News
Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos: The Rivalry of the Century (that we are all benefitting from)
Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos have shared an extremely public rivalry throughout the past few years, aiming to one-up each other in space exploration and self-driving cars. The two men, who own the top two positions on Forbes’ Billionaires List, are chomping at the bit to get ahead of one another, and the competition that lies within the Tesla and Amazon CEOs gives the people of Earth all something to benefit from: longevity and innovation.
The two most powerful men in the world in their respective sectors, Bezos being at the helm of the most dominating company in the e-commerce world, and Musk surging forward the acceleration to sustainable energy with Tesla. There is a lot of money, a lot of power, and a lot of reputation at stake, and the rivalry between the two men is mostly comprised of healthy competition to out-do the other. However, the two men share a similarity in their strategy to help humankind move forward, and it lies within their aerospace companies: Musk’s SpaceX and Bezos’ Blue Origin. But it isn’t a competition that has always been healthy and in good spirits. It has often resulted in name-calling and Twitter contradictions, showing that even the two richest men in the world can share a very public rivalry while benefitting the rest of us.
In past years, Musk has been the more successful entrepreneur in the space exploration and self-driving vehicle front, of course. His two companies being Tesla, the largest car company in the world in terms of market cap, and SpaceX, which has been launching satellites for global internet service with Starlink and sending astronauts to the International Space Station on several missions. It is no secret that Musk has an astounding lead over Bezos in those sectors, and he doesn’t have any intention of selling consumer goods, even though he would encourage competition in that market after calling Amazon a monopoly.
Time to break up Amazon. Monopolies are wrong!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 4, 2020
But Musk’s lead must leave a small portion of Bezos feeling left out. Musk undoubtedly receives more recognition and more kudos for his work, and he should. He’s made legacy automakers change their strategies moving forward, forcing them to work on all-electric powertrains, and SpaceX has made the possibility of human space travel possible again. Bezos, being the extremely successful person that he is, must thrive off of competition and the work that it takes to make things more efficient and better than anyone else.
In the early 2000s, both Musk and Bezos were struggling entrepreneurs who worked to grow their entities into the world’s biggest and most successful companies. Bezos, who once held an office in a shady part of Seattle above a Chinese food restaurant, had a desk that wasn’t level, and an uneven canvas on the wall that said “amazon.com” in blue spraypaint. He drove a run-of-the-mill sedan and shared an incredible joy for his work, which was then just an online bookstore.
Jeff Bezos reveals Rivian’s plans to produce electric vans for Amazon
Meanwhile, Musk was fresh out of his sizeable sale of PayPal. He reinvested his money into Tesla, and he was sleeping on the floor of his office building. Showering at the YMCA in Los Angeles, Musk and his brother Kimbal were also subjected to startup life’s genuine struggle: long hours, less-than-luxurious living conditions, and minimal pay.
Fast forward a few years, and the two men are among the most powerful people on Earth thanks to their influence on their respective sectors. But what is really driving things forward between the two men is the competition they share with one another. The constant need to outperform the other person is evident, and the two men’s based opinions constantly encourage the other one to work a little harder.
In the end, the personal rivalry has benefitted us all. SpaceX and Blue Origin are both doing things to accelerate the possibility of normalized space travel. Amazon is making consumer goods easy to obtain, and Tesla is making electric cars fun, fast, and affordable.
Elon Musk
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.
ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.
The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.
Additionally, ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.
The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.
Elon Musk
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.
The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.
Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):
“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”
Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.
Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:
“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”
This is before supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 19, 2026
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges
Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.
Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.
Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.
Elon Musk
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.
NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.
Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.
Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.
The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.
The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.
Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.
The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
