Elon Musk personally cancels blogger's Tesla order after 'rude' post(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Elon Musk personally cancels blogger's Tesla order after 'rude' post
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/03/elon-musk-blogger-tesla-motors-model-x
104 comments
You should be ashamed of yourself is an insult specially if you are writing a public letter to Elon Musk.
It was meant to be insulting had he written just a normal blog post on a badly managed Tesla event he would not have gotten such a response. If you are going to insult him publicly Elon can say fuck off in public or he can show you how to fuck off. He chose the more picking reply.
This open letter bullshit is annoying write a blog post or article on something but don't post open letters if you don't want a reaction good or bad.Course you can deny that. It is nowhere near an insult to call someone out on the behavior described in the article, and to tell someone he ought to feel ashamed is also not an insult.
You are missing the human aspect. An insult can be true but still insulting. If a random person calls me on the phone and tells me that I was incredibly lazy this weekend and I'm just a lazy, lazy person on the weekends, that would be true, but it would also be insulting.
And that's exactly not what was happening here. It was not a random person, it was not about off-time, and it was not a generalization of specific behaviour, but targeted critic of a specific occurrence happening to the author (or in your example, the caller).
But by the way: If someone tells you you are lazy on the weekends and you actually know you are lazy on the weekends, that is also not an insult. It is just a true observation. If you feel ashamed then it is because you don't want to be lazy on the weekend, for whatever reason.
It is possible you mean that as feeling insulted by being judged. But that is another story and not the definition of insult. Insult would be if the caller would call you a lazy piece of shit for being incredibly lazy on the weekend – the explicit defamatory judgment. This honor insulting part is missing from the original scenario.
But by the way: If someone tells you you are lazy on the weekends and you actually know you are lazy on the weekends, that is also not an insult. It is just a true observation. If you feel ashamed then it is because you don't want to be lazy on the weekend, for whatever reason.
It is possible you mean that as feeling insulted by being judged. But that is another story and not the definition of insult. Insult would be if the caller would call you a lazy piece of shit for being incredibly lazy on the weekend – the explicit defamatory judgment. This honor insulting part is missing from the original scenario.
Elon Musk is number one reason why I have never purchase Tesla shares. I think he is too childish and tries to sell snake oils to other people. This sort of incident confirms it.
He probably spends millions of dollars to keep himself in news with "Musk does this cool thing" type stories where in reality his Tesla or Space-X hasn't made any serious progress disproportionate to the money people have put into it.
This move is petty, brings bad PR to Musk and his company and gives more exposure to this one customer who did not like the company. This shows that Musk's PR team (and he) is incompetent to the extent that they have let emotions and ego take precedence over smart business decision.
He probably spends millions of dollars to keep himself in news with "Musk does this cool thing" type stories where in reality his Tesla or Space-X hasn't made any serious progress disproportionate to the money people have put into it.
This move is petty, brings bad PR to Musk and his company and gives more exposure to this one customer who did not like the company. This shows that Musk's PR team (and he) is incompetent to the extent that they have let emotions and ego take precedence over smart business decision.
Is this a warning to other honest reviewers and media houses that Elon Musk will go after their throat and hurt them in all possible ways if they don't strip and do a cheerleader dance for him?
Alsop is an asshat. But Musk decided to stoop to his level and prove him right. This doesn't really bode well for his reputation, and might call into question his bold assertions (especially for SpaceX) and how much water they might hold if he can't even handle someone being petty towards his launch event.
The man's obviously brilliant. But there are a lot of other brilliant men and women who don't get the credo and also don't get their flaws overlooked because of celebrity. Hopefully this is a sobering reminder that it's good not to take anyone's personality at face value until you get to know them well.
The man's obviously brilliant. But there are a lot of other brilliant men and women who don't get the credo and also don't get their flaws overlooked because of celebrity. Hopefully this is a sobering reminder that it's good not to take anyone's personality at face value until you get to know them well.
For all the boring blather about Musk I keep bumping into, this is the first that says something good about the guy! Perfectly fine response to that disgustingly entitled venture capitalist.
Sorry, not impressed with the idea the boss can just cancel your order because you are critical of his work. However since he has loads of fanboy cash and karma to burn he gets a pass.
Tesla was woefully late in delivery, they made no attempt to apologize as stated, and honestly I don't think they really care. Not a shining example of why the manufacturer direct model is better, if anything it shows people exactly why the dealership model will survive.
Tesla was woefully late in delivery, they made no attempt to apologize as stated, and honestly I don't think they really care. Not a shining example of why the manufacturer direct model is better, if anything it shows people exactly why the dealership model will survive.
Wouldn't the delivery issues have been exacerbated with a dealership middleman involved?
Let's say I go to a dealership and preorder a new car, and they let me down (for whatever reason), and I go online and write a bad review of my experience. I'm entitled to do that, and as a private business the dealership is entitled to cancel my preorder (though it's a childish move).
At that point, I can just go to another dealer and preorder there, and hopefully get better service.
That's just not possible with Tesla. There is no dealership competition with Tesla. If Elon Musk doesn't want to sell you a car, well then you are screwed. Less competition, less customer service, punishment for bad reviews, etc.
