News
ICBM rocket shopping: Elon Musk did it in Russia, so why not do it in the United States?
The ultimate goal of launching rockets is to get us exploring and building in space, not picking winners and losers. Simply put, if you can’t compete with the mousetraps on the market, you haven’t actually built a better mousetrap. Repurposed ICBM motors for rocket engines are not the problem.
Gemini 10 launches on a modified Titan ICBM motor. Credit: NASA on The Commons.
A Disagreement Among Star Travelers
There’s a debate going on among the government “powers that be” and commercial space companies over the use of excess intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) motors to launch rockets. Currently, these motors are banned from being used for commercial purposes, although military and civil launches are okay.
One side argues that the ban should be lifted because
- the missile parts provide a reliable, cost-effective means for space access; and
- it benefits taxpayers through recouped monies from private sales.
The other side wants the ban maintained because
- flooding the market with cheaper, “off-the-shelf” rocket parts could hinder the innovation and development of new rocket technologies by lowering demand for them; and
- larger companies will take away their market share through easy access to cheaper motors.
This same debate created the ban in the 1990s, and it should be mentioned that the main proponent of lifting the ban was a big part of passing it in the first place. It is also only fair to mention that this main proponent is a very large, established rocket company while the opponents are mostly smaller competitors.
Putting It All Into Perspective
First, it’s important to consider a reality-based context before taking a position on this. Absent another world war, globalization is here to stay, meaning that if a company in the United States cannot offer launch services at a 
competitive price point, their potential customers will go elsewhere. Since these customers are not exclusively American companies, U.S. lawmakers cannot simply make the problem go away through legislation by restricting the nationality of launch providers.
Second, it’s important to frame this issue using marketplace case studies relevant to the situation found here. Old technology is constantly giving way to updated and new technology, demonstrating that innovation is driven by a variety of factors, not just the pure need for a technology to exist.
Finally, it’s important to fully understand the motives of all parties involved. The commercial space industry is, by definition, business-oriented. At a fundamental level, all parties involved are concerned primarily with their own best interest, i.e., their ability to make a profit.
Space Access Should Be More Affordable
In my opinion, the ban should be lifted, as my position on issues like this will always tend towards expanding access rather than restricting it. Achieving democratized space travel will require affordable accessibility to space, and one of the best ways to drive costs down is to not spend valuable resources “reinventing the wheel” if existing resources work well for current needs. This isn’t to say that innovation isn’t necessary, but rather that different 
missions have different needs, and the existence of one option doesn’t preclude the need for other options.
The car industry is a good case study to compare to. The fact that older cars
exist does not prevent newer, generally improved cars from being developed and sold each year. Gasoline is a proven standard to fuel vehicles, but the demand for electric vehicles is getting louder. It’s the demand for better technology that moves this process of innovation forward.
The companies involved in this debate are profit-driven. What would motivate a company to keep inexpensive, proven technology out of a market they were competing in? In my opinion, the question itself contains the answer. Competition is a proven way to drive development, and the argument that a market flooded with competition would hurt competition has somewhat circular logic.
I do think it is fair to be concerned that the nature of competing against government for a product undermines the concept of a fair market; however, the global nature of launch services and the expanding need for more innovative solutions, i.e., more powerful rocket engines for the upcoming long-distance space missions, mitigate this concern.
In the current environment, American launch providers are losing business to non-American launch providers, most of which are either heavily subsidized by their governments or are the governments themselves. In order for American launch providers to afford the costs of innovation and development, they need to be able to fairly compete in the global market for a customer base. It is also important to note that the rocket motor is only one part of the process of providing launch services. In that light, opening the ICBM market to American launch providers doesn’t make the American government the competitor as much as it is a retailer selling certain parts which make up a whole rocket product.
Elon Musk, Russians, and ICBM Engines (Oh, my!)
To frame this debate in another light, recall that Elon Musk’s initial space dreams involved purchasing ICBM motors from Russia to send dehydrated plant seeds to Mars. He wanted to accomplish something inspirational without diving head first into the business of building rockets. Fortunately for us, SpaceX was born through that process; however, 
imagine a future, space-inspired millionaire looking to make a similar contribution except the purpose would ultimately be commercial. Why deny the option of a rocket built with “off-the-shelf” parts? There aren’t many Elon Musk types out there willing to invest most of their own personal fortune for a ten percent chance of success at building a rocket engine from scratch, but every time technology is sent into space, it moves us forward.
