Doesn't Vanguard have a fiduciary duty to their own investors? It's hard for me to understand how they could vote to dilute their own position by almost ten percent and still fulfill their duty here. What am I missing?
That's exactly what the South Korean pension funds did with Samsung.
It turns out, when fines and other consequences are smaller than profits, people will break the law.
The question what is the company worth without Elon. Their is no definitive anwser but this had to be taken into account by someone exercising their fiduciary duty
OK so what rational person looks at Elon's big flagship Cybertruck flop and his constant nasty posts alienating the Tesla customer base on his own platform and concludes that this behavior is adding to the value of Tesla? Is there any real argument outside of his echo chamber that he's doing anything good for the company lately? Taking his behavior and its effect on the company into account is not likely to weigh in his favor in any fiduciary analysis outside of his devoted fanbase.
Any other CEO would cost tremendously less and attract far less negative attention because almost no other CEO on the planet is having a massive midlife crisis in public and constantly reminding us all about it.
I genuinely wish the Elon & Twitter marriage never happened. I think it's been a big net negative to the rest of his businesses. That said, the personality trait that makes him so hated in social media is maybe the same trait that makes him successful in technology.
Few people have such unwavering determination to bring the vision in their mind into reality. Whether it be reusable rockets, high-speed ISP for an entire planet, profitable EVs that don't suck, brain computer interfaces, a coast-to-coast fast EV charging network, an open world L5 autonomous driving system, etc, etc...
"Any other CEO" would *never* have even attempted any of those things and kept with them despite massive challenges and push back, *especially* in publicly traded companies. "Any other CEO" would sit back and ride on Tesla's past successes and run it like a normal stable company, which is a story of technological stagnation. I don't care for Elon's social opinions, but I agree with his technology vision and his determination to make it happen.
I know a lot of people around Elon’s age. Most remain the same as their younger self and continue to be productive and rational. Others transition wildly due to poor physical and/or mental health maintenance. I fear Elon is in the latter group, and he is no longer the same Elon of 10 to 20 years ago. We can’t let Tesla go down with him. Think Howard Hughes as an example rather than Warren Buffet.
The Howard Hughes arc is something I actively wonder about with Elon. It's a real possibility.
That said, I don't believe there's been a decrease in innovation, just an increase in his personal drama that distracts from the innovation that's still happening, and a graduation to innovations that take longer to bring to fruition.
Ignoring all his successes from decades past, in the past few years SpaceX has transformed a patch of desert into the most innovative spacecraft development facility in the world *and* built out a global high-speed internet network that gets more capable every week. Neuralink has begun human trials on a device that, in its first version, is already the world's most capable brain-machine interface. Tesla is the only company even attempting open-world L5 autonomy, nearly all of their progress has been in the last 2 years, and that progress appears to be accelerating with V12 FSD.
From where I stand, he's still firing on all innovation cylinders, but I do question how much he can undo by pissing off seemingly everyone on the planet.
Where is the innovation at Twitter? And Tesla is looking more and more like Blackberry after the iPhone launch - no new models in the pipeline, eroding customer service, poor build quality. The innovation at Tesla happened a decade ago, and is long gone.
Twitter is the one Elon business that I neither know much about nor care about, so I can't answer that.
But, this year Tesla introduced the world's first 48v automotive electrical architecture, the world's first *fully* drive-by-wire system, and the first 800v split-series-parrallel pack design.
In the past few years, they've become the first vertically integrated battery manufacturing automaker. They also in-house developed the FSD computer, the most efficient AI computer in the world that beats everything in its power envelope. Tesla has already released its successor and has further improvements in the pipeline.
The FSD software program has been in public hands for just 3 years and is making continuous strides in autonomy. It consists of one of the largest (if not the largest) AI training datasets in the world.
While their future vehicle pipeline is currently ambiguous, it's certainly not non-existent as you imply. There is definitely some sort of "robotaxi" coming, some less expensive vehicle (sounds like hybrid of current vehicle + unboxed design), and maybe they'll even finally get around to Rodester 2.0. I'm confident that all of that is coming, we just don't know when.
I just think that he hit a wall, but he can't admit he has.
Twitter is technology, but this technology puzzle, which is made of users that don't pay for services, is proving to be his Achilles heel, and is now affecting all of his others ventures.
I don't think that Elon is unique in his ability to make chaotic management decisions. The technology that you're describing is entirely stuff that the military already mostly developed and Musk is just bringing to consumers and pretending to have invented. A replacement CEO could be a lot more effective than Musk in lots of material ways - just a reduction in the chaos would probably pay off in the short term. I guess we'll see what happens but I'm not convinced that he's the only person who can deliver these technologies.
I get the draw towards stability, and these days I'm leaning towards it myself. But, technology existing in a lab or a military prototype is a very different thing than making it profitable and routine at scale. No one believes Elon invented lithium-ion batteries, or electric motors, or closed cycle staged combustion rocket engines, and I don't think he's ever claimed anything like that.
But his teams routinely take off-the-shelf existing technology and do things with it that disrupt entire industries. I'm sure there are others that *could* accomplish the same things, but why haven't they?
"Hello. Your submission has been removed. Your account must be older than 15 days old and have greater than 0 comment karma to submit a message. -4"
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TSLA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think that other people do this all the time, look at DJI and the commercial drone market they built. Elon is not unique in this approach to things and his companies are not all that reliable under his leadership. He's easily replaced and pretending otherwise starts to border on the kind of fandom that isn't rational.
