Connect with us

Investor's Corner

Ford CEO Farley sees merit in separating EV biz to obtain Tesla-sized market cap

Van Dyke Electric Powertrain center supplies electric motors and electric transaxles for the F-150 Lightning. (Credit: Ford)

Published

on

Ford CEO Jim Farley believes there may be some merit to separating the automaker’s electric vehicle project from the company’s main operation. A pure-play EV business, separate from Ford’s reputable brand of combustion engine vehicles that have existed since 1903, may help the automaker obtain a Tesla-sized market capitalization.

Farley sees merit in potentially separating the two different powertrains into separate entities, people familiar with the matter told Bloomberg in a new report. Hoping to launch its brand into a value level similar to Tesla’s, Farley believes a spinoff business that focuses purely on electric vehicles could pay dividends, especially as Ford and other legacy automakers have committed to fully-electric futures, void of any combustion engine vehicles.

The mixup may not require a separate brand name or even split the operation. This may prove to be too difficult, and Ford is not considering the option, according to the report. Farley may separate the EV business internally as a “unit,” and it could be the first consideration in Ford’s recently-revealed $20 billion playbook mixup.

A New EV Playbook

In another report, it was revealed that Ford was willing to spend an additional $20 billion of company funds to restructure its EV playbook. Ford plans to use the massive budget to utilize specific strategies that Tesla used to gain its notoriety as the leader in the EV sector.

Ford doubles its F-150 Lightning production target again to 150k units per year

Ford intends to spend between $10 and $20 billion on the project, giving it a sky-high budget and relative free range for business moves. “We are executing our Ford Plus plan to transform the company and thrive in this new era of electric and connected vehicles. We would not comment on speculation,” Ford’s Communications Chief, Mark Truby, said in the report.

Advertisement
-

Ford also expanded its production goals on Farley’s request. The automaker plans to deliver at least 600,000 electric units within 22 months. With the Mustang Mach-E being the number two most popular EV in the crossover market, the F-150 Lightning set for deliveries in the Spring, and the E-Transit beginning deliveries last month, Ford seems like it has the capacity, plan, and certainly the funding to accomplish its goals.

Tesla’s Massive Market Cap

Tesla is the world’s most valuable automaker by a considerable margin. Led by its massive increase in stock price over the past two years, Tesla has skyrocketed to monumental levels not thought to be possible at one point for a simple automotive company. However, Tesla has revolutionized the way the consumer market looks at vehicles, turning them from machines to technological marvels that receive updates just like a cell phone.

Tesla stock has gained over 856 percent since January 3, 2020. Most of the company’s increased valuation came from profitability, increases in production and deliveries, the introduction of new battery and safety technologies in its vehicles, and a resilience through the COVID-19 pandemic that seemed to exist only in the automaker’s Fremont factory in Northern California. Despite Tesla being a small, scrappy automaker with as few as 80,000 deliveries in a quarter just a few years ago, the company managed to basically evade the entire semiconductor shortage thanks to engineering and stockpiling.

Nevertheless, Tesla is the perfect picture of what an EV company looks like from a financial perspective. A healthy cash flow, plenty of profitability, and continuing and proven growth gets a company to those levels. At least it does in the EV world.

ICE and EV – Like Oil and Water

“Running a successful ICE business and a successful BEV business are not the same. I’m really excited about the company’s commitment to operate the businesses as they should be,” Farley said during Ford’s recently-held Q4 Earnings Call. Farley may have been considering the option of separating the two businesses for some time. Obviously, this was not an idea that sprung up overnight. However, it appears this may have been in the works since 2021.

More Bloomberg sources said Ford had met with advisers to explore additional options for the EV operation. Farley wants to maximize the value of the EV portion of Ford’s business and has considered a potential spinoff company or even a full-on breakup. However, his idea has eventually evolved into an “internal split,” the sources said. This could still prove to be difficult, especially as it could require significant restructuring in the manufacturing layout of the company. Facilities that build both ICE and EV vehicles would need to be separated; an extremely complex task that could take a long time and cost a lot of money. Additionally, employees would have to be separated in the mixup.

Advertisement
-

Up and Onward

Ford stock spiked on Friday following the initial reports of Ford’s potential EV-ICE business breakup. Shares were up 2.88 percent at 11:57 AM in New York.

Analysts are bullish regarding the potential of Ford’s shake-up, and the F-150 Lightning is leading the way. “Huge step in the right direction as Farley doubling down on EV vision. We believe Ford is in the midst of massive EV transformation led by Electric F-150,” Wedbush’s Dan Ives said.

Disclosure: Joey Klender is not a Ford Shareholder.

I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk breaks his silence on the Starlink impact to Ukraine drones

Musk says the US military and president set Starshield limits, not SpaceX, amid Ukraine complaints.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk says the speed limit cutting out Ukraine’s military Starlink terminals is not SpaceX’s decision. In a post on X Wednesday, Musk wrote that “Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.” He added that Starlink is a commercial service limited to civilian or defensive activities and “cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.”

He was replying to Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s former defense minister, who had thanked Musk for restoring connectivity at speeds up to 160 km/h and said removing the Starshield limit entirely is “now critical for Ukraine’s defense.”

The complaint started Tuesday night, when Ukrainian officials said military terminals began losing service above roughly 100 mph. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said the defense forces got no warning and several missions were disrupted, as Teslarati reported earlier Wednesday. The 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at speeds well below the limit, which made drones harder to control. Poland’s foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asked Musk on X whether he is “playing politics with your products again.”

