Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.
Well, Elon Musk is now the richest person on the planet.
More than half the satellites in space are owned and controlled by one man.
Starting his own artificial intelligence company.
Well, he's a legitimate, super genius, legitimate, he says. He's always voted for Democrats, but this year it will be different.
He'll vote Republican.
There is a reason the US government is so reliant on him.
Elon Musk is a scam artist and he's done nothing.
Anything he does, he's fascinating people.
Welcome to Elanank, Bloomberg's weekly podcast about Elon Musket's Tuesday, December third. I'm your host, David Papatapolis. Now, Elon Musk loves himself a good lawsuit. He's always suing someone or getting sued by someone, and these cases are constantly percolating in the background, but this week they take center stage. Late yesterday, News broke to the Delaware court yet again
has struck down his ginormous Tesla pay package. Meanwhile, JP Morgan decided the best to walk away from a separate suit it had brought against Musk, who in turn decided it was time to re up an old suit he had filed against rival Sam Altman and his company Open Ai.
All is fair in love and war and law, fair, as Elon likes to call it.
After that, we're going to get into the way politics is reshaping the Musk customer base something of a fascination of ours here at Elon Inc. To talk about all this. I am joined in the studio by our old pal Sarah Friar. Hey, Sarah, Hey, you picked a hell of a week to come to New York. It is cold here, Sarah, love it okay.
Very good.
We also have our regulars Max Chafkin and Dana Hall. Hey, Max, Hey, David, Dana Hello, Hello, Hello. And on the bat phone, we have a special update coming from Bloomberg's man in Delaware, our courts reporter Jeff Feely.
Jeff, Hello, sir, Good morning. All So, Jeff, we're gonna.
Start with you and this ruling that came last night on the Musk pay package. Tell us what exactly did the judge there, Chancellor Kathlyn McCormick rule last night.
She's judge Kate. He just judged Kate down here. She ruled for the second time that must pay was the result of a tainted process and that it should not be reinstated, even though there was a second shareholder vote overwhelmingly ratifying the idea that he deserved the largest compensation award in US corporate history. And she also awarded the legal fees of three hundred and forty five million dollars to the lawyers who represented the loan Tesla shareholder who
took issue with this. With this pay package, they had been asking for stock in the neighborhood of five billion dollars. They pointed to the fifty five billion dollar pay package as the load star that they were comparing themselves to and hoping to be awarded upon. But the judge, following the guidance of the Delaware Supreme Court, found that that would be an unfair windfall and cut back their feet only to three hundred and forty five million dollars.
Woo, Who poor them.
I doubt Greg Vala, who's the lead lawyer, was crying in his beer last night.
I would think that the number on that pay package bounces all around. As we last understood it, what was the approximate number two?
What did we I think we in the story said that it had definitely bounced beyond fifty five you know, again because Tesla's stock, you know, it's so volatile, it just goes all over the place.
I thought it had gotten max to like around one hundred billion or so, giving some work, Well.
The numbers we used in the story were that when the stock option grant was made, they were worth two point six billion, and by the time the trial went on they were up to fifty six billion.
So as of Monday one hunt, according to the Bloomberg story, one hundred and one point five billion. Oh yeah, which is obviously that the stock price of Tesla has gone way up over the last month or so.
Yeah, there we are, now, Jeff, hadn't there been a sense that the new shareholder vote, done with greater transparency and so on and so forth, had addressed fully or at least some of Judge Katie's concerns. Apparently not, But I but I thought there was that sense out there that had been the case.
Well, I mean, look, the reality is this was a novel question of law in terms of could you basically use a second shareholder vote to and affect correct problems with the pay process and the problems that Judge Katie had identified the first time around, just rampant conflicts of interest had not really been addressed. I mean, you know, there were some cosmetic changes, but the process itself was tainted.
And Jeff on that the rampant conflicts of interest. Basically, this board is just too much in bed with Elon Musk.
That's the idea, and that is exactly right.
I'd just like to know.
I mean, Tesla's own proxy made it very clear to shareholders that there was no certainty that this revote was going to change the outcome of the case. I mean they said it plain as day. A special noted that even a favorable ratification vote by stockholders may not fully resolve this matter. We cannot predict with certainty how a revote will where I will vote to ratify the performance award would be treated under Delaware law under these novel circumstances.
