Tesla founder fired

I can see the good news. There is now an electric car development expert of the first order free and available to help get another electric car operation up and running. Now he has both a stick and carrot as personal motivation.

Go, Go, Go

 

#2 on the list?

How much you want to bet they screw him out of his car too?

I hope a competitor hires him and they run (silent, electric) rings around Tesla.

 

actually CNET did a video review of the Tesla coupe recently, it was a really good article,... link here:

http://www.cnettv.com/9742-1_53-31587.html

 

Yes, he was blindsided.

But for a little perspective, I bet he was treated A LOT better than most of us would be if we were fired.

I don't ever remember the humble masses ever getting favorable severance packages like those typically given to CEOs, e.g., it's common for a new CEO to start with a 3 year contract, and to receive the full 3 years contract pay amount even if s/he is fired after the first year for screwing up.

And the amount of callousness and blindsidedness corporations can exhibit when firing or laying off most people can be astounding: No human to human sit down chat. And sometimes not even a written notice or pink slip. A few years ago, when Washington Mutual Bank essentially eliminated its Commercial Real Estate division, it did so by first scheduling a mass call-in telephone conference call. When the employees called in, they were told en masse on the conference call that their jobs were eliminated.

 

I think the worst story of communications failure was when a company sent dismissal e-mails to the employees who were being let go. When the employees tried to log in to check their e-mail, their passwords were blocked, so they couldn't get the e-mail that told them they were fired....

 

I'd love to have one, and if it was on a car lot I'd buy one. But I never did get on the waiting list. I decided the uncertainty over the production date was too great, and the officially-stated goal delivery date too far away, to justify the 50% deposit.

But I do not think this means the Roadster won't be built. It sounds like a power-play and a personality clash, and maybe a lot of stuff they won't talk about. But I think the Roadster will be built.

I said from the beginning that it was a bad mistake to have a transmission. Transmissions are the weak link in a drive train. They go bad and they are expensive to repair. One of the best things about the Prius is the lack of a conventional transmission.

But the target buyer for the Roadster is a hot-rod nut, not an EV nut. And to get zero to 60 in 4 seconds, and 120 mph top speed required a transmission. I'd never drive over 80 or 85, and then only for passing on the freeway. Give my car a 90-mph top speed, which I'd never approach, and zero to 60 in 5 seconds, and I'd be more than happy, and that car would not need a transmission. The Roadster would have been on the road now. But like I said, I'm not the guy they're looking to sell to.

The transmission was a mistake, and it's costing them dearly. But the car is coming.

Meanwhile I'm driving my Xebra.

 

Something to consider. A common reason for company founders getting the boot is when they hold up the show because the company's product is never "good" enough. Eventually, the investors get fed up, send the founder(s) packing, and tell the new person(s) in charge to get product onto the street ASAP. Why? Simple. The best way to make a better product is through customer feedback. When designers and management get stuck in endless paralysis analysis and don't sell the product, everybody loses. Perhaps that was the case behind the scenes inside Tesla ?

 

Personally, I don't think the world needs yet another fast car...electric or otherwise. What the world needs is an electric Honda Civic that will go 150 or so miles on a charge. I'd buy one of those in a New York minute.

~buttster

 

You are absolutely right. But the problem is that the big car companies, from gargantuan GM right down to "little" Honda, are refusing to build an EV. They did it when California required them to, but they fought it in court, and when they won, they quit making them.

The low-volume, ultra-high-performance sports car is the only market a start-up micro company can compete in. Tesla is building the Roadster first because they simply cannot build a Civic-class electric car at a price anybody but half a dozen EV nuts would pay.

Their announced plan is to build a $50,000 sporty sedan next, and a family sedan after that.

Those big investors, and the roughly 650 people who've given them $50,000 each as a deposit, would not have given them that kind of money for an electric Civic. It's too bad, but this is a capitalist country, and a company cannot get started without capital, and a car company needs a lot of capital. Otherwise what you get is the Zap Xebra. You can buy one of those today. But most people think they need more size and speed and range and features. I like my Xebra. It's an acceptable interim car, until someone does build an electric Civic or a Volt.

 

i saw a profile on him about a year ago and he admitted he knew nothing about cars, manufacturing, etc... sentimental values aside, it probably is a good thing. many of us wondered what the holdup was...maybe he was the problem.

a lot of people are idea men but cant put it to fruition. his mistake was probably trying to do it all himself and bringing on a good manager to run the business. as a salesman, he did well and i think it might be a mistake to not keep him as a frontman only.

also, i think the thing that got most of us behind him was his level of details presented during the development phase... a huge difference between the crap put out by anyone else (are we talking volt here??) that tells us essentially nothing and that it might have rubbed the board the wrong way.

 

And another is trying to rush production before a product is ready for greed and profit. Thus you get rid of the voice of reason blocking your way to the bank.

 

Another driver for rushing production is a change in the market. More choices in hybrid cars takes attention away from the Tesla. There could have been a perception of a market window closing. Whether a market window actually was closing, I don't know. But you can bet the people calling the shots perceived either (or both) a window of opportunity closing or a promised milestone not being met. At the end it came down to $ being put at greater risk, and they decided it was time for a change.