Any NDA that requires you to actively lie to the media (rather than just not talking to them and referring them to your employer) would be insane. Are you seriously saying that you've had an employer insist that you sign an NDA that not only has a non-disparagement agreement, but actually requires you to actively lie to the media?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Articles re Tesla—Fact or Fiction?
- Thread starter Robert.Boston
- Start date
Any NDA that requires you to actively lie to the media (rather than just not talking to them and referring them to your employer) would be insane. Are you seriously saying that you've had an employer insist that you sign an NDA that not only has a non-disparagement agreement, but actually requires you to actively lie to the media?
You are claiming to know what all he *is* doing and about evidence. Where do you know this from? Media? Twitter? Some ex Employees?
Given all the experiences we have with those sources I only trust them if I get prove of several statement confirming the same from independent people.
Having worked the majority of my working life with most large companies in Germany and also abroad in Europe all the situations in the article described could be examples from this companies. So there is actually nothing worth to report here for me other than a normal situation with and organization trying to make the impossible possible and stressed managers make mistakes .... so what?
With all the chaos you claim he caused he managed to build a fantastic company right on the path to change society in the direction of sustainable transportation. I call this pretty awesome.
I am not saying you should make that happen by all costs but am saying its not an unusual situation described in the reports. On top of that there are a few points that contradict very much with we known from Elon.
On top of that I want to encourage you look at the timing this article has been released. Since yesterday there are quite some FUD attacks on Tesla as correctly predicted from @Papafox and Elon all of those based on hearsay and claims from people but nothing to back that up. We have seen that in the past and its usually pure FUD.
We are a few percent away from ATH and its not surprise that FUD attacks are orchestrated today to make sure ATH does not happen.
I do suggest therefore to validate and assess all articles these days under the aspect where the SP is today and what happens to the shorts if we break through.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
The article paints his behaviors as erratic. What I see is a clear focus on his mission and an unwillingness to let anything get in his way.
humbaba
sleeping until $7000
So this was pointed out to me: Tesla was on Autopilot in fatal crash
This is apparently being circulated as evidence that Tesla and its Autopilot is unsafe.
The article seems fair enough as it stays factual, but will whet the appetites of any Tesla or FSD detractors.
[doh. I really did think I'd checked published date
]
This is apparently being circulated as evidence that Tesla and its Autopilot is unsafe.
The article seems fair enough as it stays factual, but will whet the appetites of any Tesla or FSD detractors.
[doh. I really did think I'd checked published date
]
Last edited:
humbaba
sleeping until $7000
sorry: It was just raised to me specifically as Tesla being unsafe. Before posting here I thought I'd double checked the publish date. Obvious fail on my part.
humbaba
sleeping until $7000
yes. This was raised to my attention outside of the forum. I won't belabor the list with my response, but I covered it. I (wrongly) thought it was a current news item -- that was my only reason for posting here. Apologies.
I will note that MUSK's story is not plausible here.
Who were the several specialists? Name 'em. I'll wait. They don't exist.
I'm not going to dig back through the last DECADE of research to list all of them. For the two easiest cases: lack of sane prioritization of customer problems is well documented right here at this forum; mysterious firings of well-loved customer-facing staff who didn't appear to have done anything wrong is documented at this forum, too. I think the people quitting due to burnout is massively well documented. You were here during many of the incidents, if you ever venture out of the investment subforum.
That's fair. :shrug: I didn't actually say it was unusual, and it's not unusual. That's why I don't think it's particularly damaging to the company's future; this sort of *sugar* is pretty normal for the corporate world.
However, if Tesla had been a different sort of company where that sort of *sugar* didn't happen, then that would have been a *net positive*. As it actually is, I can scratch "healthy corporate management culture" off my list of potential positives for Tesla.
OT
The HR department, the travel department, the accounting department ???
Also, as to relevance, Mary Beth left in 2014, four years ago!, what does that have to do with GF1 (ground breaking in 2015) or Model 3?
Loved by customers does not mean good for business...
The best analogy I have seen is peacetime general vs wartime general...
The HR department, the travel department, the accounting department ???
Also, as to relevance, Mary Beth left in 2014, four years ago!, what does that have to do with GF1 (ground breaking in 2015) or Model 3?
Loved by customers does not mean good for business...
The best analogy I have seen is peacetime general vs wartime general...
Here is one of my frustrations with the article's style:
There was the anecdote about the Fired Engineer.
Musk “would say ‘I’ve got to fire someone today,’ and I’d say, ‘No you don’t,’ and he’d say, ‘No, no, I just do. I’ve got to fire somebody,’ ” one former high-ranking executive told me. (A Tesla spokesperson disputed this but added that Musk makes “difficult but necessary decisions.”)
Now, I adamantly guarantee you that the article's author was trying to paint Mr Musk at least as erratic, possibly worse. What it does not say is whether that "somebody" was an anonymous "anyone - doesn't matter who it is - anyone will do", or whether either Mr Musk OR the person relating this anecdote was puposely avoiding revealing (Musk to the executive or the executive to Wired) who this very specific "someone" was.
If you want to think of Mr Musk as being irresponsible, or tyrannical, or erratic, or loopy - then you get to choose Option 1.
