5 ms·

Technically speaking his investment came with a retroactive co-founder status according to the company. But yeah no he wasn't there in the beginning.

TekMol 6y ago
"Retroactive co-founder" - I wonder if that approach would work in other areas too. Like, how much would it cost to buy the status of an "Original member of the Beatles"?
- filmgirlcw 6y ago
  Ask Ringo? Like, Pete Best was replaced by Ringo b/c George Martin thought he wasn’t good enough in the initial recording sessions with the band. Pete Best can claim to be an early member but that doesn’t take away from the fact that Ringo was there from the beginning. The analogy works pretty well with Musk here. Now, if you’re talking a Destiny’s Child situation where two of the early members were replaced in music videos — for songs they performed on and a record with their faces on the cover, you’d be correct. Michelle Williams can never claim to be an “original” member of the band, but she was part of the band from the time it started to take off, even if she didn’t get to accept a Grammy for the second album with her two band mates (who had to awkwardly go on stage with the girls they replaced).
  - TylerE 6y ago
    > but that doesn’t take away from the fact that Ringo was there from the beginning That's a rather curious bit of revisionist history. They played hundreds of live shows and made several released recordings before they hired Ringo - and that's not even counting the Quarrymen/Johnny and the Moondogs days which represent another 2 years before that.
FireBeyond 6y ago
The retroactive co-founder status came not as a result of the investment, but by a lawsuit settlement with the _actual founders_.
TheRealSteel 6y ago
Thus making it absolute garbage. I can spend as much money as I want convincing an organization to falsely call me a founder - that does not make it correct for anyone else to call me so.
- bedhead 6y ago
  Letter of the law vs spirit of the law.
xkjkls 6y ago
Not really. The money didn't come with that restrictions. Later lawsuits created those.

TekMol 6y ago

"Retroactive co-founder" - I wonder if that approach would work in other areas too. Like, how much would it cost to buy the status of an "Original member of the Beatles"?

filmgirlcw 6y ago
Ask Ringo? Like, Pete Best was replaced by Ringo b/c George Martin thought he wasn’t good enough in the initial recording sessions with the band. Pete Best can claim to be an early member but that doesn’t take away from the fact that Ringo was there from the beginning. The analogy works pretty well with Musk here. Now, if you’re talking a Destiny’s Child situation where two of the early members were replaced in music videos — for songs they performed on and a record with their faces on the cover, you’d be correct. Michelle Williams can never claim to be an “original” member of the band, but she was part of the band from the time it started to take off, even if she didn’t get to accept a Grammy for the second album with her two band mates (who had to awkwardly go on stage with the girls they replaced).
- TylerE 6y ago
  > but that doesn’t take away from the fact that Ringo was there from the beginning That's a rather curious bit of revisionist history. They played hundreds of live shows and made several released recordings before they hired Ringo - and that's not even counting the Quarrymen/Johnny and the Moondogs days which represent another 2 years before that.

FireBeyond 6y ago

The retroactive co-founder status came not as a result of the investment, but by a lawsuit settlement with the _actual founders_.

TheRealSteel 6y ago

Thus making it absolute garbage. I can spend as much money as I want convincing an organization to falsely call me a founder - that does not make it correct for anyone else to call me so.

bedhead 6y ago
Letter of the law vs spirit of the law.

xkjkls 6y ago

Not really. The money didn't come with that restrictions. Later lawsuits created those.