Tesla Model S Caught Fire While Parked and Unplugged 329
cartechboy writes "The safety headlines involving the Tesla Model S were a mixed bag last year. The good news was the Model S received a top safety rating, but the bad news came with three of those electric cars catching fire after receiving damage to the battery packs. (Though coverage of the latter was disproportionate to the coverage of fires in other types of vehicle.) Now another Tesla Model S has caught fire, but this time the car was parked and unplugged. The fire happened earlier this morning in the owner's garage in Toronto, Ontario. At this time no one knows what sparked the fire, but we do know the vehicle was only about four months old. Again, it wasn't plugged into a charging station, and it wasn't turned on. With no one near it. Interestingly, the battery on this particular Model S was unscathed by the fire. In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire. So, how did this Tesla fire happen, and will this blow up into a larger issue for the new automaker?"
Not from the car? (Score:5, Insightful)
"In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire"
maybe the fire was cause by something in the garage adjacent to the car?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
From TFA:
Shortly after the fire, seven Tesla employees visited the owner of the vehicle. The company also offered to take care of the damages and inconvenience caused by the fire, but the owner declined.
This sounds comically similar to a villain trying to conceal the remains of a failed plan to frame someone.
Re: (Score:2)
Odd that the owner refused. Presumably he was covered by insurance. But it's going to cost him in excess and/or higher premiums.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds more likely the home owner knows exactly what caused the fire.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or the fire was caused by a cigarette left burning on the seat, or some other owner-caused action that would have happened in any car.
The fire didn't engulf the car. The top of the car is unburned. If the fire started inside the car the roof would be devoid of paint, and all windows
would be gone.
The wall in front of the car and the overhead ceiling of the garage was extensively damaged. Just look at the pictures in the linked article.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
A friend of mine had a house fire whose origin could not be reliably determined. It's not all that uncommon for the source of a fire to be unresolved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Why are they assuming it was started by the car?
"In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire"
maybe the fire was cause by something in the garage adjacent to the car?
Looking at the pictures, you see that from all appearances, the car itself wasn't even involved. It simply happened to be there.
The fire department has torn down large amounts of sheet rock, trying to get at the fire, which says they thought it it was in the walls, or
the ceiling. This sounds like an electrical fire, or something hot enough to possibly have ignited the studs behind the sheet rock, so they
have to tear it down to make sure.
The firemen are paying no attention to the car, they are looking as s
Re: (Score:3)
I still dont understand why the media hates the tesla.
I would think conservatives (like me) are a fan because Musk is an incredibly successful businessman, free market yadda yadda. He sells a good product, he makes successful companies, he shows how the private market is supposed to work.
I would think liberals would love tesla because its the environmentalist dream-- its a desirable product that is environmentally friendly AND viable in the real world.
What grinches are looking at tesla and grinding their t
Re: (Score:3)
Trouble with your argument is that the posters who criticise Tesla on here are mostly from the right. Just as Jeremy Clarkson, the TV presenter of Top Gear, who criticises Tesla to the point of lying, is a right wing twat.
Re: (Score:3)
I have no idea of his political standings.
Then you're not British. He writes right wing articles for The Times and The Sun. He criticises Labour Party politicians, and was a Thatcher fan. No one British is in any doubt of his politics.
Clarkson hasn't said a single thing bad about Tesla since he was caught lying in his first hatchet job
And so why doesn't his lies in the first "hatchet job" not count?
As to how I know about other right wingers criticising Tesla, I'm talking about posters here, of which there are a fair number with well known politics, expounded at length over the years.
Important question (Score:3)
Was the driver a smoker?
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?] (Score:5, Insightful)
If the fire "didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle," then the fact that the car was a Tesla is pretty much irrelevant, since those are the things that make a Tesla distinct from any other kind of car. So, this seems to have been a fire in which the car parked in the garage happened to be a Tesla, rather than something specifically Tesla related.
Re: (Score:3)
If the fire "didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle," then the fact that the car was a Tesla is pretty much irrelevant, since those are the things that make a Tesla distinct from any other kind of car.
