6 ms·

In fairness, musk is obviously contemptful of the sec, and public market norms/institutions generally. He should probably find a way to exit as Tesla ceo, imo.

In fairness, musk is obviously contemptful of the sec, and public market norms/institutions generally. He should probably find a way to exit as Tesla ceo, imo. Being a public company CEO doesn't suit him. He built a car company from a cold start, made good cars, and pushed EVs forward by a good many years. We're now at the point where most major manufacturers make EVs. People are willing to buy them. Range is getting sufficient. Plans to start banning ICE cars next decade are getting serious. Job done, and done well. Get a CEO that does platitudes to run Tesla. Go do spaceX, boring companies, hyperloop... plenty of stuff to do. Plenty of money. Plenty of private investors willing to fund muskco projects. This Elon Musk Vs the stock market stuff is not going to be fun for anyone.

gpm 8y ago
I agree with everything except the implication of this (so overall good comment!) > In fairness, musk is obviously contemptful of the sec Being contemptful of the sec (or even the justice system) isn't a crime, despite the name "contempt of court" means "disobeying a court order" not "being contemptful". Thought crime isn't a thing.
- empath75 8y ago
  It goes toward state of mind and that matters for crimes. If he gave every indication that he agreed with the settlement and was trying to comply, this could be seen as an accidental oversight. But given his statements on the sec, it’s hard to read this as anything other than an intentional violation.
- chipgap98 8y ago
  > In fairness, musk is obviously contemptful of the sec I'm 99% sure that this is a joke and the original commenter doesn't think having contempt for the SEC is a crime
- dalbasal 8y ago
  I know, but I also think there's a deep-ish meaning that is literal. Contempt of court is, historically and functionally, about contempt... which breeds disobedience. Respect has its own implications.. including obedience, in certain contexts. Also, I was just writing it because it sounded good att.
short_sells_poo 8y ago
> Plans to start banning ICE cars next decade are getting serious. This made me think: many cities already ban cars from their centers, but perhaps a better policy would be to ban ICE cars? Air quality and noise levels could improve dramatically, but the impact on commerce wouldn't be as harsh perhaps?
- mijamo 8y ago
  A lot of air quality problem in cities comes with tyres and brakes. This is why the air quality is so bad in metro stations even though thzy are fully electrical as well. In addition, the policies against car are not only pollution related but quality of life related and urbanism. This is why in many places in Europe you can't build open air parking in cities anymore, it just takes too much of the public space and if yoj want life in the cities you need to be able to walk easier.
  - modeless 8y ago
    Electric cars hardly use their brakes at all due to regenerative braking, so that problem is solved too.
    - cptskippy 8y ago
      They use them less and regen primarily alleviates the need for brakes to perform speed modulation when cruising. They're still used for stopping and a bad driver or rapid deceleration will still put excessive wear on brakes.
      - modeless 8y ago
        > regen primarily alleviates the need for brakes to perform speed modulation when cruising This isn't true for me. Maybe it depends on the strength of regen in your car, but 90% of my deceleration when stopping is handled by regen. I only use brakes under 5 MPH in most circumstances. And I wouldn't say I'm a timid driver.
cptaj 8y ago
I wholeheardtedly agree. He should definitely focus on SpaceX. Lots of stuff to solve there. They need to optimize falcon 9 reusability (24hr turnaround is possible), get starlink up and running, Starship and booster development, ISRU development for Mars.
- rchaud 8y ago
  Musk strikes me as a pitchman more than anything else; good at outlining a vision to laypersons and investors, but usually absent from the kitchen. The problems you've listed don't seem to be things Musk could meaningfully contribute to. Musk is quite clearly a "like"-addict (public adulation addict, really), and those problems sound like long stretches of boring work that doesn't put cameras in his face or likes on his tweets.
api 8y ago
It's another data point in support of: don't go public if you want to do anything innovative.
- duxup 8y ago
  He can be innovative and ... not get in a fight with the SEC.
- xkjkls 8y ago
  Innovative as in fake a buyout offer, get censured by the SEC, and then violate that agreement? I mean, that isn't exactly how I would use the word, but ok.
  - api 8y ago
    Imagine you have a private company. Somebody comes to you with a big fat acquisition offer and you get excited, but it's obviously not anywhere near inked yet. You send a celebratory e-mail to your investors and your option-holding employees that basically boils down to "we gonna get some bling bling!" Then the deal just totally vaporizes. This is probably what happened. In a private company the CEO might get some egg on their face, but that's it. In a public company this could be illegal. Elon is not the type of person who functions well in the heavily bureaucratized and regulated type of environment. BTW I am not totally letting him off the hook, just saying that maybe staying away from environments like the public stock markets is a good idea if you don't want a bureaucratic culture.
    - xkjkls 8y ago
