News
Indiana is back with another bill to ban Tesla’s direct sales model
If a proposed Indiana House bill is passed, manufacturers of “all-electric vehicles” would be banned from selling directly to consumers. The bill does not direct any specific language to Tesla Motors, Inc., but the innovative vehicle manufacturer is clearly the target of the legislation. Add Indiana into the mix of Tesla’s long list of court cases pending in which car dealers and automakers claim that they, as intermediaries, have sole right to sell vehicles to consumers.
Indiana House Bill 1592
Indiana automakers have traditionally used an established network of dealers who negotiate with buyers and provide automotive repair services. These automakers are part of a large umbrella of politically influential groups. They argue that Tesla’s model allows the company to evade laws, which confers an unfair advantage to Tesla and provides no accountability to its buyers.
Here is the synopsis of the Indiana House Bill 1592.
Automobile sales requirements. Provides that a manufacturer may engage in sales directly to the public only if the manufacturer meets certain requirements. Provides that a manufacturer can no longer engage in sales directly to the public after the earlier of: (1) reaching 1,000 units in cumulative annual sales; or (2) six years after the initial dealer’s license is granted.
Additionally, Sec. 20. of the bill reads:
A manufacturer licensed under this article may engage in sales directly to the general public only if the manufacturer (1) has exclusively offered for sale to the general public in Indiana all-electric vehicles on a continuous basis since July 15, 2015; (2) has never offered for sale to the general public in Indiana a line make of new motor vehicles through a franchised motor vehicle dealer.
Tesla is the only vehicle manufacturer which meets these particular criteria. Tesla sells its electric vehicles directly to consumers, while other manufacturers like General Motors, Ford, Subaru, and Toyota sell through Indiana dealerships. If passed, the bill would severely limit Tesla’s ability as a manufacturer to sell to the public:
Subject to the expiration schedule under IC 9-32-11-12.5, a manufacturer can no longer sell to the public after the earlier of the following: (1) A manufacturer described in this section reaches cumulative annual sales of one thousand (1,000) units to the general public from its licensed location in Indiana.
The author of the bill, Rep. Edmond Soliday, a Republican, has authored or co-authored several transportation bills, including transportation infrastructure funding, automated traffic enforcement, vehicle excise taxes, and department of transportation property matters. He defeated Midwest Environmental Systems CEO Pamela Fish in the November, 2016 elections. House Bill 1592 will be heard by the Roads and Transportation committee.
Last year another Republican, Rep. Kevin Mahan, supported a similar bill that would have forced manufacturers to sell their vehicles through a dealership. “For the average Hoosier, purchasing an automobile can be daunting and a big investment,” Mahan said. “A greater variety of vehicles are now available and can be brought directly to consumers virtually anywhere in the country. In the event of a recall or malfunction, consumers should be protected.”
Arguments against limiting manufacturer sales
Tesla Motors, Inc.’s Vice President of Corporate and Business Development Diarmuid O’Connell testified against House Bill 1592. “Tesla does not operate through some kind of loophole in Indiana law,” O’Connell said. “The current law is explicit in Tesla’s ability to sell directly and, as written today, it is not broken.” O’Connell’s remarks point to current Indiana law in which an auto manufacturer is not allowed to open a store in direct competition with an affiliated franchised dealer. Tesla has no direct competition franchise dealers in Indiana and has always sold directly to consumers. O’Connell added that Tesla’s presence in Indiana has “brought only good to the consumer welfare without harming anyone — not even the dealers.”
At stake is more than a corporate tug-of-war between automakers. Tesla’s electric vehicles are at the heart of that vision for tomorrow’s consumer domestic transportation and will continue to flourish and change the way automakers in the U.S. and abroad have conducted business as usual.
If “you’re interested in promoting competition and free market principles … you recognize direct distribution, particularly for a company like Tesla, is critically important,” said Todd Maron, the company’s chief counsel, during remarks at a 2016 Federal Trade Commission event. “We don’t simply believe that [electric vehicles] represent a nice complement to gas powered cars. We believe that it’s imperative that they are replaced entirely by electric vehicles.” An end to franchising laws would advance that goal and place low-mileage gas-powered vehicles at risk of obsolescence.