Well, that is not the only thing that makes Tesla different. There are a lot more electrical components only present in electric vehicles but which are not related to the charging, battery and electrical receptacle. There is the propulsion system, electrical convertors, motors at (I assume) all four wheels, then there is all kinds of geeky, energy wasting electronic gadgetry to display to the user how much energy they are saving.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, it was probably a loose oil line seeping into Mr. Fusion...
Seriously, there could be a short in any one of the many electrical things downstream from the battery. The things are always "on" so there are many wires that have live current at all times.
Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?] (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Is the hub powered?
Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?] (Score:4, Insightful)
I suspect it's mostly synchronization issues. Trying to get two independent motors turning at exactly the same speed is likely a major challenge, and if the speeds are even slightly different then the car will pull toward the slower one. A differential meanwhile is a relatively simple and well-understood piece of technology that does the same job (uniform wheel power with slippage compensation) more simply.
Plus the cooling system is no doubt much simpler with only a single motor that's not surrounded by a big spinning wheel.
Re: (Score:3)
I suspect it's mostly synchronization issues. Trying to get two independent motors turning at exactly the same speed is likely a major challenge
So how do they do it w/ diesel-electric locomotives? They may have only one motor per axle (not sure), but they have many driven axles. It's the only way for them to get enough traction.
Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?] (Score:5, Informative)
First AC got it almost perfect - as long as you have a powered axle the wheels on both sides spin at the same speed and there is no tendency to "pull" unless they're improperly aligned or your wheels are different diameters. As multiple powered axles still all push straight forward. The only part AC got wrong was that barring slippage and assuming your wheels are all the same size, every single axle must will turn the same speed.
It's like a team of horses pulling a load - so long as all the horses are in one line you can mix hard workers and slackers however you like. Some will pull harder than others, but they all move together at the same speed. If you have two rows though, then you need to be careful to balance your horses - put all your slackers on one side and you'll start going in circles.
Re: (Score:3)
Then how do all of the millions of CD and DVD players out there manage to properly play the discs, or VCRs play tapes without the TV losing sync?
Matching motor speeds is easy, even without encoder feedback. If a motor is turned at a different speed than it is driven it distorts the waveform going to the motor. Modern drive electronics can sense that, and adjust accordingly.
I've worked on machines that produce fabrics at 10 - 15 feet per second, and they contain multiple motors that are perfectly synchroniz
Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?] (Score:5, Insightful)
In a mechanical system, you can have things like viscous couplers or torsion differentials. The wheels will spin at the same speed, but if one encounters less resistance then more power will move to the others. A single power unit supplies power input, which is then distributed based on the laws of physics as applied to a complex mechanical system. Gears and metal poles are lossy due to heat from flexing, compressing metal; viscous couplings are obviously more lossy because they're non-solid and thus the working fluid is experiencing far more deformation than metal.
In a hub layout, all those inefficiencies go away. Computers perfectly apply the correct amount of torque at the correct rotational speed directly to each wheel. For a given RPM, the motor will simply spin at no torque unless there is resistance, at which point it will draw more power to retain spin speed.
Unless... your calculations are slightly wrong. And the motors have loss by heat--which they do. And the computer has to calculate when to back off power to one free-spinning motor which is now heating up and spinning the wheel too god damn fast, but only after taking a sample.
Hub motor efficiency gains aren't ungodly massive; they're small, and they require perfect operation. They also require additional (powered) sensors and computer number crunching, rather than passive mechanical systems which simply cannot function in any manner besides "distribute power correctly" or "fail completely because the system is broken". Drifting sensors, poor sampling, and just the need to get enough of a sample to make a statistically significant analysis and adjust power output per wheel all rob hub motor systems of their theoretical maximum efficiency. The first of these is of particular practical importance: it's extremely easy for this system to be out of spec and inefficient without the end user knowing or caring. The rest are engineering challenges.