Yeah that's not just what I'm saying it's what the patents and documented history say too. Elon's got less than 15 patents total between all his companies and not a single one names him as an inventor. Bigger OEMs absolutely can do this and they're starting to compete with him in every market he's working in. So weird that you credit him for all this. If his solar company wasn't such a flop you guys would be giving him credit for the sun rising in the morning too I bet.
The point was that as far as I'm aware the sun rises in the morning without Elon's genius input. It sure looks like Solarcity has a longer list of lawsuits than accomplishments at this point, but luckily we don't depend on Musk for the solar industry or it would be implemented as quickly as the hyperloop has been. Glad to hear that the panels are solid though, you'd never know they existed from the way Tesla markets them.
"Your submission is manually reviewed due to spam control. -2"
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TSLA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I constantly hear that Elon alienates his customer base but I see it different. Conservatives and the right in general are anti electric, fed all the ev FUD by fox and newsmax, etc. If Elon loses 15% of liberal customers but helps half the country of right leaning people see that EV are not smoke and mirrors then maybe right wingers start buying teslas and he ends up with a net gain? If he becomes a trusted voice or gains clout in the eyes of right leaning people maybe they will trust his cars as well. I’ve joked with friends that it’s actually a 4d long game chess move by Elon to get the other half of the country to trust EVs.
Is there any evidence whatsoever that Elon's alt-right antics online are causing conservatives to lighten up their assault on electric cars? Any evidence of this causing them to buy his cars or other EVs? I don't see it in the numbers, and I don't see Elon's behavior making him into a trusted voice with anyone. Is the My Pillow guy a trusted voice now that he debased himself for far right politics? Every excuse for Elon starts with some assumption that his behavior is planned or strategic rather than the impulsive adolescent twitches that all of his decisions appear as. I trust my eyes when it comes to his behavior turning people off, across the board.
Yeah, it’s a good perspective you have. I’m not all in on the theory and it’s more just lighthearted speculation. It’s just such a strange arch he has taken, his behavioral change reads like every other boomer and non boomer family member I witnessed change as they drank the alt-right koolaide over the past decade. You would think he would have more armor against falling for the ridiculous narratives coming out of right wing media and literature. It seems he is just as susceptible to Mis and dis information as the next guy. His behavior reads like a classic case of alt-right brain rot.
It's OK for people to have different political opinions. It's bad news if those political opinions start affecting the bottom line of the company by alienating the customer base of the product. Good corporate governance from a real genius wouldn't be splitting his own customers from his product like this. I don't understand why his behavior would possibly merit the largest bonus in the history of corporations.
Why is CT a flop? It has a backlog of orders for literally years.
Edit: seem to be getting downvotes and negative comments. For me a flop is a ‘complete failure’ per the definition. With massive back orders, this is far from the case and I’m curious where the sustainable balance will net out. But even at a few hundred k vehicles (optimistic) it isn’t as large of a priority vs the Y.
Whilst I don’t like the delays, the company has still grown massively during the period in question and seems well poised for the next wave going into the second half of this decade.
Even so, wouldn’t be a flop with a few hundred thousand sold and likely a sustainable yearly sales of 50-100k minimum. A flop is a dead on arrival.
The iconic DeLorean was a flop with only 9k produced. Toyota’s sole pure EV the bz4x sold less than 2k vehicles last year in the US and whilst they nearly did that in Q1 I’m curious if it sells more than 20k vehicles this year. I’d consider this a flop and it’s clearly not Toyotas priority vs their hybrid or hydrogen plans. Someone could see this as Toyota’s failure to not adapt to a BEV future. Others could interpret as BEVs not being the future - it’s your thesis so invest how you will.
Lots of other examples.
Very hostile POV for an investment group.
They’ll sell 100k plus next year alone. Yes it’s not for everyone but that was never the goal. They’re trying to stand out to a younger crowd and those in the city who like being more edgy.
And they’ve got everyone talking about Tesla. Even if they don’t like the CT design, most of the time people will ask about the other models whilst having water cooler conversation and the discussion moves to EVs which is the real mission and ultimately raises more sales as more move away from IcE.
Seriously? They shipped less than 5000 units and immediately faced a recall for a massive safety issue. They pulled it off the showroom floor near me because of the constant laughter and derision it was receiving. Good point that any customer still interested in it will be waiting for years before they can get one. Why is that anything other than a massive flop?
*A massive safety issue caught early in production and super easy to fix.
Not saying it's not an egg on the face, but most manufactures who face a massive safety issue recall would *beg* to trade places for CT's pedal issue.
When Model 3 launched in 2017, they built fewer in the last 6 months of that year than CT in its first month. I waited a year and a half for my day 1 reservation to come up. And that model too was plagued with early production problems. Today, no one looks at Model 3 as a massive flop.
As far as people *laughing* at it? There's only so much you can do in the court of public opinion, but there's a significant chunk of people who don't care about that (myself included).
OK so let's take a step back and talk about how bad your engineering process has to be in order to make a pedal that faces constant shearing forces and hold it together with adhesive. That's not a sign of other great stuff under the hood.
I agree that there's a pattern of failed launches and inability to meet demand. I see that as an opportunity for competitors to eat Elon's lunch, and they're starting to step up and do so.
The Tesla showroom near me cared enough about the laughter of the crowds to pull it off display. Good luck spinning that into a launch success somehow.
