Superchargers in Australia

[Jules22]

Interesting announcement from BP today looking to buy up Tesla Supercharging sites. Couple that with the deals to purchase V4 superchargers from Tesla and re-brand them, it sounds like there are a lot more moving parts to these layoffs than many understand.

There's clearly a reason they've kept both Supercharger manufacturing plants going.

 

[Vostok]

Interesting announcement from BP today looking to buy up Tesla Supercharging sites. Couple that with the deals to purchase V4 superchargers from Tesla and re-brand them, it sounds like there are a lot more moving parts to these layoffs than many understand.

If Tesla intended to exit the Supercharger business (i.e. the charging service, not making the DCFC hardware), then a sane CEO would sell it as a going concern, including the people to run it, as they have the institutional knowledge, corporate history, and expertise to keep it running.

In all the M&As I’ve been involved in - and that’s been a few - the buyer insists on all the key people (at a minimum) of the target company being part of the deal - otherwise it is simply too difficult to keep the business running, and providing business continuity would be impossible.

After deal completion, there will be an integration and transition period where the new business is integrated with the buyer’s current business. Some people might be retained for 1+ years to integrate the new business, and progressively overlapping roles are transitioned to a single role, etc. Then the redundancies are done.

In some simpler deals, headcount change might be worked out as part of the deal. CVs of all the people will be requested, their role/function, reporting lines etc and a restructure might be worked out prior to completion to minimise uncertainty at the time the deal is announced.

But I’ve never been involved in a deal where no-one from the target business is retained. Getting rid of all the people before a deal would be value destructive and would substantially reduce the offer price. Hence, it’s not what a sane CEO would do.

 

[Jules22]

There's no indication they intend to exit completely however the two deals we know of from last year clearly played into the decision to refocus on the more profitable aspects.

I wouldn't be surprised to see more announcements of other deals that have been in progress.

Selling the entire division is still a possibility that might be under way but I doubt it at the moment.

 

[B3AU]

Interesting announcement from BP today looking to buy up Tesla Supercharging sites. Couple that with the deals to purchase V4 superchargers from Tesla and re-brand them, it sounds like there are a lot more moving parts to these layoffs than many understand.

There's clearly a reason they've kept both Supercharger manufacturing plants going.

For anyone else who had no idea what the 'announcement' was, here's some Bloomberg coverage - Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

BP Plc’s electric vehicle charging arm is eager to snap up Tesla Inc. supercharging sites across the US — along with the workers behind them — and has pledged $1 billion to expand its network.
"If there are stranded real estate partners who are looking for someone to call, they should feel free to pick up the phone and call me or look me up on LinkedIn,” Sujay Sharma, chief executive officer of bp pulse Americas, said in an interview with Bloomberg.

 

[PC__LoadLetter]

But I’ve never been involved in a deal where no-one from the target business is retained. Getting rid of all the people before a deal would be value destructive and would substantially reduce the offer price. Hence, it’s not what a sane CEO would do.

Perhaps the relevant staff were already offered positions at BP, but one company or the other wasn't ready to make the public announcement yet & thus put the re-hired staff under NDAs? And besides, you don't want staff who dislike BP from having access to corporate IT systems where they could do some damage on the way out.

 

[RichardV]

There's no indication they intend to exit completely however the two deals we know of from last year clearly played into the decision to refocus on the more profitable aspects.

I wouldn't be surprised to see more announcements of other deals that have been in progress.

Selling the entire division is still a possibility that might be under way but I doubt it at the moment.

There is no deal here with Tesla. This is an open call to landlords left stranded by Tesla to contact BP Pulse as well as an open call to any ex-tesla employees to contact BP Pulse. Note also this is in America only.

"Sujay Sharma, chief executive officer of bp pulse Americas, said in an interview with Bloomberg that site owners that were working with Tesla before should come:

“If there are stranded real estate partners who are looking for someone to call, they should feel free to pick up the phone and call me or look me up on LinkedIn.”

