By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Early Tesla investor Ross Gerber advocates for Elon Musk’s resignation as CEO, citing his divided attention between Tesla and his new government role advising Donald Trump. Gerber claims Tesla’s business has been neglected, resulting in plummeting sales and a significant drop in market value exceeding $800 billion. He attributes this to Musk’s spread-thin focus, exacerbated by negative publicity from his social media activity and government position. Gerber argues that Musk must either fully dedicate himself to Tesla or appoint a new CEO to address the company’s crisis.
Read the original article here
Tesla investor calls for Elon Musk to step down as boss | Money News
The escalating controversy surrounding Elon Musk’s leadership of Tesla has reached a critical point, with calls for his resignation gaining momentum. It’s not just a simple matter of replacing a CEO; the very essence of Tesla’s brand is inextricably linked to Musk himself. Even if he were to relinquish his CEO title, the association remains, and many believe he’s actively damaging the company’s reputation and its financial health.
The argument goes that Musk’s involvement in other ventures, notably his recent high-profile acquisition of Twitter (now X), is significantly detracting from his commitment to Tesla. Some believe he was never truly focused on Tesla’s operations to begin with, and now his actions are actively harming the company. The perception of neglect, combined with his increasingly controversial public pronouncements, has led many to conclude that Musk is no longer an asset, but rather a liability.
The recent decline in Tesla’s stock price, a staggering 56% loss in just five months, has fueled the flames of discontent. This precipitous drop isn’t simply a reflection of broader market trends; many point directly to Musk’s actions and public image as the primary drivers. His controversial behavior, characterized by some as erratic and even offensive, has alienated significant portions of the customer base, particularly in Europe where sales have plummeted. This loss of consumer trust is considered by many to be irreversible damage.
Some go even further, arguing that Musk’s actions are not merely negligent but deliberately harmful. The suggestion is that he’s prioritizing his other interests, causing immense financial damage to Tesla shareholders in the process. The narrative surrounding his perceived disregard for Tesla’s operational needs and the company’s subsequent market struggles contributes to the growing calls for his removal. This argument extends beyond mere incompetence; it suggests a degree of recklessness.
There’s a widespread belief that a simple resignation isn’t sufficient. The argument extends to a complete divestment from the company. Only by severing all ties with Tesla can the company hope to distance itself from the negative publicity and regain investor confidence. The scale of the problem demands a decisive break, not just a change of title. Until Musk is completely removed from the equation, both financially and operationally, the perception of risk and instability will persist.
However, there’s another perspective. The high valuation of Tesla stock is, to a large extent, tied directly to Musk himself and the narrative of visionary genius and future technological advancements. Separating Musk from Tesla might trigger a dramatic and possibly catastrophic drop in stock price. This dilemma poses a significant challenge for the company and its board, weighing the immediate damage of his continued leadership against the potentially devastating consequences of his removal.
The debate extends to the company’s future beyond Musk. While many believe that Tesla would ultimately perform better under different leadership, there’s a fear that the company’s very foundation might crumble without the aura and mythology that Musk has cultivated. Many investors, especially those who bought into the Tesla story based on Musk’s personal brand, fear a significant devaluation that could wipe out a substantial portion of their investments.
Ultimately, the situation is complex. It’s not simply a matter of replacing a bad CEO; it’s about untangling a deeply interwoven relationship between a company’s identity, its stock valuation, and the controversial figure who built it all. The calls for Musk’s departure represent a significant turning point, forcing Tesla’s board and its investors to grapple with an unprecedented crisis that challenges the very core of the company’s existence. The question remains whether the brand can survive the damage and whether the potential for recovery outweighs the inherent risks.