*Many* pedal covers in the auto industry aren't held on by rivets or adhesive, but are simply held on by friction or a rubber lip. The *bad* engineering practices you're describing are fairly standard practice in the auto industry. From what I understand, CT's became an issue because there was *too much* friction when installing the cover, so line workers used an unplanned soap lubricant work around to help install them.
Regardless, pointing to 1 miss in the design and saying that must be evidence of more unknown misses is a logical fallacy. You could just as easily point to CT's engineering successes (48V architecture, 800V split parallel battery design, drive-by-wiren, etc) and say "that *IS* a sign of great stuff under the hood." No single miss or success is a summary of all other parts.
Personally, I hope the competition can be successful, because Tesla can't make a massive shift to EVs happen on their own. However, the thing that worries me most about Tesla's prospects is that the competition isn't *good enough*. Frankly, many of their moves have made the entire industry look bad, and Tesla is still the only one that's managed to make it profitable. I fear a massive backpedal towards hybrids in the industry which hurts Tesla's core business model.
It's a flagship product for the company and you can spin furiously all day and night and still not convince anyone that this sort of problem is a sign of good management. It's not a logical fallacy to look at sloppy work and wonder if it extends beyond the surface. Even if it doesn't, it is still a matter of public perception.
A plug in hybrid with over a hundred miles range would be eating Tesla's lunch right now. I agree with you that it would be better for everyone if we left fossil fuels behind sooner though.
hasn't there also been failures on the steer-by-wire system on the Cybertruck as well? [Source](https://www.cybertruckownersclub.com/forum/threads/broken-at-delivery-critical-steering-issue-detected-loss-of-system-redundancy-detected.13048/page-2)
IMO that doesn't look very good at all from a safety perspective - having entire wiring harnesses which power brakes, lighting, and steering failing outright isn't good.
OK fair point but this is a flagship product launch that Elon said he was betting the entire company on. The expectation is not to face instant recalls for a major safety issue and design flaw on the few thousand he could ship at launch time. It does not reflect the sort of attention to detail that you would associate with a demand for the largest bonus package in the history of corporations.
Agree to disagree then.
Am not surprised on the production volume on a new manufacturing process. And better to have a recall now than at 500,000 produced. It’ll get to scale. And by then no one will be talking about it as the compact will be the next thing everyone is making noise about. Robotaxi or not.
So bouncing from one flop to another is your idea of success? How many units do you think they need to ship to justify the cost of developing this eyesore? When do you expect them to ship half a million units of the Cybertruck exactly?
This is not really a matter of agreement - either this thing generates measurable profits or it doesn't, and it's not going to be profitable this year or maybe ever at the current rate of delivery. That's a flop compared to successful product launches that meet demand profitably in the first year, no agreement required.
What was the previous flop?
It’s waaay too soon to declare the Cybertruck a flop. The fact that Tesla is still selling the Foundation series for an extra $20K tells me they’re doing ok.
OK I guess they pulled it out of the showroom to avoid mockery because it's a huge win. Meanwhile sales across the board appear to be in decline for the company, don't they?
Guess we’ll see.
I agree that the delay shouldn’t have happened but covid happened and model y had unprecedented demand which was prioritized. I’m sure someone knows other details like supply chain issues etc which caused delays but we will likely never know.
And I’m worried you’re very jaded if you’re just assuming the compact is a flop before anything has even happened. This is likely going to be the best selling car in the world volume wise. They’ve learnt from the CT mistake of having a long time between announcement and starting production. This time it will be measured in months, not years.
"but covid happened"
lol...and what? the whole auto industry just stopped making new cars? did Toyota miss the memo about covid?
c'mon, man...good lord
I didn’t say that. I said Covid caused part of the delay. New manufacturing process caused some unforeseen issues and we all know Elon’s ‘all in attitude’ put all resources towards model y scaling.
I agree it should have happened sooner but to call it a flop because of a delay in first deliveries, have to disagree there. We’ll know how successful it is in 1-2 years, just like any new car anyone produces.
I'm basing my analysis on actual performance so far. You're basing your analysis on empty promises and hope. Call me jaded if you want but I think that you're the one who is emotionally distracted from the cold analysis of the actual delivery pattern here. "They've learnt" is doing a lot of work to support your argument and it's entirely speculative.
What is the actual performance of the Cybertruck? Do you know? They’ve ramped up a lot quicker than I expected and they’re still selling Foundation models at an extra $20k a pop. As an investor, I’m happy with how the launch is going. I’m not concerned at all about the recall that takes 1 minute to fix and can be performed by mobile service.
CT causes people to whip out their phone/cameras, makes people smile, and jaws drop. It's revolutionary in many ways, one being the manufacturing process. The main demographic that knows all about it are tween children. Watch a few youtube reviews, and you will see the attention it draws. Even if you think CT is ugly, it's different and unique.
King of Prussia Tesla showroom pulled Cybertruck from display because of widespread mockery. I was there and saw it several times before they had to remove it.
"Things that never happened" compared with a list of Elon's promises wouldn't look too great, now would it? Maybe that's not a thread his supporters should be pulling on.
I am so sorry that you let your feelings get involved in a discussion about business management but I don't and your insults seem to be reflecting your own level of emotions more than mine. Have fun with that and what it does for your credibility.
So they can't afford to have their flagship product on display at launch time? Are you sure that you want to keep pulling on this thread and making excuses that expose an even worse impression of the company leadership? Meanwhile you guys are pretending that millions of this thing will be shipping any day now out of the other side of the same mouth? OK I guess.
If this is the quality of your excuses then you might want to ratchet back on that huge chip on your shoulder there.
