From the article: “About a decade ago, Tesla rigged the dashboard readouts in its electric cars to provide “rosy” projections of how far owners can drive before needing to recharge, a source told Reuters. The automaker last year became so inundated with driving-range complaints that it created a special team to cancel owners’ service appointments.

  • ghariksforge@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Both electric cars and spacex are government subsidized industries. He’s not competing on the free market. Elon excels at getting the government to make his business for him.

    • krische@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      He’s not competing on the free market.

      Those subsidies are exclusively available only to Elon’s companies?

      Come on, he’s a massive douche; but Tesla/SpaceX are in the same market as all their competitors. They’re not special, they just chose to do things others weren’t. Why didn’t GM build BEVs sooner to suck up all those subsidies? Why didn’t ULA land their boosters to reduce launch costs and secure more launch contacts and grants?

        • krische@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          And that’s a bad thing? Isn’t the entire purpose of that government money to spur development? Seems like it is working as intended then?

          There’s no shortage of reasons to hate Elon, but using government subsidies for their intended purpose seems like a strange one.

          • Alimentar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Yes it’s bad. Competing for market share should be balanced and free of government intervention. How does a company (small or large) hope to compete against a company that is being subsidised.

            Tesla can then undercut their competitors as they don’t need to make a profit. They’re subsidiesed.

            Then the government has also imposed regulations for car manufacturers, that if they don’t sell enough EVs in the year, they have to pay a penalty by buying carbon credits.

            Well Tesla sells those carbon credits. So they can undercut their competition, entice consumers with lower prices and recoup the losses through subsidies and selling these credits. All thanks to government intervention.

            Basically screwing competition and screwing you. As these have knock on effects.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Those other companies can qualify for the same subsidies. Sometimes it’s a first mover advantage (subsidies change over time), and sometimes it’s not. But AFAIK, Tesla and SpaceX don’t get any subsidies that other companies couldn’t qualify for. Maybe there are some that foreign companies can’t get, but that’s not unique to the US (see AirBus vs Boeing).

              That said, I’m generally against subsidies. For example, I think the EV subsidies have essentially just changed into additional profit margin. Look at what happened to Tesla Model Y prices when subsidies changed, it basically dropped by the amount of the subsidy reduction. If we removed EV rebates today, I think car companies would drop prices by about that much, which means those rebates are essentially pure profit. I don’t think that’s the case for SpaceX though, but I don’t know enough about that industry to know for sure.

    • Toto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Totally agree but they would have been subsidized for anyone. It was Elon who did it

      Reminder: I really hate him

      But people saying that anyone could have done what he did IF they were born with money or IF government subsidies could somehow apply to them too. Plenty of born rich people out there who didn’t.

      He’s a smart guy. Emotionally a child, sociopath and narcissist. But he actually deserves some credit.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Yup, he’s a smart salesperson and businessman, and he knows how to find good engineers. And that has worked out well for him. He had the means and was in the right place at the right time with the right ideas.