3 ms·

He did it with SpaceX too and had to reach a settlement: > The arrangement alarmed some longtime investors in SpaceX, including its largest outside backer, Pet

by cma 4y ago

He did it with SpaceX too and had to reach a settlement: > The arrangement alarmed some longtime investors in SpaceX, including its largest outside backer, Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund, some of the people said. The investors learned in recent months that despite the diversion of SpaceX resources and staffing to the fledgling Boring startup, it was Musk who was in line to receive almost all of any future profits, these people said. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/new-questions-over-elon-musks-use-of-spacex-resources-for-boring-co-tunnels-2018-12-17 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/new-questions-over-elon-mu... > In early 2018, The Boring Company was spun out from SpaceX and into a separate corporate entity.[27] Somewhat less than 10% of equity was given to early employees, and over 90% to Elon Musk. Subsequent concerns by SpaceX shareholders resulted in a December 2018 reallocation of 6% of The Boring Company's equity to SpaceX. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boring_Company#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boring_Company#History Basically he tried embezzlement.

texasbigdata 4y ago
This is a little aggressive. The boring company is unproven technology in a perpetually capex heavy delivery model. If I was a spacex shareholder I’d probably value it at $0 in 2018, and strongly prefer it to be not associated with spacex at all.
- shapefrog 4y ago
  Yes but on t-1 your 1% of spacex also represented 1% of boring company - which you were paying to devlop. At t+1 you owned 1% of spacex and 0% of boring company. If you want to sell your shares for 0$ that is up to you. On the flip side, I am happy to look through your personal holdings, and anything I think is worth $0, take for myself. You wouldnt mind now would you?
  - texasbigdata 4y ago
    Fair. I’ve worked on divesting on unprofitable unit for $0 that ended up being worth $XXM and the distraction elimination it caused for management way more than outweighed the multi year ROI on the process. But your point stands. The counter argument to your point is taken to the absurd extreme you should be like those people on TV buying entire abandoned storage lockers full of junk in the hope of finding _something_. The fact that the boring company seems to partially be working (and many people on HN would likely disagree) is rear view mirror luck. Look at Facebook and oculus now, for an analogy.

by cma 4y ago

texasbigdata 4y ago

This is a little aggressive. The boring company is unproven technology in a perpetually capex heavy delivery model. If I was a spacex shareholder I’d probably value it at $0 in 2018, and strongly prefer it to be not associated with spacex at all.

shapefrog 4y ago
Yes but on t-1 your 1% of spacex also represented 1% of boring company - which you were paying to devlop. At t+1 you owned 1% of spacex and 0% of boring company. If you want to sell your shares for 0$ that is up to you. On the flip side, I am happy to look through your personal holdings, and anything I think is worth $0, take for myself. You wouldnt mind now would you?
- texasbigdata 4y ago
  Fair. I’ve worked on divesting on unprofitable unit for $0 that ended up being worth $XXM and the distraction elimination it caused for management way more than outweighed the multi year ROI on the process. But your point stands. The counter argument to your point is taken to the absurd extreme you should be like those people on TV buying entire abandoned storage lockers full of junk in the hope of finding _something_. The fact that the boring company seems to partially be working (and many people on HN would likely disagree) is rear view mirror luck. Look at Facebook and oculus now, for an analogy.