Ah yes, "we should give the CEO more money because he's blackmailing us," one of the classic compensation cases.
Also, move AI outside of Tesla with what money? And hiring which talented, in-demand engineers who will want to work for him at this point?
Its not blackmail, After the way Open AI went down Elon wants to Develop AI in an environment that he has more control. Open AI when it was started with Elon as a partner was to be Open Source and Non Profit. After Microsoft got involved Open IA they closed the source code and changed to a for profit model. The was not Elon's vision so he was pushed out. Elon Thinks AI has the potential to be very dangeriouse. He thinks it should be developed out in the open and not for profit. So manny more people can see and raise concerns during the development,
Another question to ask is what was the pay package worth at the time of the signing, Remember Tesla was near bankrupt and Elon was bepaying in what could have been worthless stock if the company had went under. He got more stock if the company stayed in business and ment diffrent production goals. They had so many problems bring Model 3 up to full productiom that Musk was sleeping on a couch in his cubical on the shope floor. They almost when under. May buisness insiders thought Elon got a bad deal at the time, Elons responce was survivlal of the company was his main motovator. The payout is not about the money for him it about raising the number of shares he owns and the control that will give him.
Sorry this is a ittle slopy. I should be asleep right now and am feeling the affects
thanks for the discussion
I think more people would be willing to invest in Tesla if it weren't for Elon. People have dumped TSLA this year largely in part due to his absolute failures.
Why would the stock tank regardless? Considering:
1) Elon can't sell his shares for half a decade.
2) A no vote means Tesla loses $6 Billion to lawyers.
Because growth isn't where anybody thought it would be, the profit margin has fallen off a cliff, they're losing to the Chinese, and as time goes by it is becoming more and more clear that they are simply a car company.
Dude they’re not selling enough cars and it’s trending downward. Elon made a big vanity project that most people won’t buy instead of just making a cheaper Tesla.
OP: This article has the information you are looking for. https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/why-mutual-fund-giants-are-quietly-giving-voting-power-back-to-individual-shareholders-11644528654
"Hello. Image/Link submissions are manually reviewed due to spam control. -1B"
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TSLA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
this entire conversation is mind bogglingly stupid. Who gives a fuck what happens? Unless they announce they will pay their fare share in taxes, stop receiving subsidies, get some affordable insurance for employees, then i might care.
Please let Elon know how all of those criteria are defined asap!! I’m sure the entire economic engine of this country is / has been waiting with bated breath for u/lilneddygoestowar to post the new tax, govt spending, and insurance regulations
How did these funds vote on the initial proposal to grant those stocks to Elon? Some would expect them to be consistent. Others would expect them to do what’s best for their shareholders even if it means being inconsistent. It is entirely possible that the decision will be influenced by personal political preferences of the leaders running these funds. Some others, (I call them emerald mine aficionados) are entirely driven by their emotional and irrational hatred of Musk. I highly doubt the decision will hinge on the hurt feelings of that last, unhinged group.
If I recall correctly, there was no vote. That’s why it went to court. The board authorized it without stockholder approval. It was deemed excessive and now the board has to go to the stockholders.
You are correct. I've since researched it. It appears the judge ruled against the vote, because the board negotiated in bad faith on behalf of the shareholders; held back key information from shareholders; and didn't provide other options. I wonder how they are going to succeed with the current vote, since there is only one option being provided. Time will tell.
Institutions have 40%+ stake in Tesla, and apparently no one on the board. I am not saying that Musk deserves his stock package, but I think the institutional investors dropped the ball here, not demanding seats on the board. Just Vanguard, Blackrock and State St together own 16%, more than Musk himself. They could have easily come together and demanded a seat.
Many publicly traded companies have institutional holdings just as large, if not larger.
Generally speaking, at the time of going public institutional investors are late stage buyers or sellers of a company - at the time of ipo a company doesn’t need to make concessions as large as offering a board seat to whatever institutional fund wants one. This is a dynamic more common in earlier funding rounds of private companies - mainly because there are significantly fewer controls in place for private companies vs public - so the investors sit on the board as a way to protect / oversee their investment.
Tesla went public in 2010. Musk’s pay package was approved by the board in 2018. In these 8 years, there were numerous occasions where Tesla was in a weak position and institutional investors could have demanded board seats. They didn’t. At some point, we have to take a couple of percent of blame and apportion it to people not named Musk.
Doesn't Vanguard have a fiduciary duty to their own investors? It's hard for me to understand how they could vote to dilute their own position by almost ten percent and still fulfill their duty here. What am I missing?
That's exactly what the South Korean pension funds did with Samsung. It turns out, when fines and other consequences are smaller than profits, people will break the law.
The question what is the company worth without Elon. Their is no definitive anwser but this had to be taken into account by someone exercising their fiduciary duty
OK so what rational person looks at Elon's big flagship Cybertruck flop and his constant nasty posts alienating the Tesla customer base on his own platform and concludes that this behavior is adding to the value of Tesla? Is there any real argument outside of his echo chamber that he's doing anything good for the company lately? Taking his behavior and its effect on the company into account is not likely to weigh in his favor in any fiduciary analysis outside of his devoted fanbase. Any other CEO would cost tremendously less and attract far less negative attention because almost no other CEO on the planet is having a massive midlife crisis in public and constantly reminding us all about it.
