Tesla founders Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning started the company before Elon Musk joined. Discover how Tesla evolved and why Musk became its most famous co-founder.
Here is what happened in the company’s early years — and why the founder debate is more complicated than it seems.
It’s not “complicated”. Elon Musk is not, and never has been, a “founder” of Tesla. Period. End of statement.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Tesla’s early history is more nuanced than saying Elon Musk was ‘never’ a founder. Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning started Tesla, but Tesla itself has described Musk as a co-founder and has also described the company as having a team of founders. Tesla’s own historical materials list Musk, Eberhard, Tarpenning, JB Straubel and Ian Wright among those who founded the company. So the distinction between ‘started the company’ and ‘co-founder’ matters here.
Oh “Tesla itself” said that? Lol! Well, I guess If the company itself said it, then it must be true.
Exactly 😄 That’s my point. I’m not saying Musk had no role in Tesla’s early development. I’m simply pointing out that Tesla’s own historical account has described him as a co-founder, alongside Martin Eberhard, Marc Tarpenning, JB Straubel and Ian Wright. So the history is more nuanced than saying he simply “was never a founder
The history doesn’t “become more nuanced” just because someone reinvents it. Either he was a “founding member” of the company…meaning, by definition, that he was there from the beginning…or, he wasn’t. That’s it.
Elon Musk didn’t join the company until 5 years after it was founded. That means he was NOT a “founding member”. That’s literally the definition of the word.
I think we’re mainly disagreeing over the definition of “founder.” If you’re using it strictly to mean someone who was there at the moment a company was legally established, I understand your point. My point is that Tesla’s history also uses the term in a broader sense when describing the people involved in its early development. So I think the distinction is worth discussing rather than treating it as completely black and white
My point is that Tesla’s history also uses the term in a broader sense when describing the people involved in its early development
BECAUSE THEY’RE LYING
Holy shit how difficult is this?
I understand that you see it that way, but calling it a lie doesn’t really address the historical distinction I’m pointing out. I’m not arguing that Musk was there when Tesla was legally incorporated. I’m saying that there is a broader historical discussion about the people involved in Tesla’s early development. That’s the point I’m trying to clarify.
There’s no “disagreement” over the definition of the word “founder”. It only has one definition. And it doesn’t apply to Elon Musk. That’s just a fact. There is no “gray area” here, that leaves room for debate
When someone knowingly and intentionally misrepresents the facts…that’s called a “lie”. Elon Musk is lying about being a “co-founder” of Tesla. It doesn’t matter who else is willing to repeat that lie…it’s never going to be “true”.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
That’s what used to be said about the word literally too. Time marches on and words change.
