Seeking Alpha

Tesla Motors up after-hours as Musk allays recall fears

  • Tesla Motors (TSLA) CEO Elon Musk settles the issue on whether or not the EV automaker will issue a voluntary recall of the Model S in his early comments at the New York Times DealBook conference.
  • The exec says very definitively that no recall is needed as he reiterates the strong safety record of the company.
  • Video stream
  • TSLA +1.4% AH.
From other sites
Comments (60)
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4101) | Send Message
     
    The companies safety record isn't in question... just one product within that company... but unless we see the trend continue this is probably isolated... all they would need to do is re-write the software so that the car doesn't lower itself... sure the mileage on the vehicle would need to be adjusted but you wouldn't have cars on fire every couple of weeks.
    12 Nov 2013, 04:25 PM Reply Like
  • RuudNetherlands
    , contributor
    Comments (85) | Send Message
     
    You're right, I agree. "Unless we see the trend continue"
    The current two fires are still bad luck.
    But the fact the CEO is talking about recalls says it all. As soon as the denial is starting, we are getting close to the point of no return.

     

    Especially after the detailed report from the driver of the last Tesla on fire: He drove on for 5 miles before the car told him to stop and get out. No matter what they tell about the debris, it was so small the driver did have the impression it was too small to damage the car otherwise he would have stopped his car. This indicates that a punctured battery could happen much ofter and it is too bad in both incidents people only took photo's of burning Tesla's. One of the debris would tell everyone "how big" or "how small" the problem for Tesla is.

     

    Tesla needs at least some months without a "debris" fire and for me it would be a surprise if they will. The battery is too close to the front wheels. Ford and Nissan protect their batteries with steel and have placed them under the seats in the back. Did they do this because they did see the risk of a punctured battery if it would be all over the bottom of the car?
    12 Nov 2013, 05:09 PM Reply Like
  • Cassina Tarsia
    , contributor
    Comments (646) | Send Message
     
    RuudNetherlands ... I agree with you. I Tweeted Elon Musk a few days ago asking him for exactly what you said here - for him to give us some idea about just how large that "trailer hitch" was ... so far no response. I think that he needs to address our concerns or most likely a bigger issue may emerge soon unless he is very, very lucky.
    12 Nov 2013, 05:40 PM Reply Like
  • tombland
    , contributor
    Comments (142) | Send Message
     
    RuudNetherlands, the driver of the recent Model S that caught fire never said he drove for 5 miles before the car told holm to stop and get out. Read his comments for yourself here: http://bit.ly/1fs7SBd

     

    He certainly doesn't give the impression that the debris was so small he had [in your words] "the impression it was too small to damage the car". He actually says that "I felt a firm "thud" as the hitch struck the bottom of the car, and it felt as though it even lifted the car up in the air. My assistant later found a gouge in the tarmac where the item scraped into the road. Somewhat shaken, I continued to drive."

     

    That doesn't sound like the comments of someone who didn't think the debris was very large. The size of the debris is well known – it was a "three-pronged trailer hitch", seen here: http://bit.ly/1cSKVtr
    12 Nov 2013, 06:05 PM Reply Like
  • arondaniel
    , contributor
    Comments (773) | Send Message
     
    "No matter what they tell about the debris, it was so small the driver did have the impression it was too small to damage the car otherwise he would have stopped his car."

     

    From the drivers own account: I felt a firm "thud" as the hitch struck the bottom of the car, and it felt as though it even lifted the car up in the air.

     

    So, yeah. Small enough to make a firm thud and lift a 4600 pound car.

     

    I think people are reluctant to pull over, thud or no thud, on a highway with cars whizzing past at 70+ mph. Thankfully the car told him to GTFO.
    12 Nov 2013, 06:10 PM Reply Like
  • Tri Duong
    , contributor
    Comments (1497) | Send Message
     
    "I Tweeted Elon Musk a few days ago asking him for exactly what you said here - for him to give us some idea about just how large that "trailer hitch" was ... so far no response"

     

    I have to laugh here. Why should Elon tweet you back? Do you realize how many people try to contact him? Are you special?
    12 Nov 2013, 10:23 PM Reply Like
  • csi9132
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
     
    If I was the driver, the thud and car lifting would have been enough for me to pull over ASAP, and not wait for the car to tell me.
    12 Nov 2013, 10:26 PM Reply Like
  • TAS
    , contributor
    Comments (2191) | Send Message
     
    The Musk ego will harm Tesla - sooner rather than later.