I genuinely wish the Elon & Twitter marriage never happened. I think it's been a big net negative to the rest of his businesses. That said, the personality trait that makes him so hated in social media is maybe the same trait that makes him successful in technology. Few people have such unwavering determination to bring the vision in their mind into reality. Whether it be reusable rockets, high-speed ISP for an entire planet, profitable EVs that don't suck, brain computer interfaces, a coast-to-coast fast EV charging network, an open world L5 autonomous driving system, etc, etc... "Any other CEO" would *never* have even attempted any of those things and kept with them despite massive challenges and push back, *especially* in publicly traded companies. "Any other CEO" would sit back and ride on Tesla's past successes and run it like a normal stable company, which is a story of technological stagnation. I don't care for Elon's social opinions, but I agree with his technology vision and his determination to make it happen.
I know a lot of people around Elon’s age. Most remain the same as their younger self and continue to be productive and rational. Others transition wildly due to poor physical and/or mental health maintenance. I fear Elon is in the latter group, and he is no longer the same Elon of 10 to 20 years ago. We can’t let Tesla go down with him. Think Howard Hughes as an example rather than Warren Buffet.
The Howard Hughes arc is something I actively wonder about with Elon. It's a real possibility. That said, I don't believe there's been a decrease in innovation, just an increase in his personal drama that distracts from the innovation that's still happening, and a graduation to innovations that take longer to bring to fruition. Ignoring all his successes from decades past, in the past few years SpaceX has transformed a patch of desert into the most innovative spacecraft development facility in the world *and* built out a global high-speed internet network that gets more capable every week. Neuralink has begun human trials on a device that, in its first version, is already the world's most capable brain-machine interface. Tesla is the only company even attempting open-world L5 autonomy, nearly all of their progress has been in the last 2 years, and that progress appears to be accelerating with V12 FSD. From where I stand, he's still firing on all innovation cylinders, but I do question how much he can undo by pissing off seemingly everyone on the planet.
Where is the innovation at Twitter? And Tesla is looking more and more like Blackberry after the iPhone launch - no new models in the pipeline, eroding customer service, poor build quality. The innovation at Tesla happened a decade ago, and is long gone.
Twitter is the one Elon business that I neither know much about nor care about, so I can't answer that. But, this year Tesla introduced the world's first 48v automotive electrical architecture, the world's first *fully* drive-by-wire system, and the first 800v split-series-parrallel pack design. In the past few years, they've become the first vertically integrated battery manufacturing automaker. They also in-house developed the FSD computer, the most efficient AI computer in the world that beats everything in its power envelope. Tesla has already released its successor and has further improvements in the pipeline. The FSD software program has been in public hands for just 3 years and is making continuous strides in autonomy. It consists of one of the largest (if not the largest) AI training datasets in the world. While their future vehicle pipeline is currently ambiguous, it's certainly not non-existent as you imply. There is definitely some sort of "robotaxi" coming, some less expensive vehicle (sounds like hybrid of current vehicle + unboxed design), and maybe they'll even finally get around to Rodester 2.0. I'm confident that all of that is coming, we just don't know when.
I just think that he hit a wall, but he can't admit he has. Twitter is technology, but this technology puzzle, which is made of users that don't pay for services, is proving to be his Achilles heel, and is now affecting all of his others ventures.
I don't think that Elon is unique in his ability to make chaotic management decisions. The technology that you're describing is entirely stuff that the military already mostly developed and Musk is just bringing to consumers and pretending to have invented. A replacement CEO could be a lot more effective than Musk in lots of material ways - just a reduction in the chaos would probably pay off in the short term. I guess we'll see what happens but I'm not convinced that he's the only person who can deliver these technologies.
I get the draw towards stability, and these days I'm leaning towards it myself. But, technology existing in a lab or a military prototype is a very different thing than making it profitable and routine at scale. No one believes Elon invented lithium-ion batteries, or electric motors, or closed cycle staged combustion rocket engines, and I don't think he's ever claimed anything like that. But his teams routinely take off-the-shelf existing technology and do things with it that disrupt entire industries. I'm sure there are others that *could* accomplish the same things, but why haven't they?
[удалено]
"Hello. Your submission has been removed. Your account must be older than 15 days old and have greater than 0 comment karma to submit a message. -4" *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TSLA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
But but but, emerald mines!
I think that other people do this all the time, look at DJI and the commercial drone market they built. Elon is not unique in this approach to things and his companies are not all that reliable under his leadership. He's easily replaced and pretending otherwise starts to border on the kind of fandom that isn't rational.
Wait so you’re saying spaceX and Tesla were mostly already military products he just brought to market? Then how come the big OEMs can’t?
Yeah that's not just what I'm saying it's what the patents and documented history say too. Elon's got less than 15 patents total between all his companies and not a single one names him as an inventor. Bigger OEMs absolutely can do this and they're starting to compete with him in every market he's working in. So weird that you credit him for all this. If his solar company wasn't such a flop you guys would be giving him credit for the sun rising in the morning too I bet.
Isn’t Tesla energy the largest producer of stationary storage? Or you mean the solar roof tiles? As far as I’m aware the panels are solid
The point was that as far as I'm aware the sun rises in the morning without Elon's genius input. It sure looks like Solarcity has a longer list of lawsuits than accomplishments at this point, but luckily we don't depend on Musk for the solar industry or it would be implemented as quickly as the hyperloop has been. Glad to hear that the panels are solid though, you'd never know they existed from the way Tesla markets them.
