice is like "well,
you can pay $20000 yourself or sing this paper and we take care of it".

~~~
Cyph0n
Of course it's fine. They are doing you a favor, and in exchange would like
you to sign an agreement. Remember, we're talking about out-of-warranty
repairs here. But if you don't like the terms of the agreement, you have the
choice to fix it on your own dime.

Again, it's your problem if you can't afford to not take the offer. You should
be thankful that all you need to do is sign some kind of NDA.

What I find hilarious is that people sign the agreement to get the free
repairs, then go ahead and complain about the agreement anyways. Well next
time you need an expensive out-of-warranty repair, you're not getting a free
pass :P

~~~
lafar6502
What other kind of favor you can expect from a monopolist? You're not going to
have your car repaired anywhere else and they know it So you're getting a
'favor' only because you're doing even a greater favor to them

------
castratikron
That ball joint is in miserable condition. How had the owner not noticed any
problems? The ball joint would be visible to anyone who would have had to
replace the tires, which should have happened before 70K miles. Something
feels off about this story.

And about the $3k repair bill: You will see that with any luxury car. Low
number of cars means a smaller market for used parts, so what usually happens
is only the manufacturer sells used parts. When they're the only supplier,
they can charge whatever they want for the parts, and they often do. Maybe the
owner did know about the problem, but chose not to replace it because it was
too expensive.

It doesn't sound like Tesla is at fault at all, but I suppose they feel the
need to protect their brand.

------
ktRolster
_" the blogger who fabricated this issue, which then caused negative and
incorrect news to be written about Tesla by reputable institutions, is Edward
Niedermayer. This is the same gentle soul who previously wrote a blog titled
“Tesla Death Watch,” which starting on May 19, 2008 was counting the days
until Tesla’s death. It has now been 2,944 days."_

~~~
bionsuba
I, too read the article.

------
abpavel
Material science lifecycles are measured in decades. Just because you "haven't
seen it before" does not mean it can't happen. It means you're not testing
well enough, or that your data sample is not good enough. Noone is
clairvoyant, and excuses such as "dirt" and "70000 miles" don't make you
either. Why automatically attack the victim? Is it not remotely possible, that
the fault lies with Tesla?

~~~
OliverJones
Yes, the fault may lie with Tesla. They fixed it! I bet they also put the
failed part on a test bench to figure out what happened.

------
jacquesm
What strikes me about this whole saga is that if the dealership had simply
recognized that those joints should not have failed this early in the vehicles
life and fixed them it would have ended right there.

Also I think that to have a 'will not sue' clause in the agreement to fix
issues that are out of warranty is fine but the explicit consent not to talk
about it is the kind of thing that will make your lawyer happy in the short
term but that will damage your reputation in the longer one. Manufacturers
should _never_ try to control the speech of their consumers, even if it
benefits them in the short term. It will look like you're trying to cover
something up, even when you don't.

------
awestroke
70,000 miles is an incredible distance. I am impressed the car held together
that long.

I see nothing wrong with the agreement. If I fix your car for free, I will
make you agree to not thank me with a lawsuit. It's very simple, really. The
customer gets a free repair, Tesla does not have to deal with lawsuit-wielding
psychopaths.

~~~
seszett
> 70,000 miles is an incredible distance

Is it though? That's a third of my car's, and it has not had a suspension
issue yet.

Maybe it's different in the US, but as far as I know, at least French diesel
cars are usually _expected_ to go at least to 70 000 miles (100 000 km)
without a major issue. Gasoline engines are supposed to have a lower life
expectancy, but I don't know what's a reasonable expectation for those.

Now, it's still impressive that Tesla fixed this problem for free and that old
a car (but they're under more scrutiny than other car makers, so they don't
have much choice). But to me, considering 70 000 miles "an incredible
distance" means having quite low expectations.

What would be a non-incredible distance for you?

~~~
blaisio
No, most people in the US would expect a decent car to last at least 150,000
miles.

~~~
jsjohnst
Define "to last". Having one part needing to be replaced is not a total loss
of the car.

------
yellowpug
Big fan of Tesla and their achievement even thus far, but perplexed that they
didn't take the high ground, and decided to call out the individual by name in
a derogatory and spin-like manner whilst still hiding behind the anonymity of
authorship attributed to "The Tesla Team".

