Tesla profits drop 43% in Q3
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
Rigging a car to do a flip is a clear way to tell the world they officially ran out of ideas and are desperate to get a sale.
It's like everyone has completely forgotten Musk was up on stage with the US president doing nazi salutes just a couple of years as ago.
The same applies with the "sex sells" epidemic of the early 2000s: sure, the numbers showed that it was a great way to make people remember your ad, but they forgot to take into account that people remember the boobs and completely miss the brand.
I remember seeing snippets of the "flying car" going around on social media, so it clearly made an impression on me. I think it was supposed to be a Roadster relaunch? Release date? No idea. Price? No idea. Range? No idea. Number of seats? No idea. Cargo capacity? No idea. I bet it won't actually ship with those "rockets", though. Sooo, "clown makes car mockup fly"?
If you're going to do a stunt, at least do it properly. Like Volvo suspending an entire dump truck from a crane[0].
Lie Volvo and the reversing trucks, with Jean Claude Van Dam....
A real burn-your-boats moment so there's no chance of them working together again after that.
Much of this money is going to Texas, and James Talarico (the Democratic candidate there) has not been shy about accusing Musk of trying to buy the election.
Sure, flying cars are cool. But I don't get the impression that Musk's politics have been forgotten at all.
The problem is that people keep lying to themselves about the definition of the word sentient.
1) Cars use all kind of sensors to collect info about the real world.
They measure how much air is entering the motor in real time. They know if the rear left tire is deflated. They detect when they need to be feed with gas, they know the oil pressure and the ECU, the car's brain, is collecting all this info in real time via its "neurons", the BUS cable.
2) Cars react to this information constantly taking the measures appropriated to assure that the preservation of the car functions.
The ECU sends orders in real time to inject X gas into the motor to match Y liters of air in a perfect mix. The motor enters in panic mode and stops the power temporarily.
3) Cars communicate with their drivers
They send a warning to put more gas, or beep because they detected an obstacle behind them or that the seat belt is not being used.
Cars have lots of sophisticated electric sensors to sense the world so, like amoebas or plum trees, they fit perfectly into the definition of the word sentient
Using sentient as a cheaper synonym of self-conscious is moving the goalposts and a self-scam.
So whilst a car's ability to sense and react to its environment may be at least as sophisticated as that of a plum tree, it's hard to see how it would meet the legal threshold for sentience in the same way that, say, a lobster does.
More to the point - if Musk genuinely believes that his cars are capable of suffering, why isn't he doing anything to prevent them from being harmed?
Most important question for a small group of people in a philosophical and quasi-religious movement that unilaterally redefined the term to fit their agenda.
Millions of scientists don't feel that pain is so special as to receive special treatment. Is just one of our type of sensors. Not more important than to be able to see, to taste or to hear. Definitely not more important than be able to reproduce. And there is a lot of pain involved in how mammals enter in the world.
The idea that to chop a tree is more moral than to kill a mosquito is totally random and alienated from biological reality.
- far right politics;
- helping Russia killing Ukrainian civilians;
- and threatening the livelihood of Europeans;
These might also help people decide to look somewhere else.
The last holdout being the USA, where the gov't is preferentially giving tesla their marketshare instead of letting open competition work in favour of consumers.
But like japanese cars, this will eventually also take root.
With that said I don't disagree that the market evolved and Tesla isn't what it was.
Why not? It looks like many people heard "vote with your wallet," and took it seriously. For better or worse, purchasing a Tesla, or not, has become a referendum on Musk himself.
> - helping Russia killing Ukrainian civilians;
Have you read a single thing about Starlink usage in the Ukraine conflict?
Because if you had, you'd know that Spacex has actively geofenced usage to allow it within Ukrainian territory but disallow it in Russian and Russian-occupied Ukrainian territory, instituted a whitelist policy coordinated with Ukrainian forces to whitelist Ukrainian terminals but disallow Russian terminals acquired through the black market
https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-starlink-ukraine-russ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_in_the_Russo-Ukrainia...
