Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Martin Eberhard sues Elon Musk and Tesla Motors

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I kind of agree with this sentiment. I think the majority have accepted that Elon is always lying and Martin is always truthful. I understand the respect that people have for Martin, both as a person and innovator, but the actual truth is largely unknown. I've been pretty much in the middle thus far, but honestly this lawsuit, and the way it's worded makes me lose a lot of the respect I had for Martin. 90%+ is frivolous and doesn't even concern issues of law. That doesn't mean I "like" Elon or the way he often does business, but that really isn't the issue here for me.

That is sort of how I feel on the entire ME vs EM battle.

I reserved my Tesla Roadster in September 2008. So I was not really paying attention during the time period when Martin Eberhard was CEO or how he was pushed out of Tesla Motors.

At the end of the day, it was a battle of money, power and ego. It is a common tale in many companies. But this is a high profile celebrity company with a lot of drama. So it gets more attention in the media.

I really appreciate Martin Eberhard for having the innovative dream to start Tesla Motors. It is very unfair that he was completely removed from his startup.

I really appreciate Elon Musk for putting up the major cash, and recruiting more investors, that made Tesla Motors a reality.

They both played a very valuable role in the creation of the Tesla Roadster that we all admire. But unfortunately their personalities did not work well together. It happens. Certain people just are meant to never get along.
 
Those of us that have been following Tesla Motors since 2006 remember what the company was like when Martin was at the helm. We know that he made a sincere effort to be as transparent as possible, and to share as much information as he could with the people who were interested in TM and the Roadster. We admired his enthusiasm for what he was doing, and the intelligence with which he approached his task. Martin did all the heavy lifting at TM, from coming up with the original idea for the car and the company, assembling an engineering team, finding early funding, lining up production & engineering partners, developing and refining the ESS and PEM, working with Barney Hatt on the styling, building models, mules, and prototypes, FMVSS testing, and communicating with the fan base and customers. Martin put his heart and soul into this company for nearly five years, only to be shown the door just before the Roadster went into production.

In contrast EM spent relatively little time on Tesla between 2004 - 2007. He was preoccupied with SpaceX. He would show up after the work was done and demand changes that would ultimately result in delays and cost overruns. EM stacked the Board of Directors with family, friends, and other allies and, just as the Roadster was almost completed, and literally days before the roll out to the automotive press, EM fabricated a reason to eject Martin from the company that he had founded and had worked so hard to build into a viable manufacturer. Afterwards EM made every effort to minimize and denigrate Martin's role in the development of the Roadster and the building of Tesla Motors. To add insult to injury, EM blamed the delays and cost overuns that his interference had caused on Martin. He tried to claim the mantle of "Founder", and through not-so-subtle means, he continues to claim as much credit as he can for the development of the Roadster.

One of these men is the Real McCoy, the other is a pretender to the throne.

There are no prizes for guessing which is which.
 
To be honest Chris, I'd have to take your post with a grain of salt as it's clear which side you're pushing for. Ideally, I just want to hear TM's response to the claims so that we can have 2 sides of the story and be closer to the ever-elusive 3rd side - the truth.

It's hard to get to the truth when you've got haters and zealots on either side spinning events in their favor and no one being objective.

Johnr: just another article to add to the suit I guess.

*edit* one thing I'm REALLY interested in hearing, is details about the delays. What exactly caused the original cost claims to be inflated? Was it Elon nitpicking and adding things that may not be needed (even if they were later accepted)? Or was it a mistake on Martin's part when it came time to put on the CFO hat?

I thought I remembered reading a while back that ME did actually say he couldn't (or didn't want to) handle the CFO bit and asked to be excused -- essentially saying if the board had replaced him sooner, the CFO position would've been helmed properly?
 
Last edited:
To be honest Chris, I'd have to take your post with a grain of salt as it's clear which side you're pushing for.

I'm glad that it's clear which side I support. I certainly wasn't trying to hide it. There's a reason that I've chosen one side over the other though. I've been following the progress of TM since late 2006, and over that time I have read hundreds of articles, watched hours of interviews, and participated in dozens of blogs on the subject. This doesn't mean that I consider my POV to be automatically better or worse than anyone else's, but I do think that I've managed to develop some perspective over that time.

You still need more input before you come to any conclusions, and that's fine. It's normal to want to gather as much information as possible, from as many perspectives as possible, before you take a position. I encourage you to continue that process. However, just because you have not completed the process yet, do not assume that the same is true of everyone else. Also, do not assume that just because someone has reached a conclusion, and taken a position, that it automatically lacks merit.
 
I certainly have opinions on all this, but with the courts involved, I expect they want facts, not opinions. So, lacking facts, I keep my opinions to myself.

I suspect this topic could go around and around, and never settle anything.
 
Also, do not assume that just because someone has reached a conclusion, and taken a position, that it automatically lacks merit.

Fair enough, but the very fact that you have come to a decision as to which side to support means that I have to take your statements with a grain of salt. Why? Your mind is already made regarding the issue which means you're less likely to process new information objectively and more likely to mold it to match your preconceived notions.

There's no offense meant there, just stating how I see it. I think it's a bit unfair to have basically only heard one side of the story (mainly from the underdog of the situation) and form a conclusion based on that. You have, and that's fine, but I'm not ready to do that just yet.

