The Mazda MX-30 EV is back on the chopping block for the 2024 model year, after a short reintroduction in California, wherein the car has only sold 66 units in 2023.
Mazda will no longer sell the MX-30 in the US, after this year’s model only sold 66 units so far. Sales started slow with single digits for the first three months of the year, then picked up to a year-high of 18 in May, and dropped 11% to 16 units in June. The MX-30 was only available in California, a common thread amongst low-production EVs which help automakers comply with California’s emissions rules.
This is not the first time the MX-30 EV has been cancelled in California. Its previous run sold a total of 505 total cars in the US, missing Mazda’s modest goal of 560 units. Then the car was off the shelves for about half a year with an uncertain future, but was resurrected this January for another run.
Now, again, the MX-30 will once again go off the market. There are still a few cars available in the US (Carscoops found 15 in a quick search), so if you were waiting to pull the trigger, this may be your last chance.
Mazda does have an additional MX-30 plug-in hybrid model, called the MX-30 R-EV, but it’s not available in the US. The R-EV has half the battery size of the BEV version, but this gives a 53-mile range – still respectable for a PHEV.
The MX-30’s cancellation means that Mazda will once again sell zero electric vehicle models in the United States. We don’t know whether Mazda will bring it back for another hurrah or if it will be dead for good this time, but last time Mazda didn’t issue a discontinuation press release, while this time it did. So we doubt it will come back, though it depends on how much it costs Mazda to build and distribute these few EVs versus how much it costs them to pay California’s emissions penalties for noncompliance.
Now we wait and see what Mazda will do next. The company recently gave an update on its EV plans and has an EV sales target of 25-40% by 2030 (which is still too low to meet EPA rules). But it doesn’t really have any known EVs on the horizon, other than a very cool-looking sportscar concept which might become an electrified Miata. In the meantime, it says it plans to focus on “large platform PHEVs” like the CX-90 and CX-70 PHEV, and the CX-50 hybrid (which is not even a plug-in).
Electrek’s Take
When we reviewed the MX-30 EV, we came away pretty unimpressed. The interior and exterior look nice, but the car offered a poor value proposition compared to other entry-level EVs like the Chevy Bolt, Nissan Leaf, and even the Mini Cooper SE.
It was also clear to us that the car was only being sold as a compliance vehicle, in small numbers only in California, and seemed like a callback to the early EV compliance programs of a decade ago.
In particular, the huge empty space under the hood, clearly intended to house a rotary engine for the PHEV version, and the “electric” badging only being present as a sticker on the window, made the effort feel quite slapdash. And Mazda even admitted it slowed down the car to make it feel more like a gas vehicle (and yet, it was still fun to drive through some canyons).
So it’s not really a surprise that this car didn’t take off. Mazda didn’t really seem like it was serious about the car, and buyers wouldn’t have much reason to buy it over the competition other than brand loyalty or because they like its quirky look or suicide doors. On a pure spec or value comparison, other offerings blew it out of the water, and were clearly more serious EVs.
It is currently an open question as to whether any Japanese automakers will really take EVs seriously – which could hurt the country as a whole if they don’t. Most Japanese companies are lagging on EVs, and it’s starting to be a problem, with both Toyota and Mitsubishi being forced pull back from China this month because they just don’t have any EVs to sell to a country that rabidly wants them.
Besides, as we always say, we really want an electric Miata!!! So we hope Mazda can turn it around and get up to speed on EVs. But it’s going to take more than 66 sales of a gimped PHEV to do so.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Tesla (TSLA) board members have received a wake-up call letter from eight state treasurers, asking them to fulfill their duties and supervise the company’s CEO, Elon Musk.
Will they ignore this warning as well?
There have been concerns about Tesla’s board sleeping at the wheel for a while now.
Their job is to oversee Tesla’s management for the benefit of shareholders, but Tesla’s stock is down almost 40% this year while the CEO is splitting his time between 6 different companies and projects while alienating most of Tesla’s consumer base.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Yet, the board hasn’t said a word about it.
The situation lends weight to the argument that the board is entirely under Musk’s control, which is the main point of contention in Tesla’s $55 billion CEO compensation case.
