Tesla Sues BBC's "Top Gear"

[Ready2plugin]

Looks like Tesla didn't like seeing their car pushed...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-30/carmaker-tesla-sues-bbc-s-top-gear-over-electric-roadster-test.html

 

[palmermd]

Looks like Tesla didn't like seeing there car pushed...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-30/carmaker-tesla-sues-bbc-s-top-gear-over-electric-roadster-test.html

They seem to be going out of their way to stay in the news lately. Sueing a TV show 2 years after airing, reality show about his divorce, announcing apps for the Model S, factory tours for the press. Every week there is something new to keep them in the news. Heck, I bought at $23 and I'd like to see it go to $100 but some of these news items are just silly. I'm not so sure it will help boost the stock price.

 

[Train]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/12907367


The BBC is being sued by the makers of the electric sports car, the Tesla Roadster, over claims a race on Top Gear was rigged. Tesla Motors claims the test set up by Jeremy Clarkson on a 2008 edition of the show was rigged to make it look like the Tesla ran out of power when racing a petrol powered Lotus.

The Tesla Roadster is the world's fastest production electric car.

A Top Gear spokesman said the BBC would be "vigorously defending" the claim.

On the programme Jeremy Clarkson claimed: "Although Tesla say it'll do 200 miles, we worked out that on our track it would run out after just 55 miles."

'Driven aggressively'
But in a statement on its website, Tesla said the Roadster's miles per charge had been certified at 211 miles by a third party European Union (EU) test. It argued that because the car was "driven aggressively" on Top Gear the charge didn't last as long, but that if driven "mindfully" charges could last for 313 miles.

The statement also disagreed with several other elements of the show.

A Top Gear spokeswoman said: "We can confirm that we have received notification that Tesla have issued proceedings against the BBC.

"The BBC stands by the programme and will be vigorously defending this claim."

 

[GeekEV]

I can kind of see it, but two years is a long time to wait. Maybe they were prepared to laugh it off, but then decided that it DID have a negative impact on sales. On the other hand, anyone who doesn't realize that Top Gear is a COMEDY show (and, therefore, is not to be taken seriously) is just too stupid to live. If you have the disposable income to buy a Tesla and are letting your purchasing decisions be driven by Top Gear - wow.

 

[TomT]

I'm going on record right now, and will back it up with 100 bucks, that Telsa will not be around 5 years from now, at least not in its present form, name and function...

Oh, and I love Top Gear!

They seem to be going out of their way to stay in the news lately. Sueing a TV show 2 years after airing, reality show about his divorce, announcing apps for the Model S, factory tours for the press. Every week there is something new to keep them in the news. Heck, I bought at $23 and I'd like to see it go to $100 but some of these news items are just silly. I'm not so sure it will help boost the stock price.

 

[mwalsh]

As you know, not a huge Tesla fan. Actually, it's Elon Musk I'm not a fan of, truth be told. And I'm a HUGE 'Top Gear' fan (though I never much liked how merciless they are on EVs :lol: ). So my best wishes are obviously with the 'Top Gear' guys.

 

[TRONZ]

Ya, Top Gear could have stepped around the whole mess, if in the postscript, JC had just muttered "it didn't really run out of power, but would have been no fun if it had". If I remember correctly, the episode did not claim the Tesla had run out of battery but had just "lost power" without explanation.

Regarding Tesla, I think they need to leverage their capital much deeper into battery technology if they are going to reach full potential. Making a sexy car is the fun easy part, but stringing together cell phone batteries is just NOT going to cut it in a few years.

 

[Herm]

both sides need the free publicity desperately..

 

[Smidge204]

A lawsuit seems to be a very expensive way to get "free" publicity...

If I remember correctly, the episode did not claim the Tesla had run out of battery but had just "lost power" without explanation.

While they didn't say the car had actually run out, the video made it appear as though Clarkson was surprised by something and had to stop. They then said they "worked out" that it would "run out after 55 miles." Combine the two with a little video of a team pushing the car back into the hangar and it certainly gives the impression that the car truly ran out of power.
=Smidge=

 

[DaveEV]

From what I understand Tesla has been trying to get BBC to edit the program for years now - and now they see that legal action is their only option.

Note that they aren't trying to get any money from them - just trying to get them to correct the facts.

Apparently there are a lot of people out there who truly believe that the Roadster will only do 55 miles before running out of juice because of the show...

 

[GeekEV]

And I'm sure they're absolutely right - if you drive it at full tilt around a test track... IIRC, they even said "on our track".

 

[palmermd]

Remember that the BBC already admitted that neither of its test cars actually ran out of juice, suggesting that the scene was filmed to show what would happen if it actually had

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/12/25/clarkson-fires-back-over-top-gear-tesla-controversy/


http://www.autoblog.com/2008/12/19/tesla-responds-to-top-gears-test-of-roadster/
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/12/22/bbc-responds-to-teslas-top-gear-complaints/


Like it was suggested earlier. All of this seems to serve no other purpose than to put Tesla and Top Gear in the news.

