News
European EV market expected to slow as buyers await affordable models
Several parties are echoing concerns about the European electric vehicle (EV) market as some buyers await new, more affordable models that are just a few years out — and as significant economic uncertainty remains.
Sales of battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) jumped 47 percent in Europe throughout the first nine months of this year, according to Reuters. However, automakers including Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen and Tesla have aired concerns about high interest rates putting off consumers and slowing EV growth.
According to AutoTrader, EVs in Britain are still roughly 33 percent more costly than their fossil fuel alternatives. Last week, Tesla announced plans to produce its next model, a €25,000/$25,000 EV, at its Gigafactory outside of Berlin, Germany. With the long-anticipated “affordable EV” on its way, some customers may be inclined to wait to buy, along with holding out for what they expect to be better products.
Volkswagen’s EV orders, as one example, were just half of what they were in 2022 during the same nine-month period. On Thursday, Volkswagen announced hopes to build a sub-$35,000 EV in the U.S. within the next three to four years.
Like many automakers, Tesla reported a slight delivery miss in Q3 compared to analyst expectations. However, the company had warned about sales slowing during the third quarter in its Q2 earnings call, and the company has still maintained its lofty delivery goal for Q4, which seems like a good sign.
Even beyond the economic environment and hopes for an affordable EV, data analysis firms and dealerships warn that buyers are holding off until they feel convinced that the technology meets their needs. Thomas Niedermayer, owner of a Bavarian dealership that has been in business for 45 years, notes that the fast-moving technology advancements may have some holding out for more future-proof EV options.
Credit: Reuters
“The main problem is uncertainty,” Niedermayer said. “Many assume that the technology will improve and would rather wait three years for the next model than buy a vehicle now that will quickly lose value.”
Flavia Garcia and Tom Carvell in Edinburgh, Scotland, are in the market for a new vehicle as their 15-year-old Toyota Auris requires replacement. Ahead of gas car sales bans, the couple says they would consider purchasing an EV if it weren’t for fears of charging infrastructure deficiency, battery life and sticker price.
“You want to do the right thing for the environment, but it feels like you’re setting yourself up for a very expensive investment that will make your life that bit more complicated,” Garcia told Reuters. “We’ll probably get a hybrid first.”
EV sales also slowed in September, and Felipe Munoz of JATO Dynamics says the slowdown will remain until affordable EVs are released.
Meanwhile, Tesla’s Model Y was the top-selling vehicle across Europe in September, and the company last month announced it had delivered one million vehicles across the continent. The U.S. EV maker is also rolling out its Model 3 Highland in Europe, set to continue over the next couple of quarters.
Other U.S. automakers, including Ford and General Motors (GM), have recently announced plans to delay the launch of more affordable EVs and to cut back on EV spending as they cite low demand. Over the weekend, it was reported that Ford will no longer build a plant with LG in Turkey, with the slowed pace of EV adoption being the main reason for the canceled plans.
“From a regulatory standpoint, they don’t have to push product out right now – they can afford to focus on profitability,” says Alistair Bedwell, GlobalData’s head of powertrain forecasting. “But they need to have an eye on Tesla and the Chinese brands, because they don’t want to get too far behind.”
Credit: Reuters
According to a poll from the consumer research firm The Langston Co, hopes to buy an EV in Germany have remained steady in the past year, though rising sales suggest that some automakers have finally caught up to supply chain bottlenecks, according to Insights Manager Ben DuCharme.
Philip Nothard, insight director at dealer services firm Cox Automotive, says that concerns around low residual values have also lowered customer sentiment, with many choosing vehicle purchases based on what they think they can resell in a few years.
“We call it the valley of death, which we will be going through in 2024 to 2027: low residual values, high supply, and low demand,” Nothard said.
Tesla Model 3 and Y still dominating U.S. EV market, shows data
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
