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.
Elon Musk said today on X that Teslas will start to learn your individual preferences. This is something that he seemed to hint toward earlier this month when he said parking was by far the biggest reason drivers intervene with Full Self-Driving.
Musk made the comment in response to notable Tesla influencer Whole Mars, who said that his vehicle will sometimes disobey the settings he has enabled for his car. He responded to the post, stating that “The car will start to remember your specific interventions and match each person’s individual preferences.”
The car will start to remember your specific interventions and match each person’s individual preferences
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 18, 2026
This is something that could be perhaps one of the biggest ways Tesla could minimize or even work closer toward eliminating interventions altogether. While FSD does a lot of things really well, many people intervene a vast majority of the time not due to major or critical safety errors.
Instead, many take over because the car is doing something that they do not like as a preference; it might park in a parking spot that is not preferred by the driver, it might linger too long in the left lane on the highway (a personal favorite), or it could even take a route that the driver does not like.
These all lead to interventions, but they are not triggered by a major safety issue. Instead, it’s just preference.
READ OUR REVIEW OF TESLA’S LATEST FSD VERSION:
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.5 Early Impressions: new features and early performance
If Teslas could start to learn the personal preferences of the person who owns them, interventions will truly begin to be less frequent. Some of this is already pretty evident, in my opinion. Teslas use a neural network to learn behaviors and accumulate data to improve performance.
For months now, we’ve tracked FSD’s performance at “Except Right Turn” stop signs, something that is very common in Pennsylvania, but many of our readers located in other parts of the U.S. have never heard of. FSD handles one Except Right Turn stop sign very well, one that I travel past frequently. Others that I do not navigate through as often do not have as confident a performance. It seems like the cars might already be doing this to an extent.
🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3 proceeds through an Except Right Turn Stop Sign pic.twitter.com/YemRSlens7
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 8, 2026
That example is also for something that is a street sign and not necessarily a driver preference; however, I still feel it is worth mentioning because it only handles that commonly passed Except Right Turn stop sign with true confidence. Others it still seems to struggle with.
This could be one of Tesla’s big moves toward full autonomy, and it could be a pathway to truly unsupervised driving. Every day, millions of cars on the road travel at a human driver’s personal preferences with no incident. Why can’t autonomous vehicles still cater to a passenger’s preferences while being autonomous? Tesla seems to have the idea that it would be possible.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has sharply criticized legacy media outlets for what he describes as selective and biased reporting on vehicle accidents involving Tesla. In a recent X post, DeSantis questioned why headlines routinely spotlight the Tesla brand in crash stories, even when human error is the clear cause, while similar incidents with other automakers often receive generic treatment.
A prime example is the June 19, 2026, fatal crash in Katy, Texas. A Tesla Model 3 driven by Michael Butler struck a brick home at high speed, killing 76-year-old Martha Avila inside. Initial reports and headlines prominently featured “Tesla crash” and referenced the driver’s claim that an automated driving-assistance system was engaged.
Many outlets quickly speculated that Full Self-Driving or Autopilot were the cause of the crash, immediately blaming the suites for the accident shortly after it happened.
However, Tesla responded shortly after the accident with vehicle data that showed Butler manually overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100 percent, reaching 73 MPH in a residential area, more than double the speed limit. The accelerator remained floored after impact.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) later confirmed these findings, and Butler now faces manslaughter charges. His phone searches also included queries like “Tesla FSD too timid,” suggesting he may have intervened aggressively. Despite this, many headlines continued to center Tesla’s technology rather than the driver’s actions.
DeSantis highlighted a Washington Post headline, which was labeled, “Newly released photo shows wreckage of Tesla crash that killed grandmother.”
Do legacy media outlets typically use headlines involving the make of a car in a crash or is that only for Tesla?
It would be one thing if the self-driving malfunctioned but the crash was purely human-induced.
Seems like these outlets want to associate Tesla with crashes as… pic.twitter.com/EmfyeYiuv6
— Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) July 17, 2026
The subheadline noted the driver overrode assistance and floored the accelerator, yet the brand name dominated the framing. He asked whether legacy outlets typically name the make of a car in routine crashes or reserve that treatment for Tesla to push a narrative.
This pattern appears widespread. Crashes involving Ford, Chevrolet, or Toyota vehicles frequently appear as “pickup truck slams into home” or “fatal car crash kills pedestrian” without brand specifics, especially absent new technology angles.
