Tesla victorious in misleading statement suit for Full Self-Driving

[Actual Bloomberg source](https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/2024/09/30/tesla-defeats-investor-lawsuit-over-musks-autopilot-marketing/) Though trigger warning they seem to be playing fast and loose with autopilot vs fsd terminology >In her ruling Monday, US District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín rejected shareholders’ allegations that Musk overstated Tesla’s self-driving technology with assurances that drivers could “go to sleep” in their car by 2020, among other promises. She found that some of the alleged overstatements concerned future plans, while others weren’t necessarily false. >“Plaintiffs fail to connect Musk’s hands-on management with any information that he allegedly learned rendering his statements false or misleading,” the judge wrote. However, she gave the investors until Oct. 30 to file an updated version of their complaint. Tldr musk was just way too optimistic, but had no reason to believe what he was saying read impossible so it's not technically a lie? No dog in this race just trying to understand the ruling

The way I read it. And I am not a legal anything.  The statements made were so outlandish that a reasonable person would not have believed them. At least that's how I understand teslas defence...

Forward looking statements are tough to call lies. Sometimes people genuinely believe x and it doesn’t work out. CEOs and their companies fall short all the time. What this is saying is that the ‘plaintiffs’ failed to show that elons statements were knowingly efforts to lie or deliberately mislead investors. So your assessment is correct.

Where did you read that?

Probably somewhere else on the internet about a different topic some time ago and they're trying to apply it here.

https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/download.html?id=333471393&z=300ed0cf

The same people that bash Tesla and Musk for not keeping promises, forget that Volvo and their CEO Hakan promised similar capability in 2016 and are way behind today to a point where they quit the effort: https://phys.org/news/2016-09-volvo-self-driving-car-years.html

Probably Fox "News"

>with assurances that drivers could “go to sleep” in their car by 2020, among other promises. What was the full quote by Elon? Was it “I 100% promise that in 2020 you can go to sleep in your Tesla?”. Or was it something a bit more ambiguous?

I am a legal something, specifically a federal court expert in consumer messaging. That's an incorrect take. They weren't presented as too outlandish at all. The “problem” is that they'd have to prove Elon knew it would be impossible to deliver on time. I'd suggest the faked video of city driving is a form of false advertising. It was on their official site for some time. If, when published, it was presented as “look at what we can do now” why would a consumer think it was impossible? The defense would be that it represented genuinely what they expected to have at time of delivery. The fact that 12.5 can now do everything in that video bolsters Tesla’s claim that they were overly optimistic on timelines but not lying.

Fair enough.  Is there an extension for the lawsuit or are they done. Like I said law is not something I'm even remotely knowledgeable in.

the judge was probably bribed like the tesla board of directors is.

Why it feels like election promises hahaha. Ye we'll see this and that, not But hey, no one really chases politicians for accountability.

I think the big difference between musk(tesla) and milton(nikola) is that he made promise for the future that were not realized, while milton pretended he had the existing manufacturing/technology and told his investors that.

These are wildly different scenarios, though. Volvo saying that they would sell a car in the future with that capability is not the same as marketing that **existing** vehicles that they sell will be able to do self driving in the future and using that to justify its value proposition. I’m not necessarily claiming he outright lied, but these two scenarios are not comparable and completely side-steps the *actual* point of contention here.

Politics are far different and especially in the USA, much harder to keep due to the presidential system

[deleted]

The shareholders have until October 30th to respond.

I am also not a lawyer but struggling through that document (what terrible formatting) it seems like essentially the case was about whether Tesla/Elon are protected by certain laws and safe harbor provisions that essentially try and protect businesses from lawsuits because they aim high and say so, then fall short. You might be getting confused by some of the wording in one of the earlier pages about the qualifications for who can bring suit over investment losses based on a statement. I don't think that's super relevant here

They linked a source. Don't be a weirdo

Yes. One is vision for future, the other is blatant lying about the present.

I'd argue that Tesla/Elon blatantly lied in their 2016 FSD demo.

Has your CTO been charging $8k for the bold claims in the meanwhile?

Worth every penny. Would not own a car without it.

They've clearly been trying to make that happen though. FSD for existing vehicles has improved a lot.

