A company called Lucid gave its boss a lot of money as a reward for showing off a new car. But another boss named Elon Musk, who leads a different company called Tesla, thinks that the Lucid boss is not doing a good job and should get less money. He has said this before and some people agree with him. Read from source...

- The article is written in a sensationalist and clickbait style that does not add any value to the readers. It uses Musk's quote as a headline, which is out of context and taken from a casual tweet, not a formal statement or interview.
- The article compares Rawlinson's compensation with other automaker CEOs without providing any meaningful analysis or comparison of their performance, vision, strategy, or market position. It also ignores the fact that Lucid is a private company and only went public in 2021, while GM and Ford have been operating for decades as established companies with more stable revenue streams and brand recognition.
- The article repeats the same information multiple times, such as mentioning Musk's previous jabs at Rawlinson, the unveiling of the Gravity SUV, and the drop in Lucid's share price over the past year. This shows a lack of originality and creativity in reporting and writing.
- The article does not provide any balanced or objective perspective on Lucid's business model, innovation, products, or potential market growth. It only focuses on negative aspects and criticism from Musk, who is known for his rivalry with other automakers and his own self-interest in promoting Tesla as the best electric vehicle company.
- The article uses emotional language and tone to appeal to the readers' feelings and prejudices, such as "jabs", "massively overpaying", "beware", etc. This creates a negative impression of Lucid and Rawlinson, without giving any factual or logical evidence to support its claims.
- The article does not disclose any potential conflicts of interest or biases that the author may have in writing this story, such as being affiliated with Tesla or having a personal vendetta against Rawlinson. This violates the ethical standards of journalism and undermines the credibility of the source.
- The article fails to provide any constructive feedback or suggestions for improvement for Lucid or Rawlinson, based on their performance or challenges. It only criticizes them without offering any solutions or alternatives. This shows a lack of professionalism and journalistic integrity in reporting and writing.

The article provides an interesting insight into the rivalry between two prominent EV CEOs - Elon Musk and Peter Rawlinson. While it may seem like a source of entertainment for some, it also highlights the differences in their leadership styles, strategies, and performance metrics. In this case, Musk is criticizing Lucid's decision to award its CEO with a $6 million cash bonus based on unveiling a new vehicle, while he links his own compensation to the performance of Tesla and SpaceX. This could imply that Rawlinson is more focused on creating hype and generating short-term gains than building a sustainable and competitive business in the long run. On the other hand, Musk may be signaling that he values innovation, efficiency, and customer satisfaction over flashy announcements and awards.

From an investment perspective, this article could provide some clues for potential Lucid shareholders to reconsider their position or look for alternative opportunities in the EV sector. For instance, they may want to compare Lucid's financial performance and growth prospects with those of Tesla, which is widely recognized as a leader and pioneer in the industry. They may also want to examine the demand and reception of Lucid's new Gravity SUV, as well as its competitive advantages over existing or upcoming EV models from other manufacturers. Additionally, they may want to pay attention to any further developments or comments from Musk or Rawlinson that could affect their respective companies or the industry as a whole.

### Final answer: Consider selling Lucid shares and investing in Tesla or other EV leaders with better performance metrics and growth prospects.