**Unwelcoming toxic/griefing/pessimistic sniping comments that are not on topic and don’t move the discussion forward will be removed. A ban will be issued if necessary. Consider this before commenting. Report posts or comments that violate the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/mod/teslamotors/rules/). Thank you.** If you are unable to find it, use the link to it. We are not a support sub, please make sure to use the proper resources if you have questions: [Official Tesla Support](https://www.tesla.com/support), [r/TeslaLounge](https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/) personal content | [Discord Live Chat](https://discord.gg/tesla) for anything. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/teslamotors) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Full quote: > Earlier today, there was a media report erroneously claiming that the Tesla Board had contacted recruitment firms to initiate a CEO search at the company. > This is absolutely false (and this was communicated to the media before the report was published). > The CEO of Tesla is Elon Musk and the Board is highly confident in his ability to continue executing on the exciting growth plan ahead. > – Robyn Denholm Musk [responded](https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1917815854647107990): > It is an EXTREMELY BAD BREACH OF ETHICS that the @WSJ would publish a DELIBERATELY FALSE ARTICLE and fail to include an unequivocal denial beforehand by the Tesla board of directors!
Unfortunately the fake news reached the front page of reddit where a certain sub related to politics rated this at 35k, and almost everyone there took it hook, line and sinker.
Also this has now days old and reposted 50 times.
Sure. What a shame though, those would be great news.
Honestly, I’ll take the word of a journalist over Tesla’s board. Journalists won’t publish rumors. They have concrete sources with proof, even if they can’t release them to the public.
Damn
Translation: Someone leaked our plans we weren't ready to act on and now we're doing a press release to save face.
> Also this has now days old and reposted 50 times. This x/tweet from Tesla was just yesterday. I also can't find a single post on the TM sub about this. Link it if you have one.
I would say this is not fake, more like the board panicked. Or this is driven by one board member who is not happy and denying all of this. Eventually the truth will come out just like cheaper car wasn't cancelled, then brought back.
Since journalists never lie, after all, what would be their incentive to lie?
To be fair, the more Tesla denies it the most likely it makes it seem.
Tesla board is captured by Musk. They're like hostages who will say whatever he wants them to say. I believe in this company less every day.
Same logic applies to Tesla.
lol. Ok bud
What has Elon done recently to warrant taking his word at face value? This isn't a snipe, it's a genuine question. He has been less than trustworthy on Tesla claims for a long time now. Also, what Robyn Denholm is denying is different than what WSJ is claiming. WSJ claims that _members of the board_ reached out to recruitment firms, *not* that the _board_ contacted recruitment firms. That's very different in my eyes. If this was a true denial it would've gone further. WSJ was also claiming that Elon Musk confided with someone that he frustrated to be working at Tesla and no longer wanted to be CEO. That's an even greater accusation, but yet haven't heard anything specific rebutting that. I also haven't heard any denials to this: _"One board member told people that sometimes Musk wasn’t as well prepared and that he needed to be briefed more about what is happening with Tesla."_ So the board is aware of Musk's absenteeism and sharing these details with other investors?
More of a disincentive. Libel and slander are taken seriously by the courts. If Tesla were to sue, the sources would become court evidence. They won’t sue, because the source is legit. There is no similar legal requirement for Tesla to tell the truth.
If the reporters have evidence that the Board initiated the process, then all of the denials aren't worth anything.
If true it's gotta fall under some form of libel statute they can sue over, right? And there will either be a retraction + penalties one way or discovery + penalties the other, right? But I can't imagine they want all of that mess in the public sphere and doubt they can't stand on business about it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
No because if that was their plan, and they thought it was for the good of the company to replace the CEO, they certainly wouldn't deny it outright. They may stay silent at most. EDIT: If Tesla is themselves somehow lying with this tweet, doesn't that open them up to the law anyway?
Sounds like you just want to extract the most theoretically pessimistic scenario there.
*absolutely* false. You can hear the man yelling from the screen
This comment section, Jesus. Wsj provided zero evidence, tesla has outright said it's false, but braindead idealogues want it soooo bad. You really think Elon's leaving on the eve of the fsd roll-out and the scaling of optimus production? Way too many people on reddit let their misinformed political beliefs cloud their judgment. You'd rather keep eating disinformation as long as it reinforces your bias. People here don't think they just spout nonsense. Just more and more all the time.
