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
Elon Musk
Tesla analyst: ‘near zero chance’ Elon Musk’s $1T comp package is rejected
“There is a near-zero chance that $TSLA shareholders will vote down Elon’s new proposed comp plan at the Nov 6 shareholders’ meeting.”
A Tesla analyst says there is “zero chance” that CEO Elon Musk’s new compensation package is rejected, a testament to the loyalty and belief many shareholders and investors have in the frontman.
Tesla investors will vote on November 6 at the annual Shareholder Meeting to approve a new compensation package for Musk, revealed by the company’s Board of Directors earlier this month.
The package, if approved, would give Musk the opportunity to earn $1 trillion in stock, an ownership concentration of over 27 percent (a major request of Musk’s), and a solidified future at the company.
The Tesla Community on X, the social media platform Musk bought in 2023, is overwhelmingly in favor of the pay package, though a handful of skeptics remain.
Nevertheless, the big pulls of this vote are held by proxy firms and other large-scale investors. Two of them, Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and Glass Lewis, said they would be voting against Musk’s proposed compensation plan.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
Today, the State Board of Administration of Florida (SBA) said it would vote in favor of Musk’s newly-proposed pay day, making it the first large-scale shareholder to announce it would support the CEO’s pay.
One analyst said that Musk’s payday is inevitable. Gary Black of the Future Fund said today there is a “near-zero chance” that shareholders will allow Musk’s pay package to be rejected:
“There is a near-zero chance that $TSLA shareholders will vote down Elon’s new proposed comp plan at the Nov 6 shareholders’ meeting.”
He added an alternative perspective from Wedbush’s Dan Ives, who said that he had a better chance of starting for the New York Yankees than the comp package not being approved.
There is a near zero chance that $TSLA shareholders will vote down Elon’s new proposed comp plan at the Nov 6 shareholders’ meeting. As Wedbush analyst Dan Ives (@divestech) colorfully put it in a Yahoo Finance interview on October 23rd: “I have a better chance of starting for…
— Gary Black (@garyblack00) October 27, 2025
Black’s the Future Fund sold its Tesla holdings earlier this year. He explained that the firm believed the company’s valuation was too disconnected from fundamentals, citing the P/E ratio of 188x and declining earnings estimates.
The firm maintained its $310 price target, and shares were trading at $356.90 that day.
Shares closed at $452.42 today.
The latest predictions from betting platform Kalshi have shown Musk’s comp package has a 94 percent chance of being approved:
— Kalshi (@Kalshi) October 20, 2025
Tesla analysts are expecting big things from the stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) after many firms made price target adjustments following the Q3 Earnings Call.
Last Wednesday, Tesla reported earnings with record revenue but missed EPS estimates.
It blew delivery expectations out of the water with its strongest quarter in company history, but Tesla’s future relies on the development of autonomous vehicles, robotics, and AI, which many bullish firms highlight as major strengths.
The earnings call reiterated those points, along with the belief that Tesla CEO Elon Musk should be rewarded with a newly proposed pay package that would enable him to gain $1 trillion in wealth if he comes through on a lengthy list of performance tranches.
Nine Wall Street firms made adjustments to their outlook on Tesla shares in the form of price target increases since last Wednesday’s call, all of which are indications of big expectations for the stock moving forward.
Here are the nine firms that made moves:
- Truist – $280 to $406, reiterated Hold rating
- Roth MKM – $395 to $404, reiterated Buy rating
- Cantor Fitzgerald – $355 to $510, reiterated Overweight rating
- Deutsche Bank – $435 to $440, reiterated Buy rating
- Mizhuo – $450 to $485, reiterated Outperform rating
- New Street Research – $465 to $520, reiterated Buy rating
- Evercore ISI – $235 to $300, reiterated In Line rating
- Freedom Capital Markets – $338 to $406, upgraded to Hold rating
- China Renaissance – $349 to $380, reiterated Hold rating
The boosts in price target are largely due to Tesla’s future projects, as Roth MKM, Cantor Fitzgerald, Mizuho, New Street Research, and Evercore ISI all explicitly mention Tesla’s autonomy, robotics, and AI potential as the main factors for its price target boosts.
