News
Tesla fires back at Fortune with cheeky “Misfortune” blog post

The drama continues between Tesla and Fortune after the media outlet published a story questioning Tesla’s ethics claiming the company sold $2 billion worth of stock but failed to disclose that it was under investigation by the National Highway Transport Association (NHTSA) after Joshua Brown was killed when his Model S in Autopilot mode crashed into a tractor trailer.
Since the story was published, Tesla CEO Elon Musk defended the company’s position that news surrounding the Autopilot related death was not material to its stock price. Fortune disagreed citing that the stock price dropped $6 per share after news broke that the NHTSA was in fact investigating evidence surrounding Brown’s death. That’s when Musk fired back via email picking choice words with Fortune’s writer and stating, “Indeed, if anyone bothered to do the math (obviously, you did not) they would realize that of the over 1M auto deaths per year worldwide, approximately half a million people would have been saved if the Tesla autopilot was universally available. Please, take 5 mins and do the bloody math before you write an article that misleads the public.”
The Tesla vs Fortune debacle spilled over into the public Twittersphere between Fortune’s Editor Alan Murray and Elon Musk. The tweets continued throughout Wednesday with Alan Murray defending the media outlet’s position that Tesla did not disclose news of the Autopilot death. Fortune went as far as quoting statements made in an SEC filing by Tesla which warned investors that a fatal crash related to its Autopilot feature would be a material event to the company’s brand, business, and operating results. Tesla would later bring to light that Fortune mischaracterized the quote within the SEC filing.
Tesla has since released a blog post on this matter titled “Misfortune”.
Misfortune
Fortune’s article is fundamentally incorrect.
First, Fortune mischaracterizes Tesla’s SEC filing. Here is what Tesla’s SEC filing actually says: “We may become subject to product liability claims, which could harm our financial condition and liquidity if we are not able to successfully defend or insure against such claims.” [full text included below] This is just stating the obvious. One of the risks facing Tesla (or any company) is that someone could bring product liability claims against it. However, neither at the time of this SEC filing, nor in the several weeks to date, has anyone brought a product liability claim against Tesla relating to the crash in Florida.
Next, Fortune entirely ignores what Tesla knew and when, nor have they even asked the questions. Instead, they simply assume that Tesla had complete information from the moment this accident occurred. This was a physical impossibility given that the damage sustained by the Model S in the crash limited Tesla’s ability to recover data from it remotely.
When Tesla told NHTSA about the accident on May 16th, we had barely started our investigation. Tesla informed NHTSA because it wanted to let NHTSA know about a death that had taken place in one of its vehicles. It was not until May 18th that a Tesla investigator was able to go to Florida to inspect the car and the crash site and pull the complete vehicle logs from the car, and it was not until the last week of May that Tesla was able to finish its review of those logs and complete its investigation. When Fortune contacted Tesla for comment on this story during the July 4th holiday, Fortune never asked any of these questions and instead just made assumptions. Tesla asked Fortune to give it a day to confirm these facts before it rushed its story to print. They declined and instead ran a misleading article.
Here’s what we did know at the time of the accident and subsequent filing:
- That Tesla Autopilot had been safely used in over 100 million miles of driving by tens of thousands of customers worldwide, with zero confirmed fatalities and a wealth of internal data demonstrating safer, more predictable vehicle control performance when the system is properly used.
- That contrasted against worldwide accident data, customers using Autopilot are statistically safer than those not using it at all.
- That given its nature as a driver assistance system, a collision on Autopilot was a statistical inevitability, though by this point, not one that would alter the conclusion already borne out over millions of miles that the system provided a net safety benefit to society.
Given the fact that the “better-than-human” threshold had been crossed and robustly validated internally, news of a statistical inevitability did not materially change any statements previously made about the Autopilot system, its capabilities, or net impact on roadway safety.
Finally, the Fortune article makes two other false assumptions. First, they assume that this accident was caused by an Autopilot failure. To be clear, this accident was the result of a semi-tractor trailer crossing both lanes of a divided highway in front of an oncoming car. Whether driven under manual or assisted mode, this presented a challenging and unexpected emergency braking scenario for the driver to respond to. In the moments leading up to the collision, there is no evidence to suggest that Autopilot was not operating as designed and as described to users: specifically, as a driver assistance system that maintains a vehicle’s position in lane and adjusts the vehicle’s speed to match surrounding traffic.
Fortune never even addresses that point. Second, Fortune assumes that, putting all of these other problems aside, a single accident involving Autopilot, regardless of how many accidents Autopilot has stopped and how many lives it has saved, is material to Tesla’s investors. On the day the news broke about NHTSA’s decision to initiate a preliminary evaluation into the incident, Tesla’s stock traded up, not down, confirming that not only did our investors know better, but that our own internal assessment of the performance and risk profile of Autopilot were in line with market expectations.
The bottom line is that Fortune jumped the gun on a story before they had the facts. They then sought wrongly to defend that position by plucking boilerplate language from SEC filings that have no bearing on what happened, while failing to correct or acknowledge their original omissions and errors.
Full text referenced above:
We may become subject to product liability claims, which could harm our financial condition and liquidity if we are not able to successfully defend or insure against such claims.
“Product liability claims could harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition. The automobile industry experiences significant product liability claims and we face inherent risk of exposure to claims in the event our vehicles do not perform as expected resulting in personal injury or death. We also may face similar claims related to any misuse or failures of new technologies that we are pioneering, including autopilot in our vehicles and our Tesla Energy products. A successful product liability claim against us with respect to any aspect of our products could require us to pay a substantial monetary award. Our risks in this area are particularly pronounced given the limited number of vehicles and energy storage products delivered to date and limited field experience of our products. Moreover, a product liability claim could generate substantial negative publicity about our products and business and would have material adverse effect on our brand, business, prospects and operating results. We self-insure against the risk of product liability claims, meaning that any product liability claims will have to be paid from company funds, not by insurance.”
Elon Musk
Elon Musk is now a remote DOGE worker: White House Chief of Staff
The Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is no longer working from the West Wing.