      > Imagine you have a private company. Somebody comes to you with a big fat acquisition offer and you get excited, but it's obviously not anywhere near inked yet. You send a celebratory e-mail to your investors and your option-holding employees that basically boils down to "we gonna get some bling bling!" Then the deal just totally vaporizes. A couple of major points: One, Tesla is not a private company. They are a public company with an actively traded stock. The price of the stock moved significantly based on this information being revealed, and people who were short might have been subjected to margin calls causing them to close out their position, and new longs might have invested in the stock on the assumption that an acquisition at $420 a share would take place. This people have real harm due to Musk's irresponsibility, and they are exactly the kind of people the SEC exists to protect. Two, you say that is probably what happened very confidently here without any evidence. There isn't a single investor that has come forward and said that they were the one planning to facilitate this transaction, which is surprising, because the universe of institutions that can fund a $50 billion buyout is incredibly small. Most likely whatever Musk might have been referring to in his infamous "funding secured" tweet was even less material than you describe. Three, I would also describe this as irresponsible and unethical in a private company as well. If you started telling your employees that their shares are worth $420 a share and will soon be as good as cash, then one of them decides to buy a house on the knowledge that his net worth can take the added mortgage relatively easily, you should feel bad about misleading them. > BTW I am not totally letting him off the hook, just saying that maybe staying away from environments like the public stock markets is a good idea if you don't want a bureaucratic culture. There have been plenty of innovative CEOs who have existed in public companies. I don't think "don't tweet out securities fraud" is really too high a hurdle for someone to meet that it will impede the innovation at their company.
xadhominemx 8y ago
The best thing for SpaceX would be for Musk to continue to have minimal operational involvement
- tachyonbeam 8y ago
  I have been a Tesla shareholder since 2016, and I find Elon has been very inspirational, but I agree. I think that Elon is too much of a micromanager. He seems to be trying to control everything at Tesla, and it's backfired multiple times. Gwynne Shotwell is doing a fine job running SpaceX. In my opinion, Elon should focus on the engineering side of things (e.g. BFR development) and let other people do the management and public relations.
- Gpetrium 8y ago
  It is a tough pill for someone like Musk to swallow. Having seeing your companies grow to such heights in part because of hard work you made and the brand value that your name has created. It will be interesting to see the compromise he might be willing to take
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
swalsh 8y ago
I like to think Elon Musk, and Clarence Saunders (the Piggly Wiggly guy) have a lot in common. I hope Elon learns from Saunders magnificent story. You can be smarter than Wall Street, but wall street has the NYSE, and the SEC on their side.
arikr 8y ago
> Being a public company CEO doesn't suit him. That's one perspective, and the other perspective is that despite his public company CEO flaws, he's still overall very suited. I don't personally know which of the two is truer. Most HN readers probably aren't in a position to know if someone is a good public company CEO, maybe you are. But it seems worth noting that saying that someone isn't suited from their job likely comes from a position of knowing far less about what it means to be suited at their job than they (Musk) know, with the exception of the highly public aspects of their job. So most people can say that he doesn't seem that suited at the highly public aspects of being a public company CEO, but he may be so well suited to the other aspects that those aspects massively dominate, making him overall an excellent public company CEO.
rootusrootus 8y ago
I don't necessarily agree with some of the adulation for his accomplishments, but ... I totally agree that he is not a great fit for running Tesla. In my opinion they should try and get Alan Mulally to run the show.
jsight 8y ago
Yeah, I like that line "contempt of SEC". That is really what it feels like the SEC wanted to charge him with.
- ticmasta 8y ago
  If you read the layperson defniition, but the legal one applicable to any legislative or judicial body is defined as: "... the offense of being disobedient to or disrespectful toward a court of law and its officers in the form of behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice and dignity of the court" now that's kind of a mix of breaking the rules and being a general dick, but the point is that to respect the intent institution you need to both respect its judgements and its identity. Musk may or may not be violating the former but is definitely failing the later. You may not agree with this but that's how our institutions work. As for "thought crime" that doesn't apply once you open your mouth and share it with everyone else.
  - gpm 8y ago
    Speech, like thought, is well protected. Saying "the courts are useless entities and I do not respect them" is well protected. Apart from the first amendment, I think your missing the "and" in your quote. It's required that you "oppose or defy" the "authority of the court"... I.e. violate an order. PS. The SEC is not the courts. Musk has been rather clear that he does in fact have respect for the courts... Edit: And to be clear I'm not saying Musk isn't guilty of contempt of court, is just has nothing to do with being contemptful of the SEC (except perhaps his motive).
gumby 8y ago
> He built a car company from a cold start FWIW Musk was an A round investor who took over as CEO after the founder was fired a few years later.

