News
How Tesla’s Standard models will help deliveries despite price disappointment
“What a giant miss,” one person said.
“With all due respect, no way is this what y’all have been hyping for 6 quarters…” another one claimed.
“So…where are the affordable models?” another reply read.
When Tesla unveiled its Standard versions of the Model 3 and Model Y this week, reactions were mixed. Many liked the addition of two new models, but they were also concerned about the price.
“What a giant miss,” one person said.
“With all due respect, no way is this what y’all have been hyping for 6 quarters…” another one claimed.
“So…where are the affordable models?” another reply read.
Tesla launches two new affordable models with ‘Standard’ Model 3, Y offerings
There’s no arguing it: $36,990 and $39,990 for the Model 3 Standard and Model Y Standard were not what consumers had in mind.
But, despite Tesla getting its new offerings to a price that is not necessarily as low as many expected, the two cars still have a chance to assist with quarterly deliveries.
-
Here’s how:
First-time Tesla buyers will lean toward Standard models
Tesla owners have become accustomed to expecting all the bells and whistles in their cars. Heated seats, ventilated seats, acoustic glass, vegan leather, industry-leading performance, world-class range, and a glass roof are all expected by current or past owners.
But what about new owners?
New owners do not have these high expectations, so to many of those who have not sat in a Tesla or driven one before, they are going to be blown away by the minimalistic looks, capabilities, and features of the Standard models.
The Premium models will feel like the high-end offerings that other automakers also have for sale, except they’ll only be a few thousand dollars more than Tesla’s base models. With other companies, the price for these higher-end trims is $10,000 or more.
The more affordable Standard models will be there, but if buyers want the extra features, they’ll likely be able to justify the extra few thousand dollars.
Tesla’s Standard Models fall under the U.S. Average Transaction Price
Kelley Blue Book releases a new report each month showing the average transaction price (ATP) of all vehicles sold in the U.S. for that month.
-
The latest report, released on September 10 for the month of August, revealed an ATP of $49,077. This was up 0.5% from July ($48,841) and higher year over year by 2.6%.
Technically, Tesla’s new Standard models fall well under that ATP, meaning they technically do qualify as “affordable.” However, realistically speaking, affordable does not mean “under the national average.”
It means accessible for low-income families, single-parent households, and other groups. This would likely be under $30,000.
Déjà Vu with the Cybertruck Rear-Wheel-Drive
When Tesla offered the Cybertruck RWD, it stripped out many of the best features of the Cybertruck, such as the adjustable air suspension, powered tonneau cover, and interior materials, just to name a few.
It was $10,000 less than the Cybertruck AWD, but many people essentially viewed it as a way to push consumers toward the more expensive variants, since the discount was a better value than missing out on features.
Tesla released the Cybertruck RWD to make the AWD look like a deal
Something similar could happen with the Standard models. With it only being a few thousand dollars less than the Premium Model 3 and Model Y, some consumers will see it as a better option to go with the more expensive trim levels.
-
Even if they don’t, many car buyers will see it as a deal to grab the Standard versions.
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
-
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
-
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
-
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Elon Musk
Another Tesla SpaceX merger prediction by ARK Invest has Elon Musk talking
Elon Musk again denies a Tesla China split as new SpaceX merger speculation resurfaces quickly.
Elon Musk restated that Tesla has no plans to separate its China business from the rest of the company, responding to a new round of merger speculation from ARK Invest.
On the firm’s “Brainstorm” podcast, Cathie Wood’s team, including chief futurist Brett Winton and research director Nick Grous, argued a Tesla and SpaceX combination remains likely, with an announcement possible before the end of the year even if the deal itself would not close that quickly. Winton called Tesla’s Shanghai operations a “small ish wrinkle” for a merger rather than a real obstacle, since SpaceX’s national security work with the U.S. government sits uneasily next to Tesla’s manufacturing base in China.
Musk pushed back on the framing directly. “China is awesome. I strongly encourage people to visit,” he wrote on X. He also repeated language he first used in late July, when the Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla executives had been told to prepare for a possible spinoff, sale, or closure of the China business ahead of a SpaceX tie up. Musk called that report “absurdly fake news” at the time, adding that a separation had “never even come up in a discussion ever,” a line he echoed again this week.
The repeated denial has not settled the underlying question, because Shanghai’s role in Tesla’s business is exactly what makes a merger complicated. Gigafactory Shanghai still ships more than half of Tesla’s global deliveries and functions as the company’s main export hub for Europe and Asia. Teslarati previously reported on Musk’s initial denial, and the merger conversation itself has been building since SpaceX’s IPO gave it public shares to use as acquisition currency.
Wedbush’s Dan Ives has pegged the odds of a Tesla SpaceX merger at 80 to 90 percent by early 2027, and ARK’s prediction of a year end announcement adds another data point to that timeline, even as Musk keeps rejecting the specific mechanics reporters have described. Neither position rules out the other. Musk can deny a China spinoff was ever discussed while analysts still expect some form of combination to move forward, since ARK and Ives are both describing convergence at the corporate level, not necessarily the internal restructuring the Journal described in July.
For now, Tesla’s China business remains intact, and Musk’s comments this week make clear he has no interest in publicly walking that position back, no matter how often the merger question resurfaces.
-
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y
