Tesla fire EV Supercharger team
Discussion
DodgyGeezer said:
Why is it bad news for all EV drivers?FMOB said:
They have ripped off Toyota technology and are launching "self-charging" electric cars.FMOB said:
It kind of makes sense as a way to maintain the irrational (to me) valuation of the stock - improves the revenue per assets ratio. Once they got the other manufacturers on board with NACS, eventually other infrastructure providers will emerge. There's also public pressure to turn Electrify America into an actual charging network (instead of an indulgence paid by Volkswagen) and apparently a regulatory push towards common standards. Competition, regulation and standardisation tend to be bad for the profit margins.In the EU, this won't matter. End of 2022 (the latest figures I could find), there were over 70,000 fast chargers and less than 800 Tesla stations. Assuming ~6 charger stalls per station (seems to be average), we're talking about 7% of chargers. On average, already by the end of 2022 there was a fast charger for every 64 square kilometres for Tesla drivers; non-Tesla drivers had to make do with one per 70 square km. In both cases, the chargers are almost literally everywhere.
At the end of 2022, the US had 28,060 fast chargers, three-quarters of which were Tesla. That's a fast charger for every 350 square kilometre—or for 1400 square kilometre if you don't drive a Tesla.
(most of the numbers are from here: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2023... - so it should be an apples-to-apples comparison. Land areas used from Wikipedia)
UK might fall somewhere between the two extremes (depends on how you interpret this: https://www.statista.com/statistics/673612/chargin... - an ultra fast charger per 100km2 end of 2022, almost half of them Superchargers?).
Didn't look into China, but my impression is that Tesla is not dominant there.
Edited by PetrolHeadInRecovery on Friday 3rd May 08:56
Wonder if the US government grants are ending for the network. I was unaware until this news was first announced that much of the Supercharger network in the US was actually paid for by US Government grants. When you know this then it becomes understandable just how they expanded so well and so quickly and also why other makers, initially US owned ones, jumped on the NACS charging standard.
I should point out I am not saying the US government was funding the network from the start, I am assuming this was Musk/Tesla and their involvement was more recent.
I should also point out this is in addition to the new US government funding that was announced in Feb 2023, and it is the latter that has presumably allowed Musk to cut the team.
Edit - the US Government Grants may actually only be more recent (early 2022), and may be behind the Tesla opening up the network to the cars of other makers.
I should point out I am not saying the US government was funding the network from the start, I am assuming this was Musk/Tesla and their involvement was more recent.
I should also point out this is in addition to the new US government funding that was announced in Feb 2023, and it is the latter that has presumably allowed Musk to cut the team.
Edit - the US Government Grants may actually only be more recent (early 2022), and may be behind the Tesla opening up the network to the cars of other makers.
Edited by dapprman on Friday 3rd May 09:39
dapprman said:
Wonder if the US government grants are ending for the network. I was unaware until this news was first announced that much of the Supercharger network in the US was actually paid for by US Government grants. When you know this then it becomes understandable just how they expanded so well and so quickly and also why other makers, initially US owned ones, jumped on the NACS charging standard.
I should point out I am not saying the US government was funding the network from the start, I am assuming this was Musk/Tesla and their involvement was more recent.
I should also point out this is in addition to the new US government funding that was announced in Feb 2023, and it is the latter that has presumably allowed Musk to cut the team.
Edit - the US Government Grants may actually only be more recent (early 2022), and may be behind the Tesla opening up the network to the cars of other makers.
The IEA document referred to new government funds, but they probably come with the condition that the network be open. Based on what happened in the EU, things might improve quite rapidly. I should point out I am not saying the US government was funding the network from the start, I am assuming this was Musk/Tesla and their involvement was more recent.
I should also point out this is in addition to the new US government funding that was announced in Feb 2023, and it is the latter that has presumably allowed Musk to cut the team.
Edit - the US Government Grants may actually only be more recent (early 2022), and may be behind the Tesla opening up the network to the cars of other makers.
Edited by dapprman on Friday 3rd May 09:39
From today's perspective, the project that launched the IONITY network ( https://europ-e.eu/) seems to have cost peanuts (39M€ EU grant, total budget under 200M€) when considering its impact. The pool of 100,000 charging points they integrated into the shared payment system by the end of 2021 has now grown to over 700,000 (based on the number I see on chargemyhyundai.com today).
I might be biased, but I find that more impressive than the Supercharger network. Might be "continental Europe" goggles, though.
I think he's mad, and posted a slightly ranty video yesterday. Saying we need to slow the rollout of new chargers is not what you do when you have the best selling car in the world and have a major point of difference to everyone else in the form of Superchargers.
