Tesla is the only EV brand with a net negative brand perception, according to the Electric Vehicle Intelligence Report – and much of the negative shift has happened in the last 6 months.
The Electric Vehicle Intelligence Report (EVIR) surveyed 8,000 US consumers to ask them questions about electric vehicle purchasing decisions, both asking about brands and finding out what they value in an EV purchase.
The most notable result of the survey is that consumers had the most negative view of Tesla – and in fact, Tesla is the only brand in the survey which received a net negative brand image.
When asked whether they have a positive or negative view of Tesla, 32% said they have a “very” or “somewhat” positive view combined, but 39% said they have a “very” or “somewhat” negative view.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
This means Tesla has a -7% net score, behind even VinFast, which has a 0% net score (mostly because most surveyed hadn’t heard of the Vietnamese brand).
As for other brands, ironically, the top-ranked EV brand was Honda, a company that only sells one full BEV in the US, the Prologue (which people like and is selling great), which it didn’t even make itself, but rather made it in partnership with GM. Chevrolet scored well also, third place overall in brand perception.
The other EV startups (Lucid, Rivian, Polestar) did tend towards the bottom of the table, but this was largely because they had comparatively lower brand awareness, and thus their net positive numbers could not have been much higher (Lucid, for example, had 9% positive and 4% negative scores). Tesla, however, had both extremely high brand awareness and negative brand association. (But you have heard of me…)
Tesla’s score gets even worse when “view intensity” is taken into account, with people 13 points more likely to have a “very negative” view than a “very positive” one.
This negative brand perception persisted through all income brackets, regions and ages, with Tesla holding last place in each category.
In every category save one, when asked whether they would consider purchasing a Tesla, the most common answer was “would never consider.”
Tesla also ranked last in a comparison of various home EV charger brands and home battery brands, with more consumers saying they “would never consider” it.
Similar numbers appeared in a question about “brand trust,” where Tesla again had negative net trust, and a much higher “distrust a lot” score than its “trust a lot” score.
Tesla performed slightly better in perceptions of safety (second last) and family-friendliness (fourth from last), but did well in perceptions of luxury, holding fifth place overall out of eighteen brands.
According to this survey, the drop in Tesla brand perception has been quite recent. EVIR asked how views of Tesla had changed over the last 6 months. 46% said their opinion hadn’t changed, but a total of 38% of people had a “more” or “much more” negative perception, versus 16% who had a “more” or “much more” positive perception.
This, again, becomes more of a severe difference when you look at the most intense answers: 27% had a “much more negative” perception, while only 6% had a “much more positive” perception – a 4.5x difference.
Overall, over the last 6 months, there was only a +1% net change in consumers positive perceptions of EVs as a whole, so this drastic recent change was limited to Tesla, not other brands.
There was one piece of good news for Tesla, though: when asked which sort of public charging equipment consumers would most prefer, Tesla came out on top… except it also came out on top of the list that consumers would least prefer.
EVIR also asked what the factors driving consumers’ interest or disinterest in purchasing an EV.
Consumers recognized the benefits of EVs, with the top factors driving EV interest being gas savings, environment/climate change, and the ability to charge at home. Consumers who were already considering buying an EV found these to be more important factors than consumers who said they aren’t thinking about an EV yet.
Unfortunately, consumers also fell victim to the myths they’ve long been told about EVs. We’ve seen for a long time that consumers claim that range is one of their main concerns with EVs, despite that there are plenty of EVs available with way more range than you actually need.
In the EVIR, consumers ranked “length of range on a battery charge” as their top concern, even though EVs on average have enough range for a full week worth of driving from the average driver.
The second and fourth concerns, “availability of charging stations” and “I couldn’t charge at my residence” are much more pertinent. While it’s common for non-EV drivers not to recognize how many chargers are available, this is an area where the EV industry could definitely improve (I’ve long been on record saying that charger availability, especially for apartment dwellers and street parkers, is the only real problem with EVs – and that solving these problems will help people recognize that giant range numbers are not as necessary as they think).
