Elon Musk Talks Tesla Sales Slump, US Politics and Putin Relationship

Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news, Elon Musk Welcome to cut their Economic Forum. How are you?

Thank you for having me? I'm mine, How are you?

Very well? Thank you and very pleased to have you with us. You know among those here in the audience in Doha are some you will know people who have backed to you financially. Over the years since you last spoke here in twenty twenty two, a lot has changed in your life. You're not only running multiple companies. You were doing that then, but now you also have a role in government. So, first of all, I hope you

Well, I travel a lot. So I was in Silicon Valley yesterday morning. I was in LA yesterday evening. I mean Austin right now, I'll be in DC tomorrow. I'll be there having dinner with President tomorrow night, I believe, and then a lout of cabinet secrety meetings and then back to Slotton Valley on Thursday night.

But I mean, the balance of your time is it Well, clearly it's a lot. But is it still the case as you said a while ago, that it's about one to two days a week on your government work.

Yeah, that's correct.

And what does that mean for your corporate life? Because if we start with Tesla, the company has suffered in recent months what you've called blowback. So what is your plan for turning that around? The declining sales picture? And by what stage do you think you're going to be able to turn it around.

Oh, it's already to turn around.

Give me some evidence for that. I've just been looking at the sales figures for Europe in April, would show very significant declines in the big markets.

Europe is our weakest market. We're stronger everywhere else. So our sales are doing doing well at this point. We don't anticipate any any meaningful sales shortfall and.

The you know the.

Obviously the stock market recognizes that since we're now back over a trillion dollars in marketcap. So really the market is aware of the situation, so it's it's already turned around, but.

Sales still down compared to this time last year.

In Europe.

In Europe, okay, and.

Yes, but that's that's true of all manufacturers. There's no exceptions.

Does that mean that you're not going to be able?

Does that mean you're quite weak?

Okay? But you would acknowledge, wouldn't you that what you are facing. Okay, let's just take it as your what you are facing is a significant problem. This Tesla was an incredibly aspirational brand. People identified with it. It saw it, they saw it it being at the forefront of the climate crisis. And now people are driving around with stickers in their cars saying I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy.

And there are also people who are by buying it because Elon's crazy, or however they may view it. So, yes, we've lost some sales perths on the left, but we've gained them on the right. The sales numbers at this point are strong and we've seen no problem with them had So what I.

Mean, you can just look at the stock price if you want the best inside.

Information the stock market analysts have that, and our stock wouldn't be trading near all time eyes if it was not, if things weren't in good Jay, They're fine, don't worry about it.

Okay, I was citing sales figures rather than share price. Well tell me then, how committed you are to Tesla? Do you see yourself and are you committed to still being the chief executive of Tesla in five years time? Yes, no doubt about that at all.

Well, no, I might die, Okay, sure to that. Let me see you if I'm dead. So does that.

Mean that the value of your pay doesn't have any bearing on your decision?

Well, that's not really serject discussion in this forum. The I think, obviously there should be a conversation for if there's something incredible is done, that compensation should match.

That something incredible was done.

But I'm confident that so whatever the whatever some activist posing as a judge in Delaware happens to do will not affect the future compensation.

This is the judge who twice struck down the fifty six billion dollar pay package that was awarded to you. I think the value on the basis on the current value of stock options.

Yeah, not a judge, not a judge the activist who is cars playing a judge in a Halloween costume.

Okay, that's your characterization. I think the value on the current value of stock options.

I think the actual justice according to the law, on the.

Current value of stock options. I think the value of that pay package stands at about one hundred billion dollars. Are you saying you are relaxed about the value of your future pay package? Your decision to be committed to Tesla for the next five years as long as you are still with us on this planet, is completely independent of pay. No, it's not independent. So pay is a relevant factor then to your commitment to Tesla.

A sufficient voting control such that I cannot be ousted by activists investors is what matters to me. And I've said this publicly many times, but let's not have this whole thing be a discussion of my list pay. It's not a money thing. It's a reasonable control thing over the future of the company, especially for building millions, potentially billions of humanoid robots.

I can't be sitting.

There and weren't going to get tossed out by for political reasons by activists. That would be unacceptable. That's all that matters. Now let's move on.

Okay, Well just one question, well one question before we move on to other companies, which is that I wonder if some of what you've has happened to Tesla in the last few months, did you take it personally?

Yes?

And did it make you regret any of you all think twice about your political endeavors, because it is I did what needed.

To be done, Uh, the violent antibody reaction, and I'm not someone who's ever committed violence, and yet massive violence was committed against my company's massive violence was threatened against me.

Who are these people? Why would they do that? How wrong can they be?