All of these potential failures are multiplied by the number of hub-powered wheels. An entire drive train system--a hub motor, its connection to the wheel, sensors, power connectors, regenerative braking mechanisms, and so on--must be duplicated four times to get all-wheel drive. With a single power unit in a mechanical system, you only need to build one drive train, which is simpler and only needs to be incrementally improved in very direct and simple ways. No improving computer code for the average case while trading off the better case; no attempting to get sensors to get more precise data, then trying to factor that improvement into the rest of the control system. You use better alloys, better machined gears, you use what you learn from further research to tweak the design so that it couples and transfers power more effectively and reacts more quickly and immediately to slippage.
The big driver for hub motor vehicles is all the things you can do in theory. Modern traction control and ESC applies braking force to individual wheels, whereas you could just back off the hub motor... or apply braking force by the regenerative brake. But that begs the question: aren't you using the same computer control programs for regenerative brake applied traction control as you are for hub motor regenerative brake traction control? And then of course those benefits essentially come down to the corner case of driving in terrible conditions, which is inefficient as hell anyway--and your efficiency gains are minimal.
Lots of funny theory, lots of "with X we can Y", as it has always been. One of the big pushes with Firewire was that we were going to have revolutionized home entertainment: you would have abstract equipment with IEEE1394 ports, plug a speaker into the VCR, plug another into the TV, subwoofer into a receiver deck at the back of the room daisy chained to the DVD player, and daisy chain rear room speakers off that, and all these devices would find each other through these arbitrary connections and unify themselves as your home theater. That was being heavily advertised in home theater shops for a while, but it never happened. All these things you should be able to do with your iPad never materialized. The XO Laptop hasn't met its potential yet--it has revolutionized nothing. Same with hub motors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the number one weight in a car is the wiring for all the electric stuff.
You mean the wiring weighs more than the engine? I doubt that.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Ironically, those are all gas-powered in a Tesla.
Re: (Score:2)
As to the conversation, the previous poster claim that there was a motor at each wheel, which is inefficient.
Re: (Score:3)
It seems silly for you to draw this conclusion when the source of the fire hasn't yet been identified.
Re: (Score:3)
The rush to draw conclusions seems to be from those who are pointing the finger at the Tesla. They are the ones not waiting for the investigation. The GP was only responding to those original assumptions.
Re: (Score:2)
It was the lawn mower's Gerry can. :)
Re: (Score:2)
"the fact that the car was a Tesla is pretty much irrelevant"
Agreed. I know of a fire that happened in a pickup truck because the head of a small screw broke off and got caught between two wires behind the dash.
Re: (Score:2)
And I would assume the car would need to be on for the radio to short circuit?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
And it could have been a short in the garage lighting circuit or electric garage door. Fires from those causes would also be likely to happen when the car and owner arrives or leaves.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Say what? Why would they do such a thing? Perhaps the charging system needs to be always-on so that it can seamlessly detect being plugged in and regulate the charging process (not uncommon in electronics - many battery chemistry are... violently enthusiastic about unsupervised charging), but what else needs to be powered that isn't always-on in any modern car? (power locks, security system, possibly cooling control system, etc)
Re: (Score:3)
A short circuit in the radio for instance can cause a fire that's independent of the battery or charger.
No evidence the car was actually involved at all. The car roof isn't even burned. They haven't even bothered to open the car door.
They yanked down a ton of sheet rock looking for fire. The firemen are looking at the wall and floor.
If anything, its probably the home handyman wiring installed (unprofessionally) to handle the Tesla charging.
Re: (Score:2)
>> No evidence the car was actually involved at all.
You obviously didn't bother to read the original article.
Re:Not from the car? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually I did, And I traced it to the source.
The first link http://www.thecarconnection.co... [thecarconnection.com] got all its information from the second link.
The first link states "another Tesla Model S has burst into flames -- this time, while parked".
However his cited source makes no such statement. He added that part all by himself.