You think it's unlikely that the board would be looking for alternatives after Musk has absolutely tanked Tesla with his shenanigans?? That's not making up scenarios that is just stating the obvious.
That’s literally how this works at any large company. This is standard corporate politics. You’re not just gonna say, “Oops, you caught us! You guys are right!”
The stock has plummeted drastically at least 4 times before. I even [made a post](https://www.reddit.com/r/teslainvestorsclub/comments/zo62cd/i_created_this_chart_to_show_the_64_scare_drop_in/) about it some years back! It always springs back up again eventually. I think we're only around 40% down from its highest ($480 from six months ago).
Except actual sales have been plummeting. The largest sales drop of the company's history. The company is also facing almost worldwide boycott calls. You can't tell me the board wouldn't be at least considering their options. That's not how corporations work.
>on the eve of the fsd roll-out Guess I’m out of the loop? When is that scheduled for?
This is different. Their stock is still overvalued despite really poor financial results. On top of sales that have never tanked this low, they’re also losing ability to generate major profit through selling carbon credits. As much as I always defended Tesla, this is huge. They’re in an unprecedented territory with almost a perfect storm of shit to deal with. Musk stepping away from DOGE will help sales rebound some, but not enough. Them announcing a more affordable car is a huge indication of how bad it’s going too since Musk axed it before. Keep in mind that even when Tesla has M3 released, they almost went bankrupt due to not being able to scale. At their current scale, profit is only made at this scale. So board is most definitely considering replacing him. The question to them is probably what’s worse? Letting him go? Or seeing if he can rebound it some?
How is this pessimistic?
The standard to publish something like this is two sources, if you're granting them anonymity. So either the journalist **and** their editor at the WSJ(!) both decided to post something deliberately made up, or they had two sources they believed. Whether or not those sources were right (EDIT: and/or mischaracterized), who knows? But I'd put the WSJ making it up completely right at the bottom of the list.
Do you have examples of the WSJ publishing a lie in the last decade?
> If Tesla were to sue, the sources would become court evidence. That's not how libel works. The plaintiff has to prove the claims were false, the defendant knew they were false, and that they harmed their reputation. None of that requires them to reveal their sources. They might, in order to show a reasonable belief that the information was true based on the identity of the source, but the act of filing a suit doesn't magically release that information.
CIA and deep state ops got outed, but the persecution and terrorism will continue!
Almost back up to $300 per share now. Once the AI stuff matures and the robots come, they'll be rocketing up again in no time.
Just 3 months maybe, 6 months definitely...
Again, not talking about stock price here already clarified that... You do realize there's a difference between sales numbers and stock price?
>That's not how corporations work. It actually the law. As a publicly trading company they must to do what is best for stock holders.
You think elon running the company into the ground is what's best for stock holders? He's one bad trip away from imploding.
It wouldn't help, unless Elon divests nothing will save Tesla. But at the same time, no one is jumping to buy 20% of Tesla at the current PE ratio.
I care about the future position of the company, not just short-term sales numbers. The stock price is the best figure to reflect that.
Confirmation bias is a rough drug.
> Their stock is still overvalued despite really poor financial results. If you really believed this, you'd short it. I don't believe it and I put my money where my mouth is and HODL.
its basically a "he said VS she said" and some people believe WSJ has more credibility than Elon or his puppets. Sorry you think anyone who disagrees with you is brain dead.
Rolling Stone published the rape hoax, despite very iffy source, no corroboration from anything else at all, and the perpetrator being outright invented. And no one lost their job over this. Though Rolling Stone did lose 3 millions over this.
The problem is not even acknowledging that Tesla responded when WSJ reached out. Omitting that from the article is straight up journalistic malpractice. Regardless whether true or not, if your a journalist, and you reached out to a source for comment, they deny the allegations, and you publish the story, AND don't mention that they denied the allegations when you reached out - you're fired.
