Fisker Needs a NEW CEO

@steve-ballamor 1 post on a fisker forum and you use it to call out fisker needing a new ceo right as mass deliveries start. Tesla has a dude who knows nothing about the automotive industry running it and right now it's about to get lapped by other auto makers. Leave the guy who has spent his life IN THE INDUSTRY in charge.

Also, come on man, do you know how suspicious you look dropping that post here? Jeesh.

@steve-ballamor nope, check back in 5 years

@bmiddaugh really dude? what it has to do with 1 post? and you with 56 posts total. that makes you forum king..suspicious with 1 post..LMAO

just re-read what I have posted. Elon is a corporate guy. He doesn't know shit about rocket, auto, cars but he is making billions and all of his companies are successful. He knows how to navigate the corporate world.

@steve-ballamor While there are potential benefits to bringing in a new CEO, it's important to consider the reasons why not to make such a change. Below are some possible reasons for not bringing in a new CEO to Fisker. Personally, I believe that Fisker has performed exceptionally well thus far and will continue to improve with time. While it is true that better communication with shareholders and increased transparency for customers are areas that could be addressed, I have confidence in Fisker's ability to persevere and succeed in the long run.

1. Henrik Fisker's Expertise: Henrik Fisker has demonstrated exceptional design skills and a deep understanding of the electric vehicle market. His expertise and creative vision have played a pivotal role in the company's success thus far. Removing him as CEO could result in a loss of his unique perspective and design-oriented leadership.

2. Continuity and Stability: Changing the CEO could disrupt the company's operations and create uncertainty among employees, stakeholders, and customers. Maintaining stability and continuity in leadership might be important, especially if Henrik Fisker has established a strong rapport with the company's stakeholders and has a clear long-term vision.

3. Founder's Passion: As the founder of the company, Henrik Fisker likely has a strong passion for its success and a deep understanding of its values and culture. His personal dedication and commitment could be essential for driving the company forward, especially if he has a clear vision that aligns with the company's goals.

4. Investor Confidence: While there may be concerns about market confidence in Henrik Fisker's leadership, abrupt changes in top management could also raise red flags for investors. The sudden departure of a founder-CEO might lead to questions about the company's stability and long-term viability, potentially impacting investor confidence negatively.

5. Cultural Alignment: Henrik Fisker's leadership style and values might be deeply ingrained in the company's culture. Introducing a new CEO could potentially disrupt this cultural alignment, leading to clashes or difficulties in maintaining a cohesive and motivated workforce.

6. Industry Knowledge and Network: Henrik Fisker's established industry knowledge and network could be valuable assets for the company. His relationships with key industry players, suppliers, and partners may have helped facilitate crucial collaborations and business opportunities. A new CEO might take time to build similar relationships and establish their credibility within the industry.

7. Potential Misalignment of Interests: A new CEO might have different priorities or strategies that may not align with Henrik Fisker's vision or the company's founding principles. This misalignment could lead to conflicts or a diversion from the company's original mission.

8. Transition Costs: Changing the CEO involves significant transition costs, including recruitment, onboarding, and potential severance packages. These costs can be substantial and may impact the company's financial resources and short-term performance. 

9. Regulatory and Legal Considerations: Depending on the terms of Henrik Fisker's employment contract and any agreements with investors, there might be legal or contractual obligations to consider when making changes to the CEO position. These considerations can add complexity and potential legal risks to the decision-making process.

It's important to weigh these reasons against the potential benefits of bringing in a new CEO and carefully assess the overall impact on the company's future prospects and stakeholders' interests. Ultimately, the decision should be based on a thorough evaluation of the company's specific circumstances, strategic goals, and the long-term vision for success. As a customer and shareholder of Fisker, I'd like to see Henrik Fisker go the distance and prove all the naysayers wrong.

With respect, @steve-ballamor I think you have mis-diagnosed the problem. What Fisker needs is a strong, well-respected, experienced Chief Operating Officer. Most of the problems we are seeing are basic operations failures (from parts supply to deliveries to web site operations). I know of no other public company that has a single person as CFO and COO. And I certainly cannot think of any public car company with a COO who has never led operations in any industry, much less automotive, who has never led any large supply chain, and who has never led a single retail system. If the CEO has a glaring weakness, it is that he cannot or will not see the weaknesses in his executive team and make the necessary changes. I think it is reasonably obvious why that is. 

I honestly just think the original post was a generic list of reasons why any company “x” would need a CEO , possibly generated by AI  Chatgpt. 

As for what I think Fisker should become, I don’t want it to be another hierarchy  , like Ford or GM or Volkswagen or even a Tesla. I think a new model that is more of a holding company that reacts quickly, and then adopts innovations rapidly is what is needed in the EV industry. I think that is why and where Fisker’s is trying to go with a Fisker Magna partnership first, then and then the Fisker Foxconn partnership and so on. This will take time to play out. I find most “immediate” calls for changes are usually self serving by the author and tend to think the author is practicing applying for a job.

@kitaz and 95% of those calling for a “regime” change are invested in FSR and want a boost. I am invested as well, but i am in for the long game (the short sellers can rot for all i care) but paramount to all else is the successful and timely roll out of the Ocean and that’s all i am focused on now. If that happens, the FSR bump will follow.

All great replies and valid points. Thanks!

At the end of the day, I want Fisker to succeed because I'm heavily invested in FSR. I'm in for the long game. It will be not before at least 2026 when we will see some profits. Most of this anxiety is caused by delays in deliveries. 

And no I'm not looking for a job in Fisker.I'm an IT consulting guy 🙂

@steve-ballamor Musk was an "IT consulting" guy.  🤣

@ttrinchi Thanks for the compliment sir