News
CT Dealership said “direct sales EVs like Tesla are a very small percentage of the vehicles sold”
A Connecticut dealership employee said at a planning and zoning meeting that “direct sales EVs like Tesla are expensive luxury vehicles and they are a very small percentage of the vehicles sold.” The dealership employee who made that claim works for Hoffman Auto Group.
This is a follow-up to our earlier report that Tesla cut ties with South Windsor after siding with the local dealerships.
Tesla was looking to purchase a new location for a new service center and gallery. In this area, Tesla would complement stores such as Apple. All Tesla would need the town to do is adjust the zoning laws to allow car sales and service.
The South Windsor, CT Facebook page shared a live stream of the meeting and you can watch the replay here.
Dealership sales rep: “Direct sales EVs Tesla are a very small percentage of the vehicles sold”
Tyrrell Dabrowski, sales director at Hoffman Auto Group could be seen laughing at around 1:30:10 which is when the statement about Hoffman suing towns was read aloud.
He also spoke beginning at 1:58 into the meeting. In his speech, he claimed that Tesla owners can’t get good service. I’m not sure if he was boasting or actually taking himself seriously about this since Hoffman Auto Group is blocking Tesla from serving its customers.
“The Hoffman Auto Group, you know, we’re committed to defending the dealer franchise system because it provides the consumers with benefits and protections.”
Dabrowski added that the dealer franchise system “keeps prices low by fostering fair and healthy competition on a level playing field. Direct sales by manufacturers is not necessary for the rapid introduction of EVs in the State of Connecticut. Direct sales EVs like Tesla are expensive luxury vehicles and they are a very small percentage of the vehicles sold.”
Other Dealership Testimonies
Mitchell Sealing Ford testified that Tesla is terrible and illegal. And the Connecticut Automotive Retailers Association claimed that Tesla is trying to sell vehicles in South Windsor which is illegal.
Unfortunately for Tesla, the change was voted down and the location is dead. It’s another win for dealerships–especially those who are spreading misinformation.
Hoffman Auto Group’s Claim Debunked
The claim that direct sales EVs like Tesla are only luxury cars and make up a small percentage of sales is highly misleading.
Tesla is not only the global EV leader, but during the first half of 2022 alone, Tesla delivered 564,000 vehicles which represented a growth increase of 27% year-over-year.
During Tesla’s Q2 2022 earnings call, Elon Musk said that he is confident that Tesla would be able to get to 5,000 cars a week in Austin and Berlin by the end of this year.
“There’s always a lot of uncertainty like the production looks like S-curve, and that intermediate part of S-curve the difficult to bridge that with high certainty. But the end part of the S-curve, you can say, I think you can have a lot more certainty.”
“And so that’s why I’m confident we’ll get to 5,000 cars a week at — in Austin and Berlin by the end of this year or early next year and probably but not certainly, 10,000 cars a week at both locations by the end of next year.”
Statement from Tesla Owners of Connecticut
The Tesla Owners Club of Connecticut shared the following statement with me in an email:
“Unfortunately, once again Tesla was kicked to the curb. Legacy dealerships have an awful reputation. South Windsor didn’t want to open up pandora’s box to any dealership coming into this beautiful part of their town. “
“It was painful to listen to the dealer’s disparaging testimony. Their backward thinking and anti-competitive remarks will lead them to bankruptcy eventually. “
My Previous coverage of Hoffman Auto Group & Tesla
When I wrote for CleanTechnica, I extensively covered the ongoing drama that Hoffman Auto Group caused.
- In June 2021, Hoffman Auto Group sued Tesla and the Town of East Hartford because they didn’t want Tesla to sell to customers.
- In June 2021, Hoffman’s Bradley Hoffman told Senator Haskell, that dealers have spent millions on charging stations and solar panels. I replied to him on Twitter asking him to share where he got that information from. He never replied.
- In August 2021, East Hartford approved the Tesla Service Center—but that didn’t last for long.
- Once the Tesla service center was approved, Hoffman sued Tesla.
- In September 2021, I wrote about why dealerships don’t want to compete with Tesla.
- And in March 2022, I reported on East Hartford ruling in favor of Hoffman and other dealerships regarding Tesla and its new service center.
- My interview with Senator Will Haskell
News
Tesla door handle saga gets its latest chapter and a big change is coming
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Investor's Corner
Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.