> Personal anecdotes with skin in the game (ie, the OP chooses to continue owning a Tesla) N=1 > are more informative than "journalism" [0] paid to have an o

> Personal anecdotes with skin in the game (ie, the OP chooses to continue owning a Tesla) N=1 > are more informative than "journalism" [0] paid to have an opinion [1]. That's quite the statement. Can you point which parts of the article are paid for ? Especially when the conclusion goes against the title: > With battery prices predicted to continue steadily declining in the coming years, the math is likely to shift more in favor of EVs. [0] your bias is showing [1] everyone is entitled to it but for an opinion piece there were still some sources in it