Tesla Tripp Police Report Released
twitter.com
twitter.com
Well, the most favorable thing you could say about $TSLA is that Musk hasn't managed to destroy the company, in spite of his well-known and recurring antics.
I’m not remotely a fanboy of that company but your comment does seem to be out of whack with the scale of their success despite gargantuan odds.
https://thedriven.io/2019/02/06/tesla-byd-fight-for-lead-in-...
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/electric-car-sales-china-vs-...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-04-16/the-world...
https://qz.com/1606881/chinas-byd-reports-632-jump-in-profit...
> Looking purely at BEV sales (according to data from EV-Volumes), Tesla leads the way
That first chart that confirms your beliefs measures both EV and Hybrid. I seriously doubt anyone is conflating those two things here. Additionally, considering both EV and Hybrid, the difference between Tesla and BYD is less than one percent. Your arguments would be much more persuasive if you weren't so clearly biased...
Really? Tesla is spyware on wheels. The first time I can remember hearing about their consumer products was about someone finding their car remotely disabled because they'd found an ethernet port in it and plugged into it.
I mostly see it referenced in a mocking way about conspicuous consumption and weird corporate antics. They were even made fun of on the TV show Silicon Valley.
We have an EV at my household (a nissan leaf) which we like very much. A tesla would never have been a consideration. Googling briefly shows that worldwide leafs outnumber tesla on the road by a significant margin.
I think we inhabit very different bubbles.
I do not understand how people can confirm their beliefs so quickly with such little effort. If a stat makes you feel good, you should probably look into more than usual.
According to insideevs.com and QZ.com, in the US, there are 133,178 Leafs sold _ever_ since 2010. Since 2017, there have been 190,000 Model 3s sold. Sources: https://qz.com/1703260/teslas-model-3-may-never-catch-up-to-... https://insideevs.com/news/347565/nissan-leaf-sales-outlook-...
When considering globally, 200,000 Leafs were sold in the first 5 years on the market. The Model approaches that number in a single year (2019) in a single country (US). It's _somewhat_ possible, that for a brief period of time in early 2018, it was true there were more Leafs on the road than Teslas, but that's a bit like being a Nokia fan on January 10th, 2007 saying "Oh, but there are far more Nokias than iPhones in the world". Certainly not a "significant margin".
It's totally and completely fine to dislike Telsa - and I don't disagree with the spyware comment, but please don't decide a thing, and then go google to find evidence of that thing you decided.
It's a little hard to make an apples to apples comparison because tesla was apparently taking money-down preorders for years while Nissan was actually shipping cars. Shipping obviously results in installed base advantages, but preorders obviously result in sales rate advantages.
I'll take your word for it that there are just now more tesla on the road although articles at least as recent as two months ago state otherwise-- but that doesn't really contradict my comment above that the statement that the claim that tesla is the 'benchmark ev' is odd to me.
The benchmark product in any given category isn't even necessarily the best product (leaving aside the spurious nature of "best") although that's more often true.
Tesla's EV products have been the benchmark product which other EVs inevitably get compared. And we know this because every time anyone announces or releases a new EV, most commentators will benchmark it against the nearest Tesla competitor.
I do think the Model 3 caught everyone's attention though, but I'm deeply skeptical that Tesla has any significant first mover advantage. Car companies aren't exactly unique.
https://www.secwhistleblowerattorney.net/tesla-related-polic...
https://www.secwhistleblowerattorney.net/wp-content/uploads/...
Someone called Tesla to advise that Tripp was heavily armed and coming at the Gigafactory. Tesla called the police, which then looked for Tripp and found the information to be false.
Subsequently, the police tried to identify who placed the initial call, and found that the caller was just "a concerned friend", as they knew Tripp to be unstable and shaken by his firing from Tesla and thus concerned he could do something like that.
Ultimately from the report we don't know who placed the call, either it is indeed from a "concerned friend" and there is nothing interesting happening here.
Or it is from someone from Tesla trying to harass Tripp as a payback for his leaks, as I have seen suggested on twitter, however nothing in the report even alludes to that, so what am I missing?
A more enlightened response from Tesla, in my mind, had the complaints by Tripp been untrue, would have been to have been to quietly dismiss him, address his claims in a press release, and use gentle language to address him, identifying him, sincerely, if possible, as a genuinely useful member of the team with whom Tesla had an irreconcilable disagreement.
Tesla is not taking this route, however. Their handling of the situation suggests that they may have something more serious to hide or, at minimum, that they are not committed to deeper humanistic means of engaging with individuals that challenge them (though Musk must not be exclusively defined by this, is it so surprising given the terrible names he called one of the Thai rescuers?). Tesla has and are continues to attend to Tripp with tremendous force (legal, and perhaps otherwise -- as suggested by this link) as opposed to just moving on and letting things be. They are proactively seeking to proactively discredit and arguably harm Tripp as opposed to contending with his contentions head on.
Were they genuine concerns, though? The overall impression from available sources is that he was overreacting to a situation that, while perhaps unusual, was basically par for the course given that Gigafactory itself is a newly-built facility, and one that's still largely under-construction. Why would you expect things to be 100% perfect and with zero unnecessary waste? Screwups happen all the time, most of the time it's totally normal and not a big concern.
Generally, if you want to whistleblow you should blow the whistle to the regulators. Probably the EPA or a similar agency for any supposed environmental concerns, and the DOT, NHTSA, or a similar agency for any safety concerns related to vehicle's battery packs.
You don't get to leak to the press in violation of your NDA just because you disagree with your employer. Maybe it becomes legitimate if you think that the government and your employer are conspiring to keep issues secret, but I don't see any suggestion of that here.
It's pretty clear that the goal of these lawsuits is not to recoup losses, but instead to silence critics, and to attack someone that alledgedly "betrayed" Tesla.
This is not normal corporate behavior. Normal companies don't try to swat their ex-employees. Normal companies don't start lawsuits on the whim of their CEO.
Normal companies either don't talk at all about employees that make crazy allegations, or they make a press release thanking the whistleblower, stating that they investigated the allegations and determined that there are no problems and everything is fine!
Like the biology of a crocodile, this is the natural behaviour of a capitalist corporate entity under current US law. We have this set of incentives for corporations and we’re all surprised when they follow them to the letter.
https://old.reddit.com/r/EnoughMuskSpam/comments/c7pmaf/yes_...
It would have been easy for Tesla to release a recording of the call, and if it exists the malicious call could be traced.
He could easily have been shot, police being what it is in the US...
This person does exists, as you can see in the report that he/she was interviewed by a police officer. So this person would need to be on it too...
If Tesla security had credible information that a recently fired employee who has already damaged the company greatly by leaking information to the press, is inclined to shoot up the place, it would be monumental incompetence on their part if they didn't report this to the police.
And it would be monumental incompetence on the part of the police if they didn't investigate it.
BTW: this wasn't swatting. Swatting is making false, anonymous 911 calls about active, armed threat.
It wasn't anonymous and it wasn't false. Tesla security presented the evidence to the police and the police (not the SWAT team) followed up on that. Let's give the police the benefit of the doubt and assume that they found the evidence credible enough to investigate it.
The police reports in the screenshot do not indicate that the police verified these claims. Rather, they suggest that they took the word of the security personnel from Tesla.
It’s perfectly fine for the police to presume that information given is accurate until proven otherwise! However, it was false information. The police confirmed that the suspect wasn’t armed.
The most charitable reading here is just that the Tesla employees were mistaken, but nothing here says that Tesla presented evidence; so it’s not exculpatory.
So your answer has 0 value.