Just looking at the pictures you can tell it wasn't the car that was burning. It was something else in the garage.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it looked like the front end was probably involved somehow, they just don't show it directly. Otherwise they would have presumably removed the Tesla along with the Lexus that was parked next to it when the fire broke out.
direct link to the article with photo:
http://www.businessinsider.com... [businessinsider.com]
Re:Not from the car? (Score:5, Informative)
They yanked down a ton of sheet rock looking for fire. The firemen are looking at the wall and floor.
That's because when a structure becomes involved in a fire, even if it didn't start there, they need to make sure the fire isn't still active in the walls of the structure. It's really embarrassing for firemen to pack up after thinking they've put a fire out, only to get called back a couple of hours later because some two-by-four in the wall wasn't fully extinguished. Also dangerous for the structure owner.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but this is a rear drive car, with batteries amidship. There is no damage to the rear or the battery areas. All the glass is intact.
There is nothing in the front of the tesla that could start that fire other than the power steering assist motor. If that got hot enough to ignite
what ever was in the boot (front trunk) you could have a small fire, but not one this big.
Paying damages as PR (Score:2)
> and the fact they offered to pay damages?
Given the huge amount of bad press Tesla got from the three earlier debris fires, I can totally understand why they would bend over backwards to make this guy (and hopefully the press) happy. It doesn't necessarily mean they're trying to cover something up.
Arson? (Score:2)
Maybe by someone looking to short the stock?
Maybe a "hit" taken out by disgruntled Ohio auto dealers?
As others have pointed out, garages are full of flammable stuff. Fire could have originated anywhere.
Re:Arson? (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe a "hit" taken out by disgruntled Ohio auto dealers?
Oh no. The Ohio dealers are fully gruntled.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh no. The Ohio dealers are fully gruntled.
Never go full gruntle.
Re: (Score:2)
As others have pointed out, garages are full of flammable stuff. Fire could have originated anywhere.
The picture in TFA sure does make it look like it originated somewhere in the front hood area of the Tesla. If it was a regular car, I could believe that he might have parked a hot engine above an oily rag, but i don't think Teslas are supposed to get hot under the hood.
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing under the hood other than what you put there. It's a trunk.
Funny point of driving a Tesla covered in a light layer of snow is that the snow on the hood doesn't melt like it does with a gas car.
Disgruntled Neighbor (Score:3)
I'm expecting the following... (Score:5, Interesting)
That it'll be attributed to a improper maintenance/improper sealing of some kind against corrosion. It's that's the second on the list with cars up here when gasoline leaks aren't the cause. The first is of course gasoline leak related, the third is usually modifications to the exhaust system which cause body frame fires. We use *a lot* of salt on the roads here in the winter, and I mean a lot. It's just so damn cheap since we have mines for it all over the place between Ottawa and Windsor(Windsor Salt for example), and man places are in a locked in 100 year contract.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Its electric. It has no exhaust.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
He didn't say it did. He was going through the top 3 causes of automobile fires. Not EV fires.
In other news... (Score:2)
One of the most common causes of house fires has always been parked cars, regardless of propulsion technology.
Re: (Score:2)
One of the most common causes of house fires has always been parked cars, regardless of propulsion technology.
Never heard that one before; I always heard it was a mix between irresponsible smokers and improperly used space heaters (with the majority).
Re: (Score:2)
Those are probably more common (and I said one of the most common), but modern building codes require fire-resistant construction (like thicker drywall and heavy doors) between the garage and the main house for a good reason.
Cars are involved in less than 1% of fires. (Score:2)
There are about 13,900 vehicle fires per year without structural involvement and 366,000 home structure fires of which only 8,9000 started in a garage or vehicle storage area, according to the NFPA. [nfpa.org] Cars don't even make the 1% cut-off for inclusion in their table of sources of ignition. Your washer and drier are a far bigger risk (15,200 house fires).
