Tesla Australia says it's focused on cars, not Elon Musk
Tesla's Australian division says its main focus right now is to get people behind the wheel of its cars, including the facelifted
Tesla Model Y
, amid persistent US reports about the electric vehicle (EV) company's controversial CEO Elon Musk and his involvement with the Trump administration.
While it's impossible to draw direct correlations between Mr Musk's political endeavours and the carmaker's sales performance, Tesla's local sales have undoubtedly been on a significant downward spiral over the past 12 months.
In April 2025, Tesla managed just
500 deliveries for the entire month
, almost 76 per cent fewer EVs than it sold in the same month last year, placing it 23rd on the sales chart just ahead of Porsche, but behind other luxury brands like Land Rover and Audi.
Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal.
Browse now
.
Meantime, key rival BYD sold more than six times the number of vehicles last month (3207), over 127 per cent up on April 2024 and placing it 10th overall for the month.
Year to date, Australian Tesla sales are now almost 62 per cent down.
Asked about the potential impact of Mr Musk's high-profile activities in the US on local sales and perceptions of his company, Tesla Australia country director Thom Drew said he preferred to focus on Tesla's vehicles rather than its CEO's politics.
'Externally, looking at any of these political factors, is going to have some kind of influence, depending on what people see in the media, so that would likely be having an impact on people engaging with us,' he told CarExpert at this week's Australian launch of the facelifted 2025 Tesla Model Y.
'We're trying to take this as an opportunity to remind the Australian public of our products and how great they are.'
The Model Y's midlife 'Juniper' facelift brings a raft of updates including revised suspension, tweaked interior equipment, increased range, and Cybertruck-inspired styling.
The Model Y was unavailable for several months in the lead up to first deliveries of the facelifted mid-size electric SUV, heavily impacting the American brand's local sales given the model's status as its best-selling vehicle and Australia's favourite EV in 2024.
'Obviously [with] a new Model Y coming up, we're focusing on that, and then also our local business,' said Mr Drew.
'So far, the response has been amazing. We've only just started test drives of [the Model Y] within the past few weeks in Australia, and we've had record test drive numbers than we've had in our entire time in the country.
'[That's] partly why we've been trying to make sure people can see into Tesla Australia, and who we are as an established brand here, [to] help solidify why we still remain the number one EV brand in the country.'
MORE:
Tesla revenue plunges as global sales slump
MORE:
No love for Elon Musk? Tesla owners are ditching their cars at record rates
MORE:
Tesla vandalism and fake ads highlight anti-Elon Musk sentiment
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
Millions of Aussie consumers ditching US-made products over Donald Trump's trade war, comparison site Finder reveals
Aussie shoppers are steering clear of United States brands as the stench of Donald Trump's trade war latches onto American-made products. New research from comparison site Finder, shared exclusively with revealed almost one in four Aussies (23 per cent) are avoiding buying US goods due to President Trump's tariff regime. Another 31 per cent said they plan on avoiding buying American products in the coming months, meaning 11.6 million Aussies are either avoiding or plan to avoid purchasing US-made goods. Finder's head of consumer research Graham Cooke said President Trump's trade war could hurt the US economy as he seeks to boost American manufacturing. 'This shift in shopping habits could deliver a multi-billion dollar blow to American brands fighting for a foothold in Aussie households,' Mr Cooke said. 'As trade tensions escalate, many Australians are voting with their wallets in a move that could redraw the retail map. 'The great Aussie Trump dump signals more than protest – it's a potential pivot in loyalty that local and alternative brands are poised to capitalise on.' Finder's research showed men and women were equally avoiding purchasing American-made products, however, more women were planning to avoid buying US goods. Almost two in five women (38 per cent) said they planned on avoiding US goods while 25 per cent of men said they plan to steer clear of products made in President Trump's America. Meanwhile, baby boomers and gen Z were the most likely to avoid purchasing US goods due to the trade war. Mr Cooke said shoppers could be tactful by supporting local industries while President Trump attempts to force manufacturing to American shores. "Every dollar you spend helps shape the economy. By choosing local alternatives, Aussies can support homegrown businesses,' he said. "This is a wake-up call to rethink our spending habits – ditch the brands that don't align with your values and back businesses that support local jobs and sustainable practices. "Consumers have more power than they realise. Audit your spending, shop smarter and hopefully save some money in the process.' Australian steel and aluminium exports now face 50 per cent tariffs after the Trump Administration doubled the levies earlier this month. Automotive parts face a 25 per cent tariff while the nation remains temporarily exempt from the US President's sweeping 10 per cent 'Liberation Day' tariffs until July 9. The US and China continue to undergo negotiations to avert a massive trade war after the two economic superpowers continually hiked tariffs on each other earlier in the year. China had a 125 per cent tariff on US goods at the peak of the trade war, while the US had a 145 per cent tariff on China before they mutually agreed to drastically lower the levies.
