The information provided here by the publishers of this video is completely inadequate to inform the viewer in a meaningful way of the veracity of the the information portrayed. I see this as a blatantly fraudulent practice that should be banned in a modern civilised society! ... TPB / TVM

• 0:08
• The truck that was supposed to break every rule may have broken something else instead. Tesla’s
• Cybertruck debuted as the future—sharp angles, stainless steel, and promises of
• indestructibility. But behind the viral demos and futuristic image lies a hidden story.
• This isn’t just about a panel falling off or a software glitch. It’s about
• deeper issues rooted in how these trucks were built. Investigators found troubling
• flaws during a teardown—issues serious enough to raise eyebrows in one vehicle and alarms
• in many others. Internal memos suggest these weren’t isolated problems. Beneath the steel
• exterior is a reality Tesla didn’t showcase. From structural concerns to hidden defects,
• this is the version of the Cybertruck story the company likely didn’t want revealed. Structural Weakness Hidden Beneath the Armor Tesla promoted the Cybertruck as nearly


• 1:10
• indestructible, boasting its '30X cold-rolled stainless steel' exoskeleton as a revolutionary
• step in vehicle durability. The steel was meant to deflect small arms fire, withstand sledgehammers,
• and reject the traditional need for crumple zones. In theory, the vehicle’s outer shell was
• its armor, both literally and metaphorically. But behind that marketing promise was an overlooked
• vulnerability in how the panels were held together, not what they were made of.
• The core issue stemmed not from the steel itself, but from the structural bonding
• method used to attach it. The vehicle’s cant rail, a critical support component near the windshield,
• was glued in place using a specialized adhesive instead of being mechanically


• 2:05
• fastened or welded. Under stress — whether from road vibrations, thermal expansion, or moisture
• exposure — the adhesive began to fail. This caused panels to loosen or even detach entirely,
• including during high-speed driving. What was pitched as armored became structurally unstable.
• Inconsistencies between the units came from the manner in which the adhesive was applied.
• There were some locations with so little adhesion, but improperly cured areas or
• exposure to road salt as an environmental factor led to compromised adhesion. Videos
• made on the inside, revealing internal leaks and teardown, showed a disturbing pattern:
• it was not an occasional defect or even a bad production batch-thus was the wide range of


• 3:01
• Cybertrucks' fate. Every vehicle inspected was about showing signs or symptoms of very
• poor bonding. This raised questions about not only materials but also about Tesla's quality control
• in production. Most worryingly, an adhesive that was not up to standard undermined the
• entire premise of the strength of the Cybertruck as a vehicle. Stainless steel may resist dents,
• but that makes no difference if the panels can only peel off due to the highway wind force,
• rattle loose over time. What protection does that actually afford? Was it already
• possible to cover something fundamental, say 'structure', with a view to seamless futurism?
• And if it became apparent to Tesla early on that the bonding was inconsistent, why was it
• not dealt with before deliveries commenced? And just when you think the armor is the
• problem, wait until you see how it performs in a suburban parking lot. Designed for War, Failing at Walmart The Cybertruck was introduced as a vehicle built


• 4:08
• for extremes — a machine tough enough to withstand bullets, tackle Mars-like terrain, and survive
• post-apocalyptic scenarios. Elon Musk described it as “apocalypse technology,” making bold claims
• about its off-road capabilities, resilience, and utility in blackout or disaster scenarios. But
• once the vehicle reached consumers, a different story emerged. Far from conquering the elements,
• the Cybertruck struggled with ordinary driving conditions, raising doubts about whether it could
• live up to even a fraction of its promises. Owners and test drivers quickly reported
• performance issues in everyday environments. Videos circulated of the truck spinning its
• wheels in snowy parking lots, getting stuck on basic off-road trails, and requiring tows


• 5:03
• in situations other trucks handled with ease. Testers found the truck’s sheer size — over 6 feet
• wide and 18 feet long — made maneuvering through urban areas and residential driveways cumbersome.
• The futuristic shape and low visibility further complicated basic navigation,
• especially in tight or unfamiliar areas. For a vehicle supposedly built to survive the end times,
• it struggled with routine trips to the store. Most alarming, however, was the discrepancy
• between the vehicle's claimed ruggedness and its actual structural construction.
• Instead of traditional steel frames common to utility trucks, the Cybertruck employs aluminum
• undercarriages - the lighter, less rigid material that deforms under heavy strain. This compromises
• utility under towing and hauling, which cuts one of the basic reasons for a pickup truck. How far


