Connect with us

Published

on

I fully divested from Tesla (TSLA), selling all my shares. I’m going to try to explain why. At Electrek, we like to be clear about our biases rather than claim we have none.

I’ve followed Tesla since 2008 and invested in the company after it went public in 2010. I started writing about EVs, and especially Tesla, full-time in 2015.

I invested in the stock mainly because I fully supported Tesla’s mission to accelerate the advent of electric transportation. I thought then, and still do today, that a combination of battery-powered vehicles, with the ethical sourcing of raw battery materials, battery recycling, and renewable electricity production to power electric vehicles, is the only solution to making the transportation sector long-term sustainable while decarbonizing it.

Over the years, I had become a fan of electric vehicles, but I was clueless about how they could become mainstream until I read Elon Musk’s 2006 ‘Tesla secret master plan’. The plan made sense to me: make a high-end electric vehicle that is uncompromising against its gas-powered counterparts. Once you prove that it can be done, make increasingly cheaper and higher-volume EV models with the same approach.

That sounds simple, but it was a difficult task from an engineering perspective. Either way, it seemed to be the only way to meaningfully move the industry toward battery-electric vehicles.

On top of Musk’s blog post, which Tesla has recently removed from its website, I was also convinced by lectures given by Tesla’s original two co-founders, Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning.

While these guys have been forgotten by many as part of Tesla’s history, partly due to Musk’s own effort, I credit them as early pioneers of the electric revolution. They were great early communicators of the feasibility of electrifying the auto industry and the necessity to do it.

Not without hurdles, Tesla did it. I am not going to recap Tesla’s entire incredible history, but the company was successful in convincing the world and the auto industry that electric vehicles are here, here to stay, and the future of the industry — something that most were denying less than a decade ago.

Tesla engineered and designed several highly competitive and attractive EV products, managed to ramp them up to millions of units, and forced the rest of the industry to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in electric vehicles.

This was possible due to a lot of different factors. A lot:

  • The vision of Tesla’s early leadership
  • Elon Musk’s early funding and leadership
  • The incredible talent that the mission attracted, including many early employees that became critical to Tesla, like JB Straubel, Drew Baglino, Deepak Ahuja, Franz von Holzhausen, and many more
  • The support of early investors like Antonio Gracias, Sergey Brin, Larry Page, Jeff Skoll, and Steve Jurvetson, among others
  • The support from other automakers, like Daimler and Toyota, who both invested in Tesla at a critical time
  • Government support was a big one, especially California’s support. California regulations, which spread to other states in the US known as ‘CARB states’, were critical in Tesla’s early success and were also factors in Daimler and Toyota’s investments as the automakers made deals with Tesla to help them produce EVs to comply with the state regulations. Later, the federal EV tax credit helped, the IRA helped, the solar tax credit, and more also helped.
  • The support from passionate owners
  • The support from passionate retail investors

I’m most likely forgetting some factors, but these are some of the most important ones, in my opinion.

Many will say that they weren’t equally important, and that might be true, but I seriously doubt that Tesla would have survived if you removed any of these factors.

If you contributed to any of these factors, it’s my personal opinion that you should be proud to have contributed to the electrification of the auto industry.

The Shift

In the last few years, Tesla has become a widely different company. My main issue with this shift is that I no longer feel like the original mission to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport or renewable energy is a priority.

Now, it’s all about AI, self-driving, and robots.

I’m not saying that those things are wrong or that they will not happen. I think all these technologies are important and will transform the world, but it’s simply not what I invested in.

I would also argue that Tesla is not the same company, which makes sense since the company is no longer about its mission.

That’s my main issue. It can’t be more evident than Tesla’s EV deliveries tracking down year-over-year for the first time in a decade, Musk canceling EV programs in favor of Robotaxi, and even the CEO going as far as saying that “Tesla is worth nothing without self-driving.”

My other issue is the leadership. I don’t trust Elon Musk anymore. I think a combination of social media addiction and the cult of personality around him has broken his feedback loop and set him on the wrong path.

I think he disqualified himself from running Tesla or any public company when he started threatening to breach his fiduciary duty to shareholders if he didn’t get 25% control over Tesla.

On top of my distrust of the CEO, I think that his own changes in the last few years, combined with the shift away from the mission, have driven a lot of the rest of the leadership away:

As part of my job, I track the comings and goings of top talent at Tesla very closely, and in the last few years, I’ve seen tons of high-level departures and very few new top hires.