     

    "I am invincible" has been the downfall of many a genius.
    12 Nov 2013, 10:59 PM Reply Like
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (1488) | Send Message
     
    @TAS: +1
    12 Nov 2013, 11:29 PM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3863) | Send Message
     
    Add to that the excessive speed and reckless driving on the other accidents. and maybe, just maybe, we are seeing that "S" buyers aren't extra-special (as they like us to believe) but cut from the same "idiot loaf" we all are.
    13 Nov 2013, 07:02 AM Reply Like
  • Keith_69
    , contributor
    Comments (175) | Send Message
     
    I don't even know why this is newsworthy. Did anyone expect him to issue a recall ? But I agree. To me it is not about safety records. I have always said I'd like to see the number of events where objects have struck or penetrated the battery 'armor' and either resulted in a fire or did not result in a fire. I am guessing we're 3 for 3. Regardless if someone crashed their at high speed.

     

    Does this mean the model S is a bad vehicle...NO. Just something that could need to be fixed/adjusted.
    12 Nov 2013, 04:35 PM Reply Like
  • Tri Duong
    , contributor
    Comments (1497) | Send Message
     
    we're not 3 for 3. There were other incidents. Some of them are on the Tesla forums. Car got away with scratches.
    12 Nov 2013, 10:21 PM Reply Like
  • New Low Observer
    , contributor
    Comments (2114) | Send Message
     
    As all auto manufacturers eventually do, a recall will come. This statement by Musk leaves no way out when and if a recall really is necessary. Musk might have said, "A recall will only be issued when and if there is a problem, right now there are no problems." Backing Telsa against the wall with the most recent statement will not go over well when a recall is needed.
    12 Nov 2013, 04:43 PM Reply Like
  • SenseTheWorld
    , contributor
    Comments (19) | Send Message
     
    If there would be a recall, nobody would care what Elon said today.
    12 Nov 2013, 09:06 PM Reply Like
  • DougRk
    , contributor
    Comments (1567) | Send Message
     
    No. Statements are used to show intent to deceive in security and safety lawsuits. Better to say nothing. All it will take is a single internal email within the engineering department discussing the recall potential to paint a picture of obfuscation.
    12 Nov 2013, 10:11 PM Reply Like
  • Cassina Tarsia
    , contributor
    Comments (646) | Send Message
     
    Better safe than sorry ... Elon Musk needs to at least have something ready to make the car safer ... one more fire and the stock is going to go down below 100. If that happens, then he could be in real trouble if he doesn't have a fix in hand.
    12 Nov 2013, 04:44 PM Reply Like
  • New Low Observer
    , contributor
    Comments (2114) | Send Message
     
    agreed.
    12 Nov 2013, 04:48 PM Reply Like
  • Christopher Cowan
    , contributor
    Comments (150) | Send Message
     
    Does there need to be an injury for this to occur?
    12 Nov 2013, 05:35 PM Reply Like
  • Joe E Coyotee
    , contributor
    Comments (249) | Send Message
     
    To me the bigger fix to this issue is the Department of transportation and public safety need to seriously crack down on the cause of everything falling of vehicles in the first place , we only hear of the 2 Tesla incidents , Road Debris Causes More Than 25,000 Crashes Per Year
    http://bit.ly/17SEdSf
    12 Nov 2013, 09:11 PM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4101) | Send Message
     
    road debris is never going to go away... you can't possibly police every mile of road every day. So just get over that; cars being built so that they can avoid/withstand road debris combined with smart driving (this tesla driver was obviously following way to close if he didnt see the supposedly HUGE hitch ) are the only answers.
    13 Nov 2013, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • goran.krabbas
    , contributor
    Comments (50) | Send Message
     
    A drunk driver sped into a roundabout, struck a wall and then crashed into another wall in a private residence before hitting a tree. And survive! Who cares if it gets on fire.
    Tesla Model S is the safest car in the World!
    12 Nov 2013, 05:01 PM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3863) | Send Message
     
    Hi Goran,

     

    Tesla is not the safest car in the world. It's safety ratings at NHTSA are mis-stated and have been de-bunked by NHTSA themselves. People are quick to quote the crash-test results, but fail to cite that "S" landed near the bottom on NHTSA crash-avoidance technology.

     

    Over a recent four year period, the Audi A6 and the Mercedes E class had NO fatalities. I think given the number of those cars in service, that's a pretty impressive record.

