Tesla CEO Elon Musk and his security detail depart the company’s local office in Washington, January 27, 2023.
Jonathan Ernst | Reuters
Elon Musk‘s multiple ventures and the relationships between them are facing increased scrutiny as the Tesla CEO continues to add more to his plate.
During Tesla’s second-quarter earnings call on Wednesday, Truist analyst William Stein asked Musk about yet another tech venture he has started up and incorporated in Nevada: xAI. Musk recently said that the artificial intelligence startup aims to compete with Google Bard or OpenAI’s ChatGPT someday, and plans to collaborate with Tesla on software and silicon alike.
Stein asked him, “For investors that think there might be quite a bit of value in the AI features and products of Tesla, it might be concerning to see you pursuing another endeavor where AI is the focus. Can you talk about how xAI might overlap, might perhaps compete with Tesla or in other ways perhaps it enhances the value of what Tesla does?”
Musk claimed that xAI and its focus artificial general intelligence on would bring some value to Tesla, and talked about recruiting as an example.
“There were just some of the world’s best AI engineers and scientists that were willing to join a startup but they were not willing to join a large, sort of relatively established company like Tesla.” He added, “So I was like, OK well, better it’s a startup that I run than they go work somewhere else. That’s kind of the genesis of xAI.”
In addition to the xAI example, he said he was only able to entice a top materials science engineer away from his job at Apple by promising the engineer could work concurrently for SpaceX and Tesla. The engineer in question, Charles Kuehmann, joined Tesla in late 2015 and now holds the title of vice president of SpaceX and Tesla materials engineering, reporting directly to the CEO.
The issue of Musk and his multiple ventures also came up earlier this month, when Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., urged the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate its Twitter ties and related corporate governance issues.
Musk led a $44 billion buyout of the social media company last year and appointed himself CEO there temporarily. He is now the controlling shareholder, CTO and executive chair of Twitter while holding down the CEO role both at Tesla and at his aerospace and defense company, SpaceX. He’s also the founder and funder at the brain-computer interface startup Neuralink and tunneling venture The Boring Co.
Tesla is the only public company among the bunch. And it has never disclosed to shareholders exactly how much talent, time and money it has spent helping Musk at his other ventures, or why sending people over to Twitter would comprise a reasonable use of Tesla resources. Musk previously enlisted Tesla, SpaceX and The Boring Co. employees to assist him with his Twitter takeover, as CNBC reported.
At least one senior Tesla employee has jumped ship to Musk’s X Corp., the parent company of Twitter. Court filings revealed thatDhruv Batura, who had worked at Tesla since late 2013 and was a senior manager of business operations finance there, is now a senior director of finance at X Corp. Batura was posting job ads for X Corp. on Twitter on the day of Tesla’s second-quarter earnings report.
In a May 2023 proxy filing, Tesla did disclose a few details about its related party transactions. Among these, Tesla revealed that “Twitter is party to certain commercial and support agreements with Tesla. Under these agreements, Twitter incurred expenses of approximately $1.0 million in the aggregate in 2022 and $0.4 million in 2023 through February.” Tesla hasn’t said what, exactly, Twitter is buying from the company.
Risks include lack of focus, employee burnout
According to London School of Economics professor of organizational behavior, Randall S. Peterson, “Musk is making a convoluted argument in saying ‘I am helping Tesla by keeping these great people from joining a competitor.’ It’s a counter-factual you cannot ever really test or challenge in an investigation.”
Most startups fail, Peterson noted, and people who want to create startups were probably not likely to join Tesla’s direct competitors in the automotive industry.
Peterson said Musk’s many ventures can create risks for Tesla, and shareholders should seek more details.
“It’s hard to focus on and excel at any one thing when you run multiple companies,” Peterson said. “That’s a risk around the CEO himself. Would most companies’ shareholders tolerate their CEO running several other companies at the same time? The answer to that is probably no. So that raises a question of what the Tesla board is doing, whether they are independent at any level, or are so enamored of Musk that they not only tolerate his unusual way of working, but might be missing significant fundamental problems as long as the money keeps coming.”
Boards at companies that have ended up in crisis, like Enron and the Royal Bank of Scotland, failed to rein in their CEOs despite signs of problems for many quarters, he noted.
Another risk, Peterson said, is that Musk’s employees may feel pressure to work on many projects at once for him concurrently, outside of Tesla. In a quest to please him or rack up new work experience, employees may fail to recuperate from their work and burnout. Burnout, he said, can lead to high attrition or poor performance.
Finally, the professor noted, Musk may be creating distractions that impede focus among his employees, even if his intention is to cross-pollinate among his businesses.
“You need to be super-focused to be the best at something, both as an individual and as a corporation. That’s the reason we have seen a trend away from conglomerates which were big in the 70s to companies that are more focused today,” the professor said.
Still, Musk appears to be doubling down on unapologetic collaborations between companies in his growing empire.
On Wednesday’s call, he was asked to give an update on Tesla’s progress developing a humanoid robot dubbed Optimus. Musk waxed on in a futuristic vein, saying that Tesla may one day collaborate with Neuralink to make robotic, prosthetic arms and legs to help amputees return to full mobility or dexterity.