Now, eight state treasurers have joined forces to raise their concerns with the board. They wrote in a letter addressed to Robyn Denholm, chair of Tesla’s board:
We are increasingly concerned that Tesla’s recent performance signals deeper governance and leadership challenges that, if left unaddressed, could have serious consequences for the company and its stakeholders. In the first quarter of 2025 alone, Tesla’s stock declined by 36%. The company missed delivery targets, recalled a substantial number of vehicles, and experienced a surge in trade-ins for competing brands. Meanwhile, CEO Elon Musk continues to divide his attention across multiple companies and a high-profile advisory role within the federal government. These external commitments raise serious questions about whether Tesla’s leadership is fully engaged in addressing the company’s core challenges.
In the letter, the treasurers remind Tesla’s board of its duty “to provide strong oversight, uphold fiduciary standards, and ensure that the company’s leadership is aligned with the long-term best interests of the company.”
They are directly asking the board three questions:
How is the Board ensuring that Mr. Musk and Tesla’s leadership team are devoting adequate time and focus to resolving recent performance issues and guiding the company’s future direction?
In light of the company’s underperformance, how is the Board evaluating whether executive compensation remains aligned with shareholder value and corporate accountability?
How does the Board plan to communicate its strategy for navigating this period of uncertainty and restoring investor and public confidence in Tesla’s leadership?
Tesla is going to release its Q1 2025 financial results today, hold its earnings conference call, and have a “live company update.’ Maybe some of these questions will be answered.
Here’s the letter in full:
2025-04-17 Letter to Tesla Board Chair
April 17, 2025
Robyn Denholm
Chair of the Board
Tesla, Inc.
1 Tesla Road
Austin, TX 78725
Dear Chair Denholm,
We are entrusted with promoting the long-term economic health and financial stability of our states and the people we serve. Tesla, Inc. is not just one of the world’s most valuable companies—it is a major player in the clean energy economy and a leading force in emerging technologies such as robotics and autonomous driving. The company’s success or setbacks have significant implications for workers, regional industries, and innovation ecosystems in our states.
We are increasingly concerned that Tesla’s recent performance signals deeper governance and leadership challenges that, if left unaddressed, could have serious consequences for the company and its stakeholders. In the first quarter of 2025 alone, Tesla’s stock declined by 36%. The company missed delivery targets, recalled a substantial number of vehicles, and experienced a surge in trade-ins for competing brands. Meanwhile, CEO Elon Musk continues to divide his attention across multiple companies and a high-profile advisory role within the federal government. These external commitments raise serious questions about whether Tesla’s leadership is fully engaged in addressing the company’s core challenges.
We regularly interact with stakeholders across our states, including institutional investors, industry leaders, workers, and small businesses. We are hearing increasing concern about Tesla’s direction, not only from financial professionals but from those who have looked to Tesla as a leader in clean energy innovation and American industrial renewal. If Tesla falters, the effects won’t be confined to shareholders—they will ripple through regional economies, workforce pipelines, and public confidence in the energy transition.
At a moment when American industrial leadership is facing stiff global competition, it is essential that companies like Tesla are governed with focus, discipline, and clarity of mission. The Board’s role is especially critical now—to provide strong oversight, uphold fiduciary standards, and ensure that the company’s leadership is aligned with the long-term best interests of the company. Public officials like us do not take the step of raising these concerns lightly except when the obvious risks demand it.
We believe the Tesla Board has a responsibility to act decisively to ensure the company returns to a stable and focused trajectory.
We respectfully request the Board provide clarity on the following:
How is the Board ensuring that Mr. Musk and Tesla’s leadership team are devoting adequate time and focus to resolving recent performance issues and guiding the company’s future direction?
In light of the company’s underperformance, how is the Board evaluating whether executive compensation remains aligned with shareholder value and corporate accountability?
How does the Board plan to communicate its strategy for navigating this period of uncertainty and restoring investor and public confidence in Tesla’s leadership?
Finally, we strongly believe Tesla’s Board would benefit from engaging with public sector stakeholders who share an interest in the company’s long-term value and societal impact. We welcome the opportunity to speak further about these concerns and discuss how the Board can take swift and transparent action to restore investor confidence and public trust in Tesla’s leadership and the company’s future.
We welcome a response and the opportunity for continued dialogue.
Signed,
Mike Pellicciotti, Washington State Treasurer Deborah B. Goldberg, Massachusetts State Treasurer and Receiver-General Michael W. Frerichs, Illinois State Treasurer Erick Russell, Connecticut Treasurer Laura M. Montoya, New Mexico State Treasurer David L. Young, Colorado State Treasurer Mike Pieciak, Vermont State Treasurer Malia M. Cohen, California State Controller
Electrek’s Take
Tesla is a $700 billion publicly traded company that is run like a family business by Musk, who owns just 13% of the float.