Now, please understand that I'm a fan of the 'no dealership' model, which is why I'm highly disappointed in his reaction to the bad review. I was hopeful that Tesla would be a good citizen, and show everyone that the 'no dealership' model is a fair one, with no downsides. Unfortunately, this reaction isn't it.
At that point, I can just go to another dealer and preorder there, and hopefully get better service.
That's just not possible with Tesla. There is no dealership competition with Tesla. If Elon Musk doesn't want to sell you a car, well then you are screwed. Less competition, less customer service, punishment for bad reviews, etc.
Now, please understand that I'm a fan of the 'no dealership' model, which is why I'm highly disappointed in his reaction to the bad review. I was hopeful that Tesla would be a good citizen, and show everyone that the 'no dealership' model is a fair one, with no downsides. Unfortunately, this reaction isn't it.
But tesla would still be the manufacturer? How would a dealership benefit in any way? If there were others that didn't use the silly dealership model, you could go to them and buy an electric car on the internet.
But tesla is first to market with an electric car at this scale, sure it can be seen as bad press to decline a pre-order, but introducing additional hands in the mix in no way would fix this situation. The problem lies with a lack of competition on this one- If tesla had any real competition, and supply constrains, do you honestly think a pre-order would be canceled?
But tesla would still be the manufacturer? How would a dealership benefit in any way?
Tesla wouldn't be able to not sell you a car. The dealerships buy (not really) the car, then they sell it to you. If a dealership is unhappy with your review, and won't sell you something (again, something within their rights), some other dealership would. If the manufacturer is pissed, and doesn't want you to own one of their cars, then they have to convince the dealership not to sell to you. And there is likely to be at least one dealership who would be willing to (or more likely the manufacturer would never make that request because of the power relationship between manufacturers and dealers).
For all the crap that dealerships do, they provide a layer of abstraction between the buyer and the manufacturer. Normally that's a crap deal for the buyer because it's inefficient, but it cuts the other way when the manufacturer is going to be childish about a bad review.
I just have a really hard time imagining BMW coming around and saying 'we got a bad review for a preview event, the CEO called the writer up, and we're banning every dealer in the world from selling a vehicle to that person'.
It's honestly the kind of 'parade of horribles' that the dealer's themselves are spouting in trying to prevent the 'no dealership' model from happening. Except it happened, and that sucks for everyone.
Tesla wouldn't be able to not sell you a car. The dealerships buy (not really) the car, then they sell it to you. If a dealership is unhappy with your review, and won't sell you something (again, something within their rights), some other dealership would. If the manufacturer is pissed, and doesn't want you to own one of their cars, then they have to convince the dealership not to sell to you. And there is likely to be at least one dealership who would be willing to (or more likely the manufacturer would never make that request because of the power relationship between manufacturers and dealers).
For all the crap that dealerships do, they provide a layer of abstraction between the buyer and the manufacturer. Normally that's a crap deal for the buyer because it's inefficient, but it cuts the other way when the manufacturer is going to be childish about a bad review.
I just have a really hard time imagining BMW coming around and saying 'we got a bad review for a preview event, the CEO called the writer up, and we're banning every dealer in the world from selling a vehicle to that person'.
It's honestly the kind of 'parade of horribles' that the dealer's themselves are spouting in trying to prevent the 'no dealership' model from happening. Except it happened, and that sucks for everyone.
I would think so considering the level of influence Musk plays within this particular product line. For me the dealership experience is already at the peak of my tolerance level. Even with sustantial liquidity on my part, I tend to buy well below my means and have no need to preorder something that will hardly make a difference to the environment is as much as it fuels the egos of the over privileged. But to each their own I suppose.
[deleted]
Perfectly fine response to a rude customer.
As the owner of a business you're entitled to do as you like, but this still makes him look like a pansy.
No car for you!
> pansy
This is a homophobic term of abuse. Please reconsider attacking people by saying that they are gay.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pansy
This is a homophobic term of abuse. Please reconsider attacking people by saying that they are gay.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pansy
He's using the last of the definitions you linked to: "one that is generally unmanly." No homophobia anywhere to be seen.
I also grew up using pansy as in weakling, as in like the flower. Gay men can be pansies or not. Straight men can be pansies or not. Sometimes I am a pansy. Sometimes I am not.
There is a connection to offensive meanings even if it's not strictly a slur. It's the wrong word here anyway--really the opposite of what I would take as the intended meaning. The behavior being argued here certainly isn't weak; those arguing against it are saying that it's overly aggressive.
If you really felt that strongly about it I don't think you'd create a new account just to say so.
Reading the twitter comments at https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/694802955170553861 is super depressing. The mob cheering for blood.
It's a bad review of an event that was poorly executed. Turning around and cancelling a preorder is just childish.
I honestly hadn't realized that he had such thin skin.
It's a bad review of an event that was poorly executed. Turning around and cancelling a preorder is just childish.
I honestly hadn't realized that he had such thin skin.