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
Defence experts warn Australia's armed forces 'languishing', short on firepower due to 'deeply inadequate' military spending
Australia's defence force is weaker than it was before East Timor, is under armoured and short of firepower according to stinging analysis by two of the nation's leading defence experts. With the Prime Minister heading to the G7 in Canada, defence analyst Peter Jennings and Retired Chief of Army, Peter Leahy have both given their thoughts on the AFD and how it stacks up. A break down by Sky News of regional power players also lays out Australia's fragile capabilities despite numerous governments talking up potency, reliability and acquisitions. 'We are in a very dangerous strategic situation now,' said Peter Jennings, from Strategic Analysis Australia. It's a sentiment shared by Retired Lieutenant General, Peter Leahy. 'In the case of the Australian Army I was the Chief from 2002 to 2008. If I look at the army now it is smaller than what it was then. It's not as capable. It has less armoured protection and recruiting is really quite difficult,' said the former Chief. A former senior naval officer who wished to remain anonymous affirmed the Royal Australian Navy was down on the missile firepower it had 30 years ago – leaving it short of ships and under-gunned. With Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Europe rearming and the Chinese Communist Party intent on achieving hegemony in the region, armouries are growing, and defence budgets are being stretched. This year the United States intends to spend (in Australian dollars) $1.56 trillion on defence. China stated spend is $375-billion although its estimated to more accurately be around $620 billion. It's acquired three aircraft carriers and the world's second largest air force in a little over decade. It's also expanding its nuclear arsenal and is amassing a bespoke fleet to potentially take the democratically governed islands of Taiwan. Japan continues to ramp up its own defence spending, reportedly up nearly ten per-cent year on year to $105-billion. The sum is equal to one-point-eight percent of its GDP. Australia will spend $59 billion. It's roughly two per-cent of GDP with an intention to reach two-point-four per cent by 2034. 'We are facing some difficult times,' said Peter Jennings. 'Up against that level of risk, our defence spending is deeply inadequate… We are just a tiny shade over two per-cent of GDP and you know, that I think was a peace time level spend.' When it comes to combat airpower – fighters, bombers and long-range armed drones, America's force numbers around 3,276. China's air fleet is estimated to be around 2750. It remains highly secretive around the number of long-range drones capable of inflicting damage. Japan's defence force numbers 258. Indonesia's strike force is 116. Australia's modest but capable strike force numbers 108. The Department of Defence was specifically asked how many long-range armed drones Australia has acquired, but in its answer, didn't identify any. It's concerning considering the state of the Royal Australian Navy, which critics believe lags a decade behind in acquisition. Australia operates on a 'three to one' rotation policy meaning its force needs to be divided by three. Consequently, it aims to have two submarines, one destroyer and two frigates available for deployment. Although Australia's two resupply ships are both currently out of action tethering the navy even closer to shore. When it comes to soldiers and marines, China's fighting force numbers more than a million. Indonesia stands around 300,000. Australia's active duty force has shrunken to 28,500. 'The ADF is a professional organisation, sadly I think it's languishing,' said Peter Leahy. 'There's a really solid debate that says we need to spend more money on defence and I agree entirely. But I agree with the Prime Minister and others that it's not just a sum we need to spend, we need to be careful about what we want. How we acquire and how we introduce it into services. 'Everybody is saying it's the most catastrophic circumstances since before the second world war (and) we need to do something …. Action is required.' The former Army Chief dismissed the notion Australians should be scared. 'I don't think there's any reason to be scared …. (but) the public need to be concerned that people are thinking about this.' Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese has publicly sidestepped – if not rebuffed - America's request for Australia to urgently increase the nation's defence spending to three-point-five per cent of GDP, saying 'I think that Australia should decide what we spend on Australia's defence. As simple as that.' 'It's very clear that the Americans think our defence spend is deeply inadequate,' said Peter Jennings. '(US Defense Secretary) Pete Hegseth in Singapore said we should lift it from two per- cent to three-and-a-half per cent. That's a massive increase … So, I think the signal, not particularly coded from the United States is we need to do a lot better.' Former Prime Minister Scott Morrison recently told this reporter, 'We've got to be looking at three per cent. We should be at two-and-a-half per cent as quickly as possible. You know, I'd be saying three-per cent by 2030 … and it's not like we haven't been there before.' Though, it's always easier to talk about where defence spending should be than decide where taxes should increase or what must be cut. In the Second World War Australia's defence spend climbed towards 35 per cent of GDP. It's nothing if not an indication of the financial cost of conflict when diplomacy fails. When it came to opposition, Peter Jennings rebuffed suggestion the outcry amounted to warmongering. 'With the biggest war in Europe since the Second World War, with the Middle East in flame, with China not hiding the fact that it's becoming increasingly aggressive to all of its neighbours, circumnavigating Australia with some of its best military equipment. How could anyone think we are in a benign period and we don't have to worry about these developments,' he said. 'Il's plain for all to see, it's not like you need to have some special security clearance to understand what's going on. We can't afford to be in denial about it,' he said.
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Why James Cummings picked Hong Kong over ‘bricks and mortar' of Leilani Lodge
James Cummings said people and his passion for training, not the 'bricks and mortar' of his family's Randwick stables at Leilani Lodge, were key factors in his decision to accept a contract with the Hong Kong Jockey Club from September next year. Cummings' deal to join the famed racing district was announced on Wednesday, ending speculation about the 52-time group 1-winning trainer's future. The 37-year-old, the grandson of Melbourne Cup king Bart Cummings, was due to finish as Godolphin's head trainer on July 31 after the racing powerhouse's decision to move away from a private training model. Returning to the public ranks, Cummings was then set to face a battle with Ciaron Maher and the Gai Waterhouse-Adrian Bott team to take over the 55-box stables of Leilani Lodge. Cummings' father, Anthony, was forced out of the stables in February after having his trainer's licence revoked because of his financial troubles. The Cummings family has occupied the stables since Bart established them in the early 1980s. The Australian Turf club has not announced a new tenant, but Maher, the nation's leading trainer, looks certain to get the nod after Cummings' withdrawal. Cummings said his decision to move to Hong Kong came without knowledge about who was getting Leilani Lodge. 'The ATC were very patient, and I respect the position they were in, and the decision hadn't been made at all. I never got that sense,' Cummings said. 'I wanted to know all the information that was on the table there, and I got to that position.' He said the potential to train out of Leilani Lodge again had been tempting but the need to provide clarity for staff and clients, given his chance in Hong Kong, was more important.