     

    You see, maybe if the driver of that "S", had an E-Class, the car would have stopped well before it caused so much damage.

     

    I don't know about you, but I'd be much more inclined to favor a car that reduces my chances of an accident than one that protects me if 4 cars land on my roof. But, that's me, each to their own.
    12 Nov 2013, 07:00 PM Reply Like
  • Tri Duong
    , contributor
    Comments (1497) | Send Message
     
    What are you ranting about Reel Ken. Actual testing shows it's safe. I guess we should take your word over an agency whose expertise is testing vehicle safety.

     

    Again, 3 accidents, no injuries, no fatalities, over 20k vehicles. You can't rant all you want. It won't change reality.
    12 Nov 2013, 10:28 PM Reply Like
  • Tech Talker
    , contributor
    Comments (216) | Send Message
     
    The Tesla Model S has had no fatalities either.

     

    You need a link for "Model S landed near the bottom on NHTSA crash-avoidance technology" because NHTSA does not rate or mention crash-avoidance technology. Consumer reports does, and they gave the Tesla Model S an excellent score on crash avoidance, just like the Mercedes E-Class and the Audi A6. Besides, customers can get new crash avoidance technology with over the air updates, can a Mercedes E class or an Audi A6 do that?

     

    Lets not forget that the Model S warns the driver to pull over before shutting itself off in emergency situations, and tells the driver to leave the car, after which there might be a small fire. Meanwhile, in any ICE vehicle, your only warning is the smell or visible smoke, and at that point it may be too late to save yourself because ICE vehicles tend to explode, unlike the Tesla Model S. There hasn't been a single incident in the Model S in which the passenger cabin was damaged.
    12 Nov 2013, 11:13 PM Reply Like
  • Locked Down Investments
    , contributor
    Comments (1362) | Send Message
     
    Thanks for setting the record straight Carfan79....cheers.
    13 Nov 2013, 05:47 AM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3863) | Send Message
     
    Hi tduong,

     

    It would be nice if you would actually grow to read what I said.

     

    I did not say (as you mention ) that the car is not safe....I said that it is "...not the safest car in the world."

     

    I was simply pointing out the erroneous exaggeration that Goran was making.

     

    I was also comparing three accidents without scratches to four years without fatalities. If you can't see that difference, I can't help you.
    13 Nov 2013, 07:05 AM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3863) | Send Message
     
    Hi Carfan,

     

    Just go to NHTSA web-site. there is a whole drop down menu on crash avoidance.

     

    Go to vehicle ratings on the web-site and look up crash test results for any car you want. In addition to the direct crash test result, just below it, they provide ratings for 3 different areas (stability, forward warning, lane departure). "S" ranks at the bottom in each category.

     

    If you need a link, start here (http://www.safercar.gov)

     

    Please, please try to understand that I'm not saying that "S" is not a safe car and it does have safety features. I'm just refuting the exaggerated claims that some make that it is the safest car in the world. Safe and safest are two completely different concepts.
    13 Nov 2013, 07:16 AM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4101) | Send Message
     
    Reel Ken, exaggeration is about the only thing people are good at in the comments section lol
    13 Nov 2013, 08:38 AM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3863) | Send Message
     
    Hi Wigit,

     

    You're making me a believer.
    13 Nov 2013, 08:44 AM Reply Like
  • Keith_69
    , contributor
    Comments (175) | Send Message
     
    @Carfan, Ummmm petrol vehicles on fire explode everytime only in the movies. Sorry.
    13 Nov 2013, 08:45 AM Reply Like
  • Dan Fichana
    , contributor
    Comments (1883) | Send Message
     
    If I was Musk I would push the issue with the NHTSA if they try to force it...

     

    The cause of both the US fires is large debris off of trucks.

     

    Perhaps they should look at truck designs and making sure the trucks have the parts secured to them, no bumpers falling off or rusting off, no tow hitches falling off.

     

    That solves the Tesla issue and the debris issue. End of the day, you make Tesla reinforce the pack, you solve their issue, but the road debris causing other damage, accidents, and potential deaths.
    Heck, who knows what would have happened had a car been tail gating the trucks that dropped those objects.

     

    After all, the NHTSA is there to ensure the safety of all drivers, the best way to accomplish that is better inspection of our truck fleet and strict draconian enforcement for drivers leaving such debris on the road.
    12 Nov 2013, 05:03 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    There is already laws for securing loads at the state level.