They literally provide connectivity to Ukrainian forces and actively try to prevent usage by Russian forces but the moment they put any caveats on how the tech is used, like disallowing its usage by fast-moving objects or for offensive weapon guidance, they are "helping kill Ukrainian civilians".
Perhaps they should have just said Starlink would not work with defense/war usage at all and sat the conflict out and geofenced all of eastern Europe, like many protesters at Google ask their leadership to not do any defense industry deals. Would that have been better from your perspective?
You are actively spreading misinformation.
which makes it harder to use it for intercepting incoming drones and missiles
see also https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/10/22/ukraines-access-to...
- not whitelisting the capacity for terrorism and war crimes;
- and not collecting 36 million USD per year from Poland. You know, the guys that asked Elon if he's playing politics with starlink? [0]
> but the moment they put any caveats on how the tech is used, like disallowing its usage by fast-moving objects or for offensive weapon guidance, they are "helping kill Ukrainian civilians".
You mean the moment Trump caved in to Putin (again), when Trump and Musk said Zelensky should be removed from the presidency (again), and then proceeded to cap Starlink speeds, taking away from Ukraine the capacity to intercept jet powered Shahed drones[1]?
Is that the moment you're referring to?
Or you're going to be cynical to the point of saying this was just a SLA update that happened coincidentally with the moment Russia, Trump and Musk are pressuring for the capitulation of democratically elected president?
It looks like it's you who's attempting to spread misinformation.
And maybe they shouldn't have allowed starlink usage, just like maybe Starlink should not be allowed to provide services in Europe, and Twitter should be blocked for foreign interference.
[0] https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/polands-sikor...
[1]https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/10/14/8057960/index....
But it comes with Elon, so I drive a Rivian.
MANY EVs sold by renamed automakers, and even good chinese brands.
From my recollection, the car door handle's that Tesla "innovated" are so unsafe that China has now banned hidden door handle designs. Some articles on related deaths due:
https://www.statesman.com/business/article/tesla-door-handle...
https://www.autonews.com/automakers/teslas-futuristic-door-h...
And then I recalled the insanely high fault rate with Tesla's from a report from Denmark: https://fdm.dk/nyheder/nyt-om-trafik-og-biler/tesla-skandale...
2025 Vision statistics for electric cars:
Car model | Total number of cars | Approved | Conditionally approved | Inspection | Percentage of care
Tesla Model Y | 2,394 | 1,281 | 44 | 1,069 | 45%
Tesla Model 3 | 8,564 | 5.438 | 189 | 2,937 | 34%
VW ID.4 | 7,121 | 6,292 | 651 | 178 | 2%
And so I googled for a few minutes and found some more stuff, like a reuters investigation into coverups, german reporting of defect rates as well, UK defect rate reports, a US investigation too.
Here's your AI and human assisted summary:
# Overview of the Tesla Inspection Issues
Data from mandatory vehicle inspection agencies in Europe and federal investigations in North America show that relatively new Tesla Model Y and Model 3 vehicles are failing safety tests at unprecedented rates. The issues stem from high vehicle weight, a lack of traditional annual service schedules, and component material choices.
## Key Regional Inspection Data
- Denmark (FDM): Danish roadworthiness data reveals that 45% of 2021 Tesla Model Ys failed their first periodic vehicle inspection. The primary culprit is excessive play in the suspension and wheel hubs. [https://fdm.dk/nyheder/nyt-om-trafik-og-biler/tesla-skandale...]
- Germany (TÜV Association): In official vehicle inspection reports, the Tesla Model Y ranked dead last out of 110 models with a 17.3% serious defect rate at its first 3-year check. The year prior, the Tesla Model 3 ranked worst out of 111 models with a 14.2% failure rate. [https://marqstats.com/insights/germany-tesla-model-3-tuv-ins...]