*edit* TEG put it best. We need facts, not inferences and opinions (no matter how long you've been watching Tesla). Let's let this play out and go from there.
 
To be honest. Although this isn't a popularity contest, I like EM and I like ME. I like them both and believe that much of TM is a result of them both.

I can't say that I disapprove of EM as the CEO. He may need some refining when it comes to integrity but I don't think he is a bad guy.

I do think it's rotten that ME was removed completely. And I think it was unnecessary.

I hope that through this legal process, they can find common ground because I would like to see ME back, if for no other reason than, TM being his baby.

Think Steve Jobs and Apple several years ago. He had a similar departure but returned better than ever.
 

paul said:
Eberhard should get a life and MOVE ON…

He lost, Musk won, end of story! Find something better to do that grasp desperately for blog mentions like Musk is making a career of!

If he’s looking to divide up credit for the Tesla Roadster how about putting Alan Cocconi at the top of the list? After-all, the Tesla Roadster started out as a production version of Cocconi’s tzero and Eberhard’s only input into that vehicle was to pay for the first set of Li-ion batteries put into it.

Jim said:
Paul: Ouch!

But not incorrect.

Now that you mention it, I’m not sure what Tesla really provided that was all that different from the tzero conceptually.

Plus, missing the plug-in hybrid boat is a potentially fatal mistake as well.

I bolded the last bit.. perhaps a thread should be made on that alone?
 
I hope that through this legal process, they can find common ground because I would like to see ME back, if for no other reason than, TM being his baby.

Think Steve Jobs and Apple several years ago. He had a similar departure but returned better than ever.

I doubt the departure of Jobs from Apple was as acrimonious as ME's departure from TESLA. For example, I don't recall any lawsuits being filed, or the back and forth recriminations. I think this particular pond is just too polluted for ME to return to TESLA. That said, if it were open for a vote, it would have mine.
 
Fair enough, but the very fact that you have come to a decision as to which side to support means that I have to take your statements with a grain of salt. Why? Your mind is already made regarding the issue which means you're less likely to process new information objectively and more likely to mold it to match your preconceived notions.

There's no offense meant there, just stating how I see it. I think it's a bit unfair to have basically only heard one side of the story (mainly from the underdog of the situation) and form a conclusion based on that. You have, and that's fine, but I'm not ready to do that just yet.

*edit* TEG put it best. We need facts, not inferences and opinions (no matter how long you've been watching Tesla). Let's let this play out and go from there.
I also respect facts, and if anybody here has any facts that contradict anything that I've said I would be happy to hear them and discuss their relevance. I think that the reality is that short of TM releasing the minutes of their board meetings, or the existence of hundreds of hours of CCTV footage (with sound) of private discussions between Martin & Elon, then there will only be "he said/he said". In that case, I think you have to side with the person whose version of the story is most consistent with the things that you do know to be true.

I have heard both sides of the story so far, and I will read/listen to the response from EM and TM, and take that into consideration too. Up to this point I know which story correlates most closely to my own memory and understanding of what has happened at TM, and which one sounds like revisionist history.

No offense taken.
 
None of this really matters. Our opinions on EM vs ME mean absolutely nothing. This is all a bunch of BS for blogs and media to start panting over. After it is all over, nothing will be any different. ME will still be out of Tesla Motors and EM will still own about 1/3 of the company and be in control.

There is no way to take things back to 2007 and "fix" this based on all that is right and just.

My prediction: This will all be settled out of court and we will never know what the final deal is.
 
My prediction: This will all be settled out of court and we will never know what the final deal is.

I don't know about that. This is clearly a lawsuit about ego -- on both sides, and when you have that as the main motivation for a lawsuit, it makes it incredibly difficult to settle. If I were EM (or his attorneys), I'd be loathe to settle for anything less than nuisance value (i.e., maybe half the cost of defending the case). I assume that ME would never accept such a low figure, and he seems to have filed this to "get his day in court", and maybe to try to shed some light on what he considers to be the "truth", even if it costs him a lot of time and money.

I wouldn't be surprised to see this case go the distance -- either a decision by the judge that the case has no merit (called "summary judgment"), or a full-fledged trial. IF there are facts that would be embarrassing to EM that would come out at trial, and he can't get summary judgment, then he may be incentivized to settle, but that's really speculating at this point as to what facts will come out in discovery.
 
... This is clearly a lawsuit about ego -- on both sides,..

It's not just about ego. If ME has been not able to find work and is having his reputation sullied then it's about livelyhood. The Earth2Tech article goes into how this affects ME financially. (it's called Incredible Importance with conversations with other founders stressing what's at stake) Basically, if EM "wins" then ME's career is besmirched as the man who had to be outed because he was loosing money for the company. At best his resume has a big hole in it for 6 years. That's not ego, that's trying to feed your family.
 
This is a fair point. Having his name still in good standing as one of the originators of the Tesla brand would go a long way when it comes to developing and pitching new products and ideas.

An investor is much more likely to want to work with one of the Founders of the (hopefully by then) great Tesla Motors than with the guy who started it, but got booted because of XYZ.
 
The settlement might be the financial issues actually noted in the lawsuit. 4 months pay that is owed to ME plus the 250,000 shares promised in the severance agreement.

Since we don't know the current price per share, it is impossible to know the value of those shares. But based on the Daimler investment, they are clearly worth something now.

If Martin still owns 3% of the company, he is a multi-millionaire already.