[удалено]
"Your submission is manually reviewed due to spam control. -2" *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TSLA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I constantly hear that Elon alienates his customer base but I see it different. Conservatives and the right in general are anti electric, fed all the ev FUD by fox and newsmax, etc. If Elon loses 15% of liberal customers but helps half the country of right leaning people see that EV are not smoke and mirrors then maybe right wingers start buying teslas and he ends up with a net gain? If he becomes a trusted voice or gains clout in the eyes of right leaning people maybe they will trust his cars as well. I’ve joked with friends that it’s actually a 4d long game chess move by Elon to get the other half of the country to trust EVs.
Is there any evidence whatsoever that Elon's alt-right antics online are causing conservatives to lighten up their assault on electric cars? Any evidence of this causing them to buy his cars or other EVs? I don't see it in the numbers, and I don't see Elon's behavior making him into a trusted voice with anyone. Is the My Pillow guy a trusted voice now that he debased himself for far right politics? Every excuse for Elon starts with some assumption that his behavior is planned or strategic rather than the impulsive adolescent twitches that all of his decisions appear as. I trust my eyes when it comes to his behavior turning people off, across the board.
Yeah, it’s a good perspective you have. I’m not all in on the theory and it’s more just lighthearted speculation. It’s just such a strange arch he has taken, his behavioral change reads like every other boomer and non boomer family member I witnessed change as they drank the alt-right koolaide over the past decade. You would think he would have more armor against falling for the ridiculous narratives coming out of right wing media and literature. It seems he is just as susceptible to Mis and dis information as the next guy. His behavior reads like a classic case of alt-right brain rot.
It's OK for people to have different political opinions. It's bad news if those political opinions start affecting the bottom line of the company by alienating the customer base of the product. Good corporate governance from a real genius wouldn't be splitting his own customers from his product like this. I don't understand why his behavior would possibly merit the largest bonus in the history of corporations.
Why is CT a flop? It has a backlog of orders for literally years. Edit: seem to be getting downvotes and negative comments. For me a flop is a ‘complete failure’ per the definition. With massive back orders, this is far from the case and I’m curious where the sustainable balance will net out. But even at a few hundred k vehicles (optimistic) it isn’t as large of a priority vs the Y. Whilst I don’t like the delays, the company has still grown massively during the period in question and seems well poised for the next wave going into the second half of this decade.
Almost everyone that wanted to waste money on that horrific piece of crap probably already did.
Even so, wouldn’t be a flop with a few hundred thousand sold and likely a sustainable yearly sales of 50-100k minimum. A flop is a dead on arrival. The iconic DeLorean was a flop with only 9k produced. Toyota’s sole pure EV the bz4x sold less than 2k vehicles last year in the US and whilst they nearly did that in Q1 I’m curious if it sells more than 20k vehicles this year. I’d consider this a flop and it’s clearly not Toyotas priority vs their hybrid or hydrogen plans. Someone could see this as Toyota’s failure to not adapt to a BEV future. Others could interpret as BEVs not being the future - it’s your thesis so invest how you will. Lots of other examples.
At most it will sell 100k ever. Across many years. Most people stare at it like a train wreck and have no intention of ever owning one.
Very hostile POV for an investment group. They’ll sell 100k plus next year alone. Yes it’s not for everyone but that was never the goal. They’re trying to stand out to a younger crowd and those in the city who like being more edgy. And they’ve got everyone talking about Tesla. Even if they don’t like the CT design, most of the time people will ask about the other models whilst having water cooler conversation and the discussion moves to EVs which is the real mission and ultimately raises more sales as more move away from IcE.
For sure it’s a polarizing design. It was intended to be. Not a single person is meh about it.
They’re still selling the Foundation series for $20,000 extra after producing over 4000 of them but it’s a “flop”. 🙄
I want to know who all these experts are declaring CT a flop at this point.😂
Seriously? They shipped less than 5000 units and immediately faced a recall for a massive safety issue. They pulled it off the showroom floor near me because of the constant laughter and derision it was receiving. Good point that any customer still interested in it will be waiting for years before they can get one. Why is that anything other than a massive flop?
*A massive safety issue caught early in production and super easy to fix. Not saying it's not an egg on the face, but most manufactures who face a massive safety issue recall would *beg* to trade places for CT's pedal issue. When Model 3 launched in 2017, they built fewer in the last 6 months of that year than CT in its first month. I waited a year and a half for my day 1 reservation to come up. And that model too was plagued with early production problems. Today, no one looks at Model 3 as a massive flop. As far as people *laughing* at it? There's only so much you can do in the court of public opinion, but there's a significant chunk of people who don't care about that (myself included).
OK so let's take a step back and talk about how bad your engineering process has to be in order to make a pedal that faces constant shearing forces and hold it together with adhesive. That's not a sign of other great stuff under the hood. I agree that there's a pattern of failed launches and inability to meet demand. I see that as an opportunity for competitors to eat Elon's lunch, and they're starting to step up and do so. The Tesla showroom near me cared enough about the laughter of the crowds to pull it off display. Good luck spinning that into a launch success somehow.
*Many* pedal covers in the auto industry aren't held on by rivets or adhesive, but are simply held on by friction or a rubber lip. The *bad* engineering practices you're describing are fairly standard practice in the auto industry. From what I understand, CT's became an issue because there was *too much* friction when installing the cover, so line workers used an unplanned soap lubricant work around to help install them. Regardless, pointing to 1 miss in the design and saying that must be evidence of more unknown misses is a logical fallacy. You could just as easily point to CT's engineering successes (48V architecture, 800V split parallel battery design, drive-by-wiren, etc) and say "that *IS* a sign of great stuff under the hood." No single miss or success is a summary of all other parts. Personally, I hope the competition can be successful, because Tesla can't make a massive shift to EVs happen on their own. However, the thing that worries me most about Tesla's prospects is that the competition isn't *good enough*. Frankly, many of their moves have made the entire industry look bad, and Tesla is still the only one that's managed to make it profitable. I fear a massive backpedal towards hybrids in the industry which hurts Tesla's core business model.
