Entire Supercharging Team Fired?

News yesterday is that the entire 500+ person word-wide SC team has been let go. That is alarming. Why would Elon sack the execs and all the employees of this important part of Tesla's business? Could Tesla be selling the SC network off to a third party? Opinions? Other theories?

 

[texas_star_TM3]

This seems pretty straightforward to me:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1785406795814510785

https://twitter.com/x/status/1785461086688256361

Oh Elon said something on X. Take that to the bank. Meanwhile there are countless of new locations on the supercharger map which had been “coming in 2022/2023/2024” …

 

[gearchruncher]

At least from some of the X posts this morning - there are claims that the SC group that was cut was dev/planning/implementation only - there's a separate maintenance team that did not report up to Rebecca Tinucci.

This does not align with Tinuuci's LinkedIn job description:

Responsible for managing Tesla's global, charging-related business units including our Supercharging and Destination Charging businesses, as well as our Charging equipment sales units. Manage and lead a team of 450+ employees who, with partner teams, has successfully scaled our Charging businesses, welcomed non-Tesla vehicles, substantially improved Network financials, decreased customer wait-time, and launched multiple new products and features. Engage with Company leadership to identify, plan and execute all Charging-related programs, like those linked below.

 

[Ostrichsak]

I don't take anything on this site personally. I just think you're spouting nonsense and trying to make yourself sound smarter than you are.

So you admit that I sound smart.

 

[Ostrichsak]

"Elon gets misquoted in the news that's why you don't like him" -> posts Elon quotes direct from twitter -> "I'm not going to read those, that's an echo chamber of hate"

Niiiiiiceee.

Usually quotes indicate that someone said something.

 

[ucmndd]

The difference is that I don't consider my car purchases investments.

Nobody mentioned "investment" but you...

The ability to charge, service, and maintain my cars with the backing of a reliable, functional, and long-term viable company has a material impact on my finances. Not just because I bought a car, but because reliable and serviceable cars are material to my ability to make money at my actual job. Pretending it doesn't have an impact, or going in to some fart-huffing financial sermon about what is or isn't an "investment" is just another side-show distraction.

It's true that cars are relatively easy to get rid of if things go off the deep end and losing a few grand here or there because a petulant CEO lit the company on fire isn't going to ruin me. But not everything Tesla sells is quite so easy to divorce yourself from. What about the solar panels on my roof or the powerwalls in my garage that I'm wed to for the next decade or more?

Hitching your sails to an unstable/unpredictable/failing company is a financial risk, and "investment" has broader meaning than "something you expect a financial return from".

 

[yessuz]

This seems pretty straightforward to me:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1785406795814510785

https://twitter.com/x/status/1785461086688256361

know, all what he tweets or says is absolutely true and 100% accurate. Like, robotaxis, 500 mile cybertruck which costs 40k, roadster, FSD, Steam games in cars (witcher anyone??), hyperloop etc. etcd.

how's kool aid?,

 

[DuncanM]

The NYT's take on this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/30/business/tesla-layoffs-supercharger-team.html

It's a very interesting read and it highlights the effects on the entire EV industry, including the subcontractors who were tasked with installing all the planned SC stations.

 

[Ostrichsak]

Nobody mentioned "investment" but you...

Your post:

This is naive and unrealistic when the individual at hand has a material impact on financial choices I've made.

"Just don't pay attention and pretend it isn't happening" isn't a serious solution to a serious problem.

So if you weren't talking about investment, what were you talking about financially that explained your ongoing requirement to monitor Elon for the financial choices you've made? Did you loan him fifty bucks and were concerned he may not be able to pay you back?

The ability to charge, service, and maintain my cars with the backing of a reliable, functional, and long-term viable company has a material impact on my finances. Not just because I bought a car, but because reliable and serviceable cars are material to my ability to make money at my actual job. Pretending it doesn't have an impact, or going in to some fart-huffing financial sermon about what is or isn't an "investment" is just another side-show distraction.


It's true that cars are relatively easy to get rid of if things go off the deep end and losing a few grand here or there because a petulant CEO lit the company on fire isn't going to ruin me. But not everything Tesla sells is quite so easy to divorce yourself from. What about the solar panels on my roof or the powerwalls in my garage that I'm wed to for the next decade or more?

Hitching your sails to an unstable/unpredictable/failing company is a financial risk, and "investment" has broader meaning than "something you expect a financial return from".

Again, all new cars "lose a few grand here or there" so what does what the CEO of this one specifically have to do with anything if all you're referring to is new vehicle depreciation. Nobody who buys a home does so because of the company of solar installer on the structure. Prospective buyers only care if they're leased or owned outright. Everything else is of minimal consequence, at best.