Tesla seems to have a pretty well-established track record in which criticism is dealt with by going full-on attack mode. One can argue about how fair or unfair the criticism was in individual cases--running out of juice, ruining batteries by letting them de-charge, etc--and those cases have been debated at great length with nothing to be gained by rehashing them. Nonetheless, for better or worse, more sane PR would typically acknowledge any valid criticisms/lack of education/etc. and move on. Tesla's mode is to essentially universally go on the offensive.
[EDIT: To just add, as someone who is not "in" PR but deals with PR in various ways regularly, sometimes an aggressive response is indeed called for. But it shouldn't be the default response.]
[EDIT: To just add, as someone who is not "in" PR but deals with PR in various ways regularly, sometimes an aggressive response is indeed called for. But it shouldn't be the default response.]
The skin has always been thin. This is the same company that had a three-year (losing) libel battle with Top Gear for a bad review.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/mar/05/top-gear-tesla-...
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/mar/05/top-gear-tesla-...
Don't forget the whole debacle with Tesla's original founder Martin Eberhart. After he was fired, the first edition Tesla he was entitled to was given to a C level executive instead. Then the car they gave him instead was somehow badly damaged during delivery. See a pattern?
"Bad review" is misleading. They sued because they outright lied in the review (saying the battery died when it did not). Not really any different from NBC rigging the Chevrolet truck explosion back in the 90s, in which NBC lost tons of credibility and was sued by GM for libel (and settled for $1mm). Both were journalistic bullshit, but everyone loves Jeremy too much to call him on it.
a) They implied it ran out of battery, they did not actually say it was out of battery: Tesla complained about a passage of Clarkson's commentary in which he said: "Although Tesla say it will do 200 miles, we worked out that on our track it would run out after just 55 miles and if it does run out, it is not a quick job to charge it up again." Clarkson and others are then shown pushing the Roadster into the Top Gear hangar and recharging it. Note that he says "worked it out", indicating calculations. They then reinforced the viewer's natural misconception by pushing the car (unnecessarily) to the charger.
b) Appeal court judge Lord Justice Moore-Bick ruled that the programme did not libel Tesla.
c) Everybody except Tesla knows Top Gear is an entertainment show that uses cars as props, just like Mork and Mindy was an entertainment show poking fun of human foibles, not a show about aliens.
b) Appeal court judge Lord Justice Moore-Bick ruled that the programme did not libel Tesla.
c) Everybody except Tesla knows Top Gear is an entertainment show that uses cars as props, just like Mork and Mindy was an entertainment show poking fun of human foibles, not a show about aliens.
a) The point was made very plainly regardless of how implied it was. I don't think the pedantic details of it really matter.
b) I care less about the legality of it and more about the ethics of it
c) Literally the first sentence of each Top Gear presenter on Wikipedia labels them as a journalist. Make whatever label you want for the TV show, the content is largely journalistic. The segment about the Roadster was largely journalistic. The can hide behind the "it's just entertainment" veil as much as they want, but it's a huge grey area at best. Regardless of this, you can still libel and be damagingly deceitful even without being a journalistic program - as far as morals go, it is only slightly less shitty.
b) I care less about the legality of it and more about the ethics of it
c) Literally the first sentence of each Top Gear presenter on Wikipedia labels them as a journalist. Make whatever label you want for the TV show, the content is largely journalistic. The segment about the Roadster was largely journalistic. The can hide behind the "it's just entertainment" veil as much as they want, but it's a huge grey area at best. Regardless of this, you can still libel and be damagingly deceitful even without being a journalistic program - as far as morals go, it is only slightly less shitty.
I'm not sure appealing to Wikipedia mentioning the word journalist is going to win you any points.
If you watched Top Gear even occasionally you'd know how rediculous it is claiming that Top Gear is serious news rather than an opinion-based entertainment show.
I actually remember a banter they did about the Ford GT that Jeremy owned having to stop at every gas station just to have enough gas to get to the studio. It's not like they're picking on Tesla, exaggeration is a form of comedy and they regularly exaggerated everything in the show.
If you watched Top Gear even occasionally you'd know how rediculous it is claiming that Top Gear is serious news rather than an opinion-based entertainment show.
I actually remember a banter they did about the Ford GT that Jeremy owned having to stop at every gas station just to have enough gas to get to the studio. It's not like they're picking on Tesla, exaggeration is a form of comedy and they regularly exaggerated everything in the show.
I don't see why it shouldn't. Claiming Top Gear is completely devoid of any journalistic content is absurd, and the fact that it is presented by three journalists drives this home. Being on is Wikipedia is irrelevant, the point is they are all journalists and widely accepted and labeled as such.
On the show they are presenters in a comedy driven magazine-style opinion show.
That they are journalists elsewhere is utterly irrelevant, also they would more properly be called columnists these days rather than journalists as their work in print now is usually opinion based and presented as such.
Even wikipedia splits up James May's journalistic career and his Top Gear presenting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_May#Journalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_May#Radio_and_television
There's virtually no mention of journalism on Richard Hammond's page (and no evidence that he actually is one).
Jeremy Clarkson was a journalist for actual papers before he started presenting Top Gear.
That they are journalists elsewhere is utterly irrelevant, also they would more properly be called columnists these days rather than journalists as their work in print now is usually opinion based and presented as such.
