News
Elon Musk’s Boring Company gets stern dismissal from tunneling veteran: ‘Something like that doesn’t work’
Elon Musk’s companies have a pretty strong tendency to attract their own fair share of critics, including those in notable positions in their respective industries. This was the case with Tesla and its electric vehicles, and the same was true with SpaceX and its reusable orbital-class rockets. The Boring Company, another one of Elon Musk’s ventures, is now gathering its own skeptics as well, with Martin Herrenknecht, the founder of Herrenknecht AG, one of the world’s premier tunnel boring machine (TBM) makers, recently expressing his doubts about the tunneling startup.
German business publication Manager Magazin recently interviewed Herrenknecht. When asked about Elon Musk’s tunneling aspirations with The Boring Company, the Herrenknecht AG founder was dismissive, noting that he believes the Tesla and SpaceX CEO is overrated, at least when it comes to tunnel construction. The executive added that his company’s TBMs are far more advanced than the Boring Company’s tunneling machines today.
“For my industry, I see Musk above all as a skillful whisker. He claims that he can build tunnels faster and cheaper than others and is causing a stir. On his reference project in Las Vegas, Musk drilled 20 meters in one week. We can do the same route in one day,” he said. (Despite Herrenknecht’s statement, Teslarati has been informed that The Boring Company has already managed to dig 40 meters in a 24-hour period using its first machine, Godot.)
Explaining further, Herrenknecht noted that it would be very challenging for Elon Musk to become competent in the tunneling industry. The executive noted that he believes The Boring Company will not reach the same heights as Musk’s other ventures like Tesla and SpaceX in the next ten years or so due to the complexity of the tunneling segment. “I think the degree of difficulty and complexity in tunneling are higher,” Herrenknecht remarked.
Interestingly enough, the executive also shared a personal anecdote about Elon Musk himself. As per Herrenknecht, Musk actually approached Herrenknecht AG for the potential purchase of a tunnel boring machine for The Boring Company in the past. However, during the negotiations, Elon Musk reportedly exhibited “strange business behavior,” leaving the room for long periods and suggesting numerous ideas. Musk was also adamant in reducing the price of TBMs from $10 million to just $2 million.
“It was pretty chaotic because he left the room several times for a long time and kept coming up with different ideas… Something like that doesn’t work,” Herrenknecht said.
Needless to say, The Boring Company did not purchase a TBM from Herrenknecht AG. The tunneling startup did manage to purchase its tunneling machines from another company, the first of which was used to complete a test tunnel in Hawthorne, CA. Elon Musk has also announced that The Boring Company is working on developing an all-electric TBM called Prufrock, which has the potential to dig tunnels significantly faster than the industry’s best today.
Elon Musk’s ill-fated meeting with Herrenknecht AG echoes some elements of the Tesla CEO’s meeting with the Russians in 2001. Back then, Musk was aiming to purchase intercontinental ballistic missiles that could be used to launch some payloads to space. The discussions ultimately broke down because of the missiles’ cost, and on the trip back to the United States, Musk figured that building rockets would be feasible. SpaceX was founded the year later, and the rest is history.
It remains to be seen if The Boring Company would be the disruptor that Elon Musk plans it to be. That being said, skeptics of the tunneling startup today seem to be following the same patterns as Tesla and SpaceX’s critics, most of whom have been proven wrong over the years. If any, Herrenknecht’s references to the Tesla CEO’s aggressive cost-cutting demands and out-of-the-box ideas are classic Elon Musk. And just like critics before him, the executive reacted adversely to the CEO.
It would then be interesting to see if The Boring Company, at least in the coming years, could rise enough to challenge the titans of the TBM industry, just like its fellow Elon Musk-led companies Tesla and SpaceX. At least for now, history seems to favor Elon Musk and his bold companies, all of which are noted and respected for their unorthodox nature and aggressive strategies.
Don’t hesitate to contact us for news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk explains why Tesla’s 4680 battery breakthrough is a big deal
Tesla confirmed in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter that it is now producing 4680 cells whose anode and cathode were produced during the dry electrode process.
Tesla’s breakthroughs with its 4680 battery cell program mark a significant milestone for the electric vehicle maker. This was, at least, as per Elon Musk in a recent post on social media platform X.
Tesla confirmed in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter that it is now producing 4680 cells whose anode and cathode were produced during the dry electrode process.
Why dry-electrode matters
In a post on X, Elon Musk stated that making the dry-electrode process work at scale was “incredibly difficult,” calling it a major achievement for Tesla’s engineering, production, and supply chain teams, as well as its partner suppliers. He also shared his praise for the Tesla team for overcoming such a difficult task.
“Making the dry electrode process work at scale, which is a major breakthrough in lithium battery production technology, was incredibly difficult. Congratulations to the @Tesla engineering, production and supply chain teams and our strategic partner suppliers for this excellent achievement!” Musk wrote in his post.
Tesla’s official X account expanded on Musk’s remarks, stating that dry-electrode manufacturing “cuts cost, energy use & factory complexity while dramatically increasing scalability.” Bonne Eggleston, Tesla’s Vice President of 4680 batteries, also stated that “Getting dry electrode technology to scale is just the beginning.”
Tesla’s 4680 battery program
Tesla first introduced the dry-electrode concept at Battery Day in 2020, positioning it as a way to eliminate solvent-based electrode drying, shrink factory footprints, and lower capital expenditures. While Tesla has produced 4680 cells for some time, the dry cathode portion of the process proved far more difficult to industrialize than expected.
Together with its confirmation that it is producing 4680 cells in Austin with both electrodes manufactured using the dry process, Tesla has also stated that it has begun producing Model Y vehicles with 4680 battery packs. As per Tesla, this strategy was adopted as a safety layer against trade barriers and tariff risks.
“We have begun to produce battery packs for certain Model Ys with our 4680 cells, unlocking an additional vector of supply to help navigate increasingly complex supply chain challenges caused by trade barriers and tariff risks,” Tesla wrote in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter.
News
Even Tesla China is feeling the Optimus V3 fever
As per Tesla China, Optimus V3 is “about to be unveiled.”
Even Tesla China seems to have caught the Optimus V3 fever, with the electric vehicle maker teasing the impending arrival of the humanoid robot on its official Weibo account.
As per Tesla China, Optimus V3 is “about to be unveiled.”
Tesla China hypes up Optimus V3
Tesla China noted on its Weibo post that Optimus V3 is redesigned from first principles and is capable of learning new tasks by observing human behavior. The company has stated that it is targeting annual production capacity of up to one million humanoid robots once manufacturing scales.
During the Q4 and FY 2025 earnings call, CEO Elon Musk stated that Tesla will wind down Model S and Model X production to free up factory space for the pilot production line of Optimus V3.
Musk later noted that Giga Texas should have a significantly larger Optimus line, though that will produce Optimus V4. He also made it a point to set expectations with Optimus’ production ramp, stating that the “normal S curve of manufacturing ramp will be longer for Optimus.”
Tesla China’s potential role
Tesla’s decision to announce the Optimus update on Weibo highlights the importance of the humanoid robot in the company’s global operations. Giga Shanghai is already Tesla’s largest manufacturing hub by volume, and Musk has repeatedly described China’s manufacturers as Tesla’s most legitimate competitors.
While Tesla has not confirmed where Optimus V3 will be produced or deployed first, the scale and efficiency of Gigafactory Shanghai make it a plausible candidate for future humanoid robot manufacturing or in-factory deployment. Musk has also suggested that Optimus could become available for public purchase as early as 2027, as noted in a CNEV Post report.
“It’s going to be a very capable robot. I think long-term Optimus will have a very significant impact on the US GDP. It will actually move the needle on US GDP significantly. In conclusion, there are still many who doubt our ambitions for creating amazing abundance. We are confident it can be done, and we are making the right moves technologically to ensure that it does,” Musk said during the earnings call.
Elon Musk
Tesla director pay lawsuit sees lawyer fees slashed by $100 million
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
The Delaware Supreme Court has cut more than $100 million from a legal fee award tied to a shareholder lawsuit challenging compensation paid to Tesla directors between 2017 and 2020.
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
Delaware Supreme Court trims legal fees
As noted in a Bloomberg Law report, the case targeted pay granted to Tesla directors, including CEO Elon Musk, Oracle founder Larry Ellison, Kimbal Musk, and Rupert Murdoch. The Delaware Chancery Court had awarded $176 million to the plaintiffs. Tesla’s board must also return stock options and forego years worth of pay.
As per Chief Justice Collins J. Seitz Jr. in an opinion for the Delaware Supreme Court’s full five-member panel, however, the decision of the Delaware Chancery Court to award $176 million to a pension fund’s law firm “erred by including in its financial benefit analysis the intrinsic value” of options being returned by Tesla’s board.
The justices then reduced the fee award from $176 million to $70.9 million. “As we measure it, $71 million reflects a reasonable fee for counsel’s efforts and does not result in a windfall,” Chief Justice Seitz wrote.
Other settlement terms still intact
The Supreme Court upheld the settlement itself, which requires Tesla’s board to return stock and options valued at up to $735 million and to forgo three years of additional compensation worth about $184 million.
Tesla argued during oral arguments that a fee award closer to $70 million would be appropriate. Interestingly enough, back in October, Justice Karen L. Valihura noted that the $176 award was $60 million more than the Delaware judiciary’s budget from the previous year. This was quite interesting as the case was “settled midstream.”
The lawsuit was brought by a pension fund on behalf of Tesla shareholders and focused exclusively on director pay during the 2017–2020 period. The case is separate from other high-profile compensation disputes involving Elon Musk.
Elon Musk explains why Tesla’s 4680 battery breakthrough is a big deal
Even Tesla China is feeling the Optimus V3 fever
