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.
Tesla just raised Model Y prices for the first time in two years, with the largest increase being $1,000.
The move signals shifting dynamics in the competitive electric vehicle market as the company continues to work on balancing demand, profitability, and accessibility.
The new pricing affects premium trims while leaving entry-level options unchanged. The Model Y Premium Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) now starts at $45,990, a $1,000 increase.
The Model Y Premium All-Wheel Drive (AWD)—previously referred to in the post as simply “Model Y AWD”—rises to $49,990, also up $1,000. The top-tier Model Y Performance sees a more modest $500 bump, bringing its starting price to $57,990.
Tesla Model Y prices just went up:
New prices:
🚗 Model Y Premium RWD: $45,990 – up $1,000
🚗 Model Y AWD: $49,990 – up $1,000
🚗 Model Y Performance: $57,990 – up $500 https://t.co/e4GhQ0tj4H pic.twitter.com/TCWqr3oqiV— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) May 16, 2026
Base models remain untouched to preserve affordability. The entry-level Model Y RWD holds steady at $39,990, and the base Model Y AWD stays at $41,990. This selective approach keeps the crossover accessible for budget-conscious buyers while extracting more revenue from higher-margin configurations.
After years of aggressive price cuts to stimulate volume amid slowing EV adoption and rising competition from rivals like BYD, Ford, and GM, Tesla appears confident in underlying demand. Recent lineup refreshes for the 2026 Model Y, including refreshed styling and efficiency gains, have helped maintain its status as America’s best-selling EV.
By protecting base prices, Tesla avoids alienating price-sensitive customers while improving margins on the more popular variants.
Tesla Model Y ownership review after six months: What I love and what I don’t
For consumers, the changes are relatively modest—under 3% on affected trims—and still position the Model Y competitively against gas-powered SUVs in the same class. Federal tax credits and potential state incentives may further offset costs for eligible buyers.
This marks a subtle but notable shift from the deep discounting era that defined much of 2024 and 2025. As the EV market matures into 2026, Tesla’s pricing strategy will be closely watched for clues about production ramps, new variants like the rumored longer-wheelbase Model Y, and broader profitability goals.
In short, today’s adjustment reflects a company that remains dominant yet pragmatic—willing to test higher pricing where demand supports it. It is unlikely to deter consumers from choosing other options.
Elon Musk cannot be fired from SpaceX, and there’s a reason for that.
In a blunt post on X on Friday, Elon Musk confirmed plans to structurally shield his leadership at SpaceX, ensuring he cannot be fired while tying a potential trillion-dollar compensation package to the company’s long-term goal of establishing a self-sustaining colony on Mars.
Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!
Obviously, IF SpaceX succeeds in this absurdly difficult goal, it will be worth many orders of…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 15, 2026
The revelation stems from a Financial Times report detailing SpaceX’s intention to restructure its governance and compensation framework. The moves are designed to protect Musk’s control and align his incentives with the company’s founding mission rather than short-term financial pressures. Musk’s reply left no ambiguity:
“Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!”
He added that success in this “absurdly difficult goal” would generate value “many orders of magnitude more than the economy of Earth,” though he cautioned that the journey will not be smooth. “Don’t expect entirely smooth sailing along the way,” Musk wrote.
The strategy reflects Musk’s deep concerns about how public-market expectations could derail SpaceX’s core objective. Founded in 2002, SpaceX has repeatedly stated its purpose is to reduce the cost of space travel and ultimately make humanity a multiplanetary species.
Unlike Tesla, which went public in 2010 and has faced repeated battles over Musk’s compensation and board influence, SpaceX remains privately held. Musk has long resisted taking the rocket company public precisely to avoid the quarterly earnings treadmill that forces most CEOs to prioritize short-term stock performance over ambitious, high-risk projects.
By embedding protections against his removal and linking any outsized pay package to verifiable milestones—such as a functioning Mars colony—SpaceX aims to insulate its leadership from activist investors or board members who might demand faster profits or safer bets.
