48 Comments
Oct 9Liked by Lawrence Fossi

Elon’s collaboration with Trump reminds me of the Elon poker game story (Elon’s propensity is to go “all in” on every hand). He is “all in” here.

Why would he do this and infuriate >50% of Tesla car buyers? Personal gain over corporate stewardship as usual.

Something very ugly is coming soon. Elon sees the immunity Trump can provide as only way out, so he pushed all his chips in.

The Trump-Musk collaboration is an incestuous cesspool of self-serving narcissists. They will turn on one another eventually once they’ve extracted some personal reward.

Expand full comment
author

I'm old enough to remember the Mad Magazine "Spy vs Spy" comics (utterly brilliant, done without words).

Narcissist vs Narcissist would be something to see, right?

Expand full comment
Oct 9Liked by Lawrence Fossi

Excellent article. Let's hope justice will prevail.

Expand full comment
Oct 9Liked by Lawrence Fossi

My 5 cents: Trump would not bail Elon. Not going to happen aside from regular huffing and puffing. He is done either way.

Expand full comment
author

That would certainly be in character for Trump. And if there's anything Trump can't stand, it's someone who attempts to outshine him. The orangutan is never pleased when the chimpanzee rides the tricycle better.

Still, Musk is the guy who owns the highly influential social media site. The guy who, as someone at Threads suggested, could bail out Trump by acquiring his garbage dump media site.

Expand full comment
Oct 10Liked by Lawrence Fossi

I've come around to this. Its easy to get sucked into "Trump = Hitler; Musk = Göring/Goebbels; Vance = Himmler(?)"...but Trump will not let Musk upstage him. Trump hates him and will not reward him with some unholy marriage at the end. Trump is much smarter than Musk and Trump might be the one to finally unleash the DOJ against Musk. Trump has one team and one team only, and that's Trump.

Expand full comment
author

In many ways I agree with you.

I did not write that Trump = Hitler. What I said is that Trump & Musk getting in bed together would result in a form of fascism familiar to Mussolini or Hitler. Musk is already deeply dependent on governmental contracts, subsidies, give-aways, and mandates. That would go into hyperdrive.

Is Trump smarter than Musk? Hmmm. Trump certainly has the bigger lizard brain.

Expand full comment
Oct 9Liked by Lawrence Fossi

If Trump wins, Elon becomes a big threat to Trump’s dictatorship. We know that Putin is advising Trump, so Elon might want to avoid windows and high rises.

Expand full comment
author

heh, amusing.

Much as I loathe Trump, I don't think he could be a dictator. Our system is (still) too strong for that. He could, of course, take actions that are unconstitutional and would have to be undone in Court. Much as he did in his first term, and as Biden has done with similar gusto. Our do-nothing legislative branch helps that to happen.

Expand full comment
author

I hope Trump isn't elected. And, if he is, I hope you're right! (But I have my doubts...)

Expand full comment
Oct 9Liked by Lawrence Fossi

"...then we can expect a Harris Administration to make a determined effort to require Elon Musk, at last, to obey the law, much as the rest of us must."

I'm curious. Why can we expect this? When asked during an interview on "The View" about what she might have done differently than President Biden, she responded, "Nothing comes to mind"

I am not aware of any specific policy that the Vice President has articulated that would support this 'expectation' that you describe.

Expand full comment
author

My distaste for Trump should never be confused with an affinity for Harris.

She is an exceptionally weak candidate, not especially smart, who made what I regard as an ill-advised VP pick. We have Biden's selfishly late exit to thank for that.

That said, I feel confident that a Harris Administration would have a zesty desire to hold Musk to account for his misdeeds. Perhaps too zesty, but Musk has done ever so much to deserve it.

Expand full comment
Oct 10Liked by Lawrence Fossi

That Musk deserves the attention of the justice system is without doubt.

But nothing happens. It is unclear to me why a Harris administration would take up a cudgel that the Biden administration has allowed to lie dormant for 4 years.

Politically speaking, if Harris wins, this might not be the fight she should initiate early in her administration. The country will be polarized politically and she will need to lower the temperature. Not clear that picking a fight with Musk, despite being well deserved, will do that.

