What's new
By:

Emad Dlala out

Leftlane said:
I’ve unfortunately seen a new CEO bring in all of their flunky, unqualified people before and push out folks who were much better and more qualified, but were a part of the old regime. Many top execs need loyalists around them all the time regardless of ability. We don’t have to look too far to see examples of that, do we?
Click to expand...
Isn't that a little bit like what happened to Eric Bach? Sure, he was probably a difficult and demanding guy to work around, as many overachievers are. But the head of HR (from Ford Credit) brought in her nepotistic hire (colleague from Ford Credit) who went to war with him in the name of making a "more positive work culture", he lost and was pushed out.

But really, a casual former pal from a different job pushed out someone with the engineering street cred of Eric? How does that happen in a rational world?* And I bet very few on this forum can actually name the HR genius who damaged Lucid that way, although most know who she knocked off. This institutional harm is enabled from above which is my point.

(*rhetorical question since it has happened to me; simply a marginal person marking territory by removing competition)
 
BS8899 said:
I don't mean he is "academic". He is clearly a guru on motors, drive trains. What was not apparent to me is whether his working knowledge of technical and business beyond the power train was broad enough or he acted fast enough to change Lucid's errand trajectory (e.g., SW, service, costs, etc.). I am not a Lucid insider, so I don't know more than what I read online.

Regardless, Rawlinson departed 5Qs ago. Emad was the man in charge. This past 5Q was not exactly glorious for Lucid. Gravity problems. Service problems. Continued SW problems. Mid-size schedule is behind competitors.

Do I think Emad was the source of all these calamities at Lucid? Of course not. But he was the man at the center of it.
Click to expand...
Emad was promoted in November. Prior to that, he only managed powertrain. He had not been given enough time to show much of anything, but what he *had* shown was making waves, if this thread is any evidence.

BS8899 said:
Whatever the circumstances of his departure, in Silvio's eyes, Emad was not the leadership the CEO wanted. No matter how much lipstick one puts on the pig, that is the message!
Click to expand...
Maybe. Or there was a disagreement and Silvio had the bigger stick.

I have no idea, and don’t want to speculate as if I do.
 
Erjackson104 said:
I want Lucid to succeed, but I'm always leery when a company hires an outsider to become their CEO. What does a CEO that makes elevators know about electric vehicles? Remember when Apple fired Steve Jobs and they hired a CEO from Pepsi to replace him? Emad Dlala is a brilliant engineer and has made significant contributions to the company. I will miss his passion and technological problem solving.

​

Click to expand...
I agree. They should’ve hired a car guy as CEO. Taking 14 months to get the new CEO in place was a colossal mistake. Now there’s the learning curve of getting up to speed on the automotive business in addition to learning Lucid. It would’ve been better to hire a Mark Fields or José Muñoz type of executive. The stock price would’ve reacted better IMO.

Tesla and Rivian still have their founders. Emad wasn’t the founder, but he was close being the godfather of the powertrain, the heart of the vehicles.

I’m just sick over Emad leaving. I’m now very seriously questioning Lucid’s long-term viability. I leased my Dream Edition with the intention of buying it out, but now I’m having real anxiety over whether Lucid will still be around if I do.
 
Leftlane said:
If you’ve ever worked at a company that had a change in the CEO (I’m sure most of us have), it’s really not that unusual for the new guy to want to clean house and bring in all of their loyal lieutenants. Let’s see who the new CEO stocks his team with - that will tell you a lot about the future of Lucid.

I’ve unfortunately seen a new CEO bring in all of their flunky, unqualified people before and push out folks who were much better and more qualified, but were a part of the old regime. Many top execs need loyalists around them all the time regardless of ability. We don’t have to look too far to see examples of that, do we?
Click to expand...

Regarding your last sentence, no $hit.
 
ClearlyLucid said:
I agree. They should’ve hired a car guy as CEO. Taking 14 months to get the new CEO in place was a colossal mistake. Now there’s the learning curve of getting up to speed on the automotive business in addition to learning Lucid. It would’ve been better to hire a Mark Fields or José Muñoz type of executive. The stock price would’ve reacted better IMO.

Tesla and Rivian still have their founders. Emad wasn’t the founder, but he was close being the godfather of the powertrain, the heart of the vehicles.

I’m just sick over Emad leaving. I’m now very seriously questioning Lucid’s long-term viability. I leased my Dream Edition with the intention of buying it out, but now I’m having real anxiety over whether Lucid will still be around if I do.
Click to expand...
Gazing into my all-seeing crystal ball, I think worst case the underlying hardware and intellectual property gets bought by a legacy manufacturer or maybe a wild card like Apple and the brand continues on. The vehicles are just too good and fill such an obvious gap in the market (at least to me). Tesla has exited the luxury EV SUV market (if they ever were truly "luxury?"), the R1S is for a different consumer than the Lucid I think (plus R2 sales will probably cannabilize the R1 line like Y/3 did to S/X). Comparable interior space on a Cadillac is a behemoth with an unusable 3rd row.
I find these vehicles incredibly impressive and unique. I have high hopes for the Cosmo's and future iterative development of the Gravity and Air products.
 
mike1121 said:
Gazing into my all-seeing crystal ball, I think worst case the underlying hardware and intellectual property gets bought by a legacy manufacturer or maybe a wild card like Apple and the brand continues on. The vehicles are just too good and fill such an obvious gap in the market (at least to me). Tesla has exited the luxury EV SUV market (if they ever were truly "luxury?"), the R1S is for a different consumer than the Lucid I think (plus R2 sales will probably cannabilize the R1 line like Y/3 did to S/X). Comparable interior space on a Cadillac is a behemoth with an unusable 3rd row.
I find these vehicles incredibly impressive and unique. I have high hopes for the Cosmo's and future iterative development of the Gravity and Air products.
Click to expand...
I hope you’re right. We’d be very lucky if Apple were to buy them. Not sure if just buying the underlying hardware and intellectual property means the cars continue to be supported & serviced.
 
I am sad to see Emad go just like when Peter left. However, the new CEO Silvio has a job to do, I also believe in his judgement.
Much of Lucid project Emad was leading such as Zeus and Atlas is now completed.
Emad expertise is in computer simulation and ''overseeing software'' was later added to him.
With Cosmos UI/UX development, ADAS, ESS and many more project to come, it is more to do with software implementation rather than hardware,
and being a past electrical engineer, I understand it is a very different field and needs to be balanced to make compiling product.
I believe Silvio is appointing software expertise to lead the department while strengthening the service department to make the company stronger.
 
ClearlyLucid said:
I agree. They should’ve hired a car guy as CEO. Taking 14 months to get the new CEO in place was a colossal mistake. Now there’s the learning curve of getting up to speed on the automotive business in addition to learning Lucid. It would’ve been better to hire a Mark Fields or José Muñoz type of executive. The stock price would’ve reacted better IMO.

Tesla and Rivian still have their founders. Emad wasn’t the founder, but he was close being the godfather of the powertrain, the heart of the vehicles.

I’m just sick over Emad leaving. I’m now very seriously questioning Lucid’s long-term viability. I leased my Dream Edition with the intention of buying it out, but now I’m having real anxiety over whether Lucid will still be around if I do.
Click to expand...
I am going to wholeheartedly disagree here. Background...I spent 38 years at an OEM, I am a car guy, and I've spent many years shoulder-to-shoulder with recognized name car guys. I will briefly name drop...

Sat behind Bob Lutz and Gary Cowger at a weekly Product Development decision meeting for two years. Worked directly for Bob Purcell, one of the key project leaders for EV1 (this was after EV1, but before / during Volt development). Worked closely with and still have friendship relationship with Tony Posawatz, Volt Chief Engineer / Vehicle Line Exec who went on to serve as CEO for an EV startup. Know Mark Reuss on a " hey how's it going" basis and worked in his dad's (Lloyd) organization for a while and also interacted with Lloyd at a non-profit he supported after he retired. Know Tadge Juechter (Corvette), Al Oppenheiser (Camaro, Hummer EV) John McElroy (Autoline) on a "hey how's it going" basis,. I really could go on.

Most of those people would be redundant wrt Lucid's current strengths. They aren't NEEDED. They would not be a detriment, although I would question whether John McElroy would even have an interest in running a car company. What all of these people have in common is that they are all outstanding PRODUCT experts.

What Lucid needs is someone who understands and can master the ability to make strategic decisions that grow the company. Would there be a benefit to that person being someone who understands the product? Definitely. But if the CEO is supposed to have company sustainability skills and product skills, but you can only fill one of those buckets, which bucket do you fill first? I say it needs to be the company sustainability bucket. What does Lucid need more than someone expert at sustaining the venture?