You can check out the full Electric Vehicle Intelligence Report here.
Electrek’s Take
As we’ve been warning people about for quite some time now, Tesla CEO Elon Musk is doing his best to completely destroy Tesla’s brand.
As an EV publication, we have the same mission as Tesla – to advance sustainable transport. In order for that to happen, we obviously want the (formerly) largest EV company in the world to do its job the best it can.
The problem is, Musk doesn’t have that mission, and has been doing his best over the last year(s) to ruin Tesla’s brand perception with increasingly idiotic decisions, both in terms of his public advocacy and his work within Tesla.
This report shows the effect of the constant drumbeat of bad Tesla business moves and horrendous public behavior by the company’s CEO. The company’s employees, for the most part, are still working to try to make good electric vehicles, but Musk is spending the money he made from selling EVs to try to ruin EVs – something that the company itself had to call him out on in its quarterly report (and which the formerly-more-lucid Musk would have opposed just a few years ago before he forgot how climate change works).
We’re not sure what’s going to many any of them wake up to Musk’s destruction of the company, but this report is just one more data point showing how severe the situation has gotten.
Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Zero Motorcycles has announced that its newest line of electric motorbikes will see a price increase in the US due to the Trump Administration’s tariff policy. But the saving grace is that the company is allowing reservations made in the next few weeks to secure pre-tariff pricing.
Zero launched its new X-line of smaller electric motorcycles late last year, ushering in a Sur Ron-style pair of bikes that cost a mere fraction of the company’s larger street bikes.
Designed for off-road use in the US or both on and off-road use in Europe, the Zero XB and XE were designed to be as affordable to new riders as they are approachable.
The XB was unveiled with a price tag of a mere US $4,195 or €4,500, while the larger and more powerful XE carried a price tag of US $6,495 or €6,500.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
The pair were part of the motorcycle maker’s plans to have six unique models all priced at under US $10,000 in the next two years. However, those plans may face increasing pressure after the Trump Administration imposed harsh new tariffs on imported goods to the US, forcing many manufacturers to increase prices.
Zero’s push for more affordable electric motorcycles is made possible mainly by its partnership with Chinese electric motorcycle manufacturers like Zongshen. While such companies have years of experience manufacturing motorcycles at more affordable prices, their relative cost advantage could take a serious hit under the US’s aggressive stance towards foreign-produced goods.
The first XB and XE motorcycles are expected to be delivered to existing reservation holders this Summer. However, for anyone who doesn’t yet have a pre-order in place, Zero says that it will still honor the existing pricing for reservations placed before May 18, 2025.
Bikes reserved in the next two weeks are not expected to ship until later this year, meaning they will almost certainly be subject to increased tariffs, though it appears Zero is prepared to eat those tariffs for an early group of reservation holders.
“Zero Motorcycles remains committed in our mission to deliver industry-leading electric motorcycles while maintaining an accessible price point for consumers around the world,” said Sam Paschel, CEO of Zero Motorcycles. “Our customers are at the heart of everything we do. And by honoring prices for early reservation holders – despite the shifting global economy – we’re reinforcing our position as the leader in the electric space and building the future of two-wheel transportation.”
Electrek’s Take
What a time to double down on Chinese partnerships. I feel for Zero, who was obviously looking for a way to reach more riders, especially young riders in the Sur Ron/Talaria demographic, and found the obvious way to do so by going to the world’s biggest market for producing e-motorcycles.
That’s not to say that US-based production isn’t possible. Zero used to do more production locally before slowly shifting more and more of its manufacturing overseas. There are still companies like Ryvid who manufacture in the US, though even those companies rely on many imported components and will still likely take a hit from tariffs.
The long and the short of it is that the entire electric motorcycle industry is going to be shaken by these tariff policies, and no US consumer will spared. Or at least, none after May 18th.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
The Shell gas station logo is displayed on February 13, 2025 in Austin, Texas.