Musk has referenced past experiences, including his ouster from OpenAI and shareholder lawsuits at Tesla, as cautionary tales. In those cases, he argued, external pressures risked diluting the original vision.
Critics may view the arrangement as excessive, especially given Musk’s already substantial voting power and wealth. Supporters, however, argue it is a necessary safeguard for a company pursuing goals measured in decades rather than quarters. Achieving a Mars colony would require sustained investment in Starship development, orbital refueling, life-support systems, and in-situ resource utilization—technologies that may deliver no immediate financial return.
Musk’s post underscores a broader philosophical point: true breakthrough innovation often demands tolerance for volatility and a willingness to ignore conventional business wisdom. As SpaceX prepares for increasingly ambitious Starship test flights and eventual crewed missions, the new governance structure signals that the company’s North Star remains unchanged—humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.
Whether the trillion-dollar package materializes depends on execution, but Musk’s message is clear: SpaceX exists to reach the stars, not to chase the next earnings beat. For investors or employees who share that vision, the protections are not a perk—they are a prerequisite for success.
News
Tesla discloses two Robotaxi crashes to NHTSA
Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.
Tesla has disclosed information on two low-speed crashes that occurred in Austin with its Robotaxi platform. These incidents occurred with teleoperators steering the vehicle, and there were no passengers in the car at the time they happened.
Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.
The first crash took place in July 2025, shortly after Tesla launched its nascent Robotaxi network in Austin. The ADS reportedly struggled to move forward while stopped on a street. A teleoperator assumed control, gradually accelerating and turning left toward the roadside. The vehicle then mounted the curb and struck a metal fence.
In the second incident, in January 2026, the ADS was traveling straight when the safety monitor requested navigation support. The teleoperator took over from a stop, continued forward, and collided with a temporary construction barricade at approximately 9 mph, scraping the front-left fender and tire.
Tesla Robotaxi service in Austin achieves monumental new accomplishment
Tesla has previously told lawmakers that teleoperators are authorized to pilot vehicles remotely—but only at speeds below 10 mph, as the only maneuvers they were approved to perform were repositioning in awkward areas.
“This capability enables Tesla to promptly move a vehicle that may be in a compromising position, thereby mitigating the need to wait for a first responder or Tesla field representative to manually recover the vehicle,” the company stated in filings earlier this year.
Before this week, Tesla redacted the NHTSA reports, but they decided to reveal all 17 Robotaxi incidents recorded since the launch in Austin last Summer. Most of the other crashes involved the Tesla being struck by other road users and were not caused by the self-driving suite itself.
There were other incidents, including two additional self-caused accidents involving the ADS clipping side mirrors on parked cars. In September 2025, one Robotaxi struck a dog that darted into the roadway (the dog escaped unharmed), while another made an unprotected left turn into a parking lot and hit a metal chain.
Although Waymo and Zoox have reported more total crashes, Tesla operates at a far smaller scale. The cautious pace reflects the company’s broader safety concerns; it has been very slow with the Robotaxi rollout to ensure the suite is ready for operation.
Last month, CEO Elon Musk acknowledged that “making sure things are completely safe” remains the primary bottleneck to expanding the network, describing the company’s approach as “very cautious.”
The unredacted filings arrive amid heightened regulatory scrutiny of autonomous vehicles. NHTSA recently closed a separate probe into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software repeatedly striking parking-lot obstacles such as bollards and chains—a problem that also prompted a recall at Waymo last year.
Tesla Robotaxi has been a widely successful program in its early days of operation, and the transparency Tesla brings here is greatly appreciated. Incidents will happen, of course, but the honesty gives customers and regulators a sense of where Tesla is in terms of developing its self-driving and fully autonomous ride-hailing suite.
Tesla Model Y prices just went up for the first time in two years
Elon Musk explains why he cannot be fired from SpaceX
