Here is the link from Yahoo's 2013 car of the year http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/tesla-model-2013-yahoo-autos-car-165907072.html.
It says that 250 cars have been delivered and 359 (additional?) have been produced.
Yay, buy those numbers look way low.
Many more accolades to come I think.
1263 comments as of now, and all of the usual negative suspects. I've tried to address a few of them, but I can't wait how much it burns up these guys as more awards come in.
I would not bother responding to that crowd - you will NEVER convince them. They do not get the idea in the first place. All they see is the price for the car and that's enough for them to ridicule it.
Almost all the comments are negative (and a lot of them are very rude)! How is this possible? Are we witnessing an attack of a computerized horde of anti-Tesla/EV/Obama/etc. trolls?
When they get jobs, then they will begin to understand, or maybe go to school. Naw that won't. Help
They have been there all along. Actually seem less than before; about 1.5yrs ago when I was digging up info on Tesla before giving them my deposit a simple google search would turn up 25% hater links. Nowadays not so much.
I suspect a lot of people feel their usual way of life, or possibly even their job, are threatened by the start of the EV revolution. As ICE production and repair, along with oil industry influence become less prevalent , people will need to transition to careers supporting an electric economy. That's going to hurt for a while, but it will be well worth it in the end.
Many insecure people are threatened by change itself-- of any kind.
This link has been posted in the sister thread, but it belongs here at least as much:
"Our selection of the Tesla Model S as Yahoo! Autos 2013 Car of the Year has stirred an overwhelming response online in just a few hours. While many agree, we thought it'd be best to tackle the criticisms from the commentariat in one place. If you think we're short-sighted, bought off or didn't think this through, this story's for you. Let's tackle them as they come; these are actual comments from actual readers: [...]"http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/means-tesla-car-why-matters-21255...
You know what's funny... I must be completely blinded. I work for one of the Big 3 and would have NEVER seen this coming. I'm shocked that there is such backlash over the Model S. It's an AMAZING vehicle with so much going for it. If it were a piece of crap, then you should be told that it is. That way people stay away from it. The same should apply if it's revolutionary; get the word out. I don't know... I never expected there to be a need to justify an award. This is throwing me for a loop.
All the ignorant comments I see on those posts remind me of what Apple used to suffer from in the mid 1990s. People didn't understand what they were about.
Look at them today; products that people want and buy because they didn't follow what the others were doing.
Tesla is no different. If they can survive financially over the next couple of years and get out of the woods from being a "startup" they will do just fine.
We're all so close to Tesla that we all know their business and car plans but it drives me crazy to see all the comments about "I want a $30,000 version of this car". I know it's not in Tesla's best interest to talk about future products when they need to sell Model S and soon Model X but the car business is not as secretive as Apple is with their product plans but perhaps they need to a bit more vocal about Gen 3 so that people understand they operate more like a computer business; technology will get cheaper, we just need some time.
Aaw come on, guys...
Haven't you learned by this age to block out input from "Psychic Vampires"? (DEF: People who, when they're around, seem to suck the life out of you.)
As Eleanor Roosevelt said, "No one can hurt you without your consent."
All of us Tesla fan-boys know for sure that the Model S is going to be a huge success; so why waste your energy obsessing about tiresome blog-surfing nay-sayers who will never have the money to buy a really fine automobile of ANY brand. Just blow them off.
Be glad that you can afford a Model S and have fun! :-)
I remember in the early 2000's when I bought my plasma TV. One coworker actually said, "I heard the plasma runs out of them and you have to get them refilled." He was serious too. I still have that 10 year old 42" TV and it works perfect. Some people have to have excuses why they can't buy something out of their price range so they can feel better about themselves.
What baffles me is neither that other people's opinions differ from mine, nor that they may not be particularly qualified. What I find really odd is 1) that the overwhelming majority of the comments are negative 2) that so many negative comments where published this fast 3) the predictability of the content (one gets the feeling that a simple caricature Fox TV-Oil apologetic-Tea Party based statement generating software could produce all of it).
I am not usually into conspiracy theories, but how the heck do they do this?
And to add to the list is Time's take on Tesla Model S, which is one of the year's best inventions. http://techland.time.com/2012/11/01/best-inventions-of-the-year-2012/slide/the-tesla-model-s/
New Bloomberg article on the Model S:
Couldn't have said it better myself!
Er... Automobile Magazine's "Car of the Year" anyone? I saw it on the CNN.com home page.
Doncha know? The Tesla Master Plan is Secret!
Corr: above is for innoveight.
Automobile magazine car of the year
Yeah, I noticed the negative comments, too bad for them. They don't have the facts right, nor do they have the vision.
Heh. When TM finally gets around to advertising and promo, it's going to have a rucksack full of material to use!
CONGRATULATIONS! To everyone at Tesla Motors for being acknowledge Car Of The Year by Yahoo & Automobile Magazine.
Every employee at Tesla is now seeing the results of their work, I expect management will be sitting down to a very nice dinner tonight and having a toast to their achievements.
Many more awards to come!
I find some of the responses on this forum, talking about the negative comments, to be just as bad as the negative comments to Automobile magazine picking the Tesla Model S as car of the year.
I am a libertarian, I already voted in the presidential election, and I didn't vote for Barack Obama, I watch the FOX business channel every week, I am sceptical of the "global warming" crisis, but last month I put my $5,000 down on a Tesla Model S.
People assume too much. I don't fit the "profile" of what some people in support of EV's think that profile is. Everyone is free to make their own judgements about EV's, and some reasons to support EV's have nothing to do with environmentalism and/or political liberal ideology.
Negative comments are made because many of the so called Republicans and "Libertarians" in general are either ignorant of the FACTs, or they just don't care.
If you are skeptical of the "global warming" , then you don't really understand SCIENCE. FACTS are FACTs. Nothing more. It's okay to be skeptical at first. that's what science is, but it's now undisputed. just as the EARTH is round. Or are you skeptical about the EARTH being a spherical in shape?
I don't want to sound perturbed, but I'm sick and tired of politicians--both liberal and conservatives, who are quoted at being "skeptical" about global climate change just to appease the big oil company lobby. and the people who believe their CRAP.
Ok. I'm done ranting. P12,893, anxiously awaiting my Model S.
@jchangyy I'm sceptical of "global warming", because what one person calls facts, often differs from what another person calls facts.
Again you assume too much. I have studied the research around "global warming", and climate change in detail, and I understand science. People on both sides of the debate use the data in their own way to present themselves as correct. I won't get into a debate on this forum about it, and I have nothing to gain from "Big OIL", but suffice it to say that the simplistic data that is often shown in the media is very misleading.
If the concept of man made climate change is wrong and we spend extra developing new technology to avoid it, then we just spent more that we needed to to develop new cleaner technology. If, however man made climate change is real and we ignore it then we have just succeeded in destroying our planet, the current and future economy and cost ourselves enormously. Trying to play catchup wile rectifying the damage and produce new technology will cost even more.
If I were to come up with a plan that meant we'd burn billions of tons of fuel that took millions of years to form over the course of a hundred or so years without it impacting anything else would that sound credible? If studies had already been done that showed that it was dangerous would they be as dismissed if the industry wasn't already established?
Congratulations Tesla in being a leader in developing an alternative that doesn't require a massive change in lifestyle. A truly practical vehicle that people like and want.
Those hyping global warming fears use a "base" status from about 1880 as the "ideal". This was the coldest point since the ice sheets retreated. The mild warming since then has been entirely benign, and more would get us partway back to the much better climates of the Medieval Warm Period, or maybe even the Roman Optimum. The preceding Minoan or Holocene Optimums would be too much to hope for.
CO2 levels result from and follow warming (of the oceans) by about 800 years.
As I said Brian, if you are wrong and the world listens to you then we have a serious and extremely expensive problem. If 99% of the worlds climate scientists (who actually study this stuff) are wrong and the world listens to them, then we spend money developing new technology ( like a Tesla ) that we didn't need to develop.
I'd rather have the technology earlier.
Every statement I made is fully documented. Your 99% is completely imaginary, though. It comes from a hilariously flawed student survey that hand-selected 79 out of 1400 respondents (out of 5,000+ invited) to a poorly worded questionaire as the only "qualified" ones, and misrepresented 77 agreements with a fuzzy misstatement of the science as a 97% "support" for the Anthropogenic Global Warming" speculation. Pathetic, really.
@Brian H: Not sure your '1880' comment reconciles with the 'little ice age' of the 16th-18th centuries with frost faires across Europe when the rivers froze:
That chart is completely erroneous. Here's some perspective:
@BrianH - I think this really isn't the forum to be arguing about climate change, though I grant that Elon has used it as part of the explanation for why he built Tesla and so has some relevance.
Your graph above is an mirrored version of Easterbrook's graph, which makes a few mistakes. For one, he defines present as 2000AD, when the data he is actually looking at defines 1950AD. His chart also has the edge marked "0 thousands of years" as 95 years before present (which is actually 1950), meaning the graph stops 155 years ago, well before any modern industrialization. Part of the confusion is he uses the date of the sample of 1987 rather than the date the layer of ice being measured as 1905 (since it takes decades for the snow to compact into ice). The CO2 line being constant until recently is obviously incorrect as well, as there is natural variation.
Read the full article at http://www.skepticalscience.com/10000-years-warmer.htm -- that site has other great articles (with links to all the source materials for the conclusions so you can verify them yourself if you are so inclined) that I encourage you to read for other doubts you may have. For example, addressing the more general point of the graph above that it has been hotter before, see http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-w...
Beyond that, consider scientists who were opposed to the idea that climate change is attributed to human activity, yet when they researched it in detail they changed their minds -- http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-ch... is a prominent example (background at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_A._Muller).
Brian, Please go somewhere else to discuss your BIG OIL agenda. You're not welcome here, spreading so called "facts" that are glued together to make it look like there is no serious climate change.
every credible scientific studies have shown a SHARP increase in global temperature since the man made pollution has started. I do grant you that there are cycles that the earth goes through, but the degree to which we've seen temperature change is out of norm. If you cannot accept that fact, then you just don't know what you're talking about or don't care.
