News
The ‘Elon Musk Method’ explains Tesla’s runaway success in the EV sector
Over his 16-year tenure at Tesla, Elon Musk went from knowing very little about the automotive business to being the CEO of the world’s most valuable carmaker by market cap. The journey towards Tesla’s current place in the electric vehicle sector, together with the numerous small milestones that the company has achieved over the years, is partly due to Musk’s style. Without the “Elon Musk Method,” Tesla’s successes would likely have been not as notable, and most certainly not as radical.
As noted in a Reuters article, Elon Musk’s record has shown that beyond the rockstar bravado that he displays on social media platforms like Twitter at times, the Tesla CEO is a quick learner who is smart and strategic enough to forge alliances with companies that had tech that Tesla lacked. Musk would then follow this up by hiring the smartest people available in the industry, before powering through boundaries that limited companies that are more risk-averse.
Under Musk’s leadership, Tesla flourished as a vertically-integrated electric car maker. From computers to car seats and now to battery cells, Musk is intent on making Tesla more and more independent. Speaking with the news agency, a former senior executive at Tesla noted that Musk is consistently set on pursuing improvements that would make something better, faster, and cheaper. “Elon doesn’t want any part of his business to be dependent on someone else. And for better or worse – sometimes better, sometimes worse – he thinks he can do it better, faster and cheaper,” the executive said.
According to people familiar with Tesla’s strategy in its early days, Musk has always been looking to learn more about the auto industry. He accomplishes this through several means such as strategic partnerships and aggressive talent recruitment. Back then, the goal of Tesla was reportedly to create a digital version of Ford’s iron-ore-to-Model-A production system, which was developed in the late 1920s. Former Tesla supply chain executive Tom Wessner noted that during these times, “Elon thought he could improve on everything the suppliers did – everything. He wanted to make everything.”
Among these components, of course, were the battery cells that are used for Tesla’s electric cars. Musk’s subordinates have reportedly argued against the idea of developing proprietary battery cells, but the CEO has been adamant about his goal. A former Tesla veteran who spoke to Reuters added that such a reaction from Musk is well within character. “Tell him ‘No’ and then he really wants to do it,” the veteran said. This is something that has happened in the past, as Musk was reportedly looking into battery cell manufacturing since 2011, well before going into a close partnership with Panasonic in 2013.
Tesla’s relationship with Panasonic could be described as a roller coaster ride. Tesla’s demands during the Model 3 ramp appeared to have strained the capabilities of its Japanese partner, and last year, reports emerged alleging that the two companies were growing apart. Yet even with the upcoming debut of Tesla’s Roadrunner cells, Panasonic maintains that it has a strong relationship with Tesla. “There has been no change in our relationship with Tesla. Our relationship, both past and present has been sound. Panasonic is not a supplier to Tesla; we are partners. There’s no doubt our partnership will continue to innovate and contribute to the betterment of society,” a Panasonic spokesperson stated.
It appears that Tesla’s long partnership with Panasonic is part of the building blocks of the Roadrunner project. True to form, Musk likely used the knowledge he learned from the veteran Japanese firm to help create an in-house battery cell production line that could be perfectly designed for Tesla’s electric vehicles and energy products. This, in a way, echoes much of Tesla’s development alliance with Daimler in the past. Daimler was an early investor in Tesla, and during the time, Musk reportedly became very interested in sensors that could help keep cars within lane lines. As noted by a senior Daimler engineer, the Tesla Model S lacked the necessary cameras and driver-assistance sensors to match the flagship features of the Mercedes-Benz S-Class then. Musk and the Tesla team then went to work, and the result was history.
“He learned about that and took it a step further. We asked our engineers to shoot for the moon. He went straight for Mars,” the Daimler executive said.
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