~~~
makomk
This is their standard M.O of late. Remember the misfeature where depending on
the Summon Mode settings, accidentally double-tapping rather than single-
tapping Park would cause the Model S to start driving forward a few seconds
after leaving and how Tesla blamed the driver after this caused their car to
crash into a truck, obfuscated how easy it was to activate, and made it sound
like they'd deliberately activated it.

------
pedrocr
This was perhaps not the best phrasing:

"A few things need to be cleared up about the supposed safety of Model S
suspensions:"

Maybe it's just me but it seems to imply that Model S suspensions aren't safe.
The whole post is written in a pretty aggressive tone as well. Not your run of
the mill PR piece that's for sure. If what Tesla states about this case and
about the blogger is true I can see why they would be angry about it though.

~~~
colinbartlett
I always find Tesla's responses like this astonishing because they are clearly
not written by a traditional PR team. In fact, they always read to me like
they are written by Mr. Musk himself. Like the stereotypical CEO gone wild who
writes from his heart and doesn't care what the guys in suits want him to say.

Which makes the byline "The Tesla Team" always so strange to me, as I never
quite believe they were written by a team.

~~~
schneidmaster
I'd actually suspect it's a content team that ghostwrites for Elon. So they're
probably intending to use his tone while also keeping relatively minor things
like drafting PR off his plate.

------
miander
So are the documents customers were allegedly asked to sign real, or
fabricated? This post calls Mr. Niedermayer everything short of a liar, and
yet they didn't answer the obvious question. I am still withholding judgement.

~~~
shawn-butler
I agree, if it is true they executed even a soft-NDA in exchange for repairs
(ala hush money), regulators rightly need to start looking alot closer at
Tesla.

Nothing illegal about it but it would definitely be a symptom. Fanboys will be
fanboys, and haters will be haters but auto safety is not something to take
lightly.

We have had auto manufacturers and parts suppliers outright lie to regulators
and the public about safety issues. It seems to be a recent pattern in the
industry.

------
gnoway
Looking at Mr. Niedermeyer's linkedin profile[0] and what he's doing/where
he's worked was kind of enlightening as to his purpose and motivations.

It probably works for him, though. I think 99+% of people, myself included, do
not often look at who is writing what they read online. And I'd guess a
majority percentage don't think about the fact that they are reading opinion
vs. news.

[0] [https://www.linkedin.com/in/edward-
niedermeyer-35942261](https://www.linkedin.com/in/edward-niedermeyer-35942261)

~~~
blatant
Please explain how it was enlightening. I do not have a LinkedIn account, so I
might not be able to see his while profile, but it looks fine to me.

~~~
gnoway
I was going on the public profile as well.

The profile notes that Mr. Niedermeyer works in the PR and Communications
industry, and the bio blurb says he has written Op/Ed for several major
publications. His listed work history is at TTAC, followed by Argot Industries
and, mostly concurrently with Argot, an unnamed startup. He founded Argot,
which is an automotive industry research/analysis/communication/consulting
firm serving private clients. His startup promises to redefine strategic
communications.

I came away from this thinking Mr. Niedermeyer's work is more about
influencing readers than informing them; that he is more PR flack than
journalist.

It's not always clear what a blog or blog writer is all about. A lot of sites
I read are literally subject enthusiasts recounting personal experience,
testing something and reporting on the result, etc. You can often just take
that information at face value: this is what this does, this is how this
works, I did this and/or this happened, etc. Based just on work history, I
don't think Mr. Niedermeyer falls into this category at all, which is what I
meant by enlightening.

~~~
blatant
Thanks, I obviously didn't go deep enough into it. Yes, he is definitely not
trustworthy.

------
sathishvj
[http://www.bloomberg.com/view/contributors/ARwBOWvU7QI/edwar...](http://www.bloomberg.com/view/contributors/ARwBOWvU7QI/edward-
niedermeyer)

A list of articles by said Edward Niedermeyer. There definitely are a lot of
anti-Tesla articles.

------
icu
What a coup de grâce this blog post is! I have never read any corporate
communication that pushed me to finish the whole thing, enhanced my perception
of their brand, increased my desire to own one of their products and become a
shareholder.