Even wikipedia splits up James May's journalistic career and his Top Gear presenting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_May#Journalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_May#Radio_and_television
There's virtually no mention of journalism on Richard Hammond's page (and no evidence that he actually is one).
Jeremy Clarkson was a journalist for actual papers before he started presenting Top Gear.
> If you watched Top Gear even occasionally you'd know how rediculous it is claiming that Top Gear is serious news
You could say the same thing about most mainstream newspapers and TV channels, and yet...
You could say the same thing about most mainstream newspapers and TV channels, and yet...
How is that UK libel law punishes people making actual true claims, but doesn't punish people making false insinuations and incorrect math?
c) Top Gear's audience doesn't. It's the _Sun_ of TV shows.
c) Top Gear's audience doesn't. It's the _Sun_ of TV shows.
I'd like to hope that if I'd somehow ended up in a similar situation, I'd have expedited this guy's Tesla order out of spite, not cancelled it.
That's the spirit. Award asshole customers at the expense of those who can wait. </sarcasm>
Calling him an "asshole" seems unfair. He had a legitimate grievance (2 hour delayed start, without apology) that is factually true (the whole event was streamed, we KNOW it started 2 hours later than scheduled).
If Musk has just said "sorry for the delay" at the start of the event, all of this could have been avoided. But no, no apology, and then petty revenge when someone complains about it.
If Musk has just said "sorry for the delay" at the start of the event, all of this could have been avoided. But no, no apology, and then petty revenge when someone complains about it.
I completely disagree. That would give other people a reason to be rude and receive their order faster. What Musk did will now make people think before being rude I guess.
When a child throws a temper tantrum you don't give them what they want. You also don't slap them or lock them in the closet.
You ignore them, which is what Tesla should have done.
You ignore them, which is what Tesla should have done.
> I honestly hadn't realized that he had such thin skin.
Just few weeks back there was this Blue Origin pissing contest about nothing.
Just few weeks back there was this Blue Origin pissing contest about nothing.
My worry, seeing this, is in what he might feel entitled to do to a current owner who pisses him off.
He can't do illegal things. It's perfectly within his rights to deny someone service beforehand.
Since Tesla vehicles have a lot of functionality that is basically SaaS (firmware updates, functionality updates, remote start/unlock via application, etc), if Tesla were to say "You gave us a bad review, we're not going to provide you any updates to your vehicle and you are not allowed to use any of our authorized service centers for repairs", what law would they be breaking?
Check your contract. When you buy a Tesla, what OTAs are you buying?
...and this is why I will never buy a Tesla, no matter how cool they might be.
I would do exactly the samething. When pre-releasing an early product which is what tesla is doing with model X - it's looking for people they can trust to provide not just a great car but really the first set of product testers. It's the best way to build a new product. Find devoted customers and work with them to build a great product for them. Now if one of those customers decides to turn this into negative press, they need to be fired because they are not the customer that will make such a process work. Buying a model X at this stage is more like paying to get the car early and be a QA team member. The perk, is you get to play with the new and shiny first.
Keep in mind at this stage the guy got his 5k refund and just lost his place in line. A real first world crisis...
Keep in mind at this stage the guy got his 5k refund and just lost his place in line. A real first world crisis...
Wow. Just wow. Now a $100K+ car is just a buggy beta product--because Elon Musk? And, if they didn't get that memo, fire them as customers?
No, but you can be selective about which customers and this was not a 100k purchase this was a 5k deposit... Really though my point is nothing to do with telsa. My point was you need to fire customers sometimes and it's a difficult balance. In pre release phase of a product it is an acceptable approach.
Not to pick on you, but it looks as if I can go to Tesla's website, fill out a short form to reserve a Model X, and click on a Visa button to give them a $5K deposit. I don't see anything on there about being a product tester or working with Tesla to build a great product or being fired as a customer if I don't keep my mouth shut about my experiences.
Of course a beta program is a different situation. When I've been a beta tester for various products, I expect them to be buggy (and typically have had to sign NDAs or at least have an implicit agreement not to talk publicly about my experiences).
Of course a beta program is a different situation. When I've been a beta tester for various products, I expect them to be buggy (and typically have had to sign NDAs or at least have an implicit agreement not to talk publicly about my experiences).
There were car companies which didn't have show rooms and test drives. You would simply be contacted by a concierge and offered the opportunity to buy one.
People selling things can be as exclusive as they want, and sometimes exclusivity means excluding people.
People selling things can be as exclusive as they want, and sometimes exclusivity means excluding people.
from the follow up post[0]:
"I heard from our phone conversation that you feel that my post, “Dear @ElonMusk: You should be ashamed of yourself”, was a personal attack on you. I also hear that you are not comfortable having me own a Tesla car and have cancelled my order for a Tesla Model X."
The thing that jumps out at me is "you are not comfortable having me own a Tesla". There certainly is no concrete indication on whether that's a lifetime ban or what since it's a paraphrase of a conversation we didn't get to hear.
"Find devoted customers and work with them to build a great product for them."