OK Brian: How about ' the majority of scientific opinion' vs the skeptics? If the skeptics are wrong, and we listen to them, doom. If the skeptics are right, but we ignore them the we are better off.
Gambling at these stakes is no win for following the skeptic brigade and mostly upside for doing something to shift us from a fossil fuelled dependency.
Even if co2 is not to blame, setting fire to huge amounts of fuel at a rapidly increasing rate with all of the waste going into the atmosphere is irresponsible. The world uses something like 85 million barrels a day.
At 42 gallons to the barrel, that’s three billion, five hundred and seventy million gallons of oil (3,570,000,000).
Then there is coal at around 7 billion tons per year, plus land clearing etc etc.
Whether you believe in climate change or not, continuing on this path is stupid and we must move from it at some stage. I vote that we do it to avoid a potential catastrophe.
Climate skeptics remind me of the people who complain about all the money spent to avoid the y2k issue. They say 'look it wasn't that bad after all - nothing happened!' The reality is that nothing happened because we spent the time and money to fix the problem in time. I know many systems were affected as I was on some of the projects to fix them - several banks that I know of had serious widespread problems.
Of course, as with y2k, it could all be a beat up - right?
You'd better be pretty sure that you are 100% correct if you ignore all of the evidence and experts, put your head in the sand and decide to do nothing.
If you are willing to fund it, you can find a scientist willing to justify your position! That being said, I would error on the side of global warming as the negatives of siding the other way doesn't amount to anything except for dirty air and the market to sell oxygen in the future.
Surprising that there still is any discussion related to global warming. It is even more surprising that there is so much denial about global warming. This is similar to the flat earth society and creationism believers.
It's no surprise that you watch Fox.
The rest of world is making leaps and bounds when it comes to education and science and here, in this country, people still believe that the universe is 6,000 years old and the sun goes round the earth.
My wife says the world revolves around me and I would like to believe her... ;)
You should Brian....thank God for your wife. No one else does. And yes, I'm a Christian, but I believe in science rather than creationism CRAP.
@BYT +1, and yours around her :)
Well, she really says the the world DOESN'T revolve around me, but she also says that I hear what I want to hear so... there you go. :D
that's sweet. sounds like she's a keeper. anyway, getting back to the forum topic, wonder if there is much attention from the European market for Tesla?
On the contrary; the mitigation efforts the AGW alarmists are pushing are so economically destructive and defective that they guarantee loss and hardship for all. Fuel poverty is wracking the UK and Germany, with millions unable to afford heat, etc. Legions have already died in poor coutries as a result of food price spikes (doubling in a couple of years) as side effects of misbegotten carbon swap and biofuel scams. More corn is grown in the US for ethanol than people, now. The UN FAO chief once described growing food for fuel as a "crime against humanity", e.g.
The payoff table is very heavily negative, while absolutely no unwanted effects of warming have been demonstrated or observed. (Actually, severe weather and droughts and all the other scary stuff hyped are characteristic of cooling climates!! The energy gradient tropic-poles gets shallower and quieter under warming.)
typo: poor countries
Back on topic ("accolades") Plugincars observes the 2 "Of The Year" awards, and summarizes about the way we do: "Expect the Model S to continue its sweep of Car of the Year awards. Hopefully, this will give Tesla the moral[e] and publicity boost it needs, as it works to ramp up production, and become financially viable for the long run."
Brian H "getting perspective" graph is deliberately chosen to not show the rapid heating of the modern age. Also that green bar showing CO2 raise is not accurate to say it mildly. CO2 has varied a lot more than that.
There is undeniable global warming happening. That can't be disputed anymore, much like dinosaur feathers can't. Only thing that can be argued (intelligently) is whether or not that is caused by human activity.
I say that however small effect the human activity has, it has an impact. CO2 is greenhouse gas. That's just fact. Pumping it to the atmosphere is a bad thing for us humans. You actually witnessed it with Sandy just recently, and Katrina and Isaac earlier. That is what it causes to us humans. Changes in weather patterns. Some added heat itself would be nice, but if you get drought/flood in places where you grow crops you have a problem. Nature likes, human infrastructures, not so much.
@Brian H: Wish you were here. In New Jersey. With your clothes spread all along the highway, for the second time in 14 months. With everything you own under 10 feet of water, for the second time in 14 months. In the dark, shivering in the cold, unshowered for days, for the THIRD time in 14 months. And your kids crying, scared, looking at you, and you are helpless... for the whatever time... From a phenomenon that supposedly happens only once in a century, this far north. Then maybe, just maybe, you would consider doing something just in case, not eve believing ... like when you knock on wood, just in case. Or you buy insurance, just in case. Or maybe you'll just stick your head back in the piles of sand washed up around your house and leave your rear end exposed for the next imaginary thing to hit it.
Ah, hmm, I keep checking into this thread to read about new accolades I've missed. Instead I get grown persons yelling at each other. Could you please take that somewhere else so we could get back to the topic at hand? I suspect there are a huge number of NEW awards coming and I for one would like a place to read about them.