Here is reality. There are growing numbers of chargers from other networks. So many with their own faffy apps. So many with a slow charging speed (<108kW for the ones just installed at Tebay across from the Superchargers), and with a cost 50%-100% more than Supercharging.
I put an image of him as Hank Scorpio on the thumbnail, torching superchargers, asking people if I am wrong with my assertion. A few angry US-based fanbois but huge support from UK and European Tesla drivers. There is a world outside the US!
Here is reality. There are growing numbers of chargers from other networks. So many with their own faffy apps. So many with a slow charging speed (<108kW for the ones just installed at Tebay across from the Superchargers), and with a cost 50%-100% more than Supercharging.
I put an image of him as Hank Scorpio on the thumbnail, torching superchargers, asking people if I am wrong with my assertion. A few angry US-based fanbois but huge support from UK and European Tesla drivers. There is a world outside the US!
JustGetATesla said:
I think he's mad
Agreed, and probably a good example of why you shouldn't do drugs. My plans were to keep our X till it falls apart, but once our house renovations are done this summer, as soon as financially sensible I'll be chopping it in for either a Lexus RX or possibly a X5. What Musk seems to have not learnt its the team that helps you to achieve amazing things, the Tesla SC network is amazing, you can see the effort/hardwork People have gone to inorder to negotiate land rights, planning, power access, than maintain, not to mention the truly class leading incar software integration.
To sack that entire team.....his finally totally lost it, and Tesla is only going to one way if the lead figure of the company has become so out of touch with reality.
JustGetATesla said:
I think he's mad, and posted a slightly ranty video yesterday. Saying we need to slow the rollout of new chargers is not what you do when you have the best selling car in the world and have a major point of difference to everyone else in the form of Superchargers.
Here is reality. There are growing numbers of chargers from other networks. So many with their own faffy apps. So many with a slow charging speed (<108kW for the ones just installed at Tebay across from the Superchargers), and with a cost 50%-100% more than Supercharging.
I put an image of him as Hank Scorpio on the thumbnail, torching superchargers, asking people if I am wrong with my assertion. A few angry US-based fanbois but huge support from UK and European Tesla drivers. There is a world outside the US!
I agree with the assessment of his rationality in general, but I'd rate this at maximum one milliCybertruck on the corporate folly scale.Here is reality. There are growing numbers of chargers from other networks. So many with their own faffy apps. So many with a slow charging speed (<108kW for the ones just installed at Tebay across from the Superchargers), and with a cost 50%-100% more than Supercharging.
I put an image of him as Hank Scorpio on the thumbnail, torching superchargers, asking people if I am wrong with my assertion. A few angry US-based fanbois but huge support from UK and European Tesla drivers. There is a world outside the US!
Reality may be slightly different in the mainland Europe and probably fundamentally different in China. Charger density in Europe seems higher than in the UK (and especially the US). It is a level where you don't need to think about it even if not driving a Tesla. There are already more non-Tesla chargers sharing a single payment system (DCS, who doesn't seem to be that interested in advertising - but the press releases give some hints about developments under the surface)
It's not uncommon to see Teslas on Ionity/Fastned/other 300kW+ stations, so I assume user experience and costs are not massive differentiators. However, the lack of 800V support might become a negative differentiator for most Supercharging stations (v4 charger deployment seems to be in very early stages).
Faffy apps might bring some financial advantages, but - for the most part - I just swipe the car manufacturer-branded DCS card (or sometimes a credit card). I timed the extra time waving the card takes (~30 seconds) and decided not to faff around with the "plug-n-charge" support.
Seems pretty simple what has most likely happened.
Musk has been somewhat neglecting Tesla in recent times, following his acquisition of Twitter and his increasing interest in US political issues. However, two things have happened which have caused him to give maximal focus back on Tesla. The first was his 2018 remuneration package being cancelled by a judge in Delaware. The second is slowing EV sales, which is affecting not just Tesla but other EV makers too.
It's fine having a bit of fat in an organisation when you are achieving 50% cagr but when you have declining sales you can quickly get yourself into a lot of trouble.
And that trouble is exacerbated by what is happening with AI (and in the context of Tesla, their FSD programme). There is currently a huge 'land grab' in terms of compute power between the main tech companies as they each strive to get more Nvidia H100's than their competitors into their datacentres. Tesla have already spent circa $1bn this year on computing power, and they wanted to spend $10bn this year on FSD and AI. That will all come off the bottom line, in a time of declining margin and declining sales.
