So lets start at the beginning where the unidentified author lays out a straw man fallacy opening shot to anyone that disagrees with his/her opinion. If you aren't going to allow yourself to be held accountable to the public for your opinion why publish your opinion ? If you disqualify anyone that isn't in Mr. Musk's fan club or on his waiting list due to actual skepticism surrounding him or his business practices, what's the use other than just stroking an already oversized ego ? Then we can move on to this : "We, Model 3 owners and people on the waiting list", Which at least lets us all know there is a possible bias right from the very start. The fact people short sell the stock is due to not only speculation but the fact that Tesla has repeatedly missed its manufacturing forecasts and has shown $10 bil. dollars in losses. Being a publicly traded company means that when you fail to look good compared to other companies being held to the same standards you'll get investors betting against you. As far as the companies balance sheet goes when the author states that : "Tesla can reduce R&D at will (and to a lesser extent, SG&A) — the two main negatives on their balance sheet." he's conveniently omitting Mr. Musk's proposed 10 year compensation plan of $2.6 bil. in stock options which is one of the biggest in US history, and would increase his own holdings from 22% to 30% of the total shares. There is also some other details about the balance sheet of Tesla that were not mentioned that might cause investors to bet against it... US regulators have raised questions about the firm's financial disclosures, while some shareholders have complained about the board's independence and its 2016 decision to buy SolarCity, a money-losing solar power company backed by Mr Musk and led by his cousin." To suggest social media and labor unions are going to destroy Tesla when Mr. Musk relies upon an estimated $4.9 bil. in "a variety of government incentives, including grants, tax breaks, factory construction, discounted loans and environmental credits" is rather ridiculous when in actuality people should have a right to opine wherever public money goes and should be able to gamble on Mr. Musk failing to get his act together before the public money stops rolling in. Being either an owner or on the "list" the author does a terrible job of informing anyone of anything other than his/her brand loyalty and bias towards his/her latest purchase. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-43008430 http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html#

Although some may read this article as biased in favor of supporting Elon Musk and Tesla, I see this as a rare, in-depth analysis of how the media has been misleading and sensational when covering Musk and Tesla. I thoroughly enjoyed this article and learned a lot about how criticisms of Musk and Tesla break down when presented with the facts.