Expand full comment
author

Fewer and fewer of us any longer believe we are seeing the law enforced without fear or favor. Which is tragic.

Expand full comment
Oct 10Liked by Lawrence Fossi

"...things fall apart, the center cannot hold..."

Expand full comment
Oct 10·edited Oct 10Liked by Lawrence Fossi

FUN FACT: Today, in Los Angeles WB CEO David Zaslav can take a Waymo-assisted Jaguar from his Beverly Hills mansion to 20th Century Fox studios, Sony Studios, CBS Studio City, Netflix Studios, Hulu Studios, Amazon Studios, Apple Studios, Nickelodeon Studios, Paramount Studios, Jim Henson Studios, UCLA and USC Film Schools, ESPN's LA Live Studios, CNN Studios, William Morris Endeavour, CAA, the LATimes, Spotify, the WGA, the DGA, AMPAS, and TikTok... before heading to the beach, the Petersen Automotive Museum, LACMA, a Laker/Kings game, or a movie at the Fox Village Westwood theater co-owned by Christopher Nolan, the director he chased away from WB after delivering 17 years of critically acclaimed hit movies.

But yeah; a shitty concept economy car someday driving around Burbank almost sounds impressive by comparison! 😂

Expand full comment

Thanks as always. Your comments are always a joy to read and a breath of fresh air. And clearly both DJT and EM have a way of ignoring and bending the law that should concern us. The country is on a track of the worst banana republics we have every witnessed. Meanwhile, one after another regulatory agencies have been corrupted beyond all recognition and become protectors of the industry against the citizens, instead of the other way around. Still, I think certainly the DJT presidency was a necessity historically. A bull in the China shop of DC was definitely needed. If a return of Trump is beneficial remains to be seen.

We have seen what Harris is made of in the Herbalife case, when she blatantly refused to do her job, and declined to enforce the 1986 consent decree against the company at a time when it might have mattered. I can only imagine it was because hubby's firm represents HLF. I don't need to know any more, but she proves she is a disaster every time she opens her mouth. Not only that, she still has a vax mandate for her campaign workers, at a time when the evidence would make us believe that amounts to manslaughter, not to mention it being blatantly illegal. So I tend to think she's the worst of two evils.

DJT on the other hand has done something perfectly statesmanlike in embracing RFKJr. That, combined with Nicole Shanahan, as well as Tulsi Gabbard, opens up the possibility of a more balanced approach this time. It would certainly result in shining the light on the profound corruption of the food and pharma military complex, which has long since become a threat to the health of the american people and the world. It implies that DJT is ready to admit he was fooled by Fauci & Co, who has been our modern day Pasteur, financed by Gates, instead of the Emperor of France.

It seems we are facing a world that is fascist in nature, in the sense that regulators serve the industries they are supposed to regulate and are diametrically opposed to the interests of the citizens. AI has become the meta-censorship machine, a sort of an invisible fence around the plantation, and the medical-military-industrial complex is the commissary, forcing us to disgorge all our assets, before the remains are discarded in the trash.

RFKJr has the vision, and DJT may simply open the door. EM may become irrelevant. It is hard to see how Tesla remains relevant, but he has profound support from the military and security interests, as is evident from SpaceX and StarLink. RFKJr is still not willing to fully confront the nonsense of the allopathic medicine monopoly, but he's on a track to at least expose that for what it is. His failing to be logical and opt for conservatism instead was exposed when he let go of Dr. J. Jay Couey, and maintain the nonsensical position that he's merely arguing for safety in vaccines. Of course safety, who would argue against that, but it has been long enough for Pasteur's fraud to continue. The money is in germ theory, which is why terrain theory loses out, but that won't last forever. They are running out of place to bury the bodies from this Covid vax scandal. If that gets exposed that may lead to some useful shifts in focus.