It's clear from his posts that he was a devoted customer (his recent post even praises Telsa the company). That doesn't make the disappointment in the how the event was run any less. They invited those devoted customers to an event, and then ran it poorly. Someone calling Tesla out on that, and pointing out that Tesla is treating those devoted customers in a negative way could be handled in a less heavy handed fashion.
[0] - https://medium.com/@salsop/banned-by-tesla-8d1f3249b9fb
"I heard from our phone conversation that you feel that my post, “Dear @ElonMusk: You should be ashamed of yourself”, was a personal attack on you. I also hear that you are not comfortable having me own a Tesla car and have cancelled my order for a Tesla Model X."
The thing that jumps out at me is "you are not comfortable having me own a Tesla". There certainly is no concrete indication on whether that's a lifetime ban or what since it's a paraphrase of a conversation we didn't get to hear.
"Find devoted customers and work with them to build a great product for them."
It's clear from his posts that he was a devoted customer (his recent post even praises Telsa the company). That doesn't make the disappointment in the how the event was run any less. They invited those devoted customers to an event, and then ran it poorly. Someone calling Tesla out on that, and pointing out that Tesla is treating those devoted customers in a negative way could be handled in a less heavy handed fashion.
[0] - https://medium.com/@salsop/banned-by-tesla-8d1f3249b9fb
A rather over the top response IMHO. Not sure why Musk got so worked up about it. Negative reviews happen, just deal with it.
In case anybody needed a practical demonstration that power corrupts, here you are.
What's corrupt about choosing not to sell somebody something of yours? dickish perhaps, but not corrupt.
It a modern fallacy to say that power corrupts. Asymmetrical power, and responsibility corrupts.
The saying goes back to 1887, so (whether or not it's a fallacy) it's not all that modern.
[EDITED to add:] It occurs to me that the original saying runs as follows: "All power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" -- which is amusing, at least if you're as easily amused as I am, because your objection is precisely that it's only relative power that corrupts :-).
[EDITED to add:] It occurs to me that the original saying runs as follows: "All power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" -- which is amusing, at least if you're as easily amused as I am, because your objection is precisely that it's only relative power that corrupts :-).
I'm not sure how should I interpret this. I guess that we are missing some context to put this in perspective. Maybe something else happened which is not in the tweet/article what made Musk cancel the order. If there is no missing context then I'm somewhat disappointed by Musk's response. I've read the actual criticism written by the other guy and I wouldn't be offended in Musk's place. There was nothing inherently evil/discrediting/etc in that post.
Elon Musk could start an energy company which renders down baby seals and burns the blubber and HN would say its usual thing like 'Actually this is a really smart move by Elon' (everyone here seems to be on first-name terms with him). This place would be greatly improved by some perspective.
He's built a very cool rocket company, but on HN people take the CTO title at face value and assume he's a genius rocket scientist. He's built a cool car company, and is right to focus on battery technology and solar being better than biofuels etc etc. I admire him a lot, but i think a lot of people project their ideals onto him as a sort of symbol of the primacy of the Valley Way, which they're staking their twenties and thirties on. Whilst taxonomy doesn't really achieve much, I sort of think of him as more Henry Ford than some sort of Tony Stark/Einstein hybrid that is often seen here.
Like I said, there's a lot to admire, but he's just a guy still. Petty, tantrums, lots of SpaceXers i know (current and former) talk about how really you have to go to Gwynne Shotwell for some sober leadership and patience when he jumps the shark a bit, and she can speak truth unto power and figure out a way forward. She never gets mentioned from from what one hears in this industry (I'm in it to) she deserves a lot of credit.
He's built a very cool rocket company, but on HN people take the CTO title at face value and assume he's a genius rocket scientist. He's built a cool car company, and is right to focus on battery technology and solar being better than biofuels etc etc. I admire him a lot, but i think a lot of people project their ideals onto him as a sort of symbol of the primacy of the Valley Way, which they're staking their twenties and thirties on. Whilst taxonomy doesn't really achieve much, I sort of think of him as more Henry Ford than some sort of Tony Stark/Einstein hybrid that is often seen here.
Like I said, there's a lot to admire, but he's just a guy still. Petty, tantrums, lots of SpaceXers i know (current and former) talk about how really you have to go to Gwynne Shotwell for some sober leadership and patience when he jumps the shark a bit, and she can speak truth unto power and figure out a way forward. She never gets mentioned from from what one hears in this industry (I'm in it to) she deserves a lot of credit.
'Actually this is a really smart move by Elon' (everyone here seems to be on first-name terms with him)
Except the majority of the comments so far imply that's it's actually not a good move. Also, no one in the thread has yet mentioned him by first name (there are only 3 occurrences of 'Elon' in this thread with 2 being by full name, and then your hypothetical HN commenter being the only that uses it alone)
Except the majority of the comments so far imply that's it's actually not a good move. Also, no one in the thread has yet mentioned him by first name (there are only 3 occurrences of 'Elon' in this thread with 2 being by full name, and then your hypothetical HN commenter being the only that uses it alone)
Musk has done a lot but the other thing to remember is how much his current businesses actually depend on billion in taxypayer subsidy - http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-2015...
That's just because these are technologies that the US government wants to stimulate. Musk is doing an excellent job of that. You'd better be worried about the subsidies received by harmful industries.
