The Elon Musk (Failing) Way
OIJ (#37) How to Consistently Hype, Disappoint and... Win ft. Elon Musk
Welcome back dear fellow š§āāļø Hermits š
š§āāļø First time here? ā This 3-Minute Crash Course Will Save You Hours
š The SpaceX Parts Supplier ā Advanced Materials Deep-Dive
š How to Invest When Youāre Not a Full-Time Investor ā Easy to Read Guide
When businesses consistently fail or succeed, it usually comes down to the founder(s) and their team.
Headlines love short-term drama, especially when itās about failure or someone elseās misery.
Will grab your attention, butā¦
Yet another Tesla product failing to meet production deadline
ā¦ this will tickle your pickle.
Q: Is your storm a happy storm?
Elon Musk: No.
We all know who Elon Musk is, and if you donāt, do yourself a favor and pick up Walter Isaacsonās biography.
Regardless, this is a short piece about how results-driven people often overlook the process (sometimes a little too much).
Elon Muskās Stretch-Goal Machine: How Big Targets Inspireā¦ and Often Slip
(with Optimus as the freshest case study)
Elon Musk has a superpower: getting people hyped about impossible goals.
Employees, investors, fansā¦ heās got them all dreaming big.
Butā¦ reality keeps crashing the party.
Being in the form of physics, manufacturing, regulations, time, or all of the above, something always tends to disagree with Elonās timelines.
Hereās a short and insightful look at the usual Musk pattern, which contains elements including but not limited to wild promises, a hype tornado, an all-out sprint to make it real, inevitable delays, seemingly random tweaks, or a quiet rebrand.
And itās latest iteration is Teslaās humanoid robot, Optimus.
What (exactly) just happened with Optimus?
In true Musk fashion, the plan for Optimus was nothing short of sci-fi come to life.
Through 2023ā24, he laid out an aggressive roadmap with humanoid robots doing āuseful tasksā in Tesla factories by the end of 2024, a limited production run in 2025, and full-blown robot armies by 2026.
Reuters even documented this āinternal use firstā rollout as basically the robot equivalent of training wheels before the big debut.
Fast forward to mid-2025, and that timeline looksā¦ well, a bit human after all.
Reports started surfacing that Tesla had quietly ditched those ambitious āthousands of unitsā production targets. Supply chain headaches, endless redesigns, the usual Muskian turbulence.
The Information broke the story, and the German tech outlet heise didnāt mince words: āTesla cancels ambitious production targets for Optimus.ā
Meanwhile, Electrek added that the whole program was āin shamblesā after a leadership shakeup. Not exactly the āAI robot revolutionā marketing was going for.
Then came the canary in the coal mine. On June 6, 2025, Milan Kovac (the guy leading Optimus engineering) packed up and left.
When your top robot wrangler leaves just months before supposed mass production, itāsā¦ not exactly a good look.
Previous Case Studies
A) Robotaxi & āFull Self-Driving (Supervised)ā
Letās travel back in time to Autonomy Day (a.k.a. The Great Robotaxi Prophecy back in 2019)
Musk took the stage and confidently declared that Tesla would haveā¦
Over a million robotaxis [on the road by 2020].
Spoiler, it didnāt happen.
Years later, āFull Self-Drivingā (or FSD, if you like your acronyms ambitious) is still very much a Level 2 driver-assistance system.
Thatās just a fancy way of saying youāre still the driver, buddy.
Regulators, meanwhile, are watching like hawks.
Feature-complete by end of 2019
ā Elon Musk
Customers would get a āfeature-completeā FSD beta by the end of that year.
But when the software finally landed, it was more ānervous teenager learning to driveā than āautonomous chauffeur.ā
By December 2023, Tesla had to recall over 2 million cars to address Autopilot misuse risks.
And just when things seemed to calm down, 2025 brought another round of federal investigations into FSD performance.
The Infamous Model 3 āproduction hellā
So.. the goal was to crank out 5,000 Model 3s per week by December 2017.
Easy, right?
Perhaps not so much.
This was a masterclass in overpromising and under-sleeping.
Tesla pushed the goal back again and again, as Elon famously dubbed the whole ordeal āproduction hell.ā
It wasnāt until July 2018 (literally hours after yet another deadline) that the line finally hit the magic number. Reuters chronicled every twist, turn, and meltdown along the way.
