[ivraatiems]

> It is far more likely that your personal dislike of him is making you see a distorted reality.

Certainly possible. I personally think he's acting like a buffoon and I haven't been shy about stating it.

However, as I told another commenter in this thread, I think the relatively objective argument is that while Musk was necessary initially to get Tesla into existence and functioning, he's now more of a liability than an asset. It's not that he was never valuable or never deserved any trust - rather that he doesn't deserve it now.

Put another way: At what point does the goodwill he's earned expire?

[_ea1k]

I have always seen him as a bit like William Durant. His use expires when the company is no longer trying to grow at 2x every 3 years.

Alternatively, he could dramatically change his approach as the business matures.

[permatech]

> I think the relatively objective argument is that while Musk was necessary initially to get Tesla into existence and functioning

Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpennin initially got Tesla into existence.

[minhazm]

True, but Elon Musk led their series A, which is also when he joined the company along with J.B. Yes Martin and Marc created the company, but it would not be where it is today without Elon Musk.

It doesn't always matter who initially created the company. For example one of the co-founders of Apple was Ronald Wayne, whom the vast majority of people have never heard of. He left Apple very early and sold all his shares back to Jobs and Wozniak for $800.