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.
Energy
Tesla’s newest “Folding V4 Superchargers” are key to its most aggressive expansion yet
Tesla’s folding V4 Supercharger ships 33% more per truck, cuts deployment time and cost significantly.
Tesla is rolling out a folding V4 Supercharger design, an engineering change that allows 33% more units to fit on a single delivery truck, cuts deployment time in half, and reduces overall installation cost by roughly 20%.
The folding mechanism addresses one of the least glamorous but most consequential bottlenecks in charging infrastructure: getting hardware from factory floor to job site efficiently. By collapsing the form factor for transit and unfolding into an operational configuration on arrival, the new design dramatically reduces the logistics overhead that has historically slowed Supercharger rollouts, particularly at large or remote sites where multiple units are needed simultaneously.
The timing aligns with a broader acceleration in Tesla’s network strategy. In March 2026, Tesla’s Gigafactory New York produced its final V3 Supercharger cabinet after more than seven years and 15,000 units, pivoting entirely to V4 cabinet production. The V4 cabinet itself is already a generational leap, delivering up to 500 kW per stall for passenger vehicles and up to 1.2 MW for the Tesla Semi, while supporting twice the stalls per cabinet at three times the power density of its predecessor. The folding transport innovation layers logistical efficiency on top of that technical foundation.
Tesla launches first ‘true’ East Coast V4 Supercharger: here’s what that means
Tesla Charging’s Director Max de Zegher, commenting on the V4 cabinet when it launched, captured the operational philosophy behind these changes: “Posts can peak up to 500kW for cars, but we need less than 1MW across 8 posts to deliver maximum power to cars 99% of the time.” The design philosophy has always been about maximizing real-world throughput, not just peak specs, and the folding transport upgrade extends that thinking into the supply chain itself.
Posts can peak up to 500kW for cars, but we need less than 1MW across 8 posts to deliver maximum power to cars 99% of the time.
No more DC busbar between cabinets. Power comes from a single V4 cabinet to 8 stalls. Easier to install, cheaper, more reliable.
Introducing Folding Unit Superchargers
– V4 cabinet with 500kW charging
– 8 posts per unit
– 2 units per truck
– 2 configurations: folded, unfoldedFaster. Cheaper. Better. pic.twitter.com/YyALz0U5cA
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) March 25, 2026
The network is expanding rapidly on multiple fronts. The first true 500 kW V4 Supercharger on the East Coast opened in Kissimmee, Florida in March 2026, followed closely by a new site in Nashville, Tennessee. A public Megacharger for the Tesla Semi launched in Ontario, California in early March, with 37 additional Megacharger sites targeted for completion by end of year. Meanwhile, more than 27,500 Supercharger stalls are now accessible to non-Tesla EVs from brands including Ford, GM, Rivian, Hyundai, and most recently Stellantis, whose Dodge, Jeep, Ram, Fiat, and Maserati BEV customers gained access in March 2026.
As Tesla pushes toward a denser, faster, and more open charging network, innovations like the folding V4 Supercharger reflect the company’s growing focus on deployment velocity, not just hardware performance. Getting chargers to the ground faster, cheaper, and in greater volume per shipment may ultimately matter as much as the kilowatts they deliver.
Elon Musk
The Boring Company clears final Nashville hurdle: Music City loop is full speed ahead
The Boring Company has cleared its final Nashville hurdles, putting the Music City Loop on track for 2026.
The Boring Company has cleared one of its most significant regulatory milestones yet, securing a key easement from the Music City Center in Nashville just days ago, the latest in a series of approvals that have pushed the Music City Loop project firmly into construction reality.
On March 24, 2026, the Convention Center Authority voted to grant The Boring Company access to an easement along the west side of the Music City Center property, allowing tunneling beneath the privately owned venue. The move follows a unanimous 7-0 vote by the Metro Nashville Airport Authority on February 18, and a joint state and federal approval from the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration on February 25. Together, these green lights have cleared the path for a roughly 10-mile underground tunnel connecting downtown Nashville to Nashville International Airport, with potential extensions into midtown along West End Avenue.
Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption
Nashville was selected by The Boring Company largely because of its rapid population growth and the strain that growth has placed on surface infrastructure. Traffic has become a persistent problem for residents, convention visitors, and airport travelers alike. The Music City Loop promises an approximately 8-minute underground transit time between downtown and the Nashville International Airport (BNA), removing thousands of vehicles from surface roads daily while operating as a fully electric, zero-emissions system at no cost to taxpayers.
