A Public Confrontation Over Giga Berlin's Performance
In a rare and direct public rebuttal, the leadership of Tesla’s Gigafactory Berlin-Brandenburg has challenged the accuracy of a recent investigative report by the renowned German business publication, Handelsblatt. The dispute centers on the facility's production output for the year 2025, its financial profitability, and the stability of its workforce. Andre Thierig, the Senior Director of Manufacturing at Giga Berlin, utilized the professional networking platform LinkedIn to dismantle assertions made by the publication, labeling them as factually incorrect and misleading.
The controversy highlights the ongoing tension between the American electric vehicle manufacturer and segments of the German media landscape. As Tesla continues to entrench itself in the European automotive heartland, scrutiny regarding its operational efficiency, labor practices, and financial transparency has intensified. The Handelsblatt report in question painted a picture of a factory struggling to meet targets and suffering from slimming margins. However, Thierig’s detailed response suggests that the narrative of struggle is not only exaggerated but fundamentally flawed, citing internal data that significantly contradicts the figures published by the newspaper.
This incident serves as a critical case study in corporate communication and crisis management. By bypassing traditional press releases and addressing the claims directly on social media, Tesla’s local leadership is attempting to control the narrative surrounding its most critical European asset. The stakes are high; Giga Berlin is not just a factory, but the beachhead for Tesla’s expansion into a market traditionally dominated by legacy giants like Volkswagen, BMW, and Mercedes-Benz.
The Core Dispute: Production Volume Discrepancies
At the heart of Thierig’s rebuttal is the contested production figure for the fiscal year 2025. Handelsblatt reported that the Grünheide facility produced approximately 149,000 Model Y vehicles throughout the year. For a factory designed with a capacity to produce significantly more, such a figure would suggest a dramatic underutilization of assets and potentially waning demand.
Thierig emphatically denied this figure, stating, “The article is simply filled from front to back with false information and claims!” He proceeded to offer a correction based on internal data, asserting that the actual production volume for 2025 exceeded 200,000 vehicles. This discrepancy of over 50,000 units is substantial, representing a difference of roughly 25% to 30% in reported output.
“I have to set the record straight here! In the last article about Tesla in Grünheide, the Handelsblatt speaks e.g. of 149,000 Model Ys built in 2025. WRONG! In 2025, we again produced over 200,000 vehicles.” — Andre Thierig, Senior Director of Manufacturing at Giga Berlin
To provide further context, Thierig explained the operational nuances of 2025. He acknowledged that there were production pauses, specifically in the first quarter, but clarified that these were strategic rather than symptomatic of failure. The factory stopped production to retool and prepare for the “changeover to the new Model Y”—widely rumored to be the “Juniper” refresh. Following this planned downtime, the factory successfully ramped production back up, achieving a run rate of 5,000 units per week over several consecutive weeks.
Thierig also noted a quarter-over-quarter increase throughout 2025, countering the narrative of a slowdown. He revealed that since the start of manufacturing in 2022, Giga Berlin has produced a cumulative total of more than 700,000 Model Y units. Looking ahead, he indicated that the first quarter of 2026 is already planned to show a production increase compared to the fourth quarter of 2025, signaling continued growth momentum.
Financial Margins and Corporate Accounting
Beyond the physical count of cars leaving the assembly line, the dispute extended to the financial health of the German subsidiary. The Handelsblatt report cited an operating profit margin of merely 0.74%, a figure that would be considered dangerously thin in the capital-intensive automotive industry. Such a margin would imply that for every vehicle sold, the factory is retaining almost no profit after covering operating costs.
Thierig mocked this calculation, writing that how the publication arrived at such a figure “remains reserved for their secret ‘calculation skills.’” While he did not release the specific internal profit margins—likely due to corporate confidentiality rules—his dismissal suggests the actual figure is significantly healthier.
However, Sönke Iwersen, the Head of Investigative Research at Handelsblatt, defended the newspaper's reporting in the comments section of Thierig’s post. Iwersen stated that their figures were derived directly from Tesla’s own annual financial statements filed for the Grünheide entity. He cited a 2024 revenue of €7.68 billion, an operating profit of €156.8 million, and a net income after taxes of €55.6 million.
This clash likely stems from the complexities of multinational corporate accounting. Regional subsidiaries often operate under transfer pricing agreements with their parent companies. The
