Investor's Corner
Tesla critic Bob Lutz vs. Elon Musk: A look back behind the bluster
In this corner, the father of the Chevrolet Volt, an auto industry veteran who has held senior positions at Chrysler, Ford and BMW, an unlikely advocate for EVs – a cigar-chomping ex-Marine who has called climate change “a crock.” Bob Lutz!
In the other corner, the mastermind of PayPal, SolarCity, and SpaceX, the archetypal Silicon Valley entrepreneur, who wants to electrify transportation and save Planet Earth – and if that doesn’t work, he’ll take us to Mars to start over. Elon Musk!
Back in the day, Bob Lutz was a champion of Tesla and Musk, citing the Roadster as a major inspiration for the Volt, and saying that he would “always owe them a debt of gratitude for having kind of broken the ice.” After Lutz left GM, he founded Via Motors, which set out to build plug-in hybrid vans and pickup trucks for commercial fleets, but has had a difficult time finding its market. The 85-year-old Lutz has written extensively about the auto industry. For whatever reason, he has evolved into a harsh critic of EVs, and especially Tesla. In 2016, he compared Musk to the leader of a religious cult. (Musk responded on Twitter, saying, “Dear cult members, I love you.”)
Dear cult members, I love you https://t.co/1OzRaSQzhT
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 26, 2016
Lutz launched his latest salvo against the California upstarts at a forum sponsored by a provider of insurance for collectible cars, suggesting that collectors buy a Model S now before Tesla goes belly-up. He had nothing but praise for the car itself: “A Model S, especially with the performance upgrades, is one of the fastest, best handling, best braking sedans that you could buy in the world today,” he said. “The acceleration times will beat any $350,000 European exotic.”
However, Lutz said Elon Musk “hasn’t figured out the revenues have to be greater than costs…when you are perennially running out of cash you are just not running a good automobile company. I don’t see anything on the horizon that’s going to fix that, so those of you who are interested in collector cars, may I suggest buying a Tesla Model S while they’re still available.”
Above: Bob Lutz starts to discuss Tesla and Elon Musk at the 1:06:19 mark in the video (Youtube: Hagerty via InsideEVs)
“Twenty-five years from now, [the Model S] will be remembered as the first really good-looking, fast electric car,” Lutz told the LA Times. “People will say ‘Too bad they went broke.’”
This time, Musk does not appear to have responded publicly to Lutz’s zinger, but naturally, a number of his disciples have come to his defense. Enrique Dans, writing in Forbes, notes his admiration for Lutz’s writings on the auto industry, but believes that “he has missed something enormously important. In fact, possibly the most important difference between the old and the new economy: fundamentally, timeframes.”
Lutz (along with legions of stock-market analysts) sees Tesla’s ongoing losses as a sign of the company’s inevitable failure. However, according to Dans, “Seeing the bottom line as the be-all and end-all of management is problematic…The principle that revenue must exceed costs is Management 101. The tricky bit is how you define the timeframe in which that has to happen.”
As anyone following the Tesla story knows by now, the company’s stock market valuation has no apparent connection to the number of vehicles it’s producing. Tesla’s market cap, currently around $59 billion, exceeds that of Ford, and rivals those of GM and Honda (which, interestingly, was once the subject of the same sort of criticism now leveled at Tesla). Stock-market pundits tend to see this lofty valuation as madness, proof of the irrationality of Elon Musk’s mindless minions. However, Enrique Dans finds the reason in fundamental differences in the companies’ missions, and the timeframes in which they expect to fulfill them.
If you parse the pedantic “mission statements” on the legacy automakers’ web sites, you’ll find that they basically amount to: “We want to sell cars.” Tesla’s mission statement is very different: “To accelerate the advent of sustainable transport by bringing compelling mass market electric cars to market as soon as possible.”
Tesla doesn’t just want to sell cars, it wants to change the world. This massive difference of ambition is reflected in the longer timeframe that Tesla envisions.
“In the economy Bob Lutz and other traditional car industry players understand, the goal and the metrics were clear: the quarterly results,” Dans writes. “If they were below what the analysts expected, bad; if they were higher, good. End of story. But the rules have changed…For today’s companies, profits are not the goal, they’re the cherry on the cake. Because the idea is, in the long term, to move toward an infinitely more ambitious goal, one that entails a whole new level of change. Companies that have grasped this can spend many years, even decades, without making a profit, as long as they are able to create a narrative that shows they are on the right track toward the defined goal.”
