It's unfortunate that appearances are always so important, but it's definitely ingrained deeply into reality. Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect
Since I saw his presentation on Starship, I have started considering the “polish” of a presentation, and the “skill” of public speaking, to be a negative signal (the speaker wants us to focus on the form, instead of on the content).
Musk often just says what comes to mind. He clearly doesn't often rehearse or sometimes even prepare. He comes across as human and relatable. Not just some dude in a suit that has a team of secretaries of lawyers and hasn't had to flush his own toilet in 20 years.
Both Gates and Zuck had substantial backing from their parents from the start.
Bill Gates was given a huge gift horse via nepotism, in the IBM DOS contract.
Zuck isn't a bad looking fellow.
"According to Fire in the Valley, he also reportedly told Gates that when IBM CEO John Opel heard Microsoft would get the contract, he said "Oh is that Mary Gates' boy's company?" since Opel and Bill Gates' mother served together on the national board of the United Way."
The way it's worded makes it sound like they already had the deal aside from any nepotism, but perhaps the CEO's approval sealed it / ensured terms were kept fair.
Secondly, I think Elon's role is a lot more outward-facing than Bezos's role, and that would probably have been the case even if Bezos was more attractive, so I doubt the procedures would have had as much an effect on Bezos's success as they may have on Musk's.
But he would be hated a lot less, IMO.
Saying that is normative, not descriptive, especially if you recognize the phenomenon is real.
Anyway, what is it unfortunate?
Hackers hack. Finding an investment with a 1,000x ROI is a great hack.
Additionally I wonder what bald Elon looks like. Jeff Bezos put on some muscle and looks a lot better afterwards despite losing his hair
He was also 6'2".