Tesla is evil and must be destroyed, and here’s how you do it

THE real target, of course, is not Tesla Motors, but rather the vicious, planet-scale fascist parasite who leads the company. If there were no Elon Musk, then Tesla would be just another car company; perhaps a bit bland, but otherwise a normal brand with its good points and bad points. That, however, is not the case; Tesla is evil and must be destroyed, because Elon Musk is evil and must be destroyed; and Tesla is Elon Musk’s gravy train, the basis of his obscene wealth. Kill Tesla and you kill Elon Musk – figuratively, of course – by removing, or at least reducing to a dismissible level, the only thing that supports the level of attention he commands and influence he wields, which is his wealth. Being irrelevant, in fact, is the preferred fate for an obnoxious little narcissistic twat like Elon Musk, because to someone like that it is a fate worse than death.

For the record, I am not recommending or urging anyone to take any actions described below that may be illegal. I am simply describing how someone who has concluded that Elon Musk is evil and must be destroyed, and who may have a strong desire to take direct and effective action based on that knowledge might do so. You make your own choices about whether your actions are right or wrong, because I’m not your dad. And along those lines, I have no knowledge about anyone making use of the information herein, or planning to make use of the information, and I will have no such knowledge in the future, either. So don’t ask.

For the curious, this information is based primarily on my own knowledge of how the automotive business works. I spent about 18 years in various positions with a major automaker before I started doing what I do now, and while my focus was mostly on logistics and aftersales, I did receive extensive training in other aspects of the business, such as sales, financing, and accounting. Whatever gaps I discovered in my knowledge as I was putting this together I tried to fill in with as up-to-date research as I could find.

Okay, enough with the preamble, here’s the good stuff:

1. It’s all about sales: Sales is everything. If Tesla doesn’t sell cars, Tesla doesn’t survive as a company. For an EV manufacturer like Tesla, declining (or nonexistent) sales cuts two ways; first, it loses the direct revenue from the sale of its product, and second, it loses the income from tradeable clean energy/carbon credits that are created by sales. For Tesla, that secondary income amounted to about $2.8 billion last year.

This is the one aspect of all of this that the growing Tesla Takedown movement gets exactly right, because the effect the movement’s activities lead to is to convince a growing number of would-be Tesla customers that purchasing a Tesla carries with it an extremely high reputational risk. Keep doing that, and do it some more.

2. Teslas that are already on the road should be considered fair game: To be clear, this means vandalizing privately owned Tesla vehicles to the extent that they require repairs, or are destroyed. This is a dicey proposition, particularly because of the risk of injury to people, which is something that should be avoided, and because engaging in destructive violence is distasteful to many people, as well as illegal just about anywhere on the planet. However, a results-oriented approach demands it be considered, for two reasons. First, the risk of loss or damage by itself will discourage many potential Tesla customers, further depressing sales. Second, the reality of loss or damage drives up insurance rates, and in some cases, leads to coverage being withdrawn altogether. This greatly increases the costs of ownership of a Tesla, which becomes another disincentive to buying one.

3. Tesla inventory must NOT be harmed in any way: Many of the incidents of vandalism of Tesla vehicles that have occurred so far have been directed at vehicles Tesla still owns, i.e. those sitting at dealerships or on factory lots, out of a misguided belief that this is somehow “better” than attacking cars belonging to ordinary consumers. It may seem counterintuitive, but this is precisely the wrong approach.

Unlike most car companies, Tesla sells directly to customers rather than through a network of independently owned dealerships. In a conventional dealership arrangement, unsold cars (i.e., still owned by the company) are consigned to dealerships, with the carrying costs of that inventory being passed on in the form of flooring fees, which are also usually high enough to compensate for the depreciation of the vehicle during the period it remains unsold. Under the Tesla system, however, it has to bear the carrying costs and depreciation. True, unsold inventory is accounted as an asset, but it is one that steadily loses value; whereas a conventional dealership arrangement allows the manufacturer to make up for that value loss in the charges paid by dealers, Tesla has to periodically write down the value of its unsold inventory.

I’m not going to take up a lot of space explaining the ins and outs of that, but if you’re curious, Tesla’s own explanation of its inventory valuation where it says as much is on page 63 of its 2024 10-K filing.

Unsold inventory is a terminal cancer to Tesla, because it can only be written down to the point where its expected future selling price is equal to the cost of producing the finished product; at that point, it has to be written off, or in other words, ceases to be an asset. Up until the point when Tesla’s sales started to really lag – which really started after the introduction of Cybertruck Wank Panzer, and when Elon began to reveal his full personal douchebaggery through Twitter – Tesla’s inventory management system was actually pretty good, more or less a modified version of the system Toyota uses (believe me, this dickhead has never invented or innovated a damn thing). However, the tolerances in that sort of system are extremely tight, and once the demand forecast is just a little higher than it should’ve been and inventory starts to pile up, so do the costs, and the size of the inevitable write-downs or write-offs. It also doesn’t help Tesla’s situation that its vehicles apparently depreciate as much as three times faster than the average for other automobiles.

The salvation for Tesla in its present circumstances is to have someone come along and destroy the unsold inventory, because then it’s insured (industrial-grade insurance for vehicles in inventory is not the same thing as insurance for vehicles in the hands of consumers). It’s still an asset loss, but one that is mostly compensated by insurance coverage; the difference, or net loss, between the estimated realizable revenue from sale and the insurance payout is not large enough that burning up a dozen, a hundred, or even a thousand unsold Teslas is going to make a significant dent in the company’s financial health.

So, juicy targets though they may be, leave the Teslas that are still in Tesla’s possession alone. They are doing the company far more damage sitting there in unsold condition than they would be if they were in flames.