3 ms·
The article covers this. Quite well in fact. A public company where the owner had said “Tesla does not advertise or pay for endorsements” had said they were goi
by jasonlotito 3y ago
The article covers this. Quite well in fact. A public company where the owner had said “Tesla does not advertise or pay for endorsements” had said they were going to start doing that and this is following up on that. These sorts of things are generally note worthy for public companies.
“Instead [of advertising], we use that money to make the product great.” That they feel the need to start advertising might mean the product isn’t as good as it was once perceived to be.
The article goes into this more. Asking “so?” Makes it appear as if you just read the headline and thought you knew enough to make a worthwhile comment here. Which I know isn’t true.
So?
- rapsey 3y agoYou are right that is exactly what I did. I did not need to read the article to know what they are talking about. A company maturing and doing what every other company is doing is not however interesting. The only reason it is a story is because it is an Elon company. Personally what I find strange is how people perceive Twitter comments as somehow a contract with the public. People say lots of things, the smart ones are able to change their minds.
- metabagel 3y agoIt’s a story, because people wonder if he’s using funds from one company he controls to prop up another company which he outright owns. Right now, the amount is small, but I expect it will increase.
- jasonlotito 3y agoSo you argument is that Elon Musk is unimportant? That statements made to investors is unimportant? That changes made about quality and spending and where money is being used is not important to investors for publically traded companies? That's an odd stance to take.