I think that the nearly 40% of people who responded to this survey citing “Elon Musk” and “brand perception” as reasons they will not purchase another Tesla to be a pretty convincing indicator that he does in fact impact consumer purchase decisions. On the anecdotal side of things, I did’t even look at Tesla when I…

But how much better would they be selling if Musk wasn’t connected to them? I don’t think any of us know the answer, but it is realistic to think that it is still a significant drag on sales.

Weird take that reduces down to “whataboutism.”

When Musk has been dead as many decades as Ford, then we can start separating him from the brand identity. The only part of Henry in the company today is the squiggle of a signature in the blue oval. Musk is still elbow deep in Tesla, and still actively causing real world harm. Give him a few decades of being dead,…

I can vouch for this. I used to be a bit Tesla fan, I really was a chearleader for him and the brand. But ever since he wouldn’t shut up up on twit-site, his actions towards trans people, and his just increasingly obvious racism as well as the general shabby build qualities and grifting business practises, I will not…

Yeah, Tesla is becoming the cost favorite, turning into the Hyundai / Kia of electric cars. Honestly it wouldn’t shock me if they never saw a major redesign and people simply didn’t care. You don’t buy the cheapest appliance to stare at it all day long.

I wonder how sustainable that will be, with competitors actually investing to develop and improve their models (well, maybe not Toyota just yet).

Most CEOs may be d***s / not the greatest people... perhaps delusional a lot of times and living in their own little world, but few are outspoken like Elon and do so much to tarnish the name and the brands associated with him.

The problem is, Tesla can still significantly under cut every OEM on price while delivering positive margins. The surveys might show people are selling, but their deliveries continue to increase quarter over quarter.  I hate Tesla and would never own one, but it’s hard to argue that Musk’s shittiness is really having…

Can confirm.

Forcing “dark” mode a week after changing the name of the company to X. Musk truly is the edgiest of 90s edgelords.

X is for the people, by the people.

I swear most of what he does is just predicated on whim and the need to look like you’re doing something.

But in many if not most ways Twitter really is gone. It’s not just a rebrand to Musk’s name for his boner, it’s a culmination of a complete initiative to dismantle the previous status quo.

Is there any sort of legal requirement for journalists (Or Gizmodo, lol) to call Twitter by its new and completely dumb name? I mean, if say The New York Times just continues to call it Twitter, can they be sued or otherwise harassed with Cease and Desist letters?

It’s particularly surprising coming from Musk, who has a penchant for calling his enemies pedophiles and made loud, self-celebratory pronouncements about how he was stepping up child safety efforts at the company.

This disagreement just demonstrates what a bad headline it is.

It’s just a bad headline - I would have written it as: “SAG-AFTRA’s Contract Demands (which seem reasonable) Rejected by AMPTP”.

I too raised an eyebrow at reading the headline before the article laid out its case. Another pass from the editor would’ve helped.

Read my post again. As currently written, the headline is describing SAG-AFTRA’s demands, the ones that were rejected, as “beyond reasonable.” That implies that they were the ones asking for ridiculous things when in fact they were just asking to be treated like human beings. It’s AMPTP’s demands that were…