Glencore is 1/10th the size, so it's fair to suggest that action by Tesla would influence Glencore to clean up its act.
They and hundreds of other companies.
>Glencore is 1/10th the size
In marketcap (which is speculative). They are 3x the size in revenue (which reflects size of operation). Action by Tesla would not cause glencore to do anything. Do you know what glecore has already done and gotten away with? They don't give a shit that some car maker isn't buying from them.
So we agree then? This feels like a "but the guy in front of me was speeding too" proposition.
> Do you know what glecore has already done and gotten away with?
I do, I used to work for them. The point is not to influence Glencore, a quick look at their majority shareholders is all anyone should need to know where they are on the sustainability responsibility spectrum. The point is to illustrate that Tesla, which advocates that "the future is sustainable" is building that vision on the back of some very unsustainable partners and practices.
I'm going to leave off the fallacy of using revenue as a primary proxy for business scale. See: Air Lease. A better comparator would probably be employee counts (they are similar).
How does that happen? Who in their right mind thinks to themselves "Maybe I should work for an obvious criminal entity". Did they at least pay well?
>I'm going to leave off the fallacy of using revenue as a primary proxy for business scale. See: Air Lease. A better comparator would probably be employee counts (they are similar).
What? Do you not understand that these are different metrics which measure different things? You measured size by evaluation, how can you accuse me of a fallacy?