The playground rivalry between Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk dates again years—and in who-is-cooler-than-whom phrases, Mr Musk normally wins simply. As an innovator, Mr Zuckerberg, co-founder of Fb and boss of Meta, a social-media big, has usually been dismissed as a geeky dilettante in a hoodie. He has by no means obtained the Promethean kudos Mr Musk has for turning Tesla right into a stallion of electrical automobiles (EVs) and SpaceX right into a rocket sensation. Mr Zuckerberg is infamous for his motto “transfer quick and break issues”, which can have helped Fb conquer the world however gave licence to critics to forged it as a social menace. Mr Musk is revered as a rule-breaker, performs up his bad-boy picture and largely will get away with it.
Such was the tenor of their relationship when Mr Musk proposed a cage match with Mr Zuckerberg in June final 12 months simply earlier than Meta launched a short-messaging app, Threads, to compete with Mr Musk’s Twitter (now X). Neglect the bodily combat that by no means occurred. In enterprise phrases, even then Mr Musk had the higher hand. He was the richest man on Earth. Tesla’s market worth, although falling, was greater than Meta’s. Its revenues had been rising sooner. But since then, he couldn’t have kicked himself more durable within the tooth. Previously few weeks Tesla has shocked traders with a horror-show earnings presentation. Mr Musk’s $56bn pay bundle from 2018 was rescinded by a decide, which has slashed his internet price. From America to China, his EVs have suffered recollects.
Mr Zuckerberg, in the meantime, is punching the air. On February 1st Meta launched earnings exhibiting a staggering rise in gross sales and margins. Its market worth has reached $1.2trn, precisely the extent Tesla achieved at its peak in 2021, and greater than twice what the EV-maker is price now. To make certain, short-term measures of monetary efficiency will not be every little thing. However have a look at longer-term components, corresponding to the best way each males run their companies, deal with their shareholders and clients, and reply to their very own failures, and it’s clear the combat is nearly as good as over. Zuck has received.
To grasp why, begin with the interaction between the best way each gazillionaires management and run their firms. Every of them lords it over their corporations in a manner that makes corporate-governance advocates blanch: Mr Zuckerberg through a dual-share construction that offers him majority management of Meta; Mr Musk, by having everybody at Tesla in his thrall. However as Mr Zuckerberg has turn into extra delicate to his fellow shareholders, Mr Musk has turn into much less so. That has had a big effect on efficiency.
Mr Zuckerberg’s volte face began in 2022 when shareholders recoiled on the manner he was blowing their cash (and his) on moonshot tasks just like the metaverse, simply as Meta’s core enterprise was slowing. As an alternative of ignoring them, he listened. Since then he has modified his tune to give attention to chopping prices, boosting income, and utilizing the money to put money into synthetic intelligence (AI) and the metaverse in a manner that improves present merchandise in addition to funding futuristic bets. Furthermore, to persuade shareholders he’s not losing their cash, Meta will return extra cash to them through share repurchases and pay the corporate’s first-ever dividend.
Mr Musk has had no such epiphany. Within the two years since Tesla’s share value peaked, he appears to have doubled down on disappointing fellow house owners of the corporate’s inventory. The wise ones lengthy for an inexpensive, mass-market EV. As an alternative Tesla is promoting costly ones at a margin-shredding low cost. They need him to spend extra time at Tesla, however he splits it with SpaceX and wastes it at (and on) X. They yearn for full-self-driving vehicles because the catalyst for a robotaxi revolution. As an alternative, even diehard followers had been shocked lately when Mr Musk threatened to maneuver his AI and robotics efforts away from Tesla except he was given 25% voting management.
That results in a second large distinction: motivation, which was the crux of the decide’s choice in Delaware on January thirtieth to strip Mr Musk of his gargantuan pay cheque. Mr Zuckerberg, because the judgment famous, receives no wage or share choices. His 13% financial stake in Meta is the primary incentive to return to work every day. Mr Musk, nonetheless, is totally different. Although his Tesla shareholding on the time meant he would turn into $10bn richer each time Tesla’s worth jumped by $50bn, that wasn’t sufficient. Tesla’s board (a lot of whom the decide dominated had been too chummy with Mr Musk to be unbiased) satisfied shareholders that an additional incentive was wanted to maintain his nostril to the grindstone: particularly, the largest payout within the historical past of public markets. Now that it has been voided, his motivation, presumably, is much more doubtful.
Then there are each males’s attitudes to clients, which have additionally moved in reverse instructions. Mr Zuckerberg was vilified for Fb’s fast-and-loose strategy to customers’ knowledge, content material moderation and privateness. The considerations are nonetheless sturdy, particularly in the case of kids on social media. However Fb now has an unbiased oversight board to rule on content material choices, and Meta says it has invested $20bn since 2016 in on-line security. Little doubt Mr Musk nonetheless has some loyalists as clients. However contemplating what number of American EV house owners lean Democratic, the extra he rants on X, the extra it’s clear that he disdains their political views. The most recent recollects are an extra supply of fear (although the issue could be fastened with a software program replace). In China, an enormous market, he faces stiff competitors. Meta, against this, credit Chinese language advertisers with serving to drive an enormous surge in advert revenues final 12 months.
In a nutshell, as Mr Zuckerberg grows older, he seems to have discovered from his errors. As Mr Musk grows older, he will get extra puerile and distracted. His huffy response to the Delaware court docket’s judgment, threatening to up sticks and transfer Tesla’s incorporation to Texas, is a living proof. It signifies he desires the corporate’s shareholders to have even much less safety from his capriciousness than ordinary. If anybody ought to get into the ring and hammer some sense into him, it’s them. ■