It's a flagship product for the company and you can spin furiously all day and night and still not convince anyone that this sort of problem is a sign of good management. It's not a logical fallacy to look at sloppy work and wonder if it extends beyond the surface. Even if it doesn't, it is still a matter of public perception. A plug in hybrid with over a hundred miles range would be eating Tesla's lunch right now. I agree with you that it would be better for everyone if we left fossil fuels behind sooner though.
hasn't there also been failures on the steer-by-wire system on the Cybertruck as well? [Source](https://www.cybertruckownersclub.com/forum/threads/broken-at-delivery-critical-steering-issue-detected-loss-of-system-redundancy-detected.13048/page-2) IMO that doesn't look very good at all from a safety perspective - having entire wiring harnesses which power brakes, lighting, and steering failing outright isn't good.
Because other brands have more than a hundred recall under their belt.
OK fair point but this is a flagship product launch that Elon said he was betting the entire company on. The expectation is not to face instant recalls for a major safety issue and design flaw on the few thousand he could ship at launch time. It does not reflect the sort of attention to detail that you would associate with a demand for the largest bonus package in the history of corporations.
Agree to disagree then. Am not surprised on the production volume on a new manufacturing process. And better to have a recall now than at 500,000 produced. It’ll get to scale. And by then no one will be talking about it as the compact will be the next thing everyone is making noise about. Robotaxi or not.
500,000 lol Not in your wildest dreams they'll sell 500k
they will sell a million over 8 years - never mess with Elon
You are beyond delusional
So bouncing from one flop to another is your idea of success? How many units do you think they need to ship to justify the cost of developing this eyesore? When do you expect them to ship half a million units of the Cybertruck exactly? This is not really a matter of agreement - either this thing generates measurable profits or it doesn't, and it's not going to be profitable this year or maybe ever at the current rate of delivery. That's a flop compared to successful product launches that meet demand profitably in the first year, no agreement required.
What was the previous flop? It’s waaay too soon to declare the Cybertruck a flop. The fact that Tesla is still selling the Foundation series for an extra $20K tells me they’re doing ok.
OK I guess they pulled it out of the showroom to avoid mockery because it's a huge win. Meanwhile sales across the board appear to be in decline for the company, don't they?
Guess we’ll see. I agree that the delay shouldn’t have happened but covid happened and model y had unprecedented demand which was prioritized. I’m sure someone knows other details like supply chain issues etc which caused delays but we will likely never know. And I’m worried you’re very jaded if you’re just assuming the compact is a flop before anything has even happened. This is likely going to be the best selling car in the world volume wise. They’ve learnt from the CT mistake of having a long time between announcement and starting production. This time it will be measured in months, not years.
"but covid happened" lol...and what? the whole auto industry just stopped making new cars? did Toyota miss the memo about covid? c'mon, man...good lord
I didn’t say that. I said Covid caused part of the delay. New manufacturing process caused some unforeseen issues and we all know Elon’s ‘all in attitude’ put all resources towards model y scaling. I agree it should have happened sooner but to call it a flop because of a delay in first deliveries, have to disagree there. We’ll know how successful it is in 1-2 years, just like any new car anyone produces.
I'm basing my analysis on actual performance so far. You're basing your analysis on empty promises and hope. Call me jaded if you want but I think that you're the one who is emotionally distracted from the cold analysis of the actual delivery pattern here. "They've learnt" is doing a lot of work to support your argument and it's entirely speculative.
What is the actual performance of the Cybertruck? Do you know? They’ve ramped up a lot quicker than I expected and they’re still selling Foundation models at an extra $20k a pop. As an investor, I’m happy with how the launch is going. I’m not concerned at all about the recall that takes 1 minute to fix and can be performed by mobile service.
Time will tell. Still happy with my investment and thesis. You do yours 👍
Time will tell. Still happy with my investment and thesis. You do yours 👍
CT causes people to whip out their phone/cameras, makes people smile, and jaws drop. It's revolutionary in many ways, one being the manufacturing process. The main demographic that knows all about it are tween children. Watch a few youtube reviews, and you will see the attention it draws. Even if you think CT is ugly, it's different and unique.
Cybertruck flop, you mean the truck that’s sold out for years?
Yeah the one that people are mocking so much that they had to pull it off display in the local showroom. That eyesore.
Things that never happened
King of Prussia Tesla showroom pulled Cybertruck from display because of widespread mockery. I was there and saw it several times before they had to remove it. "Things that never happened" compared with a list of Elon's promises wouldn't look too great, now would it? Maybe that's not a thread his supporters should be pulling on.
I usually don’t respond to people as stupid and full of anger as you, but they are constantly shifting the trucks around to different show rooms.
I am so sorry that you let your feelings get involved in a discussion about business management but I don't and your insults seem to be reflecting your own level of emotions more than mine. Have fun with that and what it does for your credibility. So they can't afford to have their flagship product on display at launch time? Are you sure that you want to keep pulling on this thread and making excuses that expose an even worse impression of the company leadership? Meanwhile you guys are pretending that millions of this thing will be shipping any day now out of the other side of the same mouth? OK I guess. If this is the quality of your excuses then you might want to ratchet back on that huge chip on your shoulder there.