gpm 8y ago

I agree with everything except the implication of this (so overall good comment!) > In fairness, musk is obviously contemptful of the sec Being contemptful of the sec (or even the justice system) isn't a crime, despite the name "contempt of court" means "disobeying a court order" not "being contemptful". Thought crime isn't a thing.

empath75 8y ago
It goes toward state of mind and that matters for crimes. If he gave every indication that he agreed with the settlement and was trying to comply, this could be seen as an accidental oversight. But given his statements on the sec, it’s hard to read this as anything other than an intentional violation.
chipgap98 8y ago
> In fairness, musk is obviously contemptful of the sec I'm 99% sure that this is a joke and the original commenter doesn't think having contempt for the SEC is a crime
dalbasal 8y ago
I know, but I also think there's a deep-ish meaning that is literal. Contempt of court is, historically and functionally, about contempt... which breeds disobedience. Respect has its own implications.. including obedience, in certain contexts. Also, I was just writing it because it sounded good att.

short_sells_poo 8y ago

> Plans to start banning ICE cars next decade are getting serious. This made me think: many cities already ban cars from their centers, but perhaps a better policy would be to ban ICE cars? Air quality and noise levels could improve dramatically, but the impact on commerce wouldn't be as harsh perhaps?

mijamo 8y ago
A lot of air quality problem in cities comes with tyres and brakes. This is why the air quality is so bad in metro stations even though thzy are fully electrical as well. In addition, the policies against car are not only pollution related but quality of life related and urbanism. This is why in many places in Europe you can't build open air parking in cities anymore, it just takes too much of the public space and if yoj want life in the cities you need to be able to walk easier.
- modeless 8y ago
  Electric cars hardly use their brakes at all due to regenerative braking, so that problem is solved too.
  - cptskippy 8y ago
    They use them less and regen primarily alleviates the need for brakes to perform speed modulation when cruising. They're still used for stopping and a bad driver or rapid deceleration will still put excessive wear on brakes.
    - modeless 8y ago
      > regen primarily alleviates the need for brakes to perform speed modulation when cruising This isn't true for me. Maybe it depends on the strength of regen in your car, but 90% of my deceleration when stopping is handled by regen. I only use brakes under 5 MPH in most circumstances. And I wouldn't say I'm a timid driver.

cptaj 8y ago

I wholeheardtedly agree. He should definitely focus on SpaceX. Lots of stuff to solve there. They need to optimize falcon 9 reusability (24hr turnaround is possible), get starlink up and running, Starship and booster development, ISRU development for Mars.

rchaud 8y ago
Musk strikes me as a pitchman more than anything else; good at outlining a vision to laypersons and investors, but usually absent from the kitchen. The problems you've listed don't seem to be things Musk could meaningfully contribute to. Musk is quite clearly a "like"-addict (public adulation addict, really), and those problems sound like long stretches of boring work that doesn't put cameras in his face or likes on his tweets.

api 8y ago

It's another data point in support of: don't go public if you want to do anything innovative.