They're on the wrong, on the wrong side of history, and that's an evil thing to do, to go and damage some pointocent person's car, to threaten to kill me. What's wrong with these people? I have not harmed anyone, So something needs to be done about them. And a number of them are going to prison and they deserve it.

You're well, you're referring to the attacks on Tesla showrooms.

But I think, well, it's into showrooms and burning down cars unacceptable. Those people will go to prison, and the people that funded them and organized them will also go to prison.

Don't worry, wouldn't you coming you wouldn't you, hm, wouldn't. Wouldn't you acknowledge that some of the people who turned against Tesla in Europe were were upset at your politics, and very few of them would have been violent in any way. They just objected to what they saw you say or do politically.

Well, it's certainly fine to object to political things, but it's not it's not fine to resort to violence and hanging someone in effigy and death threats. That's obviously not okay. Uh, you know that's sir.

That is in no way justifiable at all.

In any way, shape or form, And some of the legacy media and nonethless have sort of justified, which is unconscionable.

Shame on them.

Let's talk about your other companies then, in other business area, SpaceX. I saw that you said in a speech at the West Point Military Academy recently that the future of warfare is AI and drones, and obviously defense is an increasingly booming sector with the state of the world at the moment, do you see SpaceX moving into weaponized drones?

You certainly ask interesting questions that are impossible to answer. So SpaceX is is the space launch leader.

So SpaceX doesn't do drones.

SpaceX world's rockets, satellites, and Internet terminals. So SpaceX has a a very dominant position in space launch. So of the mass launch to orbit this year, SpaceX will probably do nine.

China will do the.

Remain half of the remaining amounts of five percent, and the rest of the world, including the rest of the US, will do about five percent. So SpaceX will do about ten times as much as the rest of world combined, or twenty times as much as China, which is in

Are very happy with it.

I don't currently in space likely getting into the weapons business, that's certainly it's not an aspiration. We're freaquing. We're frequently asked to do to do weapons programs, but we have done by a client.

Do you envisage SpaceX or Indeed, starlink is a separate entity publicly listing in the near future or at all.

It's possible that starlink may go public at some point in the future.

And what would be the what would be the time frame, what kind of time frame you consider it?

I mean no rush, no, I mean no rush to your public. The public is I guess a way to you know, potentially make more money, but at the expense of a lot of public company overhead and inevitably.

A whole much of lawsuits, which are very annoying.

So there's really something needs to be done about the share shareholder shareholder derovative lawsuits in the US because it allows plaintiffs law firms who don't represent the shareholders to pretend that they represent the shareholders by getting a puppet plainter for a few shares to initiate a massive lawsuit against the company, and the irony being that extreme irony that even if the class they purport to represent were to vote that they don't want the lawsuit, the lawsuit

So how can it be a.

Class action representing a class if the class worked against it. And that's the bizarre situation we've got in the US that needs a diary to reform. As anyone's running public company, you've experienced this, it's an absurd situation that needs to change.

Well, do you think Donald Trump might change it. You've certainly got his ear. I imagine that you've put this to him. Is this something you're trying to change before any starlink IPO.

Well, we need a law to be passed. The trouble being that you need extent Senate votes and the Democrats will vote against it. The plaintiff's bar is I believe, the second largest contributor to the Democratic Party.

That's that's the issue.

At the state level, this can be solved, and I should say Texas recently passed a law which at least the state level made it is much more reasonable because you have to get at least one in thirty three shareholders to agree that they are part of a class of shareholders three percent.

This will be really helped with frivolous lawsuits.

Let's talk about AI, which is in so many of your businesses and in all our worlds in different ways. It's one of the big changes the development of generative AI. Since you last spoke to this forum three years ago, you're in this space of course with GROP which almost everyone will know. You co founded open ai and then left, and you've obviously got a legal battle with open ai

Yes. So I came up with the name open AI as an open source and as a nonprofit, and I founded AI opening I for the first roughly fifty million dollars, and it was intended to be a nonprofit open source company, and now is they're trying to change that for their own financial benefit into a for profit company that is closed source.

So this would be like, let's.

Say you you find it a nonprofit to help preserve the Amazon rainforest, but instead of doing that, they became a lumber company, chopped down the forest and sold the word. You'd be like, wait a second, that's not what I found it. That's opening Eye.

They've made some changes to their corporate instructure, though, haven't they since in recognition of of what you've.

Said, and now that's just what they told the media.

Okay, part they have part they have partly walked back their plan to restructure the business. I guess that's made no difference to how you feel about it. So you determined to see them in court.

Of course.

