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

CES2025 | Kubota brings electric equipment, robots, and hydrogen to CES

Published

on

By

CES2025 | Kubota brings electric equipment, robots, and hydrogen to CES

Kubota came to this year’s CES with a sprawling display filled with electric equipment, hydrogen gensets, and an onslaught of commercial robots ready to mow, farm, dig, and build. If you weren’t impressed by Kubota’s display this year, you weren’t paying attention.

Kubota gave us a sneak peek of its KATR farm robot – itself a smaller, updated version of last year’s New Agri Concept – before the doors officially opened last week. Kubota’s robotic farm buddies promise to be able to quietly and autonomously haul stuff from one end of the farm to another, or pull carts and specialized implements along predetermined paths.

KATR uses self-leveling technology and active suspension to ensure its cargo deck stays level when working on the sort of uneven terrain found on farms or construction sites.

Kubota KATR w/ self-leveling cargo deck; photo by the author.

That doesn’t mean the New Agri Concept is dead, though. Agri Concept 2.0 debuted as an electric tractor concept offering AI-powered automation and a fully electric powertrain. The new version features a Lite Brite-style “grille” that it uses to communicate its current mode, direction, and other important information with the people it shares a job site with.

On the more practical side, Kubota showed off its KX38-4e Electric compact excavator. First shown in overseas markets in 2022, the KX38-4e Electric features a 49.2 kWh lithium-ion battery that’s good for up to five hours of continuous operation. More than enough to complete a typical day of work on a construction site when you factor out idle time.

An onboard DC fast charger means it can be quickly recharged between shifts, too. But when there’s no grid power on the site, charging can be a challenge. That’s why Kubota has hydrogen genset for zero-emission on-site power generation.

Looked at individually, each of the new electric Kubota products on display might be impressive. The real magic, though, is in the way the Kubota machines work together as a holistic job site or farm solution.

“At Kubota, we believe that truly listening to our customers drives innovation in every aspect of what we call the ‘Work Loop’,” explains Brett McMickell, Chief Technology Officer of Kubota North America. “The Work Loop — an essential cycle of assessing, analyzing, and acting — has always been fundamental to effective task management. With the integration of advanced sensors, AI-driven analysis, networking protocols, automation, and robotics, we are enhancing this cycle to be more seamless and efficient than ever before.”

That was obvious in some of the more thoughtful implements and attachments on display, including a Smart Plant Imager that uses advanced robotics and “hyper-spectral imaging” cameras to capture real-time data and insights on a plant-by-plant level – as well as a Smart Autonomous Sprayer and Robotic Pruner that that classifies buds and canes based on position and fruiting potential, it optimizes production precision and accuracy.

The more you look, the more impressive Kubota’s farming solution gets. “We will continue to learn from many of our customers across segments to iterate the next product and technology solution that will help them manage tomorrow’s challenges and grow their businesses,” McMickell added. “This is how Kubota works to make a better quality of life for individuals and society.”

There was more, of course. Autonomous versions of the company’s electric zero-turn mower with GPS-powered route memory, fun accessory baskets for the robots, even a weird, jet engine looking thing that I forgot to ask about (below). I was genuinely impressed, in other words, and can’t wait to see what Kubota comes up with next year.

Kubota CES2025 | more photos

Original content from Electrek.

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

Continue Reading

Environment

Tenways C GO 600Pro commuter e-bike is as smooth as it gets

Published

on

By

Tenways C GO 600Pro commuter e-bike is as smooth as it gets

The e-bike industry has stalled a little bit in terms of features, and with harsh new legislation coming in from places like California, maybe it is time to start looking at e-bikes that are light, efficient, and smooth rather than how much wattage they can output. The Tenways CGO 600Pro, which comes in at just 37 pounds, is a model e-bike you should keep an eye on…

The CGO 600Pro comes in 2 flavors: a carbon belt single-speed version that Micah reviewed and this one, which is a chain and 8-speed Shimano gears. The belt drive is going to win out on simplicity and weight but if you are expecting to get close to the ‘class 1’ top speed of 20mph or need to go up some significant hills, you’ll want to opt for the chain/gear version here.

One thing I love about this bike is the tradeoff decisions. These keep the price low and weight down while still providing a great ride. The spec sheet overall is solid but not top-shelf.

Tenways CGO600 Pro tech specs (chain/geared version)

  • Motor: 350 Watt rear hub motor with 45 Nm of torque
  • Top speed: 20 mph (32 km/h)
  • Range: Claimed up to 53 miles (85 km)
  • Battery: 36V 10Ah (360 Wh)
  • Weight: 37 lb (16.8 kg, over 40lbs with fenders, kickstand, etc)
  • Frame: 6061 aluminum alloy
  • Tires: CST Puncture-proof 700*45C-size Tires
  • Brakes: Tektro dual-piston hydraulic disc brakes
  • Gearing: Shimano 8-Speed Claris
  • Extras: Compact LED display, 4 pedal assist levels, slim fender set, kickstand, internally routed cables, LED lighting, removable battery, Tenways app integration, torque sensor, four color options

No Throttle?

Note that as a class 1 e-bike, neither belt/chain version has a throttle. While this may be controversial to some, it not only simplifies the bike, it makes it a Class 1, which will be legal in the most places. I tend to think of no throttle as a “foot throttle” and for the commuter application, this will serve well. Would I appreciate a throttle on a hill start? Perhaps.