Advertisement
-

That is why the Starlink and Starshield distinction matters. SpaceX introduced Starshield in 2022 as the government version of Starlink, with an initial focus on Earth observation, communications and hosted payloads. It won a Space Force contract in 2023 with a $70 million ceiling. In December 2024, the Pentagon moved Ukraine’s terminals onto Starshield, covering about 3,000 units across two contracts. Ukraine’s military connections therefore run through a service that Musk now says sits under Washington’s control.

SpaceX pitches subscription model for Trump’s Golden Dome

While Musk’s post describes who holds authority, it does not infer that anyone ordered the limit, and neither SpaceX nor the US government has confirmed who set it. Ukrainian officials have pointed to the timing, which follows President Trump’s push for an energy ceasefire and Musk’s Saturday post that “Zelensky has gone too far.” The BBC noted Trump denied threatening to restrict intelligence sharing with Kyiv, and no evidence has been presented that Washington requested the cap.

The episode also revives a promise from 2025. After Poland accused him of threatening Ukraine’s access, Musk said Starlink “will never turn off its terminals” and would not be used as a bargaining chip. Poland has since supplied more than 29,000 terminals to Ukraine. Teslarati also covered Kyiv’s search for Starlink alternatives in 2025, and the latest dispute gives that search new urgency.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet

Tesla opens its Q3 earnings Q&A, and Cybercab, Robotaxi, Optimus and regulators loom over October 21.

Published

on

By

Tesla has opened its shareholder question portal for the Q3 2026 earnings call, with the Say Q&A page already listing questions. Investors have until 4:00 p.m. EDT on October 20 to submit and vote on what management should answer.

The call is set for Wednesday, October 21. Tesla will post results after the market closes, with a live webcast at 4:30 p.m. CT, or 5:30 p.m. ET, through its investor relations site.

Say ranks questions by the number of shares behind the votes, which gives institutional holders extra weight over the retail crowd.

Ahead of Q2, retail investors asked why Robotaxi growth had stalled, when Cybercab would start customer rides, and where the Optimus Gen 3 ramp stood, while an institutional holder asked how Tesla and SpaceX would split Terafab duties. Cybercab has since answered one of those. Tesla said last week it has 300 plus Cybercabs serving Austin, up eightfold in 30 days, with Dallas named as the next city. The questions now are likely to move from when to how fast.

There is also a regulatory question hanging over the call. NHTSA has demanded sworn answers on how the pedal free Cybercab was certified against federal safety standards, with responses due October 30, nine days after the call. Whether an analyst raises it live is unknown, but it is the kind of exposure that tends to find its way into a Q&A.

The numbers will not be the main draw. Tesla already reported 486,532 deliveries and 13.7 GWh of storage for the quarter. Consensus sits around 43 to 45 cents per share on roughly $27.8 billion in revenue, according to Zacks, after a Q2 report that missed on EPS. Goldman Sachs, which holds a Neutral rating and a $360 target, argues the outlook for Robotaxi, FSD and Optimus will matter more to the stock than the quarter itself.

Advertisement
-

The call also lands six days after the rescheduled Roadster event, which Tesla will stream on X on Thursday, October 15, at 7:55 p.m. CT. If the Roadster shows up with a production date or a SpaceX thruster package, expect it to climb the voting list before the deadline.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

FAA kicks off review of SpaceX’s bid to fly Starship nearly every day

FAA is reviewing SpaceX’s plan for 456 Starship launches a year, up from 25 today.

Published

on

By

Rendering of Elon Musk overlooking a Starship fleet (Credit: Grok)

The FAA said Tuesday that it will prepare an environmental impact statement on SpaceX’s proposal to run as many as 456 Starship launches and 912 landings a year from Starbase, Texas. SpaceX is currently authorized for 25 launches and 50 landings annually, which makes the request roughly 18 times the existing ceiling. The notice of intent is set to publish in the Federal Register on Wednesday.

The plan comes in two phases. Phase 1 would allow up to 100 launches and 200 landings a year, on any day and at any hour. Phase 2, which the FAA says could arrive within several years, would raise the limit to the full 456 launches, still at any hour but only on weekdays. The agency noted that 912 landings is the upper limit for the Texas facility no matter where a given mission begins, and that Starship and Super Heavy could come down at the launch site or in the Gulf and open ocean.

A draft statement will be released for public comment at a later date, and the FAA has not said when. According to the Federal Registar, written comments are due November 30 on regulations.gov under docket FAA-2026-12808, with in person scoping meetings on November 17 in Brownsville and November 19 in Port Isabel, plus a virtual session on November 18. The review will weigh air quality, wildlife, coastal resources, water, noise, and aviation, and the FAA said any increase beyond this proposal would need its own separate review.

The numbers look large next to what Starbase has actually done. Starship has flown three times from Texas this year, including Flight 14 on September 28, the first orbital flight, which deployed 26 Starlink V3 satellites. Bloomberg reported that Starbase has never launched more than five times in a calendar year. The current cap of 25 comes from an FAA approval in May 2025. In February, the agency also approved up to 44 Starship launches a year from Launch Complex 39A in Florida, so Phase 1 in Texas alone would more than double that allowance.

Musk has said Starship could eventually fly more than once per hour within less than a decade, per Bloomberg. The nearer term target is Flight 15. Musk said on October 10 that it is hopefully four to six weeks away and will try to catch the ship with the tower, as Teslarati covered. That flight still runs under the existing 25 launch limit, and so would every Starbase launch for as long as the new review takes.

Advertisement
-

As of mid morning Pacific time on Tuesday, SpaceX had not posted about the filing on its own account.

Continue Reading