The Big Money is speaking.
intercst
2 Likes
WSJ wrong perhaps.
1 Like
The egregious part is that the Tesla board claims that they TOLD the journalist directly that it isn’t correct. And the WSJ reported it anyway! That’s what happens when media gets rid of all their experienced editors.
3 Likes
The WSJ reached out to Tesla and got no reply. That’s what happens when you fire your entire Press department.
9 Likes
I am going to put on my tinhat for a moment…
She appears to be completely liquidating her stake in the company she chairs.
…
As of her last filing, she had only 85,000 shares left and 300,440 stock options expiring later this year.She has now liquidated most of her Tesla position.
Perhaps the Board did indeed start this process, and now Robyn is paying the price for it?
Hawkwin
Who has no direct ownership of any foil companies.
5 Likes
That’s according to the Tesla board. The WSJ article said they asked for a comment but received no response.
Since we don’t know for sure, we have to ask if this sounds plausible. Well, we’ve all talked about Tesla’s missteps. Cybertruck flop, Model 2 cancellation in favor of cybercab (which Musk denied initially, it should be said), falling sales, etc. The board approved Musk’s gargantuan pay package–they said–to keep Musk focused on Telsa. Clearly, he isn’t focused on Tesla.
If the board were doing their jobs, they should be looking for a new CEO. Or at least talking about it.
10 Likes
And anyone believes anything management, or the Board, says, because?
Steve
7 Likes
Tesla hasn’t had a PR department for … over 6 years… at least since I bought mine…
I get it, even the WSJ jumps at phantoms of rumors sometimes, and sometimes (Theranos) they get it right and sometimes it’s just someone or two’s agenda.
As a car owner I would LOVE to see a new CEO who knew something about and was highly committed to expanding a car business, not spouting nutjob talk about full autonomy self driving for 5 years running, stayed out of making design mistakes like an overpriced SUV out of Terminator and making decisions like “let’s make PARTS available so that people with damaged cars don’t wait SIX MONTHS” to get their cars fixed!"
FC
8 Likes
Have you considered that, without Musk, the market might see Tesla as just another car company, until and if any of the other stuff started producing real revenue.
8 Likes
Oh yeah. It’s a double-blind problem. Tesla without Musk is trouble, but with him it’s also trouble.
Steve Jobs probably learned a lot when he was exiled from Apple, including with the big NeXT failure and his forays into other fields. I don’t know that he would have been as successful at Apple the second time around (but it’s certainly possible.)
But if Tesla could find someone who is a terrific automotive manager, then Tesla (the car company) could prosper, but Tesla (the everything else company) probably wouldn’t. With Musk there I think Tesla (the car company) may not, but Tesla (the everything else company) has a decent shot.
(I am skeptical that the self-driving industry will develop the way he thinks it will, but it will still be a multibillion dollar enterprise, surely. I just find it doubtful that Tesla will be the only, or even the best at it.)
I note, however, that there is nothing about humanoid robots that’s a given: there are others in the space and it’s unclear what the eventual uses might be that would make it more than a plaything/curiosity.
The AI, etc. is anothe whole thing entirely, but then it’s in another whole thing entirely.
3 Likes
Dear Mark,
Nah, the WSJ has always been a very bad rag with a self proclaimed great reputation.
Dear Goof,
What are you trying to say?
Even the magic 8-ball has one face that says “Future cloudy. Ask again later.”
3 Likes