So these risk factors were all laid out in the proxy. I think what happened was that Musk kind of did this like marketing campaign to all of the retail shareholders and got them whipped up into this frenzy so that they think that this is like a direct democracy that they voted to ratify it again. And therefore it would sail through. And they're completely ignoring the precedent of Delaware law and the process in Delaware. And that's why you're
seeing so many people upset today. And you know, like Tesla's obviously going to appeal, but Tesla's ow proxy made it very clear that they were taking a novel approach to trying to resolve.
So, Jeff, when Tesla appeals, how does that appeal process work?
They've already filed their notice of appeal.
They did, and so they filed that to whom and how exactly does that work? And what would the timeline that look like?
All right, So, the Delaware Supreme Court is where this case goes, and unlike the US Supreme Court, they don't choose their cases any lower court ruling. They have to hear the appeal of So it's headed to the five members of that court, and it's going to take the better part of a year for all the processing to get done.
Hey, Jeff, can I ask a dumb question. Isn't Tesla based in Texas?
Now?
It is?
So, at what point.
Does that have an effect on what the company tries to do with Elon Musk's pay Okay?
Well, so, because they were a Delaware company when this package in two eighteen was negotiated, they're still covered by
Delaware law for this case. If they decide, you know, if they lose on appeal, the likelihood is they're going to run to the new Business Court in Texas and you know, basically create a whole new package in Texas, and it's probably going to be the same package that they proposed here at Delaware, and the likelihood is it'll sail through like you know, bacon or in Greece decision.
I don't know that bacon and grease sales. But anyway, Sara, you were.
Does that mean that Musk's plan to just move all of his lawsuits to Texas, like anything that we ever do to challenge Musk in the court of law will be heard there.
That's going to work.
Well, there is a provision in the law where corporations can decide where their litigation is going to be. They're called you know, basically forum clauses, and yes, those are considered legal. If Elon and the Tesla board decide that all litigation against Tesla will be heard in Texas, there's really not much that shareholders can do about it.
So then why take the step of appealing to the to the top court in Delaware if in the end you just know you're going to go to Texas.
Well, I can tell you it's pretty easy. I mean, we just mentioned that the guy is worth more than one hundred billion dollars, so picking up the tab for another appeal in Delaware it'n't exactly going to leave him eating dog food out of cans. So I think he's appealing, you know, basically because he can.
I mean, it's an interesting test of the like Elon Musk ability to just sort of force things make, you know, try to try to essentially avoid the law or ignore the law, you know, go on Twitter and say this is this is bs, I'm not going to do it, and then the ability of like courts to assert their authority. I mean, over the last month, we've seen all of these kind of very optimistic projections by like Tesla shareholders that somehow Trump is going to drastically shift, you know,
basically the dollars and cents of this company. And I feel like this this case, although it's not going to change that much, it just shows that like you cannot you know, reality and the reality of the justice system will assert itself.
Well, I mean, remember this is the judge that forced Musk to buy Twitter. That history has sort of been revised now into something Musk always wanted to do, to say, free speech. But as we remember while on this podcast, it was really Judge Katie.
Yeah, for a guy who's been winning and winning and winning of late. And you know he, as we've said perhaps in the past, when he tangles with Judge Katie, he loses.
As my friend Dana Hall has very evocatively said, you know, he's he was teflon Elon. Nothing stuck to him. He slid like bacon on greef.
You're making me hungry here, Pheely.
I know, I know. Anyway, he's got some dents in his armor here, and she's pretty much the only one who was held his feet to the legal fire.
You got to give her some credit, absolutely, mister Peeley. We will let you go, sir.
We'll have you back on soon when there's a new twist and turn in the case.
Listen, everybody have a wonderful day, Dana.
So let's zoom the lens back out for a second. In general, on lawfair as a whole, Elon loves to talk about the term. What exactly is the definition of lawfair as we understand it, what's kind of.
This combination of law and warfare? And I think the coinage comes from two thousand and one, after the September eleventh attacks, when the idea is that you could sort of weaponize the law to go after your adversaries.
And Musk loves this term.
He has often said that Donald Trump is a victim of lawfair, that he himself is a victim of law fair. If you do a search of his posts on X, it's like lawfair, lawfair, law fair. When when he hosted Trump on in August, he kept kind of trying to steer the conversation to like, hey, like, we're both victims of lawfair. So it's just something that he is constantly harping on. But the big irony is that he himself
is so litigious. I mean, he is right now trying to sue Sam Altman into oblivion, and he is often the plaintiff in a lot of cases. And so I just think it's fascinating to look at how Musk himself has kind of weaponized the law. He has so much money, he can hire the best law firms, he can go for broke and oftentimes that's how law works, right, Like, the richest people have the resources to litigate beyond their adversaries.
