A Dutch leasing and rental firm Mistergreen now face insolvency after betting its entire future on the idea that Tesla’s cars would become highly valued autonomous robotaxis. Once a champion of electric mobility, the company built a fleet of more than 4,000 Tesla electric vehicles with one core assumption: Tesla’s promise of full self‑driving would turn these cars into revenue‑generating machines and appreciating assets.

Investors and bondholders in Mistergreen are now facing heavy losses as the company moves toward bankruptcy, selling off its remaining vehicles to other European leasing firms. The collapse has become one of the most dramatic illustrations yet of how high‑flying bets on Tesla’s autonomous future collided with hard market realities.

Promises vs. Reality

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has long made bold claims about autonomy. In 2019, he publicly suggested that buying a Tesla was akin to acquiring an appreciating asset, predicting that the vehicles would one day operate as robotaxis and generate income.

“Buying a car today is an investment into the future. I think the most profound thing is that if you buy a Tesla today, I believe you are buying an appreciating asset – not a depreciating asset,” Musk said in the interview.

Apparently, Musk’s fans and supporters interpreted this as meaning that over time these cars could be worth significantly more than their purchase price.

That vision was seductive enough for Mistergreen to build its business model around it. Yet the key components of that promise never fully materialized. Tesla’s self‑driving technology, despite iterative improvements, remains classified as a Level 2 system requiring human supervision and is far from meeting the threshold of true autonomy that would make robotaxi operations economically viable at scale. These shortcomings have now hit home in dramatic fashion.

Tesla also slashed prices on new vehicles repeatedly over the last two years to spur demand and manage inventory. That strategy may have helped bring more cars into customer hands, but it also hastened depreciation in the resale market. Used Teslas have lost value far faster than many in the industry expected, squeezing firms that depend on residual values to stay solvent.

For Mistergreen, the combination of dramatic depreciation and stalled autonomy dreams meant fleet values were written down by millions, wiping out margins and undermining its ability to pay debts.

Broader Industry Ripples

Another high‑profile rental play involving the automaker made headlines this month when California regulators threatened to suspend Tesla’s sales license over misleading self‑driving claims. The state found Tesla’s marketing around Autopilot and Full Self‑Driving could lead consumers to overestimate what the technology could actually do. Tesla has 90 days to adjust how it markets these systems before facing penalties. 

At the same time, Tesla’s nascent robotaxi program continues to grow in places like California, with more than 1,600 vehicles and nearly 800 drivers registered. That expansion paints a picture of a company determined to pivot into ride‑hailing services. However, the rollout is not yet fully autonomous and underlines how much work remains before Tesla can realize the revenue‑generating fleet that once captivated firms like Mistergreen.

The Mistergreen fallout cuts in two directions. For EV buyers, lower prices and slower depreciation can be good news. Cheaper used Teslas make electric vehicles more accessible, and the diminished premium once attached to Tesla’s advanced tech could push competitors to innovate further.

For investors and fleet operators, though, the episode is a stark lesson in not equating corporate hype with economic fundamentals. Companies that assumed Tesla’s cars would hold or increase in value based on promised future capabilities overlooked the standard drivers of vehicle valuation: age, miles, market demand, and real-world performance. The self‑driving narrative was compelling, but it could not counteract those basic economic forces.

The Future Still Hangs in the Balance

Tesla’s ambitions are far from dead. The company continues to refine its self‑driving software, expand robotaxi tests and court regulatory approval. Elon Musk still frames autonomy as a core pillar of Tesla’s future growth, and investors remain intrigued by the potential of AI‑driven mobility.

Yet the bankruptcy of a major rental fleet that bet its future on those claims is nothing less than a cautionary tale. It suggests that transformative claims must eventually withstand scrutiny not just from regulators and engineers, but from accountants and balance sheets. It stands to reason that today’s reality for Tesla is a blend of promise and peril with no clear winner yet.