There’s still a lot of great talent at Tesla, I’m not denying that, but I think it’s also clear that there has been a significant talent exodus at Tesla, especially over the last year.

Despite these issues becoming clear to me over the last few years, I remained a shareholder because I naively thought things could go back to normal. I thought maybe Musk would wake up from his social media-fueled madness, or shareholders would give him the boot.

This brings me to my next issue: I am becoming unaligned with the majority of Tesla shareholders.

It couldn’t have been clearer when 73% of them voted to reinstate Musk’s ~$50 billion compensation package without any change after a legal discovery process showed that the board and the CEO didn’t follow due process in getting the original shareholder vote.

Some greedy lawyers and a courageous judge gave Tesla shareholders an opportunity to tell Musk and Tesla’s board that the company deserves proper governance and not be “run like a family business,” as Tesla’s largest independent investor said.

The timing was incredible. The opportunity came right after:

  • Musk threatened shareholders to not build products he himself claimed were critical to Tesla if he didn’t get 25% of the company
  • He sold tens of billions of dollars worth of Tesla shares to buy Twitter, said he would stop selling and yet kept going
  • He entirely lost his mind for a while and challenged Mark Zuckerberg to an MMA fight, then chickened out (I thought this was all a joke at first, and it might have been at first, but it undoubtedly became not a joke)
  • Musk seemed completely uninterested in Tesla for about a year, when he was running Twitter, SpaceX, Neurallink, the Boring Company, and xAI – with many of those companies recruiting from Tesla. Then, he returned and fired 15-20% of the company, including the entire charging team for no good reason.
  • Finally, he canceled the stock options of Tesla employees

The last one was a big one for me. Musk had just canceled the stock options for Tesla employees just a month before the judge’s decision to rescind his own stock option package. Right after the judge’s decision, Musk got interested in Tesla again, started talking about the company more, and, of course, started to fight to get his own stock options back.

In his view, his stock options are essential, but those of Tesla employees? Less so.

I thought that Tesla shareholders would see the hypocrisy in this. They would see that Musk has become a burden at Tesla more than an asset.

Instead, despite all those factors, Tesla shareholders convinced themselves that it was “the right thing to do” to give more money to the wealthiest man in the world. Not only that, they made “lists” of shareholders who said they were voting against the package and told them to go ‘f*ck’ themselves and that they wouldn’t be part of the Tesla community anymore.

I don’t want to be a part of that anymore. I still love many of Tesla’s products and I will keep reporting on them, but I am completely unaligned with the investor base, so I don’t think it makes sense for me to be a shareholder anymore.

Finally, and for full disclosure, the last reason why I sold has nothing to do with Tesla. I see a lot of signs that we are entering a recession. I prefer to be more liquid in those situations, and Tesla is up 10% in two days for seemingly no reason, so it felt like a good time to get out since I don’t feel aligned with shareholders.

I sincerely hope the best for them, though. I know that many of them are well-intentioned people. That said, I recommend caution as I think you are also in the company of low-moral individuals who are poisoning the TSLA community.

FSD side note: what if Tesla does solve self-driving? I am mentioning it because I know this is something that keeps a lot of people in, but there’s no FOMO for this MOFO. If it happens, it happens. I’ll celebrate it and shed a tear for my wallet.

I’m the first to admit that if Tesla can solve self-driving with its approach, it would result in unprecedented value creation, but I am simply not convinced that this will happen anytime soon or before others can solve it.

Why? As a Tesla shareholder, you have two options: take Elon at his word or trust the data.

For the reasons mentioned above, I don’t trust what Elon says, so we can forget about the former.

As for the latter, despite Tesla now openly using miles between interventions as a metric to track FSD progress, the automaker has never released this data. This is a giant red flag.

For the data, we have to rely on our own experience with the system and the experience of others. I’ve had Tesla FSD for years and I’ve been impressed at times and unimpressed other times. The only thing I’m certain of based on my experience is that it is currently nothing close to an unsupervised self-driving system.

We can also use the crowdsourced data, which is limited, but the best we have since Tesla refuses to release its own:

The average of the v12.5.1 versions, the latest to be released, is 32 miles between disengagement and 128 miles between critical disengagement.

This compares to 30 miles between disengagement and 189 miles between critical disengagement for v12.3.6, which is the last FSD version that went into a wide release earlier this year.

Elon is talking about 3x that this month and maybe 6x that next month. He has been consistently wrong about these predictions, but even if he was right, most experts are talking about 400x to 1,000x needed to achieve an unsupervised robotaxi service.