It’s clear that they have a quid pro quo with Musk, whereby they receive compensation at a rate several times higher than any other similarly sized company in exchange for allowing Musk to run Tesla as if it were his private company.
While I am glad they sent this letter, I doubt that a group of state treasurers will convince Tesla’s board to do anything.
At this point, they are either completely fine with Musk destroying Tesla or they believe his claims about self-driving technology.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Chevron is not seeing signs that the U.S. is close to a recession even as President Donald Trump’s tariffs weigh on expectations for oil demand, CEO Mike Wirth said Tuesday.
“There’s no signs that we see at this point that we are in or close to a recession,” Wirth told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “There are signs that growth may be slowing and we have to always be prepared for that.”
The International Monetary Fund on Monday cut its growth outlook for the U.S. this year to 1.8%, down from 2.7% previously.
The oil market is expecting reduced demand as a consequence of Trump’s tariffs and the decision by OPEC+ increase production faster than expected, Wirth said. Chevron isn’t changing its capital spending plans in response to drop in prices, the CEO said.
U.S. crude oil prices have fallen about 11% since Trump announced his tariffs on April 2. West Texas Intermediate was last up about 72 cents at $63.80 per barrel. OPEC and the International Energy Agency have cut their demand outlooks for this year.
Wirth said U.S. onshore oil production in patches like the Permian Basin is likely to pull back if prices hit $60 per barrel. Offshore production likely won’t be affected, he said.
“That’s an area where if we were to be at a $60 price or even lower you’re likely to see activity pull back in this sector and you’ll see the production response over a few months,” Wirth said. “That’s what we should watch, not so much the deep water activity.”
Chevron is not expecting a major direct impact on its business from Trump’s tariffs as energy has largely been exempt from the levies, Wirth said.
“The effects that we feel are likely to be more the macroeconomic effects as they flow through the economy,” Wirth said. “The bigger issues would be what would it mean for growth, and global trade and how does that evolve.”
Executives at oil and gas companies were scathing in their criticism of Trump’s tariffs in an anonymous March survey by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, warning that steel tariffs were raising their costs and low prices could impact their activity.
Get Your Ticket to Pro LIVE
Join us at the New York Stock Exchange!
Uncertain markets? Gain an edge with CNBC Pro LIVE, an exclusive, inaugural event at the historic New York Stock Exchange. In today’s dynamic financial landscape, access to expert insights is paramount. As a CNBC Pro subscriber, we invite you to join us for our first exclusive, in-person CNBC Pro LIVE event at the iconic NYSE on Thursday, June 12.
Join interactive Pro clinics led by our Pros Carter Worth, Dan Niles, and Dan Ives, with a special edition of Pro Talks with Tom Lee. You’ll also get the opportunity to network with CNBC experts, talent and other Pro subscribers during an exciting cocktail hour on the legendary trading floor. Tickets are limited!
Little is known about super-secretive EV startup Slate, but the fledgling brand is rumored to be backed by Jeff Bezos and determined to shake up the existing electric order with an affordable lineup of compact SUVs and pickups with that golden $25,000 price tag.
Now, at least, we know what it’s gonna look like. The battle of the billionaires is on!
Redditor jonjopop over at the spotted subreddit spotted what looks like an early prototype of an unbranded SUV with bizarre “CryShare” wrap. CryShare, as a concept, seems to combine the functionality of a ride sharing app like Uber or Lyft with the familiar (to parent, anyway) idea that small babies will often sleep better in a moving car than in their own cribs … but that’s not what’s important here.
Instead, focus on the vehicle itself – parked on Abbot Kinney Boulevard in Los Angeles without explanation or fanfare, this is our best look yet at the kind of vehicle(s) Slate is likely to reveal in the coming days.
Other local automotive journalists caught wind of the public unveiling, too – and our friends at The Autopian (Hi, Matt!) sent their own David Tracy out on the streets of LA to check it out. Tracy took the following video and posted it to Instagram.
As with so much involving Slate, however, there is nothing here written in stone – or even cast in cheese. Nothing has been announced, nothing is promised, and for all we know this might have more to do with the affordable Rivian brand launch, a new BYD, or be a viral marketing bit from some local Art Center design student in (relatively) nearby Pasadena. In fact, about the only thing I think we can say about Bezos (?) new Slate project with confidence today is this: Elon could probably use that drink.
SOURCES | IMAGES: Reddit, The Autopian.
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.