[dubeye]

You don't have to win them all.

[kimixa]

He does (or at least a good proportion) if you want to use as precedent for delivering on these promises, though. Especially for the larger more extreme statements and not just buying himself into an existing business.

[dubeye]

Why does he?

that's an arbitrary standard set by you.

His investors are quite happy with his success rate. He is constantly building new stuff. And as a consumer who has had great experience with every product I've bought, so am I

[Slartie]

No one buys into Elon's firms because he's expecting dividends.

His investors are not investing because of his success rate in delivering on his promises. His investors are investing exclusively because they believe that stock they buy now will be worth more tomorrow. They all know that's most likely not because Elon delivers anything concrete (because he only does that in what, 20% of cases?), but because Elon rides the hype train harder tomorrow. But they don't care if it's hype or substance, as long as numbers go up.

Elon's investors are happy with his success rate only in terms of continuously generating hype. Which, I have to admit, he's been able to keep up longer now than I ever thought possible.

[dubeye]

Perhaps my marketing background is clouding my view, but have exceptional hyping skills seems quite useful when attracting investment.

And fact is Musk is building a lot of stuff of real substance. The hype to substance ratio isn't quite as important as some choose to beleive

[pzo]

Theranos were also hyping a lot and trying to build some stuff. There is some threshold (to be decided where) after which something is more of a fraud than a hype.

Also these days stock market doesn't have much relation to real state of economy - it's in many ways a casino.

[dubeye]

Not sure who determines the threshold, he certainly goes to court more than your average person, but these are not start ups, they are large companies under a lot of scrutiny. I don't think the comparison is valid

[indoordin0saur]

If Theranos promised ten amazing innovations or useful products, got 7 of them to market to great success while revolutionizing their industry I'd forgive them if their other 3 products turned out to be hype.

[AlexandrB]

> The hype to substance ratio isn't quite as important as some choose to beleive

Musk's ratio is such that his utterances are completely free from actionable information. If he says something, it may or may not happen and even if it does happen the time frame (and cost) is unlikely to be correct.

I don't get why anyone would invest their money on this basis.

[dubeye]

it's more to do with his track record at creating returns for investors?

[greggoB]

> but have exceptional hyping skills seems quite useful when attracting investment.

Elizabeth Holmes (Theranos) and a lot of ex-crypto-bros (fraudsters) would agree.

"Exceptional hyping skills" is (today) possibly a more derogatory term than you're expecting.

> And fact is Musk is building a lot of stuff of real substance.

I think the point others are making is this is a more accurate description of Musk ~10 years ago. In the past 5 years its been what, the cybertruck?

[dubeye]

It's a derogatory comment among certain types of technical employee, I would agree. Not so much amongst those in leadership or softer roles.

I wouldn't put cybertruck in the win column personally

[the_sleaze_]

Cynics are often right

Optimists are often rich

[kimixa]

I feel that Cynics are often average.

Optimists are either rich, or destitute. And though you probably hear more about the richer parts, that doesn't mean they're more common.