I have a decent amount of Tesla shares, that I purchased around 2017. All I want is a shareholder vote to get rid of Elon. His time has passed.
Meme his way into taking the company private at a wildly inflated price per share? That's not a problem, that's a deus ex machina.
I’m interested to know how many other HNers also hold this belief, or think this is a reasonable way to treat entrepreneurs in America?
I think it’s reasonable not to allow a single employee to be compensated (55b$) more than all the EBITDA the company has ever made.
I think it’s reasonable to question the decision making demonstrated by firing the most successful team at the company and put the major competitive advantage at risk.
I think it’s reasonable to question the constant monkeying with product and design (Cybertruck, removal of loved features like LIDAR or physical wiper blade controls).
I think it’s reasonable to question how the CEO has lost first mover advantage so badly by failing to improve products and introduce new models as the legacy competition and foreign companies quickly have caught up.
I think it’s reasonable to want an engaged, full-time CEO who is not distracted by executive responsibilities at several other ventures, half of which are actively failing as well.
We don't know the full details of the Supercharger team's "firing" yet, so let's not speculate.
Reuters speculated when they reported about the cancellation of the affordable Model 2, and they got that reporting horribly wrong (damaging the stock price with their error).
As for Superchargers being a major competitive advantage, that's no longer the case, as the network is open to cars from other brands.
Tesla hasn't lost its first mover advantage. Name another American or European carmaker that sells as many EVs as Tesla. BYD briefly caught up in terms of raw sales figures, but that trend quickly reversed when China's economic woes weighed on the company.
As for "failing to improve products," the Model S has been improved in so many meaningful ways, it's practically a new car. The performance (0-60 in 1.99s) is absolutely mind-bending, and Tesla's innovations such as the carbon-wrapped motor are responsible for this.
> I think it’s reasonable to want an engaged, full-time CEO who is not distracted by executive responsibilities at several other ventures, half of which are actively failing as well.
Which ones are failing? SpaceX is untouchable. Neuralink successfully implanted a brain/computer interface in a paraplegic man. X.com delivers features at a greater rate than Twitter 1.0, at lower operational cost, and -more importantly- it is defending free speech. xAI just secured $6bn in funding, with its value soaring to $18bn. All of which was acheived by a man who is "distracted."
And other companies that Musk co-founded (e.g. OpenAI, PayPal), seem to be ticking along nicely also.
Not if the deal had one party misrepresent the information they knew, such as in this case.
1. You want corporations, that already have huge protections, and relatively weak governance to re-domicile in states that offer even less regulations.
2. You assume that Tesla couldn't possibly make a bad decision regarding the Supercharger team and are casting reports of its demise as mere speculation when the leader of that team is terminated, and members of the team are reporting its demise.
3. You're stating that the Model 2 is still alive, and will be here any time soon!
4. That the Supercharger network isn't a competitive advantage.
5. Tesla hasn't lost its first mover advantage when the number of well-financed competitors has increased dramatically over the last 10 years.
6. That the Model S (which sells in minuscule amounts) is indicative of Tesla improving its product line up.
7. That X is succeeding when it's bleeding advertisers, and its value is continually being downgraded by banks.
8. And that OpenAI and PayPal owe their success to Musk who was minimally involved in OpenAI, and Musk hasn't been involved with PayPal for 23+ years.
Who's delusional here?