------
S_A_P
Edward Niedermayer seems to be more concerned with click bait and controversy
than really promoting discourse. The Truth About Cars has almost become
readable since his departure, but its still a car tabloid at best. The dude is
young and was given a pretty good sized platform, decided he didn't like Elon
Musk and has now spent a significant percentage of his time to prove Tesla is
a scam.

I wouldn't call myself a die hard tesla fan, and Im not willing to spend the
kind of money required to own a model s or x. But I would certainly call them
compelling reasons to look into an electric car and they are easily 10-15
years ahead of the entrenched auto makers.

I think that Tesla definitely has challenges ahead as well. The biggest is
that they need to have cars fully baked and delivered on time. They need to
start showing positive balance sheets regularly and they need to get the
gigafactory done. I dont see them failing in the near term but their balance
sheet and stock price need to reconcile eventually.

As to the claims of reliability, Ive not seen anything that looks to be
egregiously worse than cars in the target market. Ive yet to own a single car
that has never had a defect or something break that required a warranty/out of
warranty repair. I have had cars that were better than average (My current
2014 A4 has had one thing break in 55k miles) and some that were much worse
(2009 Chevrolet silverado - everything electric broke, power rear glass, power
windows, cruise control, fuel pump, power seats; 2001 VW GTI vr6 had the check
engine light on every 6 weeks after I exceeded the ridiculously short 24000
mile warranty- I think they knew that was all that car was good for. I
replaced the MAF twice, several other engine electrics as well)

Whatever happens I have to give Tesla(not just Musk) a lot of credit for
taking on a hard problem and creating a credible product.

------
Shivetya
Great news. Still Tesla obviously expects this type of news to break and it
will be an ever constant duty for them to refute or acknowledge issues.

They must also understand that eventually some customers will want to work on
their own cars, do preventive service and the like. They need to accommodate
them as well.

It is one thing to be serving almost exclusively early adopters, when the III
comes along its going to be very interesting to see how they handle it. There
will be a whole lot of people who simply don't know how to treat their cars
well combined with many who are louder about issues simply because its a
bigger investment to them

------
HeavyStorm
"That said, sometimes Tesla does make genuine mistakes. We are not and have
never claimed to be perfect. However, we strongly believe in trying to do the
right thing and, when we fall short, taking immediate corrective action."

This is what makes me feel confident about a company. Doesn't ring like false
humbleness or a disclaimer, just something that you'd hear on a open
conversation, where the other party is being sincere.

And the worse thing about the whole situation is that damage is already done.
Because people will believe anything they read.

------
rplnt
This is what caused Tesla to dip so much yesterday?

[https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3ATSLA](https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3ATSLA)

~~~
LeonM
I'm no expert on the subject, but unless something else happened at Tesla
yesterday, this was indeed what caused the dip.

About a year ago a youtube video popped up of a Tesla caught fire after it hit
a metal object which pierced the battery pack. The stocks immediately
plummeted, even though car fires are a common thing.

Like the article states, it is likely the negative news story was fabricated
to drive prices down, to gain profit for those selling short on tesla stocks.

------
heisenbit
Ok, someone has an axe to grind and there is a blogger with an vendetta. But
at the end there was this surprising update:

    
    
        Of greater concern: 37 of 40 suspension complaints 
        to NHTSA were fraudulent, i.e. false location 
        or vehicle identification numbers were used
        — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 10, 2016
    

If true this goes beyond telling blown up stories and may cross the threshold
over to criminal behavior.

------
geomark
Musk tweeted that "37 of 40 suspension complaints to NHTSA were fraudulent,
i.e. false location or vehicle identification numbers were used"[1]

[1]
[https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/741411531582115841](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/741411531582115841)

------
reubensutton
I love how non-corporate the Tesla blog is: "It is deeply ironic that the only
customer who apparently believes that this document prevents him from talking
to NHTSA is also the same one who talked to NHTSA. If our agreement was meant
to prevent that, it obviously wasn’t very good."

------
hartator
I think it's worth noting that Tesla models seems to have issues with leaks
and water infiltrations that can explain the rust. Anyway, if they beleive in
stock manipulation, they should sue.

------
quocble
Edward Neidermeyer is a douchebag. Look at all the articles he wrote.
[http://www.bloomberg.com/view/contributors/ARwBOWvU7QI/edwar...](http://www.bloomberg.com/view/contributors/ARwBOWvU7QI/edward-
niedermeyer)

------
post_break
The real crime here is Tesla dangling repairs in front of owners only if they
sign an NDA.

------
abpavel
Very interesting Tesla's response: 1\. The car was not brand new and was
actually driven, which is horrible. 2\. NHTSA did not investigate anything,
they just asked us for the documents. 3\. We don't ask customers to sign
anything, just demand that they sign "the agreement". 4\. We're the best.
Customers are idiots. 5\. We'll even publicly expose the identity of the
customer for you to hate. Here is his name, address, and SSN. Have fun!

