Despite making some progress in contract negotiations with the United Auto Workers (UAW) union, Ford says there are still some major gaps to address before an agreement is reached. The statement comes after Ford avoided escalated strikes by meeting some UAW demands last week, just as parts workers walked out of 38 Stellantis and General Motors (GM) distribution centers on Friday.
Ford said on Sunday that there were still “significant gaps to close” in contract negotiations with the UAW, according to a report from Reuters. The UAW said it made “some real progress at Ford” over the weekend, although it added that the two parties still had serious issues to work through.
On Sunday evening, Ford said the related “issues are interconnected and must work within an overall agreement that supports our mutual success.”
At the time of writing, the UAW has not yet commented on the statement from Ford. The news also comes ahead of U.S. President Joe Biden’s plans to visit Michigan in support of the strikes on Tuesday.
Ford also said that it would be pausing construction on a $3.5 billion battery manufacturing plant in Michigan, as detailed in a Monday afternoon report from Reuters.
“We are pausing work and limiting spending on construction on the Marshall project until we’re confident about our ability to competitively operate the plant,” Ford said. “We haven’t made any final decision about the planned investment there.”
The Detroit automakers have offered contracts with 20-percent raises over the next four and a half years, though the UAW is reportedly still asking for 40-percent wage hikes over a four-year period, in addition to 32-hour work weeks. The union is also demanding the restoration of defined pension benefits and an end to a tiered wage system that requires a certain amount of time to reach top wages.
Workers at an additional 20 Stellantis and 18 GM parts distribution centers walked off the job on Friday due to a lack of progress in UAW contract negotiations. The walkouts are straining other Stellantis and GM manufacturing facilities, rendering them unable to receive the necessary parts to continue production. The expanded strikes totaled around 5,600 workers, joining the initial wave of 12,700 workers who walked out a week prior.
The UAW represents roughly 150,000 workers total, and this is the first time in history that the union has lodged strikes against all three of the Michigan automakers simultaneously.
“Like the rest of us all, all we’re asking is to not have to struggle. Just wanting enough money to pay my bills, buy groceries, and have enough for extras like taking my kid to the jump park.”– Samantha Richter, a worker at Ford Michigan Assembly Plant https://t.co/pCgxP36QWo
— UAW (@UAW) September 25, 2023
Last week, GM said it was forced to lay off around 2,000 workers at a Fairfax, Kansas plant, citing a lack of available work due to the UAW strikes. The automaker went on to call the UAW demands “untenable,” adding that it wouldn’t be able to offer unemployment for the laid-off employees.
As the Detroit Free Press reports, one auto supplier in Wixom, Michigan also announced plans to lay off 230 workers on Monday. The figure represents 75 percent of employees at Eagle Industries, Inc., which makes a material used in car door components along with other non-automotive products. While the company hasn’t explicitly disclosed its clients, a separate analysis noted that its product had been used in Ford’s vehicles.
“As a result of unforeseen business circumstances, we are providing information in anticipation of a potential layoff at the worksite,” wrote the company in a note to the state of Michigan. “The estimated number of workers is subject to change due to evolving business circumstances.”
Some predict that the ongoing strikes will likely result in higher vehicle prices due to increased costs for parts. Another analysis from the University of Michigan noted that as many as 150,000 workers could be subject to layoffs if the strikes last an entire month, highlighting the situation’s far-reaching effects until the parties can finalize a deal.
“These growing spillover effects across the automotive supply chain produce successively larger spillovers to the broader economy, as well,” states the analysis, “as laid-off workers in the supply chain lose purchasing power and cut back on spending in other parts of the economy.”
Update: Updated to include the Monday afternoon report from Reuters, in which Ford said it was pausing construction on a Michigan battery plant.
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
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