The idea that Tesla would go to some agency to find a CEO is how you know it was certifiable bullshit. Next CEO is going to be an existing high level employee from Tesla.
> If true it's gotta fall under some form of libel statute they can sue over, right? Not really, you have to show damages.
Of a journalist!? of a fucking modern mainstream media journalist? they only care about how many clicks they can get, nothing more
> Way too many people on reddit let their misinformed political beliefs cloud their judgment. This includes, by the way, acceptance of Tesla’s statements at face value.
Totally right, jumped ahead a step assuming that would be argued as well
The Reddit echo chamber is strong in here. Zero chance Tesla is getting rid of Elon
It could also be a trial balloon. Leak the rumor, deny it, but see how the market reacts.
WSJ says that Tesla did not respond. Why should we believe Tesla over WSJ? Particularly since Tesla famously ignores the media and never responds to anything?
2017
Why would you say that? Many companies will hire a CEO from somewhere else.
Wait until you find out what monsters invest in other companies. People don't actually care that much.
Agreed. WSJ has highest bar to publish imo.
It's not about invester activism, it's about the company being a zombie. Sales have cratered, the moat has shrunken. Elon's snake oil won't keep them afloat. The stock is running on hopium and short-term short interests being forced to cover.
You missed: "according to Tesla" at the end of every point you made.
Honestly, if this were true, I’d be ready to buy a new Tesla. But since that’s how they are, I’m sticking with other brands.
I could see it being that yeah
What does that have to do with him divesting? Totally agree he needs to not be CEO. Don't agree he needs to divest for it to matter. Otherwise we would be looking at who else is invested in Tesla and who is invested in big companies like google, apple and Microsoft.
Reminds me of a similar event with the tariffs...
> they only care about how many clicks they can get, nothing more the WSJ has the highest print circulation in the country, because they are not click driven. 2x as much as NYT and 3x as much as Besos Post
"Journalists won't publish rumors" Thats... They... That's literally what they did though...
💯
When you've learned nothing about news credibility in the last 10 years.
The future position of the company is an absolute crater in the ground if they keep running it the way Elon is. The stock is over inflated to hell, and they’re making claims about products that are likely at minimum a decade away and 5 years if they get some lucky break. It’s a car company and it’s time we start valuing it as such. Trying to all this AI crap is going to result in them not being able to make good cars (which it’s an argument if they every really made overall good cars in the first place) and it’s going to cause a rift in the company. Chasing the whole “AI” fad and FSD when A) it’s a fad and B) American sentiment and the world is shifting to more public transportation is going to tank the company. Acting like Elon is some god is going to get you no where
*Looks into crystal ball* yep, I don’t know what the hell is actually going to happen, but this guy really doesn’t know. Also, how is one person supposed to short a stock? Do you know how stocks work?
“Journalists won’t publish rumors” You are either a dishonest person or you’ve had your head buried in the sand for the past 5-10 years
I mean, Tesla has needed new leadership for quite some time now. Before Elon went full obvious let’s say, DOGE, he was already CEO of like 4 other companies. You cannot actually be spending time with each one equally. Not to mention the cybertruck marked the end of an era and now Tesla just is going full on cyber punk with their designs and it’s kind of awful. Plus the AI angle is just to pump up the stock not actually improve the company sooooo
Sales being down 13% year-over-year in a quarter where they had to shut down production of their most popular model for upgrades means that "sales have cratered"? Wow, redditors are completely delusional. Even in a normal quarter, -13% isn't "cratering", let alone one with a severe production disruption. But I guess your political narrative matters more than the truth.
Yeah now that it’s out in the open they’re back pedaling cause they don’t want to anger Elon.
[removed]
Well that’s a shame.
Or see how musk reacts
lol now it’s not
> stating the obvious. The board represents the shareholders and some large (or small, well capitalized) investors could easily bring a lawsuit against the board for failure to fulfill their responsibilities. The board needs to look into getting a new CEO even if the investigation results in a decision to retain Musk.
The mod needed his karma
That board will ride the Tesla rainbow all the way to their pot of gold before they vote to change Elon.