Even with exponential growth, this will take way longer than what Elon is claiming right now. Then, it needs to make that work on the current hardware and the HW3, which is already running a smaller model than HW4.

If the Tesla investment thesis relies on this program to work, which is what Elon himself is saying, it’s a pass for me.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

SunZia Wind’s massive 2.4 GW project hits a big milestone

Published

on

By

SunZia Wind’s massive 2.4 GW project hits a big milestone

GE Vernova has produced over half the turbines needed for SunZia Wind, which will be the largest wind farm in the Western Hemisphere when it comes online in 2026.

GE Vernova has manufactured enough turbines at its Pensacola, Florida, factory to supply over 1.2 gigawatts (GW) of the turbines needed for the $5 billion, 2.4 GW SunZia Wind, a project milestone. The wind farm will be sited in Lincoln, Torrance, and San Miguel counties in New Mexico.

At a ribbon-cutting event for Pensacola’s new customer experience center, GE Vernova CEO Scott Strazik noted that since 2023, the company has invested around $70 million in the Pensacola factory.

The Pensacola investments are part of the announcement GE Vernova made in January that it will invest nearly $600 million in its US factories and facilities over the next two years to help meet the surging electricity demands globally. GE Vernova says it’s expecting its investments to create more than 1,500 new US jobs.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Vic Abate, CEO of GE Vernova Wind, said, “Our dedicated employees in Pensacola are working to address increasing energy demands for the US. The workhorse turbines manufactured at this world-class factory are engineered for reliability and scalability, ensuring our customers can meet growing energy demand.”

SunZia Wind and Transmission will create US history’s largest clean energy infrastructure project.

Read more: The largest clean energy project in US history closes $11B, starts full construction


If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. 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. 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 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.

Continue Reading

Environment

Stablecoin issuer Circle files for IPO as public markets open to crypto

Published

on

By

USDC stablecoin issuer Circle files for IPO as public markets open to crypto

Jeremy Allaire, Co-Founder and CEO, Circle 

David A. Grogan | CNBC

Circle, the company behind the USDC stablecoin, has filed for an initial public offering and plans to list on the New York Stock Exchange.

The prospectus, filed with the SEC on Tuesday, lays the groundwork for Circle’s long-anticipated entry into the public markets.

JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup are serving as lead underwriters, and the company is reportedly aiming for a valuation of up to $5 billion. It will trade under ticker symbol CRCL.

It marks Circle’s second attempt at going public. A prior merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) collapsed in late 2022 amid regulatory challenges. Since then, Circle has made strategic moves to position itself closer to the heart of global finance, including the announcement last year that it would relocate its headquarters from Boston to One World Trade Center in New York.

Circle reported $1.68 billion in revenue and reserve income in 2024, up from $1.45 billion in 2023 and $772 million in 2022. The company reported net income last year of about $156 million., down from $268 million a year earlier.

Read more about tech and crypto from CNBC Pro

A successful IPO would make Circle one of the most prominent pure-play crypto companies to list on a U.S. exchange. Coinbase went public through a direct listing in 2021 and has a market cap of about $44 billion.

Circle will be trying to hit the public markets at a volatile moment for tech stocks, with the Nasdaq having just wrapped up its steepest quarterly drop since 2022. The tech IPO market has been mostly dry for over three years, though there are signs of life. Online lender Klarna, digital health company Hinge Health and ticketing marketplace StubHub have all filed their prospectuses recently. Late last week, artificial intelligence infrastructure provider CoreWeave held the biggest IPO for a U.S. venture-backed tech company since 2021. But the company scaled back the offering and the stock had a disappointing first two days of trading before rebounding on Tuesday.

Circle is best known as the issuer of USD Coin (USDC), the world’s second-largest stablecoin by market capitalization.

Pegged one-to-one to the U.S. dollar and backed by cash and short-term Treasury securities, USDC has roughly $60 billion in circulation and makes up about 26% of the total market cap for stablecoins, behind Tether‘s 67% dominance. Its market cap has grown 36% this year, however, compared with Tether’s 5% growth.

The company’s push into public markets reflects a broader moment for the crypto industry, which is enjoying political favor under a more crypto-friendly U.S. administration. The stablecoin sector specifically has been ramping up as the industry gains confidence that the crypto market will get its first piece of U.S. legislation passed and implemented this year, focusing on stablecoins. President Donald Trump has said he hopes lawmakers will send stablecoin legislation to his desk before Congress’s August recess.