Brandon Bell | Getty Images News | Getty Images
British oil giant Shell on Friday reported stronger-than-expected first-quarter profit and kept the pace of its share buyback program, even as earnings fell by more than a quarter compared to the same period last year.
Shell reported adjusted earnings of $5.58 billion for the first three months of the year, beating analyst expectations of $5.09 billion, according to an LSEG-compiled consensus. A separate, company-provided analyst forecast had expected Shell’s first-quarter profit to come in at $4.96 billion.
Shell reported adjusted earnings of $7.73 billion over the same period last year — around 28% higher than first-quarter 2025 — and $3.66 billion for the final three months of 2024.
Shares of Shell traded 3.2% higher at 8:55 a.m. London time.
Big Oil’s shareholder returns have been a hot-button issue for investors, particularly as industry profits continue to fall from record highs in 2022.
A weak demand outlook, falling crude prices and U.S. President Donald Trump’s fast-changing trade policy have rattled investor sentiment in recent months.
For its part, Shell on Friday announced another $3.5 billion share buyback program, which it expects to complete over the next three months. It marks the 14th consecutive quarter of at least $3 billion in buybacks, the company said.
By contrast, British rival BP on Tuesday lowered its share buyback as first-quarter profit fell short of analyst expectations.
Shell CEO Wael Sawan described the earnings as “another solid set of results.”
“Our strong performance and resilient balance sheet give us the confidence to commence another $3.5 billion of buybacks for the next three months, consistent with the strategic direction we set out at our Capital Markets Day in March,” Sawan said in a statement.
Shell reaffirmed its reduced annual investment budget of $20 billion to $22 billion for 2025.
In March, Shell had announced plans to increase shareholder returns and cut spending, doubling down on its liquified natural gas (LNG) push.
In the increasingly crowded market for peer-to-peer payments, Venmo is showing momentum while Cash App has hit a rough patch.
The parents of both businesses reported quarterly results this week. PayPal, which owns Venmo, reported an earnings beat and kept its forecast for the year. Block, meanwhile, plummeted in extended trading on Thursday after the Cash App parent missed on revenue and issued disappointing guidance.
Venmo and Cash App are simultaneously competing to gobble up more consumers for their peer-to-peer offerings while also adding services like debit, credit and transfer services so they can actually make money from those users.
For PayPal CEO Alex Chriss, who took over the struggling payments company in 2023, monetizing Venmo is a key piece to his turnaround plan.
Venmo revenue jumped 20% in the first quarter from a year earlier, though PayPal didn’t provide a dollar figure. PayPal pointed to growing adoption of features like the Venmo debit card, instant transfers, and integration into online checkout. The company said monetization per user is improving and that Venmo continues to play a role in its broader e-commerce push.
Revenue at Venmo increased at twice the rate of total payment volume, which rose 10%, reflecting progress in turning engagement into profit.
Read more about tech and crypto from CNBC Pro
During the quarter, PayPal added nearly two million first-time debit card users across PayPal and Venmo, and said Venmo debit card payment volume rose more than 60%. Monthly actives on the card grew about 40%, while Pay with Venmo volume surged 50%.
“We’ve leaned into Venmo and the investment is starting to pay off,” Chriss said on the company’s earnings call.
Block CEO Jack Dorsey struck a different tone on his company’s call.
Cash App posted 10% gross profit growth from a year earlier to $1.38 billion in the first quarter. PayPal’s gross payment volume,or a measure of money moving through Square and Cash App, came in at $56.8 billion, missing the average analyst estimate of $58 billion, according to StreetAccount.
“I just don’t think we were focused enough and had enough attention on the network and the network density, and that is our foundation,” he said.
Dorsey noted that some users still don’t view Cash App as a true banking platform, in part because their experience with the app can feel limited or restrictive when trying to move or access funds. The company is promoting its lending program, Cash App Borrow, which has received approval from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and can now bring origination and servicing in-house.
“We of course want to deepen engagement with our customers through banking services and Borrow, and I have no doubt we will,” Dorsey said. “But at the same time, we need to make sure that we continuously grow our network, and that starts with peer to peer.”