"Announced CEO transition..." Rawlinson out as CEO

[Batteryman]

Probably the right move for Lucid. Doesn't look good for Rawlinson. A necessary move nevertheless!

Agree, at this point probably the right thing for the company. Many aknowledge Peter is an amazing engineer but not what Lucid needs at present. Time for a reshuffle. Saudi want more rapid movement...its been 4 years and stock is in the doldrums.....nothing wrong in getting a new CEO to get a new direction. But Peter will always be known as the founder of Lucid, very unlike Musk ( self proclaimed founder).

I salute you Mr.Rawlinson! Thank you for bringing to this world these amazing vehicles!

 

[msaunders9430]

I just wonder where they will draw from. The legacy auto world? Or an outsider? Neither are clear standard bearers for a pioneering company.

Two sets of shoes to fill; CEO & CTO.

 

[Batteryman]

I am in the same boat. I have a Gravity on order. At this point, my immediate urge is to cancel the order and wait for the dust settle. But I am going to let that sit for a couple of days before making a decision. I am not sure if Lucid will be the same company I fell in love without Peter. In my mind, he was the greatest of them all and I am not quite sure if Lucid is ready for a non founder mode CEO.

Peter was CEO when Gravity was engineered.....every company has transitions like this....why deprive yourself of this engineering marvel?

 

[Batteryman]

Two sets of shoes to fill; CEO & CTO.

At this point, its all down to marketing and software...I'm sure midsize is almost finalized.

 

[msaunders9430]

I am not quite sure if Lucid is ready for a non founder mode CEO.

I don't think Lucid is ready for a non founder mode CEO, but the PIF, other investors, and a lot of customers are ready for it.
If the PIF takes Lucid private, don't blame Peter.

 

[Batteryman]

Peter should have been appointed at CTO. Sure they have Air and Gravity with the Zeus drivetrain and then the midsize with the Atlas drivetrain but what comes AFTER that? Peter’s DNA is in the company. Sort of foolish to cut him out of the company and make him a Board advisor only. Sad.

Peter has established a magnificent team, and you can see the toll this had on him the past few years. Peter will always be remembered as the founder of Lucid! But his team will chug along. Sad to see him go but it was needed. I suspect medical reasons played a role as well.

 

[DreamTour]

Peter was CEO when Gravity was engineered.....every company has transitions like this....why deprive yourself of this engineering marvel?

Exactly, I was driving my Air today and was thinking, wow this is a moment in time. A piece of fine art that existed outside of the confines of classic consumer mass market capitalism that perhaps will not exist again for a while.

It was avant guard and refreshing. I was an early supporter of GM's EV's (Owned VIN #10 Chevy volt in 2010). That was avant guard for the time, then it degenerated into GM's... well GM blandness.

Gravity is part of Peter's vision too. I imagine it will be great. Looking forward to it. Enjoy it before everything gets watered down!

 

[msaunders9430]

Peter has established a magnificent team, and you can see the toll this had on him the past few years. Peter will always be remembered as the founder of Lucid! But his team will chug along. Sad to see him go but it was needed. I suspect medical reasons played a role as well.

Good point about the team.

 

[borski]

Agree, at this point probably the right thing for the company. Many aknowledge Peter is an amazing engineer but not what Lucid needs at present. Time for a reshuffle. Saudi want more rapid movement...its been 4 years and stock is in the doldrums.....nothing wrong in getting a new CEO to get a new direction. But Peter will always be known as the founder of Lucid, very unlike Musk ( self proclaimed founder).

I salute you Mr.Rawlinson! Thank you for bringing to this world these amazing vehicles!

Reminder: the stock price going up is not the goal.

 

[Batteryman]

Wall Street’s celebrations are often short-lived. I admire Rawlinson and bought my Air because of him, but I don’t argue with replacing him as CEO - I am not sure his gifts were strongly suited for the role as it expanded. The question i believe is whether a new CEO can maintain the focus on excellence and expand Luci’s visibility and sales without losing key staff and momentum. Look at the established auto companies globally and the havoc created by CEO’s brought in to turn things around. Does Nissan ring a bell? I doubt having Rawlinson named as CTO would have worked. He has too much ownership of the whole process to be content with a limited staff role. It seldom works out. I have been thinking of a second Lucid purchase, but now I am very much wait and see. I wonder how many others will also sit out a decision to purchase with Rawlinson no longer the visionary for excellence? I wish him well.

Nissan had no engineering advantage....thats why they floundered- no hybrids, old designs, no innovation.....not comparable to Lucid which is at the top of its game in EV engineering. But agree, software needs more work.

 

[par11768]

Nothing unusual here in terms of changing out the CEO. Most founder CEOs do not remain with the company as it scales. The expertise and experience are different and this happens all the time with investor funded, early stage businesses, especially those run by technical or engineering types. The timing is certainly questionable because there is no replacement to name, leading to the possibility that there was some sort of falling out between investors/Board and Peter.

 

[Batteryman]

Reminder: the stock price going up is not the goal.

I suspect Saudi's believe otherwise....and the more confidence people have that the company won't get delisted ( I dont beleive that for a second), more sales....stock price has some importance.

 

[Batteryman]

More I think about it, I think Rawlinson did resign for health reasons....there is no way he woudn't continue as CTO...and Saudi's would never create a situation where this was so sudden without someone in line and ready to go. They would have given Peter are more prominent technical role. Why lose his talent on the shop floor?

 

[RayMan]

Wow! I was expecting some good news from Lucid today, but not this type of news. I liked Peter.

Time will tell if forcing out the CEO at this stage was a good move.

 

[DreamTour]

More I think about it, I think Rawlinson did resign for health reasons....there is no way he woudn't continue as CTO...and Saudi's would never create a situation where this was so sudden without someone in line and ready to go. They would have given Peter are more prominent technical role. Why lose his talent on the shop floor?

That is, unless there is someone ready to go and we just don't know it yet.

My opinion is the CTO role at lucid is a bit ceremonial. He's built a great engineering team with knowledge that exceeds his at different facets (note he points to the team and knowledge of the whole instead of the individual unlike some others who claim they alone are smarter than everyone else.

The main role was building the team / executing the vision of more with less. I'm sure his engineering insight was critical for Air, but now that vision / pattern has been set with the two flagship products and the follow on products are executions of the same philosophy during the scale out.

 

[HC_79]

More I think about it, I think Rawlinson did resign for health reasons....there is no way he woudn't continue as CTO...and Saudi's would never create a situation where this was so sudden without someone in line and ready to go. They would have given Peter are more prominent technical role. Why lose his talent on the shop floor?

When you’re a CEO and CTO and told “we don’t want you as CEO but would you be willing to stay as CTO” most people in those positions would probably choose to leave vs looking like they failed and got demoted.

Given how abrupt it was, Peter certainly didn’t resign. Let’s not open the rabbit hole of health issues.

 

[DRWHO42]

I was shocked after hearing the news. Peter was a magnificent CEO who can speak about the product, our vehicles, in-depth compared to other “show” CEOs who do not have any idea what is under the hood, etc. Part of the decision for me to make my purchase was Peter’s ability to explain how the car was engineered and his desire for a unique driving experience. Meeting him in person a couple of times was fantastic as well. He showed a keen interest in the people he spoke with and was extremely gracious in his interactions but I got the impression he really enjoyed talking with people about the vehicle.

CEOs do change and I get it and I hope they treat him well in his new role(s) as advisor. Maybe they formulate the title Chief Design Officer or Chief Engineering Officer for him.

 

[HC_79]

Peter was a magnificent CEO who can speak about the product,

Working in the games industry for over two decades, we have a recurring joke: creatives are essential for crafting high-quality products, but we never entrust them with company leadership. In their minds, the product would never be good enough for release. They yearn for perfection, an unattainable ideal that makes me wonder if Peter shared this mindset. He was an exceptional engineer, constantly pushing for improvement. As CEO, however, no one could tell him to “enough is enough” and release the product.

Peter was a great guy, engineer & founder but I wouldn’t say he was a magnificent CEO

 

[Batteryman]

Working in the games industry for over two decades, we have a recurring joke: creatives are essential for crafting high-quality products, but we never entrust them with company leadership. In their minds, the product would never be good enough for release. They yearn for perfection, an unattainable ideal that makes me wonder if Peter shared this mindset. He was an exceptional engineer, constantly pushing for improvement. As CEO, however, no one could tell him to “enough is enough” and release the product.

Peter was a great guy, engineer & founder but I wouldn’t say he was a magnificent CEO

I disagree....if it was any other CEO, Lucid's would not have been the technological marvel that they are. Other CEO's would have cut costs, rushed the product and releases a half baked product like every other car. Peter had a vision for Lucid as a company and stuck by it. You have to understand one of the main reasons cars didn't sell as expected was Covid supply chain issues, inflation ( worst time to start a new company that needs heavy capital) hate from Tesla fanboys and Elon Muck and EV negativity. Agree software wasnt the greatest initially, but Peter improved that a lot and it should be even better with the Gravity. Peter's persistence and leadership gave us these vehicles.

He was a great CEO and a greater CTO! Lucid would be zero without Peter!

 

[GMan]

In fact, Peter’s abrupt departure was the first question analysts focused on. They mentioned how highly unusual is that to happen before the earning calls, the fact that he wasn’t there and the fact that he is not sticking around in the role until a replacement is found. If this was a managed exit, he would have stuck around and probably be even part of finding a successor. Having seen this play out in the industry, my only conclusion was he was forced out. Unless he resigned over major disagreements.

I am curious how others felt about the earning call today. I felt like others were not really prepared to handle the QA. I miss Peter’s confident and detailed answers on the questions as well as plugging in any gaps Gagan or others answers. I hope they find a good CEO soon and the new CFO is up to speed very fast.

Some other highlights.

* Hands-free is coming later this year - may be sooner.
* They were asked about end to end AI and didn’t have a great answer. My summary of the answer was it is rapidly evolving and they are figuring out their play including doing in-house or not
* Gravity is production/supply constrained
*12% bottom line impact if Mexico and Canada tariff move forward

Curious what stood out for others.

Being forced out is the most likely scenario based on everything I've seen.

I attended the call which sounded hollow, in terms of missing a passionate voice. It was factual and dry, and clearly there was a lack of rhythm among the team in responding to the questions.

We cannot blame the Lucid leadership team on the call, as I suspect they were surprised with the announcement likely delivered within the past 36 hours (my speculation). Forcing a CEO out, let alone a founder, is not something you can do with much runway. Nothing stays secret for long.