• 6:04
• can the most durable electric truck on earth go for this price if it cannot withstand regular use?
• It raises an even bigger question as to what the priorities were. The wood appears to have been on
• sci-fi aesthetics and shock factor - something you'd rather feel at home with in the set of
• a Blade Runner, not on practical engineering. This design speaks more of image than function,
• critics claim, especially as rivals like Rivian's R1T keep performing better in the real world.
• Where is the faith in this vehicle going to come if the Cybertruck cannot take extreme conditions of survival, like winter roads, tight turns, or a weekend
• haul to the dump? The gap between hype and reality is now harder than ever to ignore.
• Banned, Seized, and Deemed Dangerous While the Cybertruck earned a five-star safety


• 7:00
• rating from U.S. authorities like the NHTSA, that approval didn’t carry over to Europe. In the U.K.
• and EU, the vehicle is outright banned from legal road use due to multiple fundamental violations
• of pedestrian and vehicle safety standards. British police recently seized a privately
• imported Cybertruck for lacking a “certificate of conformity,” highlighting the broader issue: the
• truck simply does not meet safety criteria set by international regulators. For a vehicle positioned
• as the future of transportation, its failure to clear basic legal hurdles abroad is telling.
• Among the most glaring concerns is the Cybertruck’s use of exposed sharp edges
• on its exterior. While the angular stainless steel design may be visually striking, it poses a real
• threat to pedestrians in the event of a collision. European regulations require certain minimum edge
• radii to reduce injury risk, and the Cybertruck fails that standard. The vehicle’s rigid 30X steel


• 8:07
• body also offers little to no energy absorption during impact — a crucial element in modern crash
• safety design. Instead of crumpling zones, the Cybertruck acts more like a solid battering ram,
• increasing the danger for other road users. Other aesthetic features undermine traditional
• safety standards. The heavy-duty luminary strip of the Cybertruck, one that spans the width of the
• truck, is contrary to several European lighting laws that regulate the brightness, beam angle,
• and separation of indicator lights. Just another thing — exceeding vehicle height and width,
• weighing almost 7,000 pounds and 2.2 meters, the truck is banned from a plethora of European
• roads where limits of that kind and weight are strictly enforced. These violations should not


• 9:00
• be treated as minor errors; they point to a more fundamental incompatibility between
• the process of designing and the paradigms of public safety accepted the world over.
• It is an incongruity: In the USA, Tesla uses its safety results to sell the Cybertruck as
• a high-performance utility vehicle. In the biggest EV markets around the globe,
• that vehicle is perceived to be a danger to the public. Why wasn't the design adapted
• for international compliance? Was this a design consideration they overlooked, or has Tesla chosen
• to disregard these global standards in favor of their bold design? Whichever it was, the fact
• that it is banned in Europe severely undermines its viability as a global product and raises
• serious questions about what Tesla's long-term strategy for international expansion might be.


• 10:00
• The Meme Machine When the Cybertruck first debuted, it sparked intense curiosity, awe, and even admiration. Celebrities like Pharrell Williams
• and Kim Kardashian were seen behind the wheel, and the vehicle quickly became a cultural status
• symbol — an aggressive, space-age pickup that defied convention. But as production models
• reached customers and flaws began surfacing, the tone shifted. The Cybertruck went from a
• bold innovation to a symbol of overpromise, with owners and onlookers alike turning to
• social media to mock its real-world performance. One of the earliest and most damaging reputational
• hits came from viral videos showing Cybertruck panels falling off or being removed by hand
• with minimal effort. Footage of warped bodywork, detached exoskeleton pieces, and DIY fixes flooded


• 11:01
• platforms like TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram. Some users even turned panel removal into internet
• challenges. These clips directly contradicted Tesla’s messaging of rugged durability and left
• many questioning whether the vehicle was built to any meaningful quality standard at all.
• It has also become, dare I say it, a visual punch line: photos of it compared to low-poly
• video game assets or children's projects made the rounds online. The critics said, 'Sorry,
• you just can not judge this thing to be a modern road vehicle, it has more failed dystopian film
• prop department about it.' Even serious car reviewers started calling it a 'meme car'-an
• item already bought as much for its irony and novelty as it is for its functionality.
• The Cybertruck has been all but sunk in the court of public opinion: Tesla lost
• control of the storyline with this event. The very internet culture that once provided the