In a conversation with the New York Post, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles stated that Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is no longer working from the West Wing.
As per the Chief of Staff, Musk is still working for DOGE—as a remote worker, at least.
Remote Musk
In her conversation with the publication, Wiles stated that she still talks with Musk. And while the CEO is now working remotely, his contributions still have the same net effect.
“Instead of meeting with him in person, I’m talking to him on the phone, but it’s the same net effect,” Wiles stated, adding that “it really doesn’t matter much” that the CEO “hasn’t been here physically.” She also noted that Musk’s team will not be leaving.
“He’s not out of it altogether. He’s just not physically present as much as he was. The people that are doing this work are here doing good things and paying attention to the details. He’ll be stepping back a little, but he’s certainly not abandoning it. And his people are definitely not,” Wiles stated.
Back to Tesla
Musk has been a frequent presence in the White House during the Trump administration’s first 100 days in office. But during the Q1 2025 Tesla earnings call, Musk stated that he would be spending substantially less time with DOGE and substantially more time with Tesla. Musk did emphasize, however, that DOGE’s work is extremely valuable and critical.
“I think I’ll continue to spend a day or two per week on government matters for as long as the President would like me to do so and as long as it is useful. But starting next month, I’ll be allocating probably more of my time to Tesla and now that the major work of establishing the Department of Government Efficiency is done,” Musk stated.
Elon Musk
Tariff reprieve might be ‘Tesla-friendly,’ but it’s also an encouragement to others
Tesla stands to benefit from the tariff reprieve, but it has some work cut out for it as well.

After Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick made adjustments to the automotive tariff program that was initially announced, many quickly pointed to the reprieve as “Tesla-friendly.”
While that may be the case right now, it was also a nudge of encouragement to other companies, Tesla included, to source parts from the U.S. in an effort to strengthen domestic manufacturing. Many companies are close, and it will only take a handful of improvements to save themselves from tariffs on their cars as well.
Yesterday, Sec. Lutnick confirmed that cars manufactured with at least 85 percent of domestic content will face zero tariffs. Additionally, U.S. automakers would receive credit up to 15 percent of the value of vehicles to offset the cost of imported parts.
Big Tesla win? Sec Lutnick says cars with 85% domestic content will face zero tariffs
“This is ‘finish your cars in America and you win’,” Lutnick said.
Many were quick to point out that only three vehicles currently qualify for this zero-tariff threshold: all three are Teslas.
However, according to Kelley Blue Book’s most recent study that revealed who makes the most American cars, there are a lot of vehicles that are extremely close to also qualifying for these tariff reductions.
Tesla has three vehicles that are within five percent, while Ford, Honda, Jeep, Chevrolet, GMC, and Volkswagen have many within just ten percent of the threshold.
Tesla completely dominates Kogod School’s 2024 Made in America Auto Index
It is within reach for many.
Right now, it is easy to see why some people might think this is a benefit for Tesla and Tesla only.
But it’s not, because Tesla has its Cybertruck, Model S, and Model X just a few percentage points outside of that 85 percent cutoff. They, too, will feel the effects of the broader strategy that the Trump administration is using to prioritize domestic manufacturing and employment. More building in America means more jobs for Americans.