[deleted]

I tracked the source down from a Wired article and of course it was different. Most often when he makes claims he freely admits that they are estimates or simply his personal opinion. This podcast interview from 2019 is the source and no different. https://www.ark-invest.com/podcast/on-the-road-to-full-autonomy-with-elon-musk Transcript: https://www.livewiremarkets.com/wires/on-the-road-with-elon-musk > when will regulators agree that these things can be done without human oversight? That is another level beyond that. These are externalities we don't quite control, and the conservatism of regulators varies a lot from one jurisdiction to another. **My guess as to when we would think it's safe for somebody to essentially fall asleep and wake up at their destination, probably towards the end of next year.** That's when I would think it's most likely it would be safe enough for that. I don't know when regulators will agree. And while he was totally wrong, he qualified it as a guess. It was not a promise. And furthermore his larger point was that even if Tesla would reach such a technology level in future, regulations would not allow that as a customer facing feature. Difficult to make a law suit out of that statement. Depending on ones opinions about bureaucracy it could even be interpreted as a point to depress stock price.

Some of them from Elon in autonomy day 2019: > “From our standpoint, if you fast forward a year, maybe a year and three months, but next year for sure, we’ll have over a million robotaxis on the road,” Musk said. “The fleet wakes up with an over the air update; that’s all it takes.” And another: > “By the middle of next year, we’ll have over a million Tesla cars on the road with full self-driving hardware, feature complete, at a reliability level that we would consider that no one needs to pay attention.” And in one example saying “predicting” but other times saying “for sure”: > “I feel very confident predicting that there will be autonomous robotaxis from Tesla next year — not in all jurisdictions because we won’t have regulatory approval everywhere”

And Volvo has never misled its costumers ever before.  https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/consent-order-volvo-group-north-america#:~:text=The%20consent%20order%20includes%20a,and%20the%20company's%20safety%20practices. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15346393/volvo-exec-vw-diesel-emissions-cheating-was-an-open-secret-for-years/

awesome news

The issue for investors is that so long as legacy vehicles sold as having the necessary hardware continue to be supported, it’s a losing case to say they failed. At best right now you can only prove they are late. It also helps Tesla that the competition hasn’t done much better. 2019 vehicles from Tesla are more capable than virtually all new vehicles from competitors rolling off the assembly line today. At some point Tesla may have to declare that legacy models won’t be further updated, and they’ll be more exposed to potential lawsuits, but they are still fairly well protected at this point.

The judge granted a demurrer. The Plaintiffs can amend the complaint. The case is not over, so this isn’t much of a victory.

Sure but no one _paid_ for a volvo that is "Full Self Driving Capable". That's a material difference.

I mean VW paid millions if not billions of dollars for their lies, you're suggesting Tesla should be subject to the same?

1st link is Volvo and they paid damages. The 2nd is regarding VW emissions scandal and they also paid damages.

[deleted]

Last I heard it was still `Supervised` Level 2 instead of what was promissed (which was in essence Level 4). Did anything change in last week or so?

Yea sorry when he starts saying "for sure" that is pretty misleading. I would think he could get in trouble for stock manipulation. I think he can get away with it since he makes so many statements are largely he is not consistent with these promises and it's not written so most Judges are like no sane person really believes him or would "trust" what he says will happen. There is so much lying/false promises going around though in todays society though.

[deleted]

Lawsuits like these are always a major uphill climb. I genuinely feel bad for people that actually bought into the FSD hype and even purchased a car with the hope of offsetting the cost with his initial robotaxi promises.

Sorry I should have clarified the links and that the second wasn't about volvo.. Every car manufacturer has weighed the cost of doing business and opted to keep lying at some point. Ford, GM, Volvo, VW, Toyota, Tesla.. all of them. Emissions, Battery Range, Exploding... if the long term damage is more than the short term payouts and fines, they will keep lying.

very cutesey, very demure

He said it would drive itself- it drives itself. The levels are for liability and competence. It doesn't drive at the competence level you want but it does drive itself. Many companies got in the game and spent tens of billions of dollars many of them with little or nothing to show for it. Musk was far off on his prediction. He and others were completely wrong on how hard the problem was. I watched Cruise and Waymo practice for years and was trying to get early access. It took them 15 years but Waymo now has a product I can use. Always, always discount people's prognostication of the future. Expect to be disappointed if you're an early adopter.

Elon absolutely lied about the present as well on Tesla’s site. Even in 2017 it claimed that FSD was only blocked by “additional software validation and government regulation”. That was a straight up lie, the software was nowhere close to be in that stage back in 2017. I had a coworker who leased a P90D with the FSD package in 2017 because of “3 months maybe, 6 months definitely” scam.