And you're seeing that play out over and over and over again, and so I just think there's sort of a wider frame here, Like right now Musk is saying that he is a victim of the lawfair against him in Delaware Chancery Corps, and he's clearly whipping all of
his fans and retail shareholders into agreeing with him. At the same time, look at what he's doing, suing not just open ai, but now Microsoft to over open aies you know, nonprofit versus for profit status plans, and and how how many times Musk has been in lawsuits.
Yeah, so Max tell us a little bit about that freshly opened Musk suit against open Ai.
Well, he filed the suit, then he dropped it, then
he refiled. And the latest twist is an injunction asking the court to stop open AI's plan to change its status from a non for profit or this very complicated legal status that had had where there was a non for profit that owned the for profit to a more conventional for profit, which it's trying to do because it's trying to raise, you know, buckets of money, and Elon Musk's suit is basically asked in the court to stop that, and it's and the arguments it's megan, they're kind of interesting.
There's a few different ones, but couple of which are basically anti trust claims. I trust, yeah, yeah, based on a couple of factors. One is interlocking directors. To me, the most interesting one is this idea of the interlocking directors, which would be a violation of federal antitrust law.
You have Sam help me out there for.
AI.
So this is this is a thing that has come up in discussions around Microsoft and anti trust and open Ai and anti trust and various FTC things.
But basically, like there are.
Legal issues with a director serving on the board of companies that are doing business together, which is a case for open ai where you had Reid Hoffmann simultaneously serving on the board of open Ai and Microsoft. He's now anyway, and so a bunch of issues like that. And then there's also a complaint about open Ai suggesting to venture capitalists that they not invest in Elon Musk's company, which my understanding is something that is not all that unusual.
Sarah may have a better sense of this is not something that's entirely unusual in the world of venture capital, although you know, perhaps it does raise some raise some legal issues. Basically Elon Musk doing everything you can to mess with you know, a competitor and and really the strongest competitor in the in the world of AI.
What's so interesting about this case to me is like, usually when there's a lawsuit, you can get a sense of who is who's the big doug and who's like fighting for their life right. Usually it's like a David versus Goliath kind of situation. In this situation, you know that you've got the richest man in the world who has his own AI company suing his I guess co founder is one way to put it. Of Open Ai, who has also created this extremely powerful, influential AI company that's that wants.
To conjunction with Microsoft.
In conjunction with an extremely powerful big tech company which wants to completely reconfigure like the data center infrastructure in
the United States. It's going to cost them billions upon billions of dollars, are going to need a lot of government support, and so this lawsuit is interesting, but it's also interesting in the sort of wider lens of like Musk is now sitting at the right hand of the president, Altman needs the government to be behind him one hundred percent on his data center build out to fulfill open
AI's ambitions. So this not for profit debate is kind of like a hiccup in the grand scheme of things, in both of these men having like these intense ambitions for AI taking over.
I do think Elon Musk's position has gotten a lot stronger, and not only because he's revived this lawsuit, but because, as Sarah says, he's in a position to have a huge impact on AI policy and open ai and not just AI policy, but anti trust policy, lots of policies that potentially impact you know, not just open AI, but
like any company that he competes with. And so you have this suit on one side, and then on the other side, you know half a dozen things that the Trump administration could or couldn't do that would have an effect on this market and potentially could benefit and must We.
Should note that his AI company, Xai, all the while is growing quite a bit, is it not.
They've built out this massive data center in Memphis, Tennessee that they call Colossus. They have all these Nvidia GPUs. They've hired a bunch of people. I don't know what the current valuation is, but they yeah, no, it's I mean it's a real company. It's small, but it is not something to be taken lightly. Like Elon moves very.
Fast and in the market of AI, like what matters is the capital, Like you just need money, Like the tech is kind of open source at this point, you just need buying and sometimes like appearing it's super capital intensive industry, super capital intensive, Like it's getting more efficient, right, but the amount of of compute power necessary to do an energy and energy to do the kind of analysis that AI needs to do, it's only getting getting exponentially
heavier as AI develops, and it's going to continue in that direction. As AI gets more efficient, they're just going to try to make it do more things, which is going to cost more and require more. Like even if like every energy plant in the entire United States ran it full capacity, like it wouldn't fulfill the need of this industry. But then there's also just like the idea that if you are a competitor of Musk, which is,
to be clear, a lot of the entire business America. Yeah, if you're if you're in if you're in EVS, if you're Jeff Bezos, if you're you know, a rival in social media, if you're you have to be scared of this open Ai lawsuit and also must proximity to Trump, And like what that might mean for who Trump decides to have a grudge against the other.
