Connect with us

News

Chinese electric car company credits Tesla for being a “2.0” but aims to be a “3.0” with its own EV Supercar

Published

on

Former race car driver and co-president of Chinese electric car startup NextEV Martin Leach credits Tesla for disrupting the traditional car business, but says his company will go one better than Tesla.

In an exclusive interview conducted by International Business Times, Leach says Elon Musk and Tesla Motors have done a “brilliant job” and should be congratulated for creating products people want. He added, “I do think, though, that if normal car companies were the internet at 1.0, then Tesla is probably 2.0 and does some really good things like over-the-air software updates. But what we’re trying to be is 3.0.” Leach suggests his company will be a complete reboot of the car industry.

We have heard it all before from the likes of Faraday Future and Atieva who are all looking to disrupt the disruptors. So far, however, all any of them have to offer are vague promises, half-formed dreams, and a boatload of vaporware. Leach says NextEV is different. His company will unveil an electric supercar before the end of 2016, he claims.

“When we launch the car it will not be a concept. It’s a car, it will be engineered and validated and you will see it driving at some point shortly after the introduction. Certain lucky people will be able to drive it.” He adds it will be a “car which will be able to hold its own against the best of today’s competition. We want it to show what we can do. For sure, it will have a few surprises. It will not just be another cookie-cutter supercar.”

Advertisement

After that, Leach says NextEV will “do things that help people’s automotive lifestyles.” That seems to include an entirely new business model. “We do want people to own their cars, but we want to make it fun again. We want to take out the pain points that people complain to us about, about the ownership experience today. Not just electric vehicles, but generally.” That could include a subscription format, which would allow people to drive different cars at different times, according to their needs.

When asked about autonomous driving technology as part of daily life, Leach says “It can solve a lot of problems that we have today with society…[but] we want to support our people with a drivable lifestyle. A lot of people still want to drive their cars. It’s not all of one thing at the expense of the other; people still want to drive cars and have fun with that.”

Finally, Leach says, “Our strategy is quite different to Faraday Future because as you get to understand NextEV better you will begin to realize we are very much a value driven organisation. We’re not really a car company.”

Perhaps. We have heard similar statements from any number of startups who seem to think that putting an electric motor in a chassis is all that’s required to make automotive history. As Elon Musk and Tesla have found out, producing cars successfully is not for the faint of heart. Leach talks a good game but it remains to be seen if there is substance to his claims.

Advertisement

 

"I write about technology and the coming zero emissions revolution."

Advertisement
Comments

Lifestyle

NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story

The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.

Published

on

By

The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.

Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot

Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.

The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.

The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.

The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Lucid denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

Advertisement

Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”

Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”

Napoli said:

“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.

Advertisement

As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.

We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.

My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.

I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”

Advertisement

It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.

Advertisement

Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.

Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.

The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.

One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.

These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.

To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.

At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.

Advertisement

Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line

By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.

The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.

Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

Advertisement

It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.

The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.

In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.

Advertisement
Continue Reading