• Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 hours ago

    The bigger part of Tesla’s business in Europe is that each car sold is used to sell carbon credits to polluting companies. Less cars sold means less credits earned to sell to polluters.

    Not selling Tesla EVs might almost be better for the environment as the companies will either have to pollute less or find another (actual) environmentally responsible carbon credit creator.

  • chandlerbung@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Now let’s start seeing people cancel SpaceX contracts and go elsewhere. Really hit him where it hurts.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    How did they get away with that? One would assume a contract was in force. Was there an ,“no fash CEO” clause? Kind of an important item the story doesn’t bother to cover.

    • SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Contracts basically always have conditions for each party to back out. There’s probably a break fee but for leased vehicles it’s probably not that significant.

      As a construction company, the Tesla fleet is probably a pretty small portion of their vehicle fleet and cashflow.

      Could also be some kind of ‘bringing the business into disrepute’ clause there.

    • dumblederp@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I reckon online feedback like “fuck this Tesla driving bunch of fascist assholes” would be as big a PR nightmare for the company as its proving for tesla.

    • XnxCuX@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The US is one of the few countries that would side with Tesla on this. American company or not