David Vespremi on Tesla's relevance in bringing EVs to the masses

While things have been quiet on the official legal front in the battle for recognition between Martin Eberhard and Elon Musk, some of the bystanders in the saga are continuing to come forward with their takes of the story. Earlier this week we heard from Tesla's former SVP for marketing Darryl Siry in a piece that ran on Wired. Now, former communications director David Vespremi is responding with a counterpoint to Siry's article.
The heart of the legal argument revolves around who did what in the very earliest days of Tesla's existence in 2003-4 and then what happened in 2006-7 as Tesla approached Job 1 for the Roadster. The two men have their own versions of those events and how that relates to what has been said by and about Musk over the past 18 months.
Keep in mind that neither Vespremi or Siry were there in the earliest days of Tesla. Instead Siry's piece looks at the Roadster's evolution from the AC Propulsion tZero. Vespremi's response goes way beyond that and places Tesla in some historical context in the progression from the EVs of a century ago as they "cross the chasm" to mainstream acceptability. You can find Vespremi's entire response after the jump and it's a worthwhile read.
Gallery: 2009 Tesla Roadster v1.5
[Source: David Vespremi]
The following was contributed by David Vespremi:
Tesla helped cross the chasm to mainstream electric vehicle acceptance
In his recent contributed blog to Wired's Autopia, entitled "Will the Real Tesla Founder Please Stand Up?" Darryl Siry posits that Elon Musk and Martin Eberhard have, in effect, taken their eyes of the prize in attempting to set the record straight about which of the two men can rightfully lay claim to founder status for Tesla Motors.
Let's get right to the point and address the core of Mr. Siry's missive,
"But the truth is, the idea that led to the Tesla Roadster didn't come from Eberhard or Musk... neither Martin Eberhard or (sic) Elon Musk came up with the idea of an electric sportscar (sic) with excellent range and amazing acceleration."
While it is true to say that the Tesla Roadster is an electric sports car with excellent range and amazing acceleration, the reverse statement is not equally true. There have been, there are, and there will be other electric sports cars with excellent range and amazing acceleration; ownership of that idea is not the issue. However there is only one company producing the Tesla Roadster and ownership of that is the issue.
Siry employs this bit of false logic to steer around the core of Eberhard's claims and, in so doing, glosses over Tesla Motors' many accomplishments as a technical innovator, as a marketing innovator, and as an honest-to-goodness car company. These points have been validated not just by hundreds of road legal vehicles in the hands of paying customers, but also by investment from both a major car manufacturer and even U.S. taxpayers. At the end of the day, it is against the backdrop of these accomplishments that Tesla Motors stands in a class apart from the skunk works programs and backyard shop offerings that held technical promise but were neither designed for, nor anticipated to evolve into, the kind of scale needed to meet consumer demands.
Logical fallacy aside, mindful readers with an interest in the Tesla Roadster's evolution would be well advised to put AC Propulsion in its historical place – namely, as a company that took the advances of Aerovironment (in the form of the GM Impact program which led to the EV-1) to the next step. Going back further, it was a team from Cal Tech, led by Wally Rippel, which piqued Aerovironment's initial interest in electric cars via the GM-sponsored Sun Raycer. And that is just for the "nouveau electric car." We can go back a hundred years or more if we want to dig even further into the electric horseless carriage archives – after all, behind every originator is another originator.
For those interested in the progression, AC Propulsion falls roughly midstream in this sequence: Caltech-> Wally Rippel->Sun Raycer->Aerovironment->Al Cocconi->Impact (and by extension, EV1)->AC Propulsion->Martin Eberhard (rescuing ACP with his investment in capital and the introduction of commodity lithium ion batteries)->Tesla (founded by Eberhard/Tarpenning and principally funded by Elon Musk). What a difference an "o" makes...
The idea for 'an electric sportscar (sic) with excellent range and amazing acceleration' may have stalled with AC Propulsion if Martin Eberhard had not entered the picture with his investment in capital and the introduction of commodity lithium ion batteries.
These lithium ion battery cells were first used in the Tesla Roadster – and gave it the unique combination of range, acceleration, and, just as important, reliability. In fact, an electric car is only as good as the batteries that allow it to compete with combustion cars across these key criteria. Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning brought the lithium ion silver bullet solution from their prior company, Nuevo Media, and their Rocket eBook. The Rocket eBook will be best remembered by Silicon Valley geeks as a quirky historical footnote en route to today's Amazon Kindle – a paperless, electronic book. Rewind the VHS tape to 1999 or so. In order to meet the demands of a cross-country flight, including a reasonable layover, Eberhard and Tarpenning realized that neither lead acid nor nickel metal hydride battery chemistries were up to snuff. They needed something lighter, more compact, and with significantly greater storage – and ideally, none of the pesky "memory" that would shorten a battery's life from repeated charging/recharging. It was this same lithium ion battery technology that catapulted what would otherwise have been relegated to a novelty act into a viable mainstream consumer car. Well, that and DOT certification, airbags, doors that open, bumpers that bump, lights that work, home-friendly charging stations, and a host of other refinements that set apart a kit car from something that one could expect to buy at a dealership and drive home on public roads.