Arguments in favor of limiting manufacturer sales
A coalition of free market groups, led by Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist, argues that ending or restricting automotive franchising would actually decrease consumer choice. Norquist believes that reducing competition among dealers selling the same car brands hurts consumers. Franchising laws were actually created by anti-trust efforts at the Federal Trade Commission and “they sustain market competition rather than undermine it.” Last year, the group accused federal regulators of ignoring evidence that would undermine proposed measures governing automotive sales that stand to enrich what they saw as a “politically-powerful company” at consumers’ expense.
Harry Tepe, owner of Tom Tepe Auto Center in Milan, Indiana, supports legislation that would further protect consumers in the auto industry. “We just want to make sure there are protections in place for the consumers,” Tepe said. “The issue at hand is that the loophole is still open that allows any manufacturer to come in and market a vehicle and sell directly to the public without having any protections in place for the consumer.” He takes the position that dealerships are responsible for being a liaison between the consumer and the manufacturer.
Lobbying on behalf of the automotive industry
Proponents and opponents of Indiana House Bill 1592 are, in many cases, influenced by a powerful automotive lobby in the U.S. Automotive industry lobbyists use a combination of strategies to gain influence. They do a lot of research, sit down with lawmakers one-on-one, deliver messages in writing, and call Congressmen and members of the administration on the phone.
“If you’re a big company, like a carmaker, and you’re lobbying lawmakers, you’re almost like a pro sports team. You want to get the big names, the most talented, most knowledgeable people,” said David Levinthal, communications director for the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan research group that tracks the money spent in the U.S. political system and its effect on elections and public policy. “So, these big companies, in the major industries, hire former Congressmen and top Congressional staffers and other high-ranking government officials to be their lobbyists, because those are the folks who know who all the other major players are and they know the ways of Washington.”
Source: OpenSecrets.org
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) reports its earnings for Q3 today. Here’s what to expect, as the company will reveal its balance sheet after the market closes on Wednesday.
Tesla already reported deliveries just after Q3 ended, and it demolished Wall Street consensus estimates of roughly 462,000 vehicles. Tesla delivered 486,532 cars in the third quarter, which was a big beat, but was down 2.1 percent from the same quarter last year. Energy storage deployments were 13.7 GWh, up year-over-year.
Tesla showrooms picked clean ahead of Q3 end as demand looks strong
For the quarter, analysts have already compiled their predictions for what Tesla will report this afternoon:
- Total Revenues: $28.34B
- Non-GAAP EPS: $0.43
- Operating Margin: 2.5%
- Operating Income: $721M
- Free Cash Flow: ~-$4.51B
Here are a few things we are looking forward to hearing about on the call:
Automotive Gross Margin and Overall Profitability
This was 16.3 percent in Q2, down from 19.2 percent in Q1, and was impacted by warranty charges and some fading regulatory credits. Consensus implies overall gross margin near 18 percent, but a miss here would potentially reinforce concerns about pricing pressure on its vehicles.
Pay attention to energy storage margins as well, especially since Tesla missed GWh expectations, although it was still a strong quarter.
Robotaxi/Cybercab, Unsupervised FSD, and Optimus Progress
The Say questions from retail investors usually focus on these types of projects, and this quarter is no different. Scaling the Cybercab fleet beyond Austin amid the open NHTSA safety review, timeline for Unsupervised FSD in customer cars, Robotaxi unit economics, and Optimus cost per unit plus when it could start generating revenue, are all things to be looking for.
Any concrete timelines or regulatory path details will likely move the stock more than the near-term numbers. SpaceX merger speculation, which was detailed during SpaceX’s earnings call last night, may also surface, although the key details were shared last night.
Elon Musk just confirmed the Tesla and SpaceX merger step everyone was waiting for
Say Investor Questions
- How does the Cybercab fleet scale past Austin, and what’s the regulatory path outside Texas given NHTSA’s open safety review?