duxup 8y ago
He can be innovative and ... not get in a fight with the SEC.
xkjkls 8y ago
Innovative as in fake a buyout offer, get censured by the SEC, and then violate that agreement? I mean, that isn't exactly how I would use the word, but ok.
- api 8y ago
  Imagine you have a private company. Somebody comes to you with a big fat acquisition offer and you get excited, but it's obviously not anywhere near inked yet. You send a celebratory e-mail to your investors and your option-holding employees that basically boils down to "we gonna get some bling bling!" Then the deal just totally vaporizes. This is probably what happened. In a private company the CEO might get some egg on their face, but that's it. In a public company this could be illegal. Elon is not the type of person who functions well in the heavily bureaucratized and regulated type of environment. BTW I am not totally letting him off the hook, just saying that maybe staying away from environments like the public stock markets is a good idea if you don't want a bureaucratic culture.
  - xkjkls 8y ago
    > Imagine you have a private company. Somebody comes to you with a big fat acquisition offer and you get excited, but it's obviously not anywhere near inked yet. You send a celebratory e-mail to your investors and your option-holding employees that basically boils down to "we gonna get some bling bling!" Then the deal just totally vaporizes. A couple of major points: One, Tesla is not a private company. They are a public company with an actively traded stock. The price of the stock moved significantly based on this information being revealed, and people who were short might have been subjected to margin calls causing them to close out their position, and new longs might have invested in the stock on the assumption that an acquisition at $420 a share would take place. This people have real harm due to Musk's irresponsibility, and they are exactly the kind of people the SEC exists to protect. Two, you say that is probably what happened very confidently here without any evidence. There isn't a single investor that has come forward and said that they were the one planning to facilitate this transaction, which is surprising, because the universe of institutions that can fund a $50 billion buyout is incredibly small. Most likely whatever Musk might have been referring to in his infamous "funding secured" tweet was even less material than you describe. Three, I would also describe this as irresponsible and unethical in a private company as well. If you started telling your employees that their shares are worth $420 a share and will soon be as good as cash, then one of them decides to buy a house on the knowledge that his net worth can take the added mortgage relatively easily, you should feel bad about misleading them. > BTW I am not totally letting him off the hook, just saying that maybe staying away from environments like the public stock markets is a good idea if you don't want a bureaucratic culture. There have been plenty of innovative CEOs who have existed in public companies. I don't think "don't tweet out securities fraud" is really too high a hurdle for someone to meet that it will impede the innovation at their company.

xadhominemx 8y ago

The best thing for SpaceX would be for Musk to continue to have minimal operational involvement

tachyonbeam 8y ago
I have been a Tesla shareholder since 2016, and I find Elon has been very inspirational, but I agree. I think that Elon is too much of a micromanager. He seems to be trying to control everything at Tesla, and it's backfired multiple times. Gwynne Shotwell is doing a fine job running SpaceX. In my opinion, Elon should focus on the engineering side of things (e.g. BFR development) and let other people do the management and public relations.
Gpetrium 8y ago
It is a tough pill for someone like Musk to swallow. Having seeing your companies grow to such heights in part because of hard work you made and the brand value that your name has created. It will be interesting to see the compromise he might be willing to take

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

swalsh 8y ago

I like to think Elon Musk, and Clarence Saunders (the Piggly Wiggly guy) have a lot in common. I hope Elon learns from Saunders magnificent story. You can be smarter than Wall Street, but wall street has the NYSE, and the SEC on their side.

arikr 8y ago

> Being a public company CEO doesn't suit him. That's one perspective, and the other perspective is that despite his public company CEO flaws, he's still overall very suited. I don't personally know which of the two is truer. Most HN readers probably aren't in a position to know if someone is a good public company CEO, maybe you are. But it seems worth noting that saying that someone isn't suited from their job likely comes from a position of knowing far less about what it means to be suited at their job than they (Musk) know, with the exception of the highly public aspects of their job. So most people can say that he doesn't seem that suited at the highly public aspects of being a public company CEO, but he may be so well suited to the other aspects that those aspects massively dominate, making him overall an excellent public company CEO.

rootusrootus 8y ago

I don't necessarily agree with some of the adulation for his accomplishments, but ... I totally agree that he is not a great fit for running Tesla. In my opinion they should try and get Alan Mulally to run the show.

jsight 8y ago

Yeah, I like that line "contempt of SEC". That is really what it feels like the SEC wanted to charge him with.

ticmasta 8y ago
If you read the layperson defniition, but the legal one applicable to any legislative or judicial body is defined as: "... the offense of being disobedient to or disrespectful toward a court of law and its officers in the form of behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice and dignity of the court" now that's kind of a mix of breaking the rules and being a general dick, but the point is that to respect the intent institution you need to both respect its judgements and its identity. Musk may or may not be violating the former but is definitely failing the later. You may not agree with this but that's how our institutions work. As for "thought crime" that doesn't apply once you open your mouth and share it with everyone else.
- gpm 8y ago
  Speech, like thought, is well protected. Saying "the courts are useless entities and I do not respect them" is well protected. Apart from the first amendment, I think your missing the "and" in your quote. It's required that you "oppose or defy" the "authority of the court"... I.e. violate an order. PS. The SEC is not the courts. Musk has been rather clear that he does in fact have respect for the courts... Edit: And to be clear I'm not saying Musk isn't guilty of contempt of court, is just has nothing to do with being contemptful of the SEC (except perhaps his motive).

gumby 8y ago

> He built a car company from a cold start FWIW Musk was an A round investor who took over as CEO after the founder was fired a few years later.