• 12:05
• company with 'iconic' status now descends on them in derision. Where once an edgy,
• progressive design had focused public attention in a positive direction was now a warning of how
• quickly opinions could turn when promises did not match reality. And the gap between public
• perception and Tesla illusion only widened with the constant unveiling of flaws in new features.
• A Prepper’s Worst Nightmare The Cybertruck was pitched as the ultimate survival vehicle — a doomsday-ready, all-electric fortress designed to thrive in chaos.
• Its stainless steel body, bioweapon defense mode, and bold marketing tapped directly into
• prepper culture and apocalyptic anxieties. But when survival experts and preppers began
• analyzing the vehicle's actual capabilities, the conclusion was blunt: the Cybertruck is


• 13:03
• not built for true off-grid resilience. In fact, many within the prepping community have outright
• rejected it as impractical, overly complex, and overly reliant on fragile infrastructure.
• One of the biggest concerns is its dependence on electronics and software. In a disaster scenario
• involving an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) or extended grid failure, the Cybertruck’s reliance
• on computerized systems and software updates could render it useless. Preppers typically prioritize
• older, simpler vehicles that can be repaired without external systems or specialized tools.
• In contrast, the Cybertruck’s integrated electronics and digital controls require
• proprietary diagnostics and likely a Tesla service center — neither of which would
• be available in a real emergency. The other problem is the size and weight of the vehicle. Heavier than most consumer trucks, at nearly 7,000 pounds,


• 14:07
• Cybertrucks generate some significant problems related to escape scenarios. The footprint leaves
• much to be desired in maneuverability on rural trails or disaster fields where infrastructure
• is blocked or damaged. Quite possibly fast on pavement, yet mass and low clearance do
• not lend it to sudden evacuation across varied terrain. While many preppers view the Cybertruck
• as a liability more than a lifeline compared to rugged diesel-powered trucks, which can carry
• extra fuel and be repaired with hand tools. Even the ability of the vehicle to power
• itself off-grid, once one of its biggest bullet points, is now under scrutiny.
• It can certainly run small appliances, but most preppers point out that few have the requisite
• solar infrastructure to regularly charge a 3-ton EV in the field. The Cybertruck is, without a grid


• 15:06
• infrastructure or access to fast charging, just a 7000-pound paperweight. The irony is that a
• truck touted for societal collapse may only be able to function when society runs perfectly.
• Turns out, surviving the end of the world might be easier than surviving a Tuesday in suburbia.
• Unfit for the Apocalypse The Cybertruck was sold as a go-anywhere,
• do-anything machine. Tesla positioned it as a truck not just ready for the apocalypse,
• but also capable of replacing traditional vehicles in everyday life, from hauling gear to school
• drop-offs. But real-world use suggests that it's not well-suited for either extreme. Critics have
• raised concerns about range, recharging logistics, and the Cybertruck's ability to handle daily


• 16:00
• driving needs without unnecessary complications. What was supposed to be a revolutionary
• utility vehicle is turning out to be more of a design experiment with limited practical value.
• One of the most pressing concerns is the Cybertruck's range under realistic conditions.
• While Tesla claims a range of up to 340 miles, that number can quickly drop in cold weather,
• towing loads, or driving off-road. In survival or emergency situations, where power may be scarce
• and routes unpredictable, the last thing users want to worry about is whether their oversized
• electric truck will make it home. Unlike gas or diesel vehicles that can carry backup fuel,
• EVs rely entirely on electricity, and portable charging solutions for a truck this
• large are neither affordable nor widespread. Its dubious claims to use in any situations


• 17:01
• of true emergency or off-grid application have been highlighted by NASA engineers and survival
• experts. Their main concerns pertain to the Cybertruck's weight and complexity, as well
• as its susceptibility to both environmental and electronic failures. Some noted that although
• Tesla boasts features like 'bioweapon defense mode,' the basic systems underpinning the vehicle
• do not withstand widespread grid failure or EMP attacks — a critical consideration for those
• planning worst-case scenarios. Almost ironically, a possible performance of the Cybertruck at such
• times might well be worse than that of a standard hybrid or even a 30-year-old gas-powered truck.
• Many find it not well engineered enough for a day-to-day vehicle; rather, they deem the model very inappropriate for normal family use. Limitations in rearward visibility,
• poor handling in tight urban spaces, and abominable ride quality are reported.


