Either way, I’m highly suspicious of articles like this considering the personal gain some individuals stand to win.
Telsa is on record saying that it's true, so what exactly is fake?
> Tesla declined to comment on the specific memo. But it confirmed it is seeking price reductions from suppliers for projects, some of which date back to 2016, and some of which haven’t been completed. The company called such requests a standard part of procurement negotiations to improve its competitive advantage, especially as it ramps up Model 3 production.
What Tesla confirmed is nothing more than standard business practice—and indeed good business practice. You should always be questioning whether your suppliers are giving you their best possible price.
There's a very clear pattern of headlines about a potential Tesla doomsday that's almost always rooted in rumors or anonymous tips...and guess what...sometimes you look up the analyst and find that they're openly shorting Tesla.
This article is sensationalized. We all now know that this is standard industry practice yet the article strongly implies that without these retroactive discounts, Tesla won't be able to stay afloat. What did we find out since this garbage publication? That the discounts they're asking for aren't as retroactive as the original article claimed, and the consequences are completely baseless.
I'm just pointing out this aggressive pattern of Tesla shorters taking these rumors and running wild with them. I don't need to read every unfounded rumor to comment on it.
If I was more savvy, I would look into today's selloff and see if that analyst Elon made fun of on the earnings call finally dumped his borrowed shares but that's way too much effort to justify my internet comment.
Looks like it worked: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-stocks/tesla-shares...
Why do you think only one side is corrupt?
My god some of you people are you going to look foolish.