Credit: Tesla
However, other companies that are very close to the 85 percent cutoff are only a few components away from also saving themselves the hassle of the tariffs.
Ford has the following vehicles within just five percent of the 85 percent threshold:
- Ford Mustang GT automatic (80%)
- Ford Mustang GT 5.0 (80%)
- Ford Mustang GT Coupe Premium (80%)
Honda has several within ten percent:
- Honda Passport All-Wheel-Drive (76.5%)
- Honda Passport Trailsport (76.5)
Jeep has two cars:
- Jeep Wrangler Rubicon (76%)
- Jeep Wrangler Sahara (76%)
Volkswagen has one with the ID.4 AWD 82-kWh (75.5%). GMC has two at 75.5% with the Canyon AT4 Crew Cab 4WD and the Canyon Denali Crew Cab 4WD.
Chevrolet has several:
- Chevrolet Colorado 2.7-liter (75.5%)
- Chevrolet Colorado LT Crew Cab 2WD 2.7-liter (75.5%)
- Chevrolet Colorado Z71 Crew Cab 4WD 2.7-liter (75.5%)
These companies are close to reaching the 85% threshold, but adjustments need to be made to work toward that number.
Anything from seats to fabric to glass can be swapped out for American-made products, making these cars more domestically sourced and thus qualifying them for the zero-tariff boundary.
Frank DuBois of American University said that manufacturers like to see stability in their relationships with suppliers and major trade partners. He said that Trump’s tariff plan could cause “a period of real instability,” but it will only be temporary.
Now is the time to push American manufacturing forward, solidifying a future with more U.S.-made vehicles and creating more domestic jobs. Tesla will also need to scramble to make adjustments to its vehicles that are below 85%.
News
Tesla Cybertruck RWD production in full swing at Giga Texas
Videos of several freshly produced Cybertruck LR RWD units were shared on social media platform X.

It appears that Tesla is indeed ramping the production of the Cybertruck Long Range Rear Wheel Drive (LR RWD), the most affordable variant of the brutalist all-electric pickup truck.
Videos of several freshly produced Cybertruck LR RWD units were shared on social media platform X.
Giga Texas Footage
As per longtime Tesla watcher Joe Tegtmeyer, Giga, Texas, was a hotbed of activity when he conducted his recent drone flyover. Apart from what seemed to be Cybercab castings being gathered in the complex, a good number of Cybertruck LR RWD units could also be seen in the facility’s staging area. The Cybertruck LR RWD units are quite easy to spot since they are not equipped with the motorized tonneau cover that is standard on the Cybertruck AWD and Cyberbeast.
The presence of the Cybertruck LR RWD units in Giga Texas’ staging area suggests that Tesla is ramping the production of the base all-electric pickup truck. This bodes well for the vehicle, which is still premium priced despite missing a good number of features that are standard in the Cybertruck AWD and Cyberbeast.
Cybertruck Long Range RWD Specs
The Cybertruck LR RWD is priced at $69,990 before incentives, making it $10,000 more affordable than the Cybertruck AWD. For its price, the Cybertruck Long Range RWD offers a range of 350 miles per charge if equipped with its 18” standard Wheels. It can also add up to 147 miles of range in 15 minutes using a Tesla Supercharger.
Much of the cost-cutting measures taken by Tesla are evident in the cabin of the Cybertruck LR RWD. This could be seen in its textile seats, standard console, seven-speaker audio system with no active noise cancellation, and lack of a 9.4” second-row display. It is also missing the motorized tonneau cover, the 2x 120V and 1x 240V power outlets on the bed, and the 2x 120V power outlets in the cabin. It is also equipped with an adaptive coil spring suspension instead of the adaptive air suspension in the Cybertruck AWD and Cyberbeast.
-
News1 week ago
Tesla’s Hollywood Diner is finally getting close to opening
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
Tesla doubles down on Robotaxi launch date, putting a big bet on its timeline
-
News6 days ago
Tesla is trying to make a statement with its Q2 delivery numbers
-
Investor's Corner1 week ago
LIVE BLOG: Tesla (TSLA) Q1 2025 Company Update and earnings call
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
Tesla reportedly suspended Cybercab and Semi parts order amid tariff war: Reuters
-
SpaceX2 weeks ago
SpaceX pitches subscription model for Trump’s Golden Dome
-
News2 weeks ago
Driverless Teslas using FSD Unsupervised are starting to look common in Giga Texas
-
News3 days ago
NY Democrats are taking aim at Tesla direct sales licenses in New York