The biography written by Walter Isaacson does a great job of describing the entire chain of events. Again, 100% recommended reading.
We can clearly observe a pattern ofā¦ set a stretch goal ā descend into chaos ā pull an all-nighter ā finally hit it (fashionably late).
The Cybertruck Debacle: price, timing, volume
The 2019 unveil promised a $39,900 Cybertruck and deliveries starting in 2021. The crowd went wild, the glass shattered (literally), and the hype was off the charts.
Fast forward to delivery day, November 30, 2023ā¦ and surprise, surpriseā¦ the ābaseā model showed up at $60,990, a pretty solid 50% jump from the original promise.
You could also get an upgraded version for $79,990 and $99,990.
Oh, and that affordable base version? Think 2025 (maybe).
We can clearly observe a pattern ofā¦ make a splash with an unbelievable price and timeline ā disappear for a few years ā return with higher prices, fewer features, and the same grin.
Tesla Semi: five āquartersā awayā¦ again
Itās 2017, Musk promises the Tesla Semi would hit production by 2019.
Spoilerā¦ oh noā¦ it didnātā¦ what a freaking surprise
By December 2022, a few shiny trucks finally rolled out but there was no clear word on how many more were actually coming.
Still, ever the optimist, Musk declared in 2022 that Tesla would crank out 50,000 units in 2024.
Yeah, wellā¦
Fast forward to 2025, and reality has (once again) applied the brakes downhill (Nikola pun intended).
The new production schedule wasā¦ āstarting late-2025ā at the Nevada Gigafactory, with a slow ramp into 2026.
Reuters politely called it a āmulti-year slip.ā
As a side note, š Pepsi was involved š
So againā¦ bold production target ā multi-year delay ā a handful of deliveries and a promise to āreally scale next year.ā
Solar Roof
In 2019, Musk tweeted that Tesla would be cranking out ā¦
Ofc the internet loved it.
Clean energy, shiny tiles, and that classic Musk bravado.
Butā¦ production and installations crawled for years.
By 2021, customers were hit with sudden price hikes so wild they sparked lawsuits. Tesla eventually settled for about $6 million in 2023.
Go to love this cycle ofā¦ viral tweet ā sluggish execution ā angry customers ā lawyers cleaning up the mess.
The Boring Company: grand transit, narrow tunnels
The Los Angeles Westside tunnel was supposed to be the start of a revolution in traffic. Wanna build flying cars?
No.
But how aboutā¦ underground Teslas.
But after legal pushback and neighborhood complaints, the project was quietly scrapped in 2018.
Next came the Vegas Loop, hyped as a futuristic transit system capable of moving 4,400 passengers per hour.
However, early runs looked more like a slow Tesla conga line, limited by fire codes and cramped stations.
The Verge called it out, though the LVCVA and The Boring Company later claimed āhigher tested capacities.ā
Againā¦ grand vision ā messy permits and safety bottlenecks ā a scaled-down, slightly awkward tourist attraction.
SpaceX (the counter-exampleā¦ with caveats)
This is the part of the Musk saga that actually delivers.
Starshipās June 6, 2024 flight nailed a huge milestone.
Both stages splashed down safely, marking a massive leap toward full rocket reusability.
Of course, it wouldnāt be a Musk project without a few delays sprinkled in. More test flights, regulatory reviews, and schedule āadjustmentsā are still on the horizon before Starship flies regularly.
This was was an aggregate of wild ambition + relentless iteration = real breakthroughs (just always a few launch windows late).
Why does the pattern persist?
Stretch goals as both culture and capital strategy. Elonās deadlines are less āplansā and more āmotivational fireworks.ā They light a fire under employees, charm investors, and keep the fanbase buzzing.
Great for morale, great for raising money, less great if you like actually meeting deadlines.
Most of these targets are best-case scenarios, not realistic timelines. Just ask the SEC, which had a field day with the whole āfunding securedā incident back in 2018.
The triple threat: tech, manufacturing, and regulation. Autonomy still needs to nail every weird edge case (driving under every conditionā¦ bicycles, snowstorms, raccoons).