• 18:05
• The Cybertruck is, for the most part, too much pickup for a suburban commute or simple errand,
• weighing in at nearly 7,000 pounds and measuring over 18 feet long. Thus, whether you are bracing
• for collapse or merely picking up your kids, the Cybertruck has more challenges than solutions
• vehicle caught between its promises and the harsh realities of daily life and disaster planning.
• Built on Sand: The Production Line Disaster As scrutiny intensified around the Cybertruck’s
• reliability, investigators began examining Tesla’s manufacturing process,
• and what they found pointed to a much deeper issue than isolated part failures. According to teardown
• reports and internal reviews, the production of the Cybertruck was marked by inconsistent quality,
• rushed timelines, and an apparent lack of standardization. This was not simply about


• 19:05
• a few defective units slipping through; it suggested that the entire production framework was ill-suited for a vehicle with such an unconventional design and engineering profile.
• Among the most critical findings were inconsistencies in weld quality. In a
• vehicle that relies on structural rigidity for both safety and performance, uneven or incomplete
• welds pose a major risk. Some welds showed visible stress cracks or signs of poor adhesion,
• suggesting lapses in quality control. This was particularly problematic given the Cybertruck’s
• sharp-edged design, which demands precise alignment and bonding for structural integrity.
• For a vehicle advertised as a futuristic tank, such lapses raise serious concerns
• about its ability to withstand wear, stress, and collisions over time.


• 20:02
• Further down the line, wiring harness layouts were found to be haphazard. Some harnesses
• were loosely secured, while others were positioned to substantially increase the risk of rubbing against sharp internal edges or heat-generating components. Over time,
• this could give rise to instances of shorts or high resistance-intermittent electrical issues,
• the resolution of which could not be managed without dismantling the heavily packed bodywork
• of the truck. The reports noted variations in torque measurements recorded during assembly.
• Thus, there are possibilities that bolts holding some critical structural components may have been
• either under-tightened or over-tightened, thereby compromising safety and durability.
• Together, these concerns indicate that perhaps the Cybertruck was fast-tracked for production
• by Tesla to meet internal deadlines or investor expectations at the cost of manufacturing


• 21:03
• discipline. The design appears to be one step ahead of Tesla's assembly capabilities. And while
• software patches can fix trivial things, you can't fix bad welding and improper torque with
• an over-the-air update. What was meant to be the poster child of Tesla's revolutionary innovation
• instead shows that Cybertruck production was based more on improvisation than precision,
• raising questions about whether the truck was truly ready for mass deployment.
• 10,000 Trucks No One Wants Despite years of anticipation and over
• a million early reservations, the Cybertruck has stumbled out of the gate commercially.
• As of early 2025, Tesla reportedly has over 10,000 unsold Cybertrucks sitting idle in lots across the
• U.S., representing nearly 800 million dollars in inventory. These numbers paint a stark contrast


• 22:07
• to the vehicle’s once-hyped rollout and suggest a dramatic disconnect between early interest and
• actual demand. While supply chain constraints initially explained some of the slow rollout,
• the sheer volume of unsold units points to a much deeper issue: the market no longer wants
• what Tesla is offering. Internationally, the situation looks even worse. Tesla’s sales are
• down 75% in the Netherlands, 62% in the U.K., and even 6% in China—an especially concerning
• sign given how critical the Chinese EV market is to the company’s global ambitions. The
• Cybertruck’s inability to comply with European safety regulations has all but locked it out
• of the continent, but even in regions where it is legal to drive, demand has plummeted.