- United Kingdom (DVSA): Vehicle standards data shows thousands of combined first-time MOT inspection failures for Model 3 and Model Y vehicles, largely driven by premature chassis strain.
## The Primary Defects Found
The high failure rates are consistently tied to three mechanical areas:
- Suspension and Control Arms: Extreme battery weight combined with instant motor torque causes suspension ball joints and lateral control arms to experience accelerated wear, loosening, or catastrophic snapping.
- Brake Disc Degradation: Because Teslas rely heavily on regenerative braking, physical brake pads and discs are rarely used. In damp climates, this lack of friction causes the brake discs to corrode heavily, failing mechanical efficiency tests.
- Headlight Misalignment: High rates of faulty factory headlight alignment frequently fail strict European beam leveling tests.
## Regulatory and Legal Impact
- Federal Safety Probe: The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is actively investigating roughly 1.2 million Tesla Model 3 and Model Y vehicles following over 150 customer reports of front suspension parts snapping while driving.
- The "Driver Abuse" Cover-up: Investigations by Reuters revealed that Tesla internally recognized these global suspension defects for years but actively instructed service centers to blame consumers for "driver abuse" to deflect warranty payout costs. [https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-mu...]
will the never ending musk promises around his cars - level 4 autonomous driving etc bear fruit ?
can't even talk about the roadster
kinda level 4 ish?
PS: I am not parent commenter, and this separately to the famous gesture with the arm that E.M. did, what can be guessed that harmed the sales.
As well the capital spending on Optimus is hurting the bottom line.
What is the scam? I do not like EVs and do not own a Tesla car, but Tesla does make them, they do work, and people do like them. Theranos, by comparison, never delivered (nor could deliver) what they promised. So I am not sure I get your comparison.
There’s also DOGE and all the related stock manipulation that happened, the tweet promising funding to take TSLA private which obviously made people buy the stock, the ru[n|i]ning of Twitter for political gain, the creation of teams in Tesla to convince owners not to come investigate battery/range issues under warranty, etc.
Probably not quite to Theranos levels, but I can see the pattern.
And people on Hardware 3 should collectively sue, because they will never, ever, ever, ever get FSD fully working on that. But instead of admiting that and paying people back (if they want) they continue to release small updates to pretendent its still possible. Musk is known for not giving a shit of supporting old shit, he looks at only the future always.
It’s like the entire city of Austin. It’s also the entire Bay Area.
I’m only making the point that it’s a real product and you can buy it. Sort of implied by the parent comment of it being a “scam” meaning that it was never delivered.
HW3 gets a supervised version which is the best they can do with the hardware that they shipped, it’s unfortunate I agree but it’s not totally out of line with what happens with other devices like the iPhone. Apple has a version of Apple Intelligence which is neutered on older devices, presumably because of hardware limitations.
Ok, doesn't change my point.
And Musk himself said that geo-fanced self driving isn't self driving.
> HW3 gets a supervised version which is the best they can do with the hardware that they shipped, it’s unfortunate
Its quite literally a scam and it should be viewed as such. Musk said that since like 2017 sold cars where he advertised this feature.
Also, even HW4, current FSD Beta is nowhere near actually self driving or anywhere near that is can independently go out or even make money for you while you work.
So its quite clear that HW4 will not reach that level either, so we just keep kicking that down the road while having essentially scammed all buyers since then and refused them the ability to get their money back at the very least.
And they just moved it back another year in the last call. But sure next year he wont pull the football.
> Apple has a version of Apple Intelligence which is neutered on older devices, presumably because of hardware limitations.
I don't know about Apple, I at least haven't heard about them claiming that the old phones would be able to do some incredible things.
Gentle reminder that Tesla itself opted to call Tesla's sham of a FSD as "Tesla assisted driving" after regulators from multiple European countries made it very clear that at best ist assists drivers and still require drivers to never take their attention off the road.