While it is perhaps understandable for Siry not to have an accurate grasp of Tesla's technical and historical context, as its "CMO" Siry would at least be expected to get the market relevance of Tesla's place in the resurgence of interest around the electric car and the importance of brand ethos (i.e. Apple computer and Steve Jobs' role in shaping that brand). Case in point, as a marketer and Tesla insider, Mr. Siry is no doubt well acquainted with Geoffrey Moore's seminal book, "Crossing the Chasm," in which Moore identifies a chasm between the early adopters of the product (the technology enthusiasts and visionaries) and the early majority (the pragmatists). Moore points out that the visionaries and pragmatists have very different expectations, and explores those differences. Moore suggests several essential techniques to successfully cross the "chasm," including: choosing a target market, understanding the whole product concept, positioning the product, building a marketing strategy, choosing the most appropriate distribution channel and pricing... Sounds familiar? Tesla Motors has crossed a chasm that has been up until now, one of the deepest and widest in existence. This is why they have become widely recognized as the poster child for Silicon Valley bravado and resourcefulness.
The "founders" of Tesla have captured our collective imaginations and inspired continued debate on a wide range of issues from domestic dependence on foreign oil to global warming, and the role of the automobile in shaping our collective future. Neither Eberhard nor Musk could have predicted how timely and poignant Tesla's debut would be in the context of a GM bankruptcy. The fact is, rather than celebrating Eberhard, Tarpenning (and even Elon Musk) for their role in advancing electric vehicle battery technology, and electric vehicle marketability, the importance of "founder" is in its standing for the courage, tenacity, and, yes, sheer arrogance to take the big risk and fly in the face of convention. Musk risked his money and Eberhard risked his time and name. AC Propulsion may have pioneered the tools, but the risk was borne by those that followed, as does whatever glory "founder" denotes in having crossed that chasm.
Siry and others may be aware of an analogous (and richly ironic) fight of historical significance over "founder" recognition between Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison in what has become known as the "War of the Currents." See if this Wikipedia summary sounds familiar: "Edison was a brute-force experimenter, but was no mathematician. AC cannot be properly understood or exploited without a substantial understanding of mathematics and mathematical physics, which Tesla possessed. Tesla had worked for Edison but was undervalued (for example, when Edison first learned of Tesla's idea of alternating-current power transmission, he dismissed it: "[Tesla's] ideas are splendid, but they are utterly impractical."). Bad feelings were exacerbated because Tesla had been cheated by Edison of promised compensation for his work. Edison would later come to regret that he had not listened to Tesla and used alternating current."
While we don't yet know how this story will end, we do know that "CMO" Siry fails to do justice to what Tesla, the scrappy underdog company, has accomplished in its short, but well documented history, and what Eberhard and Musk have at stake in the battle to follow.
David Vespremi is neither a CMO nor a Tesla Founder. He does, however, have experience working for Tesla Motors under Eberhard, Musk, Tarpenning, and most especially, Siry, and shares his perspective as a voice within a company that at one point at least, was fueled neither by gasoline, nor electricity, but by the collective passion of the imperfect people behind it in their attempt to make their mark in shaping the global automotive landscape.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
John Pelletier 8:43PM (6/28/2009)
nice bit, i really like it when things like this are put in proper context. context is so important especially with something like the little ol roadster.
Reply
Yanquetino 10:27PM (6/28/2009)
Vespremi expresses himself very well in this post. I can see why Eberhard hired him as Communications Director.
What I can't see is why Musk would then fire him along with dozens of others (including Wally Rippel himself!), for all the "communications" Vespremi had "directed" up to that point evidently served the company very well.
Which makes me wonder... what happened with Vespremi's similar lawsuit?
Reply
kert 3:21AM (6/29/2009)
Venturi Fetish seems to be all forgotten here.
Reply
Nick P. 10:03AM (6/29/2009)
Well, if only they provided more information beyond an opaque Flash web site (http://www.venturifetish.fr/), it would be a good start. The only real info on them is on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venturi_Fétish).
Not to take anything away from the Venturi, but they have yet to deliver a car to a paying customer. By the time they get around doing that, Tesla will have 3 European stores open and operational.
They will join the "wind-powered" car in the list of promising electric car prototypes that never made it to production.
kert 8:20AM (6/29/2009)
Um, try this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BQhDwnfpt4
The clip is from 2004/2005
Article from back in 2004
http://gizmodo.com/archives/venturi-fetish-first-production-electric-sports-car-022314.php
Just because its covered in mostly french media doesnt make it nonexistent.
Chris M 3:01PM (6/29/2009)
Venturi had a very limited production run, I believe it was 35 cars, though they originally planned more. Venturi got their technology from AC Propulsion, too.
