Read the wild email Tesla is sending to suppliers amid Supercharger chaos
After firing its entire Supercharger team, Tesla has sent out an email to suppliers which shows just how chaotic the decisionmaking leading up to the firings must have been.
Earlier this week, Tesla abruptly fired its entire Supercharging team, leading to an immediate pullback in Supercharger installation plans. Now we’ve seen the email that Tesla has sent to suppliers, and it’s not pretty.
When the firings were announced Monday night, there was little information about how they would affect Tesla’s plans.
On Tuesday, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said that “Tesla still plans to grow the Supercharger network, just at a slower pace for new locations and more focus on 100% uptime and expansion of existing locations.” According to Tesla’s website, Superchargers currently have 99.95% uptime.
But in the interim, we’ve already heard about Supercharger projects being cancelled, including halting rollout in the entire country of Australia, including sites that had already been subject to long-term leases and given the go-ahead for construction which will now be abandoned.
And Tesla has also sent out an email to all of its suppliers, which leaked to the internet. Here it is in full, but with contact information redacted:
To all concerned:
You may be aware that there has been a recent adjustment with the Supercharger organization which is presently undergoing a sudden and thorough restructuring. If you have already received this email, please disregard it as we are attempting to connect with our suppliers and contractors. As part of this process, we are in the midst of establishing new leadership roles, prioritizing projects, and streamlining our payment procedures. Due to the transitional nature of this phase, we are asking for your patience with our response time.
I understand that this period of change may be challenging and that patience is not easy when expecting to be paid, however, I want to express my sincere appreciation for your understanding and support as we navigate through this transition. At this time, please hold on breaking ground on any newly awarded construction projects and planned pre-construction walks. If currently working on an active Supercharging construction site, please continue. Contact [email redacted] for further questions, comments, and concerns. Additionally, hold on working on any new material orders. Contact [email redacted] for further questions, comments, and concerns. If waiting on delayed payment, please contact [email redacted] for a status update. Thank you for your cooperation and patience.
The email is remarkable for several reasons, largely because it shows a lack of structure and consideration to the decision to fire the entire team.
Firstly, Tesla states that it is “attempting” to connect with suppliers and that it may have sent multiple emails to some of them. This suggests that Tesla doesn’t have an established method of contact for all of its suppliers – either it doesn’t have a master contact list, or its previous method including points of contact within Tesla is not usable because, well, those points of contact would have been fired.
Second, it says that the “adjustment” (an odd word for firing an entire department) has led to a process of establishing new leadership roles. This is typically something that a company would consider before changing leaders, and ensure that there are current employees with experience who are ready to step up to take the position of a retiring leader, perhaps with a period of mentorship prior to the outgoing leader’s retirement.
Even in a situation where a firing is sudden, it’s typically reasonable to elevate a previous second-in-command to fill the void. This is why it’s beneficial to have a deep bench – something which Tesla has touted before.
Third, Tesla goes on to mention that these suppliers are “expecting to be paid,” which suggests that Tesla is likely to welch on its payment obligations, at least in the short term. We have seen Musk refuse to pay bills before, so mention of skipping out on payment must raise alarm bells for suppliers who have been working in good faith with Tesla.
Finally, Tesla asks for suppliers to continue construction on active projects, but to hold on breaking ground or doing pre-construction site walks. This could be considered unclear, as there are many parallel steps to approval, permitting and construction of sites, so it’s hard to set a single line that is easily communicated about which sites should continue and which sites shouldn’t. Presumably, site contacts within Tesla would be able to reach out to individual sites and tell them whether to continue construction or not – if they were still working there, which it seems they are not.
To ask for patience is reasonable when an unforeseen circumstance hits a company, but this is not an unforeseen circumstance – it is entirely self-inflicted by Tesla.
Other charging providers have reacted to Tesla’s disruption of its own Supercharger plans, with at least one company, Revel, suggesting that it’s ready to swoop in on “really good sites” that Tesla left on the table, particularly in Revel’s home in New York City.
Electrek’s Take
We have heard from several sources who told us that the reason for these firings is because Rebecca Tinucci, former head of Tesla’s EV Charging division, resisted Musk’s demand to fire large portions of her team.
