Investor's Corner
Tesla Model 3 delays due to battery module assembly line
Tesla has confirmed that the source of its Model 3 production bottleneck is the battery module assembly line at its $5 billion Gigafactory 1 facility in Sparks, Nevada. The Silicon Valley electric car maker noted in its third quarter 2017 earnings report that the manufacturing process for Model 3’s battery modules – processes that were “done by manufacturing systems suppliers” – were taken over and “significantly redesigned” by Tesla, thus causing the delays.
“To date, our primary production constraint has been in the battery module assembly line at Gigafactory 1, where cells are packaged into modules.” reads the statement from Tesla in its update letter. Furthermore, Tesla says engineering talent at the company have been redirected to fine-tune the automated processes involved with battery module production, noting that these were key elements of which were “done by manufacturing systems suppliers”. This is one of the primary reasons why only 260 Model 3 vehicles have been produced at the end of the third-quarter. Tesla did not provide any guidance on how this will translate into end of year Model 3 production numbers, but did note that throughput is expected to increase substantially in November. The company also noted that Model 3 volume production of 5,000 vehicles per week is expected late in the first quarter of 2018, delayed three months from CEO Elon Musk’s original end of year guidance.
Like the Model S and Model X which uses a low-mount battery pack that’s made up of individual lithium-ion cells that are packed into battery modules, Model 3 utilizes the same design for its skateboard-style battery pack but with fewer modules. Tesla’s mass market-intent vehicle uses a larger 2170 form factor cylindrical cell versus Model S and X that utilize a 18650 lithium-ion cell that resembles a traditional AA battery. Taking a look at a Tesla battery pack teardown video that we shared in the past, we can see that Tesla arranges Model S and X battery cells into 16 modules that are inserted into an aluminum battery case. Model 3 on the other hand utilizes only 4 modules, thereby arranging more battery cells into larger compartments.
Model 3 production constraint is related to the automated processes that’s responsible for manufacturing two of the four Model 3 battery modules. “Four modules are packaged into an aluminum case to form a Model 3 battery pack. The combined complexity of module design and its automated manufacturing process has taken this line longer to ramp than expected. The biggest challenge is that the first two zones of a four zone process, key elements of which were done by manufacturing systems suppliers, had to be taken over and significantly redesigned by Tesla.” said Tesla in its update letter.
Musk added additional color during the Q&A call with analysts following the update letter, citing challenges faced by the programs that operate the robots in Model 3’s battery assembly line. “We had to rewrite all of the software, from scratch. We managed to write 20 to 30 man-years of software in 4 weeks.” said Musk in explaining the level of reprogramming needed on the factory floor.
Both Musk and CTO JB Straubel reasserted that Model 3’s design is vastly less complex than Model S and X, and built with high volume production in mind. “The initial phase of manufacturing in any new vehicle is always challenging, and the Model 3 production ramp is no exception,” said Tesla.
Because the production process for Model 3 is highly automated, any misconfiguration or general issue around a specific machine in the process becomes amplified across all other machines that rely on it. There’s less tolerance for errors in an automated process, explained Musk. Once Tesla fixes many of the mechanical and electrical issues that it’s currently facing, production ramp up will scale exponentially. Conversely, Model S and Model X production was far less automated, which served as a double edged sword: Tesla was able to quickly address issues in the production process by increasing the number of human labor hours involved, but at the expense of reaching a finite production level.
Tesla Model 3 production is expected to reach 5,000 units per week in the first quarter of 2018, but achieving its originally planned 10,000 units produced per week “sometime in 2018” still remains unclear.
Elon Musk
The Tesla and SpaceX merger everyone is talking about is quietly building
Tesla and SpaceX may be closer to merging than Wall Street or either company is admitting.
Elon Musk has reportedly discussed merging Tesla and SpaceX with people close to him, according to CNBC, which cited sources familiar with the conversation. Tesla employees have long expected such a transaction and the topic is openly discussed internally, according to internal sources. With SpaceX is days away from kicking off its Wall Street roadshow for what could be the largest IPO in market history, this would be the first time the company will have public market currency to execute a stock-for-stock deal with Tesla.
The financial logic for a merger would make sense. A combined SpaceX and Tesla would create a conglomerate spanning rockets, satellites, electric vehicles, AI infrastructure, and energy storage valued at roughly $3.35 trillion to $3.6 trillion based on SpaceX’s IPO target range and Tesla’s current market capitalization. The two companies are already more intertwined than most people realize. SpaceX bought $697 million worth of Tesla Megapack systems for xAI data centers and $131 million worth of Cybertrucks. Tesla invested $2 billion in xAI, which subsequently merged with SpaceX. Past transactions also include Tesla selling solar equipment and parts to SpaceX, and SpaceX helping with Cybertruck materials.
Will Tesla join the fold? Predicting a triple merger with SpaceX and xAI
Musk himself signaled where this was heading in November 2025 when he posted on X, “My companies are, surprisingly in some ways, trending towards convergence.” Tesla and SpaceX announced a joint semiconductor fabrication facility in Austin called Terafab on the Gigafactory Texas campus, covering two advanced chip factories, with one serving Tesla’s AI needs for vehicles and Optimus robots, the other targeting space-based data centers under SpaceX’s infrastructure vision.
Wedbush analyst Dan Ives places the probability of a merger at 80% to 90% with a target completion in the first half of 2027. The mechanics of a deal became possible the moment SpaceX filed its S-1. Legal experts said a merger likely would not spark antitrust issues but would raise concerns among shareholders in each company, with questions around which company would be the parent, how a stock swap would take place, and who determines the appropriate price. Musk holds about 20% of Tesla’s equity but controls 85.1% of SpaceX’s voting power through a super-voting share class, meaning he would largely be negotiating the terms with himself.
Not everyone is convinced the timing is imminent. Traders on Kalshi place only 33% odds that a merger will happen before May 2027. The more immediate concern for Tesla shareholders is whether the SpaceX IPO pulls capital and Musk’s attention away from Tesla before any merger consolidates the upside for both.
What is clear is that the structural groundwork is already being laid. The Terafab announcement, the xAI merger, the shared supply chain, the cross-company balance sheet transactions, and now the IPO all point in the same direction. Whether the merger follows in 2027 or later, the two companies are already operating more like divisions of a single entity than independent competitors.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just filed for the IPO everyone was waiting for
SpaceX filed its public S-1, revealing $18.7 billion in revenue and billions in losses.
SpaceX publicly filed its S-1 registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2026, making its financial details available to the public for the first time ahead of what could be the largest IPO in history.
An S-1 is the formal document a company must submit to the SEC before going public. It includes audited financials, risk factors, business descriptions, and how the company plans to use the money it raises. Companies are required to file one before selling shares to the public, and it must be published at least 15 days before the investor roadshow begins. SpaceX had already submitted a confidential draft to the SEC in April, which allowed regulators to review the filing privately before it went public.
The S-1 reveals that SpaceX generated $18.7 billion in consolidated revenue in 2025, driven largely by its Starlink satellite internet division, which posted $11.4 billion in revenue, growing nearly 50% year over year. Despite that growth, the company lost about $4.9 billion in 2025 and has burned through more than $37 billion since its founding.
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
A significant portion of those losses trace back to xAI, Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, which was recently merged into SpaceX. SpaceX directed roughly 60% of its capital spending in 2025 to its AI division, totaling around $20 billion, yet that division lost billions and grew revenue by only about 22%.
SpaceX plans to list its Class A common stock on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX, with Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America leading the offering. The dual-class share structure means going public will not meaningfully reduce Musk’s control, as Class B shares he holds carry 10 votes per share compared to one vote for public Class A shares.
The company is targeting a raise of around $75 billion at a valuation of roughly $1.75 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO ever. The investor roadshow is reportedly planned for June 5.
Elon Musk
Tesla ditches India after years of broken promises
Tesla has ditched its plans to build a factory in India after years of failed negotiations.
Tesla’s long-running effort to establish a manufacturing presence in India is officially over. India’s Minister of Heavy Industries H.D. Kumaraswamy confirmed on May 19, 2026 that Tesla has informed authorities it will not proceed with a manufacturing facility in the country.
Tesla first signaled serious interest in India around 2021, when it began hiring local staff and lobbying the Indian government for lower import tariffs. The ask was straightforward: reduce duties enough for Tesla to test the market with imported vehicles before committing capital to a local factory. India’s position was equally firm, with an ask of Tesla to commit to manufacturing first, then receive tariff relief. Neither side moved, and the talks quietly collapsed.
Tesla to open first India experience center in Mumbai on July 15
India had offered a policy that would reduce import duties from 110% down to 15% on EVs priced above $35,000, provided companies committed at least $500 million toward local manufacturing investment within three years. Tesla declined to participate. The tariff standoff was only part of the problem. Analysts pointed to significant gaps in India’s local supply chain, inadequate industrial infrastructure, and a mismatch between Tesla’s premium pricing and the purchasing power of India’s automotive market as additional factors that made the investment difficult to justify.
First signs of an unraveling relationship came in April 2024, when Musk abruptly cancelled a planned trip to India where he was set to meet Prime Minister Modi and announce Tesla’s market entry. By July 2024, Fortune reported that Tesla executives had stopped contacting Indian government officials entirely. The government at that point understood Tesla had capital constraints and no plans to invest.
The more fundamental issue is that Tesla’s existing factories are currently operating at approximately 60% capacity, making a commitment to building new manufacturing capacity in a new market difficult to defend to investors. Tesla will continue selling imported Model Y vehicles through its existing showrooms in Mumbai, Delhi, Gurugram, and Bengaluru, but local production is no longer part of the plan.