Follow us on Twitter


Go Back   Tesla Motors Club Forum > Media > News, Articles and Events

News, Articles and Events Discussion about News, Articles and Events

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 06-17-2009, 12:51 PM   #121
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnOutsider View Post
I don't think anyone here is doubting that Martin is one the founders?
No, but it seems clear that Elon definitely is not. He cannot say that he is one of the founders. He may be the principal investor and owner. But he wasn't even around during the founding.

Last edited by Tdave; 06-17-2009 at 12:57 PM..
Tdave is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2009, 01:21 PM   #122
P463 Model S
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tdave View Post
No, but it seems clear that Elon definitely is not. He cannot say that he is one of the founders. He may be the principal investor and owner. But he wasn't even around during the founding.
Where has Elon stated he was the founder? Everyone is lashing out at cleverly-worded phrases but are doing the same here...

The law suit shows other publications referring to Elon as the founder. Elon never said he's the founder as far as I know, he's not listed as a founder on the site, and as far as I know he has never said Martin is NOT a founder.

I realize a lot of folks here are from the early days of TM and followed Martin similar to how people follow Steve Jobs, but let's step back a moment and gain some perspective. Too many people are taking this all too personally

I'm here to discuss TM not the highschool drama between EM and ME, if this keeps spilling into every thread, this board will become just as bad as the sucking up people say goes on at the official Tesla forums only on the opposite side.
AnOutsider is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2009, 01:36 PM   #123
Mostly water
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 306
Some people wonder how Elon was able to kick Martin out of the company that he had founded. Here's Martin's version of the story (from his blog):

Quote:
Hi Pete,

You said:

“One thing I always wondered about the Martin et al ousting is how did Elon manage this. I would assume the board would have been put together with Martin and the board agreed. Why? I can see Elon wanting to get Martin out I just don’t understand why the board voted to agree with his position.”

My understanding of the situation was that the Board consisted of 7 or 8 members. They included Elon (the Chairman), his brother Kimbal, and then 5 or 6 others who were mostly representatives of the VC firms who invested early in TM. To pass a motion they just needed a simple majority, so 4 or 5, depending on the exact total # on the Board. Some of the VC board members had been brought into TM by Elon, who had led funding rounds series B, C, & D. I guess because Elon was their initial, and main, contact at TM (plus they probably thought he had the “Midas touch”), they were willing to back his decisions. Of course, I don’t know exactly how the vote went down, but that would be my best guess.

It really is disturbing how easily Elon appears to have taken control of the company. Some people may think that he was justified in doing what he did because he invested $50M into TM, but I believe that there is no amount of money that justifies taking somebody else’s idea and trying to pass it off as your own. That’s just plain old fraud as far as I’m concerned. Anyway…

All the best,

Chris H.

Martin sez:

That’s the right idea, but the numbers are different. At the time I left the board, it comprised 8 members:

2 appointed by series A shareholders, where Elon was the majority owner, so they were Elon’s appointees.
1 was the Series B representative, again where Elon owned the majority of the stock
1 appointed by the Series C shareholders, where Vantage Point appointed Jim Marver
1 appointed by the Series D shareholders, where Elon managed to get a very good friend, Antonio Gracias, appointed.
3 appointed by the Common shareholders – one of these defined as the CEO. Marc & I collectively controlled the Common stock class.

In order to get me off the board, Elon converted enough of his Series A stock to Common stock so as to be able to out-vote Marc and me. (He had enough Series A left still to control Series A as well.) He thus controlled 7 out of 8 board seats at the time, while owning less than 40% of the company’s stock.

Comment by Chris H. May 22, 2008 @ 7:19 pm Reply
Once Elon controlled the majority of the seats on the Board, he could do what he wanted, including firing Martin.
__________________
Don't forget about the real world...
Chris H. is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2009, 02:12 PM   #124
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnOutsider View Post
Where has Elon stated he was the founder? Everyone is lashing out at cleverly-worded phrases but are doing the same here...
This is the just the first time I've fully realized the chronology, and how clear it is. While ME may have no case from a strict argument of law, I can sympathize with his plight, and the point he's trying to make.
Tdave is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2009, 03:09 PM   #125
Model S -- P 96
 
Arnold Panz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tdave View Post
This is the just the first time I've fully realized the chronology, and how clear it is. While ME may have no case from a strict argument of law, I can sympathize with his plight, and the point he's trying to make.
Doesn't this kind of thing happen all the time to the people who create companies -- they come up with a great idea, nurture it, grow it, get VCs involved, and then get sacked because they are perceived as not being able to take the company to the "next level"? It seems here to have been more of a personal dispute between EM and ME than in some other cases, but I recall stories like this every week coming out of the dot coms a decade ago, and it seems to be a fairly common storyline in the technology sector in general.

That doesn't make what happened to ME any more or less fair, but it is the unfortunate reality of starting a business like this one that, in order to get the funding you need to really see your idea reach fruition, you need to essentially sell your idea to others, and then you are more or less working at their mercy from then on. I couldn't believe the amount of money needed to get "green" companies up and running and to scale, as described in this article from this month's issue of The Atlantic.
Arnold Panz is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2009, 05:55 PM   #126
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 10
Yes, it happens all the time. Indeed, it happened once with EM himself, in a somewhat analogous situation. He was kicked out as top guy for PayPal in a boardroom putsch.

Interesting contrast of styles of ME and EM... EM still does deals with those who kicked him out of PayPal. Apparently, he didn't hold grudges.
Rarity is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2009, 06:01 PM   #127
Mostly water
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rarity View Post
Interesting contrast of styles of ME and EM... EM still does deals with those who kicked him out of PayPal. Apparently, he didn't hold grudges.
Perhaps that has something to do with him having walked away with over $300 million from the sale of PayPal to ebay...
__________________
Don't forget about the real world...
Chris H. is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2009, 06:10 PM   #128
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 10
And presumably, ME could walk away from Tesla with $30 million or more.

Tesla Motors Valued at $1B in New Private Equity Marketplace, SharesPost
Rarity is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2009, 06:45 PM   #129
Senior Member
 
JRP3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 651
Or maybe not:
Quote:
It seems too early to take the share prices and valuations on the just-launched SharesPost as truly accurate assessments of startups’ value
__________________
Building the AMPhibian http://amp-phibian.blogspot.com/
If you can't wait for or afford a Tesla
http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/
JRP3 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Old 06-18-2009, 11:56 AM   #130
vfx
ERIC VFX
 
vfx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 4,502
The secrets listed here could be talking about Martin
__________________
.
.
.
.
.
.
The world loves to be deceived.
vfx is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:27 AM.

Tesla accesories at EVComponents
Click here to learn about advertising!

| Home | Register | FAQ | Today's Posts | Search | New Posts |
Teslamotorsclub.com (TMC) is in no way sponsored, endorsed, or affiliated by or with Tesla Motors, Inc. or any of its subsidiaries, suppliers, or vendors. ‘Tesla Motors’, 'Model S' and ‘Tesla Roadster’ are trademarks of Tesla Motors, Inc. Click here to learn about advertising!

SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0