If weāre talking humanoid robotsā¦ Add dexterity, safety, and the looming fear of a Terminator headline.
What about those wild designs like the Cybertruck? They look cool until you actually try to build them at scaleā¦ so take production into account, especially if the redisgn is radical.
Leadership roulette. Nothing screams āweāre totally on tĀ©rackā like your head of engineering walking out the door months before launch.
This oneās touchy, as thereās a combination.
Youāve got an autocratic leadership style, one person calling the shots with absolute conviction, combined with a team of hyper-independent, high-IQ maniacs who hate being told what to do.
The culture runs on intense 80-hour weeks, midnight meetings, and a relentless fixation on the smallest details. Every bolt, every line of code, every pixel matters.
Then add a dash of controlled chaos. Thatās the unpredictable energy Musk seems to cultivate on purpose. It keeps people sharp, but it also keeps them on edge.
One day youāre solving a problem no oneās ever cracked before; the next, your entire project is redefined in a single tweet.
Just remember the key words: mood swings matter.
Definition drift. āFeature-complete.ā āRobotaxi.ā āHigh-volume.ā These terms are as stretchy as Muskās timelines. They keep the story exciting, but anyone taking them literally will need a stiff drink and a new calendar.
A practical framework to handicap Musk's timelines
If youāre trying to make sense of Musk timelines, hereās a simple rule of thumb: whatever date he gives, multiply it by two (or three if youāre feeling realistic).
The Model 3, Cybertruck, Semi, and FSD have all taught us that Musk years operate on a different clock, one powered by caffeine, optimism, and selective amnesia.
You can also spot reality checks by watching the regulators. When the NHTSA pokes around Autopilot or FSD, or when new factory permits stall in bureaucratic limbo, itās the universe telling you the timeline just slippedā¦ again.
Production ātellsā are another clue. Keep an eye on supplier orders, hiring sprints, and whether key executives are still showing up for work.
Specs and pricing are their own comedy show. Compare whatās promised to what actually ships, and youāll see the story in numbers. The Cybertruck went from ā$39,900 starting priceā to āhope youāve got $60k and patience.ā
And remember, Tesla isnāt the only one chasing the humanoid dream. Amazonās testing Agility Roboticsā Digit, and Figure AIās been pulling in serious funding.
Musk might still own the spotlight, but the race is crowded. Remember that robots, unlike investors, donāt care about charisma.
What would change the Optimus story from hype to results?
If Optimus is ever going to be more than a flashy demo, it needs to actually earn its keep on the factory floor.
That means doing real, repetitive work:
picking parts, moving bins, loading palletsā¦
ā¦ andā¦ doing it safely, efficiently, and across multiple shifts.
Reuters was right when it said the smartest first step is internal use; if Tesla canāt make the robots useful in its own factories, good luck selling them to anyone else.
Money math is also crucial. For this to make sense, the cost of actuators, motors, batteries, and processors has to drop fast enough to beat the total cost of a human worker.
And this includes uptime, repairs, and maintenance as part of the overhead.
Then thereās the regulatory headache. Teslaās already had a front-row seat to how messy that can get with Autopilot, so Optimus will need clear safety standards, third-party certifications, and real transparency when things go wrong.
And finally, stability. No more leadership musical chairs or constantly shifting timelines.
Until Tesla shows steady headcount, a clear roadmap, and actual working robots doing actual jobs, talk of āthousands of units in 2025ā should be treated as what it isā¦ aspirational marketing, not manufacturing reality.
š Feel free to ā¤ļø and comment so that more people can discover and enjoy this Substack š
When does a stretch goal become value-destructive? Whatās the line between motivating ambition and misleading timelines?
The SpaceX comparison really is the critical piece that exposes the pattern. When you have actual engineering constraints like rocket physics that dont care about your timeline, the organization adapts and delivers real results. But when the constraint is just manufaturing scale or software maturity, Musk seems to chronically overestimate what's achievable. The Cybertruck price jump from 40k to 60k is particualrly telling because it shows he either fundamentally misunderstood production costs or deliberately lowballed to generate reservations. Either way its not great. The leadership churn on Optimus right before supposed mass production is another massive red flag that nobody seems to be talking about enough.