“This disaster has rung a big alarm for Sino-Metals Leach and the mining industry,” [says company directly responsible.]

Yeah, no it hasn’t. This isn’t the first mining dam to fail with consequences. It won’t be the last. No one at that company is losing sleep over this.

Both mines have now halted their operations after orders from Zambian authorities, while many Zambians are angry.

Gotta let it die down. Placate the masses. Then back to business as usual.

Realistically, this makes no difference.

Denying Tesla the sale of a second car to a second person makes no difference because they already got the first sale of the first car? Pretty sure Tesla would prefer to sell two cars instead of one, and get the profit directly. There is an assumption here that the original buyer (who sold the car) went and bought another Tesla, which is in conflict with the other poster saying people should sell their Tesla (as it move away from the brand).

The only ones who will buy Teslas now are conservatives and they will buy new ‘just to show support for Musk’.

So, let them. It’s still not getting Tesla what they ultimately want – money – long as the original owner doesn’t buy a Tesla themselves.

Subscriptions might be an argument that Tesla could still profit, but then the question is where/how do they profit more from ownership?