High-profile Ford F-150 or Chevy Silverado incidents tied to large sales volumes often escape brand-callout scrutiny. In contrast, Tesla stories consistently lead with the manufacturer, amplifying perceptions of risk despite data showing strong overall safety performance:
🚨 Why do Tesla Owners get so defensive over the narrative of crashes involving Teslas? https://t.co/aX7ogtjTCR pic.twitter.com/KO4QWaLOKl
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 24, 2026
Tesla’s own 2025 Impact Report indicates vehicles using FSD logged 0.19 major incidents per million miles, roughly eight times fewer than the U.S. average. Models like the Model Y also rank among the safest in IIHS and NHTSA testing for occupant protection. Critics argue disproportionate coverage ignores these statistics and driver behavior factors, such as younger or more aggressive Tesla owners in some studies.
DeSantis frames this as part of a broader political agenda against innovative American companies like Tesla. By consistently naming Tesla while downplaying others, media outlets risk eroding public trust and shaping perceptions detached from the evidence of human error in most cases.
As autonomous technology evolves across the industry, consistent and factual reporting will be essential to separate real safety concerns from narrative-driven coverage.
Tesla entered two new markets this week by advancing its presence in Latvia (Europe) and officially launching operations in Uruguay (South America), marking a rapid dual-continent expansion.
These moves underscore the company’s strategy to tap into emerging EV markets with supportive policies, renewable energy grids, and growing demand for sustainable transport.
Latvia: Strengthening the Baltic Footprint
In Latvia, Tesla has built on its earlier registration of Tesla Latvia SIA in late 2025 with recent steps toward full operations, including job postings for a service center and representation in Riga. This aligns with broader Baltic expansion following Lithuania’s model of pop-up stores and service centers.
Coming to Latvia https://t.co/XNkQQJ2O6a pic.twitter.com/yS9kpcNky1
— Tesla Europe, Middle East & Africa (@teslaeurope) July 17, 2026
EV penetration in Latvia stands at around 7 percent for BEVs in new passenger car registrations. 2025 data showed 1,602 BEVs out of about 22,500 total, or 7.1 percent, with combined plug-ins nearing 19 percent. Growth has been steady but below the European average, supported by government subsidies and infrastructure development. Tesla models like the Model 3 lead local EV registrations.
Vehicles for the Latvian market will likely be sourced from Gigafactory Berlin or Gigafactory Shanghai. Charging infrastructure is robust for the region as well, with over 400- 2,000 public points, with Tesla Superchargers in Riga, Jūrmala, and along Via Baltica routes offering up to 250 kW.
Uruguay: Third South American Country
Tesla teased its Uruguay arrival with “Estamos llegando,” or, “We are arriving,” on social media, followed by an official presentation scheduled for mid-July.
Hola Uruguay 🇺🇾
Nuestros Model 3 y Model Y están cada vez mas cerca! pic.twitter.com/FR41fsA7um
— Tesla Latinoamérica (@Tesla_LatAm) June 30, 2026
The company established Tesla Uruguay SAS, homologated Model 3 and Model Y (three versions each), and appointed local leadership. This makes Uruguay Tesla’s third official South American market after Chile and Colombia.
Uruguay boasts one of Latin America’s highest EV penetrations, with battery-electric vehicles exceeding 20 percent market share recently, driven by tax incentives, high fuel prices, and a nearly 95-100 percent renewable electricity grid. Hundreds of Teslas already operate via grey imports, but official sales bring warranties, service, and support.
Vehicles will be imported from Gigafactory Shanghai, enabling competitive pricing for Model 3 and Model Y. Charging plans include Supercharger development alongside existing infrastructure, leveraging the country’s green energy advantage for affordable operation.
Tesla Superchargers follow Model 3 and Model Y to South American country
Tesla’s Dual Continent Expansion
Tesla’s simultaneous push into Latvia and Uruguay demonstrates efficient scaling: prioritizing service and infrastructure first, then direct sales in high-potential niches. In Europe, it fills Baltic gaps; in Latin America, it counters Chinese dominance while leveraging renewables.
This dual move signals Tesla’s ambition to accelerate global EV adoption amid varying regional paces. By addressing local needs, like subsidies in Latvia or incentives and green grids in Uruguay, Tesla not only boosts volumes but advances its mission of sustainable energy.
For investors and consumers, it highlights resilience and opportunity in diverse markets, potentially paving the way for further growth in underserved regions. With strong fundamentals in both, these entries could yield long-term gains as EV transitions mature worldwide.
Elon Musk says your Tesla will start to learn your individual preferences
Ron DeSantis calls out media bias in Tesla crash coverage