Elon Musk’s ICBM story isn’t the only thing worth noting in this debate. Unfortunately for supporters of the ban, SpaceX essentially renders their argument moot because SpaceX’s innovation and resulting lower launch price tag are what’s making Russian space authorities somewhat cranky about the business they’re usurping from them. Clearly, innovation is still possible even with other ICBM-based rockets on the market.
In Summary
The ultimate goal of launching rockets is to get us exploring and building in space, and this is hindered when the regulatory environment has the effect of hand picking winners and losers. Restricting ICBM motors from being on the commercial market does exactly that. This doesn’t advance the long term goals of space exploration. It only interferes with getting technology into orbit and beyond by restricting the capital available to develop better technology.
The argument that innovation is hurt by a market full of ICBM motors is one based on a desire to control market forces in an unfair way. Simply put, if you can’t compete with the mousetraps on the market, you haven’t actually built a better mousetrap, and there’s nothing to prevent you from selling existing mousetraps in service packages while you develop better ones.
Granted, as Elon Musk has reminded us in several interviews, rockets are hard, making the business of rockets even harder. Imagine, however, if the government banned access to all major highways, an existing tax-funded resource, because there was a need for a surface material that was resistant to pot holes and existing asphalt mixes hindered its development. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see what a bad idea that would be and what type of impact it would have on those needing the highways to conduct their business, especially while other countries still had their road systems up and running.
Autobahn, anyone?
Elon Musk
Elon Musk echoes worries over Tesla control against activist shareholders
Elon Musk has spoken on several occasions of the “activist shareholders” who threaten his role at Tesla.
Elon Musk continues to raise concerns over his control of Tesla as its CEO and one of its founders, as activist shareholders seem to be a viable threat to the company in his eyes.
Musk has voiced concerns over voting control of Tesla and the possibility of him being ousted by shareholders who do not necessarily have the company’s future in mind. Instead, they could be looking to oust Musk because of his political beliefs or because of his vast wealth.
We saw an example of that as shareholders voted on two separate occasions to award Musk a 2018 compensation package that was earned as Tesla met various growth goals through the CEO’s leadership.
Despite shareholders voting to award Musk with the compensation package on two separate occasions, once in 2018 and again in 2024, Delaware Chancery Court Judge Kathaleen McCormick denied the CEO the money both times. At one time, she called it an “unfathomable sum.”
Musk’s current stake in Tesla stands at 12.8 percent, but he has an option to purchase 304 million shares, which, if exercised, after taxes, he says, would bump his voting control up about 4 percent.
However, this is not enough of a stake in the company, as he believes a roughly 25 percent ownership stake would be enough “to be influential, but not so much that I can’t be overturned,” he said in January 2024.
I am uncomfortable growing Tesla to be a leader in AI & robotics without having ~25% voting control. Enough to be influential, but not so much that I can’t be overturned.
Unless that is the case, I would prefer to build products outside of Tesla. You don’t seem to understand…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 15, 2024
Musk’s concerns were echoed in another X post from Thursday, where he confirmed he has no current personal loans against Tesla stock, and he reiterated his concerns of being ousted from the company by those he has referred to in the past as “activist shareholders.”
The CEO said during the company’s earnings call in late July:
“That is a major concern for me, as I’ve mentioned in the past. I hope that is addressed at the upcoming shareholders’ meeting. But, yeah, it is a big deal. I want to find that I’ve got so little control that I can easily be ousted by activist shareholders after having built this army of humanoid robots. I think my control over Tesla, Inc. should be enough to ensure that it goes in a good direction, but not so much control that I can’t be thrown out if I go crazy.”
The X post from Thursday said:
Just fyi I don’t have personal loans at this time against Tesla stock.
Also, the taxes on the options are ~45%, so net gain in voting control is more like 4%.
It is worrying in that I don’t want to build millions of robots and then potentially be ousted by activists and…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 31, 2025
There is a concern that Musk could eventually put his money where his mouth is, and if politicians and judges are able to limit his ownership stake as they’ve been able to do with his pay package, he could eventually leave the company.
The company’s shareholders voted overwhelmingly to approve Musk’s pay package. A vast majority of those who voted to get Musk paid still want him to be running Tesla’s day-to-day operations. Without his guidance, the company could face a major restructuring and would have a vastly new look and thesis.
News
People are already finding value in Tesla Robotaxi services
Tesla initially launched its Robotaxi service in Austin, though the company more recently launched it in the Bay Area.
Tesla’s Robotaxi service is still in its earliest days, but some consumers are already finding surprising value in the autonomous ride-hailing system.
This was hinted at in recent comments on social media platform X.