While this is hearsay, it’s plausible considering the language in Musk’s letter announcing the firings – which claimed that some executives are not taking headcount reduction seriously, and made a point to say that executives who retain the wrong employees may see themselves and their whole teams cut. It isn’t a stretch to think that Musk included those demands since they were related to his firing of Tinucci and her team.
The Supercharging team was one of the more successful and crucial teams within Tesla, and many observers consider the Supercharger network to be Tesla’s primary “moat” that makes it better than the competition. Tinucci was also responsible for negotiating NACS agreements across the industry, leading to a huge win when Tesla’s plug became the de facto standard after basically every automaker adopted it over the course of the last year.
Superchargers are also incredibly important, especially in North America. In Europe there are more successful non-Tesla charge providers, but in NA, Tesla is the big dog. And if infrastructure is important, then Tesla pulling back is bad not just for Tesla but for EVs as a whole.
It seems abundantly clear that, whatever explanation we accept, the firing of the Supercharger team was not well-considered (and our readers seem to agree). Even if headcount reduction is necessary, the whole team shouldn’t be laid off. Even if it was necessary as a retaliatory measure – which would not be a good rationale – it still would be wiser to retain some part of it so as to avoid the chaos suggested by the email above.
Whatever mechanism led to the firing, it does fit into a pattern of increasingly erratic behavior that Musk has been showing lately.
Many possible explanations have been advanced to explain this behavior, and most of them don’t increase my personal faith that Musk will make the right decisions with Tesla.
As I said in our original post about Tesla’s first round of layoffs, we do need Tesla to keep pushing the industry forward. While Pandora’s box is open and EVs are here to stay at this point, regardless of Tesla’s ups and comparatively-rare downs, the rest of the industry is still trying hard to pump the brakes on the transition, even if it means America will be less competitive if those companies get their way.
Tesla is one of the few entities that is large enough and committed enough to dragging those timelines forward, whether the rest of the industry likes it or not. We need a healthy Tesla, and for that, we need steadier management. This email is not an example of that – and neither are most of Musk’s managerial actions recently.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The US installed 50 gigawatts (GW) of new solar capacity in 2024, the largest single year of new capacity added to the grid by any energy technology in over two decades. That’s enough to power 8.5 million households.
According to the US Solar Market Insight 2024 Year in Review report released today by the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) and Wood Mackenzie, solar and storage account for 84% of all new electric generating capacity added to the grid last year.
In addition to historic deployment, surging US solar manufacturing emerged as a landmark economic story in 2024. Domestic solar module production tripled last year, and at full capacity, US factories can now produce enough to meet nearly all demand for solar panels in the US. Solar cell manufacturing also resumed in 2024, strengthening the US energy supply chain.
“Solar and storage can be built faster and more affordably than any other technology, ensuring the United States has the power needed to compete in the global economy and meet rising electricity demand,” said SEIA president and CEO Abigail Ross Hopper. “America’s solar and storage industry set historic deployment and manufacturing records in 2024, creating jobs and driving economic growth. It’s critical that lawmakers continue to support an ‘all of the above’ energy strategy that fosters the growth of American energy sources like solar and storage.”
Total US solar capacity is expected to reach 739 GW by 2035, but the report forecasts include scenarios showing how policy changes could impact the solar market. Sudden changes to federal tax credits, supply chain availability, and permitting policy will create uncertainty for investors, increase costs for developers and manufacturers, and cause a slowdown in solar deployment.
The low case forecast shows a 130 GW decline in solar deployment over the next decade compared to the base case, representing nearly $250 billion of lost investment. A slowdown at this scale could leave the US without the electricity needed to meet rising demand, threatening growth in the manufacturing and technology sectors that rely on abundant power.
Many of the fastest-growing solar states such as Texas, Indiana, and Florida would see the largest declines in deployment under the low-case scenario. Texas alone could lose out on over $50 billion of solar investment over the next decade.
“Last year’s record-level of installations was aided by several solar policies and credits within the Inflation Reduction Act that helped drive interest in the solar market,” said Sylvia Levya Martinez, principal analyst, North America utility-scale solar for Wood Mackenzie. “We still have many challenges ahead, including unprecedented load growth on the power grid. If many of these policies were eliminated or significantly altered, it would be very detrimental to the industry’s continued growth.”