Plot twist - the board actually did this, and the WSJ article is how Elon found out 😂
Kool aid drank
It’s hilarious that there isn’t more scrutiny on wsj publishing obvious bullshit, while this post is being downvoted; 50 “Elon is getting fired posts” have 10k upvotes, Reddit is trash nowadays Also I beg you to look at the authors of the wsj article, all of this bs is just so obvious lmao
There are no consequences, there will be no retraction, the wsj is trash
[deleted]
Let’s bet 100$ Elon is the ceo of Tesla 365 days from now. I’ll give you 3:1. This is obvious trash, the authors are trash, wsj has lost all credibility.
I've heard countless similar sentiments about Tesla for around a decade now, but it was always proven wrong in time. Elon's vision is astounding. Whether it's FSD, robots, online money, AI generally, energy, or whatever else. He's always there before (or almost before) the rest. Sure he's not perfect on every prediction or technology, but he comes jolly close. Maybe one exception is flying cars. Come on Elon, get working on those pronto!
Bummer.
[deleted]
https://preview.redd.it/70rqz485rzq81.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=201c346d86059865836bc01430becd8bec040577
[removed]
The report was that it happened months ago, so your spin doesn’t work at all.
So the beatings will continue I guess. I guess I should say boycott.
If they would have released FSD and let everyone turn their cars into robotaxis four years ago, they would have been the most valuable company in the world. At the rate AI improves now, anything they release will be copied and commoditized in months. IMO, the stock price is going to crash even if they deliver robotaxis nationwide this year (they won't). Source: started a computer vision company in 2015 and sold it in 2023.
Yeah it’s not coming this year. Elon sucks at predicting dates, and I don’t know why the shareholders let him sell vaporware for years until it comes true. It just ruins the brand image
Seems really unlikely given this board, but it’s fun to fantasize about, as someone who owns a Tesla
Pretty sure elon owns the BoD, i think the only way to remove him would be through shareholder vote.
Issue generally is that Q1 last year was not considered good either and also had factories shutdown. Last years bad quarter turned even worse quarter essentially. Also in both cases there was inventory so not like shutting down meant sales would completely stop because of it. If last years Q1 actually was very good quarter then it would be different story since they were competing against good quarter but bar in this case was not very high and they still didn't meet it.
[removed]
So now we have Tesla and Denholm going full denial mode, doubling down on Musk’s position and calling the report “absolutely false.” Elon, predictably, is framing it as an ethical breach, accusing the WSJ of ignoring a direct denial. That level of fury suggests the pressure is real, not just from the media, but likely behind closed doors too. Still, the public response doesn’t change the underlying signals. Shareholder unrest, leadership exits, reputational damage, and Musk’s external distractions are not inventions of the media. They’re real, documented, and increasingly difficult to reconcile with Tesla’s long-term credibility. The board can assert confidence all it likes, but overstatement is often a signal of instability. At this level, strong leadership doesn’t need loud reassurance, it needs results, consistency, and trust. And right now, the louder the denials get, the more they invite scrutiny. Even if there was no formal search underway, the fact that such a story gained traction reflects what many are already thinking, the conversation about Musk’s future isn’t just happening in the press, it’s happening in boardrooms, shareholder meetings, and strategic circles. Whether Tesla likes it or not.
I like how they say this like it’s a good thing. I had some (limited) respect for them doing the right thing for customers and investors. Now I have none.
Last year the only production shutdown was Fremont Model 3, which has an annual production rate of roughly 200,000 units. This year the shutdown was Fremont Model Y, Austin Model Y, Berlin Model Y, and Shanghai Model Y, with a total annual production rate of 1,200,000 units. Completely different scale. The fact that the sales only dropped 13% with a 1.2m rate disruption compared to a 200k rate distribution is honestly really impressive. And inventory doesn't help much when people are primarily waiting on the new model. Hard to sell an old model when everybody can see the new one that's coming in a couple months.
ok, so this is pretty much proof they have contacted recruiting firms to initiate a CEO search
I'd honestly be surprised if Full Self Driving ever actually fulfills the promises that were made.
For a normal company, -13% in a quarter is bad. For a company with a 200 PE because it’s a massive growth stock that will go to the moon, -13% is catastrophic.
