EV sales are up, Tesla sales are down, and around the world people are protesting against Tesla because of Elon specifically.
If this was simply a demand problem because Teslas were being compared against “incumbents” (ICE cars?), what explains their strong performance in the past, and the sudden drop in performance now? The standard excuse is the new Model Y changeover, but Electrek offers lots of evidence that demand for the new car is weak too.
The incumbent being the concept of a car (EV or ICE) that you own and that you have to drive to get to places.
Don't compare the Tesla MVP with an existing concept of a car.
Demand for new "car" is a noise. Austin FSD launch is the key differentiator and I foresee lot of sleeping on the floor moment from Elon to see it through.
But if they do, the 100 year old concept of a "car" will be completely redefined.
EV convert here. I owned two Teslas so far. Won't buy a third one until Musk is the CEO. My sentiment is widely shared on /r/tesla and other Tesla forums. South Korea will get my car payment.
I have nuanced/mixed feelings about X, Tesla, and SpaceX. They are all products that have moved past the “because it’s different” disruption stages. But in each case, I’m intrigued and supportive by certain aspects still, especially SpaceX.
But the “Brand of Elon Musk” I want nothing to do with. Just absolutely nothing. The man is unhinged and attached to way too much unchecked power.
A reasonable person doesn’t start a company with a stated goal to make humans a multi planetary species.
A reasonable person thinks, “it sure would be neat if there was a way for humans to live on Mars,” then finishes his shower and goes to work selling insurance.
To get some of these advancements in the world, it takes giving a little allowance to the unhinged from time to time.
We are still within his estimate window; he hasn't missed it yet.
Giving ambitious public goals can help to create some urgency around finding solutions. It's not all that dissimilar to Kennedy claiming we'd make it to the moon within the decade back in 1961. I'm sure he has his skeptics as well. Without a target, and the expectation being decades, it can easily stretch on forever as teams bike shed around various things.
Will SpaceX hit their target... who knows. But it's not like it's a vaporware company that hasn't made any progress. Dismissing everything they've done so far based on an assumption that they will miss an ambitious target set 14 years ago just seems like being a hater.
What made me very skeptical about Starship is that Elon seems to think that software people have the right idea about project management for everything. When in fact software is the oddball. Almost every other kind of project should be done the traditional way. Agile doesn't work for most things outside of software and the way Elon views. The style of management is as an excuse to make bullshit pronouncements about timelines.
A X account was also created to share the letter, but it was suspended by the platform, which is owned by Musk, who calls himself a “free speech absolutist.”
The trouble with getting rid of Musk from an investor point of view is his vision/hype/bs/skill/whatever keeps the stock valued at many times the price/earnings of other car companies.
Maybe if the stock crashes the board/investors would say au revoir.
22 comments
[ 5.3 ms ] story [ 60.3 ms ] threadTesla cars are the MVPs being compared to existing automotives just like the Model T was the MVP being compared to horse carriages.
That said Elon could do an even better job of inspiring his employees on the vision if the premise of this post is indeed true.
If this was simply a demand problem because Teslas were being compared against “incumbents” (ICE cars?), what explains their strong performance in the past, and the sudden drop in performance now? The standard excuse is the new Model Y changeover, but Electrek offers lots of evidence that demand for the new car is weak too.
Demand for new "car" is a noise. Austin FSD launch is the key differentiator and I foresee lot of sleeping on the floor moment from Elon to see it through. But if they do, the 100 year old concept of a "car" will be completely redefined.
I have nuanced/mixed feelings about X, Tesla, and SpaceX. They are all products that have moved past the “because it’s different” disruption stages. But in each case, I’m intrigued and supportive by certain aspects still, especially SpaceX.
But the “Brand of Elon Musk” I want nothing to do with. Just absolutely nothing. The man is unhinged and attached to way too much unchecked power.
A reasonable person thinks, “it sure would be neat if there was a way for humans to live on Mars,” then finishes his shower and goes to work selling insurance.
To get some of these advancements in the world, it takes giving a little allowance to the unhinged from time to time.
No, we can get and do get advances without people like Musk. They seem slower, because they lie less and defraud less. Which is net positive.
Giving ambitious public goals can help to create some urgency around finding solutions. It's not all that dissimilar to Kennedy claiming we'd make it to the moon within the decade back in 1961. I'm sure he has his skeptics as well. Without a target, and the expectation being decades, it can easily stretch on forever as teams bike shed around various things.
Will SpaceX hit their target... who knows. But it's not like it's a vaporware company that hasn't made any progress. Dismissing everything they've done so far based on an assumption that they will miss an ambitious target set 14 years ago just seems like being a hater.
It's disingenuous to look at this estimate in isolation while Elon has a decade of (with the charitable take) completely failed predictions.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_auto...
Maybe if the stock crashes the board/investors would say au revoir.