TPT January 2016

78 / 106

76 January 2016
Global Marketplace
Automotive
The Tesla Model S
hits a quite jarring speed bump
In late August, Consumer Reports said that Tesla’s Model S
P85D, the most expensive of the company’s “S”-series all-
wheel-drive electric sedans, performed “better in our tests
than any other car ever has, earning a perfect road-test
score.”
Connie Loizos, the Silicon Valley editor of TechCrunch, noted
at the time that this was “something you don’t see every day.”
The Model S P85D was awarded 103 points, a total so high
that it broke the Consumer Reports road-test ratings system.
But something even more remarkable would be seen two
months later: Consumer Reports’ dilution of the earlier high
praise with its assignment of a “worse-than-average” rating
to the Model S in the category of predicted reliability of new
vehicles.
As reported by Ms Loizos, in interviews with more than
14,000 Model S owners “an array of detailed and complicated
maladies” came to the attention of the respected testing and
survey organisation. The main problems, it said, involve the
drivetrain; power equipment; charging equipment; the giant
iPad-like centre console; and body and sunroof squeaks,
rattles and leaks. Systems that scored worse on the 2015
model, compared with 2014, are steering, suspension and
climate control. (“Consumer Reports Withdraws Its Tesla
Model S Recommendation,” 20 October)
The issues were enough to knock the car out of its “average”
predicted reliability slot, wrote Ms Loizos. Worse, for Tesla,
the Model S lost its chance at the coveted Consumer Reports
“recommended” designation. For this, a vehicle must meet
“stringent testing, reliability, and safety standards, including
having average or better predicted reliability.”
Asked for comment, a spokesperson for California-based
Tesla e-mailed TechCrunch: “Consumer Reports also found
that customers rate Tesla service and loyalty as the best in
the world. Close communication with our customers enables
Tesla to receive input, proactively address issues, and quickly
fix problems. Over-the-air software updates allow Tesla to
diagnose and fix most bugs without the need to come in for
service. In instances when hardware needs to be fixed, we
strive to make it painless.”
If the response was a little to the side of the issues, Consumer
Reports did in fact largely endorse Tesla’s self-praise, noting
that according to its data 97 per cent of Tesla owners would
buy the car again. It commented, “Despite the problems it
appears that Tesla has been responsive to replacing faulty
motors, differentials, brakes, and infotainment systems, all
with a minimum of fuss to owners . . . For its early adopters,
Tesla has made a practice of overdelivering on service
problems under the factory warranty.”
› For an outside opinion on Tesla’s fall from grace
TechCrunch turned to Max Zanan, a New York-based
automotive retail expert who downplayed the likelihood of a
lasting negative impact. Mr Zanan noted the rising fortunes
of Korean automakers Kia and Hyundai, early laggards in the
Consumer Reports reliability survey.
“In the 1990s, Kia and Hyundai had poor ratings, too,”
he reminded Ms Loizos. “With time they improved their
processes and are now able to build very reliable cars with
which consumers are very happy.” Mr Zanan said something
else that should buoy Tesla: “Purchasing decisions aren’t
guided by Consumer Reports . They’re guided by feel of the
car, marketing, and word of mouth.”
› That may be, but initial reaction to the Model S news would
scarcely have rejoiced management in Palo Alto. The
Los Angeles Times began covering the story early. Shares in
12-year-old Tesla, which has a $26.5 billion market cap, took a
nosedive, falling 10.3 per cent by midday.
Oil and gas
In natural gas country, combative
presidential hopeful Marco Rubio
champions drilling, fracking, and
the Keystone XL pipeline
Only those with a strong tolerance for boredom and
exasperation will pay much attention to the run-up to the
US presidential election before, say, midyear. But very early
in the cycle one of the aspirants – Senator Marco Rubio, of
Florida – made a speech that warrants attention for its almost
total repudiation of President Barack Obama’s environmental
agenda.
In eastern Ohio, with its extensive underground natural gas
deposits, Mr Rubio on 16 October declared an intention to roll
back Mr Obama’s most consequential achievements and laid
out his own energy policy. As reported in the New York Times,
he declared that, if elected, he would: immediately authorise
construction of the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline
that would traverse the western US from Alberta, Canada,
to Illinois, Texas, and Oklahoma; permit more offshore oil
and gas drilling, already expanded by the president; and
effectively nullify an international climate change accord the
administration is pursuing.
Not least, the Republican senator would move promptly to
reverse Environmental Protection Agency regulations on
greenhouse gas emissions and hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”)
to allow the extraction of gas buried deep in the ground near
places like Salem, where he addressed an audience of some
300 people. (“Marco Rubio’s Energy Policy Centers on Drilling
and Reversing Obama Rules,” 16 October)
Taking issue with what he described as a Democratic “fear
campaign” against fracking, Mr Rubio said that the hundreds
of billions of dollars’ worth of natural gas and oil underneath
the ground “are doing the people of Ohio no good pent-up in
shale rock.”