So Musk has decided to do two things - firstly, to continue investing massively in computing power, in the hope they can solve FSD sometime in the near future. Yes, he has been hoping/predicting that for years, but nevertheless, that's his plan.
The second part is cutting back as much as possible on everything else, so they don't get themselves into a position when they need to raise more cash going into next year. Assuming interest rates start to come back down, that should improve consumer confidence, and affordability, which should cause growth in the overall EV market in the next 1-2 years.
And this is where the Supercharger network comes in. Musk recently decided he wanted to dramatically increase his number of direct reports, so he could get more visibility of what was happened in Tesla. And I believe Rebecca Tinucci, who was the head of the supercharging, became a direct report to Musk at that point.
He told Tinucci it was imperative she needed to make some big cuts to her team. Apparently it was 'known' the Supercharging team had the most excess capacity of any department in the company, and with declining sales, there was no need to accelerate as quickly with the build out of new chargers.
However, she pushed back, making all the obvious, logical arguments about the importance of their charging network to EV adoption rates etc etc. But Musk knows all of that - that's the reason they have the supercharging network in the first place.
I suspect she wasn't that used to 'managing upwards' and so didn't read the room. If Musk is telling you, there is a cash burn problem, and you must cut costs urgently, your next task is to start figuring out how to achieve that in the best possible way. You don't start 'pushing back' and resisting it. It's also suggested she even threatened to hand in her resignation if Musk insisted on pushing through with his plans (talk about being delusional?). So, in a fit of pique, he sacked her. And said he was sacking the whole of her team, to make the point, on this issue, they don't have time for a debate, it just needs to get done.
Personally, I don't think the whole of the charging team will actually end up being sacked. I think once the dust has settled, they will probably lose the original proportion Musk was asking for (~30% I believe). Definitely Tinucci will be gone though. But it will make for some lurid headlines in the meantime.
Musk has been somewhat neglecting Tesla in recent times, following his acquisition of Twitter and his increasing interest in US political issues. However, two things have happened which have caused him to give maximal focus back on Tesla. The first was his 2018 remuneration package being cancelled by a judge in Delaware. The second is slowing EV sales, which is affecting not just Tesla but other EV makers too.
It's fine having a bit of fat in an organisation when you are achieving 50% cagr but when you have declining sales you can quickly get yourself into a lot of trouble.
And that trouble is exacerbated by what is happening with AI (and in the context of Tesla, their FSD programme). There is currently a huge 'land grab' in terms of compute power between the main tech companies as they each strive to get more Nvidia H100's than their competitors into their datacentres. Tesla have already spent circa $1bn this year on computing power, and they wanted to spend $10bn this year on FSD and AI. That will all come off the bottom line, in a time of declining margin and declining sales.
So Musk has decided to do two things - firstly, to continue investing massively in computing power, in the hope they can solve FSD sometime in the near future. Yes, he has been hoping/predicting that for years, but nevertheless, that's his plan.
The second part is cutting back as much as possible on everything else, so they don't get themselves into a position when they need to raise more cash going into next year. Assuming interest rates start to come back down, that should improve consumer confidence, and affordability, which should cause growth in the overall EV market in the next 1-2 years.
And this is where the Supercharger network comes in. Musk recently decided he wanted to dramatically increase his number of direct reports, so he could get more visibility of what was happened in Tesla. And I believe Rebecca Tinucci, who was the head of the supercharging, became a direct report to Musk at that point.
He told Tinucci it was imperative she needed to make some big cuts to her team. Apparently it was 'known' the Supercharging team had the most excess capacity of any department in the company, and with declining sales, there was no need to accelerate as quickly with the build out of new chargers.
However, she pushed back, making all the obvious, logical arguments about the importance of their charging network to EV adoption rates etc etc. But Musk knows all of that - that's the reason they have the supercharging network in the first place.
I suspect she wasn't that used to 'managing upwards' and so didn't read the room. If Musk is telling you, there is a cash burn problem, and you must cut costs urgently, your next task is to start figuring out how to achieve that in the best possible way. You don't start 'pushing back' and resisting it. It's also suggested she even threatened to hand in her resignation if Musk insisted on pushing through with his plans (talk about being delusional?). So, in a fit of pique, he sacked her. And said he was sacking the whole of her team, to make the point, on this issue, they don't have time for a debate, it just needs to get done.
Personally, I don't think the whole of the charging team will actually end up being sacked. I think once the dust has settled, they will probably lose the original proportion Musk was asking for (~30% I believe). Definitely Tinucci will be gone though. But it will make for some lurid headlines in the meantime.