~~~
dingo_bat
Though all other points in your comment are quite juvenile, I think the first
one is valid.

>the suspension ball joint experienced very abnormal rust. We haven’t seen
this on any other car, suggesting a very unusual use case. The car had over
70,000 miles on it and its owner lives down such a long dirt road that it
required two tow trucks to retrieve the car. (One to get the car to the
highway and one to get it from the highway to the service center.) When we got
the car, it was caked in dirt.

So what, Tesla? Cars are meant to be caked in dirt, sand, water, whatever
elements they may encounter in the course of use by people who buy them. Most
people drive on roads but some do go off-road and the cars should be able to
handle it. Just the information provided here does not indicate misuse. It may
still turn out that way, but not right now. It is more likely, IMO, that your
engineers failed to consider some particular scenarios and the suspensions in
your cars are a bit less rust-resistant than they should be.

~~~
unethical_ban
If a car is frequently driven in abnormally severe conditions, perhaps by a
bad driver, for many more miles than a routine service check would warrant, it
may be useful to point out the irregularity of the circumstance.

------
antihero
> we believe in putting our customers’ happiness ahead of our own bottom line.

Fuck off with this shit. Your customers happiness IS what defines your bottom
line in the long run. Can we stop with all this fucking corporate lies.

I think we need a new trend. Blunt honesty. I'd trust a company far more if
they just came out and said yes, we're here to make money and expand. If this
means treating you well as a customer, we will do that, but at the end of the
day, we make money for our shareholders and to fund other crap we want to do,
and we provide you with a thing you are cool with paying for and give you good
service in order to do that.

------
SFJulie
A whole company going after one person. Whether they are right or wrong makes
is irrelevant compared to the door to company bullying it opens: if a customer
speaks against a company right or wrongfully the arsenal of legal retaliation
a company has against him/her is disproportionate (libeling, doxing, mass
PR/reputation, secrecy of affair new laws), resulting in de facto possibility
for companies to control public space communication.

Government are just giving the key of censorship to corporation. Private owned
interests that do not represent the people.

Tesla and its owner's arrogance are creepy.

~~~
mthoms
I have a hard time imagining how you got all that from the article. Bullying?
Legal Retaliation? Doxing? Companies "controlling public space communication"?
Censorship?

Not a single one of those things have come close to happening here.

~~~
SFJulie
well, there is an asymmetry that is obvious to me: it is easier for the PR of
tesla to make its voice overpower the voice of a consumer (promoted links,
using the crowd of the company to upvote on HN or /., paying community manager
to do damage control).

And random rightful consumers may just remember that before daring to voice a
concern.

I call it bullying because like in school, it it the tallest and strongest
against the isolated weak ones.

And yes Tesla so far has used yet no legal means, but they have a better
arsenal to harm a consumer than a consumer has to fight the company,
especially if you have NO lawyer to support you.

So, it is a new prototype of censorship by bullying resulting in people
potentially shutting their mouth in fear of the harm for their cyber
reputation or liability.

Most people think we should fear government and need more secrecy, I say we
should begin to fear corporations and need more transparency from these legal
entities.

I don't know if the consumer is a fraud (maybe he is) but I find the tesla PR
pretty disproportionate.

~~~
mthoms
We should certainly be watching for abuses of power like you describe, no
question. But let's be careful not to _cry wolf_ lest we hurt our own cause.
Let us save our outrage for when a real abuse has occurred.

In this particular case, we now have both sides of the story and are able to
form our own opinions based on the presented information. I think that's as
close to an ideal situation as you're ever going to get. Were this to happen
in the 1980's (or earlier) we wouldn't even be discussing it.

What a great time to be alive :-) And yes, we should definitely remain
vigilant against corporate/government abuse and control.

