A man who works at Tesla made a big tent for people who buy their cars. Some people online didn't like how it looked in some pictures, but he said it looks better when set up properly. He also said they don't make the tent just to make money, but to make their customers happy. He compared the bad picture to someone judging a suit that is wrinkled and messy. Another car company makes a similar tent for more money, but you need extra parts to use it. So Tesla's tent might not be so expensive after all. Read from source...

1. The director of product design at Tesla, At a Glance Verdura, took to social media to defend the $3K Cybertruck tent against negative reviews and criticism from customers who received their tents and found them wrinkled and flimsy-looking. He blamed bad photos for misrepresenting the product and claimed that it looks great when set up properly. However, this is a weak argument as it shifts the responsibility of customer satisfaction to the end user, rather than ensuring quality control and accurate representation of the product in marketing materials.
2. Verdura also compared the tent review to writing a suit review using a picture of a wrinkled suit, with untucked shirt & undone tie, then saying the suit looks bad. This is an irrational analogy as it does not account for the fact that clothing and tents are different products with different purposes and expectations. A suit review would still be valid even if the picture showed a wrinkled suit, as long as the quality, material, and fit of the suit were evaluated properly.
3. Verdura claimed that Tesla does not design and launch products like the CyberTent to make money as the primary objective, but rather to bring smiles to customers' faces and improve their post-vehicle purchase experience. This is an emotional appeal that tries to evoke positive feelings and loyalty from customers, rather than addressing the actual issues with the product quality and design. It also implies that critics are only focused on the financial aspect of the product, rather than its utility and aesthetics, which may not be fair or accurate.
4. Verdura pointed out that rival EV makers offer tents at higher prices as compared to Tesla's $3K Cybertruck tent. He cited Rivian Automotive's tent as an example, which is priced lower at $2,800, but requires cross bars to be installed, taking the total cost to $3,450. This is a biased and misleading argument, as it uses a different product as a reference point, rather than comparing similar products with comparable features and prices. It also ignores the fact that customers may have other preferences or needs when choosing a tent, such as size, weight, durability, ease of use, etc., which may not be met by Tesla's or Rivian's offerings.

Neutral
Summary: Tesla's Director of Product Design, Andre Lardner Verdura, defends the company's $3K Cybertruck tent against criticism that it looks wrinkled and poorly designed based on bad photos. He claims that the tent looks great when set up properly and that Tesla does not design products for profit but to make customers happy. He also points out that rival EV makers offer similar tents at higher prices or require additional accessories.