3 ms·

That fits with Tesla's stated plan, which is "to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport by bringing compelling mass market electric cars to market as so

by sowbug 9y ago

That fits with Tesla's stated plan, which is "to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport by bringing compelling mass market electric cars to market as soon as possible." Tesla doesn't have to be the #1 auto manufacturer, nor does it even need to survive. As long as EVs are "fully commoditized," the company achieved its mission.

maxxxxx 9y ago
I hope the investors have read this.
- sowbug 9y ago
  It's hard to miss because they say it at least once during every earnings call, and it's been on their blog for around a decade. Moreover, wouldn't investors be happy to read it, according to your original point? If Musk becomes bored with a company that isn't doing what he cares about anymore because it's merely producing in-demand EV cars under a great brand, and he hands it to someone with skills like Tim Cook who can actually make the company run smoothly and profitability, isn't that the best of all worlds?
- neolefty 9y ago
  Tesla can continue just fine after Elon moves on.
- HillaryBriss 9y ago
  yes. so true. and, beyond merely selling off their shares, investors who could prove that management pursued a goal which significantly obstructed a reasonable return on investment probably have a viable lawsuit against management. the managers of publicly traded companies are supposed to pursue providing a return on investment. they aren't entitled to exclusively pursue other obstructive goals, even goals generally beneficial to society, company workers, the poor, etc. that's not what investors are buying into. of course, that doesn't mean investors would sue and it doesn't mean the government would necessarily investigate such a company. but there would be reasonable grounds for a lawsuit...
  - Negitivefrags 9y ago
    This isn't true at all. A company can pursue any not-profit related goal it likes. All that is required is that this information is clearly disclosed to investors.

by sowbug 9y ago

maxxxxx 9y ago

I hope the investors have read this.

sowbug 9y ago
It's hard to miss because they say it at least once during every earnings call, and it's been on their blog for around a decade. Moreover, wouldn't investors be happy to read it, according to your original point? If Musk becomes bored with a company that isn't doing what he cares about anymore because it's merely producing in-demand EV cars under a great brand, and he hands it to someone with skills like Tim Cook who can actually make the company run smoothly and profitability, isn't that the best of all worlds?
neolefty 9y ago
Tesla can continue just fine after Elon moves on.
HillaryBriss 9y ago
yes. so true. and, beyond merely selling off their shares, investors who could prove that management pursued a goal which significantly obstructed a reasonable return on investment probably have a viable lawsuit against management. the managers of publicly traded companies are supposed to pursue providing a return on investment. they aren't entitled to exclusively pursue other obstructive goals, even goals generally beneficial to society, company workers, the poor, etc. that's not what investors are buying into. of course, that doesn't mean investors would sue and it doesn't mean the government would necessarily investigate such a company. but there would be reasonable grounds for a lawsuit...
- Negitivefrags 9y ago
  This isn't true at all. A company can pursue any not-profit related goal it likes. All that is required is that this information is clearly disclosed to investors.