2022 Tesla Model Y Long Range on 2040-cars

Auto blog

This is why Tesla doesn't release monthly sales numbers

While most automakers that sell vehicles in the US release a flurry of numbers at the beginning of every month to tell us how many cars and trucks they've sold, Tesla Motors has resisted following the herd. This can be frustrating for those of us who like to look at some cold, hard numbers, but CEO Elon Musk has a good explanation for why he won't play the sales figures game. During a call with investors about Tesla's third-quarter activities – Tesla does reveal its deliveries every three months – Musk was asked by John Lovallo of Bank of America if Musk would ever consider releasing monthly sales numbers? Musk's initial reply was a short: "Um, no. Sorry," but he then explained why: Part of the reason why we don't release the monthly deliveries number is just because it varies quite a lot by region and the media tends to read all sorts of nonsense into the deliveries. So, we'll have 1,000 cars reach a country one month and none the next month or 100 the next month trickle in because those are the numbers that were registered one month versus the next. People will say, 'oh, wow, Tesla sales drop by a factor of 10. Well, no, the boat arrived in January and not all the cars got registered in January and some got registered in February and in March it's back up again. People assume deliveries are a proxy for demand, and that's not the case. It is the case for other car companies but in our case, it really needs to be parsed into orders and deliveries. And bear in mind, there are a lot of things we could do to amplify orders. Orders is not a true measure of demand, it's just a measure of what we need to do to meet our production and deliver number. In other words, let's not worry about the little ups and downs because we've got plenty of demand and we're selling plenty of cars. See you in February! You can read the full transcript of the call here and listen here.

Feds decide against investigating Tesla Model S fire

Despite earlier reports, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has announced it will not be filing a formal investigation into the fire that engulfed a Tesla Model S earlier this month, as the agency says there was no evidence to suggest the fire was due to a manufacturer defect or that the car was in violation of government-mandated safety standards, according to Automotive News.
The NHTSA's decision whether to investigate was delayed, as the fire happened on the first day of the US government shutdown. AN reports that as of October 22, the administration was still "gathering data," according to a statement by Administrator David Strickland.
The October 1 fire that torched the critically acclaimed EV was started after an impact with a "large metallic object," according to multiple sources including the driver/owner. As we reported on October 3, despite the car-destroying blaze, Tesla maintained that the battery pack acted exactly as designed, by containing the blaze to just one of the battery pack's 16 modules, rather than sending the whole lithium-ion unit up in flames.

Tesla pushes hard against Michigan's anti-direct vehicle sales bills

While Tesla has been fighting against direct-vehicle sales bans in a number of states, the California electric vehicle company doesn't ask for help every time it finds itself in a skirmish. Last year, it did send out some ravens calling for assistance in Ohio. It has done so again to deal with a fast-moving situation in Michigan. A new bill, House Bill 5606, would not allow a vehicle manufacturer to "directly or indirectly own, operate, or control a new motor vehicle dealer." It would also prevent Tesla from opening one of its we're-not-selling-cars-here 'galleries' in the Mitten State. Local news station WSJM talked to State Representative Aric Nesbitt (who introduced the bill) and he maintains that the bill is not "anti-Tesla at all." It just clarifies other laws, he said, adding that "if Tesla wants to have a real debate on current structure and state statute, I look forward to sitting down and meet[ing] with them, but them spreading lies about my bill, that's not a constructive use of their time." Lies, eh? Tesla did call the legislation "harmful to consumers" and described the way it says the bill came about in somewhat conspiratorial terms: On the last day of the legislative session, the dealers managed to make a last-minute change to the bill in an attempt to cement their broader retail monopoly. Using a procedure that prevented legislators and the public at large from knowing what was happening or allowing debate, Senator Joe Hune added new language in an attempt to lock Tesla out of the State. Unsurprisingly, Senator Hune counts the Michigan Automobile Dealers Association as one of his top financial contributors, and his wife's firm lobbies for the dealers. A number of Michigan auto dealers are big contributors to Michigan Governor Rick Snyder, who has yet to announce if he will sign the bill. He has until Tuesday to decide. You can read the full text of Tesla's call for help below. A Raw Deal in Michigan By The Tesla Motors Team October 16, 2014 On October 1, the Michigan Automobile Dealers Association succeeded in passing a bill that is harmful to consumers. The bill, HB5606, was originally a single amendment to existing law designed to ensure that the car dealers can tack additional fees on to the purchase price for all vehicles (from any manufacturer) sold in Michigan. Such fees have a controversial history, are generally regarded with skepticism and have been the subject of consumer concern in other states.