Tesla’s long road to ultimate triumph is not unprecedented – it’s a path that’s been trodden by other tech companies that set out to transform an industry. “For how many years did Amazon continue turning in negative quarterly results while its share price rose steadily?” asks Dans. “Did Jeff Bezos…supply his investors with drugs to maintain their confidence? Yes, he did, actually: a powerful substance called growth and clarity in the use of funds obtained. Amazon’s mission was never to sell stuff, but to change the world.”
Amazon is not the only example. In this age of instant communication, in which whole industries can be radically transformed, or even disappear, “reporting a profit each quarter has never been less important.”
“If Lutz is right, if the grand plans for a new economy that will change the world are bullshit, Tesla will go bust,” Dans concedes. “But if Tesla’s plans and strategy make sense, it may well spend a long time in the red, but it will end up as the auto industry’s benchmark.”
Change is taking place ever faster, and humans’ attention spans are growing ever shorter, so it may seem counter-intuitive that the timeline for corporate success should grow longer. However, even in the fast-paced internet era, changing the world, or even one industry, can’t be done in the space of one quarter. Tesla’s mission is a risky one, but so far investors are willing to accept that risk.
Bob Lutz and Elon Musk look at the world in two different ways, and they have very different visions of the future. Which one will prove prophetic? We shall see.
===
Note: Article originally published on evannex.com, by Charles Morris
Source: Forbes
Investor's Corner
SpaceX IPO is coming, CEO Elon Musk confirms
However, it appears Musk is ready for SpaceX to go public, as Ars Technica Senior Space Editor Eric Berger wrote an op-ed that indicated he thought SpaceX would go public soon. Musk replied, basically confirming it.
Elon Musk confirmed through a post on X that a SpaceX initial public offering (IPO) is on the way after hinting at it several times earlier this year.
It also comes one day after Bloomberg reported that SpaceX was aiming for a valuation of $1.5 trillion, adding that it wanted to raise $30 billion.
Musk has been transparent for most of the year that he wanted to try to figure out a way to get Tesla shareholders to invest in SpaceX, giving them access to the stock.
He has also recognized the issues of having a public stock, like litigation exposure, quarterly reporting pressures, and other inconveniences.
However, it appears Musk is ready for SpaceX to go public, as Ars Technica Senior Space Editor Eric Berger wrote an op-ed that indicated he thought SpaceX would go public soon.
Musk replied, basically confirming it:
As usual, Eric is accurate
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 10, 2025
Berger believes the IPO would help support the need for $30 billion or more in capital needed to fund AI integration projects, such as space-based data centers and lunar satellite factories. Musk confirmed recently that SpaceX “will be doing” data centers in orbit.
AI appears to be a “key part” of SpaceX getting to Musk, Berger also wrote. When writing about whether or not Optimus is a viable project and product for the company, he says that none of that matters. Musk thinks it is, and that’s all that matters.
It seems like Musk has certainly mulled something this big for a very long time, and the idea of taking SpaceX public is not just likely; it is necessary for the company to get to Mars.
The details of when SpaceX will finally hit that public status are not known. Many of the reports that came out over the past few days indicate it would happen in 2026, so sooner rather than later.
But there are a lot of things on Musk’s plate early next year, especially with Cybercab production, the potential launch of Unsupervised Full Self-Driving, and the Roadster unveiling, all planned for Q1.
Investor's Corner
Tesla Full Self-Driving statistic impresses Wall Street firm: ‘Very close to unsupervised’
The data shows there was a significant jump in miles traveled between interventions as Tesla transitioned drivers to v14.1 back in October. The FSD Community Tracker saw a jump from 441 miles to over 9,200 miles, the most significant improvement in four years.
Tesla Full Self-Driving performance and statistics continue to impress everyone, from retail investors to Wall Street firms. However, one analyst believes Tesla’s driving suite is “very close” to achieving unsupervised self-driving.
On Tuesday, Piper Sandler analyst Alexander Potter said that Tesla’s recent launch of Full Self-Driving version 14 increased the number of miles traveled between interventions by a drastic margin, based on data compiled by a Full Self-Driving Community Tracker.