BP is also looking to scoop former Tesla charging employees."

 

[Jules22]

There is no deal here with Tesla. This is an open call to landlords left stranded by Tesla to contact BP Pulse as well as an open call to any ex-tesla employees to contact BP Pulse. Note also this is in America only.

"Sujay Sharma, chief executive officer of bp pulse Americas, said in an interview with Bloomberg that site owners that were working with Tesla before should come:


BP is also looking to scoop former Tesla charging employees."

The deal was done last year. October for BP November for EG group.

BP are licensing Tesla hardware and I would not be surprised if there are more deals in progress other than the two we know of.

With a little thought it makes perfect sense. These companies can not only do all the hard work of building new sites but they have the experience in building and maintaining surrounding services like food etc which Tesla don't want to be getting into.

They've proven the technology, shown how far ahead their chargers are compared to any others, now they have the opportunity to sit back and licence them and allow others to deploy ( also avoiding the risks of being seen as a monopoly on charging stations as another smart user on here pointed out).

With a little thought the moves all make a lot of sense and I'm sure we'll see more emerge on what has been going on in the background.

 

[SPadival]

We’re so back, baby

 

[B3AU]

We’re so back, baby

View attachment 1045795

Good to see the social media team at Tesla Charging survived the layoffs!

 

[dronus]

If Tesla intended to exit the Supercharger business (i.e. the charging service, not making the DCFC hardware), then a sane CEO would sell it as a going concern, including the people to run it, as they have the institutional knowledge, corporate history, and expertise to keep it running.

In all the M&As I’ve been involved in - and that’s been a few - the buyer insists on all the key people (at a minimum) of the target company being part of the deal - otherwise it is simply too difficult to keep the business running, and providing business continuity would be impossible.

After deal completion, there will be an integration and transition period where the new business is integrated with the buyer’s current business. Some people might be retained for 1+ years to integrate the new business, and progressively overlapping roles are transitioned to a single role, etc. Then the redundancies are done.

In some simpler deals, headcount change might be worked out as part of the deal. CVs of all the people will be requested, their role/function, reporting lines etc and a restructure might be worked out prior to completion to minimise uncertainty at the time the deal is announced.

But I’ve never been involved in a deal where no-one from the target business is retained. Getting rid of all the people before a deal would be value destructive and would substantially reduce the offer price. Hence, it’s not what a sane CEO would do.

I worked for an electrical contracting company many moons ago and was placed inside a huge “electrical company” (which I won’t mention their name. We learnt how they did business, documented strengths and weaknesses, tested current SLA and timelines etc.
Long story short, after about 6months EVERYONE at the company (except us contractors of course) had to reapply for their jobs or take notice. The people who were not performing and thought they had a job for life had to apply for their job, giving examples of SLA compared to the contractors work which they struggled to do.
Massive clean out of deadwood. It was the best thing for the company in the end and it thrived.
There was no public debate, no putting the decision makers in the limelight, they just did it and it worked.
Just because we don’t hear about things it doesn’t mean they don’t happen

 

[Jules22]

Just because we don’t hear about things it doesn’t mean they don’t happen

Absolutely, happens all the time, particularly in tech. Just don't have the plethora of politically motivated 'analysts' wanting to put a negative spin on everything.

 

[Vostok]

Perhaps the relevant staff were already offered positions at BP, but one company or the other wasn't ready to make the public announcement yet & thus put the re-hired staff under NDAs? And besides, you don't want staff who dislike BP from having access to corporate IT systems where they could do some damage on the way out.

Yeah, nah, that’s not how it works. If some or all of the SC business was being sold to BP, along with a bunch of people, it would have been announced at the time (indeed listing rules would require that be done), and we wouldn’t be playing guessing games here.

If there was no such deal to announce, and Elon is just making this up as he goes along after firing everyone in the SC division, then that’s a damning indictment of the way he runs a business.