Back to the environement, if nothing else, CO2 is a misdirection for a pollution problem which is real, for CO2 is plant food, not a pollutant. So, as always, such misdirections ensure that the real problems remain unaddressed, even if they are very profitable for some people. However, there is such an array of solutions that suggests a bright future for ICE technology, and direct derivatives, whereas the electrical solution has a tendency to fly in the face of the 2nd law of thermodynamics. There simply is no way that carrying the extra weight around adds up to energy efficiency. See next.

The electrical car in its current form is a liability not an asset, and that cannot help being exposed eventually. Some time ago I consulted the ChatGPT on the major achilles heel of the BEV project, which is the indirect cost, which will completely overwhelm the whole thing. I got this:

1. Exponential Damage Relationship

The damage a vehicle causes to the road is not linear but exponential. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) developed the "Fourth Power Law," which states that the damage to the road surface increases with the fourth power of the axle load. This means that if the axle load doubles, the damage caused increases by a factor of 16.

2. Impact on Road Surfaces

Heavier vehicles, especially those with high axle loads, can cause various types of road damage:

Pavement Deformation: Heavier vehicles can cause ruts and depressions in the pavement, leading to an uneven road surface.

Cracking: The repeated stress from heavy loads can cause cracks in the pavement, which can develop into potholes if not repaired.

Fatigue Failure: The cumulative effect of heavy loads over time can cause the pavement to fail prematurely.

3. Bridge Wear and Tear

Bridges are particularly sensitive to heavy loads. Excessive weight can lead to:

Structural Wear: Increased weight can cause stress and strain on bridge components, leading to fatigue and potential failure.

Accelerated Deterioration: Heavier vehicles accelerate the wear and tear on bridge decks, joints, and supports.

4. Increased Maintenance Costs

Due to the above-mentioned damages, heavier vehicles lead to higher maintenance and repair costs:

More Frequent Repairs: Roads and bridges used by heavy vehicles require more frequent maintenance and repairs to keep them in good condition.

Expensive Upgrades: In some cases, infrastructure needs to be upgraded to accommodate heavier loads, which is a significant expense.

5. Economic Impact

The economic impact of the damage caused by heavy vehicles includes:

Direct Costs: The costs associated with repairing and maintaining road and bridge infrastructure.

Indirect Costs: These include traffic delays, increased vehicle operating costs due to rough road conditions, and potential accidents caused by poor road conditions.

===========

On and on. Change is in the air. Regardless of who wins, certain issues are unavoidable any more.

Oh well. We are living in interesting times, it seems. Hopefully some form of common sense will prevail eventually but change is seldom pain-free.

Expand full comment
author

A whole lot here, Rogier!

As you know, I am hardly endorsing Harris. It's simply that, to me, as someone who admires our Constitution and regards it as largely responsible for our prosperity and freedom, I cannot abide Trump.

Expand full comment

Yup, DJT is easy not to like, especially not if you might have had a run-in with him, or know people who have. However, I am involved in a biotech and our entire product launch was derailed once we understood the mechanism of action of the vax. DJT was stubborn for a long time, but now, with RFKJr, he has opened the door for an investigation, of what is in my view a major crime against humanity. And also, while #45 never showed too much respect for the Constitution, the Biden/Harris team began their censorship campaign within two days of taking office. My guess would be that DJT has transcended himself, by the team he is now lining up.

Expand full comment
Oct 10Liked by Lawrence Fossi

Elon Musk's series of awful performances this past week, from his total lack of charisma at the Trump rally (that likely REALLY pisses Trump off), to his interview with KGB stooge Tucker Carlson (where he "jokingly" said he's fucked if Trump loses), makes me think Robotaxi is going to be a total farce. He's also lost several executives this past week, including the CIO and the Head of Vehicle Programs.

Hopefully the tide goes out for the last time with the whole world realizing Elon Musk has been swimming naked the last ten years.

Expand full comment
author

The Cybercab reveal most certainly was a total farce. Good call!

Expand full comment
Oct 16Liked by Lawrence Fossi

American Tycoons are increasingly resembling mafia figures even as monopoly capitalism becomes more dystopian in its attempt to control the future. What brilliant global leadership.