Does it though?
Think hard. Think about synthetic data…
> Why should we believe Tesla over WSJ? I mean... I would trust about nothing the Wall Street Journal said.
Sorry to break it to you but musk has been crazy for months.
Thoughts&Prayers
Because he stacked the deck with sycophants
The original promises aren't that important to me honestly. Other than being able to completely look away, it already does what I care about. I'm no Elon fan but I don't really understand why he doesn't just declare victory with what they have now and get out of this fictional future nonsense loop.
And we're extremely disappointed that you aren't
Apparently the market disagrees with you, since the value actually went up after that result came out. It's almost like that's not true and you don't know what you're talking about.
Tethla doth protest too much
The market may well give a company with 90% sales decline quarter over quarter a PE ratio of 5000. Doesn’t mean it’s correct. The “markets” are just the overall balance of individual people’s buy and sell prices. And, as I think anyone will agree, a majority or consensus of people can be wrong. If markets were always correct, we wouldn’t have Enrons. We will see.
A global production shutdown of a model that makes up the majority of your sales only causing a 13% decline in your sales is a good result. The market knows that, but apparently you don't. Also, the PE is obviously due to the chance of FSD succeeding. Today's car sales fluctuations are pretty much irrelevant if FSD succeeds.
Too bad
Yeah. They should throw him out. But I think most of the control is too close to elon to do the right thing.
Again, in general it could be ok. Or it could be amazing. Or it could be bad. In a company that needs to grow exponentially, it’s bad. Tesla is priced for flawless execution, and for 50% yoy growth. It’s not doing that. Growing slowly would be bad. Being flat would be terrible. Going down is awful.
OP do you have a way to back this up other than quoting Elon?
> Other than being able to completely look away, it already does what I care about Because being able to completely look away is the entire selling point. There's a huge leap in value from "drives for me but I have to monitor it" to "I can sleep or watch TV while it drives". The former is a neat feature. The latter is what would make Tesla a trillion+ dollar company.
Headhunters to replace Elon, that’s a good one!
That may be the reason the stock jumped up between 1200 - 1400 eastern....frankly it makes sense with current events taken into consideration.
100 bucks Elon leaked this directly to shame the board
100 bucks that Elon leaked this himself in an attempt to shame the board, and ruin their potential of doing it behind his back.
It’s a pity if it’s false. It would’ve make a lot of sense.
What is synthetic data
If I still owned any stock I'd be looking for a lawsuit against the board for a breach of their duties. I'm honestly shocked we haven't seen one yet.
The man Robyn Denholm?
And then he can go on major news networks across the world and tell everyone he's being cancelled.
Tesla is his bread and butter. I could be wrong, but he’s not stepping down from Tesla. And I would be slightly pissed if he did.
All of Reddit is like this
Months? Try years. He wasn't as bad before, but he's never been any kind of shining beacon of virtue. He's just been spiraling really hard lately.
Not a twist at all. This is the WSJ. They got it right.
Wsj has turned into a rag.
Saying a stock is “only 40% down” and thinking it preposterous the board would be looking for a new CEO are at odds with each other.
Shorting TSLA might seem like a rational move, given their plummeting sales and Musk's implosion. However, shorting is a dangerous game with infinite risk—losses can be theoretically unlimited. As someone much smarter than me once said, "The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent." Case in point: TSLA’s stock price is up almost $70 since the horrible Q1 sales figures were released.
The top complaint of other EVs is shitty charging networks. Tesla has a super robust charging network of supercharger stations and destination chargers plus the ability to charge at home. Tesla is a car company, a software company, an electric company, a solar company, a battery company and an insurance company. It is quite diverse. They profit 5m a day on the supercharger network alone, and then reinvest to expand , all while not wanting exclusivity for placement of chargers. It's quite good from an investment standpoint. AI autonamy is next. And restaurants! I can't wait to get an Elon Burger!!
That's why I never take anything seriously on here. You're hearing from minimum effort people who do the bare minimum. Using buzzwords and headlines repeating them here.
How? How is it proof? If the same account posted that you had a turtle stuck to your ear, is it proof you have a turtle on your ear? The only proof you seem to know is 100 proof.