Cantor Fitzgerald raises Tesla PT To $510, citing Cybercab, Semi, and AI momentum
It is no surprise that many firms are adjusting their outlook on Tesla shares considerably in an effort to prepare for the company’s transition to even more of a tech company than a car company.
The issue with many analysts is that they treat the company’s vehicle deliveries as the main indicator of value.
However, Tesla has a robust energy division, which was a major contributor to the company’s strong margins and gross profit in Q3, as well as its prowess in robotics and AI.
Additionally, the company is seen as a key player in the autonomy field, especially after launching driverless rides on a Robotaxi platform in Austin and expanding a similar program in the Bay Area.
Tesla shares were up over 5 percent at 12:18 p.m. on the East Coast.
Investor's Corner
Tesla warns Elon Musk could step down if shareholders reject pay plan
Denholm’s letter emphasized Tesla is at a “critical inflection point” as it scales AI-driven projects such as Full Self-Driving (FSD) and Optimus.
Tesla Board Chair Robyn Denholm has urged shareholders to approve CEO Elon Musk’s new 2025 Performance Award ahead of the November 6 Annual Meeting, warning that rejecting it could risk losing his leadership.
In a letter posted on Tesla’s official handle on X, Denholm stated that the company must “foster an environment that motivates Elon to achieve great things,” or risk losing “his time, talent, and vision,” which she described as essential to Tesla’s success.
Retaining Musk amid Tesla’s critical transition
Denholm’s letter emphasized Tesla is at a “critical inflection point” as it scales AI-driven projects such as Full Self-Driving (FSD) and Optimus. She argued that Musk’s leadership remains vital as Tesla pushes toward becoming “the leading provider of autonomous solutions and the most valuable company in the world.” Without a new performance-based plan, Denholm warned, Musk could step away, potentially costing Tesla significant long-term value.
“If we fail to foster an environment that motivates Elon to achieve great things through an equitable pay-for-performance plan, we run the risk that he gives up his executive position, and Tesla may lose his time, talent, and vision, which have been essential to delivering extraordinary shareholder returns,” the Tesla Board Chair stated.
The board’s proposed 2025 Performance Award aligns Musk’s compensation with ambitious targets while extending his commitment for at least 7.5 more years. Denholm stated that the vote is a defining moment for Tesla’s future direction, adding that the plan was designed to keep Musk focused on innovation while maintaining governance discipline. “A vote here is both an endorsement of Elon’s vision and a vote for Tesla’s carefully tailored strategy,” she said.
Musk’s pay history is rooted in performance
Elon Musk’s pay history with Tesla has long been unconventional. For years, he has declined a regular salary, instead directly tying his earnings to Tesla’s ability to meet ambitious production and market-value goals. His 2018 performance award, approved by shareholders at a time when Tesla had a market cap of just about $59 billion, granted him stock options only when Tesla reached aggressive growth milestones, such as growing the company’s market cap to $650 billion.
At the time, the milestones included $50 billion additions to Tesla’s market cap, which were considered by many to be unrealistic. Those goals were ultimately met by the electric vehicle maker, but a Delaware court later rescinded the plan in January 2024, calling it an “unfathomable sum.”
Tesla shareholders reaffirmed support for Musk’s pay in 2024, even as legal disputes continued. The board then issued an interim equity package valued around $29 billion while developing a new long-term plan earlier this year. Since then, Tesla’s Board has proposed Musk’s 2025 CEO Performance Award, which could be worth nearly $1 trillion, but only if Musk were to grow Tesla into the world’s most valuable company with a market cap of $8.5 trillion, among other aggressive and ambitious targets.
Tesla sends clear message to Waymo with latest Austin Robotaxi move
Tesla exec reveals shock development with Cybercab
SpaceX opens up free Starlink service for those impacted by Hurricane Melissa
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoSpaceX posts Starship booster feat that’s so nutty, it doesn’t even look real
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
-
News2 weeks agoElon Musk confirms Tesla FSD V14.2 will see widespread rollout
-
News2 weeks agoTesla is adding an interesting feature to its centerscreen in a coming update
-
News2 weeks agoTesla launches new interior option for Model Y
-
News2 weeks agoTesla widens rollout of new Full Self-Driving suite to more owners
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
-
News1 week agoTesla might be doing away with a long-included feature with its vehicles