 

[Smidge204]

Like it was suggested earlier. All of this seems to serve no other purpose than to put Tesla and Top Gear in the news.

Might be part of it, but since the BBC has only admitting (almost in passing) that pushing the car was a staged event and not actually sought to correct the show itself in any way, Tesla still seems to have a valid complaint.

If I post something false and libelous about you, and even though I admit it's not exactly true I do not take it down/edit it or even make any attempt to make sure the correction gets at least the same level of exposure as the original did, would that satisfy you?
=Smidge=

 

[GeekEV]

I just don't see how it's libelous to show the car running out of juice. It absolutely would have if they actually kept driving. Nor do I see the problem with saying it would run out after 55 miles under their lap testing conditions. I'm sure that's also true. Did they paint the Tesla in a positive light? No. But that's no crime.

You don't see Toyota suing over the episode where BMW M3 was portrayed as being more fuel efficient than a Prius. While misleading, under their track conditions it's absolutely true.

Grow up, Tesla!

 

[palmermd]

Might be part of it, but since the BBC has only admitting (almost in passing) that pushing the car was a staged event and not actually sought to correct the show itself in any way, Tesla still seems to have a valid complaint.

If I post something false and libelous about you, and even though I admit it's not exactly true I do not take it down/edit it or even make any attempt to make sure the correction gets at least the same level of exposure as the original did, would that satisfy you?
=Smidge=

Top Gear’s allegation that the car’s range is 55 miles is defamatory because it suggests Tesla “grossly misled potential purchasers of the Roadster,” the filing said.

Top Gear said that driving the car on a track like they did would cause the car to run out of power in 55 miles and then showed the car getting pushed into the garage with 20% remaining in the pack. Ok, its a bit silly to push the car into the garage when it still has power available, but its a TV show. Tesla has not argued that the 55 mile range is not correct given the driving characteristics of the test, they only complain that the 55 mile range is defamitory when they claim it will do 245 on an EPA drive cycle. I don't think Tesla has much ground to stand on, but it does put them in the news.

That is like taking a Leaf and autocrossing it and running out of juice in 30 miles. Of course if you drive it hard the range suffers. You could also autocross a Prius and only get 15mpg.

 

[AndyH]

We've already seen how bits are picked from this forum to 'prove' the anti-EV view. The transportation status-quo likely feels a bit more fearful with each new EV announcement - and the public still think EVs are short-range low-speed golf-cart wanna-bes. Looks like we're entering the 'push back' phase of the evolution.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."
Gandhi

Woo Hoo - EVs are entering "stage three" - it'll get a bit darker for a bit then then we're home free! :lol:

 

[Smidge204]

Here's the segment in case anyone needs a refresher.

=Smidge=

 

[qwk]

I'm going on record right now, and will back it up with 100 bucks, that Telsa will not be around 5 years from now, at least not in its present form, name and function...

Oh, and I love Top Gear!

You seem to ignore facts. Tesla might not be around, but only if they get bought out.

It doesn't matter where the battery comes from, it could come from a Tonka toy for all I care. The fact is that it costs Tesla $200/kwh, and has almost twice the energy per kg of Nissans pack(which costs twice as much or more).

The Roadster has 3X the range of the Leaf. That is embarassing for a huge auto manufacturer like Nissan. I know that somebody will compare price, BUT you also have to take into account the carbon fiber, aluminum chassis, superior drivetrain.........
The Leaf is basically a Versa with batteries.

 

[TRONZ]

I just don't see how it's libelous to show the car running out of juice. It absolutely would have if they actually kept driving. Nor do I see the problem with saying it would run out after 55 miles under their lap testing conditions. I'm sure that's also true. Did they paint the Tesla in a positive light? No. But that's no crime.

Actually if Tesla can prove damage to reputation creating lost income, etc., then yes. This is the bedrock foundation of any successful lawsuit. Proving the above and measuring the $$ damages is the real catch. Tesla certainly have a case if they can prove intentional malice on the part of Top Gear/BBC. Careful though, Top Gear trots out the "we are an Entertainment program" whenever they get in legal hot water. Never claiming to make factual documentaries gives them a lot of wiggle room in situations like this. Top Gear being a very well liked and popular TV show is also another issue. Does Tesla really want to become the bad guy for Top Gear fans if they are really just worried about their reputation? Apparently so.

 

[DaveEV]

I know that somebody will compare price, BUT you also have to take into account the carbon fiber, aluminum chassis, superior drivetrain.........
The Leaf is basically a Versa with batteries.

Hah - if it's so easy to to produce a 100 mile EV for $33k - why isn't Tesla doing it yet?

Oh wait - that's right. Because they KNOW it's hard to do, which is why they're focusing on the high-end market where margins are higher and a low volume EV from a small manufacturer can absorb the costs.