Thing is like this lawsuit doesn't have to succeed in a conventional sense for it to hurt open Ai. Like just slowing down open Ai is potentially a win for Elon must because open Ai, yes, it's very successful. But Sarah kind of hinted at this, none of these companies
are making money. Open Ai is losing huge amounts of money, burning billions of dollars, and that's part of the reason they're trying to go for profit, because they're trying to create additional things they can offer investors to keep the capital spigot flowing. So, you know, anything Musk can do to slow open Ai down is going to help his company,
which is at effectively an earlier stage. But you know, really all these companies are at an early stage, So so despite the fact that open as a lead, you know, he can kind of like start to try to bring his company up to parody.
Got it okay? Now? Dan?
Meanwhile, JP Morgan decided, I believe sometime in the last few days, to drop a lawsuit it had brought against Musk tell us.
What happened there, Yeah, I mean this was sort of a suit from twenty twenty one where JP Morgan was claiming that Tesla owed them one hundred and sixty two million dollars tied to like stock warrant transaction and it was over a strike price. It was such a small amount of money, which is crazy because like I always think of Elon in terms of billions, not millions, and this one seemed relatively small.
If it ain't fifty billion, what is It's nothing?
Yeah, Anyway, they agreed to drop the lawsuit.
And I think you have to think about like the judiciary as a whole, like which courthouses are all these suits heard in, and like why Tesla has moved to Texas. And I think that anytime there's a change in administration, you just start to see a lot of litigation wrap up because people think about the cost benefit analysis of continuing to litigate under a new administration when there could be new judges appointed in different courtrooms and.
Max, you know, it's also just the calculus, as Danager said, it just a few million dollars or I don't know how many millions, But yeah, is it worth pursuing that when against the next president's first budy?
But it's not, and it's not I don't even think it's that.
I think it's that, you know, JP Morgan wants those one hundred and sixty two million dollars, but it very much also wants future fees that Elon Musk could pay and you know, in the.
In the's, but it also presumably one of those future fees at the time it suited him.
No, no, But my point is like I'm not saying you shouldn't pay your professional services providers, but businesses choose to not pay their professional service to providers all the time. And there are lawsuits just like this that are effectively like negotiations over how much money are going to be paid? Is he going to pay more in the future. And in the reports about this settlement, part of the reason that they're the rational for dropping is that there are future commercial arrange.
Yeah, there's some kind of settlement agreement. Yeah, there's like an undisclosed settlement agreement.
Okay, so.
Yeah, yeah, they're saying that it's I forget the exact wording, but it's essentially with an eye to future commercial stuff.
All right, Listen, we're gonna drop the lawsuits for now. They will keep coming up up again and again and again, so.
Do not fret.
And I want to talk a little bit about further signs of the shifting customer base for Elon's companies. You know, Sarah, yesterday Bloomberg we had a good story some of our colleagues did on how we're starting to see signs that conservatives are driving Model Wise and other vehicles. I suppose this is proof that at some level, at least anecdotal proof that this shift has begun.
I mean, this is something we've been talking about for a while, ever since Elon started to move rightward his products. His companies are getting politically coodd too. And I guess they always were because Tesla's were at one point considered this environmental statement, right, like, you cared about climate change, you got a Tesla because you wanted to drive an electric car.
You didn't want to use.
Fossil fuels, and so liberals bought a lot of Tesla's, and now those same people are saying, oh my god, I bought the car that is backed by Elon Musk and I feel I feel like connected to Trump when I drive it around, even though I didn't vote for him. So on the one hand, you've got a lot of liberals trying to get rid of their Teslas, and then you also got a lot of conservatives saying, hey, maybe this is cool, right.
It's cool, and they're buying them. And to Sarah's point, there Max, there has been a proliferation of these bumper stickers that some of these liberals on the coast who had bought their Teslas and are suddenly mortified by the fact that they own Tesla's, but they're not yet quite ready to get rid of their Tesla. So all these bumper stickers are out now. Some are tame and subdued. There's like as simple as love the car, not Elon, and there's the anti Elon Tesla club. Some are a
little creative Elon ate my cat. And there are some that are just like blunt and aggressive Elon sucks, shut up. Elon, And then there are also some pro Elon stickers. If one is so inclined to by those, you have Elon Musk Free Speech Hero, Elon Musk making speech free again, and in Musk we trust, by the way, max up point one other thing out. There's not one that I could find. Zero bumper stickers on Elon Inc. Neither four or against that is.