Maybe the charger network is less important now? I had a cursory look earlier and the utilisation on a random selection of superchargers was maybe 20%. Which seems a bit low on a bank holiday weekend. I’d say it’s a tricky ol’ business with most people doing the vast amount of charging at home. There are probably enough dots on the map to give buyers the confidence that there are chargers (that they rarely ever use).
DMZ said:
Maybe the charger network is less important now? I had a cursory look earlier and the utilisation on a random selection of superchargers was maybe 20%. Which seems a bit low on a bank holiday weekend. I’d say it’s a tricky ol’ business with most people doing the vast amount of charging at home. There are probably enough dots on the map to give buyers the confidence that there are chargers (that they rarely ever use).
Utilisation all depends on the exact date/time/location. There are plenty of times now when people are trying to get home after the weekend or at the start of a holiday when key hubs will be completely full. The good thing is that the car knows the utilisation of all the chargers in real-time, so it automatically routes you the optimal charging location based on your journey plan, battery remaining etc. But tbh I don't think any of that relates to what Musk did with the charging team. Their slow down in sales, the reduction in margin, and the increase in expenditure on computing power has put Tesla in a precarious position. They need to cut costs, quickly, and they need all their senior managers to be aligned with that objective. They don't need someone dragging their heels and telling Musk how 'their team do important work' and should be protected from any cuts. That's basically what this was about.
EddieSteadyGo said:
Utilisation all depends on the exact date/time/location. There are plenty of times now when people are trying to get home after the weekend or at the start of a holiday when key hubs will be completely full. The good thing is that the car knows the utilisation of all the chargers in real-time, so it automatically routes you the optimal charging location based on your journey plan, battery remaining etc.
But tbh I don't think any of that relates to what Musk did with the charging team. Their slow down in sales, the reduction in margin, and the increase in expenditure on computing power has put Tesla in a precarious position. They need to cut costs, quickly, and they need all their senior managers to be aligned with that objective. They don't need someone dragging their heels and telling Musk how 'their team do important work' and should be protected from any cuts. That's basically what this was about.
Tbf the spend on Nvidia GPUs is braindead. I know he needs to sell some AI dream to the faithful but come on. It's a car company so perhaps focus on the cars. But tbh I don't think any of that relates to what Musk did with the charging team. Their slow down in sales, the reduction in margin, and the increase in expenditure on computing power has put Tesla in a precarious position. They need to cut costs, quickly, and they need all their senior managers to be aligned with that objective. They don't need someone dragging their heels and telling Musk how 'their team do important work' and should be protected from any cuts. That's basically what this was about.
What I'm mostly surprised about is why they don't open the whole supercharger network to everyone. That is an immediate revenue upside on stuff that's just sitting there. Make some money on that while they figure out how to make another model.
DMZ said:
Tbf the spend on Nvidia GPUs is braindead. I know he needs to sell some AI dream to the faithful but come on. It's a car company so perhaps focus on the cars.
What I'm mostly surprised about is why they don't open the whole supercharger network to everyone. That is an immediate revenue upside on stuff that's just sitting there. Make some money on that while they figure out how to make another model.
I'm probably brain-dead too then, as I think they are going to launch a regulator-approved, full self-driving car before the end of 2026. Might still be geo-fenced, and might have other restrictions (like Waymo), and might be limited in numbers, but it is going to happen imho.What I'm mostly surprised about is why they don't open the whole supercharger network to everyone. That is an immediate revenue upside on stuff that's just sitting there. Make some money on that while they figure out how to make another model.
Re opening up the Supercharging network, they have done that in the US. Or at least, they are currently in the process of doing that in the US. Although that was motivated as part of a deal with the US government to secure Tesla customer's $7,500 per car in Federal Tax Credits on most of the cars they sell.
As to opening up the charging network for non-Tesla cars in other countries, they are doing it on a limited basis, for mainly lower demand sites. They need to be careful, as the main reason to choose a Tesla vs a competitor brand is the supercharging network. And they make their profit from the cars, not from charging.
DMZ said:
Tbf the spend on Nvidia GPUs is braindead. I know he needs to sell some AI dream to the faithful but come on. It's a car company so perhaps focus on the cars.
I agree. However, there's a catch: car company stock trades around three (BMW at the end of 2022) to eight (Ford, May 2024) times the annual earnings. This also applies to companies as close as Tesla (or closer) to having the technology that would be needed for robotaxis. And most (all?) of these companies pay annual dividends, unlike Tesla.Tesla being correctly classified as a car company and stock trading between 12 and 31 dollars instead of Friday's 180 might be problematic for Elon.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff