Tesla discloses it spent $200k advertising on X

Post by datascienced » Fri, Apr 19, 2024, 6:34 AM UTC

nmfisher wrote: post #25

lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no conflict of interest. Companies do this all the time. It's even considered a good thing in business circles. If you want preferential treatment, pricing, or scheduling, then buying the company is a great way to get it. Businesses call it "synergy."

Tesla doesn't own X/Twitter though. Elon does. If I were a Tesla shareholder, I'd be mildly[0] irritated that Elon feels it's OK to take money out of "our" company to spend it on "his" company, even if there is some nominal benefit. [0] the amounts are so tiny, I wouldn't really care. I'd be more angry that he thinks he can reasonably function as a full-time CEO for Tesla while gallivanting about with his other ventu…

Post by spiderice » Fri, Apr 19, 2024, 6:36 AM UTC

kelthuzad wrote: post #9

rapsey wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People love a new opportunity to bash on Musk.

Elon also loves a new opportunity to bash people, what goes around comes around.

Post by datascienced » Fri, Apr 19, 2024, 6:37 AM UTC

lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #26

nmfisher wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla doesn't own X/Twitter though. Elon does. If I were a Tesla shareholder, I'd be mildly[0] irritated that Elon feels it's OK to take money out of "our" company to spend it on "his" company, even if there is some nominal benefit. [0] the amounts are so tiny, I wouldn't really care. I'd be more angry that he thinks he can reasonably function as a full-time CEO for Tesla while gallivanting about with his other ventu…

Have you ever worked for a company that bought a software package that was so bad, you thought "who on earth would actually choose to buy this?" Chances are, the decision maker owns part of that company. It's considered a value-add because that said decision maker can put pressure on that company to make changes they want made, where if they went with another company they wouldn't have that inside leverage.

Post by akira2501 » Fri, Apr 19, 2024, 6:43 AM UTC

kelthuzad wrote: post #3

rapsey wrote: post #2

so?

Elon has previously stated that he doesn't believe in advertising, "Tesla doesn't advertise". I assume that's the reason why it's newsworthy.

Post by Hamuko » Fri, Apr 19, 2024, 6:47 AM UTC

al_borland wrote: post #36

daghamm wrote: post #32

Elon has been threatening other companies with all kind of crap for stopping advertising on twitter. They have also directly and indirectly attacked Media Matters for affecting their advertising revenue. Does the fact that his own company barely advertises on twitter be used against him now?

The article mentions a few times that Tesla is well known for not advertising, so any spending at all is meaningful. It’s not like they are spending $200m on Facebook and Google marketing, and $200k on Twitter. Elon also Tweets about Tesla often, as one would expect. With his reach on the platform, that is likely better than actually advertising.