Connect with us

Investor's Corner

Tesla isn’t “losing” all of its executives — it just has a ton

Published

on

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.”

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Christian Prenzler is currently the VP of Business Development at Teslarati, leading strategic partnerships, content development, email newsletters, and subscription programs. Additionally, Christian thoroughly enjoys investigating pivotal moments in the emerging mobility sector and sharing these stories with Teslarati's readers. He has been closely following and writing on Tesla and disruptive technology for over seven years. You can contact Christian here: christian@teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

California snubs Tesla in its newly passed EV incentive that favors Rivian and Lucid

California passed a $135 million EV incentive that rewards Rivian and Lucid while sidelining Tesla

Published

on

By

tesla fremont

California just drew a line in the EV incentive sand to put Tesla on the wrong side of it. The state recently passed a $135 million program offering first-time electric vehicle buyers a direct incentive with no application required, but the rules were written in a way that leaves Tesla at a structural disadvantage compared to Rivian and Lucid.

The program caps eligible vehicles at $50,000 for new EVs and $25,000 for used ones. That pricing threshold rules out a significant portion of Tesla’s lineup, though some lower-priced Model 3 and Model Y configurations would still qualify. California-based automakers are exempt from the price cap entirely, regardless of what their vehicles cost. Rivian, headquartered in Irvine, and Lucid, based in the San Francisco Bay Area, both benefit from that exemption. Rivian’s R2 starts at roughly $45,000 but has versions above the cap. Lucid’s Air and Gravity start at $70,990 and $79,990 respectively, well above any threshold a non-California company would face.

California hits Tesla Cybercab and Robotaxi driverless cars with new law

Tesla built its reputation and a significant portion of its early market share in California, where EV adoption has consistently led the nation. The company operates its original factory in Fremont, California, and the state was home to Tesla’s headquarters for most of its existence. That changed in 2021 when Tesla moved its corporate headquarters to Austin, Texas. Since then, the relationship between the company and California Governor Gavin Newsom has been openly adversarial, with Musk and Newsom trading public criticism on multiple occasions.

Advertisement

California’s EV incentive landscape has shifted repeatedly in recent years, and Tesla has previously lost eligibility for state-level programs as its vehicles exceeded income-adjusted price thresholds. The federal $7,500 EV tax credit, which Tesla models have qualified for and lost depending on policy cycles, is no longer available after it expired without renewal, making state-level programs more meaningful to buyers than they have been in years.

The practical impact for buyers is more nuanced than the headline suggests. California residents purchasing a Tesla under $50,000 for the first time can still access the incentive. But the exemption written for California-based manufacturers is a structural advantage that rewards where a company plants its headquarters flag rather than where it builds its products, and Tesla moved that flag to Texas.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX’s newest logo confirms everything about what it’s become

SpaceX officially absorbed xAI under the SpaceXAI brand, completing the largest private merger in history.

Published

on

By

SpaceX-Ax-4-mission-iss-launch-date

SpaceX made its corporate transformation official in May 2026 when Elon Musk posted on X that xAI would cease to exist as a standalone company. “xAI will be dissolved as a separate company, so it will just be SpaceXAI, the AI products from SpaceX,” he wrote.

A new SpaceXAI logo was announced today, visually embedding the xAI letters inside the SpaceX identity, which can be seen as a deliberate design choice that signals the merger is not a partnership but a full absorption and XAi a core function of the same company. The same way Starlink is not a separate brand but a SpaceX product. The announcement closed the loop on a process that began February 2, 2026, when SpaceX acquired xAI in the largest private merger in history, valued at $1.25 trillion. SpaceX at $1 trillion and xAI at $250 billion.


The reason SpaceX bought xAI was stated plainly by Musk at the time of the deal: to build orbital data centers. SpaceX had simultaneously filed with the FCC to launch up to one million satellites designed to function as AI compute nodes in low Earth orbit, escaping what Musk described as the energy constraints limiting AI development on Earth.

Advertisement

xAI provided the AI software stack, with Grok, the X platform, and the Colossus supercomputer infrastructure in Memphis with over 220,000 NVIDIA GPUs, while SpaceX provided the rockets, Starlink, and the capital base to fund it. The two companies needed each other. xAI was burning $2.5 billion in losses on $250 million in revenue. SpaceX was generating an estimated $8 billion in profit on $15 billion in revenue and needed an AI narrative to command the valuation it was targeting for its IPO.

SpaceXAI just launched into your kitchen with their new app

What SpaceX has done, regardless of how the orbital AI vision ultimately plays out, is walk into a public market as something no company has been before: a rocket manufacturer, satellite internet provider, AI software company, social media platform, and supercomputer operator under one ticker. Whether that combination is worth $2 trillion depends entirely on which of those businesses you believe in most.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla challenges startups to score a gig inside its most advanced European factory

Tesla is challenging startups to bring their best battery tech directly to Gigafactory Berlin.

Published

on

By

Tesla has issued an open challenge to startups across Europe, inviting them to bring their best battery technology directly to the floor of Gigafactory Berlin. The program, called the JUNI x Tesla Battery Cell Giga Challenge, opened applications this month with a deadline of July 24, 2026, and is targeting startups with solutions that can make battery cell manufacturing faster, cheaper, safer, and more scalable at an industrial level.

The timing of the challenge is directly tied to Tesla’s most aggressive European battery investment yet. On May 12, 2026, Giga Berlin plant manager André Thierig announced a $250 million investment to scale the factory’s annual 4680 cell production capacity from 8 GWh to 18 GWh, more than doubling the previous target set just months earlier in December 2025. Thierig confirmed the expansion on X, saying the investment “will enable 18 GWh of annual 4680 cell production and create more than 1,500 new jobs.” Combined with a previously announced battery investment at the Grunheide site now approaches $1.2 billion.


The challenge is looking specifically for startups with proven solutions across five categories: materials, equipment, operations, automation, and artificial intelligence. Applications are screened directly by Tesla’s cell manufacturing team in Grunheide, and the strongest submissions move through technical discussions, a pitch day in front of Tesla stakeholders, and potentially a paid pilot project with the cell team. Tesla is not looking for ideas at concept stage. The program requires applicants to demonstrate working prototypes, test data, or prior pilots before being considered.

Advertisement

The historical context matters here. Elon Musk first announced plans for what he called the world’s largest battery cell production facility alongside the Giga Berlin car factory back in 2020, targeting up to 250 GWh of annual capacity. Those plans were shelved in 2022 when Tesla shifted its battery investment focus to the United States to take advantage of Inflation Reduction Act incentives. The revival of cell production at Giga Berlin, now backed by over $1 billion in committed capital, represents a return to an ambition that was set aside for three years. As Teslarati has reported, the 4680 format is central to Tesla’s long-term cost reduction strategy across vehicles, energy storage, including the Tesla Semi and Cybercab.

By opening the challenge to outside startups, Tesla is acknowledging that reaching 18 GWh at Grunheide will require technology it does not currently have in-house, and it is willing to pay for the right solutions. For a startup in the battery supply chain, a paid pilot with Tesla’s European cell team is as close to a direct commercial path as the industry offers.

Continue Reading