If someone impacted by a transaction “does some damage on the way out” they were clearly never professional to begin with, would be instantly fired, and then sued. I haven’t seen that happen in my corporate life, because most people realise that petulant behaviour like that not only puts them at risk of a civil or criminal action, but also damages their future employment prospects. Few people are that dumb.

 

[moa999]

Tesla Australia email just received.
Notably the comments on the NSW and QLD part-Govt funded sites.

​

​ Supercharger Network Update​ We’ve heard concerns from our Tesla community about recent changes to the Supercharger program and would like to provide an update on the network in Australia: Core to the Mission – The Supercharger network is still core to Tesla’s mission of accelerating the world’s transition to sustainable energy. Reducing costs and increasing efficiency are important for fulfilling our mission and remain a priority. Customer Experience is Key – Customer experience for charging continues to be a top priority for the Supercharger network and we continue to focus on the ease of charging, competitive pricing and investing in the charging experience holistically. Expansion of Network – The Supercharger network will continue to be expanded. Projects currently in construction are continuing to be completed and put into operation. NSW Fast Charging Grant Program & QLD Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Scheme – Tesla will continue to move forward with participating in these programs. Service and Support – Supercharger sites are continuing to be serviced and maintained by our team, with operational support being provided. Thank you for continuing to support our mission to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy.​

 

[B3AU]

Tesla Australia email just received.

So if it's not part of the grant programs, ie Glenelg and regional Victoria - they're not going to be built for the foreseeable future?

(As a new south Welshman I don't really mind ;P)

 

[Jules22]

Tesla Australia email just received.
Notably the comments on the NSW and QLD part-Govt funded sites.

Yep, more evidence that all the gnashing of teeth was totally unnecessary.

 

[Max Spaghetti]

NSW Fast Charging Grant Program & QLD Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Scheme – Tesla will continue to move forward with participating in these programs.

OK, so let's look at what it doesn't say.

It doesn't say that the NSW and QLD projects committed to but yet to be commenced will be built. "Continue to move forward with participating" means nothing.

It doesn't say that any projects anywhere else in the country announced but not commenced (e.g. Mansfield VIC) will be built.

 

[coref1]

OK, so let's look at what it doesn't say.

It doesn't say that the NSW and QLD projects committed to but yet to be commenced will be built. "Continue to move forward with participating" means nothing.

It doesn't say that any projects anywhere else in the country announced but not commenced (e.g. Mansfield VIC) will be built.

A little bit reassuring but more details needed. If they open Taree and Hay that will give me a bit more comfort.

 

[Chuq]

Yep, more evidence that all the gnashing of teeth was totally unnecessary.

I think the gnashing of teeth was entirely valid based on the actions and information we had at the time.

Tesla still has to re-hire their charging team in Australia. Either the same people (who have been burned once), or new people who have to start from scratch.

 

[Jules22]

I think the gnashing of teeth was entirely valid based on the actions and information we had at the time.

Tesla still has to re-hire their charging team in Australia. Either the same people (who have been burned once), or new people who have to start from scratch.

No issues, with people being uneasy, but a lot of what went on was completely unnecessary.

We still don't know what shape the new department will take, nor what will be required to keep the growth in this country where it is needed. As with the initial situation I'll wait till more becomes clear before jumping to conclusions.

 

[Chuq]

but a lot of what went on was completely unnecessary.

To use the metaphor of "turning an ocean liner around" (often used to refer to ICE manufacturers who struggle to become EV manufacturers - but used in a different context here):

Tesla's Australian supercharger network was like an ocean liner that was moving slowly for 8 years, then finally in the last year managed to get it up to full cruising speed. (30% of all sites opened in the last 8 months).

If Elon wanted to alter direction slightly at that speed, sure. But what he did was the equivalent of dropping the anchor what the ship was at full speed. This email is like telling everyone that it's fine, we're still moving. Whereas in reality, most of the engines aren't working and we don't know what direction the ships is facing.