Two things you've said here are in direct conflict the way you've said them. Is it that hard to admit you follow someone because you want to? This insistence that you're somehow obligated to track his every post is goofy.

 

[SO16]

know, all what he tweets or says is absolutely true and 100% accurate. Like, robotaxis, 500 mile cybertruck which costs 40k, roadster, FSD, Steam games in cars (witcher anyone??), hyperloop etc. etcd.

how's kool aid?,

Aspirational goals.

Take it with a grain of salt then. If people are “concerned” or will later throw shade for not making the goals, don’t buy a product based on “aspirational goals”. Only buy a product for what it does TODAY.

 

[pinolero]

The SC network is a game changer with practically all other car manufacturers jumping onboard with NACS. Very odd and erratic to dismantle the entire team. Range anxiety is still one of the top reasons people are reluctant to go all in on a BEV. This doesn't help solve this instead it extends that fear that people have and as such does not translate to sales and profit which appear to be the driving force behind this.

 

[HitchHiker71]

This does not align with Tinuuci's LinkedIn job description:

I don't see any reference to ongoing maintenance responsibilities in that JD. I see reference to product development, implementation (execution), for new products, programs and features in other words. Maintenance is typically handled by a separate set of teams. Not that the maintenance and development teams don't work closely together - they always do - since bugs/issues reported up to maintenance reparations may require product improvements that are fed back into the product development team of course. While the two teams/departments have separation missions - they do work intimately together as it relates to continuous improvement initiatives.

 

[EbS-P]

I think I posted this reply in the wrong forum, but here's my hypothesis:
1) Elon and Tesla aren't dumb, they know that good charging networks are highly critical to high levels of EV adoption.
2) They got almost all NA market to adopt NACS while in Europe they followed existing standards that were getting traction eg CCS.
3) They know that it's a team game (with all EV manufacturers) now to get the supercharger network built out (whether in NA with NACS or in other places in the world with CCS or whatever standards become most popular.
4) Supercharging network is a commodity, and a capital and resource intensive business (high capex to build, ongoing maintenance costs to maintain and deploy, dealing with local regulators for permits, etc). Tesla prefers higher margin businesses and ones with greater competitive moat and differentiation (eg FSD, robotaxi, robotics or hardware businesses with a better moat - eg cars, batteries, energy, etc). Heck in the beginning they said they would operate the Supercharger network at break even and not try to make money off it so they clearly initially viewed the supercharger network as a means to enable people to actually buy and use the cars, but not as a strategic source of profit (because in the long run there isn't much profit because they have to buy the energy from a local utility).
5) So they decide to build the hardware and license it (like recent deals they've done with BP and EG) and let other people build out the boring, low margin, capital intensive business that now every car manufacturer that wants to sell EVs is reliant on. Yes they may be walking away from some profit if they were to eventually try to operate charging as a profitable business (especially to non Tesla EVs) but the truth is these margins weren't durable since electricity is a commodity so charging costs should be very much in line with underlying costs.
6) Maybe they continue to build a few locations where needed, or some of the "flagship" locations that are fun/brand halo like the drive in diner, but the boring old regular "gas stations" they lean on others to finish the job they started because there isn't much interesting business in building out the next generation of "gas stations".
7) I wonder if a weird side effect of this is that free supercharging is only available at Tesla operated supercharges and as the network gets built out to maturity by a boatload of other companies, Tesla's liabilities tied to costs of free supercharging go down as more charging gets done at third party operated charging stations which don't honor FUSC.

^^This^^
The supercharging network on average is probably good enough the next year. Everything will get more crowded sure but why should they care. The charging network sold cars to early adopter. If you’re still skeptical about charging networks you aren’t buying an EV in the next 12 months.

This is what it takes to keep stockholders happy with rates of return. Focus at all costs on the highest margin products and services. Tesla is a Tech company. They just happen to make cars. Is Apple a phone company?

 

[gearchruncher]

Only buy a product for what it does TODAY.

Like having the best DC fast charger infrastructure on the planet, with an appropriately sized team supporting it?

The whole reason we're discussing this is that we did buy a product for what it did today, and now that has changed. We know for a fact 500 people are gone. We are reasonably questioning what that means for our vehicles in the future, and reasonably distrustful of an Elon tweet saying "it will be fine, trust me."

 

[texas_star_TM3]

^^This^^
The supercharging network on average is probably good enough the next year. Everything will get more crowded sure but why should they care. The charging network sold cars to early adopter. If you’re still skeptical about charging networks you aren’t buying an EV in the next 12 months.

This is what it takes to keep stockholders happy with rates of return. Focus at all costs on the highest margin products and services. Tesla is a Tech company. They just happen to make cars. Is Apple a phone company?

