Investor's Corner
Big Oil fights back against electric vehicle revolution, “EVs are not the silver bullet everyone is looking for”
The purveyors of old technologies have always done what they could to impede the adoption of new ones, not only by pointing out the drawbacks of the new products, but also by making their old products better. In the last days of the Age of Sail, shipbuilders crafted super-fast clipper ships, which shared the seas with steamships for many years. Typewriters steadily added high-tech features, evolving into stand-alone word processors before they were superseded by computers.
However, never in history has there been an industry as profitable, powerful and all-pervasive as the oil industry – an industry whose lifeblood is a soon-to-be-obsolete technology. Big Oil, supported by its allies in the auto industry and numerous national governments, is fighting the nascent electromobility revolution on several fronts. Its decades-long campaign to discredit the science of climate change, and its financial support of backwards-looking political figures, are well known. Now that EVs are emerging as an existential threat, industry players are also working to sow doubts about their viability in the public mind – the media churns out “EVs are a bust” articles on a daily basis, often employing quotes helpfully provided by auto industry trade groups and oil-friendly think tanks.
On a somewhat more constructive front, oil producers and automakers are working together to make legacy vehicles ever more fuel-efficient, hoping to delay demand for electric alternatives.
Oil giants including Exxon, BP and Shell are working with automakers such as Ford and Fiat Chrysler to create a new generation of super-slick engine lubricants in a quest to squeeze even more efficiency out of traditional engines. “It’s really important that we are able to squeeze the lemon,” Shell VP Andrew Hepher told the Wall Street Journal. “The combustion engine has still got a long way to run…Car makers are very, very heavily motivated to improve the economy of their fleet.” BP’s CEO Bob Dudley adds, “EVs are not the silver bullet everyone is looking for.”
Governments of petroleum-producing countries are also getting proactive about prolonging the reign of the ICE. The Persian Gulf state of Qatar, which has the world’s third-largest reserves of oil and natural gas, acquired 17 percent of Volkswagen’s voting rights in 2009, becoming the third-biggest investor in VW. “We are really committed to VW,” said VW supervisory board member Hessa Al Jaber. “They are taking steps to mitigate any future risks on emissions.”
A recent article in the Detroit Free Press reports that the Saudi national oil company, Aramco, came to the Detroit auto show for the first time ever this year, to spread the word about its cutting-edge research to improve legacy gas engines.
Above: Aramco cranks up the PR machine with a booth at the Detroit Auto Show (Youtube: aramcoservices)
“In an era of climate change concerns, battery electric vehicles have become a symbol of innovation, promising to disrupt the automotive industry,” said Ahmad Al Khowaiter, Aramco’s Chief Technology Officer. “Yet hidden in plain sight are some of the most disruptive technologies the industry has ever seen; and they happen to be new and improved internal combustion engines.”
“Ironically, as countries announce plans to phase out gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles in favor of battery electric vehicles, new fuels and engine designs are making internal combustion engines greener than ever, and far more efficient,” Al Khowaiter said.
Aramco has invested hundreds of millions in global R&D – it is the third-largest holder of oil industry patents, behind Exxon and Chevron. It has research facilities all over the world, including in Detroit and Houston, and works with researchers at Stanford, MIT and the University of Michigan.
“Public policy should be technology-agnostic,” Al Khowaiter said. “Neither the battery electric vehicle nor the internal combustion engine is the perfect solution in all scenarios; both are needed for a sustainable and affordable mobility future.”
Donald Runkle, a mechanical engineer who ran product engineering at GM, told the Free Press that fuel economy is increasing every day. “The combustion engine is not going away in the foreseeable future, not for 15 or 20 or 30 years. It has proven, and continues to prove, to be the low-cost approach to moving things. Yes, there will be electrification, adding batteries and all that. It just improves the overall efficiency of the internal combustion engine.”
Obviously, the oil and electricity camps disagree about the timeline for electrification. However, all seem to agree that any technology that reduces emissions is a good thing. Don Anair, Research Director for the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Clean Vehicles Program, acknowledged the conflicting/complementary goals. “We need an 80% or more reduction in oil use,” he told the Free Press. “No matter how you look at it, to address climate change, we can’t continue to power our transportation system with oil. We need to continue to improve emissions from conventional vehicles while we accelerate the transition toward electric vehicles powered by clean energy.”
===
Note: Article originally published on evannex.com by Charles Morris
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s amended S-1 is sparking a major Tesla merger conversation
A single line in SpaceX’s amended S-1 just sent Tesla stock down 5% in one day.
A single line buried in SpaceX’s amended S-1 filing is doing more to move Tesla’s stock price than anything Tesla itself has announced in months. The clause, disclosed as SpaceX prepares for what could be the largest IPO in Wall Street history, states that the company “may issue a significant amount of equity in connection with future transactions.” While this may be seen as boilerplate language in S-1 filings, the historical ties between SpaceX and Tesla, and with Elon Musk reportedly discussing a possible merger with close colleagues, investors are interpreting it as something closer to a signal.
The concern among institutional investors like Gary Black, managing director of The Future Fund, pointed directly to the amended filing on X, saying it “strongly suggests more SPCX equity will be issued,” which could potentially be used to acquire Tesla. He estimated such a deal could be 28% dilutive to Tesla shareholders since SpaceX would likely command a significantly higher valuation multiple. Black added that institutional investors he knows hate the idea of a combination because they prefer pure plays over conglomerates, which he said “nearly always gravitate to the lowest common multiple.”
The Tesla and SpaceX merger everyone is talking about is quietly building
The bull case runs the math differently. Tesla influencer and retail shareholder advocate AleXandra Merz pushed back on what she called a widespread misunderstanding of how merger-of-equals deals actually work. Rather than simply splitting the difference between two market caps, a merger exchange ratio is negotiated based on relative fair market values, meaning the lower valued company typically sees its stock reprice upward toward the deal value.
Under her model, SpaceX enters at a $2.5 trillion valuation and Tesla at $1.6 trillion, producing a combined entity worth $4.1 trillion split evenly between both shareholder groups. That implies Tesla’s side of the deal would be valued at $2.05 trillion, a gain of roughly $450 billion from its current market cap. She cited Dow-DuPont and CBS-Viacom as historical examples of how markets reprice both companies toward the announced exchange ratio after a deal is unveiled.
What does a Merger of Equals mean to Elon’s compensation packages?
Well, it changes everything.
Enjoy https://t.co/uekCldyITw pic.twitter.com/kolq1C9qTu
— AleXandra Merz 🇺🇲 (@TeslaBoomerMama) June 1, 2026
The SpaceX S-1 amendments also revealed just how much financial infrastructure already binds the two companies together. As Teslarati has reported, SpaceX purchased $697 million in Tesla Megapacks, $131 million in Cybertrucks, and the two companies have shared supply chain resources, and semiconductor fabrication plans since well before any merger conversation became public. A retail poll by Tesla influencer Sawyer Merritt is finding that 36% of respondents do not plan to buy SpaceX shares at IPO and 15.3% saying their decision depends on the valuation.
Do you plan on buying @SpaceX stock at its IPO?
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 1, 2026
Whether the merger happens or not, the amended filing is seemingly moving markets and sharpened a debate that is no longer theoretical. SpaceX is weeks away from trading publicly, and Tesla shareholders are now watching every word of every filing for clues about what Musk plans to do next.
Elon Musk has firmly denied recent media reports suggesting that SpaceX has reduced its target valuation for an upcoming initial public offering.
The denial came directly from the SpaceX and Tesla frontman on his social media platform X, where he responded with a single word, “False,” to a post from ZeroHedge that cited Bloomberg sources.
This swift rebuttal underscores Musk’s ongoing effort to manage speculation surrounding one of the most anticipated market debuts in recent history.
False
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 29, 2026
According to the disputed reports, SpaceX had lowered its IPO valuation goal to at least $1.8 trillion from previous ambitions exceeding $2 trillion.
The claims emerged amid growing anticipation for the company’s confidential S-1 filing, which positions it for a potential public listing as early as June.
Some had pointed to strong revenue growth, particularly from the Starlink satellite internet service, which contributed heavily to the firm’s 2025 figures of $18.7 billion. Yet challenges persist in other areas, including substantial investments and losses tied to ambitious projects like Starship development and artificial intelligence initiatives, which plan to make life multiplanetary eventually.
Musk’s response highlights a pattern in which he actively counters what he views as inaccurate portrayals of his companies’ trajectories.
SpaceX, already valued privately at extraordinary levels, stands as a cornerstone of Musk’s empire alongside Tesla and xAI. The entrepreneur has long emphasized the transformative potential of reusable rockets and global broadband access, factors that fuel investor enthusiasm despite operational hurdles.
By rejecting the valuation downgrade narrative, Musk signals confidence in SpaceX’s fundamentals and its readiness for public markets on terms favorable to its long-term vision. People have been waiting a very long time to invest in SpaceX, and the valuation, as well as the introductory share price, is not going to need adjusting.
They’ll have plenty of suitors.
This episode reflects broader dynamics in the technology sector, where rumors often swirl around high-profile entities. Musk’s direct engagement with media narratives serves to maintain transparency and control the narrative around his ventures.
As SpaceX prepares for greater scrutiny in public markets, the founder’s denial reinforces optimism about its prospects. Supporters argue that the company’s innovative edge positions it for enduring success, far beyond short-term valuation debates. With the denial now public, attention turns to forthcoming regulatory filings that could provide clearer insights into SpaceX’s strategy and financial health.
The coming weeks promise to reveal more about how SpaceX will transition into a publicly traded powerhouse.
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.
Tesla improves Dashcam playback with awesome addition
Tesla Full Self-Driving attempts 150-mile stress test: the good and the bad
