“Skeletons in the closet” implies an issue in the distant past.

The supercharger network isn’t shutting down or even shrinking. We don’t really know the reason why this team was fired, but it’s obviously not because the charging network is losing priority. Maybe the team had internal politics or low performance or a myriad of other issues?

Rebecca Tinucci started showing up above Elon in listicle popularity contests. Investors loved her, the industry loved her, the media loved her. She wasn't yet a challenger for CEO, but she could have become one if investors soured enough on Elon.

One can't help but wonder (or personally, hope) if this move sour investors enough on Elon...

> it’s obviously not because the charging network is losing priority

Why is this obvious?

It seem obvious to me that the Twitter acquisition made Tesla as a whole lose priority to some extent.

The likely scenario is that the local electrical utilities supplying/servicing the chargers will take over the operation in the shadows until they develop their own brands and change the signage and payment terminals.

The Immediate effect is likely going to be that the prices are going to be readjusted to make sure the network makes money for the owners without Tesla funneling investment capital(they likely cant raise anymore) into the network.

>I've been in the market searching for a car for sometime, and I was about to go with a Tesla, but this layoff pushed me away from the brand.

Depends on the reasons for it. If their performance is low why not lay them off?

A BU level layoff is not performance driven. I've done layoffs and this means an attempt at investor relations.

> but this layoff pushed me away from the brand.

Why? They already have the largest network in the industry. And whatever the news says, they not gone fire everybody involved and stop making more superchargers.

> And whatever the news says, they not gone fire everybody involved and stop making more superchargers

The entire supercharger division was laid off [0], from the head of the BU (Rebecca Tinucci) to all the ICs.

[0] - https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/musk-d...

> according to two former employees and multiple postings on LinkedIn

I have serious question about what 'entire' means here. This is almost certainty a reorganization and not everybody is gone. Manufacturing and maintenance is certainty gone continue.

Musk then said:

> Musk subsequently said on X that the carmaker still plans to expand the Supercharger network, "just at a slower pace for new locations and more focus on 100% uptime and expansion of existing locations."

The reality is, Tesla Superchargers are still far more reliable then the competitors (at least in the US). And its unlikely that these firing will change that balance anytime soon.

That's too much risk for me to put on a $50-70k car - that's downpayment money for a condo.

So you are gone trust the companies that have invested virtually nothing in charging for 10 years instead, and trust them? Seems a bit strange.

I'm not saying you should buy a Tesla, but this reason doesn't really add up to me.

They literally just did this...

We have no actual data about exactly what happened and how they are actually reorganizing things.

There is literally 0% chance that literally everybody related to Superchargers was fired. There is 0% chance that the whole maintenance organization was fired.

The sources that are suggest here its comments from fired employees, and those kinds of comments can very much lead exacerbation.

This isn't the first time we got reports that 'every XY' was fired and it turned out to not actually be true in various ways.

> There is literally 0% chance that literally everybody related to Superchargers was fired. There is 0% chance that the whole maintenance organization was fired.

The only sources we have say they fired the entire division. Sure, we can wait for the dust to settle before conclusively saying what happened but "literally 0% chance" is objectively wrong.

They have 10000 of chargers in the wild. Do you think there is nobody at Tesla that knows anything about Supercharger because somebody that was just fired used the term 'entire division'? And what 'division' was it, what was its responsibility exactly?

Musk had developers PRINT OUT THEIR CODE to try and determine who was essential to Twitter...

He's a white supremacist, but I guess nobody's perfect?

Ford also wanted to lower consumer prices and raise salaries to help people have easier lives. But that was ruled illegal by our "justice" system, because his primary duty is apparently to shareholders[1]:

> The Michigan Supreme Court held that Henry Ford could not lower consumer prices and raise employee salaries.

> ...Russell C. Ostrander argued that the profits to the stockholders should be the primary concern for the company directors. Because this company was in business for profit, Ford could not turn it into a charity.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

So he wasn't a supporter of Nazis? I don't follow.

It's a valid reason to not give money to someone you dislike. Tesla is not owed his money because they were first movers in the serious EV market, especially as time goes on and more and more options exist.

I don't disagree with your comment - not liking Elon is a great reason not to buy a Tesla.

I think it's a faux moi thing to say you don't want to support Tesla because you were disenfranchised with them because of them laying off the super charger team - that hardly seems like a major enough reason for someone to dislike a car company unless theres a personal connection to that team.

To me OP comment sounds like they are using that reason but they really don't like Musk. Just be honest about your position.

Sure, as I read the parent post, they were just saying you don't have to dress it up and pretend it is a different reason.

You read it right.