Tesla sells cars

Apple sells phone, tablets, notebooks, desktops, cloud solutions, has a streaming service for music, movies, tv shows, sells watches, VR headsets

 

[gearchruncher]

This is what it takes to keep stockholders happy with rates of return. Focus at all costs on the highest margin products and services. Tesla is a Tech company. They just happen to make cars.

As someone that owns a Tesla car, but not Tesla shares, they are a car company. They sold me a car. That is why we are here, not as a question of what is best for shareholders (although this looks pretty shortsighted there as well, given that if Tesla stops selling cars because demand craters, they go bankrupt in just a few months, which is the whole reason Tesla is cutting costs right now).

And for now, Tesla is a car company. They can WANT to be a tech company, but they sell one thing today. Cars. They need to pivot to be a "tech" company (whatever that means), and they have yet to succeed at that. When 95% of your revenue comes from selling one thing, that is what you are. Call me when Tesla is making even 25% of revenue from something that isn't tied to a physical vehicle they make in one of their factories.

 

[Ostrichsak]

Like having the best DC fast charger infrastructure on the planet, with an appropriately sized team supporting it?

The whole reason we're discussing this is that we did buy a product for what it did today, and now that has changed. We know for a fact 500 people are gone. We are reasonably questioning what that means for our vehicles in the future, and reasonably distrustful of an Elon tweet saying "it will be fine, trust me."

What you don't know is if that dismissing of 500 people will have ANY impact on the existing structure or up time.

Yet here everyone is jumping to conclusions and freaking out over that which they actually know little, if anything, about. For all you know, it could be a step to actually improve the experience but that wouldn't support the narrative, would it?

Is it really so hard to believe that the entirety of the automotive industry adopting NACS may have an impact on the actual NACS network? Do you think that Tesla wouldn't have any inside knowledge of anything coming along that may impact this for users?

 

[IronCoffee_Max]

I'm not seeing a generous take on Elon's action here, to be frank. We don't know if there's something going on behind the scenes, of course, but if Elon is so out of his mind as to not understand that cutting the entire supercharger team needs additional context, then he's still acting crazy. Not to mention the entire US car industry is switching to NACS ... there must have been agreements or plans with the other car makers to build MORE superchargers, not less. And certainly not NONE.

Going by Elon's response later, it's not NONE. It's slowing down expansion, and focus on expansion of existing sites.

 

[ucmndd]

So if you weren't talking about investment, what were you talking about financially that explained your ongoing requirement to monitor Elon for the financial choices you've made? Did you loan him fifty bucks and were concerned he may not be able to pay you back?

I wasn't talking about "investment" in your evangelical and narrow interpretation of what that implies, as I clarified later in my post. You seem to be stuck on the idea that how you buy your cars and only use cash and only buy used except when you don't minimizes your exposure to the performance of the company. It doesn't, in any meaningful way.

Again, all new cars "lose a few grand here or there" so what does what the CEO of this one specifically have to do with anything if all you're referring to is new vehicle depreciation.

If you don't understand that the long-term viability and ability of a company to support, service, and maintain your vehicle (or any other products you have purchased from them) has a material impact on that vehicle's value and usefulness, then you're either deluded or just being deliberately obtuse.

Nobody who buys a home does so because of the company of solar installer on the structure. Prospective buyers only care if they're leased or owned outright. Everything else is of minimal consequence, at best.

I don't really care what a buyer wants as I'm not selling my home. I want a company that can effectively service, maintain, and honor the warranty of my significant investment as agreed.

Is it that hard to admit you follow someone because you want to? This insistence that you're somehow obligated to track his every post is goofy.

You are once again manifesting concerns and putting words in peoples' mouths. I follow Tesla and news related to Tesla because I have long believed in the mission of the company and voted with my wallet to support them. I don't follow every Elon post, have never used twitter/X, but read the news and follow topics of interest to me because I make it a point to be informed. "Don't be informed" is not a serious response to the concerns being raised here. It's childish and dismissive.

 

[texas_star_TM3]

The NYT's take on this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/30/business/tesla-layoffs-supercharger-team.html

It's a very interesting read and it highlights the effects on the entire EV industry, including the subcontractors who were tasked with installing all the planned SC stations.

They even quote a company who installs chargers for Tesla and overnight the 20 people they work with at Tesla got fired and the email bounced back. Imagine being in the charger installation business and you can’t reach anyone at Tesla anymore for ongoing projects/ installs. Yikes.

 

[texas_star_TM3]

Going by Elon's response later, it's not NONE. It's slowing down expansion, and focus on expansion of existing sites.

Firing the entire team responsible for selecting new sites, getting permits, working with local contractors to install on site … that’s one way to ensure expansion is “slowing down”. Per the NYT article they quote a construction company installing superchargers for Tesla and all their Tesla contacts they work with have been fired.