• 23:02
• Analysts have noted that potential buyers are being scared off not just by the vehicle’s
• unconventional design, but also by a growing perception that the truck is unreliable,
• overpriced, and impractical for daily use. The decision was rather late; after that,
• Tesla had quietly altered its marketing strategy away from Mars-oriented advertisements and
• futuristic action shots toward a more truckish kind of consumer appeal. Too late, though,
• for the damage had been done. To many, the Cybertruck actually came to represent excess:
• a vehicle that promised everything and gave little. The massive price hike-almost
• doubling from the initial 40,000 dollars down to anything north of 99,000 dollars for one or
• two trims-surely alienated some early backers who felt that they were duped by the original
• proposition. The Cybertruck's problems with the inventory are really branding problems. After a


• 24:05
• good six years of building consumer excitement, Tesla now has to pay for unmet expectations,
• all due to a fading public trust. For a company that lived on grand announcements
• and viral product reveals, the quiet piling up of unsold trucks stands in glaring contrast.
• Will Tesla ever find a way back? Or will the Cybertruck then tell the tale of what
• happens when ambition outruns execution? The resale market tells an equally grim
• story. Unlike Tesla’s earlier models, which often appreciated in value due to scarcity and demand,
• used Cybertrucks are already being listed at steep discounts, some dropping below MSRP within
• months of ownership. Owners report difficulty finding buyers even after heavy price cuts, with
• prospective shoppers wary of quality concerns, inconsistent build reports, and the increasingly


• 25:06
• negative media spotlight. What was once hyped as a collector’s item now resembles a depreciating
• asset, and fast. For early adopters who saw the truck as both a tech leap and an investment,
• the reality has been a sobering reversal. Dealers and analysts point to a perfect storm:
• high sticker prices, niche appeal, unresolved quality issues, and a growing cultural backlash.
• While Tesla has tried to pivot messaging, downplaying the truck’s sci-fi identity and
• emphasizing utility, the product itself hasn’t fundamentally changed. It’s still massive,
• unconventional, and expensive. The initial excitement has cooled into hesitation,
• and hesitation has hardened into disinterest. At this point, even loyal Tesla fans are asking the


• 26:02
• uncomfortable question: was the Cybertruck ever really built for the market that exists today?
• The Political Fallout The Cybertruck’s issues are compounded by Elon Musk’s increasingly polarizing public profile. His outspoken support for controversial
• figures and movements—from high-profile endorsements of Donald Trump to comments
• sympathetic to Germany’s AfD party—has alienated large segments of Tesla’s traditional fan base.
• What was once hailed as a technology company with an environmental mission now carries the baggage
• of Musk’s political stances. As a result, many environmentally minded consumers who once queued
• for a Model 3 or Model Y have publicly distanced themselves from the Cybertruck, viewing it as a de
• facto rallying cry for views they reject. This shift in perception has turned the


• 27:01
• Cybertruck into more than just a vehicle; it’s become a mobile political statement. Instances
• of vandalism at Tesla showrooms—graffiti labeling the steel “Nazi Cars and Steel
• Lies”—and protests at charging stations reflect the depth of public anger. In cities like Denver
• and Los Angeles, demonstrators have targeted Cybertrucks specifically,
• leaving messages scrawled across their doors or intentionally denting panels. For many critics,
• the truck’s futuristic, armored aesthetic now symbolizes what they see as unchecked corporate
• ego and disregard for social responsibility. The tarnished image seems to have drawn the
• attention even of investors. After the recalls and the public backlash, several large institutional
• holders put on record statements questioning Tesla's governance and brand risk. There were


• 28:00
• even analyst comments by Ross Gerber that Musk's personal controversies really are the
• most significant threat to Tesla's valuation, much more so than any technological challenge.
• When a flagship product is perceived not just as imperfect, but rather as an extension of the CEO's
• contentious personality, consumer trust erodes way quicker than any warranty work can fix it.
• Tesla is, of course, working to change the narrative itself—subtly downplaying the Cybertruck
• in earnings calls and refocusing marketing on the more mundane Model Y—but that has given
• it neither good press nor effective publicity to restore its lost sheen. The Cybertruck continues
• to be a lightning rod for criticism of Musk himself, obstructing Tesla's own pathway to
• moderate customers. Unless the company decouples its products from the founder's divisive image,


• 29:01
• the political fallout engendered by such products threatens to become à permanent drag on the company's ability to launch any future vehicles free of controversy.
• What’s notable is how the Cybertruck has become emblematic of a broader shift in how Tesla is
• perceived, not just as a car company, but as a cultural and political lightning rod.
• The vehicle’s design, once celebrated as disruptive, now feels more like a provocation. In
• online forums and review threads, buyers aren’t just debating torque specs or range—they’re
• questioning whether purchasing the Cybertruck signals allegiance to Musk’s ideology. For a brand
• once admired for its neutrality and innovation, this politicization is both unprecedented and
• risky. In many ways, the truck’s controversial aesthetics and bold marketing have made it


