Electric car news
Martin Eberhard, original co -founder of Tesla, comes out of silence to express his disappointment concerning the brand’s recent strategic choices. His statements take a critical look at the abandonment of the project of Electric vehicle $ 25,000 For the benefit of the Cybertruck, which he qualifies bluntly as a “truck that looks like a dumpster”.
This position reveals the persistent tensions around the original vision of Tesla and its evolution under the direction of Elon Musk. To understand the scope of these criticisms, we must return to the complex history of the Tesla Foundation and the initial ambitions of its creators.
Tesla’s real founders and their original vision
Tesla’s story starts long before Elon Musk arrives. Martin Eberhard et Marc Tarpenning created the company in 2003, a full year before Musk joined the project as a main investor. Despite this anteriority, a judicial regulation today allows five people to claim the title of co -founder: Musk, Eberhard, Tarpenning, Ian Wright and JB Straubel.
This complex legal situation masks the reality of the first years. Eberhard and Tarpenning led Tesla during her first five years of existencecrucial period when they established the technical and strategic foundations of the company. Their engineering approach based on the first principles has shaped Tesla’s technological DNA, an influence that still continues today.
The initial strategic plan provided for a logical progression: starting with the sports roadster, then developing premium vehicles such as future Model S and X, before democratizing technology with consumer models. This cascading strategy had to peak with affordable electric vehicles for the greatest number.
The controversial abandonment of the project at 25,000 dollars
Tesla’s project at 25 000 dollarsoften nicknamed “Model 2” by observers, represented the culmination of this democratic vision. According to information available, Tesla engineers have fought to maintain this program, aware of its strategic importance for the accessibility of electric vehicles.
Musk finally decided to abandon this project for the benefit of two alternatives: the development of Cybercab Robotaxi and the creation of cheaper versions of Model 3 and Model Y existing. This decision marks a turning point in Tesla’s strategy, favoring advanced technological innovation rather than price accessibility.
- Cybercab is focusing on full autonomous driving
- Lightened versions of existing models reduce development costs
- The abandonment of the “Model 2” repels the objective of a truly affordable Tesla
For Eberhard, this orientation betrays the original ambitions: “I am really disappointed that Tesla has canceled its entry -level car program because that’s what the world needs – not a truck that looks like a garbage dumpster.”
Cybertruck in the crosshairs of criticism
Eberhard’s criticism particularly targets cybertruck, whose polarizing design has been divided since its presentation. Beyond the controversial aesthetics, it is the strategic relevance of this vehicle that questions. Cybertruck can only be marketed in a Limited number of countries With less strict security regulations, unlike a compact sedan that could have conquered all global markets.
This geographical limitation raises questions about the effectiveness of the allocation of development resources. While Tesla investigated massively in this niche project, European and Asian competition reinforced its positions on the segment of affordable electric vehicles.
| Vehicle | Accessible markets | Potential volume | Democratization impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cybertruck | Limit | Weak | Minimal |
| Model 2 Abandoned | World | Very high | Maximal |
Skepticism on autonomous driving and new orientations
Eberhard also expresses his reservations about Tesla’s obsession for the Autonomous driving. Without explicitly named the company, he criticizes the approach consisting in deploying prototypes on open roads despite occasional failures with dramatic consequences. This position reflects an engineering philosophy favoring absolute security before marketing.
The co -founder is particularly skeptical of the concept of Robotaxi, which he considers a premature technological promise. This position contrasts with Musk’s enthusiasm for this technology, presented as the future of urban mobility.
Eberhard’s criticisms extend to the recent designs of Tesla, which he considers to lack inspiration. This appreciation suggests that the company has lost part of its original creative soul, favoring spectacularity with functional elegance that characterized its first models.
These tensions reveal a fundamental debate on the future of electric mobility. On the one hand, the daring technological vision of Musk pushes the limits of innovation. On the other, Eberhard’s pragmatic approach favors immediate social impact by democratization. This divergence illustrates the crucial choices facing all manufacturers: revolutionizing technology or revolutionizing accessibility. For Tesla, this debate remains open, and the next few years will reveal what philosophy will prevail in an increasingly competitive market.
React to the article