I personally trust Elon Musk and I am a large investor. I don't expect him to hit all his targets, but I trust him to only raise money on the heels of good news.
Musk has always been largely bluster, but now the bluster is hurting people, and his companies as well. He's the biggest liability Tesla has.
I don't know what he's done to earn my trust, or any investor's.
The ~20x ROI since IPO has made many people trust him. Tesla itself is a marvelous success, with no established car maker able to match them yet. It is far more likely that your personal dislike of him is making you see a distorted reality.
Certainly possible. I personally think he's acting like a buffoon and I haven't been shy about stating it.
However, as I told another commenter in this thread, I think the relatively objective argument is that while Musk was necessary initially to get Tesla into existence and functioning, he's now more of a liability than an asset. It's not that he was never valuable or never deserved any trust - rather that he doesn't deserve it now.
Put another way: At what point does the goodwill he's earned expire?
Alternatively, he could dramatically change his approach as the business matures.
Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpennin initially got Tesla into existence.
It doesn't always matter who initially created the company. For example one of the co-founders of Apple was Ronald Wayne, whom the vast majority of people have never heard of. He left Apple very early and sold all his shares back to Jobs and Wozniak for $800.
The Hyundai Kona EV is cheaper, has good range, and outperforms new model Teslas in 24-hour efficiency (interestingly finishing second to the original Tesla Roadster):
https://insideevs.com/hyundai-kona-electric-gets-shockingly-...
https://electrek.co/2018/12/23/tesla-roadster-24-hour-electr...
Teslas are among the least reliable cars you can buy. If you want high reliability and low maintenance costs, you're best off with a sensible Toyota today:
https://www.consumerreports.org/media-room/press-releases/20...
Here are some currently available and soon to be available EVs from established car makers:
https://www.hyundai.co.uk/new-cars/kona-electric
https://www.kia.com/uk/new-cars/all-new-e-niro/
https://www.jaguarusa.com/all-models/i-pace/index.html
VW has to sell electrics to meet the new fleet emissions targets set by the EU and they're going to do it with their MEB platform:
http://fortune.com/2018/12/20/volkswagen-electric-cars-emiss...
https://electrek.co/2018/09/18/vw-meb-platform-electric-for-...
Right now the primary reason to buy a Tesla is the novelty of buying a battery electric. But when all manufacturers are producing battery electrics, why am I buying a Tesla?
It is a compliance car, to reduce the emissions overall of the fleet they sell allowing them to sell more high profit ICE cars. They are likely losing money on each sale as well.
I think the Kona is a great start and wish it would have a better chance, but it is crippled from the beginning.
On a positive note, it is a step in the right direction to rev up that part of the company, as they will need the experience for future success when they can no longer rely on ICE sales
Yes, I agree. Hyundai has better quality control than Tesla:
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1115659_tesla-model-3-q...
Agreed. The Kona's fit and finish is miles ahead of the Model 3, and the interior comfort is the same for...1/4 the cost of the Model 3? Tesla's got quite a bit of work cut out for it if it hopes for the $35k Model 3 to stand a chance in the marketplace, since it'll being facing a ton of competition by the time it comes out (if ever).
I think another advantage Tesla has is the Supercharger station access.
Supercharger access is becoming less of an exclusive as well. Electrify America is putting in a lot of stations (there's a couple near me right now, with about a dozen more planned) that support 150kW now (30 more than a Supercharger), and 350kW as soon as there's a car that can take it.
Like the Porsche Taycan:
https://electrek.co/2018/07/30/porsche-taycan-all-electric-p...
Even though I've only used superchargers 4 times in 6 months, it absolutely solves the EV roadtrip FUD in a way that nobody else has figured out yet.
[1] https://insideevs.com/november-jaguar-i-pace-sales-u-s/ [2] http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/tesla/tesla-model-...
I live in the most EV friendly region in the US and I hardly see I-Paces. Meanwhile Tesla is just crushing it here.
With rare exception, I don't subscribe to the idea of "key men" in general, and especially not in this case. Even if I did, I don't think that Musk is acting in a way that makes him an asset.
I agree that Tesla, for instance, is doing good and important work. However, I think attributing Tesla's success, and net impact on the world to Musk alone is unsupported by evidence. That's because aside from initial investment/PR, and sufficient cult of personality to inspire people to work for him at the start, I don't see what Elon Musk is contributing to the company's work at this point. In fact, I see him as a liability and I think Tesla would be better off without him.
Candidly, I also believe that if Musk was less driven by his own ego, as he appears to be, he'd see that and step aside.
If Musk did not exist, and Tesla as a company did not exist, then all the engineers, expertise, effort, and capital that is currently with Tesla would be placed elsewhere.
Would all those people and resources do more good with all the other companies?
Of course then in that 60 Minutes interview he all but declared he wouldn't honor his side of the settlement, but we'll see if he follows through on that.
* not sure if it was initial cost or cost over the life of plus the energy savings, I don't remember nor really care. Either is fine by me.
As an upside, I think the comparison is with one roof replacement, which is supposed to be done every 8-20 years. Tesla tiles should last 100 years.
The innovation comes purely from the battery and associated electronics. The rest of the car is pretty standard and it's in this area where they are having problems.
There are plenty of car companies with electric cars today e.g. Jaguar, BMW, Nissan, GM and in 2019/2020 everyone else is jumping onboard e.g. Audi, Landrover etc. And they have managed to hit their targets.
tesla also acts like they are the only game in town. they aren’t even the largest electric vehicle maker in the world.
Twitter insults aren’t impressive.
You need to lighten up. Musk doesn't owe anything to anyone, if anything he garnered interest for selling more cars to the 18 million people that watched that podcast. If the CEO of <any fortune 500 company> was on the same podcast, do you think it would have been anywhere close to as entertaining?
He owes a lot to his shareholders, and wiped 9% off the value of Tesla with that podcast. If he has to be entertaining as well as reassuring them he's also laser focused on solving production challenges - and CEO of an engineering company is definitely a job description where being dull is no disadvantage - there were certainly better ways of doing it.
Investors and board members definitely think otherwise.
I personally don't care what Elon, or anyone does in his spare time but smoking pot on TV (or podcast, basically the same thing since both are going to be broadcast to viewers) shows a willingness to take risks with the wrong amount of upsides relative to their downsides and wall street doesn't like that.
The part of it in discussion was, because of its content.
Everything that is recorded and available outside of a narrowly controlled group is effectively national TV, in that if you do something that would be newsworthy, that's where it's going to end up.
Anyone in a PR-sensitive role, including any CEO, ought to be aware of that.
EDIT: SEO > SEC - Context switching is hard