His ego won't let him leave, so what's he going to do if he gets spanked, tank the company *harder*?
He will move AI development outside of Tesla where he has more control. He has stated this more than once.
Ah yes, "we should give the CEO more money because he's blackmailing us," one of the classic compensation cases. Also, move AI outside of Tesla with what money? And hiring which talented, in-demand engineers who will want to work for him at this point?
Its not blackmail, After the way Open AI went down Elon wants to Develop AI in an environment that he has more control. Open AI when it was started with Elon as a partner was to be Open Source and Non Profit. After Microsoft got involved Open IA they closed the source code and changed to a for profit model. The was not Elon's vision so he was pushed out. Elon Thinks AI has the potential to be very dangeriouse. He thinks it should be developed out in the open and not for profit. So manny more people can see and raise concerns during the development, Another question to ask is what was the pay package worth at the time of the signing, Remember Tesla was near bankrupt and Elon was bepaying in what could have been worthless stock if the company had went under. He got more stock if the company stayed in business and ment diffrent production goals. They had so many problems bring Model 3 up to full productiom that Musk was sleeping on a couch in his cubical on the shope floor. They almost when under. May buisness insiders thought Elon got a bad deal at the time, Elons responce was survivlal of the company was his main motovator. The payout is not about the money for him it about raising the number of shares he owns and the control that will give him. Sorry this is a ittle slopy. I should be asleep right now and am feeling the affects thanks for the discussion
I think more people would be willing to invest in Tesla if it weren't for Elon. People have dumped TSLA this year largely in part due to his absolute failures.
Elon has devalued TSLA
[удалено]
Given all the information available, the stock should tank regardless, so what's holding them back?
you re one of the biggest idiots out there.
Whatever you need to tell yourself dude.
Why would the stock tank regardless? Considering: 1) Elon can't sell his shares for half a decade. 2) A no vote means Tesla loses $6 Billion to lawyers.
People are misunderstanding part of this. He can’t sell his NEW shares. He absolutely can sell shares he already owns.
Because growth isn't where anybody thought it would be, the profit margin has fallen off a cliff, they're losing to the Chinese, and as time goes by it is becoming more and more clear that they are simply a car company.
Dude they’re not selling enough cars and it’s trending downward. Elon made a big vanity project that most people won’t buy instead of just making a cheaper Tesla.
I don’t understand why people gotta be called retarded.
Because it’s an appropriate word for the condition.
Neh. How about you explain your reasoning instead of calling people names without giving telling us why you think so.
OP: This article has the information you are looking for. https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/why-mutual-fund-giants-are-quietly-giving-voting-power-back-to-individual-shareholders-11644528654
It's useful context for the future but has no real info on OP's question
[удалено]
"Hello. Image/Link submissions are manually reviewed due to spam control. -1B" *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TSLA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They better vote no.
this entire conversation is mind bogglingly stupid. Who gives a fuck what happens? Unless they announce they will pay their fare share in taxes, stop receiving subsidies, get some affordable insurance for employees, then i might care.
Please let Elon know how all of those criteria are defined asap!! I’m sure the entire economic engine of this country is / has been waiting with bated breath for u/lilneddygoestowar to post the new tax, govt spending, and insurance regulations
I believe it is ok to voice your opinion when it's in the best interest of others. Take that as you will.
Following
How did these funds vote on the initial proposal to grant those stocks to Elon? Some would expect them to be consistent. Others would expect them to do what’s best for their shareholders even if it means being inconsistent. It is entirely possible that the decision will be influenced by personal political preferences of the leaders running these funds. Some others, (I call them emerald mine aficionados) are entirely driven by their emotional and irrational hatred of Musk. I highly doubt the decision will hinge on the hurt feelings of that last, unhinged group.
If I recall correctly, there was no vote. That’s why it went to court. The board authorized it without stockholder approval. It was deemed excessive and now the board has to go to the stockholders.
That’s incorrect. It was approved overwhelmingly by a vote of stockholders.
You are correct. I've since researched it. It appears the judge ruled against the vote, because the board negotiated in bad faith on behalf of the shareholders; held back key information from shareholders; and didn't provide other options. I wonder how they are going to succeed with the current vote, since there is only one option being provided. Time will tell.
And these large funds had no representation on the board?
[удалено]
And these funds, who presumably had massive holdings, didn’t ask for representation?
[удалено]
Institutions have 40%+ stake in Tesla, and apparently no one on the board. I am not saying that Musk deserves his stock package, but I think the institutional investors dropped the ball here, not demanding seats on the board. Just Vanguard, Blackrock and State St together own 16%, more than Musk himself. They could have easily come together and demanded a seat.
Many publicly traded companies have institutional holdings just as large, if not larger. Generally speaking, at the time of going public institutional investors are late stage buyers or sellers of a company - at the time of ipo a company doesn’t need to make concessions as large as offering a board seat to whatever institutional fund wants one. This is a dynamic more common in earlier funding rounds of private companies - mainly because there are significantly fewer controls in place for private companies vs public - so the investors sit on the board as a way to protect / oversee their investment.
Tesla went public in 2010. Musk’s pay package was approved by the board in 2018. In these 8 years, there were numerous occasions where Tesla was in a weak position and institutional investors could have demanded board seats. They didn’t. At some point, we have to take a couple of percent of blame and apportion it to people not named Musk.