Expand full comment
Oct 13Liked by Lawrence Fossi

Great work as always! I am curious why you think the ruling will be any week or any day now. What made you come to that conclusion on the timing of a ruling? Thanks!

Expand full comment
author

At bottom, of course, it is just my guess. The Court has held hearings on both the legal fees and ratification issues. It was apparent from both hearings that the Chancellor has done deep thinking on those points. The opinion she will write will include careful analyses of the factual record on both issues, with plenty of footnotes, but the amount of work required to perform such analyses is significantly less than what was required for her January 30 ruling that voided the 2018 grant. This case has been around for a long time, and the Chancellor was eager for it to conclude soon after her January 30 ruling was made. It did not conclude sooner because of the maneuvers by Team Musk. But the door is now open for her to issue a final order and put it in the hands of the Delaware Supreme Court. So, I continue to believe that we will see a ruling soon.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the info! Do you have any guess how long it would take to get a final verdict from the Supreme Court of Delaware? I am wondering if that would be the actual catalyst on the stock, and not the decision by McCormick.

Expand full comment
author

A guess? Sure, I have a guess!

About a year after the Court of Chancery makes its final ruling. Probably 10 months on the low side and 16 on the high side.

I think it is highly likely that, assuming the Chancellor rules the ratification gambit was without legal effect, she will be affirmed on both the voiding of the 2018 grant and the ruling that the ratification vote was ineffective. Hard to say on legal fees as we don't know what her number will be, but I am pretty confident she'll stay well within the boundaries laid down by the Del Sup Ct in the Dell Technologies decision.

A further guess: Musk's lawyers know he will lose the appeal, and before the appeal is decided, Musk will demand that the Tesla board make a new grant to him, and to hell with the outrageous cost.

Expand full comment

Good stuff, thanks for responding!

Expand full comment
Oct 11Liked by Lawrence Fossi

Wow. Cybrrrcab.

So....

1. Model 2 hits the buffers with the single 'megacasting' underbody. Woops.

2. Take the concept, add butterfly doors (a designer's favourite).

3. Make the rear wheels bigger than the front for no apparent reason.

4. Paint it gold.

5. Reveal a mobile garage / livestock cover (a shed) and call it 'Robovan'.

6. Claim yet again 'this time next year we'll all be millionaires'.

Seems the Mazda / California design studio era is at an end.

Next!!!! Cybrrr, Cybrrr, Cybrrr, Cybrrr.....

See you in another Cybrrr 12 months!!!

Expand full comment
Oct 10Liked by Lawrence Fossi

A superb essay written by Mr Fossi, who's expertise brings such depth to these episodes. Thank you.

Three contrasts:

1. The BEV affair has struggled to go very far from battery ideas of the 1900s, and the vehicle technology links back to GM's EV1 - a mere three dacades ago. Now the 2 ton plus monster BEVs are being scaled back, we get the proposal for.... a small commutor pod. Hardly ground breaking - especially given the elements of ADAS critical for autonomy have been around for more than 2 decades. The issue? No insurer or government want to accept the financial risk of the autonomous system going wrong.

2. The CyberTruck surely has surely hurt the bottom line - a vehicle which is effectively unable to be sold in some major markets, yet the remedial work (slight re-tooling of the exterior) is nowhere to be seen. Semi is in a low volume batch production loop. Facelifts of Model 3 and Y have been over blown, given the number of running chnages that have been made anyway. Is the Mazda / California design studio theme running out of road? The production company is stalling.

3. Henrik Fisker is / was a talented automotive designer, but a less than useful businessman. 'Fisker' has failed twice with Henrik at the helm - the parallel is he got through about as much USA tax cash as Tesla did for Model S in 2012, before extended discussions with SEC. Now, the re-boot has failed, and he's in..... extended discussions with the SEC. Odd how some select people get to answer for certain things.

Expand full comment
author

All excellent points.

It's odd to me that the movement to save the Earth with EVs has now given us the Cybertruck and equally monstrous electric Hummer.

