Investor's Corner
Tesla isn’t “losing” all of its executives — it just has a ton
Over the past week, you’ve probably heard reports of Tesla “losing” executives, and while the reports are correct, the narrative is wrong. As Musk pushes the Model 3 production ramp forward, he’s also aiming to bring the company to profitability in the second half of the year. Shedding unnecessary positions on the executive level certainly seems to be part of this plan.
But with reports of “executives” leaving Tesla surfacing what feels like, everyday, it seems like the company is spiraling out of control. This is fundamentally incorrect because the media is highlighting any “senior” departure as a major loss and isn’t providing context to Tesla’s broader management structure.
First, reports of “key” people leaving Tesla now range from Vice Presidents, Product Directors, Managers, and Directors. But how are we determining people to be key? Bloomberg’s Dana Hull reported that Bob Rudd and Arch Padmanabhan left the company. Rudd and Padmanabhan’s positions were Senior Director and Director respectively. Padmanabhan had been at Tesla for 5 years, while Rudd joined SolarCity in 2012 at VP of Project Development for Energy Storage & Microgrids.
It’s unclear why Rudd and Padmanabhan have left the company, but it could be part of Musk’s broader company reorganization. On Monday, Musk sent out a memo to employees telling them, “To ensure that Tesla is well prepared for the future, we have been undertaking a thorough reorganization of our company.”
In addition to the company’s overall structure, Musk is aiming to rid a significant number of contract workers at the company. During Tesla’s Q1 2018 earnings call, Musk referred to contractors as “barnacles” stating that, “…we’re going to scrub the barnacles on that front.”
“It’s pretty crazy. We’ve got barnacles on barnacles. So there’s going to be a lot of barnacle removal.”
I could list dozens of executive departures at Tesla that were not previously reported in the past year, all senior to both Rudd and Padmanabhan, but I think it’s more important to provide perspective on the number of executives Tesla actually employs. After an in-depth analysis of LinkedIn data, I have found 23 active Vice Presidents at Tesla. There were far too many Directors and Senior Directors to conduct an accurate analysis.
Since the beginning of 2017, Tesla has lost 9 VPs and 3 other major executives (CAO, CFO, and President). Of the executives that left, their average tenure was 3.9 years — nearly a third less than existing VPs. Comparably, the VPs that are currently employed by Tesla hold an average tenure of 4.8 years.
Of the executives that have left since the start of 2017, only 4 had stayed at the company longer than 3 years, suggesting that their departures could have been related to culture clash (Chris Lattner) or a stepping stone to a C-Suite position at another company (Jon McNeill, Diarmuid O’Connell).
While it isn’t clear how exactly Tesla will be “restructured,” you can be certain that nearly all departures will be “high profile” as investors watch closely.
Full list of executives included in this analysis:
Active (23):
- VP, Legal: Jonathan Chang
- VP, Manufacturing: Gilbert Passin
- VP, Materials Engineering: Charles Kuehmann
- VP, Sales: John Walker
- VP, Communications: Sarah O’Brien
- VP, Gigafactory Operations and EPC: Kevin Kassekert
- VP, Treasurer: Ron Klein
- VP, Automation, Equipment and MES Engineering: Pablo Gonzalez
- VP, Global Supply Chain: Sascha Zahnd
- VP, Worldwide Service and Customer Experience: Karim Bousta
- VP, Technology: Drew Baglino
- VP, Legal: Phil Rothenberg
- VP, Engineering: Steve MacManus
- VP of Engineering: Nick Kalayjian
- VP of Engineering: Dr. Michael Schwekutsch
- VP, Technology and Engineering: Nagesh Saldi
- VP, Asia Pacific: Robin Ren
- VP, US Energy Sales: Bryan Ellis
- VP, Global Recruiting: Cindy Nicola
- VP, Environment, Health, and Wellness: Laurie Shelby
- VP, Worldwide Finance and Operations: Justin McAnear
- VP: Ganesh Srivats
- VP, Production: Peter Hochholdinger
- VP, Gigafactory 1: Jens Peter Clausen
- VP, Trucks and Programs: Jerome Guillen
- VP, Powertrain Hardware Engineering: Jim Dunlay
- VP, Global Supply Management at Tesla Motors: Liam O’Connor
- VP of Vehicle Software, Services, and Diagnostics: David Lau
- VP of Energy Sales and Operations: Cal Lankton
- VP, Product Marketing: Elliott Summers
Executive Departures from 2017-current (8 VPs, 3 other Major Execs) :
- VP, Finance and Corporate Treasurer: Susan Repo
- VP, Investor Relations: Jeff Evanson
- VP, Talent Acquisition & Analytics: Raj Dev
- President, Global Sales, Marketing, Delivery, and Service: Jon McNeill
- VP, Autopilot Hardware Engineering: Jim Keller
- CFO, Jason Wheeler
- CAO, Eric Branderiz
- VP, Autopilot: Chris Lattner
- VP, HR: Arnnon Geshuri
- VP, HR: Mark Lipscomb
- VP, Autopilot Vision David Nister
Disclaimer: This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Teslarati and its owners. Christian Prenzler does not have a position in Tesla Inc. or any of its competitors and does not have plans to do so in the next 30 days.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Electric vehicle maker Lucid Group has denied rumors of an imminent bankruptcy after a report from this morning sent the stock on a dramatic drop on Wall Street, seeing losses of more than 40 percent during trading hours.
Lucid’s Director of Communications, Nick Twork, responded to the report from Eletric-Vehicles.com, which stated the company’s restructuring advisor, AlixPartners, was asked to review two decisions: taking Lucid shares private or filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
The report also claims AlixPartners told the Lucid board to “concentrate on Gravity production while improving its quality, and to temporarily hold back the Lucid Air, the sedan that has defined the company since its launch.”
Twork said:
$LCID The rumors are completely false. The company has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year, as recently published in its last quarterly filings, and it has not formed any special Board committee to explore the scenarios reported today. Our focus is…
— Nick Twork (@ntwork) July 14, 2026
Shares rebounded after the response to the report, halving its losses as the trading day neared 3 p.m. Eastern.
Lucid has struggled to get its sales off the ground and into more respectable numbers, but the company is in its early years, when things are hard to begin with. It is also backed by several notable investors, including the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF), which has nearly limitless money and likely would not ditch an investment of this size so soon.
Lucid shares were down just 14 percent at the time of publication, a far cry from the 55 percent its losses topped out at during the day.
SpaceX announces new Starship 13 test flight target date
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
