and yet there are competitors with far bigger budgets who can't seem to poach those engineers doing the work. Or for some reason refuse to hire the engineers that are kicking their ass. So Musk is either a better manager(getting more done with equal talent) or better at finding talent that Boeing and Blue Origin reject. If Musk is actively impeding SpaceX, why can't these companies seem to beat him? SpaceX engineers should be jumping at the chance to take their knowledge to Boeing/Lockheed/Blue Origin/Europe and work for people who are better than Musk(according to the media)

Who has far bigger budgets nowadays?

>So Musk is either a better manager(getting more done with equal talent) or better at finding talent that Boeing and Blue Origin reject.

Or his choices turned out to be better out of poor luck. Survivorship bias.

Maybe would talk the same about Bezos if some engineers would have chosen Blue Origin over SpaceX or if NASA had chosen Blue Origin over SpaceX

BlueOrigin is spending 1-2 billion a year easly on New Glenn. That is probably as much or more then SpaceX spends on Starship. And there is really no question what the better program.

> Or his choices turned out to be better out of poor luck. Survivorship bias.

If you start out with 1000 and 1 is successful claiming survivor bias might be valid, if its a tiny number of companies this explanation doesn't really work. Specially in a field where before SpaceX most starups just outright failed with no survivors at all.

Hard for me to judge spacex, but I know Tesla is second to last in reliability (at place 27, only better than Lincoln). Let me quote from the report:

    "Model Y still has body hardware issues with the tailgate and door alignment, paint defects, and multiple other problems. The Model X and Model S have body hardware, climate system, and in-car electronics problems. All three models are well below average."

Maybe, an unstable slave driver who just wasted 44B because he couldn't keep his mouth shut is not the best leader for anything that requires long term care??

There is an all electric Lincoln?

If you invoke a report, how about actually providing the report? Because I think this wasn't a report about reliability at all. Paint defects have nothing to do with reliability for example.

If its the report I'm thinking about, the difference between Tesla and their competitors isn't actually all that great. Not to mention this report is already a few years on.

Also, this report only evaluated Model Y from California, China, Berlin and Austin have better reputation for quality.

Model Y is the most sold car in the world both by volume and revenue in Q1 2023. I don't know about you but if I can choose between some 'report' and being car that makes the most money of any car on the planet, I know what I would choice.

Its a bit ridiculous to say 'haha you loser your 27 in some random report' and ignore that Tesla is both growing very fast an is highly profitable. Call me crazy but I thought those things were important.

Musk really is the only person where people have to make up these ridiculous arguments to somehow justify that he is an insane madman, despite his companies being incredibly successful.

> not the best leader for anything that requires long term care??

He is the longest serving CEO in the car and the space industry. He is literally known for having a long term view and both of his major companies have seen incredibly growth for 20+ years. Like 2 decades isn't long term enough for you?

I get that people dislike Musk, he isn't very likeable, but some basic logic needs to be applied when criticizing.

Consumer Report is paywalled, how about an extract (1) and another from a previous survey (2). What about a video from a new customer (3).

Are those enough sources for you?

(1) https://insideevs.com/news/549130/consumerreports-tesla-reli...

(2) https://insideevs.com/news/489178/tesla-bombs-jd-powers-depe...

(3) https://www.reddit.com/r/Wellthatsucks/comments/zni97u/140k_...

I have seen these reports, I just ask that you provide sources on principle and so other people can see them.

Of course there are other studies:

https://insideevs.com/features/481518/tesla-wins-jd-power-ev...

or

https://insideevs.com/news/626814/tesla-nissan-consumer-repo...

or

https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2023-us-vehi...

In this study Tesla is better then Audi and Ford, on level with Mercedes Benz.

I think pretty much most companies on the plant would be happy with a CEO that produces:

https://www.statista.com/chart/26705/yearly-net-income-and-r...

Seems to me, pretty successfully in the long term, from 2008 to 2023 is literally longer then any other automotive CEO.

But I guess they were 27th in some study so he must be an incompetent idiot incapable of planning. Tesla just magically grew by 100x.

Wow.

What do you think about the video I linked to?

I think most engineers at SpaceX are glad Musk is wasting his time with Twitter instead of at Starbase

This is such an strange line of argument. Nobody would ever use such an insane line of argument for anybody other then Musk.

Of course in a company of 10k+ the real work is not done by the CEO. Like this is an absurd standard.

But since when does company leadership not matter anymore? SpaceX has been consistently successful for 25 years and somehow the founder, CEO and chief engineer had nothing to do with it?