If you want to think of Wired as being irresponsible, or devious, or with an agenda against Mr Musk, then you get to choose Option 2.
QED: In that the article was written so that there is ambiguity in points that REALLY matter, the article is in itself a bad one.
There was the anecdote about the Fired Engineer.
Musk “would say ‘I’ve got to fire someone today,’ and I’d say, ‘No you don’t,’ and he’d say, ‘No, no, I just do. I’ve got to fire somebody,’ ” one former high-ranking executive told me. (A Tesla spokesperson disputed this but added that Musk makes “difficult but necessary decisions.”)
Now, I adamantly guarantee you that the article's author was trying to paint Mr Musk at least as erratic, possibly worse. What it does not say is whether that "somebody" was an anonymous "anyone - doesn't matter who it is - anyone will do", or whether either Mr Musk OR the person relating this anecdote was puposely avoiding revealing (Musk to the executive or the executive to Wired) who this very specific "someone" was.
If you want to think of Mr Musk as being irresponsible, or tyrannical, or erratic, or loopy - then you get to choose Option 1.
If you want to think of Wired as being irresponsible, or devious, or with an agenda against Mr Musk, then you get to choose Option 2.
QED: In that the article was written so that there is ambiguity in points that REALLY matter, the article is in itself a bad one.
You want for me to quote to you Tesla's non-public personnel records? Sure thing - want to request anything else of me while you're at it? Maybe page 36 of a privately circulated memoir of the Slovenian Philological Society, 1883? Or manuscripts from the Great Library of Alexandria, perhaps? I keep all of the sort of stuff next to my original English text of the Voynich Manuscript.
That makes them accurate. Misleading & accurate is a thing; it's called "spin". This isn't "Elon hates the color yellow", which is inaccuarate.
Oh, I ran through and verified most of the others from other sources. The first incident is unverifiable but similar in tone and randomness to several firings we've heard about here.
Sure. But we can also safely assume they all happened. This does give us important information about the company's management or lack thereof.
I didn't know about the silicon vat odor incident. I am also hypersensitive to chemical smells (BTW, the odor hypersensitivity is further evidence that Musk is on the autism spectrum), and Musk was right that that needed to be fixed ASAP before it made workers sick. This is actually new news. Forget the spin, that's accurate information, and Tesla agreed that it was.
Yes, and they're also all exes for good reasons.
The thing is, if you read the Wired article objectively, filtering out the spin, you see a management style which is... pretty much what I already knew Musk was doing. The same good parts and the same bad parts, but with more examples than the ones I already had. I mean, I know for a fact that Jarrett Walker was right and Musk was wrong, and Musk was dismissive because he didn't want to learn. I knew in advance exactly why Musk's scheme for full automation designed in CAD was likely to mess up (no room to replace stations which didn't work right with redesigned stations), which Musk took two years to admit was wrong. We know that Musk's memo in reaction to the sexual harassment problems was best described as "well meaning but really stupid", having failed to actually bother to do his research.
The Wired article gives an ACCURATE picture of Musk. Zhelko Dimic agrees. "Dr. Elon and Mr. Musk" is definitely an ambivalent profile, not a purely negative one; it does emphasize the positives and makes it very clear that Musk's goal is Tesla's mission, to accelerate the transition to sustainable transport.
I like Musk. He's been making serious mistakes, hopefully mostly due to sleep deprivation, though some appear to be due to unwillingness to do his homework, which are worse. He's created a bad management culture and he hasn't admitted or realized that. Bad managment cultures are *the norm* for corporations, so this is no worse than anywhere else, but it's no better, either.
It's a funny response, but what exactly was the first-cited engineer fired for? Being in the wrong place at the wrong time? Did Musk even figure out who was actually responsible for the robot and the software which didn't work? *Was* it that engineer, or not?
Tesla calls it "overly dramatic and sensationalized", which admits that all the statements in the article are factually accurate. If there was a factual inaccuracy, they'd call that out specifically. Tesla objects to the tone. Fine, whatever. As someone on the autism spectrum myself, I read the facts, not the tone.
Maybe it was released for the purpose of acting as a hit piece. Nevertheless it is full of useful, undisputed details which give a fuller picture of Tesla's management (or mismanagement).
I learned long ago (with other stocks) that horrendous disorganized mistake-ridden management... usually doesn't actually hurt a company's bottom line, because every other company is also horrendously disorganized and mistake-ridden in their own way. (Management has to make a much bigger strategic-level screwup for it to really hurt the corporate prospects.) So I don't think this means Tesla's future is any worse than I thought it was before. But I have scratched off the possibility that Tesla has a super-healthy corporate culture of the sort which can create extra value, which I have seen on rare occasions (mid-1980s 3M, Wegmans today). It doesn't and it won't. So, useful information.
Last edited:
Headline: "Fired Employee Thinks His Firing Was Unfair; Details At 11"
Sam Teller and the rest of the Office of the CEO. According to LinkedIn, this includes at least the following.
*Omead Afshar
*Katherine Chan
*Shivon Zilis
*Reyna Ortiz
Last edited:
Similar threads
