In a twist worthy of a Silicon Valley drama, prominent Tesla investor Ross Gerber has floated a provocative theory: the explosive Wall Street Journal report suggesting Tesla’s board is considering replacing Elon Musk as CEO may have been orchestrated by Musk himself. Gerber made the claim during an interview with Newsweek, stirring debate across the financial and tech worlds and reigniting questions about Musk’s grip on Tesla, his strategic intentions, and the mounting pressures facing the electric vehicle giant.
The Wall Street Journal article, published earlier this week, cited unnamed sources who said Tesla’s board has quietly begun working with executive search firms in recent weeks to explore potential successors to Musk. What prompted this move?
Mounting backlash over Musk’s increasingly visible role in U.S. politics—particularly his controversial tenure as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under President Donald Trump—has reportedly weighed on Tesla’s public image and stock value.
Musk, never one to shy away from confrontation, responded forcefully on X (formerly Twitter), calling the article “an EXTREMELY BAD BREACH OF ETHICS” and a “DELIBERATELY FALSE ARTICLE.” He claimed the Journal published the story despite what he described as a prior denial from Tesla’s board.
Robyn Denholm, Chair of Tesla’s board, publicly dismissed the claims raised in the Wall Street Journal report, echoing Elon Musk’s denial and reaffirming the board’s confidence in his leadership.
However, Ross Gerber—CEO of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth and Investment Management and a long-time Tesla advocate—offered a strikingly different view during his Newsweek interview. “This news likely indicates that Elon is searching for a successor at Tesla,” Gerber asserted, suggesting that Musk himself may have leaked or influenced the article to begin shaping the narrative of a leadership transition on his own terms.
According to Gerber, this may be a form of strategic misdirection—“4D chess,” as he describes it—designed to manage perception, retain influence, and prepare for the future. Musk, now a polarizing figure due to his political affiliations, controversial management style, and omnipresence in the media, may be signaling awareness of the growing risk his image poses to Tesla’s brand.
By subtly introducing the idea of stepping back from the CEO role—while potentially remaining as board chair—Musk could distance himself from the political fallout without relinquishing control. Gerber believes someone like Tesla co-founder JB Straubel could take over as a stable, credible CEO, allowing Musk to shift into a more background role. “This is precisely what is required,” Gerber said. “Elon will not suddenly relinquish control. He requires a visible CEO.”
Such a shift, Gerber argues, would offer Tesla much-needed “marketing separation” from Musk, enabling the company to regain consumer confidence while freeing Musk to focus on his broader ventures, including SpaceX, xAI, and ongoing political engagements—all without losing his influence over Tesla’s direction.
The strategy appears to be taking shape. Amid the CEO speculation, Musk announced during Tesla’s April earnings call that he would scale back his involvement with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to refocus on Tesla, though he noted he would still devote “a day or two each week” to federal work—highlighting that his political ambitions remain active.
Tesla shares, which had plunged 25% since President Trump’s inauguration—driven by boycotts and a wave of vandalism at Tesla facilities—saw a modest rebound following Musk’s commitment to re-engage. Still, investor confidence remains shaky. Many view the situation as evidence of a deeper identity crisis at Tesla: Can the company truly thrive under Musk’s continued leadership, or must it evolve beyond his personal brand?
Gerber, who once held more than 250,000 Tesla shares but sold $60 million worth in 2024 over concerns about Musk’s governance and the board’s passivity, now sees the potential for a well-orchestrated shift—possibly engineered by Musk himself. “Investors are eager to observe how Elon can continue to be a pivotal influence,” Gerber said, “albeit with a more subdued presence.”
While some dismiss Gerber’s theory as conspiratorial, it aligns with Musk’s long-standing pattern of using media narratives to his advantage. Musk has mastered the art of dominating news cycles—leveraging social platforms and dramatic headlines to influence markets, distract from setbacks, and reassert control over public perception.
Planting a story about his potential ousting—only to loudly refute it—could serve multiple purposes: gauging investor sentiment, testing board loyalty, and laying the groundwork for a leadership pivot on Musk’s terms.
Reactions are sharply divided. Critics argue that Musk, juggling multiple companies including Neuralink, X, and xAI, is overextended and needs to delegate before key projects falter. Others warn that reducing Musk’s role—or even suggesting such a move—risks alienating Tesla’s fiercely loyal base, for whom Musk is inseparable from the brand itself.
Recent financial results add urgency to the debate. Tesla reported a staggering 71% drop in first-quarter profits for 2024, along with a 9% year-over-year revenue decline. Musk’s political ties have done little to reassure investors, with protests and boycotts growing at home and abroad. Not even Trump’s eccentric gesture of turning the White House lawn into a temporary Tesla showroom could curb the backlash.
Against this backdrop, Gerber’s claims raise critical questions: Is Tesla undergoing a carefully orchestrated leadership handoff, or is it caught in a chaotic unraveling masked by corporate spin? Is Musk’s indignation a genuine rebuttal, or part of a deeper strategy?
The Wall Street Journal stands by its reporting. In a statement to Axios, the paper confirmed that Tesla had the opportunity to respond before publication—contradicting Musk’s assertion that the board’s denial was ignored.
With Musk expected to re-engage with Tesla in May in a more focused capacity, the months ahead could prove decisive. If Gerber’s theory is correct, Tesla may soon unveil a revamped leadership model—one designed to preserve Musk’s long-term vision while shielding the company from the fallout of his public persona.
Though unproven, Gerber’s provocative hypothesis—that Musk may have engineered the story of his own decline—could mark one of the boldest moves in his already legendary career.
