Elon says that the person claimed he did it because he didn't get a promotion he wanted. That's probably true because it would be the least extraordinary possibility. But it doesn't hurt to consider and prepare for extraordinary circumstances.

> From the standpoint of anyone trying to sabotage Tesla, the risk/reward ratio is extremely high.

Can you show your working in that calculation please?

My understanding is that the reward / risk ratio is extremely high for more than a handful of obvious players.

That was my initial reaction to that assessment as well. Normally the risk-reward ratio is high, but with the largest short position of the market (at some point inthe last couple months, possibly still currently) at above $10 billion, that's a lot of potential reward that might be capable of being paid out, even when we consider that much of it is small individual positions.

Uh it says the guy admitted to it...and gave reasons...a confession is more than enough evidence.

People at Tesla are working incredibly hard, they just had a FTE mass layoff and are relying heavily on 'associates'. This reminds me of the darker days at Zappos with their holocracy business model and all powerful vanity CEO. It's not hard to imagine the disgruntled moving fast and breaking things in frustration

s/holocracy/holAcracy/

I wish I saw this before taking to google and becoming disappointed that no hierarchy based on holograms exists

There's no evidence that the guy was paid to sabotage Tesla by any competitor or anything other than a purely personal grudge. That an upset worker intentionally sabotages a production line isn't the extraordinary claim; that your competition is paying some workers to sabotage your production lines is.