Nick P. 9:55AM (6/29/2009)
Just to be clear: I think you are right. The Fetish should have been on any official EV timeline. My point is that it is frustrating to see that despite their early head start and pioneering use of AC propulsion drive train, they do not provide any update on that project.
We don't know if the Fetish is in production, where it can be purchased, it's availability or who has (or will) purchase it. It this era of free blogs and twitter, this is inexcusable, specially if you consider the hard work that must have gone in producing the first prototypes.
BTW, if you want them to get better known, do like me and send an email to PlugInAmerica encouraging them to add the Fetish to their list of production EV cars (http://www.pluginamerica.org/plug-in-vehicle-tracker.html).
Lastly, I read & write french, so -- je ne suis pas un francophobe, mais je pense qu'ils doivent faire un meilleur marketing au dela des media francophones.
Reply
kert 1:53AM (6/30/2009)
For plug-in-america vehicle tracker, i believe MES-DEA well-known conversions are missing from the list as well.
http://hosting.infomaniak.ch/ecology/voiture.php
Nick P. 5:11AM (6/30/2009)
PlugInAmerica had to draw a line in the sand somewhere and decided not to include any *third party conversion* vehicle. This is why the AC Propulsion eBox (http://www.acpropulsion.com/ebox/index.php) is not listed either.
I agree with their choice, since the average buyer will go for a manufacturer willing to stand behind a brand name and provide its own warranty & service. The Coda, iMiev, SmartEV and CooperEV are are conversions, but they come from the manufacturer, not a third party.
Listing all available third party conversions for the Prius alone would probably take a whole page...
SomeDipshit 11:12AM (6/29/2009)
Who gives a crap about the Venturi Fetish, stay on track, this discussion is about Tesla!!
Speaking of which, let me just say.......
THEY'RE ALL WRONG!!!! IT WAS MY IDEA FROM THE BEGINNING!!!!!
Martin, Mark & Elon stole it from me; the same way that George Lucas stole my idea for Star Wars!!!
I will have my revenge, once my patent for perpetual motion is granted I WILL RULE THE WORLD!!!
Reply
DasBoese 1:24PM (6/29/2009)
Speaking of world domination, I've been wondering... Musk's other business is building space rockets. Anyone know if he has stock in companies developing laser technology?
If so, god help us.
meanderingthemaze 6:54PM (6/29/2009)
i will call him...mini-Musk
Chris H. 2:06PM (6/29/2009)
@DasBoese,
he did buy 10% of a company called "Surrey Satellite Technology", but I don't know if they develop lasers.
Reply
Serge 2:07PM (6/29/2009)
DavidV, thank you for the well-written article.
Reply
Chris H. 2:09PM (6/29/2009)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrey_Satellite_Technology
Reply
Roger 3:16PM (6/29/2009)
For those who missed the irony here - Siry takes great pains in his article to highlight that titles don't really matter. But, in the same piece he annoints himself as the former "Chief Marketing Officer" of Tesla -- a title that he never held. Siry's last title at Tesla was SVP of Sales, Marketing & Service. Tesla, in fact, has never had the position of CMO.
Reply
Chris H. 2:56PM (6/29/2009)
Siry's blog post seemed to be an attempt at obfuscation, an attempt to "muddy the waters", to make the issue less clear rather than to clarify.
In contrast, David Vespremi's response helps to restore some clarity to the issue, specifically by putting the genesis of Tesla Motors into context in the rebirth of the EV, and by describing Eberhard's role in the development of the tzero (which was ignored by Siry).
On another site (TM Club), Siry complained that people were "taking the headline [of his blog post] too literally". Perhaps it's just me, but when I read a headline that asks "Will the Real Tesla Founder Please Stand Up?", I expect that the author will at least express an opinion on who "the Real Tesla Founder" is, instead of pulling a bait-and-switch, as he did. At least Vespremi was clear about who he believes the real founders are: "Tesla (founded by Eberhard/Tarpenning and principally funded by Elon Musk). What a difference an "o" makes..."
Thanks David. It was great to read your response.
Reply
Mike!!ekiM 6:04PM (6/29/2009)
Are there any plans to make a Tesla Jr.?
0-60 in 10 sec
120 mile range
80 mph top speed
Affordable Price?
Reply
polo 9:00PM (6/29/2009)
Yeah, the Model T.
vfx 2:10PM (7/05/2009)
Thank you David,
The overiding question I had has been answered. We knew That ACP had the TZero and that Matin had used his own money to make a Lith Ion version of the car and drove it for months. (what type of lith batteries did that one have?) But what was never clear* was where the concept of thousands of commodity lith cels as a power source originated. That is the breakthrough idea that made the Roadster a real disruptive technology.
From D.V., "The idea for 'an electric sportscar (sic) with excellent range and amazing acceleration' may have stalled with AC Propulsion if Martin Eberhard had not entered the picture with his investment in capital and the introduction of commodity lithium ion batteries."
*Does anyone have an old article speech or video of CEO Martin telling this story? It's a detail worth having handy.
Reply