Texas led all states for new solar capacity additions last year, replicating a record-setting 2023 with 11.6 GW of new installations. In total, 21 states set new annual installation records, and 13 states added over 1 GW of new solar capacity in 2024.
The utility-scale segment saw historic gains in 2024, growing by 33% year-over-year with a record 41.4 GW of installed capacity. The community and commercial solar markets also set annual records, growing by 35% and 8%, respectively. The residential solar market experienced its lowest year of installations since 2021 due to state-level policy changes and elevated interest rates nationally. Forecasts show that the market is expected to rebound over the next decade.
Read more: IEA: power use to soar through 2027, but renewables will keep up
To limit power outages and make your home more resilient, consider going solar with a battery storage system. In order to 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. They have 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 you share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Elon Musk has claimed that the Democratic party organized recent protests at Tesla locations worldwide. As he usually does with his wild claims lately, he hasn’t offered any proof whatsoever.
Over the last few weeks, there have been growing protests at Tesla locations around the word.
It started small with just a few locations in the US, but it has since grown to now dozens of locations every weekend, with sometimes hundreds of people at some locations.
Protestors have different reasons for wanting to disrupt Tesla, but they are mostly centered around seeing the company as Elon Musk’s piggybank and they are upset at his involvement in the government through his financial contribution to Trump’s election and his role at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Musk took to X today to comment on the situation, and he made the claim that the protests at Tesla locations are funded by ActBlue:
An investigation has found 5 ActBlue-funded groups responsible for Tesla “protests”: Troublemakers, Disruption Project, Rise & Resist, Indivisible Project and Democratic Socialists of America. ActBlue funders include George Soros, Reid Hoffman, Herbert Sandler, Patricia Bauman, and Leah Hunt-Hendrix. ActBlue is currently under investigation for allowing foreign and illegal donations in criminal violation of campaign finance regulations. This week, 7 ActBlue senior officials resigned, including the associate general counsel.
ActBlue is a political action committee (PAC) used by the Democratic Party.
Musk did not elaborate on what “investigation” he was referring to nor did he provide any proof to back up his claim. In fact, he even asked for people to help provide information:
“If you know anything about this, please post in replies.”
Musk directly named Reid Hoffman, his former Paypal Mafia friend turned foe due to political differences, who was quick to deny any involvement:
Just one more of Elon’s false claims about me: I never funded anyone for Tesla protests. I don’t condone violence. But it’s clear Americans are angry at him – it’s easier to explain away their anger, than to accept that actions have consequences.
While the Democratic Party could be sympathetic to the Tesla protestors, there’s no evidence that they started the “Tesla Takedown” movement or have any significant involvement.
As we previously reported, it started as a grassroots movement with some posts on BlueSky, an X competitor, last month.
It has since gained considerable momentum, and they are now using Action Network, an open platform, to organize. As it grew, some groups have gotten involved to organize local protests, like The Disruption Project, which claims to stand “against the unjust systems of racial capitalism, the hetero-patriarchy, white supremacy and settler colonialism.”
In Seattle, The Troublemakers, a local environmentalist group, has also been helping organize.
The biggest blow to Musk’s claim is that there have also been protests outside the US, including in Canada and Europe. It’s unlikely that the US Democratic party would be involved in those.
There are currently six protests planned in Europe by the “Tesla Takedown” in the coming weeks:
Musk has also been involved in European politics, promoting far-right parties throughout Europe.
Along with the claims about the Tesla protests, Musk also retweeted someone linking several Cybertrucks burning down at a Tesla location in Seattle to “Democrat NGOs”:
Again, this claim is without evidence. In fact, the fires are still under investigation and it hasn’t yet been confirmed if it was arson.
Electrek’s Take
Could the Democratic Party be involved in some of the protests? It wouldn’t shock me, but you can claim that without proof.
I think most people involved in the protests are just mad at Elon for any of the hundreds of stupid things he has done or said in the last few months, including doing a couple of Nazi salutes at Trump’s inauguration.
He prefers to think that there’s some grand conspiracy against him because that’s easier to swallow than people hating home for being a compulsive liar, oligarch dork with the sense of humor of a maladjusted 13-year-old.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports11 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway