|
|
|
|
|
by bko
537 days ago
|
|
The upside of having an outspoken public figure at the head is that he's in charge and takes ownership. It's pretty wild that you can have some failure in your Tesla, and you can just tweet about it and if its a compelling issue you'll get the CEO to respond and address it directly. Imagine trying to get the attention of someone from Ford. I don't know if you can have it both ways. Either you're a faceless soulless corporation and you're dealing with PR people and can't get a straight answer, or you're dealing with someone in founder mode but you'll have to hear their political opinions if you choose to use the social media platform they also own. In other words, I don't think him being eccentric and generally disagreeable is unrelated to him building great products and companies. I wish more founders were eccentric and taking risk rather than trying to squeeze out every last dime of profits by outsourcing or cutting corners or the million other marginal things an MBA program will teach you to do. |
|
Within the domain of the private sector, yes. The paedo comments were distasteful, but that's about it.
That changed when he became a political figure. (And a partisan one at that.) Musk, the brand, has fundamentally changed in a way that more resembles Soros or Murdoch than the bipartisan tech titan he was.