Okay, well that's certainly going to be one to watch. I also wanted to ask you about AI and regulation because when you were here last talking to John Mickelfwait, you had some pretty strong words about the risk that AI poses, and you said that you really felt what the US was missing was a federal AI regulator, that you know, something along lines of the Food and Drug Administration or the Federal Aviation Administration. Now you're clearly now in a zone where you're more you're more on the

Well, so that I don't think there should be regulators.

You can think of regulators like referees on the on the field in sports, there should be some number of referees, but that you shouldn't have so many referees that you can't kick the ball.

Without hitting one. So in many in most.

Fields in the US, the regulatory burden has grown over time to the point where it's like having more referees than players on the field. So, and this is a natural consequence of an extended period of prosperity.

It's very important to appropriate I appreciate this.

This has happened throughout his When you have an extended period of prosperity with no existential war, there's no cleansing function for the for unnecessary laws and regulations. So what happens is that every year more laws and more regulations are pasted, because you know, legislators are going to legislate, regulators are going to regulate, and you will get the steady pile of more and more laws and regulations of a time until everything is illegal. And let me give

So we're simultaneously.

In a situation where it's illegal to hire slams US and is also illegal to hire asylum seekers and the violence Partner of Justice chose to prosecute us despite both paths being illegal.

Down if you do, down if you don't.

But my question was specifically about a regulator for AI, which you said three years ago was needed, and you said we need to be proactive on the regulation of AI rather than reactive. Have you changed your mind on that?

No, of course not.

What no, of course not.

What I'm saying is that there should be some referees on the field, a few referees, but you shouldn't have a field jam packed with referees such that you could not kick a ball in any direction without hitting one. So the fields that have been around for a long time, such as automotive, so aerospace, you know, the sort of food and drug industries are overregulated, but the new fields like artificial intelligence are underregulated.

In fact, there is no regulator at.

All, so they should be.

Do you still think that, Yes, I'm simply saying, which I think is just basic common sense, that you that you want to have at least you want to have a few referees in the field. You don't want to have an army of referees, but you want to have a few referees on any given field, in any given sport, or even any given arena industrial arena.

To ensure help that public safety is taken care of.

But you don't have so there's a there's a there's a proper number of referees. Like I said, it's actually very easy to visualize this when compared to sports. If the whole field is packed with referees, that would look absurd. But if there were no referees at all, your game is not going to be as good.

Okay, So let's then talk about your new world to your role advising government. You are in this unique and unprecedented position of having billions of dollars worth of contracts with the federal government yourself, mostly through SpaceX, and also now an insiders knowledge of it because of dose. Can you see that there is a conflict of interest or a potential conflict of interest in broad terms just through that very fact?

I don't think so.

Actually, there have been many advisors throughout history and the US government and others who have had economic interests, And I absolutely an advisor.

I don't have a formal power, and.

That's a president can choose to accept my advice or not, and that's how it goes. If there's a single contract that of my companies that have received that people think is somehow not was awarded improperly, it would immediately be front page news, to say the least. And if I hadn't mentioned it, certainly my competitors would. So if you're not seeing that, then the clear is not a conflict to interest the Yeah.

There's another way though to look at it.

That.

For example, you have many competitors, whether it's companies like Boeing or companies you would like to do more of the kind of work you do for NASA Blue Origin Rocket Lab. And because DOGE is in every federal government department, you or people who work for DOGE and you are the driving force behind it, have an insight into those companies' affairs and those companies' relationships with the federal government.

Now, all we do is we review the organization to see if the organization has departments that are no longer relevant and other contracts that are being awarded good value for money. In fact, frankly, the bar is not particularly high. Is there any value of money in a contract and if there's if there isn't, then we make recommendations to the secretary. The Secretary can then choose to take those actions or not take those actions, and that's it.

And then any action that that is as.

A function of DOGE is posted to the DOGE website and to the DOGE dog Govt at DOGE handle on the x platform. So it's it's complete transparency. And I've not seen any case where the best min has even been an accusation of conflict because it is completely and utterly transparent.

That's it.

And what about the international dimension. Now, let's think about Starlin. Starlink is obviously a very very good internet service. It's sought after all over the world. It's critical to the frontline in Ukraine. It has also had more contracts coming its way, and there is some evidence that companies are allowing access to it because they want to be close

Now, of course not.

First of all, you should be questioning why is there why the racist laws in South Africa. That's the first problem. That's what you should be attacking. It's improper for they be racist laws in South Africa. The whole idea with what Nelson Mandela, who is a great man, proposed, was that or racs should be on an equal footing in South Africa. That's the right thing to do, not to replace one set of racist laws with another set of racist laws, which is utterly wrong and improper.