Expand full comment

Indeed. Two to four ton personal mobility devices are really about the owner not understanding 'zero emission' only refers to what is coming out of an exhaust pipe - which the BEV does not need - along with demonstrating that historically sluggard battery powered vehicles are not slow by building cars with huge batteries. These deliver huge acceleration until the single speed transmission reaches the spinning electric motor's limit at about 130 mph. Hence huge power outputs which really do deliver neck straining acceleration but not always immense speed. That's why two speed transmissions are making in-roads, to extend the BEV performance envelope.

Swift acceleration with great AC and internal 'features' but a modest maximum speed fits perfectly with the Far East perception - fantastic top speed does not matter.

Fear not. Hefty BEVs will go the way of all other fashions - they are not here to stay. BEVs will morph into smaller, lighter and more efficient vehicles. That is going to be painfully slow....

Expand full comment
Oct 9Liked by Lawrence Fossi

I must question one of your points in an otherwise solid effort. The Musk Flying Monkees appear to be somewhat neutered these days so we are left to wonder how much grit and fervor they can Muster to attack Chancery?

Expand full comment
author

Just wait.

Expand full comment
Oct 9Liked by Lawrence Fossi

Unfortunately it all comes down to who will win this election and it seems too close to tell. I really can't believe this but the outcome is dependent on 7 swing states only.

I hope that the WS analyst will use a spreadsheet to re-calculate their EPS forecast for the next 4 years and not just come up with lofty number (or being told to end up with lofty numbers in the case of Adam Jonas).

Expand full comment
author

In earlier times, US political parties would aim to build durable coalitions, and 60/40 election results were common. The business of running a political party was the business of enlisting diverse interests into the cause by means of persuasion and compromise.

However, the rise of the primary system, in which the typical voter is the extreme voter, has resulted in the polarization we now witness. Too many of our legislators believe they should be performance artists. Get rid of the filibuster in the Senate and the result will be even more extreme.

I would again recommend the recently published American Covenant (How the Constitution Unified Our Nation - and Could Again) by the brilliant Yuval Levin.

Expand full comment

For years Amazon was about books, and Apple had egg-shaped pc’s and 3% of the market

Expand full comment
author

Right. And neither of them had a CEO who made fraudulent promises, cheated the company's customers, and destroyed the brand.

Expand full comment

I’m no legal scholar, that’s for sure - but I would make the following points ….

1. Worst case in Tornetta, as you say, is Elon will have to find another way to get paid, while forking over 3 billion to Lawyers - pretty sure that can be found in the couch cushions of the Tesla boardroom. So not much of a bomb really, more like a fart in the wind.

2. “Powerful Evidence” equates to filing a 13d three days late??? Yeah, ok - off with his head.

3. As for the Rhode Island case, the arguments within are both hypocritical and puerile. As near as I can tell, the plaintiffs are bent because they weren’t notified in advance of Musk’s intention to sell shares. In other words, now gifted with hindsight, they feel they were denied the opportunity to engage in the very behavior (front-running) for which they are suing Elon. While i’m not sure what the legal term is, I believe the technical term for that is Hypocrisy. Fact is, everyone on the planet with a 3 digit IQ knew where Elon was going to get the scratch to buy Twitter. If the plaintiffs wanted out, they had plenty of opportunity to get out, end of story. IMHO, Musk did shareholders a solid by not telegraphing his intentions.

4. The sum total of the rest of the arguments seem to be nothing more than claims Elon is/was acting against the interest of shareholders. Not only are their claims subjective, but In order to have merit, then we are expected to believe Elon is Torpedoing the very company from which nearly all his personal wealth is derived. Seems ludicrous, no?

Admittedly, I have no legal training - so the points above may seem rudimentary to you.

In like manner, you obviously have no Tech/Engineering training as your belief that…

“Tesla is far, far behind in the autonomous driving race. And the further reality that, having eschewed radar and LiDAR, Tesla will forever remain far behind.”

…Demonstrates clearly, that when it comes to the future of FSD tech, you know not of what you speak - as radar & Lidar won’t be a part of it, guaranteed.