The idea of this bike is to just enhance your pedal bike experience. You are going to get some exercise on this bike versus a bike that is a glorified low-power moped that runs on throttle with vestigial pedals.

More importantly, the torque sensor here is phenomenal; I mean, it is probably the best torque sensor I’ve ridden connected to a rear hub motor. The acceleration is smooth and strangely powerful for the 350W/45nm motor. Significant hills are a breeze, and this is one of the few bikes where I forget that I’m using an e-bike sometimes (until I look down and I’m going 20mph with little effort). Hills are also where the gearing really helps.

The tires are also the perfect size for a commuter with puncture resistance and treads that will do OK in rain and snow.

The bike itself is also very stealthy in terms of showing that it is a powered e-bike. The small 36V, 10Ah battery is integrated magnificently into the narrow downtube of the bike. All of the cables are integrated into the bike frame for a super-clean look. The rear hub motor is small but packs a punch. Many people won’t even recognize this as an e-bike. While I’m proud to be riding an e-bike around, perhaps some people would like to keep that on the down-low.

Brakes are great with hydraulic Tektros clasping against 160mm rotors in front and back. It is such a light bike that stopping can be jarring.

Assembly was super easy and took about 30 minutes with the included tool set. The battery came about 40% charged but was ready to go within a few hours with the 3A charger. Shoutout to Tenways for using a water-resistant standardized barrel charger adapter and not some proprietary adapter so that I can use one from another bike when I inevitably lose it.

Electrek’s take

The Tenways CGO600 is a fantastic light, clean, stiff and smooth e-bike that I have 0 reservations about recommending. While the battery and motor are small, they power the light bike admirably and for around 50 miles (your mileage will vary).

Currently there is a $200 off promotion code “HAPPY2025TW” at checkout bringing the CGO600Pro down to $1399 which is an amazing price for this bike:

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

Continue Reading

Environment

E-bike makers push speed-reduction updates after California’s stricter new laws

Published

on

By

E-bike makers push speed-reduction updates after California's stricter new laws

Earlier this month, California enacted new regulations for electric bikes that resulted in stricter speed limits on e-bikes with throttles. At the time, it was unclear how electric bike makers would respond to the new regulations, but we’re now starting to see at least one manufacturer pushing to bring its existing e-bikes owned by California residents into compliance.

The new laws remove ambiguity in the Class 2/Class 3 e-bike categorization. Formerly, many e-bikes were designed to operate in either category depending on the owner’s desires. Such bikes could operate as Class 2 e-bikes reaching max speeds of 20 mph (32 km/h) with a throttle, or as Class 3 e-bikes reaching higher speeds of 28 mph (45 km/h) on pedal assist-only.

In fact, the overwhelming majority of Class 3 e-bikes sold in the US used this design, offering hybrid compliance for functionality as both Class 2 and Class 3 e-bikes.

After California’s new laws removed any ambiguity between the classes, it is now clear that e-bikes in the state will need to function either only as Class 2 e-bikes (throttle up to 20 mph) OR Class 3 e-bikes (up to 28 mph but without any throttle).

Globe Haul ST cargo e-bike

It was unclear whether existing e-bikes already sold prior to the law’s enactment would receive an exemption, but bicycle manufacturer Specialized doesn’t seem to be taking any chances.

Specialized is the maker of the Globe line of cargo e-bikes, and recently sent out an update to owners that would help them bring their e-bikes into compliance with California’s new stricter regulations.

Like so many other electric bikes on the market, the Globe e-bikes came with throttles allowing 20 mph speeds without pedaling, but could also reach up to 28 mph on pedal assist.

A new firmware update promoted by the company will essentially restrict its e-bikes to purely Class 2 operation, removing the motor’s ability to assist the bike in going any faster, even when pedaling without throttle operation.

The update will also come with a Class 2 compliance sticker that replaces the previous Class 3 sticker.

To install the voluntary update, Globe owners are encouraged to visit their local Specialized dealer.

A copy of the update letter was shared on Reddit and can be seen below.

Electrek’s Take

This is an interesting approach, because it indicates an understanding by Specialized that it is responsible for any of its e-bikes already on the road that have now been made non-compliant by the new law.

There are basically two main options to “fix” these previously hybrid Class 2/3 e-bikes and bring them into compliance. One is to unplug and remove the throttle, turning the bike into a true Class 3 e-bike under CA regulations. The other is to remove the ability for the motor to assist at speeds over 20 mph, turning it into a Class 2 e-bike. That latter is what Specialized appears to have decided to go with, and it makes sense to me. If you asked most owners of these e-bikes about which they’d give up if they had to, they’d probably tell you “take my 21-28 mph speed but leave me my throttle”. Throttles are simply such a major part of e-bikes in North America that most riders would give up the whole bike if they were forced to give up the throttle.

The bigger question here is how many Globe riders will actually install this update. Since you need to not only opt-in to it, but also physically visit a dealer to do it, I have to imagine that the vast majority of riders will simply ignore the update altogether, keeping their faster non-compliant speed on an e-bike with a throttle. I’m not saying that’s the right thing to do, but I am saying it’s what will happen in the real world.

And if we are being honest, these Globes aren’t even the e-bikes that are at the heart of the issue. Most CA residents are more concerned with teenagers ripping down sidewalks on moped-style e-bikes, not the local moms and dads riding to Trader Joe’s on their sensible, upscale cargo e-bikes that just happen to have hybrid Class 2/3 performance.

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

Continue Reading

Trending