3 months maybe, 6 months definitely.. it’s a Non guarantee forward looking statement admitting “not currently available today” Like the court said. Overly optimistic but not a lie.

Nikola has been producing and selling Hydrogen Trucks for a while already… the key is that in that demo they made people think it was a working truck, but to me is not much different that seeing Tesla driving by itself and to look it works perfect despite many years later still it doesn’t. The robotaxi incentives for the owners that’s even worse as was making people to buy a package that has been of very little use (I.e EU and UK markets)

I had a coworker who leased a P90D with FSD package in 2017 because of the “3 months maybe, 6 months definitely” claim by Elon, and he was showing me on Tesla’s site they claimed that FSD was only blocked by “additional software validation and government regulation”. All of those were straight up lies. When Elon made that claim in 2016 nobody within the industry, or Tesla’s engineering department, or even Elon himself, believed FSD was 6 months away. Tesla needed cash in 2016 so that’s Elon’s way to raise money. Then the same lie was repeated about robotaxi and how it would make Model 3s to be appreciating assets. This suit would be a slam dunk in more pro-consumer countries but here in the U.S corporations run things. In fact like /u/HighHokie mentioned how the burden of proof for internal corporate communication is on the consumer is evidence of how insanely pro-corporation and anti-consumer this country is.

Definitely not over, but I disagree with this: >so this isn’t much of a victory. They've had quite a bit of time to put together the facts and argument so what can they now do to sway this judge? She dismissed this case and they need to try to get her to change her mind by October 30th. Good luck. This is a significant step towards a victory for Tesla.

It’s actually wild - candidates will promise the world, and the some - deliver none of it, and nobody bats an eye. Elon promises self driving vehicles and is honestly not that far off from delivering it, and people are asking for his head. It’s not like Tesla isn’t actively working towards it, nobody else is even close, just let them continue to work and quit whining.

Claiming you are “x time away from Y” is absolutely a statement about current state of things. He wasn’t overly optimistic, at that time nobody within Tesla’s engineering department believed that, not even Elon. But Tesla needed a lot of cash in 2016 so he was trying to realize additional revenue upfront. And claiming the software was in validation stage and was only blocked by government regulation was also a big fat lie.

Read the first sentence you wrote again 😅 “x time away from y” is NOT about current state 🤦🏻

So many Tesla apologists in this sub. The legal hurdle is extremely hard to clear but the compilation videos of Musk repeatedly saying “next year” all point to him knowingly lying and applying pressure to his team to do the impossible. I own two Model 3s. Great cars. One has FSD as I bought it used from a Tesla employee who had it for free. Every time I’ve used it, including recently, it’s been jarringly bad. I keep seeing people here saying it’s improved but my take is that I feel bad for the cars around me when I have it on. I’ve put it in the vaporware pile for now. Great cars, don’t believe AT ALL in FSD until major improvements are made still.

People bought it based on his fraudulent claims. Don’t be daft.

I don’t know in what world do you think claiming your **current progress** is not a claim on… *current* progress. At most you can argue it’s a “optimistic evaluation” of current state of things. But it’s insanity to say projected timeline doesn’t make statement about current status and progress. Have you ever worked in a professional environment before? If your boss asks you where you are with task X, and telling them “I’m Y time away from finishing”, that counts as a **current status report**, not “guessing the future”. If you truly believe saying things like “I’m 6 months away from graduating college or I’m 3 months away from giving birth to a child” does not imply *current* state of things, you should really reconsider how you operate in life.

No kidding. Just look at some of the [mental gymnastics](https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/1fthual/tesla_victorious_in_misleading_statement_suit_for/lpue6qi/) here. It's embarrassing. >The legal hurdle is extremely hard to clear Only in this country, because the burden of proof for Tesla's internal memo and communication is somehow on the consumer. Imagine the burden of proof for tobacco companies lying about cigarettes risk is on the lung cancer victims and the tobacco CEOs got away with "we were just optimistic and didn't know better!". **Edit**: The person below blocked me when I called him out for victim blaming lol.

No one paid for FSD that wasn't labeled either "beta" or "supervised." Tesla promised they would try to get it into production unsupervised status, they are still working on that, and it's still improving.

[deleted]

This is straight up lie, easily disproven by archive.org of tesla's website. As well as terms of sale of FSD between 2017 and 2019 People paid for FSD Capability. Not beta. Not supervised. FSD. Seven years ago.

Idk why you are so angry. The point is that business people tend to over promise and under deliver when predicting the future all the time. What makes this case different is that over a decade Tesla charged for a product that didn’t work as advertised and constantly said they were on the verge of making it work as advertised when they weren’t.

So glad the judge ruled against the haters.

Except it does not. It can't drive itself. Not without you in sight or in drivers seat, paying attention and holding the wheel. --- As a side note - your approach is utterly depresing. "You can't expect people not to lie to you! You can't expect competence from genious CEO!" Nah. If he keeps promissing vaporware year after year. He deserves shit. If my friend maanages to sell his 5 year old Tesla without ever getting FSD he paid for on the promise of "LA to NY next year" from 2017. He deserves shit.

Tesla hasn't given up on trying to deliver it, and are making massive investments in AI vision systems to do it. I can't blame you for being upset that it's been so many years, but by all legal accounts, they did not make a contractual guarantee of time of delivery.

This is the only one I pretty much agree 98% on.

Bullshit. Prove it then. I think the burden of proof is on you, since a court just looked at this and found Tesla did not make misleading statements. Edit after 17 hours: no actual proof forthcoming, evidently.

[deleted]

https://web.archive.org/web/20180201031758/https://www.tesla.com/ Like seriously people who paid for FSD when buying car paid for FSD. Not Beta. Not Supervised. FSD. Something that's still not delivered.

i'm sorry, but you are complete wrong and off base. The lies of trevor milton are [well documented](https://hindenburgresearch.com/nikola/) *in a [federal grand jury indictment](https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-nikola-corporation-ceo-trevor-milton-charged-securities-fraud-scheme)* and exemplify that he purposely mislead his investors [many times over](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t63U2hDP0k)(from a fake truck shell, to nonexistant solar panels, to in-house designed inverters, to fake orders, etc). It is not acceptable to say you already have a working truck when you do not have an actual working truck. It is not acceptable to say you already have a working pin prick blood work machine, when you do not have a working pin prick blood work machine. it is acceptable to say your car will have full autonomy, but are never able to deliver. Even the initial release was called "beta". There is a very ***big*** difference. And to that point, the guy who *didn't* commit fraud is sending rocket ships to the space station, connecting computers to human brains, and has the largest dataset for AI AUV autonomy in the world. FSD works well. It may not be perfect, but it's definitely the best we got so far.

I mean I'm sure they are trying. > but by all legal accounts, they did not make a contractual guarantee of time of delivery. I never said they did. People did technically pay for "FSD capability". I'm just correcting people that Tesla still has not delivered what people paid for severn years ago despite promissing it every year since then. People who bought FSD in 2018 did not pay for "Beta" or "Supervised".

No, they did not, but what I am saying in turn is that they have not stopped trying to deliver FSD in a non-beta, non-supervised state.

That link doesn't provide any evidence one way or the other, it's the Tesla home page

I hope you get the help you need

Agreed. Just to show how tricky it is, this was the official language used at the time I bought it back in 2019. > The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous. The activation and use of these features are dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions. As these self-driving features evolve, your car will be continuously upgraded through over-the-air software updates. Unless cookingboy is referring to different language, this text doesn’t necessarily say that the ONLY hang up is regulatory but depends on the software’s evolution and evidence of reliability. The courts have to decide how definitive the language and marketing is, and how a general consumer would interpret it. Also of note, tesla clearly avoids defining the technology by the SAE definition that would conclusively dictate what ‘full self driving’ truly means. Not intended to defend Tesla or start a debate, but as cookingboy pointed out, US consumer protection isn’t very favorable and as a result this isn’t currently a slam dunk case (at least for now). Of course if someone has an email from musk sent shortly after a presentation saying that everything he presented was bogus, that would definitely be useful in a courtroom.

I think the point you’re missing here is the CEO actively pushing sales based on vapourware while providing very near term timelines. The legal battle is proving whether he knew those timelines were achievable or not.

Ok, good is acceptable for you ;)

This lawsuit was about shareholder value though there has not been a lawsuit from customers yet, or at least not one that has reached this stage.

All I know is that my late' 22 MYP (fuckin beautiful Red) FSD 12.5 drove me from New Jersey to Philadelphia without me disengaging or touching the steering wheel once! I LOVE THIS THING!

good enough is an odd way of saying the current best.

They sell cars on false advertising. It’s wild they have not been hit with more class actions.

If you actually do the math, there was zero possibility that they would have 1M robotaxis on the roads, because there were not that many Teslas in USA at that time. A plausible interpretation was that he meant was that worldwide they would have that many cars and that all the cars were capable of becoming robotaxis in the future. This also fits with what he said during the rest of the talk.

This is a repeated argument and it always stems back to people’s definitions of what “self driving” is. And the big issue is that ‘self driving’ is such a general term; We should be discussing vehicles that are autonomous (waymo) and vehicles that aren’t (tesla). Ask a random person to experience a ride in a Tesla that does not require direct human intervention and describe it, they’ll likely say, “the vehicle drove itself”, because it did. But it didn’t do so autonomously, as you’ve pointed out. Teslas official sales pages have always made it clear that the vehicle is not autonomous. But it can change lanes, it can navigate complex intersections, it can park. Etc. etc.

Poster is making a valid point. No one can predict the future, and so promising the world on the future is very different from claiming to have something today. And it’s not that the former can’t carry penalties, it’s just much harder to prove.

Did Volvo charge $15k, and did purchasers fork over said $15k, for that capability though?

Doug DeMurrer

How is"definitely" not a guarantee?

I wish Tesla would just sell the Model 3 as is and not lie about these self driving claims to get more sales. The Model 3 itself is a really good car. It’s just about the only electric sedan you can get

How did it work without the hands on the wheel?? Suposedly, you should have the hands in the wheel during the entire drive...

Imagine believing tobacco company about cigarettes risk. That just stupid.

Based on the context, to me "definitely" in this context is just overly optimistic.

[deleted]

Imagine blaming consumers for being gullible instead of greedy corporations that lie.

Imagine blaming other rather than taking personal responsibility. You think consumer not greedy and doesn't lie too ?

[deleted]

> Yes, you (currently) have to be in the seat. This will not be necessary soon. Let me guess. Next year?

And what does it have to do with anything I wrote? I'm well aware how good FSD (Supervised) is. Doesn't change the fact you have to supervise it and sit in the drivers seat. So it's not self-driving. PS. And when you dont' supervise it properly this happens: [video from Chuck of FSD driving into a wrong lane when turning. FSD 12.5.5](https://packaged-media.redd.it/xj3owbc7ocsd1/pb/m2-res_480p.mp4?m=DASHPlaylist.mpd&v=1&e=1727910000&s=cf790c33a2e8d84a0b349fae5cef1b5df3612872)

🐶Dog: in this fight 🐴Horse: in this race

Smh dogs can race too bigot

Gotta stare at the road the whole time

Caveat emptor is a basic lesson smart people learn early. If you are not careful with 15k of disposable income you deserve to lose it

TSLAQanon

And I completely disagree. It’s a nice novelty for the vehicle, but is in no way worth paying the money for, so I own the car without it.

> Capability That’s the key term, *capability*. Assuming HW3/4’s good enough, Teslas coming off the line today are capable of self-driving, but the software has to be improved until it gets to that point. My iPhone is capable of running a LLM on-device, but currently it’s not. Because the software isn’t ready yet. Elon was just way too optimistic, which is why the last time someone asked him for a date, he said “we’re done with timelines”.

It's the same as suing Coke for causing diabetes.

> My iPhone is capable of running a LLM on-device, but currently it’s not. Because the software isn’t ready yet. Lol there's plenty of LLMs you can download from the app store that can run locally. So terrible example to give. > Elon was just way too optimistic, which is why the last time someone asked him for a date, he said “we’re done with timelines”. You can be optimistic one year, two years, after seven you are no longer "optimistic", you're either lying or incompetent.

> Lol there’s plenty of LLMs you can download from the app store that can run locally. > So terrible example to give. I can’t download **Apple’s** LLM. You know, the one they advertised 4 months ago during WWDC, and again during the iPhone launch event, *and* is the main thing all over their marketing materials when I go to their website to buy a 16. Despite the fact that those features are nearly a year or more away from being available. Maybe he was lying, but there’s no proof that he gave those timelines to purposely mislead people and investors. Tesla is still updating and improving FSD, and even gave HW2 owners an upgrade to HW3 once they realized the former wasn’t good enough. Which is why I give them the benefit of the doubt.