Tesla did not immediately respond for a request for comment. Twitter responded with an automated reply containing a crude symbol.
Opendoor shares popped about 10% on Friday after CEO Carrie Wheeler said she’s resigning from the online real estate company, which has seen a surge in recent interest from retail investors.
Pressure began building on Wheeler, who took over the top job in 2022, after the company’s quarterly earnings report earlier this month failed to reassure investors that a turnaround is underway. The stock is up more than sixfold since bottoming out at 51 cents in June, a price that put the company at risk of being delisted from the Nasdaq.
“The last weeks of intense outside interest in Opendoor have come at a time when the company needs to stay focused and charging ahead,” Wheeler wrote in a post on X. “I believe the best thing I can do for Opendoor now is to accelerate my succession plans that I shared with the Board mid-year and make room for new leadership to take the reins.”
Opendoor’s business involves using technology to buy and sell homes, pocketing the gains. In its latest earnings report, Opendoor said it expects to acquire just 1,200 homes in the third quarter, down from 1,757 in the second quarter and 3,504 in the third quarter of 2024. It’s also pulling down marketing spending.
Read more CNBC tech news
Hedge fund manager Eric Jackson, who spearheaded Opendoor’s stock jump in July, celebrated the news and told his new band of followers on X, “Let’s start THINKING BIG AGAIN.” Jackson said last month on X that his firm had taken a stake in the company and was betting it would be a “100-bagger over the next few years.”
Jackson has been a loud voice on X pushing for Wheeler’s departure, and was recently joined by Opendoor co-founder and venture capitalist Keith Rabois, who posted on Aug. 13 that “not a single founder nor executive” who guided the company to its IPO supports Wheeler as CEO.
Opendoor on Friday named technology chief Shrisha Radhakrishna as “president and interim leader” and said a CEO search is underway.
Opendoor went public through a special purpose acquisition company in 2020, riding a SPAC wave supported by low interest rates and Covid-era market euphoria. The soaring inflation and rising interest rates that followed hit all of technology stocks, but had an outsized impact on Opendoor due it its direct exposure to mortgage rates.
The company lost 99% of its value from early 2021 through its trough in June. With Friday’s gains, its market cap stands at about $2.5 billion.
The company forecasted adjusted earnings of $2.11 per this quarter, falling short of the $2.39 per share expected by LSEG. The company projected $6.7 billion in revenue, versus the $7.34 billion estimate.
During an earnings call with analysts, CEO Gary Dickerson said that the current macroeconomic backdrop and trade issues have fueled “increasing uncertainty and lower visibility,” primarily within its China business.
He also said the guidance does not account for pending export license applications and assumes a significant backlog.
Read more CNBC tech news
Applied Materials also cited weakness from leading edge customers and said China clients are easing spending after rapidly ramping up equipment manufacturing in the region.
Bank of America‘s Vivek Arya downgraded shares to a neutral rating and lowered his price target, citing ongoing China and leading-edge headwinds.
“The uncertainty could persist, making it tougher for the stock to outperform despite reasonable valuation,” he wrote. “We suspect the slowdown is more company specific.”
Despite the weak guidance, Applied Materials topped third-quarter earnings and revenue estimates, posting adjusted earnings of $2.48 per share on $7.3 billion in revenue. Net income reached $1.78 billion, or $2.22 a share, versus $1.71 billion, or $2.05 a share, a year ago.
A government intervention in struggling chipmaker Intel is “essential” for the sake of national security, analyst Gil Luria said Friday, following a report that the Trump administration is weighing taking a stake in the company.
“We’re all capitalists,” Luria, head of technology research at D.A. Davidson, said in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “We don’t want government to intervene and own private enterprise, but this is national security.”
Bloomberg reported Thursday that the Trump administration is considering having the U.S. government take a stake in Intel. The news sent Intel shares higher, and the stock climbed again Friday.
Intel previously declined to comment on the report.
Luria said such a deal is needed to revive Intel and reduce the country’s reliance on companies like Samsung and Taiwan Semiconductor to manufacture chips. President Donald Trump has called for more chips and high-end technology to be made in the U.S.
Read more CNBC tech news
How the White House could structure such an intervention is still in question. Bloomberg reported Friday that the administration has discussed using funds from the CHIPS Act.
Intel received $7.9 billion from the Department of Commerce through the CHIPS Act, and it was awarded roughly $3 billion under the CHIPS Act for the Pentagon’s Secure Enclave program.
“Intel has had many opportunities over decades to get it right, and it hasn’t. So we need to intervene,” Luria said. “The government’s going to come in and it’s going to give Intel unfair advantages, and if it’s going to do that, it wants a piece of the business.”
Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan met with Trump at the White House on Monday after the president called for his resignation based on allegations that he has ties to China.
Luria pointed to OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s comments that the rise of superintelligent AI could be “the next wave of nuclear proliferation,” as evidence that direct intervention by the government is needed.
“We can’t rely on somebody else making shell casings for our nuclear arsenal,” Luria said. “We have to get it right.”