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.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