I think that's a failing of marketing.
Don't we have.
Don't we have an Don't we have an email address where people can send us ideas?
So we need Elon Inc.
At Bloomberg dot net. Tell us your ideas for bumper stickers.
Ready, you love the show or hate the show, just send them in test us.
To just have those bumper stickers at the at the dealership.
Like my favorite stickers and the ones I've actually seen the most of are ones that say, effectively, I bought this before he went crazy classes, and I feel like that is sort of telling about the not only the sort of cultural signifiers around the brand, but also like the used car market. I mean, one reason we're seeing these bumper stickers is it's like not particularly easy to unload your used Tesla because of these discounts.
They have these stickers on them.
No, because over the lie last year and a half or so, as Tesla's sales have faltered to some extent, Tesla like rapidly dropped its prices, so huge price cuts. So people are looking at taking a huge haircut if they sell their Model three like it. This really like devastated the price for the used Tesla market. So oh and oh, by the way, there aren't that many comparably priced Evy alternatives. So you're in this situation where, gee, you'd really like to sell your Tesla, but you but
there's no good alternative. You can't get a good return, There's not there's not a comparably priced ev with with comparable things. So if you're a liberal who's like a little bit upset about the electric resolution is you can't sell your Tesla. You just have you get a bumper sticker.
So you just have to buy a bumper sticker and like virtue signal that like you like bought the car before Elon.
Went crazy again.
It's just yeah, I think it's very funny. I mean, here in the Bay Area, I see the bumper stickers all the time. But musk shift to the right has been underway for years. He moved to Texas in twenty twenty. He has been crapping on California ever since. Like Tesla's early adopters, like the consumers who basically like helped build the brand, are largely like Hollywood people and tech people
in Silicon Valley. Some of them are environmentalists, a lot of them are frankly just tech people who really like the car. And then you have like libertarians who wanted the US to be independent from oil. But but yeah, no, I mean this has been underway for a while. You can buy the stickers. You can buy the bumper stickers on Amazon. Now it's like a thing.
Yeah, they're all over the place.
I mean, I think somebody should maybe they're out there, somebody like specially to sell to the cyber truck buyers, should have a sticker that says I bought this, you know, cyber truck after I realized you know who elons.
I mean, I think how that impacts sales overall in the US going forward is going to be super interesting. I mean, Tesla is headed towards its first year over year decline because of declining sales in the United States.
The data I thought that the delivery data out of China that came out overnight for November wasn't great either, right, I.
Mean, it's okay, but like it's not going to offset what is predicted to be a decline in the US and in Europe. But it's really hard to tease out, like is the decline because of Elon's politics or is it because they frankly have like a very stale lineup and like the cyber truck is still not in like super high volume. And so I think what's what's weirder is just that all of Elon's products are so polarizing.
Like we've talked about Tesla, but I mean, Sarah, look at X, Like now if you're on X, it's like, oh, does that mean you support Trump? Or does that mean that you support the administration. We've seen this like huge surge to Blue Sky after the election, and it's remarkable that someone has so polarized the brands of his own company.
And what's funny is the X is very It's a very similar situation to Tesla, where where people are polarized about the product but they can't quite decide what to do about it. You know, people are hesitant to leave all their followers on X. You're seeing these these open debates about like, well, you know, maybe I should stay on X because somebody needs to talk to these these people and help them understand where they're going wrong. And
somebody needs to witness the dissent into fascism of America. Right. There's just a lot of justification and a lot of thinking about you know, is it better to delete my account and go to Blue Sky? Is it better to stay on X and and fight? But that means I'm giving elon my attention to my money.
Are there any conservatives by the way, I'm Blue Sky or in any kind of.
Mutual anywhere that people can fight with people they disagree with Online, You're gonna have all kinds of people, right. That was always one of the one of the draws of X. It's more fun than true social because there are people who disagree and you can go in their applies and explain why you think what you think.
Okay, just to bring it back to Tesla again for a second and a theory, I have that for you guys to opine on and blow up and Max with some of his comments earlier. Max already has begun the process of blowing up this theory. But the theory goes like this, that what if Elon's turn to the right actually winds up rapidly accelerating EV adoption in America, that.