• 30:00
• inseparable from the public’s opinion of its CEO. Tesla’s former appeal to both progressives and
• tech-forward centrists has fractured. Green energy advocates, once central to the brand’s rise,
• now find themselves alienated by Musk’s antagonism toward regulatory bodies and
• his vocal disdain for ESG policies. The irony is hard to ignore: a company that built its
• identity on environmental leadership and future-oriented thinking is now being rejected
• by the very movements that once championed it. If the Cybertruck’s brand is now tied more to
• political theater than engineering excellence, it raises serious doubts about Tesla’s long-term
• ability to grow beyond its loyalist base. And just when the headlines couldn’t get
• any worse, insiders dropped something that could turn a PR disaster into a legal one.


• 31:00
• The Whistleblower Bombshell What began as isolated complaints and teardown
• anomalies has evolved into a full-blown scandal, with internal whistleblower reports indicating
• that Tesla executives were warned about major structural flaws before the Cybertruck’s release.
• According to leaked documents and employee testimonies reviewed in early 2025, engineering
• teams flagged concerns about the bonding method used on critical support structures—including
• the cant rail and A-pillar—well before the first deliveries went out. These concerns
• reportedly stemmed from repeated lab failures in adhesion stress tests and durability simulations.
• The most damning allegation is not that the flaws existed, but that management allegedly chose to
• ignore them. Internal emails suggest that quality control reports detailing adhesive
• inconsistencies were circulated to upper management, including those overseeing


• 32:02
• vehicle safety and body integrity. Instead of halting or reevaluating the production process,
• Tesla accelerated output to meet investor targets and deliver on long-delayed
• promises. Some employees reportedly pushed for mechanical fasteners or structural revisions,
• but these proposals were dismissed due to cost, design, and time constraints.
• Allegations of corporate negligence are mounting. Critics say that Tesla was focused not on product
• safety but on optics and profit, thereby gambling with consumer trust and roadworthiness. Should
• that be true, it would cast light on a culture of conscious negligence, an atmosphere where
• engineering warnings were suppressed in favor of hitting delivery milestones. For a company so long
• identified with engineering and obsessed with safety, such revelations cut sharply.


• 33:00
• And with that would come regulatory ramifications. Consumer safety organizations have already begun
• calling for the NHTSA and SEC to formally investigate whether Tesla knowingly set off vehicles with structural compromises. Some analysts posit that class actions are
• not far behind. This is not merely about bad outer panels or disappointing performance;
• this is about accountability. And if Tesla had the data to support the fact that its
• trucks might not be able to hold together on the highway, why were buyers not made
• aware? At best, this is a case of reckless negligence; at worst, a corporate cover-up.
• What’s especially troubling is the timing. According to insiders, some of these warnings
• were raised as early as mid-2023, months before production ramped up and long before customers
• ever took delivery. Despite this, marketing campaigns continued in full force, touting the


• 34:03
• Cybertruck’s strength and engineering brilliance. This has led some to argue that Tesla was not just
• negligent but deliberately misleading. If company leadership proceeded with full knowledge of
• structural risks, it raises the specter of fraud, not just poor judgment. It also raises a legal
• gray area: was the public misled through omission, or was this an outright breach of consumer trust?
• Internally, the fallout may not be over. Whistleblower protections now cover at least
• three former Tesla engineers involved in the disclosures, according to sources familiar with
• the case. While Tesla has yet to respond publicly to many of the claims, leaked Slack messages and
• internal memos point to growing unrest within engineering teams. Morale is reportedly low, and
• some employees are quietly distancing themselves from the Cybertruck project altogether. The bigger


• 35:03
• story might not just be what happened to the trucks, but what’s happening inside Tesla itself.
• Thanks for watching. If this breakdown surprised you, hit the like button to help others find it
• too. Got thoughts or firsthand experience with the Cybertruck? Drop a comment below — we read
• them all. Don’t forget to subscribe so you don’t miss what’s coming next.
• And if you’re ready for more, click the next video on your screen — it dives even deeper into what Tesla doesn’t want you to know.