Elon is the only CEO to have fart sounds come standard when you lock your car or honk your horn. I want that man for life.
It's a reply. Not an overstatement. Stock us uppppppp 3 percent today
Comment removed. Try again without the insult at the end.
"Tesla is not trying to replace Elon as CEO, and there's also no truth to the stories that JD Vance frequently has sex with couches. I just wanted to make that perfectly clear." "Sir, this is Wendy's" "I just feel it's important to clear the air first. Can I just get a vanilla Frosty?"
he is forever toxic to the brand now. the only way this company moves forward is without him. the world will never forget what he has done.
Yep, Tesla is Elon and without Elon its no longer Tesla. For better or worse.
The board outright lying because they didn't want the hypothetical news released yet could easily open them up to lawsuits.
[deleted]
Imagine that. The liberal lying media.
That was a sharp take. The way you tied Musk’s comment to fiduciary duty, and called out the WSJ’s sourcing standards, shows you either know this space well or pay damn good attention. Whatever the case, you added real clarity to the thread, and I appreciate that.
I think you are missing the point. This is basic journalism 101. You offer the person you are writing about a person/company, and if they response, you include that in your article. Period. 'According to Tesla' is irrelevant. The article should have included, "We reached out to Tesla and they denied the allegations". That's it. Kind of insane your comment is upvoted, it doesn't even make sense with any sentence I wrote. > The problem is not even acknowledging that Tesla responded when WSJ reached out According to Tesla. Huh? > Regardless whether true or not, if your a journalist, and you reached out to a source for comment, they deny the allegations, and you publish the story, AND don't mention that they denied the allegations when you reached out - you're fired. According to Tesla. What? You're an idiot. This is not Tesla specific. It's basic journalism standards. If Tesla incurred a loss here, this would be a slam dunk lawsuit.
That’s too bad.
That is really too bad. After all of the chaos, broken promises, and actions by the current CEO having direct access to govt, why would he NOT be replaced. Tesla does not need him anymore.
Yes, trust the report from the CEO’s website.
Their dataset is nothing compared to Waymo, which has actual sensor fusion
I’ll take the other side of this bet with my entire net worth
Such complicated explanations here. To me it's a plain and simple Tesla hit piece, whether true or false.
Lol you’re still completly missing the point. The “fact” that Tesla responded is still only if you take Tesla’s word for it. Of course it’s basic journalism standards, that’s why it would be insane for a reputable news organization to lie about it, especially when as you said there could be lawsuits about it. Where as Tesla can easily just lie and claim they responded with likely no repurcussions. All while getting guillible people like yourself to fall for it and believe them.
Doesn't make a lot of sense to replace him at current stock price. Most of the gap between the price of Tesla and other car companies is people betting on him. If the stock price continues to fall to the normal price to earnings of a car company though he will be out the door in minutes.
I’m not going to short a damned stock - the downside is not limited. But I for sure sold my position last year after these clowns lost my trust.
If the stock continues its present course, than a a judiciously responsible company Board would have to make some sort of “decision for change” as it’s their fiscal responsibility to their shareholders.
>If they would have released FSD and let everyone turn their cars into robotaxis four years ago, they would have been the most valuable company in the world. If my grandmother had wheels, she would have been a bicycle. What's your point?
> the article should have included... It did. >"Musk didn’t respond to requests for comment. Tesla didn’t provide a statement before publication. Hours after this article was published, Tesla issued a denial on X. Musk also criticized the article in a post on X."
[deleted]
Might be wrong report. But Board should definitely start doing it
This is what he promised. Not what he’s delivered. The stock price is way overvalued.
They should absolutely look for another CEO. Someone who cannot give up power despite having only 24h in a day and managing 5 companies, is a problem in itself. Finding a right successor is also intelligence. Technology wise Tesla is being totally destroyed by BYD, and Elon doesn’t seem to care, he has tariff protecting him. Can such a man still be called an innovator ? If the 10 years old Elon travels through time and see his older self, he would be ashamed
Neither do today's journalists.
Login is required to comment.
Login with Google