By far the most common causes of house fires are cooking accidents (43%), heating equipment (16%), arson (8%), faulty wiring or other electrical (6%), and sm
Re: (Score:2)
Alright... let's skip the distraction of tying car fires to house fires. Your report states that there were almost 14,000 car fires on residential properties that didn't start the house on fire. Presumably, many additional car fires started in cars parked in places other than peoples' homes. That adds up to tens of thousands of annual car fires that we should be worrying about in addition to this single Tesla. There ought to be dozens of car fire articles per day here on /. so that we can hash out each one.
seriously? (Score:2)
let's obsess over the cause of a fire that has nothing to do with the battery... and only happened once and probably has absolutely nothing to do with the car's engineering?
and let's ignore the thousands of accidents with gasoline every year that kill or maim?
you're doing exxon mobile proud, slashdot editors. thanks for featuring this "story" so prominently
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why?
Electrical fires are rather common. Especially when homeowner decides to put in his own tesla charging circuit and couldn't tell an electrical code from a line of python.
Re: (Score:2)
let's obsess over the cause of a fire that has nothing to do with the battery... and only happened once and probably has absolutely nothing to do with the car's engineering?
It's worth looking into, especially because the cause is non-obvious.
But to say it "probably" had nothing to do with the engineering? Yea, I'll trust the determination of that one to the professional fire investigators, rather than some random internet user.
Same way as other cars (Score:5, Insightful)
Having some basic knowledge [slashdot.org] about car fires makes it clear just how much Tesla fires are about media hype.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you basing this percentage on the number of sensational reports in the media, or from actual stats?
This "story" already screams click bait. "Tesla catches fire and zomg it wasn't plugged and and no one was near it! - Ignore the fact that the fire department has said that there is no fire damage anywhere on the electrical components or battery, just keep clicking on 'tesla' 'fire' 'zomg!' links guys".
If this turns out to be something related to the Model S then *maybe* it is news, but right now it looks
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'm not in the former camp or the latter camp - I work on hydrogen research. ;)
Re:Same way as other cars (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, if I look at the number of cars in the US (254 million or so) vs. number of car fires per year (152 thousand or so on average), and then look at the number of Telsas sold vs. number of Teslas involved in car fires, the rate for Teslas is a third to a quarter that of gasoline-powered cars. So yes, if a gasoline-powered model had the same fire rates as Teslas and there was detailed coverage of every single fire it was involved in I'd make an accusation of media hype, how else would you explain that focus accompanied by a lack of coverage of models that catch fire 3-4x as often?
Re: (Score:2)
Unextinguished Doobie (Score:2)
I'm guessing somebody didn't put their doobie out before going in the house.
Was it the car at all? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Read the original article:
Earlier this month, a Tesla Model S sitting in a Toronto garage ignited and caught on fire.
Re: (Score:2)
With the fire not originating in anything connected to its electrical system, why are they assuming that the fire originated in/from the car at all? It sounds highly unlikely, and more like vacuous sensationalism.
Look at the picture in TFA. It is pretty clear that the front trunk area was the most damaged area.
Re: (Score:3)
The front trunk area is mostly storage. Under that there is an AC unit, electric power steering, and an air fan (for cooling the batteries I guess). Presumably at most, the air fan was in operation as the car had recently returned and was parked.
Ford, GM and Chrysler put out a bounty. (Score:2)
But be warned, if you ask for the bounty, they just give your name to the police.
Confused... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, it's like if you park your car in your garage, but then something else in your garage catches fire. The fire spreads and burns down your car.
LOL; I seriously doubt it (Score:2)
This sounds like the guy that committed suicide by shooting himself directly in the back of his head 3x with a 45.
Spontaneous Vehicular Combustion? (Score:3)
Or maybe insurance fraud, who knows.
If it was related to the car... (Score:3)
Some rare, but possible causes if it has anything to do with the car.
FOD... (Foreign Object Debris) - shorting power to ground anywhere. Doesn't take much especially on a circuit board somewhere, rapidly heats up and melts solder creating and even bigger short and more heat until fire.
Dendrite formation - Very rare and probably requires more than 4 months to happen, but certain components on a high density BGA array the solder can form tendrils towards other solder balls. As the dendrites get close to each other they will short and break kind of like a fuse, but eventually it can become big enough to hold and sustain current generating enough heat to start the solder balls melting driving more current and heat until fire.