Finally, while the idea of a Trump-Elon marriage is frightening - I think the alternative could be worse.

https://bagholder.substack.com/p/electile-dysfunction

Expand full comment
author

1. There is no "other way to get paid" without saddling Tesla with a gargantuan compensation liability. As for $3 billion (or, even, $500 million) being "couch cushion" money, please. $3 billion is double Tesla's Q2 net income. And net income has been shrinking, not growing.

2. The Rule 13 violations are real and consequential.

3. We evidently have dramatically divergent views of the gravity of the allegations made by the Employees' Retirement System of Rhode Island against Elon Musk.

4. Same as 3.

You amuse me in insisting Tesla will succeed with FSD. No, I'm not an FSD expert, but every autonomous driving expert I've read thinks Musk is completely full of it.

What's the "alternative" to a Trump-Musk marriage? Do you mean a victory by Harris? Explain why it would be worse, perhaps?

Expand full comment

I’m not certain Musk will succeed with FSD, I am certain radar/Lidar is not the answer. Have you ridden in a Tesla lately? Given the choice of being a passenger in a Tesla with FSD as it is today or a passenger in a Honda driven by my wife (or daughter), I’m going with Elon….As for the alternative being worse, you can click the link above for a detailed explanation.

Expand full comment
author

We own a Honda CR-V hybrid. The ride is noticeably more quiet than a Tesla 3 or Y (both of which I have experienced). The Honda is more comfortably appointed. It has a much greater range. It refuels much more quickly. It is far more reliable. It cost less.

Because I love my family, I will continue to discourage them from ever getting in a Tesla. Unfortunately, no one is safe from all the beta males doing the beta testing for Full-Self Frauding because the innocent driving, biking, and pedestrian public is not given the choice of whether they want to participate in those dangerous experiments.

Expand full comment

How funny, I own a 2024 honda Crv hybrid myself - it is all the things you say. But the real question is whether or not FSD is better than the average Human driver. The people most qualified to answer that question in an unbiased manner are insurance companies. They have decided that even though car repair is much more expensive on Teslas than Hondas ...the insurance on a Tesla is almost 50% less than my Honda. Having been in a Tesla lately, I can say with conviction, the FSD drives around the city of Phoenix better than most humans - of course - small sample size, and my opinion is probably biased. Even though it might not seem so from my comments, I do enjoy your columns.

Expand full comment

"Every autonomous driving expert I've read thinks Musk is completely full of it."

How would they know? No one was able to predict how computer driving would evolve up until now. Experts have been no better than anyone else. (Myself included. My predictions made over the years have been far off, and I have a patent in the field.)

It's like predicting who's going to win the World Series during the middle of the baseball season. We can guess, but no one (experts included) has an informed guess because there are too many variables involved. Same with predicting what can be done with computer driving.

Elon Musk's point is that we have billions of car drivers in the world who drive with just binocular vision. And he's got a point. You don't need all that much data to drive a car. Lidar and radar can be helpful, but are not necessary. We human drivers get by fine without them.

Expand full comment
author

Elon thanks you for coming by and spouting the idiotic talking points.

Expand full comment

I'm just curious, who are the autonomous driving experts you've read? I live and work in Silicon Valley and have been involved in this field from early on. I should know the names.

What sensors to use for computer driving, and how to blend the sensor outputs together (sensor fusion) has been a hot topic. You are right that Elon Musk is the main proponent of focusing on cameras, but he is not alone. I'm more in that camp than out myself.

In my mind, the best way to innovate is to keep an open mind and let the data drive the debate. Technology advances by trial and error (and error, and error, as Bill Janeway says). People should be allowed to be wrong.

Your hatred of Elon Musk, name-calling of people like me who support his view, and reliance on experts weakens your arguments. But that seems to be your shtick.

And who knows, you may be right about sensors. We'll see what happens.

Expand full comment

It was interesting until you started to compare Trump and Musk to Hitler and Il Duce. After that, I just thought you illiterate, lacking in judgement and any historical perspective

Expand full comment
author

Perhaps you might read more carefully. I said that the type of fascism we might see with a Trump/musk relationship would not be unfamiliar to either Mussolini or Hitler. That, I think, is different from saying Trump equals Hitler.

Expand full comment