Musk's companies are doing the job of the government anyways (developing a space program and technologies that fight global heating). It makes sense that they get government money.
I would bet that a dollar of tax money goes farther at SpaceX than it does at NASA, though.
I would bet that a dollar of tax money goes farther at SpaceX than it does at NASA, though.
Somewhat off-topic, but... Why is sending people into space or making electric cars the job of the government?
In general I think it's the job of governments to fund research. Research is one of those things where it doesn't make sense to do for a monetary gain.
Basic research, yes, I agree. But there is not much basic research in electric cars, the tech has been known for many years now, same for space travel.
Yes to this. Musk is brilliant, but more in the Henry Ford sort of way than the Einstein/Tesla sort of way.
And that's not to diminish him. To the contrary, we need more visionary industrialists than scientists/engineers. Visionary industrialists can provide jobs and funds to brilliant scientists/engineers.
And that's not to diminish him. To the contrary, we need more visionary industrialists than scientists/engineers. Visionary industrialists can provide jobs and funds to brilliant scientists/engineers.
It's just bizarre that people think he actually invented the SpaceX rocket design while on an airplane flight, and he designed the Tesla engine, and no one else could figure out a workable design.
Unfortunately traditionally rocket design and car design fields were not sexy enough. This is the first time a PR savvy guy has invested so much into either companies and he is spending good money to promote himself as some kind of demi God.
I am from India and I know how this works in India too. A lot of government officials who are in charge of our space programs, defense programs become "rocket scientists" or get a mention next to "Tesla and Newton" in school textbooks as great scientists while in reality their role was merely administrative.
This is not to say they are ordinary and deserve no credit but it depends on how they project themselves on people's mind.
I am from India and I know how this works in India too. A lot of government officials who are in charge of our space programs, defense programs become "rocket scientists" or get a mention next to "Tesla and Newton" in school textbooks as great scientists while in reality their role was merely administrative.
This is not to say they are ordinary and deserve no credit but it depends on how they project themselves on people's mind.
You could say exactly the same thing about pg
...and that wouldn't be wrong, either.
pg's cult of personality is unbearable at times. If someone reads Hackers and Painters and doesn't see that they're getting hustled, they're a fool. Or they see it and are just sycophants, which is even worse in my book.
pg's cult of personality is unbearable at times. If someone reads Hackers and Painters and doesn't see that they're getting hustled, they're a fool. Or they see it and are just sycophants, which is even worse in my book.
having not read hackers and painters, what's this about getting hustled? it's in my queue, but haven't had the chance to actually read it yet
Dude has started THREE iconic companies, two of which are in hard-ass, "real engineering" fields that were previously believed to be impenetrable. This is most certainly not a fluke. Henry Ford is nothing to be ashamed of, if you can pull it off.
What have you done with your life?
What have you done with your life?
Musk is no Henry Ford. Henry ford success is that he built an extremely profitable company that changed the way people travel. I am sure PR investments had less to do with it.
Musk is a guy who spends money to promote himself everywhere. Tesla is a rich people's car subsidized by poor people's tax money and the company is not making a profit and is unlikely to make a profit in future either. Even if it does there is nothing groundbreaking about it that Toyota or Ford can not replicate without much efforts.
SpaceX is good company but hey it isn't profitable and has not achieved anything major that NASA or Blue Origin could not have given the investments.
An hyperloop is going to be a regrettable experience for everyone involved.
All three of his companies are piggybacking on government money and have not made our lives better than the alternative.
Musk is a guy who spends money to promote himself everywhere. Tesla is a rich people's car subsidized by poor people's tax money and the company is not making a profit and is unlikely to make a profit in future either. Even if it does there is nothing groundbreaking about it that Toyota or Ford can not replicate without much efforts.
SpaceX is good company but hey it isn't profitable and has not achieved anything major that NASA or Blue Origin could not have given the investments.
An hyperloop is going to be a regrettable experience for everyone involved.
All three of his companies are piggybacking on government money and have not made our lives better than the alternative.
Oh, I didn't know companies had to be profitable from day one, I'm sorry. Maybe you should apply for a position of Musk's business development advisor, clearly you know business side of things better than he does.
And Tesla is about a month and a half away from unveiling its "non-rich" people car, and they used Model S revenues to corner the market on lithium ion batteries in the meanwhile.
Space X is the only US company that can currently deliver shit to ISS. Soon they will also be the only US company that can deliver people to ISS, and the only company in the world to use a reusable first stage. If that's not an achievement in your book, then I'm not sure what a real achievement would look like to you.
And Tesla is about a month and a half away from unveiling its "non-rich" people car, and they used Model S revenues to corner the market on lithium ion batteries in the meanwhile.
Space X is the only US company that can currently deliver shit to ISS. Soon they will also be the only US company that can deliver people to ISS, and the only company in the world to use a reusable first stage. If that's not an achievement in your book, then I'm not sure what a real achievement would look like to you.
All I got from the reference blog post is "I'm rich and important. I'm not paying for safety here, I'm paying to be rich and important![1] Also, you gave us food, but not billionaire food. I want your attention and a reference to me."