How’s that? Is coke claiming the soda will heal you? I’m not sure you know how an apology works.

🐹 gerbil: in this Gere.

[Here is a log of Elon’s claims about FSD.](https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/) You can decide for yourself if you think it constitutes false advertising.

No hands at all, and no nanny nagging, unless you take your eyes off the road, then it tells you to pay attention, but not to apply any steering inputs at all. I'm quite impressed, it's getting there but it's not FSD yet, and in MHO it with never get there with the current camera setup and no sensor support.

autopilot also took me over that bridge

Exactly. Companies overpromise ALL the time - it’s normal. These comments are so detached from reality lmfao “Elon LIED to ME!!”

If you offered me a new Rolls or Bentley without FSD vs a 5 year old Model 3 with FSD to have to drive every day. I would take the Model 3 every day of the week.

Ok. You’d also have a car with an “autonomous” system that doesn’t work as intended.

>So many Tesla apologists in this sub. Just make your points without the personal attacks.

>Have you ever worked in a professional environment before? Not the person you replied to, but I have 30 years of professional experience. It is not at all uncommon for someone to give a statement like that -- especially in a cutting edge project -- that then needs to be revised as unknown unknowns pop up. It happens. As you should know if \*you\* have any experience in a professional environment.

>It is not at all uncommon for someone to give a statement like that I don't know where you work at, but in my entire professional career I've never met anyone who had their estimate off by 1600% (and counting). >That then needs to be revised as unknown unknowns pop up. Except Elon lied about *known* unknowns and said those are known knowns.

>I don't know where you work at, but in my entire professional career I've never met anyone who had their estimate off by 1600% (and counting). Either your career is still very young, or you work in an area that does not do much edge-of-the-envelope stuff. Either way, by your own admission of what you have not seen, I just do not think you have the experience to really make much of a judgement call here. And no: he did not lie about known unknowns/known knowns (huh?). Sorry, but I am getting the feeling that discussing this any further with you is going to be like playing whack-a-mole. So I'm out.

> doesn’t work as intended Is that important? Because it works well enough where I refuse to use any car without it. Updates are coming, monthly, and at some point it might work as intended, but if it never does, I am still very happy with what I have.

Yes, that is important to the vast majority of consumers. I’m not sure why you think getting what you pay for is some esoteric want for a consumer to have.

A new iPhone was built for and is suppose to have AI. It will be coming as an update ... soon. But you can buy the phone today. Nobody has seen this AI. If you buy the phone for that, you will be disappointed. If you buy the phone for what it is, its a fine phone. I love what FSD was when I got the car and I still love it today with all the updates.

You’re just presenting the argument for slumped iPhone 16 sales. In other words, consumers don’t like to buy products when they don’t work as intended. My argument still works with your analogy… You are anecdotally happy with your purchase. Sweet. That doesn’t invalidate the argument.

The judge is basically applying Hanlon's Razor: never assume malice when something can be adequately explained by stupidity (which includes unfounded optimism in my opinion).

How is it classified as Level 2? Level 2 demands hands always on the wheel.

Leon definitely knows FSD will never work with only cameras. It is a SCAM!

A more effective approach to selling it would have been: “When FSD becomes available—expected within three months—we’ll offer you the option to purchase it for $8K.” However, after 7.5 years—roughly 75% of the vehicle’s expected lifespan—having paid for a feature that still hasn’t materialized is unacceptable. The right course of action would have been to acknowledge the unfulfilled promise and offer a meaningful resolution: “We committed to delivering this feature but failed to do so. As a goodwill gesture, we will either refund $6K of the $8K you paid or transfer FSD to a new Tesla you purchase, along with complimentary FUSC.” At the end of the day, it is what it is—but that would have been the right way to foster customer loyalty.

They also aren't out bragging about it while it gets in accidents, unlike Tesla. It's kinda like, you know the Roadster he promised back in 2017... Like terraforming mars... I guess if you are a complete moron, you could believe his bullshit.... Oh and that wonderful idea "he" invented, the "hyperloop" that is now non-existent. Lol, he's a snake oil salesman, selling you poorly built cars and trucks that fall apart because glue is cheaper than actual fasteners... Yeah, he's not a liar at all.... 🤣😂🤣

I was accused of hate when i mentioned tesla problems (not here). I have criticized Biden numerous times and no hate accusation.