     

    Debris of all types is a fact of life, get over with it.

     

    All debris does not fall from unsecured loads on trucks.

     

    If the car can't handle it. it's the car that needs remediation.
    13 Nov 2013, 12:29 AM Reply Like
  • ToolGrinder
    , contributor
    Comments (26) | Send Message
     
    Many thought "armor plate" was steel and 1/4" thick. Now it turns out to be aluminum and 6.0mm. Big difference in strength (and weight). Will it be enough? Time will tell...
    12 Nov 2013, 05:18 PM Reply Like
  • lovezagg
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    6mm and 1/4 inch are the same measurement
    12 Nov 2013, 05:37 PM Reply Like
  • MaiTesla
    , contributor
    Comments (54) | Send Message
     
    No one ever said it was steel.
    12 Nov 2013, 05:58 PM Reply Like
  • just the truth
    , contributor
    Comments (67) | Send Message
     
    6 mm is exactly 0.236 inches. Not that far off 1/4 (0.25 inches). So the thickness part is accurate. The material is something else.
    12 Nov 2013, 06:18 PM Reply Like
  • scottg1010
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    6mm and 1/4 inch are the same thing. the only difference therefore is the aluminum and steel reference you are making.
    12 Nov 2013, 09:04 PM Reply Like
  • Tri Duong
    , contributor
    Comments (1497) | Send Message
     
    "6 mm is exactly 0.236 inches. Not that far off 1/4 (0.25 inches). So the thickness part is accurate. The material is something else."

     

    They never said it was steel. As far as I've known, they've always said it was aluminum. Just because you didn't know doesn't mean they mislead you.
    12 Nov 2013, 10:29 PM Reply Like
  • astraclub
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    I am buying and i see the stock going $200 pretty soon
    12 Nov 2013, 05:19 PM Reply Like
  • nd_grad
    , contributor
    Comments (14) | Send Message
     
    Does anyone happen to know how many of the 500+ car fires that happened TODAY in the United States were with Ford, General Motors, Mercedes, BMW and Audi vehicles?
    12 Nov 2013, 06:18 PM Reply Like
  • mobyss
    , contributor
    Comments (2008) | Send Message
     
    More accurately, how many of them were 2013 models of cars costing $70 grand or more?

     

    Not old Chevy pickups with 150,000 miles.
    12 Nov 2013, 06:33 PM Reply Like
  • joenjensen
    , contributor
    Comments (705) | Send Message
     
    mobyss, your not comparing an old Chevy truck with a battery under the hood in steel battery box at least 2 feet off the ground, with a Model S battery between the wheels under the car, and the size of the battery in width and length of the car...... are you?
    If you are that's comparing apples with oranges, and even if an old truck was to come in contact violently with a huge piece of steel, the result would be nothing....plus these batteries are not made of the same material....much more reason to think you are comparing apples with oranges.
    12 Nov 2013, 09:24 PM Reply Like
  • Joe E Coyotee
    , contributor
    Comments (249) | Send Message
     
    we turn a blind eye to the 500+ car fires that happened today , we only want to see the Tesla's , why because deep down inside we all love them , we can't stop thinking about them, as soon as one catches fire we want to know how soon for a replacement.
    12 Nov 2013, 11:51 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Not all fires in ICE vehicles are fuel related.

     

    Nor all recalls in ICE vehicles for fire risk. fuel related.

     

    So statistically using the total as in incident rate is inaccurate.

     

    A large percentage are electrical in nature, something the Tesla would be subject to.

     

    BTW,

     

    Recalls don't need incidents, just evidence of risk.

     

    Tesla has already demonstrated the risk.

     

    2 out of 2 debris strikes, both resulting in both fire a vehicle totaled.

     

    If the Gov't won't take action, the insurance companies may.
    13 Nov 2013, 12:28 AM Reply Like
  • Dan Fichana
    , contributor
    Comments (1883) | Send Message
     
    There are a measely 25,000 debris related accidents per year as per AAA.

     

    http://bit.ly/1fAQ1rM

     

    Out of those there are around 80 deaths.

     

    Is that alot, not really, considering there are over 5 million car accidents and 32,000 deaths per year and 2.2 million injuries.