So that's the deal, that all races.

Should be treated equally and there should be no preference given to one or the other, whereas there are.

Now one hundred and forty laws in South Africa that give.

That basically give strong preface to you if you're black South African and not otherwise. And so now I'm in the subsurd situation where I was born in South Africa but cannot get a license to outgrates in starlink because I'm not black.

Well, it looks like that's about it looks looks like that looks like that's about to change.

I just asked you a question, please answer, Does that seem right to you.

Well, those rules were designed to bring Those rules were designed to bring about an era of more economic equality in South Africa, and it looks like the government has found a way around those rules for you.

Ask your question?

Is this is your interview. Everyone wants to hear from you.

Your question yes or no?

Not for me to answer. I have got a question for you about about your government works and the amount of savings.

Why do you like racist laws?

This is not for me to answer. Come on now, you wouldn't be trying to dodge a question.

Do you have to answer this question? Question? Answer? No, you answer mine.

I say, I think if you I'm sure you can have that conversation directly with the South African government if you want to. I want to ask you.

About the total believe it, that's not good.

I want to ask you about the total allown risks. I want to ask you about the total amount that you're planning to save through Doge's work. Before the election, you said it was going to be at least two trillion. The number currently on doze dog gov is one hundred and seventy billion dollars. That's a big change. What happened to the two trillion.

Or do you expect it to happen immediately?

Well, is it going to happen because dose is supposed to run till next July.

I mean, your question is absurd in this fundamental premise. Are you assuming that that on day you know, within a few months this instant two trillion saved?

No, I'm not all I'm just asking you, is that still your aim?

Thought willing to get the amount of time? Have we not made good progress given the amount of time?

That's exactly what I'm asking. So, is it's still your aim to go from one hundred and seventy billion to two trillion?

The ability of those to operate is this.

Function of whether the government and this includes the Congress, is willing to take our advice. We're not the dictators of the government.

We are the.

Advisors, and so we can advise. And the progress who've made thus far I think is incredible. Those team has done incredible work. But the magnitude of the savings is proportionate to the support we get from Congress and from the executive branch of the government in general.

So we're not the dictators. We are the advisors.

But thus far, for advisors, we two team to their credit has made incredible progress.

You've talked about four billion dollars a day being saved, but that that won't get which is an I think everyone can agree that combating waste and inefficiency in government is a very good thing. But if you add that up, it's not going to get to two trillion over the lifetime of DOUGH. I'm sorry, the four billion, the four billion a day, if dose is going to run till next July, is not going to get you to two trillion dollars. But you still say it's your aim, so we'll take that as read.

There's there's, there's there's what dog I mean, I fail. You're somewhat trapped.

In the NPC dialogue.

Tree of a traditional work journalist.

So it's difficult when when I'm conversing with someone who's trapped the dialog tree of a conventional journalist, because it's like.

Talking to a computer.

So doges an advisory group, we are doing the best we can as an advisory group. The progress made thus far as an advisory group is excellent. I don't think any advisory group has done better in the history of advisory groups of the government. Now, we do not make the laws nor do we control the judiciary, nor do we control the executive branch. We are simply advisors. In that context, we are doing very well. Beyond that, we cannot we cannot take action beyond that because we are

That art some degree opposed to that level of cost savings.

Nonetheless, let's let's not criticize whether there's four trillion and instead look at the fact that our sixty billion has been saved and more we so too.

And as I said, I think everyone can agree that cutting waste and indeed fraud in any government and being responsible with taxpayer money is a very good thing. So yes, I can see, I can see that you're proud of that work. I do want to ask you about USAID and the comments that Bill Gates made the other day, which and I know that you called him. I know you've said that already.

I wanted and I'm just who does Bill Gates think he is to make comments about the welfare of children, given that he is before quented Jeffrey Epstein.

Okay, well, he's he's he said he regrets those and he's spent he spent. He spent a lot. He spent a lot of his own money on on philanthropy around the world over the years. My question to you is, have you looked at the data to check if he might be right that the cuts to U S a I D might cost millions of lives.

Yes, I'd like him to show us any any evidence whatsoever that that is true. It's false. There were found with USA D cuts and by the way, they haven't open cut the parts of the U S A D that we found to be even slightly useful. We're transferred to the stage department, so they've not been deleted. They've

Going to help some.

Uh disease eradication or something like that, and then when we ask for any evidence whatsoever, I say, well, please connect us with this group of children so we can talk to them and understand more about their issue.

We get nothing.

We don't they don't even try to prevent show. We should come up with a with it with a show orphan meaning like this sort of I'm like, well, can we at least see a few kids, like where are they? If they're in trouble, we'd like to talk to them and talk to their caregivers.

And then we get that thing.

As a response because it's what we find is an enormous amount of fraud and graft.

Okay, let me put this example.

Very little of it actually yets so the kids if anything at all.

Okay, let me put this example to you because you grew up in South Africa, so you will know the impact of HIV AIDS well. And this is why I asked about the data the US led on international efforts to combat HIV AIDS treatment prevention, and there's an initiative called PEP file which is credited with saving twenty six million lives in the last twenty years. It was part

First of all, the program, the AIDS medication program, is continuing, so your fun model premise is wrong. It is continuing. Now, do you have another example, not.

In its entirety, not in its entirety the program there's a limited waiver and UNAIDS have said that not all of the services that were previously funded by USA IDEA continuing. So that's that's why I put that example to you.

Okay, well, which ones aren't being funded?

I'll fix it right now for okay, Well, actually they're all on the un unaid's website, so you'll be able to see them. But mostly they are to deal with. Mostly they are to do with, and for example, the rollout of a drug called glenna kappavir, which was hailed as one of the biggest breakthroughs against AIDS for many years, which came out last year. So if you are perhaps I'm sure UNAIDS would be delighted if you were able to look at that again.

Yes, but well, if in fact this is true, which I doubt it is, then we'll affix it.

Okay, fine, So finally, political your political influence. I wondered whether you have decided yet how much you're going to spend on the upcoming midterms.

Is it?

You spent a lot more money on the last US election than you envisaged when you were speaking here three years ago. Are you going to continue to spend at that kind of level on future elections?

I think.

In terms of political spending, I'm going to do a lot less in the future.

And why is that?

I think I've done enough?

Is it? Is it because of blowback?

Well, if I see a reason to do political spending in the future, I will do it currently see reason?

Ok what about political influence beyond the US? How often do you speak to President Putin?

I don't speak to President Putin.

You've never spoken to President Putin.

I was on a video caller with him once about five years ago.

That's the only that's the only.

Speaks President Putin. Oh you must I get it speak.

Actually, I've heard you. I've heard you speak about it. For example, in your West Point speech, you said, oh, I challenged President Putin to uh to was it an arm wrestle? And I know the wall Street Journalist reported your reported conversations. If you're if you're saying they haven't happened other than once, I'll take that as red.

Is there worst publication on the face of the earth than the Wall Street Journal, I wouldn't use that tolign up my cage for paragraphics that that newspaper is the worst newspaper in the world. And there's and you know, if there's one newspaper that should be pro capitalist, it's the one with Wall Street in the name. But it isn't.

So I have the very lowest opinion of the Wall Street Journal.

Absolutely answers, and you clearly have believed the tripe that you've written that you've written in those papers I read.

I read very widely, and I'm putting these questions to you so that you have an opportunity to respond to them, which you are and for which we're all grateful to hear. Your response is, okay, we are. We are out of time.

So you mentioned you mentioned challenging. I did so on on the X platform. I challenged Vladimir Putin to single combat over the I didn't talk to him. That was a post on the X platform.

That's why, that's why I asked you, and you've and you've clarified and explain. Thank you. That's that's why I was asking whether you have had reported conversations and and you've said you have a video.

Okay, legacy media lize.

Okay, listen. I actually thought I might give Grock the last word, because when I asked Rock what your hardest challenge is, it said the strain of managing multiple high stake ventures made financial, regulatory and public relations crises. And I wondered whether you recognize that characterization and whether you do think that this is a pivotal year in your life.

Well, ever, he has been somewhat pivotal, and this one's no different.

So I mean, in terms of interesting things that probably our complish this year, the getting Starship two be fully reusable, so that the that we catch them, both the booster and the ship, which will be the first fully re usable orbital rocket ever in history, which is would be a profound breakthrough, as the essential breakthrough necessarily to make.

Life multiplanetary and ultimately become.

A space faring civilization. We've got neuralink, which is now helped five patients restore capability using the Telefty implant where they're able to control the computer simply by thinking, we'll be doing our first patient to restore blank just rest restore site with our blind site implant, which is the end of this year early next.

In fact, that that first patient might be in U a E.

Since we have a relationship with you AE and the Cleveland clinic clinic there the I think what's running on the AI front, we are close to what you might call a GI or digital superintelligent, and I think we'll see we are seeing an explosion of digital super intelligence here.

And then we've got to at Tesla the what we'll.

Be launching unsupervised autonomy basically self driving cars with no one.

In them in Austin next month. So it's it's a big year for sure. Many other things on the in the in the works too. I'm a technologist first and foremost