[1] the referenced blog post ACTUALLY says that! direct quote : "you shuffle out on stage and start with a slide show — an amateur slide show at that — all about how safe the Model X is.\p Yup, you lead with safety, like that’s why we’re all spending $130,000 or more on this car"
[1] the referenced blog post ACTUALLY says that! direct quote : "you shuffle out on stage and start with a slide show — an amateur slide show at that — all about how safe the Model X is.\p Yup, you lead with safety, like that’s why we’re all spending $130,000 or more on this car"
Musk is cool and doing some amazing shit for the world, so I'm happy for an occasional pass.
> Dear @ElonMusk: Thank you for reaching out to me. I heard from our phone conversation that you feel that my post...
Did he personally ring and say fuck off to a potential customer/medium blogger? Cause that's a CEO I'd support.
Willing to get dirty with customers... I'll give that a shitload more cred than most CEO's who just hand it over to hitmen or cowardly marketing.
> Dear @ElonMusk: Thank you for reaching out to me. I heard from our phone conversation that you feel that my post...
Did he personally ring and say fuck off to a potential customer/medium blogger? Cause that's a CEO I'd support.
Willing to get dirty with customers... I'll give that a shitload more cred than most CEO's who just hand it over to hitmen or cowardly marketing.
Rich guy complains about richer guy. Where's the news?
Musk's seemingly consistently-bad attitude will only be 'cool' for so long. I've seen many complaints from disillusioned employees, several reports of tantrums, and several reports from customers who've been fucked over.
If I was an investor, I'd very much like to know what his suppliers think of him and how much seller's power they have in that supply chain. As the company grows he may start to become a liability.
If I was an investor, I'd very much like to know what his suppliers think of him and how much seller's power they have in that supply chain. As the company grows he may start to become a liability.
If Musk gets irritated by that, then he does have a problem... I mean. A problem.
This guy was looking for drama, and found it.
Musk, is running balls out to actualize his vision for the future. He has also shown himself to be rational, able to handle failure with candor and trust, and emotional about what he's doing.
That last bit is important. How else does one find the motivation to work that hard?
Had that guy actually not tried to invoke drama, I suspect Musk would have responded differently.
But he did.
Frankly, I believe Musk will find that sort of thing as offensive as it is irrelevant. Rewarding the guy means validating drama, not enabling a meaningful conversation, which Musk has demonstrated he will have eagerly.
If the potential for drama goes away, Musk will sell him a Tesla too.
Rude isn't the right word here. Musk understands rude, and sometimes is rude as are the alphas on his teams. (Mostly all alphas anyway)
No, rude isn't the issue. It's drama and how inconsiderate that use of precious time is. Musk is very keenly aware of time, and values it highly enough to be very seriously annoyed at such an egregious attempt to waste it.
Secondly, all that waste does is raise the profile of someone not yet ready for it.
Musk will take on a lot, and he's hard core too. Just don't attempt to burn his time to ride on his coattails, and it's likely all good.
And I am not saying the intent here was nefarious or anything. What we are seeing is a clash in values and priorities. Sometimes, we feel like we know people, when we really don't.
That is what happened here.
Musk, is running balls out to actualize his vision for the future. He has also shown himself to be rational, able to handle failure with candor and trust, and emotional about what he's doing.
That last bit is important. How else does one find the motivation to work that hard?
Had that guy actually not tried to invoke drama, I suspect Musk would have responded differently.
But he did.
Frankly, I believe Musk will find that sort of thing as offensive as it is irrelevant. Rewarding the guy means validating drama, not enabling a meaningful conversation, which Musk has demonstrated he will have eagerly.
If the potential for drama goes away, Musk will sell him a Tesla too.
Rude isn't the right word here. Musk understands rude, and sometimes is rude as are the alphas on his teams. (Mostly all alphas anyway)
No, rude isn't the issue. It's drama and how inconsiderate that use of precious time is. Musk is very keenly aware of time, and values it highly enough to be very seriously annoyed at such an egregious attempt to waste it.
Secondly, all that waste does is raise the profile of someone not yet ready for it.
Musk will take on a lot, and he's hard core too. Just don't attempt to burn his time to ride on his coattails, and it's likely all good.
And I am not saying the intent here was nefarious or anything. What we are seeing is a clash in values and priorities. Sometimes, we feel like we know people, when we really don't.
That is what happened here.
I thought Mr.Musk had more integrity. Am not his fan anymore.
Mr.Alsop was just complaining about the way the launch event was organised. Even if just one customer showed up for the event its just bad on Tesla's part to keep them waiting that long without even owing an apology for that long. Half hour delay is within normal limits for a big event. On top of that cancelling a pre order was very very childish. Look who's treating their customers badly.
Now people will think again before paying him for a trip to mars. Better not annoy him or ...
Mr.Alsop was just complaining about the way the launch event was organised. Even if just one customer showed up for the event its just bad on Tesla's part to keep them waiting that long without even owing an apology for that long. Half hour delay is within normal limits for a big event. On top of that cancelling a pre order was very very childish. Look who's treating their customers badly.
Now people will think again before paying him for a trip to mars. Better not annoy him or ...
