News
Opinion: Where would Herbert Diess fit best (hypothetically)?
Herbert Diess is officially no longer a Volkswagen employee, effective Wednesday. The seven-year reign as CEO and Chairman of the Board of Management came to somewhat of an abrupt end after Diess and VW decided to part ways at the end of August.
“These were the most rewarding seven years of my career. The future of our industry can be brilliant, but we have to change fast. Volkswagen has already changed tremendously and is well underway,” Diess said. “We have transformed the company that was seen as an autocratic cheat into a global thought leader in clean mobility.”
Herbert Diess bids farewell to Volkswagen on his final day as CEO
Diess’s future remains in question, and while retirement is the likely option, there are several routes that he could potentially go, barring any stipulation in his contract that would eliminate the possibility of working for a competitor. While it is a long shot, Diess has three main automakers he would likely benefit from almost immediately, making an impact on several companies as his proven track record speaks for itself.
Tesla
(Credit: Herbert Diess/LinkedIn)
While I have already been in numerous discussions with various people about this possibility, and even though it seems unlikely, the first company that Diess would benefit is Tesla. Not only does Diess share a friendship with Elon Musk, but he could also benefit Tesla’s European business with additional expertise on the market. VW has performed very well in Europe in terms of EVs, and helping Tesla expand its operations throughout the continent would likely be a huge advantage for the company.
Tesla undoubtedly has a bright future in Europe, but Volkswagen currently holds the EV title there. The AG owned 1/4 of the European plug-in market in 2021, according to CleanTechnica data.
Toyota
I believe Diess has the track record to be a considerable ally to Toyota. Why? Toyota and VW have a lot of parallels, and Diess would likely navigate through them with considerable success.
Toyota is the world’s largest automotive manufacturer by volume, and it has been for some time. The last time a major automotive manufacturer outproduced Toyota was when GM built nearly 1M cars more than the Japanese company in 2011. Even VW finished ahead of Toyota in terms of production that year, but it has been a masterclass in production ever since.
-
Credit: Toyota
Volume is not the only way the two companies are somewhat similar. EV development is also somewhat of a parallel. VW has coming out of the Dieselgate crisis and had to make major waves to regain consumer trust. Diess knew this, and pushed incredibly hard for several years to help VW reinvent its reputation as a sustainable company. Toyota really needs the same thing.
Although it isn’t going thru an emissions scandal, Toyota has basically half-committed to EVs, aiming to go toward hydrogen and hybrid vehicles instead. It is not to say that the company hasn’t contributed to sustainability in other ways: the Toyota Prius was a huge step forward in sustainable transport. Evolution needs to continue, however, and it is time for Toyota to really begin developing some high-tech EVs. They’re falling behind, and Diess, with his experience in high-volume companies and sluggish EV plans, is a good fit.
General Motors
GM would also be a good fit for Diess simply because of his push and determination to transition a company quickly. GM is honestly a company that has so much potential, but it feels like they’re falling just short of the mark in so many areas. The Bolt has plagued GM with bad advertising for several years, the HUMMER EV is having more issues than what were anticipated, and the company’s plans for electrification seem to be one drastic announcement followed by silence and promises that they’ll one day overtake Tesla.
While Tesla dominates the industry now, it will eventually take a few decades for others to catch up, and they likely will. However, Tesla is establishing itself as the leader and it is no secret. It is going to take a long time to figure out the tech and the manufacturing and the supply chain.
The first 2022 GMC HUMMER EV Pickup Edition 1 exits Factory ZERO in Detroit and Hamtramck, Michigan. VIN 001 was auctioned in March 2021 at the Barrett-Jackson Scottsdale auction for $2.5 million to benefit the Tunnel to Towers Foundation. (Photo by Jeffrey Sauger for General Motors)
GM will likely catch up to Tesla, but it won’t be in the 2020s or 2030s. They’ll all even out, just as the market is now. A lot of car companies do a lot of business, and it’s only a matter of time before other companies begin to figure things out.
GM will absolutely be a true player in the EV industry, and it’s just going to take some time. This is where I feel Diess would be a considerable asset to GM, simply because he emphasized on accelerating VW’s transition to sustainable energy. The goals of 2035 or more were simply not going to work. Things needed to be figured out now, and the goal is to establish yourself as an early player in the disruption of a sector. VW has done that thanks to Diess, GM has announced more (at least to me) but accomplished considerably less.
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.
In a new note to investors on Tuesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco said that Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors regarding its Robotaxi rollout, Full Self-Driving software, and Optimus.
Percoco said in the note that, for the most part, investors are still very positive about the direction the company is headed. However, there are some things the firm would like to see, and they have to do with financials.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla bulls are more than convinced that the company’s Full Self-Driving software is proof it can develop physical AI. Financially, however, there are still some questions, especially on elevated spending, which CEO Elon Musk said would occur as the company works to roll out Robotaxi faster and continue developing its Optimus robot.
The latter two are where Tesla will have to prove progress to investors, as Percoco writes that both projects “will require clearer evidence that Robotaxi is scaling and more tangible Optimus proof points to support the ROI on elevated capex.”
Percoco said the second quarter earnings call did not change his long-term thesis of where Tesla is positioned in the AI race, which is out in front. However, there are concerns that weaker gross margins and higher R&D spend will stress financials, and that has “sharpened our (and investors’) focus on measurable progress across Robotaxi and Optimus.”
Additionally, Robotaxi still needs to be proven with more operation in existing cities while maintaining safety but improving how many rides it gives in any given time, he said. For Optimus, Percoco wrote that he is “still looking for evidence beyond commentary around SOP.”
-
Morgan Stanley put Percoco in charge of covering Tesla after long-time analyst Adam Jonas transitioned to the automotive side.
Currently, Morgan Stanley has a $415 price target on Tesla and a ‘Hold’ rating on the stock. It is trading at around $330 at the time of publication, which was 2:30 P.M. on the East Coast.
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
-
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
-
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
-
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