     

    End of the day, you are more likely to be killed in an auto accident than run over any sort of road debris.
    13 Nov 2013, 05:34 AM Reply Like
  • Keith_69
    , contributor
    Comments (175) | Send Message
     
    "Is that alot, not really, considering there are over 5 million car accidents and 32,000 deaths per year and 2.2 million injuries.
    End of the day, you are more likely to be killed in an auto accident than run over any sort of road debris."

     

    They should send you over to comfort families of those who died from road debris.

     

    This is not about deaths via road debris, this is about Model S fires via road debris. Please stay on topic. :)
    13 Nov 2013, 08:51 AM Reply Like
  • Bouchart
    , contributor
    Comments (776) | Send Message
     
    Earlier today I saw Elvis and Bigfoot throwing metal debris in front of a speeding Model S. Rumor has it the two are being bankrolled by the Detroit automakers.

     

    I tried to take a picture of it, but as we all know, every picture of Bigfoot turns out really blurry.
    12 Nov 2013, 06:55 PM Reply Like
  • surferbroadband
    , contributor
    Comments (1712) | Send Message
     
    Bouchart!!! LOL ha ha ha ha ha. You made my day.
    13 Nov 2013, 02:07 AM Reply Like
  • David G.
    , contributor
    Comments (150) | Send Message
     
    Am I the only one on the planet that doesn't drive over (much less ever see) large metal objects at highway speeds on the road?
    12 Nov 2013, 07:35 PM Reply Like
  • abujordan
    , contributor
    Comments (109) | Send Message
     
    I don't think you are the only one.

     

    I did however run over a metal ladder while driving 70mph on the freeway in my chevy s-10 pickup. I think I got at least 2 feet in the air. Luckily, I landed squarely and safely.
    12 Nov 2013, 09:03 PM Reply Like
  • Tri Duong
    , contributor
    Comments (1497) | Send Message
     
    Depends on where you live. Where I live, there's debris on the highway from trucks all the time. Trucks lose their trail hitch or blow tires or entire wheel off and has to keep going. I ran into a wheel before and wrecked 1/4 of my car almost crashing into the median.
    12 Nov 2013, 10:32 PM Reply Like
  • Keith_69
    , contributor
    Comments (175) | Send Message
     
    In the D.C. Metro area, there is debris all the time. at one point I had a 69 roadrunner (sweet car) and driving the Baltimore beltway in heavy traffic, there in my lane was a shovel in the road. went under the car and punched a hole in my fuel tank. No fire, just lost all the gas I paid for.
    13 Nov 2013, 08:54 AM Reply Like
  • dmfick
    , contributor
    Comments (5) | Send Message
     
    MaiTesla - yes it was all over the TM forums that it was armored steel. Incorrect, but plenty of people said it, including employees of Tesla.
    12 Nov 2013, 08:59 PM Reply Like
  • Keith_69
    , contributor
    Comments (175) | Send Message
     
    Well when you use words like armor, I think people are surprised when it fails to protect.
    13 Nov 2013, 08:56 AM Reply Like
  • pat1000
    , contributor
    Comments (508) | Send Message
     
    The real threat to Tesla is fool-cells----
    Is every major car co. in the world wrong???????
    I hope so-----!!!!!!!!
    12 Nov 2013, 10:13 PM Reply Like
  • Manitobatex
    , contributor
    Comments (653) | Send Message
     
    Rumors have it that engineers are developing a method of recharging the batteries via satellite....the end result may be that the batteries then will be much smaller and likely moved to the roof area thus reducing the risks of fire and would likely only occur in roll overs, this would therefore create an incident rate of 1 in 675,000 vehicles.
    The biggest drawbacks will be parking garages above & below ground as well as underground tunnels.
    The other solution will be using a 1/4 " plate of titanium impregnated with diamonds (commercial) added to the existing aluminum protective under carriage. Stay tuned.........
    13 Nov 2013, 09:59 AM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4101) | Send Message
     
    How economical is charging via satellites? There is some synergies there cuz then Musk could have SpaceX launch all the satellites lol
    13 Nov 2013, 10:08 AM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3863) | Send Message
     
    Why would they need to do either? As we all know there is no defect.... Elon has assured us.
    13 Nov 2013, 10:40 AM Reply Like
  • rivochet1628
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Sell the car and sell the stocks for all the tesla owners.
    Save your life while you can.
    14 Nov 2013, 01:07 PM Reply Like
  • abujordan
    , contributor
    Comments (109) | Send Message
     
    Tesla completes first coast to coast supercharger route. http://tcrn.ch/1naQZ2K
    27 Jan, 11:31 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector