Description
Please do according to rubric
Executive Summary & Overview
Problem Statement
Analysis: SWOT Analysis
Global Perspective
Alternatives
Recommendations
Conclusion
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Content Rubric MGMT 495 Case Analysis
Content Area
Executive Summary/
Overview
Issue Statement
(Problem Statement)
Analysis
Alternatives
Recommendations
Conclusion
Meets
Expectations
Effective summary of
the case analysis
paper (not the case itself).
Information is relevant.
Includes
recommendations for the
company. Overview of the
facts of the case.
Focuses on a strategic
issue within the scope of
the guiding question. Does
recognize nuances of the
issue such as filling in
important information,
stating assumptions, or
assigning responsibilities.
Effective analysis helping
to identify causes of the
strategic issue or helping
to formulate effective
solutions. Use of concepts
(such as SWOT), theories,
or research covered in the
course.
Provides strategic
solutions that address the
strategic issue. This should
be a subset of your
recommendations. These
alternatives must address
the issues presented in
your problem statement.
Strategic solution is
recommended. Effective
course of action is
provided describing
implementation. May be
divided in short-term
“quick wins” and longterm actions.
Dedicated Summary
Conclusion of the case
study. With forward
looking statements.
Approaches
Expectations
Simple outline of the case
analysis paper. No
recommendations
included.
Does not
Meet Expectations
Simple overview of the
case itself and/or
overview of company
history.
Focuses on strategic issues
mentioned in the case but
may be outside of the
scope of guiding question.
May identify too many
strategic issues.
Focuses on strategic issues
not mentioned in the case
or provides a “laundry list”
of strategic issues.
Critical examination of the
strategic issue is evident.
Some significant but not
major errors in analysis.
No critical examination of
the strategic issue. No use
of course concepts,
theories, and research as
covered in class.
Solutions may be less
strategic or do not address
the strategic issue
effectively. Evaluation of
strategic solutions may be
incomplete or omit
important aspects.
Solutions do not address
the strategic issue. No
evaluation of solutions.
Course of action is
provided but may not be
effective.
No solution is
recommended and/or no
course of action is
included.
Summary is incomplete
No conclusion section is
and does not capture what given in the case study.
your recommendations
will do for the company.
Format Guidelines
• Please write a paper in essay format: 12 size Times New Roman (1-inch margins)
• 4-5 pages of content (excluding cover page, references, and visual elements such as figures, graphs, and tables).
• Submit a well-organized paper with headings.
• Check grammar and spelling carefully.
• Submit the paper to Blackboard as a Word document with your full name on the cover page.
• Zero tolerance for plagiarism (this includes extensive copying from the case into your paper without including
quotation marks ” “).
Common Issues to Avoid
• The analysis part may be disconnected from the rest of the paper. This usually happens when you see the issue and
jump right to solutions, and then add an analysis part later. Instead, look at the case and ask yourself: What is the
issue here that led the firm to hire a consultant (that is you!). The issue articulated by the firm is typically a superficial
or incomplete understanding of the situation. Try to think about the issue in more detail by conducting an analysis.
Then provide me with your key insights from this exercise in your paper.
• Students often focus on too many issues. Try to solve a limited set of issues effectively, rather than two or three issues
ineffectively. In other words, the client typically sets the scope of a project to widely–it is your job as a consultant to
set an appropriate project scope!
For the exclusive use of A. Mohammadi, 2024.
W15349
TESLA: INTERNATIONALIZATION FROM SINGAPORE TO CHINA1
Umair Shafique, Agata Barczyk, Lukasz Gluszynski, Adnan Kayssi and Wanyi Zhao wrote this case under the supervision of
Christopher Williams solely to provide material for class discussion. The authors do not intend to illustrate either effective or ineffective
handling of a managerial situation. The authors may have disguised certain names and other identifying information to protect
confidentiality.
This publication may not be transmitted, photocopied, digitized or otherwise reproduced in any form or by any means without the
permission of the copyright holder. Reproduction of this material is not covered under authorization by any reproduction rights
organization. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, contact Ivey Publishing, Ivey Business School, Western
University, London, Ontario, Canada, N6G 0N1; (t) 519.661.3208; (e) [email protected]; www.iveycases.com.
Copyright © 2015, Richard Ivey School of Business Foundation
Version: 2017-09-28
In late December 2012, U.S.-headquartered Tesla Motors (Tesla) was faced with a challenge in terms of
how to continue with its internationalization strategy. It had been more than a year since Tesla exited
Singapore — six months after having entered that market. In considering China as a possible location for
investment, several questions needed to be addressed. What could the company learn from its experiences
in the United States and Singapore? Was it the right time to enter the Chinese market? How could Tesla
prevent a repeat of the Singapore experience in China?
ELON MUSK — A SERIAL ENTREPRENEUR
Born in South Africa, Elon Musk immigrated to Canada at the age of 15. He later relocated to the United States
for further education.2 In 1995, he co-founded Zip2, an Internet map and directory company, which he sold to
Compaq Computer for more than US$300 million in 1999.3 He went on to co-found PayPal — an e-payments
service — which was sold to eBay for $1.5 billion in 2002.4 Not content with revolutionizing the online payments
market, Musk then founded SpaceX — a company that developed spacecraft and reusable rockets, and with
which he hoped to revolutionize space travel.5 He joined the board of Tesla in 2004 and helped shape its vision.6
He also had plans to develop a new high-speed transit system, called Hyperloop, which would transport
commuters between Los Angeles and San Francisco in only 30 minutes at 1,287 kilometres per hour.7
Despite these apparent successes in entrepreneurship, Musk’s most recent ventures had suffered setbacks,
such as delays in the production of the all-electric Roadster sports car in 2007, and the failure of the first
three rocket launches by SpaceX between 2006 and 2008.8 It had been noted how Musk’s calculated risktaking and persistence ensured that his companies were able to overcome hurdles. In fact, such was Musk’s
determination that he had even risked personal bankruptcy to ensure Tesla survived.9
TESLA — COMPANY BACKGROUND
Tesla was an automaker headquartered in Palo Alto, California. The company designed, manufactured and sold
fully-electric vehicles (EVs) as well as EV powertrain components.10 Tesla was formed in 2003 and went public
This document is authorized for use only by Aziza Mohammadi in MGMT 495 Spring 2024 taught by MICHAEL MILLER, University of Illinois at Chicago from Oct 2023 to Apr 2024.
For the exclusive use of A. Mohammadi, 2024.
Page 2
9B15M074
in 2010. Musk joined the company in 2004. He set the company’s mission, which was “to accelerate the advent
of sustainable transport by bringing compelling mass market electric cars to market as soon as possible.”11
While the concept of fully-electric vehicles was not new, automakers had struggled to balance design with
performance. Furthermore, the batteries used for these vehicles were not optimal, and a single battery charge
only offered a short driving distance.12 However, by partnering with Panasonic, a major Japanese electronics
corporation, Tesla was able to develop a lithium-ion rechargeable battery for EVs, which solved the drivingdistance-per-battery-charge issue.13 In doing so, Tesla succeeded in developing technology that other major
automakers, such as General Motors, had been pessimistic about.14 Tesla also formed partnerships with other
automakers and component manufacturers, such as Daimler and Toyota. This enabled Tesla to overcome
design and performance issues and to develop fully electric and optimally designed vehicles.15
By December 2012, Tesla had established a presence in the United States and Europe. Furthermore, it had
also opened up stores and galleries in Japan and Australia.
Corporate Strategy
Consistent with its vision to eventually create a mass market for cost-effective, fully-electric vehicles, Tesla
set out with a strategy to “go down the market.” This involved starting by developing and marketing highend products for affluent customers, and as the company, its products and its customers became more
mature, the company would use the profits and experience generated to refine the technology.16 This
strategy was similar to that employed by companies in fast-moving technology industries such as Apple,
but was quite unique in the automotive industry, where major companies like General Motors and Ford
tended to start at the lower end of the market.17
Vehicles and Complementary Products
In 2008, Tesla introduced its first vehicle, the Tesla Roadster, to the North American market. Priced at about
$109,00018 and aimed at the richest individuals, it was a two-seat convertible and the first high-performance electric
sports car. It had the ability to accelerate from zero to 97 kilometres per hour in 3.7 seconds, with a maximum speed
of about 193 kilometres per hour, and a range of 394 kilometres on a single charge of the battery.19
Tesla stopped production at the end of 2011 because its contract with Lotus Cars had expired, and Lotus
had provided the case component for the Roadster.20 Tesla sold its remaining Roadsters throughout 2012
in Europe and Asia. By December 31, 2012, it had sold a total of 2,450 Roadsters in a four year period. 21
Tesla’s second vehicle, the Model S sedan, was released in North America in June 2012. The Model S offered
customers a lower cost of ownership compared to other sedans that were available at the time.22 The Model S
was a fully-electric, four-door vehicle, with a range of 426 kilometres for each charge of its battery. It also boasted
an acceleration capability of zero to 97 kilometres per hour in 4.4 seconds.23 It was offered with several battery
pack options (40, 60 and 85 kilowatt-hours). Depending on the option chosen, Tesla priced the Model S between
$52,400 and $72,400.24 By December 2012, Tesla had sold 2,650 Model S cars, mainly in the United States. It
had also announced plans to sell the vehicle in the European and Asian markets from 2013 onwards.
The Model S was different from the Roadster in that it had an adaptable platform architecture and its own
electric powertrain. This common base would be used for newer Tesla models, and would help shorten both
the cost of, and time needed for, developing future models. This would help to fulfil Tesla’s vision to
accelerate the creation of a mass market for cost-effective EVs.
This document is authorized for use only by Aziza Mohammadi in MGMT 495 Spring 2024 taught by MICHAEL MILLER, University of Illinois at Chicago from Oct 2023 to Apr 2024.
For the exclusive use of A. Mohammadi, 2024.
Page 3
9B15M074
Tesla unveiled a prototype of a third vehicle, the Model X, in February 2012, with an intention to produce it after
2014. Tesla had intended to set a price for the Model X that would be appropriate to a comparable version of the
Model S.25 The Model X was designed to be a hybrid and to feature both the roominess of a minivan, and the
style of a sports utility vehicle, while still offering high-performance features such as a dual-motor all-wheeldrive system. In the long term, Tesla had outlined plans to release a car priced between $30,000 and $40,000.
TESLA IN THE UNITED STATES
Tesla opened its first retail stores in Los Angeles and Menlo Park, California, in the summer of 2008.26 By
December 2012, it operated a network of more than 30 stores, sales and service centres, and galleries around
the world. Locations included Seattle, New York City, Osaka, Sydney and Toronto.
Showrooms
Tesla’s ability to adapt and innovate in uncertain times came under examination in 2008. Such uncertainty
was characterized by a decline in automotive industry sales due to the credit crisis and a general lack of
acceptance of the “electric car” concept by U.S. consumers. The appeal of electric cars suffered from a
steep drop in fuel prices in the United States at the end of 2008.27 Tesla needed to be creative in order to
develop a successful strategy to sell its vehicles to consumers.
While a traditional dealership-based franchise model had been implemented by all other car manufacturers
in the United States, Musk believed that such a model would not meet Tesla’s needs. He felt that this model
had two major disadvantages for the sale of EVs. First, dealers would encounter a fundamental conflict
between the sale of gasoline-dependant cars and EVs. They would not be able to explain the benefits of an
EV without undermining the advantages of their traditional business.28
Second, Musk believed that when consumers visited a local dealership, the majority of potential buyers had
already come to a tentative decision about which vehicle they would purchase. This could potentially reduce
the dealer’s opportunity to educate those consumers on the benefits of Tesla’s EV. Tesla decided to pursue an
alternative strategy to sell its vehicles by making them available through their own dealerships.29
Tesla’s strategy allowed the company to offer a compelling customer experience while operating
efficiently. The company was also able to capture sales and service revenues that other automobile
manufacturers would not be able to attain through the use of the traditional model.
Tesla also believed that it would be have better control over the sales process if it sold its own vehicles. Factors
such as the costs of inventory, management of warranty services and the pricing of the products could be better
maintained. All of this would serve to strengthen the Tesla brand, and obtain rapid customer feedback.30
However there was one problem: U.S. law-makers in some states had prevented the direct sale of vehicles
to customers by their manufacturers. This created a barrier for Tesla to overcome in its pursuit of companyowned dealerships.31 In 48 of the 50 states, Tesla was required to sell and service its automobiles through
a middleman franchise — a dealer.32 Once dealers had invested in inventory and facilities, automotive
companies could pressure dealers to accept shipments of cars. If the dealer did not comply they could face
the possibility of the manufacturer finding another local dealer to use instead. In such a situation, the dealer
would lose the money that had been invested in the dealership. To prevent such situations from occurring,
the states had begun to enact laws to provide dealers with exclusive rights in local markets. Tesla overcame
this obstacle with a revolutionary solution.
This document is authorized for use only by Aziza Mohammadi in MGMT 495 Spring 2024 taught by MICHAEL MILLER, University of Illinois at Chicago from Oct 2023 to Apr 2024.
For the exclusive use of A. Mohammadi, 2024.
Page 4
9B15M074
On July 8, 2010, Tesla announced the appointment of George Blankenship as the vice-president of design and
store development for Tesla.33 Blankenship, the former vice-president of real estate for Apple, was best known
for his work on Apple’s brand-building retail strategy — one of the most successful retail growth strategies in
history.34 Blankenship, through the use of his knowledge acquired at Apple, was able to devise an innovative
strategy to adapt to the laws that prohibited the sale of vehicles by a manufacturer. His strategy would also
maximize the number of consumers that would be exposed to and educated about the product.
Blankenship recommended that Tesla position its new stores, which they called “showrooms,” in retail venues
that had high foot-traffic and visibility. Places such as malls and shopping districts, where people were regularly
in a relatively open and buying mood, were considered the ideal places for the “showrooms.” He believed this
would satisfy the company’s need to educate consumers because Tesla would be able to interact with potential
consumers before they had decided on which new vehicle they wanted to purchase.35 Also, implementing these
showrooms in high foot-traffic areas ensured maximum exposure for the company’s brand.
More importantly, Blankenship’s showrooms enabled Tesla to sell its own vehicles in the United States
without violating the dealership laws. Each showroom was used to display the vehicles and to educate
consumers on the benefits of EVs and Tesla’s other products. If the consumer did decide to purchase a
Tesla vehicle, a company employee would direct the consumer to the company’s website, where they would
complete their order. By having the customer purchase the vehicle online, Tesla would not infringe on state
laws and would be allowed to sell its own vehicles.
Charging Stations
Consumers had questioned the vehicles’ potential to serve as a primary form of transportation. This was due to
limitations on long-distance travel associated with EVs and their power sources. Without an improvement in the
vehicle’s range, the product would be considered impractical. This would prevent Tesla from producing vehicles
on a mass scale. Similarly, questions were being asked about the practicality of a vehicle that required a long
time to charge its battery. Tesla products had two feasible charging options: The wall charger and the universal
mobile connector. The wall charger would be installed in the consumer’s home, and could refuel a Model S at a
90-kilometre range per hour (approximately four hours). The universal mobile connector was designed to allow
consumers to travel longer distances. It could charge the vehicle at a 52-kilometre range per hour (six hours for
a full charge).36 With the high-end Model S able to travel only a 426-kilometre range between charges, the time
required to refuel would cause the vehicle to be considered impractical for everyday use.
In response to this challenge, Tesla developed a solution that satisfied both the charging-needs of its vehicle
and the requirement for the vehicle to be able to travel longer distances. These challenges were ameliorated
with the introduction of Tesla’s “supercharger stations.” A charging station allowed a consumer to recharge
a vehicle at a much higher speed then previously possible. Tesla vehicles could now replenish half of their
battery power in as little as 20 minutes.37 The significant improvement in charging time eliminated a portion
of consumer concerns related to using a Tesla vehicle as a primary mode of transportation.
The supercharger stations also addressed long-distance travel concerns. As of December 2012, Tesla had
implemented supercharger stations in two separate corridors in the United States that allowed for efficient
long-distance travel. The first corridor used six charging stations to connect San Francisco, Lake Tahoe,
Los Angeles and Las Vegas. The second corridor connected the District of Columbia, New York City and
Boston.38 Tesla announced further expansions in 2013 for its supercharger stations which included a
network that featured a “supercharger highway” that would connect Los Angeles to New York.
This document is authorized for use only by Aziza Mohammadi in MGMT 495 Spring 2024 taught by MICHAEL MILLER, University of Illinois at Chicago from Oct 2023 to Apr 2024.
For the exclusive use of A. Mohammadi, 2024.
Page 5
9B15M074
Battery Swap
Tesla’s implementation of Supercharger stations placated many critics that questioned the Model S’s
potential to serve as a primary vehicle. However, a few detractors remained. Some believed that without an
option for instant charges, Tesla products would be too time consuming for many customers. If the cars
could not refuel instantly like their gasoline-using counterparts, the issue would continue to be seen as a
weakness. To address this issue, Tesla designed a system that would allow consumers to “swap” batteries
in their vehicles, allowing for immediate refuelling. The swap option was implemented in 2013.
TESLA IN SINGAPORE
In the 2000s, Singapore was one of the wealthiest economies in the world. The real gross domestic product
per capita was fourth and fifth in the world, in 2009 and 2010, respectively, exceeding US$60,000
(purchasing power parity).39 Singapore’s population amounted to around five million people, while the
number of cars used in Singapore exceeded half a million (see Exhibit 1).40 Alongside a high tax policy for
conventional fuel-using cars, the Singaporean government pursued a policy of maintaining a green and
clean city that included limiting air pollution. Singapore was technologically advanced and offered local
expertise in electronics, power and precision engineering. These factors, together with its small size,
compact urban environment and robust power grid, as well as an information and communications
technology infrastructure, made Singapore an ideal location for testing EVs.
Singapore generated around 80 per cent of its power from natural gas. It was estimated that a 30 per cent
penetration of EVs in private car ownership would provide the benefit of a 7 per cent reduction in carbon
emissions in the country.41 Moreover, the size42 of Singapore meant short average driving distances (55
kilometres per day). This put passenger vehicle distance requirements within the range of a fully charged EV
(90 to 160 kilometres).43 Another benefit of moving over to EVs was the potential reduction in the Singaporean
preoccupation with cars as status symbols. This was hoped to be an added benefit if EVs could be seen only as
functional vehicles with the single purpose of getting from point A to point B. The move over to EVs would
potentially shift consumer focus from the fastest, most powerful cars to the most environmentally friendly ones.44
In May 2009, the Singaporean government announced its decision to establish a two-year test-bed program for
EVs.45 The program was dubbed the Transport Technology Innovation and Development Scheme (TIDES). The
program prompted the government to look for commercial partnerships with foreign companies. There were two
different types of investments within the program. First, companies were needed that were able to provide EVs.
Second, companies were needed that could help develop a charging-station infrastructure in the city.
Singapore had already offered a 40 per cent discount for EVs on the Additional Registration Fee (ARF),
but TIDES was a great opportunity for electric car manufacturers to build their presence in Singapore.46
When TIDES was announced, the Renault–Nissan Alliance was already appointed as a partner, but
applications from other players were still being accepted.
Tesla’s Response and Subsequent Outcome
Tesla opened its first store and service centre in Singapore in 2010. In order to take advantage of the
opportunities offered by the Singaporean government, Tesla applied for participation in the program. Tesla
felt that it met the government’s criteria.47 Although it had already taken advantage of a 40 per cent rebate
for the ARF, the company endeavoured to obtain additional tax breaks through TIDES; this would allow it
to decrease the initial price of the cars offered in Singapore by 50 per cent.
This document is authorized for use only by Aziza Mohammadi in MGMT 495 Spring 2024 taught by MICHAEL MILLER, University of Illinois at Chicago from Oct 2023 to Apr 2024.
For the exclusive use of A. Mohammadi, 2024.
Page 6
9B15M074
Meanwhile, a new player had joined the program: Mitsubishi i-MiEV. The i-MiEV had an open market
value (i.e. dealership price) of about SG$85,000, which would increase to about SG$190,000 after payment
of full ARF, Certificate of Entitlement48 and road taxes.49 Under TIDES, each i-MiEV was priced at only
SG$90,000, with exemption from the above duties and taxes for a maximum period of 10 years.50
Tesla’s price for the Roadster was much higher — SG$500,000 (more than SG$400,000 without any tax
exemptions). By becoming part of TIDES, the price for the Roadster would come down to SG$250,000.
Despite all of the favourable conditions, Tesla did not receive the aforementioned tax breaks. Only four
companies managed to obtain the grant from the Singaporean government (Daimler, Mitsubishi, Nissan
and Renault).51 It was reported that Tesla did not meet the technical requirements for EVs.52 Consequently,
Tesla did not sell a single car in Singapore.53 The company had garnered about a dozen orders, most on the
condition that the tax break be granted.54 A few people were willing to buy the car without the tax break,
because they perceived Tesla as the car manufacturer of the future, but the numbers were too small to justify
Tesla’s presence in Singapore. Tesla Motors’ Asia-Pacific director Kevin Yu told The Straits Times:
“Unfortunately, Singapore has not turned out to be the market we hoped it would be.” He followed: “Given
the Roadster’s limited production run and the enthusiastic support from both customers and governments
for the vehicle in other markets, Tesla has decided to focus our limited resources elsewhere.”55
Failing to Meet World Demand
By the end of 2012, Tesla’s automotive sales revenue had increased to $385.7 million from $148.6 million due
to a dramatic increase in demand.56 2,650 units of the Model S were delivered in 2012, but the total number of
reservations was 15,000. Those vehicles that were delivered were all in North America — none were delivered
in Europe or Asia. In addition, the supply of the Tesla Model S significantly lagged the demand. Tesla could not
provide vehicles in any of the countries where it operated in 2012. Tesla explained that the delays were due to
“difficulties in training new employees to use new equipment, and in part to delays from suppliers.”57
CONSIDERING CHINA
The electric and hybrid automotive industry in China consisted of well-known car manufacturers such as
Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai and Toyota, as well as other Asian brands, like Chery and BYD. Customers with
high incomes, who wanted to have high social recognition, preferred well-known manufacturers, while
customers with lower incomes, who were also concerned about environmental issues, tended to choose the
Asian brands. The market was already competitive and Tesla had no reputation amongst such players.
China had been suffering from severe air pollution, and the Chinese government had taken a variety of
approaches to reduce emissions. One of those approaches was to encourage EV purchases. At the end of
2012, the Chinese government planned to provide tax credits for those who purchased EVs and also implied
that potential subsidies would be issued to some EV manufacturers in the future.
If Tesla could apply for said subsidies it would be able to offer more competitive prices for its vehicles.
However, nothing concrete had been confirmed. In addition, Tesla did not have much information on the
demand conditions in the Chinese market. It was thought that Tesla would need to invest in measures to
educate local customers on its business vision, design and manufacturing. Another important issue was the
electric charging infrastructure. In China, most people lived in apartments with limited parking space, which
they often shared with others. Chinese customers were going to experience difficulty charging EVs which
This document is authorized for use only by Aziza Mohammadi in MGMT 495 Spring 2024 taught by MICHAEL MILLER, University of Illinois at Chicago from Oct 2023 to Apr 2024.
For the exclusive use of A. Mohammadi, 2024.
Page 7
9B15M074
would result in less incentive to purchase one. A similar issue existed for supercharger stations: there were
not enough of them, despite high population density in some regions.
DECISION POINT
Given the outcome in Singapore, as well as the mixed performance in the United States and Europe, was the
time right for Tesla to enter China? If Musk took Tesla into China, what could he learn from the experiences
Tesla had had elsewhere in order to make China a success? How could he deal with some of the unknowns
that confronted the company in China? What should the company’s entry strategy consist of?
This document is authorized for use only by Aziza Mohammadi in MGMT 495 Spring 2024 taught by MICHAEL MILLER, University of Illinois at Chicago from Oct 2023 to Apr 2024.
For the exclusive use of A. Mohammadi, 2024.
Page 8
9B15M074
EXHIBIT 1: NUMBER OF CARS IN SINGAPORE
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Total
799,373 851,336 894,682 925,518 945,829
vehicles
Cars*
465,482 505,987 540,455 566,608 584,399
*Includes station-wagons.
Source: Singapore Land Transport Authority, “Annual Vehicle Statistics — 2014: Motor Vehicle Population by Vehicle Type,”
January
19,
2015,
www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/ltaweb/corp/PublicationsResearch/files/FactsandFigures/MVP011_MVP_by_type.pdf, accessed August 10, 2015.
This document is authorized for use only by Aziza Mohammadi in MGMT 495 Spring 2024 taught by MICHAEL MILLER, University of Illinois at Chicago from Oct 2023 to Apr 2024.
For the exclusive use of A. Mohammadi, 2024.
Page 9
9B15M074
ENDNOTES
1
This case has been written on the basis of published sources only. Consequently, the interpretation and perspectives
presented in this case are not necessarily those of Tesla Motors or any of its employees.
2
A. Vance, “Elon Musk, the 21st Century Industrialist,” Bloomberg Business, September 13, 2012,
www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-13/elon-musk-the-21st-century-industrialist#p2, accessed March 27, 2015.
3
All figures are in USD unless stated otherwise; USD$1 = SGD$1.22 on December 31, 2012.
4
A. Vance, op. cit.
5
Space Exploration Technologies Corp., “About SpaceX,” SpaceX, www.spacex.com/about, accessed April 4, 2014.
6
M. Burns, “A Brief History of Tesla,” Tech Crunch, October 8, 2014, http://techcrunch.com/gallery/a-brief-history-oftesla/slide/2/, accessed July 6, 2015.
7
J. M. Chang, “Hyperloop Designed for a Quick, Convenient Commute like No Other,” ABC News, August 12, 2013,
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/hyperloop-designed-quick-convenient-commute/story?id=19936169, accessed March 27, 2015.
8
J. Hsu, “SpaceX’s Falcon 1 Falters for a Third Time,” Space.com, August 3, 2008, www.space.com/5693-spacex-falcon-1falters-time.html, accessed July 6, 2015.
9
O. Thomas, “Tesla’s Elon Musk: ‘I Ran out of Cash’,” May 28, 2010, Business Insider, www.businessinsider.com/teslas-elonmusk-i-ran-out-of-cash-2010-5-2, accessed March 27, 2015.
10
Edgar Online, “Tesla Motors Inc.: Form 10-K (Annual Report),” 2012, http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ABEA4CW8X0/496765154x0xS1193125-13-96241/1318605/filing.pdf, accessed March 27, 2015.
11
E. Musk, “Blog: The Mission of Tesla,” Tesla Motors Blog, November 18, 2013, www.teslamotors.com/blog/mission-tesla,
accessed March 27, 2015.
12
M. Eberhard, “Blog: Attitude,” Tesla Motors Blog, July 19, 2006, www.teslamotors.com/blog/attitude, accessed March 27, 2015.
13
Panasonic Corporation, “Panasonic Enters into Supply Agreement with Tesla Motors to Supply Automotive-Grade Battery
Cells,” Panasonic Newsroom Global, October 11, 2011, http://news.panasonic.com/press/news/official.data/data.dir/
en111011-3/en111011-3.html, accessed March 27, 2015.
14
T. Friend, “Plugged In: Can Elon Musk Lead the Way to an Electric-Car Future?” The New Yorker, August 24, 2009,
www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/08/24/plugged-in, accessed March 27, 2015.
15
Trefis Team, “Tesla’s Strategic Relationships with Daimler and Toyota Getting Stronger,” Trefis, November 17, 2011,
www.trefis.com/stock/tsla/articles/86006/teslas-symbiotic-relationship-with-daimler-and-toyota-getting-stronger/2011-11-17,
accessed March 27, 2015.
16
E. Musk, “Blog: The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan (just between you and me),” Tesla Motors Blog, August 2, 2006,
www.teslamotors.com/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-just-between-you-and-me, accessed March 27, 2015.
17
R. Carlson, “Why Tesla Has It Right and GM, Ford and Nissan Have It Wrong,” Seeking Alpha, October 5, 2012,
http://seekingalpha.com/article/907751-why-tesla-has-it-right-and-gm-ford-and-nissan-have-it-wrong, accessed March 27, 2015.
18
R. Valdes-Dapena, “5 Electric Cars You Can Buy Now,” June 18, 2008, CNN Money,
http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/autos/0806/gallery.electric_cars_now/,
