On September 26, 2025, CNBC published a story about Sarah Johnson, a tech executive earning $400,000 yearly, who regretted financing a $70,000 Tesla Model Y due to high interest payments and rapid depreciation. She claimed the costs drained funds from potential investments, framing her purchase as a financial misstep. The article sparked a firestorm on X, where users slammed it as clickbait, arguing the issues raised—high financing costs and depreciation—apply to any luxury vehicle, not just Teslas. Critics accused CNBC of pushing an anti-EV narrative, especially amid Tesla’s reported 5% Q3 delivery drop to 462,000 vehicles, which some linked to market saturation and competition.
X users defending Tesla highlighted its lower operating costs, averaging $0.03 per mile, compared to gas-powered vehicles, and its dominant 44% U.S. EV market share. They argued the article cherry-picked a single buyer’s experience to paint a misleading picture, ignoring EVs’ long-term savings and environmental benefits. Some pointed out that depreciation is a standard issue for luxury cars, with data showing Tesla’s Model Y retaining value better than many competitors, depreciating about 20% after one year versus 30% for some gas-powered SUVs.
However, the article’s timing coincided with scrutiny over Tesla, including NHTSA investigations into Model Y suspension issues, which fueled skepticism about the company’s quality control. While CNBC’s framing drew valid criticism for lacking nuance, the debate underscores broader tensions around EV adoption, Tesla’s market position, and media portrayals of both.
So do you think this unfairly targeted Tesla?
Discuss...