A quick look at the electric vehicle community’s sentiments about Elon Musk on X and platforms like Reddit would suggest that the CEO’s increasing political nature has now become Tesla’s largest liability. Yet as per S&P Mobility, Tesla’s brand loyalty is still incredibly strong. This suggests that even in today’s social media-driven landscape, good products still drive sales and loyalty.
Tesla’s resilient brand loyalty
In its post, S&P Mobility noted that among individual brands, “Tesla continues its run as the leader in brand loyalty with a rate of 67.8% for the first half of 2024.” Vince Palomarez, associate director of loyalty product management at S&P Global Mobility, also noted that Tesla’s customer loyalty has remained constant.
“Tesla has historically been a brand with strong loyal ties among their consumer base, despite a limited product portfolio. Changes in BEV prioritization among other OEMs, along with Tesla’s directive to cut pricing when needed, has kept households from defecting,” Palomarez noted.
S&P Mobility’s findings are extremely interesting as social media trends and media reports have practically been unanimous about the idea that Elon Musk has become poison to Tesla’s brand. As per Palomarez, however, the data does not support this narrative–at least for now.
“We can only report on what we see in the data. In this instance, there is some decline in Tesla’s loyalty for the first half of 2024 vs. 2023; however, it is below one percentage point,” he said, noting that Tesla is still clearly beating other brands. “The brand still remains the industry leader in brand loyalty by a healthy margin. For comparison’s sake, the industry brand loyalty average stands at 52.5% for H1 2024 and no other brand has a loyalty rate above 60%,” the S&P Global Mobility associate director noted.
Good products drive sales and loyalty
Perhaps one of the reasons why Tesla still sees strong brand loyalty among consumers is the fact that the company produces good products, from its electric vehicles to its battery storage systems. Even if Tesla’s vehicles have been beaten by other competitors when it comes to range, efficiency, and 0-60 mph times, the company’s vehicles offer the best value for their price.
A good example of this is the re-engineered Tesla Model 3 Performance, which is an absolute steal at $55,000 for the performance, tech, safety, comfort, and features that it offers. The same is true for the Tesla Model Y, which has effectively outsold its rivals in the all-electric crossover SUV segment despite having the same exterior design since its March 2019 unveiling event.
-
Consumers gravitate towards good products, leadership be damned. A look at the strong sales in the United States of the Volkswagen Beetle Type 1, a vehicle whose creation was driven by Adolf Hitler’s desire for a people’s car, proves this. The Volkswagen Beetle Type 1 became extremely popular in the United States in the 1960s, less than two decades after World War 2. All in all, almost 5 million Beetle Type 1 units were sold in the United States out of a total of 21.5 million cars worldwide. Part of the reason behind the Beetle Type 1’s success in the U.S. is due to the fact that it is just a great, bang-for-the-buck car.
The list goes on. Ford’s founder, Henry Ford, held deeply antisemitic views. He even brought a local newspaper to publish his own anti-Semitic writings. Ford has thrived despite its founder’s questionable ethics, and the company still produces the best-selling car in the United States today–the F-Series pickup trucks. The 47-year reign of the F-Series as America’s best-selling vehicle could be attributed to the fact that they are just great trucks.
Most amusing is the Reimann family, which owns a controlling stake in JAB Holdings. In 2019, it was revealed that the Reimann family had close ties to the Nazi party. Despite this, one cannot deny the fact that JAB Holdings’ brands, which include Krispy Kreme, Jimmy Choo, and Pret-A-Manger, are still loved by consumers because of their quality and consumer appeal.
Elon Musk’s tweets
There is no doubt that since acquiring Twitter, Elon Musk has become far more willing to share his views on a number of issues, from US and international politics to gender ideology. There is also no doubt that the negative slant in media against Musk and his companies is at an all-time high. The Guardian, just last week, published a guide on how to “rein in” Elon Musk by boycotting Tesla, having foreign governments threaten to arrest Musk, suing the CEO under Section Five of the FTC Act, and terminating contracts with SpaceX.
Musk has always attracted negative media attention, but not at this level.
Considering the nature of Musk’s posts, it is no surprise that some consumers would indeed not purchase Teslas due to the CEO’s social media posts. But ultimately, sales and brand loyalty are a game of numbers. There is a vocal portion of the car-buying community who are extremely open about not purchasing Teslas due to their dislike or hatred of Musk. However, the lines between the EV sector and the greater automotive market are growing thinner. Thus, more regular car buyers may simply be looking at Teslas because they need a car. For such consumers, the politics of Tesla’s CEO may not be a consideration at all.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
-
In a new note to investors on Tuesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco said that Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors regarding its Robotaxi rollout, Full Self-Driving software, and Optimus.
Percoco said in the note that, for the most part, investors are still very positive about the direction the company is headed. However, there are some things the firm would like to see, and they have to do with financials.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla bulls are more than convinced that the company’s Full Self-Driving software is proof it can develop physical AI. Financially, however, there are still some questions, especially on elevated spending, which CEO Elon Musk said would occur as the company works to roll out Robotaxi faster and continue developing its Optimus robot.
The latter two are where Tesla will have to prove progress to investors, as Percoco writes that both projects “will require clearer evidence that Robotaxi is scaling and more tangible Optimus proof points to support the ROI on elevated capex.”
Percoco said the second quarter earnings call did not change his long-term thesis of where Tesla is positioned in the AI race, which is out in front. However, there are concerns that weaker gross margins and higher R&D spend will stress financials, and that has “sharpened our (and investors’) focus on measurable progress across Robotaxi and Optimus.”
Additionally, Robotaxi still needs to be proven with more operation in existing cities while maintaining safety but improving how many rides it gives in any given time, he said. For Optimus, Percoco wrote that he is “still looking for evidence beyond commentary around SOP.”
Morgan Stanley put Percoco in charge of covering Tesla after long-time analyst Adam Jonas transitioned to the automotive side.
Currently, Morgan Stanley has a $415 price target on Tesla and a ‘Hold’ rating on the stock. It is trading at around $330 at the time of publication, which was 2:30 P.M. on the East Coast.
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