Stablecoins’ growth could have investment implications for crypto exchanges like Robinhood and Coinbase as they become a bigger part of crypto trading and cross-border transfers. Coinbase also has an agreement with Circle to share 50% of the revenue of its USDC stablecoin, and Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said on the company’s most recent earnings call that it has a “stretch goal to make USDC the number 1 stablecoin.” 

The stablecoin market has grown about 11% so far this year and about 47% in the past year, and has become a “systemically important” part of the crypto market, according to Bernstein. Historically, digital assets in this sector have been used for trading and as collateral in decentralized finance (DeFi), and crypto investors watch them closely for evidence of demand, liquidity and activity in the market.

WATCH: Circle CEO on launching first stablecoin in Japan

Circle CEO on launching the first stablecoin in Japan

Continue Reading

Environment

BYD’s global EV takeover is far from over as overseas sales double to start 2025

Published

on

By

BYD's global EV takeover is far from over as overseas sales double to start 2025

After its meteoric rise in the global auto industry last year, the Chinese EV giant is off to a hot start in 2025. BYD sold over one million EVs and plug-in hybrids in the first three months of the year. Even more impressive, BYD’s overseas sales doubled to start the year as it expands into new markets. With new EVs arriving, some predict BYD could see even more growth this year.

BYD’s overseas sales are surging as new EVs arrive

BYD sold 377,420 new energy vehicles (NEVs) last month alone. Like most Chinese automakers, BYD reports NEV sales, including plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) and fully electric vehicles (EVs).

Of the 371,419 passenger vehicles BYD sold in March, 166,109 were EVs, and the other 205,310 were PHEVs. Combined, BYD’s sales were up 23% compared to last year.

BYD’s Dynasty and Ocean series accounted for 350,615, while its luxury Denza brand sold 12,620, Fang Cheng Bao had 8,051, and its ultra-luxury Yangwang brand sold another 133 models.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Through the first three months of 2025, BYD sold over one million (1,000,804) NEVs. That’s up 60% from the 626,263 sold in Q1 2024. Fully electric models accounted for 416,388 while PHEV sales reached 569,710, an increase of 39% and 76% from last year, respectively.

BYD-overseas-EV-sales
BYD Dolphin (left) and Atto 3 (right) at the 2024 Tokyo Spring Festival (Source: BYD Japan)

BYD’s overseas sales reached a new record last month, with 72,723 vehicles sold in markets outside of China. Through March, BYD has sold over 206,000 NEVs overseas, more than double (+110%) the number it sold last year.

BYD has made a name for itself with ultra-low-cost EVs like the Seagull, which starts at under $10,000 in China. In overseas markets, like Mexico, it’s sold as the Dolphin Mini and starts at around 358,800 pesos, or around $20,000.

BYD-overseas-EV-sales
BYD Seagull EV (Dolphin Mini) testing in Brazil (Source: BYD)

The world’s largest EV maker is quickly expanding into new segments with pickup trucks, smart SUVs, luxury models, and electric supercars rolling out.

Last week, BYD launched the Yangwang U7, its first ultra-luxury electric sedan. With four electric motors, the U7 packs 1,287 horsepower, good for a 0 to 62 mph (0 to 100 km/h) sprint in just 2.9 seconds. It also has up to 720 km (447 miles) CLTC driving range.

BYD's-ultra-luxury-EV-sedan
BYD Yangwang U7 ultra-luxury electric sedan (Source: Yangwang)

The Porsche Panamera-size EV is loaded with BYD’s top-tier “God’s Eye” A advanced driving assistance system, DiPilot 600, and a host of other premium features. All of that, and it starts at just just 628,000 yuan ($87,700).

In Europe, BYD is aggressively expanding with new vehicles tailored to buyers in the region, like the Sealion 7 midsize SUV and Atto 2. It’s also expected to launch the low-cost Seagull EV in Europe later this year or early 2026 as the “Dolphin Surf.”

BYD-overseas-EV-sales
BYD’s wide-reaching electric vehicle portfolio (Source: BYD)

According to S&P Global Mobility, BYD’s sales are expected to double in Europe this year to around 186,000. By 2029, that number could reach 400,000 or more.

BYD outsold Honda and Nissan in 2024. As it aims to sell 5.5 million vehicles this year, BYD could be on track to surpass Ford in global sales this year. BYD also aims to sell over 800,000 EVs overseas in 2025, double the number it sold last year.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending