News
Elon Musk says SpaceX could soon face bankruptcy – here’s why that’s unlikely
In a new leaked email, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says that the company could go bankrupt if, by the end of 2022, it can’t achieve Starship and Starlink milestones that are by all practical appearances out of reach.
The news – first broken by SpaceExplored – comes about a week after CNBC reported that Musk was “shaking up” SpaceX’s leadership by effectively firing its vice president of propulsion due to “a lack of progress” in the development of Starship’s Raptor engine. Now, apparently after taking his first good look ‘under the hood’ in a while, Musk says that “the Raptor production crisis is much worse than it seemed a few weeks ago.” Worse, the CEO has implied that if it “can’t get enough reliable Raptors made [by the end of 2022]…[SpaceX will] face a genuine risk of bankruptcy.”
The email raises both skepticism and several major questions.
First and foremost, can there be any truth to Musk’s claim that SpaceX could go bankrupt because of an unspecified “Raptor production crisis [and disaster]?” Put simply, not really. Musk’s argument is simple enough. According to his estimations, the first-generation (V1) Starlink satellite internet constellation is “financially weak by itself,” which has led SpaceX to develop a much larger, more advanced second-generation (V2) Starlink satellite and constellation that the company’s existing “Falcon [rockets have] neither the [payload] volume nor mass to orbit” to launch. To efficiently launch the Starlink V2 constellation, then, Musk says SpaceX needs Starship to be operational.
Up to that point, nothing in Musk’s email implies that a “Raptor production crisis” could pose any serious harm to SpaceX beyond annoying delays. More than two years ago, Musk believed that Raptor V1.0 already cost less than $1M to produce. As of 2021, SpaceX (again per Musk) is completing an average of one Raptor engine every two days and currently has 35 functional engines installed on Starship and Super Heavy booster prototypes in Boca Chica, Texas. Already, at a rate of one engine every 48 hours, SpaceX’s Raptor production capabilities are theoretically strong enough to fully outfit a significant Starship fleet.
Both stages of Starship are designed to be rapidly and fully reusable and absolutely need to be to efficiently and rapidly launch SpaceX’s Starlink V2 constellation. In theory, a production capacity of ~180 Raptors per year should allow SpaceX to outfit a fleet of three Super Heavies (99 engines) and 13 Starships (72 engines). Even if Super Heavy booster reuse is initially no faster than Falcon (~1 launch per month) and Starship reuse is no faster than Dragon (~3 launches per year), that fleet would be able to launch at least 36 times per years. Even if SpaceX’s former propulsion executives somehow pulled the wool over Musk’s eyes, tricking him into seeing engines that just weren’t there and hiding hundreds of millions of dollars in secret cost overruns from the company’s own accountants, an annual run rate of 100 Raptor engines at a cost of $5 million each would still be able to power a fleet of six reusable ships and two boosters capable of ~20 launches per year.
Musk says that SpaceX will only face the risk of bankruptcy if it “cannot achieve a Starship flight rate of at least once every two weeks next year” – equivalent to 26 launches annually. Again, being deceived for years would be a terrible look but nothing described above appears to have any chance of bankrupting SpaceX. However, the CEO also says that SpaceX “is spooling up” one or several factories to produce “several million” Starlink user terminals (dishes) per year in a process that “will consume massive capital [and assumes] that [Starlink V2 satellites] will be on orbit to handle the bandwidth demand.” He even goes as far as to say that those millions of terminals “will be useless otherwise.”
Once again, while what he describes is an undeniable hurdle for SpaceX, the company is making a choice to “consume massive capital” to “spool up” Starlink dish factories before the constellation capacity needed to take advantage of those dishes has been secured. SpaceX doesn’t need to make such a massive investment so quickly when it could instead split that money with Starship, ensure that Starship and Raptor and Starlink V2.0 satellites are ready or close to ready for routine launches, and then invest heavily in dish production.
For example, just this month, SpaceX raised almost $350M from investors that have a practically bottomless appetite for SpaceX investments. Combined, by the end of the year, SpaceX will have likely raised more than $2.3B in 2021 alone. Valued at more than $100 billion, the company could – as a last resort – feasibly raise double-digit billions in one fell swoop with an IPO. Put simply, the only way SpaceX could ever go bankrupt in the near term would be by consciously letting itself drown in a sea of life preservers.
This is not to say that SpaceX doesn’t have numerous massive challenges ahead of it, nor is it to say that its fundraising potential is truly limitless. Investors could eventually become disillusioned. It’s entirely possible that it will take SpaceX years longer than Musk expects to begin routine Starlink V2.0 launches with Starship. Environmental approvals alone could easily preclude more than five orbital Starship launches in 2022 and potentially prevent regular (i.e. biweekly) launches well into 2023. But the fact of the matter is that unless Elon Musk is telegraphing signs that the rest of the company’s finances are a house of cards, the odds of SpaceX actually going bankrupt anytime soon are vanishingly small. In reality, he’s likely just attempting to (for better or worse) instill some amount of fear and panic in SpaceX employees to encourage them to work more hours and take fewer days off.
Update: Musk has tweeted a brief public comment confirming that he believes bankruptcy is actually an unlikely – but not impossible – outcome for SpaceX.
If a severe global recession were to dry up capital availability / liquidity while SpaceX was losing billions on Starlink & Starship, then bankruptcy, while still unlikely, is not impossible.
GM & Chrysler went BK last recession.
“Only the paranoid survive.” – Grove— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 30, 2021
News
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions appeared to be dead in the water after a large amount of speculation late last year that the company would add the user interface seemed to cool down after several weeks of reports.
However, it appears that CarPlay might make its way to Tesla vehicles after all, as a recent report seems to indicate that it is still being worked on by software teams for the company.
The real question is whether it is truly needed or if it is just a want by so many owners that Tesla is listening and deciding to proceed with its development.
Back in November, Bloomberg reported that Tesla was in the process of testing Apple CarPlay within its vehicles, which was a major development considering the company had resisted adopting UIs outside of its own for many years.
Nearly one-third of car buyers considered the lack of CarPlay as a deal-breaker when buying their cars, a study from McKinsey & Co. outlined. This could be a driving decision in Tesla’s inability to abandon the development of CarPlay in its vehicles, especially as it lost a major advantage that appealed to consumers last year: the $7,500 EV tax credit.
Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit
Although we saw little to no movement on it since the November speculation, Tesla is now reportedly in the process of still developing the user interface. Mark Gurman, a Bloomberg writer with a weekly newsletter, stated that CarPlay is “still in the works” at Tesla and that more concrete information will be available “soon” regarding its development.
While Tesla already has a very capable and widely accepted user interface, CarPlay would still be an advantage, considering many people have used it in their vehicles for years. Just like smartphones, many people get comfortable with an operating system or style and are resistant to using a new one. This could be a big reason for Tesla attempting to get it in their own cars.
Tesla gets updated “Apple CarPlay” hack that can work on new models
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
It holds one distinct advantage over Tesla’s UI in my opinion, and that’s the ability to read and respond to text messages, which is something that is available within a Tesla, but is not as user-friendly.
With that being said, I would still give CarPlay a shot in my Tesla. I didn’t particularly enjoy it in my Bronco Sport, but that was because Ford’s software was a bit laggy with it. If it were as smooth as Tesla’s UI, which I think it would be, it could be a really great addition to the vehicle.
With the launch of a new trim level for the Model Y last night, something almost went unnoticed — the loss of a moniker that Tesla just recently added to a couple of its variants of the all-electric crossover.
Tesla launched the Model Y All-Wheel-Drive last night, competitively priced at $41,990, but void of the luxurious features that are available within the Premium trims.
Upon examination of the car, one thing was missing, and it was noticeable: Tesla dropped the use of the “Standard” moniker to identify its entry-level offerings of the Model Y.
The Standard Model Y vehicles were introduced late last year, primarily to lower the entry price after the U.S. EV tax credit changes were made. Tesla stripped some features like the panoramic glass roof, premium audio, ambient lighting, acoustic-lined glass, and some of the storage.
Last night, it simply switched the configurations away from “Standard” and simply as the Model Y Rear-Wheel-Drive and Model Y All-Wheel-Drive.
There are three plausible reasons for this move, and while it is minor, there must be an answer for why Tesla chose to abandon the name, yet keep the “Premium” in its upper-level offerings.
“Standard” carried a negative connotation in marketing
Words like “Standard” can subtly imply “basic,” “bare-bones,” or “cheap” to consumers, especially when directly contrasted with “Premium” on the configurator or website. Dropping it avoids making the entry-level Model Y feel inferior or low-end, even though it’s designed for affordability.
Tesla likely wanted the base trim to sound neutral and spec-focused (e.g., just “RWD” highlights drivetrain rather than feature level), while “Premium” continues to signal desirable upgrades, encouraging upsells to higher-margin variants.
Simplifying the overall naming structure for less confusion
The initial “Standard vs. Premium” split (plus Performance) created a somewhat clunky hierarchy, especially as Tesla added more variants like Standard Long Range in some markets or the new AWD base.
Removing “Standard” streamlines things to a more straightforward progression (RWD → AWD → Premium RWD/AWD → Performance), making the lineup easier to understand at a glance. This aligns with Tesla’s history of iterative naming tweaks to reduce buyer hesitation.
Elevating brand perception and protecting perceived value
Keeping “Premium” reinforces that the bulk of the Model Y lineup (especially the popular Long Range models) remains a premium product with desirable features like better noise insulation, upgraded interiors, and tech.
Eliminating “Standard” prevents any dilution of the Tesla brand’s upscale image—particularly important in a competitive EV market—while the entry-level variants can quietly exist as accessible “RWD/AWD” options without drawing attention to them being decontented versions.
You can check out the differences between the “Standard” and “Premium” Model Y vehicles below:
@teslarati There are some BIG differences between the Tesla Model Y Standard and Tesla Model Y Premium #tesla #teslamodely ♬ Sia – Xeptemper
Elon Musk
Tesla bull sees odds rising of Tesla merger after Musk confirms SpaceX-xAI deal
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
A prominent Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) bull has stated that the odds are rising that Tesla could eventually merge with SpaceX and xAI, following Elon Musk’s confirmation that the private space company has combined with his artificial intelligence startup.
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
“In our view there is a growing chance that Tesla will eventually be merged in some form into SpaceX/xAI over time. The view is this growing AI ecosystem will focus on Space and Earth together…..and Musk will look to combine forces,” Ives wrote in a post on X.
Ives’ comments followed confirmation from Elon Musk late Monday that SpaceX has merged with xAI. Musk stated that the merger creates a vertically integrated platform that combines AI, rockets, satellite internet, communications, and real-time data.
In a post on SpaceX’s official website, Elon Musk added that the combined company is aimed at enabling space-based AI compute, stating that within two to three years, space could become the lowest-cost environment for generating AI processing power. The transaction reportedly values the combined SpaceX-xAI entity at roughly $1.25 trillion.
Tesla, for its part, has already increased its exposure to xAI, announcing a $2 billion investment in the startup last week in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter.
While merger speculation has intensified, notable complications could emerge if SpaceX/xAI does merge with Tesla, as noted in a report from Investors Business Daily.
SpaceX holds major U.S. government contracts, including with the Department of Defense and NASA, and xAI’s Grok is being used by the U.S. Department of War. Tesla, for its part, maintains extensive operations in China through Gigafactory Shanghai and its Megapack facility.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
