Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elon Musk Gambled Tesla to Save SolarCity

vanityfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 282 posts

Re: Elon Musk Gambled Tesla to Save SolarCity

#221

Post by gameswithgo »

btilly wrote: post #98
smacktoward wrote: post #9

This bit seems pretty damning: > As SolarCity struggled to raise money from institutional investors, it began offering individuals a chance to buy what it called Solar Bonds. (“Now you can get paid while driving the solar revolution,” the marketing material said.) But there were few takers—so other parts of the Musk empire took up the slack. According to the shareholder lawsuit, SpaceX acquired $255 million of the bo…

SpaceX's stated goal is "occupy Mars". Being able to land and deploy solar panels at scale is essential to this goal. And Musk has learned the hard way not to trust third party suppliers that he doesn't control. SpaceX's aspirational goal is to launch something Mars-wards in the 2022 window to identify where the base will be and have some resources. Then send several vehicles and a few people in 2025 to set up a miss…

every industry on earth would be tangentially or directly related to building a mars colony. this is a nonsensical argument.

Re: Elon Musk Gambled Tesla to Save SolarCity

#222

Post by macspoofing »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #102

For all the negativity here about Musk and his business decisions, there is something to be said for integrating transport and energy services in one great package. I consult for a large energy conglomerate that wants to get into this market from the energy suppliers side, but the problem is that they are completely clueless when it comes to expanding beyond their traditional business. In their vision, they'll supply…

>there is something to be said for integrating transport and energy services in one great package.

I don't know about that. Do you know why Boeing and Airbus don't make their own engines? Or how about why (practically) no car manufacturer makes their own tires? Because sometimes it makes no sense (or is downright detrimental) holding the entire vertical.

Tesla is in the electric car game and the Li-ion battery game - not the solar panel game. Solar is and has been a total disaster for Tesla. The Powerwall is right up their alley (and if not, it's easy enough to exit), but they should have left solar roofs and installation to partners. Let them fight it out with low-cost Chinese alternatives.

Re: Elon Musk Gambled Tesla to Save SolarCity

#224

Post by snek »

docker_up wrote: post #18

The purchase of SolarCity by Tesla was the single dumbest thing Elon Musk did and it has dire consequences for Tesla the car company. Shareholders definitely have a great chance to sue Musk because he did not do this in the best interest of his shareholders, it's in the best interest of his cousin. Co-mingling all parts of his companies (SpaceX buying SolarCity Bonds) is a huge red flag that reeks of corporate malfea…

I'm so tired of this "best interest of shareholders" thing. When you invest in a company you should be investing in its mission. Tesla's mission is clearly not to make the most money, it is to improve applications of renewable energy. Every time I hear a company is going public, this is all I can think about.

Re: Elon Musk Gambled Tesla to Save SolarCity

#225

Post by threeseed »

aerovistae wrote: post #196
threeseed wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "nice guy" or "busy guy" argument doesn't hold up in court. You have an obligation as CEO (and Chairman at the time) to be ethical and legal in your actions.

I think the long arc of history is a little more important than what holds up in court.

If Musk ends up in jail I don't think history will remember him well.

Re: Elon Musk Gambled Tesla to Save SolarCity

#226

Post by new_realist »

WheelsAtLarge wrote: post #6
admiralspoo wrote: post #2

What are actually Elon Musk's engineering talents? It seems he is not much more than a marketeer. It's not even clear his visions of reusable rockets and electric cars were original...he is known to take credit for subordinate's ideas and achievements.

His real talent seems to be, "execution of idea". Seems like when he makes up his mind to do something he does not stop until it's done. He plows thru anything that gets in his way. Including people that aren't executing at the level he wants. That's a true talent and extremely rare. Engineering and learning from mistakes maybe less so.

His real talent is finding government funds and creating losses.

Re: Elon Musk Gambled Tesla to Save SolarCity

#227

Post by new_realist »

woodandsteel wrote: post #101
admiralspoo wrote: post #2

What are actually Elon Musk's engineering talents? It seems he is not much more than a marketeer. It's not even clear his visions of reusable rockets and electric cars were original...he is known to take credit for subordinate's ideas and achievements.

Musk is a genius engineer. He is arguably the most brilliant technologist in the world today. Can you point to anyone who has produced as much technological progress, and in two quite different fields?

Steve Jobs: Apple and Pixar. And those were actually successful.

Re: Elon Musk Gambled Tesla to Save SolarCity

#228

Post by macspoofing »

snek wrote: post #224
docker_up wrote: post #18

The purchase of SolarCity by Tesla was the single dumbest thing Elon Musk did and it has dire consequences for Tesla the car company. Shareholders definitely have a great chance to sue Musk because he did not do this in the best interest of his shareholders, it's in the best interest of his cousin. Co-mingling all parts of his companies (SpaceX buying SolarCity Bonds) is a huge red flag that reeks of corporate malfea…

I'm so tired of this "best interest of shareholders" thing. When you invest in a company you should be investing in its mission. Tesla's mission is clearly not to make the most money, it is to improve applications of renewable energy. Every time I hear a company is going public, this is all I can think about.

> it is to improve applications of renewable energy.

Then they should have left SolarCity to die (it's not like there aren't other vendors), and focus on making great electric cars and maybe dabbling in the home-battery business.

Now SolarCity is an albatros around Tesla's neck and we may yet see it take them both down.

Re: Elon Musk Gambled Tesla to Save SolarCity

#229

Post by reilly3000 »

pmorici wrote: post #213
spiderfarmer wrote: post #102

For all the negativity here about Musk and his business decisions, there is something to be said for integrating transport and energy services in one great package. I consult for a large energy conglomerate that wants to get into this market from the energy suppliers side, but the problem is that they are completely clueless when it comes to expanding beyond their traditional business. In their vision, they'll supply…

Maybe Musk will be proven right in time but having followed Tesla for a long time and having recently purchased a Model 3 (It's an incredible car). The Solar City purchase is the one thing that never made a lot of sense to me. Even if you start from the premise that it makes sense for Tesla to be in the solar business, it's hard to rationalize that the best way to break into that market was to buy a debt laden solar…

As a Tesla owner would you be more likely to consider SolarCity if you wanted to install solar? Are there any enticements, integrations, or efficiencies in doing so?

Re: Elon Musk Gambled Tesla to Save SolarCity

#230

Post by Merrill »

kjksf wrote: post #179
gamblor956 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It took them two years to set up a department that sells their first product (besides gas and electricity): an outdated EV charger, from a company they bought that stopped innovating after acquisition and is now lagging behind competition. Not a car, just the charger. Two years to set up the business structure isn't that much time in the scheme of multinational conglomerates. Especially when the market isn't yet that…

> On a separate note, SolarCity stopped innovating after it was acquired You're conflating innovation with sales. SolarCity was a financing business more than they were a product company. They were selling financing of solar generation via Power Purchase Agreements. Installation and equipment manufacturing was largely outsourced. That was a business model innovation and for a while it worked splendidly, which is why…

Maybe their business model got too expensive and/or the spam calls for solar installation stopped working.

https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news...

Post reply on HN