The liberal elites or the liberal.
Buyers let's say, who are getting rid of their Tesla as they own or are refusing to buy a new Tesla, well they were just going to buy some other evy.
Those people are going to buy an ev regardless.
And by shifting to the right as Elon has, he is bringing in a whole new buyer base in red states who otherwise never would have looked at EV's at all.
Max's Smith, I think this is like fan fiction basically, Like you know, we've we've talked about versions of this theory, I think going back over a year, and you can sort of see because like Elon Musk, he sold a lot of cars to liberals, he's kind of tapped that market out. Meanwhile, you have a bunch of red states
where there isn't a lot of EV adoptions. Therefore, this all makes perfect sense now that would I guess like you could kind of get behind that theory if not for the fact that Elon Musk just became a campaign surrogate for a candidate who ran in part on the idea that EV's are bad, Like Trump went on the stump over and over again and said that EV's were no good and that we need to drill baby dress.
That's not only that, it's not just Trump, it's Elon Musk himself who's saying this, who's saying we are pivoting away from electric cars. If you think of us as a car company, you got it twisted. We are an AI company now, so it does make some sense. And I just one other thing, Like, it's not like Tesla
never had conservatives driving them. I've read some of these articles about conservative car buyers and who are like really enthusiastic about Tesla, and I'm like, it's like they're like a lot of professionals, wealthy people who happen to vote
for Trump and also Arab Tesla. And I have to ask number one, yeah, would they really have a lot of test And second, anyone who's followed this company for a long time knows that there have always been kind of off the grid type, you know, militia types who've liked this right, They like the idea of of like not relying on yeah, energy dependency, d like libert There's
always been a libertarian flair to this company. I think what's happened and this is you know, unfortunate for the company and for the mission, which is that Tesla went from being like a cool brand to bringing kind of a cringe brand, being a brand that is associated very closely with one political candidate, when whereas before it kind of transcended those bounds. And and yeah, that might lead to kind of a bump now, but is it going to be good in the long term. I don't know.
We need the data though, ultimately, Dana and the data I guess just will come our way over time.
Well.
Yeah, and just to be clear, the data is just sales data. Doesn't say why someone bought a Tesla. Doesn't say I bought a Tesla because Elon Musk is like.
But it should give us we can get if we work hard enough at it, we can get geographical breakdown.
Can we not.
Yeah, you can get geographical breakdown eventually. But I'm just saying that, like, there's no like, all of these stories are just anecdotal, and ultimately what matters to Wall Street is how many frickin' cars.
Did they sell in twenty twenty four?
Not many, is the answer, actually?
And is it more or less than last year? And if it's less, that's a problem. But at the same time, to Max's point, like Elon doesn't care anymore, like Elon is bored of making cars. He wants Tesla to be an AI company and a robotics company.
Do you think that Elon's environmental mission is true to him or true to the business, Like was that a means of selling Tesla's early on or was that something he actually cares about? And if so, is he going to change Trump's mind on Drill, Baby Drill.
We are at a time we're going to wrap it there, But I do want to remind our listeners again that we need your Elon Inc. Bumper sticker ideas. They go Max to, Yeah, it's Elon Inc. At Bloomberg dot net.
And you know we are looking for not just bumper sticker ideas, although definitely keen on those, but also slogans, product extensions, merge and really anything else about the show. We've already had a few emails come in, and I think, like next week maybe we'll.
Do it quick Singers Yeah, we'll We'll.
Go through some of them and respond to some of your ideas and maybe some of your criticisms. We will take any slogans I would even put If someone sends a slogan, I might even put.
It on the back of my Honda. Odysty Absolutely, let's do it.
I started listening to this podcast before they.
Went crazy, exactly, Max, Sarah Danna, thanks.
For joining, Thanks for having me. Always a pleasure, great to be here.
This episode was produced by Stacy Wang. Anna Maserrakus is our editor, and Rayhan Harmanci is our senior editor. The idea for this very show also came from Rayhan. Blake Maples handles engineering, and Emma Sanchez fact checks. Our supervising producer is Magnus Henrikson. The elon Ink theme is written and performed by Taka Yasuzawa and Alex Sugiura. Brendan Francis Newnham is our executive producer, and Sage Bauman is the head of Bloomberg Podcasts. A big thanks to our supporters
Joel Weber and Brad Stone. I'm David Papadopoulos. If you have a minute, rate and review our show, it'll help other listeners find us see you next week.