🚨 Piper Sandler reiterated its Overweight rating and $500 PT on Tesla $TSLA stock
Analyst Alexander Potter said FSD is near full autonomy and latest versions showed the largest improvement in disengagements, from 440 miles to 9,200 miles between critical interventions pic.twitter.com/u4WCLfZcA9
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 9, 2025
The data shows there was a significant jump in miles traveled between interventions as Tesla transitioned drivers to v14.1 back in October. The FSD Community Tracker saw a jump from 441 miles to over 9,200 miles, the most significant improvement in four years.
Interestingly, there was a slight dip in the miles traveled between interventions with the release of v14.2. Piper Sandler said investor interest in FSD has increased.
Full Self-Driving has displayed several improvements with v14, including the introduction of Arrival Options that allow specific parking situations to be chosen by the driver prior to arriving at the destination. Owners can choose from Street Parking, Parking Garages, Parking Lots, Chargers, and Driveways.
Additionally, the overall improvements in performance from v13 have been evident through smoother operation, fewer mistakes during routine operation, and a more refined decision-making process.
Early versions of v14 exhibited stuttering and brake stabbing, but Tesla did a great job of confronting the issue and eliminating it altogether with the release of v14.2.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk also recently stated that the current v14.2 FSD suite is also less restrictive with drivers looking at their phones, which has caused some controversy within the community.
Although we tested it and found there were fewer nudges by the driver monitoring system to push eyes back to the road, we still would not recommend it due to laws and regulations.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.1 texting and driving: we tested it
With that being said, FSD is improving significantly with each larger rollout, and Musk believes the final piece of the puzzle will be unveiled with FSD v14.3, which could come later this year or early in 2026.
Piper Sandler reaffirmed its $500 price target on Tesla shares, as well as its ‘Overweight’ rating.
Tesla received a price target boost from Morgan Stanley, according to a new note on Monday morning, but there is some considerable caution also being communicated over the next year or so.
Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco took over Tesla coverage for the firm from longtime bull Adam Jonas, who appears to be focusing on embodied AI stocks and no longer automotive.
Percoco took over and immediately adjusted the price target for Tesla from $410 to $425, and changed its rating on shares from ‘Overweight’ to ‘Equal Weight.’
Percoco said he believes Tesla is the leading company in terms of electric vehicles, manufacturing, renewable energy, and real-world AI, so it deserves a premium valuation. However, he admits the high expectations for the company could provide for a “choppy trading environment” for the next year.
He wrote:
“However, high expectations on the latter have brought the stock closer to fair valuation. While it is well understood that Tesla is more than an auto manufacturer, we expect a choppy trading environment for the TSLA shares over the next 12 months, as we see downside to estimates, while the catalysts for its non-auto businesses appear priced at current levels.”
Percoco also added that if market cap hurdles are achieved, Morgan Stanley would reduce its price target by 7 percent.
Perhaps the biggest change with Percoco taking over the analysis for Jonas is how he will determine the value of each individual project. For example, he believes Optimus is worth about $60 per share of equity value.
He went on to describe the potential value of Full Self-Driving, highlighting its importance to the Tesla valuation:
“Full Self Driving (FSD) is the crown jewel of Tesla’s auto business; we believe that its leading-edge personal autonomous driving offering is a real game changer, and will remain a significant competitive advantage over its EV and non-EV peers. As Tesla continues to improve its platform with increased levels of autonomy (i.e., hands-off, eyes-off), it will revolutionize the personal driving experience. It remains to be seen if others will be able to keep pace.”
Additionally, Percoco outlined both bear and bull cases for the stock. He believes $860 per share, “which could be in play in the next 12 months if Tesla manages through the EV-downturn,” while also scaling Robotaxi, executing on unsupervised FSD, and scaling Optimus, is in play for the bull case.
Will Tesla thrive without the EV tax credit? Five reasons why they might
Meanwhile, the bear case is placed at $145 per share, and “assumes greater competition and margin pressure across all business lines, embedding zero value for humanoids, slowing the growth curve for Tesla’s robotaxi fleet to reflect regulatory challenges in scaling a vision-only perception stack, and lowering market share and margin profile for the autos and energy businesses.”
Currently, Tesla shares are trading at around $441.
SpaceX IPO is coming, CEO Elon Musk confirms
Tesla adds 15th automaker to Supercharger access in 2025