The project fits squarely within a broader vision Musk has championed for years. In responding to a breakdown of the Loop’s construction costs, Musk posted on X: “Tunnels are so underrated.” The comment reflected a longstanding belief that underground transit represents one of the most cost-effective and scalable infrastructure solutions available. The Boring Company has claimed it can build 13 miles of twin tunnels in Nashville for between $240 million and $300 million total, a fraction of what comparable projects cost elsewhere in the country.

Image Credit: The Boring Company/Twitter
The Las Vegas Loop, The Boring Company’s first operational system, has served as a proof of concept. During the CONEXPO trade show in March 2026, the Vegas Loop transported approximately 82,000 passengers over five days at the Las Vegas Convention Center, demonstrating the system’s capacity during large-scale events. Nashville draws millions of convention visitors and tourists each year, and local business leaders have pointed to that same capacity as a major draw for supporting the project.
The Music City Loop was first announced in July 2025. Construction began within hours of the February 25 state approval, with The Boring Company’s Prufrock tunneling machine already in the ground the same evening. The first operational segment is targeted for late 2026, with the full route expected to be complete by 2029. The project represents one of the largest privately funded infrastructure efforts currently underway in the United States.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss
A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s legal team has filed a motion demanding that Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick disqualify herself from an ongoing high-stakes Tesla shareholder lawsuit.
The filing, submitted March 25, cites an apparent LinkedIn “support” reaction from McCormick’s account to a post celebrating a $2 billion jury verdict against Musk in a separate California securities-fraud case.
The move escalates long-simmering tensions between Musk, Tesla, and the Delaware judiciary, where McCormick previously presided over the landmark challenge to Musk’s record $56 billion 2018 compensation package.
Delaware Supreme Court reinstates Elon Musk’s 2018 Tesla CEO pay package
The LinkedIn post was written by Harry Plotkin, a Southern California jury consultant who assisted the plaintiffs who sued Musk over 2022 tweets about his Twitter acquisition. Plotkin praised the trial team for “standing up for the little guy against the richest man in the world.”
The New York Post initially reported the story.
A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.
This appears to be unequivocal proof she denied the pay package because of her own personal beliefs and not the law.
Corruption. https://t.co/8dvgcfYuvh
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 25, 2026
McCormick swiftly denied intentional endorsement. In a letter to attorneys, she stated she was unaware of the interaction until LinkedIn notified her. She wrote:
“I either did not click the ‘support’ icon at all, or I did so accidentally. I do not believe that I did it accidentally.”
The chancellor maintains the reaction was inadvertent, but critics, including Musk allies, call the explanation implausible given the platform’s deliberate interface.
McCormick’s central role in the Tesla pay-package litigation underscores the stakes. In Tornetta v. Musk, in January 2024, she ruled the 2018 performance-based stock-option grant, potentially worth $56 billion at the time and now valued far higher, was invalid.
The package consisted of 12 tranches of options, each vesting only after Tesla achieved ambitious market-cap and operational milestones. McCormick found Musk exercised “transaction-specific control” over Tesla as a controlling stockholder, the board lacked sufficient independence, and proxy disclosures to shareholders were materially deficient.
Applying the entire-fairness standard, she concluded defendants failed to prove the deal was fair in process or price and ordered full rescission, an “unfathomable” remedy she described as necessary to deter fiduciary breaches.
After the ruling, Tesla shareholders ratified the package a second time in June 2024. McCormick rejected that ratification in December 2024, holding that post-trial votes could not cure defects.
Tesla appealed. On December 19 of last year, the Delaware Supreme Court unanimously reversed the rescission remedy while largely leaving McCormick’s liability findings intact. The high court deemed total unwinding inequitable and impractical, restoring the package but awarding the plaintiff only nominal $1 damages plus reduced attorneys’ fees. Musk ultimately received the full award.
The current recusal motion arises in yet another Tesla derivative suit before McCormick. Legal observers say granting it could signal heightened scrutiny of judicial social-media activity; denial might reinforce perceptions of an insular Delaware bench.
Broader fallout includes accelerated corporate migration out of Delaware, Musk himself moved Tesla’s incorporation to Texas after the first ruling, and renewed debate over whether the state’s specialized courts remain the gold standard for corporate governance disputes.
A decision is expected soon; whichever way it lands, the episode highlights the fragile balance between judicial independence and public confidence in high-profile litigation.