What does integrity have to being a customer is already right yes man? Sometimes the customer is wrong. And sometimes you need to fire a customer. He did it in a fine way. Its not like Musk posted to twitter. He just quietly cancelled the order. I would have done the same.
This is someone who pre ordered paying $5000, i guess 2 years back, so that he could get a car ASAP. Canceling a pre order because a customer complained he was kept waiting at a poorly organized launch event? If he was so offended by it he should have organized better launch event. Inviting someone to an event and then giving a poor experience was bad. Blogging about poor experience resulting in his pre order is only tainting reputation of Mr.Musk. No response to the blog would've been a much better response.
The preorder was quite clear it had no guaranteed delievery time. It wasn't like an iPhone that was 3 years late.
I agree to disagree on it being fine to fire a customer. If someone acts like this before they have your product, why give them your product? Nothing good could come of it. If a customer Is rude in their first email to you - don't respond or don't sell them a product. The relationship isn't going to magically get better down the road. Some people are just rude.
I agree to disagree on it being fine to fire a customer. If someone acts like this before they have your product, why give them your product? Nothing good could come of it. If a customer Is rude in their first email to you - don't respond or don't sell them a product. The relationship isn't going to magically get better down the road. Some people are just rude.
It sends a message that the company is more interested in culrivating fanbois than winning customer satisfaction. That's cool as long as there are more fanbois than cars, but at some point the company needs to sell to the larger public, and I for one am spooked a bit. I'll fore Musk as a vendor before he fires me as a customer. When Nissan screws up they apologize and fix my Leaf free, they don't cut me off for hurting their brand image.
Sounds like a PayPal customer experience
Personally thought he had more integrity than that.
But then again, no one ever said that great men are good men.
But then again, no one ever said that great men are good men.
From the tweet..
>>Must be a slow news day if denying service to a super rude customer gets this much attention
Just saying. Rude customers are nothing new. As somebody who worked as a tech support guy for a call center, for a major US computer company, if anything a rude customer was treated as a opportunity. I would receive any where between 10-12 extremely rude and inconsiderate calls. Many would be very intimidating. And a lot of times, I have managed to get them to understand our side of the story, followed up on their issues, taught them how to use the internet, worked with their ISP's to fix their issues(sometimes people think, no internet is the computer's problem, not ISP's) and some times even given tuitions to customers on how to use their computers. None of that needed to be done, but doing it built very strong relationships.
I can't even remember how many times our customer interaction coach would talk to us telling delighting a rude/irate/inconsiderate customer many a times mattered more than the very quality of the product. Because strong relationships bring people back, they help in word-of-mouth of marketing and helps build brand value.
You do not look at your customers as your enemy. No matter who you are. Especially CEO's need to realize this more.
Would you like to business with a company whose CEO/Employee(s) fights with its customers? It doesn't take much common sense to understand this. If this is the experience pre-sales, how do you expect to be treated after you've purchased the product.
>>Must be a slow news day if denying service to a super rude customer gets this much attention
Just saying. Rude customers are nothing new. As somebody who worked as a tech support guy for a call center, for a major US computer company, if anything a rude customer was treated as a opportunity. I would receive any where between 10-12 extremely rude and inconsiderate calls. Many would be very intimidating. And a lot of times, I have managed to get them to understand our side of the story, followed up on their issues, taught them how to use the internet, worked with their ISP's to fix their issues(sometimes people think, no internet is the computer's problem, not ISP's) and some times even given tuitions to customers on how to use their computers. None of that needed to be done, but doing it built very strong relationships.
I can't even remember how many times our customer interaction coach would talk to us telling delighting a rude/irate/inconsiderate customer many a times mattered more than the very quality of the product. Because strong relationships bring people back, they help in word-of-mouth of marketing and helps build brand value.
You do not look at your customers as your enemy. No matter who you are. Especially CEO's need to realize this more.
Would you like to business with a company whose CEO/Employee(s) fights with its customers? It doesn't take much common sense to understand this. If this is the experience pre-sales, how do you expect to be treated after you've purchased the product.
Aslop isn't a rude customer. He is a billionaire dbag playing social signaling games with Musk. This isn't really a vendor-customer dispute.
On the scale of possible obnoxious behavior, at least Tesla didn't ship the car and then shut it down over the air later. But along those same lines, this is precedent setting. Complaints in an enthusiast forum or a poor review in Road and Driver Weekly could result in similar bans.
It also probably supports the case in favor of the state level auto dealership laws Tesla finds so troublesome. That's one reason why negative comments about BMW don't prevent someone from buying one.
It also probably supports the case in favor of the state level auto dealership laws Tesla finds so troublesome. That's one reason why negative comments about BMW don't prevent someone from buying one.
Silicon Valley is a relatively small world; venture capital is even smaller and more incestuous. While most people here have not heard of Stewart Alsop, Elon Musk almost certainly knew of him, even if they've never met. Elon Musk may have been insulted because venture capitalists in SV are generally not expected to so openly criticize other SV companies (especially those funded by rivals?), and when they do criticize companies, they certainly don't insult founders. You can't deny that "you should be ashamed of yourself" is insulting to Elon.