As Upton Sinclair famously said, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
2. That's not what I said. I just said that we need to wait until all the facts and strategy emerges, rather than going on a few statements by individuals who are not (or no longer) involved in Tesla
3. Yes, as confirmed by Musk in the earnings call.
4. It used to be. It's not any more, because it's open to all carmakers, as I said
5. Well financed maybe. Fisker, Nikola, Rivian etc - they all got surprising amounts of financing. That doesn't mean they've displaced Tesla, or come anywhere near displacing Tesla. I'd advise you to read the news about Tesla competitors, both legacy and new - look how many BEVs they're shipping vs Tesla, and look at their margins on each vehicle sold. I think you might be surprised at how far Tesla leads the field
6. I gave the carbon-wrapped motor as an example of Tesla innovations. It's one of many. The refreshed Model 3 is also an example of how Tesla is improving products. You claimed Tesla is "failing" to improve products. There are many counterexamples that refute that statement
7. X bled advertisers yes. But it's still a great social network, and that's all I care about. Elon didn't buy Twitter in order to make money. He bought it because the West needs a platform that prioritises free speech (as far as legally possible). X.com is imperfect but it's an improvement on Twitter. I don't care if it's "downgraded by banks." The whole point of Elon owning Twitter is that it no longer serves the interests of a few powerful people and institutions, and instead is an inclusive platform for people across the political spectrum.
8. Musk co-founded OpenAI. If he was "minimally involved" he wouldn't be listed as a co-founder. PayPal used to be called "X.com" Guess who owned that domain name? It was renamed to "PayPal" when Elon was ousted from the management structure. I'd recommend reading up on the history here. It's very interesting - lots of twists and turns.
2. Statements by THE PEOPLE ON THE TEAM WHO WERE JUST FIRED have a lot more weight than an internet commentator saying "let's wait for the details to arrive."
3. Sure. Musk says a lot of shit that is completely divorced from reality...
4. Competing carmakers have adopted the connector, but will they be able to really leverage the ease of use that Tesla owners have? Plug in and go?
5. I'm talking about companies like VW Group, GM, Ford, Mercedes, Porsche, BYD. Not little startups.
6. The carbon wrapped motor was first discussed in 2016, and is on the Model S, possibly the lowest selling Tesla. If Tesla is going to take 8 years for every "innovation", they're going to be DOA.
7. A great social network, filled with bots, and Nazis. Elon didn't buy Twitter for any free-speech ideals, he was forced to buy Twitter because he couldn't control his impulses and made a stupid purchase offer that he couldn't weasel his way out of. Everything else is spin. And "inclusive" is hardly what most neutral observers would use to describe Twitter.
8. Is Musk still involved with OpenAI? No. Did he do more than spend a few bucks, no. Martin Eberhard has more claim to founding Tesla than Musk does with OpenAI. And you do know that Musk was FIRED because of his stupid idea to rename PayPal and make it into a WeChat clone.
Looks like you're still delusional. That'll happen when you get financially and emotionally invested in a guy like Musk.
2. I don't judge company strategy based on statements by disgruntled ex-employees. It would be naive to do so.
3. Things Musk says in shareholder meetings are SEC audited. So if he says the Model 2 is coming, it will come.
4. The Tesla Supercharger network is great. But it's not a competitive advantage as it's open to other brands.
5. As I said, compare the number of BEVs sold and the margins, whether we're looking at startups or legacy auto. Come back to me when you've found one that comes close to Tesla in Q1 2024 sales and margins.
6. You're arguing in bad faith. As I said, the carbon-wrapped motor is just one example of innovation, and the Model 3 Highland is just one example of product improvement. Your point was that Tesla "failed" to improve their products. That point is easily disproven.
7. X.com is not filled with bots and Nazis in my experience. If it was, I wouldn't use it. What data do you base your argument on?
8. Eberhard hadn't sold a single production vehicle at Tesla. Elon Musk was co-founder, chairman, product architect and the main source of funding when Roadster (Tesla's first car) was designed and produced. He oversaw the design of the Roadster from the beginning. Musk won the Global Green 2006 product design award and the 2007 Index Design award for the design of the Roadster. Not Eberhard. Musk. Production of the Roadster started in 2008, a year after Eberhard had been replaced at Tesla.
---
Let's not accuse each other of being "delusional" - let's learn from each other and contribute to a healthy conversation.
Put another way, sure, the stock price went above the targets he set for himself. How much did profits go up?
That company no longer exists.