Robotaxi Ramp
Tesla initially launched its Robotaxi service in Austin, though the company more recently launched it in the Bay Area. Tesla’s geofence for its Robotaxi service in the Bay Area is massive, covering several times the area that is currently serviced by rival Waymo.
As noted by the EV community members on social media, going end-to-end in Tesla’s Bay Area geofence would likely take over an hour’s worth of driving. That’s an impressive launch for the Robotaxi service in California, and considering Tesla’s momentum, its California geofence will likely grow substantially in the coming months.
Secret Advantage
As noted by Tesla owner and photographer @billykyle, the Tesla Robotaxi service actually has key advantages for people who travel a lot for their work. As per the Tesla owner, using a Robotaxi service would give back so much of his time considering that he gets about 5-7 shoots per day at times.
“I’ve been reflecting on how much of a game changer this is. As a photographer that runs my own business, servicing clients all around the Philadelphia area, I could ditch having a car and let an autonomous vehicle drive me between my 5-7 shoots I have per day. This would give me so much time back to work and message clients,” the photographer wrote in a post on X.
The Tesla owner also noted that the Robotaxi service could also solve issues with parking, as it could be tricky in cities. The Robotaxi service’s driverless nature also avoids the issue of rude and incompetent ride-hailing drivers, which are unfortunately prevalent in services such as Uber and Lyft. Ultimately, just like Unsupervised FSD, Tesla’s Robotaxi service has the potential to reclaim time for consumers. And as anyone in the business sphere would attest, time is ultimately money.
News
Tesla Robotaxi and Supercharger Diner are killing a dreaded consumer tradition
Tesla is still just charging strictly for its services–while asking for zero tips.
Tesla’s Robotaxi service and its newly launched Supercharger Diner are killing a longtime but increasingly dreaded consumer tradition in the United States. Based on videos taken of consumers using the Robotaxi service in the Bay Area, Tesla is still just charging strictly for its services–while asking for zero tips.
Tesla Services with Zero Tips
When Tesla launched the Robotaxi pilot in Austin, users quickly noticed that the company was not allowing riders to leave a tip for the service. If one were to try leaving a tip after a Robotaxi ride, the app simply flashes an image of Tesla’s meme hedgehog mascot with a “Just Kidding” message.
At the time, this seemed like a small tongue-in-cheek joke from the electric vehicle maker. The initial Robotaxi pilot in Austin was rolled out on a small scale, after all, and some social media users speculated that tipping may eventually just be introduced to the service.
But upon the opening of the Tesla Supercharger Diner, consumers also observed that the facility does not allow tipping. Tesla’s notice is simple: “Gratuity: Tesla covers tipping for staff.” This means that employees who work at the Tesla Diner make enough to not rely on gratuities from consumers.
And with the launch of the Robotaxi service in the Bay Area, users observed once more that Tesla is still not allowing tipping. This was highlighted by longtime Tesla owner @BLKMDL3, who shared a video of the Tesla Robotaxi app also briefly displaying the hedgehog mascot with a “Just Kidding” message when he tried leaving a tip.
Out of Control
As noted in a report from The Guardian, tipping has been a longstanding business practice in the United States, were service workers typically make less than the federal minimum wage. With this system in place, service workers end up relying on gratuities to make ends meet. This was understandable, but after the pandemic, tipping culture ended up going out of control.
On platforms such as Reddit, users have also complained about services like Uber asking for large tips for using their services. Consumers have also shared shocking experiences involving some services that ask for tips. These include self-checkout counters, drive-throughs, hotdog stands, drug stores, a bottled water stall at a jazz festival, an airport vending machine, a used bookstore, a cinema box office, and a children’s arcade, among others.
Elon Musk echoes worries over Tesla control against activist shareholders
People are already finding value in Tesla Robotaxi services
Tesla Robotaxi and Supercharger Diner are killing a dreaded consumer tradition
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla Supercharger Diner food menu gets a sneak peek as construction closes out
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoElon Musk gives key update on plans for Tesla Diner outside of LA
-
News5 days agoTesla hints a smaller pickup truck could be on the way
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoElon Musk confirms awesome new features at Tesla Diner Supercharger
-
Investor's Corner1 week agoLIVE BLOG: Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2025 earnings call updates
-
Investor's Corner2 weeks agoTesla ‘Model Q’ gets bold prediction from Deutsche Bank that investors will love
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoElon Musk’s Neuralink posts massive update with new milestone
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla preps to expand Robotaxi geofence once again, answering Waymo