General Motors says it has a plan to dethrone Tesla: the undisputed king of electric vehicles.
GM CEO Mary Barra said in November that the company responsible for the Chevy Volt would build a million EVs in 2025. The question is, how will it get there, and what steps will it take to dethrone Tesla, who produced more than 509,000 EVs in 2020 and delivered 98% of them.
“We are committed to fighting for EV market share until we are number one in North America,” Barra said after detailing the plans for 30 EV models by 2025. The project requires a $27 billion investment from one of the U.S’s most notorious automakers. But in the past, car companies have outlined their plans to beat Tesla, and they’ve continuously fallen short, not accounting for Tesla’s planned growth.
In 2012, GM was the undisputed leader in EVs. The Chevy Volt sold 23,461 units that year. Then Tesla came along with the Model S. Five years later, Tesla had figured out that it could build a mass-market vehicle with the Model 3, proving that it’s not about the number of models. Still, the focus should be on affordability and efficiency. Tesla showed that it had figured out the formula for a fun, fast, efficient, and affordable electric car. It was a riddle that legacy automakers that had the cash and infrastructure to develop hadn’t solved.
Credit: U.S. Department of Energy, Alternative Fuel Vehicle Data Key: Blue: Chevy Volt, Burgundy: Tesla Model S, Purple: Tesla Model X, Royal Blue: Chevy Bolt, Yellow: Tesla Model 3
Despite the Model 3 giving Tesla and its frontman Elon Musk significant production issues, the vehicle has become the most popular EV in the U.S., China, and other territories. Led by the Model 3, Tesla held 58 percent of the U.S. EV market share in 2019, and Financial Post states that the automaker could own as much as 80 percent of the market share for 2020.
GM’s plan is simple: depend on its Ultium battery, which will amplify production and the development new, all-electric models. It plans to decrease the cost of battery production to the $100/kWh threshold, which will activate price parity with gas cars, in three years. It then plans to get that down to $75/kWh in 2025. These projections come from Emmanuel Rosner, an analyst with Deutsche Bank.
The problem is: Tesla detailed its complete roadmap to decrease the cost of its price per kWh during the company’s Battery Day event in September 2020, and it shows prices as low as $50/kWh.
This brings in significant possibilities for GM moving forward, especially if it can continue to leverage more affordable battery costs past 2025. However, it will need more help beating Tesla, which at this time, analysts see as the leader for the foreseeable future.
A Tesla Model 3 recently battled a Chevy Bolt on a drag race in Moscow. [Credit: KindelTech/YouTube]
“Price is going to be what determines who is the market leader, and Tesla looks set to win on price for the foreseeable future,” Luke Gear, an analyst at IDTechEX, says.
Past the financials, Tesla’s growth, which is fueled by a strict and non-diversified focus on EVs only, gives the company an explicit advantage moving forward. On the other hand, GM has to combat the development of its 30 planned EVs with its existing fleet of gas-powered vehicles. Tesla can continue developing its EVs without any other distractions. Its name and reputation as the leader in the sector will help attract young and fresh engineering talent, especially in software and manufacturing, which are some of the company’s main focuses.
ALSO READ:
GM watches Tesla go from “graveyard-bound” to inspiration in pursuit of million-mile battery
GM’s goal is considerably lofty, and its words will not win over the Tesla faithful who are critical of the companies who talk a big game but fail to back it up. Many automakers have come along with a plan to disrupt Tesla’s domination in the EV sector, only to figure out that building an effective EV goes past putting a battery pack into a familiar chassis. But even if they don’t become the leader, will it be considered a complete failure?
“If they keep putting out tons of great products…and they take a ton of share from Tesla, are their EV efforts a failure then? I would say no,” David Whiston of Morningstar said.
What do you think? Leave a comment down below. Got a tip? Email us at tips@teslarati.com or reach out to me at joey@teslarati.com.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
Investor's Corner
Tesla uber bull Ron Baron says ‘the time to buy the stock is now’
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s next Starship launch is about to attempt its biggest leap yet
SpaceX targets September 22 for Starship Flight 14, its first attempt to reach real orbit.
SpaceX has set September 22 as the target date for Starship’s 14th test flight, and this one carries a different goal than any of the 13 that came before it. Every previous Starship mission has intentionally flown a suborbital arc, reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launched. Flight 14 is designed to send the craft into a genuine orbit around Earth for the first time.
The launch window opens at 7:15 a.m. Central time at Starbase in South Texas and runs for 75 minutes, pending regulatory approval, according to SpaceX’s mission description published Tuesday. If the flight goes as planned, Starship will circle the planet roughly six times at an altitude near 275 kilometers over about ten hours before a deorbit burn sends it toward a splashdown in the Pacific Ocean west of Chile, a departure from the Indian Ocean recoveries used on the last several flights.
The mission also marks the first attempt to put a working batch of Starlink V3 satellites into actual service. Flight 13 carried 20 of the new satellites in July, but because that mission never left a suborbital trajectory, the payload reentered along with the ship instead of separating into orbit.
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
Each V3 satellite is rated for roughly one terabit per second of downlink capacity, so a successful deployment on Flight 14 would be SpaceX’s largest single jump in network bandwidth since Starlink began flying on Falcon 9.
Flight 13 still did the heavier lifting on the technical side. That July mission flew a deliberately more stressful reentry profile to test Starship’s heat shield, and the ship survived its softest splashdown yet, intact enough for drone inspections shortly after landing. Elon Musk said the flight delivered “all the heat shield data we needed and then some,” a result Teslarati covered in detail when he later said SpaceX had solved the vehicle’s biggest reusability challenge. Flight 14 is where SpaceX starts spending that confidence on an actual orbital insertion rather than another controlled fall back to Earth.
One thing Flight 14 will not attempt is a tower catch of the ship. Musk floated the idea right after Flight 13, but walked the timeline back in August, saying a catch attempt was more likely “in a few months.” The Super Heavy booster will still aim for its own recovery, targeting an offshore landing point in the Gulf of America, the same approach used on recent flights.
September 22 is SpaceX’s own target, not a locked date. Starship’s schedule has slipped before over hardware readiness and FAA sign off, and the company has said as much in its own mission notes. But the plan itself represents the clearest marker yet that Starship is moving from a suborbital test program into something meant to carry paying payloads and, eventually, people.