Re:-_- (Score:4, Informative)
A entire car line was recalled for catching fire for no reason earlier last year. People got in hi-speed wrecks and caused fires, happening to be in a Tesla. The latter gets coverage, the former gets hardly any. No spin from what I can see here, just a disproportionate coverage on a car that's already in the spotlight.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
A entire car line was recalled for catching fire for no reason earlier last year.
Not quite - Ford recalled a large number of Focus models because of the potential for fires, not because an inordinate amount of them actually caught fire.
VW did the same thing with their diesel models a few years ago, again not because of actual events but because of the potential for them.
And, for the record, there are hundreds of thousands of Ford Focus' on the roads today, compared to... how many Tesla Model S?
Re:-_- (Score:5, Informative)
My Ford truck burst into flames after sitting for 3 days in my driveway a couple years ago. Fortunately my wife was working from home and called the fire dept. Saved my house.
I talked to several lawyers after this and what they told me was scary:
1) ALL car models can burst into flames while not running.
2) Many lawyers have their entire practice base on car fires like this.
3) If no one died or was seriously injured, they won't even take the case. There are too many lucrative death cases from this sort of thing for them to bother.
4) EVERY one of these lawyers said they would NEVER park any car inside a garage attached to their house. One even said he fought his fancy HOA for the right to park in his driveway instead of his garage. He won, because he had the evidence.
I am taking that advice.
Re: (Score:2)
Aside the fact that anecdotes are not the plural of evidence, I'd like to point out that anything with a battery and "constant-hot" circuit is a continual fire risk, even when "turned off."
Hell, I remember having a Walkman start smoldering on my desk once, way back in the 90's.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone did the math the last time this came up on slashdot and the fires per vehicle produced were about 1/3rd of average for Tesla vs the general pool of vehicles, but the counterargument was that Teslas were much newer than the average vehicle and so it wasn't necessarily a good comparison. I doubt anyone outside of an insurance company's actuary department has enough data on similar vehicle rates to know for sure. All I know is that a Tesla went through a brick wall at a high rate of speed and the drive
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because the number of fires was disproportionate to the number of accidents and vehicle miles driven, and last I checked, by over an order of magnitude.
You didn't ever check.
But don't let that stop fanbois from spinning irrelevant statistics to try to show otherwise.
I think you've set your own bias out quite clearly there.
Re: (Score:2)
My brain is melting trying to read what you wrote - stop sniffing gas/petrol - start licking electricity, it's the vehicle-fuel of the future :P
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>> the headline should have read "Telsa damaged in garage fire",
Not at all. It wasn't the garage that ignited first, it was the car. Read the original article:
Earlier this month, a Tesla Model S sitting in a Toronto garage ignited and caught on fire.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, it supposedly started with the Tesla, BUT, it was not the drive train, the motor, the batteries, the super charger, the computer, or any part of the electric system.
So, where did it start?
As I said earlier, this sounds like the guy that committed suicide by shooting himself in the back of the head 3x with a 45.
Re: (Score:2)
I am guessing that there is a lot more to this than meets the eye. Like smoking something in the car.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
http://business.financialpost.... [financialpost.com] When Tesla offers to pay the owner of the car for the damages to his home, the guy declines. Now, call me stupid, but that's a little weird no?
Its not really that unusual. He likely has fire insurance that will cover the damage to his house and would rather deal with the insurance company than directly with Tesla. The insurance company can send the bill to Tesla and deal with the hassle, administrative details and lawyers, rather than the car owner.
Re:My Advice to Tesla (Score:5, Insightful)
"Loudmouth investor"? Do you mean the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk? CEOs are supposed to speak for their company.
You seem to have an axe to grind.
Re: (Score:2)
It hurting the company seems to be a personal view of yours, not a truth. Most people are happy to hear Teslas side. Only people with ann axe to grind are annoyed.
regardless of how true the negative press may be.
As I say, it appears you have an axe to grind.