Let's look at the problem from a different perspective. Ever hear of Carlos Tavares? Consummate car guy. Worked at several different OEMs and helped lead the product development out of the doldrums and into relevancy. Then he became CEO of PSA and did a decent enough job that he was named CEO of Stellantis when that merger came to play. Even though he understood the European market and maybe even the Chinese market well enough to help PSA and then Stellantis thrive in those areas, his total lack of understanding of the US market led to Stellantis getting absolutely obliterated in the US market, wide scale senior leadership exodus, and eventually his removal as CEO. Shortly after his removal, several of the senior leaders who left eased their way back to the company after their retirements.

There are times when "get a car guy" is the best move for a company. For Lucid, this is not one of those times. The product is fine.
 
Last edited:
dbsb3233 said:
True, but PIF = survival.

At this point I'm more worried about my 8th year with my Gravity than I am my 1st. I need Lucid to stay in business.
Click to expand...
Time to start a US-based Lucid after-market service. Buy up a bunch older Airs/Gravity for parts. Make a killing out of the forum devotes! ;)
 
martinjlm said:
I am going to wholeheartedly disagree here. Background...I spent 38 years at an OEM, I am a car guy, and I've spent many years shoulder-to-shoulder with recognized name car guys. I will briefly name drop...

Sat behind Bob Lutz and Gary Cowger at a weekly Product Development decision meeting for two years. Worked directly for Bob Purcell, one of the key project leaders for EV1 (this was after EV1, but before / during Volt development). Worked closely with and still have friendship relationship with Tony Posawatz, Volt Chief Engineer / Vehicle Line Exec who went on to serve as CEO for an EV startup. Know Mark Reuss on a " hey how's it going" basis and worked in his dad's (Lloyd) organization for a while and also interacted with Lloyd at a non-profit he supported after he retired. Know Tadge Juechter (Corvette), Al Oppenheiser (Camaro, Hummer EV) John McElroy (Autoline) on a "hey how's it going" basis,. I really could go on.

Most of those people would be redundant wrt Lucid's current strengths. They aren't NEEDED. They would not be a detriment, although I would question whether John McElroy would even have an interest in running a car company. What all of these people have in common is that they are all outstanding PRODUCT experts.

What Lucid needs is someone who understands and can master the ability to make strategic decisions that grow the company. Would there be a benefit to that person being someone who understands the product? Definitely. But if the CEO is supposed to have company sustainability skills and product skills, but you can only fill one of those buckets, which bucket do you fill first? I say it needs to be the company sustainability bucket. What does Lucid need more than someone expert at sustaining the venture?

Let's look at the problem from a different perspective. Ever hear of Carlos Tavares? Consummate car guy. Worked at several different OEMs and helped lead the product development out of the doldrums and into relevancy. Then he became CEO of PSA and did a decent enough job that he was named CEO of Stellantis when that merger came to play. Even though he understood the European market and maybe even the Chinese market well enough to help PSA and then Stellantis thrive in those areas, his total lack of understanding of the US market led to Stellantis getting absolutely obliterated in the US market, wide scale senior leadership exodus, and eventually his removal as CEO. Shortly after his removal, several of the senior leaders who left eased their way back to the company after their retirements.

There are times when "get a car guy" is the best move for a company. For Lucid, this is not one of those times. The product is fine.
Click to expand...
I too have spent some time in automotive business, mostly with suppliers. I hope you’re right. At the moment the stock price isn’t reflecting the CEO decision as a good one (and it’s obviously reflecting other things, too). Time will tell.
 
martinjlm said:
I am going to wholeheartedly disagree here. Background...I spent 38 years at an OEM, I am a car guy, and I've spent many years shoulder-to-shoulder with recognized name car guys. I will briefly name drop...

Sat behind Bob Lutz and Gary Cowger at a weekly Product Development decision meeting for two years. Worked directly for Bob Purcell, one of the key project leaders for EV1 (this was after EV1, but before / during Volt development). Worked closely with and still have friendship relationship with Tony Posawatz, Volt Chief Engineer / Vehicle Line Exec who went on to serve as CEO for an EV startup. Know Mark Reuss on a " hey how's it going" basis and worked in his dad's (Lloyd) organization for a while and also interacted with Lloyd at a non-profit he supported after he retired. Know Tadge Juechter (Corvette), Al Oppenheiser (Camaro, Hummer EV) John McElroy (Autoline) on a "hey how's it going" basis,. I really could go on.

Most of those people would be redundant wrt Lucid's current strengths. They aren't NEEDED. They would not be a detriment, although I would question whether John McElroy would even have an interest in running a car company. What all of these people have in common is that they are all outstanding PRODUCT experts.

What Lucid needs is someone who understands and can master the ability to make strategic decisions that grow the company. Would there be a benefit to that person being someone who understands the product? Definitely. But if the CEO is supposed to have company sustainability skills and product skills, but you can only fill one of those buckets, which bucket do you fill first? I say it needs to be the company sustainability bucket. What does Lucid need more than someone expert at sustaining the venture?

Let's look at the problem from a different perspective. Ever hear of Carlos Tavares? Consummate car guy. Worked at several different OEMs and helped lead the product development out of the doldrums and into relevancy. Then he became CEO of PSA and did a decent enough job that he was named CEO of Stellantis when that merger came to play. Even though he understood the European market and maybe even the Chinese market well enough to help PSA and then Stellantis thrive in those areas, his total lack of understanding of the US market led to Stellantis getting absolutely obliterated in the US market, wide scale senior leadership exodus, and eventually his removal as CEO. Shortly after his removal, several of the senior leaders who left eased their way back to the company after their retirements.

There are times when "get a car guy" is the best move for a company. For Lucid, this is not one of those times. The product is fine.
Click to expand...
As a fellow 30 year "Car guy" I love this post! .... again as much as it hurts to hear, Lucid needs to shed its soft image to survive.

1. Amazing to Drive
2. Sexy as hell outside luxury inside
3. Exclusive at the top obtainable for driven people on the bottom.

I said this in one of my very first posts here that a company born to market during the worst time and ideals in our American history that chased the wrong things, (go woke go broke) needs to pivot. Be a CAR COMPANY not a save the planet company.

NO LEADER OF ANY CAR COMPANY IS A NICE PERSON. Lucid doesn't need to be nice, it needs to be a bully. It needs whole market/whole world attention, not just the attention of half of our country/world.

Hard decisions were made, harder ones I am sure will follow but at least Lucid is saying WE ARE NOT GOING TO MORPH INTO A BUTTERFLY HOW ABOUT A DRAGON instead....

Just my opinion. I am sure I am gonna get flamed now.... Hahahaha. Its ok.
 
a boeing guy turned around boeing and then went on to save fords bacon.jobs were lost..egos hurt.. not a car guy he made a plan and stuck to it.Focus. focus. the cars are done and dusted... Time to give the new guys plan a shot
 
billy said:
a boeing guy turned around boeing and then went on to save fords bacon.jobs were lost..egos hurt.. not a car guy he made a plan and stuck to it.Focus. focus. the cars are done and dusted... Time to give the new guys plan a shot
Click to expand...
I get what you did there.... Focus..... Focus.... FOOOOOORD FOCUS.
 
Along with Alan Mulally there was Jim Rowan CEO of Volvo from Dyson. Keith Barr CarMax from hospitality sector. Carlos Ghosn worked for Michelin Fim Farley was in Marketing Mary Barra was in HR.... (Chat GPT)

According to Chat GPT most of these guys made major Management changes after becoming CEO of their respective companies.

They were hired for a reason and more importantly the changes they made were also for that reason.
 
billy said:
a boeing guy turned around boeing and then went on to save fords bacon.jobs were lost..egos hurt.. not a car guy he made a plan and stuck to it.Focus. focus. the cars are done and dusted... Time to give the new guys plan a shot
Click to expand...

Of course the new CEO is going to make changes and devise a new plan. And of course he gets a shot (more than one, most likely) at course-correcting. It’s his job. It’s why he was hired.

However, by letting go of Emad as one of those decisions (whether because he was let go or because he didn’t do enough to keep him), Silvio has given himself a lot more to prove.

I think that’s all anyone is saying.
 
Macrocosmcwh said:
Along with Alan Mulally there was Jim Rowan CEO of Volvo from Dyson. Keith Barr CarMax from hospitality sector. Carlos Ghosn worked for Michelin Fim Farley was in Marketing Mary Barra was in HR.... (Chat GPT)

According to Chat GPT most of these guys made major Management changes after becoming CEO of their respective companies.

They were hired for a reason and more importantly the changes they made were also for that reason.
Click to expand...
I also don't think being an especially nice guy is in successful person's job descriptions. Reference my earlier post about the demise of Eric Bach in spirit of creating a "positive work environment". WTF

One of the things not brought out here enough is Engineering Dept does not need to be the heavy hitters--just design great stuff.

I think they were trying the wrong hat on Peter and Emad. Hire that focussed guy and don't kick the talent to the curb just because they don't happen to share that DNA.
(That said, it is always possible they tried to keep both but they declined any lesser role.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top