- When can we anticipate FSD unsupervised in customer cars?
- When will the CyberCab be available for customer purchase/ownership?
- What’s the unit economics per paid robotaxi mile, and how does it compare to the thirty-cent target?
- Tesla has acknowledged that HW3 vehicles cannot support unsupervised FSD. When will owners know whether they can upgrade their hardware for free, and when will Tesla provide a clear plan?
The full Earnings Call will be streamed this evening after market close around 5 p.m. this evening.
SpaceX confirmed the date of Starship’s 15th launch window with some massive ambitions for the mission, as it will attempt to catch Ship for the first time.
CEO Elon Musk confirmed during SpaceX’s Earnings Call last night on October 20 that it would launch Starship for its 15th test flight in November, and there are some incredible things the company wants to try, making it perhaps the most groundbreaking launch in the program’s history.
SpaceX delivers blockbuster Q3 results as Super Intelligence segment booms
The most major development of the call was SpaceX’s intention to catch Ship alongside catching the Super Heavy Booster, something that has happened in the past. SpaceX showed an animation of the Ship catch, which will be done on the launch tower’s chopsticks:
SpaceX has released a new Starship tower catch animation for the upcoming Flight 15! https://t.co/kStn01Da8u
— Truthful🛰️ (@Truthful_ast) October 20, 2026
This monumental goal is to catch both the Ship and Booster in a dual-catch scenario, an incredible feat since SpaceX has never been able to reuse a Ship after launch. Musk said it would be “the first time that an orbital launch vehicle has been fully recovered,” and said it would be a “profound technology milestone.”
Musk said the odds of success on this first Ship catch attempt are “more likely than not,” but SpaceX is ultimately prepared for more tries moving forward. The SpaceX frontman said that, starting next year, Starship would have a “steady stream” of flights through the end of the year.
The cadence will accelerate in 2027, with Musk stating the company plans to target weekly flights in the first half of 2027 and twice-weekly by year-end.
The Flight 15 attempt follows that of Flight 14, which took off in late September and was Starship’s first orbital mission. It deployed 26 Starlink V3 satellites, accomplished a controlled ocean splashdown of both stages, and shed more light on potential challenges for the program moving forward.
As of now, the Starship program is firing on all cylinders.
Interested in ordering a Tesla? Use my referral code for three free months of Full Self-Driving (Supervised) here.
Wall Street analysts rapidly raised price targets on SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) after the company reported a bullish third quarter for 2026 following the market close on October 20. Shares were sent sharply higher in after-hours and premarket trading.
SpaceX posted revenue of $14.6 billion, a 161 percent year-over-year increase that comfortably topped consensus estimates, which fell near $12.7 billion. The company also posted a net profit of $4.4 billion from a prior-year loss, with adjusted EBITDA reaching $8.8 billion.
More price target movement:
🚀 Cantor Fitzgerald lifted its target to $345 from $246 (Overweight).
🚀 Barclays raised its target to $300 from $254 (Overweight).
🚀 Citi increased its target to $240 from $200 (Buy),
🚀 UBS moved to $230 from $210 (Buy)
🚀TD Cowen raised its target to $224 from $200 (Buy).
🚀Morgan Stanley held an Overweight rating with a $300 target.
🚀Other firms also adjusted higher, including Wells Fargo (to $274 from $214) and Clear Street (to $248 from $217). Analysts broadly cited the strong quarterly print, accelerating AI compute expansion, Starlink progress, and Starship milestones as drivers of higher long-term growth and earnings power.— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 21, 2026
Its Super Intelligence (AI) division generated roughly $7.6 billion and became the largest revenue contributor, growing nearly 830 percent year-over-year, while the Connectivity segment delivered $5.2 billion on strong subscriber additions that lifted the consumer base to 13.6 million for Starlink.
The Earnings Call proved especially catalytic, as CEO Elon Musk and CFO Bret Johnsen outlined Q1 2027 revenue guidance of $33 billion to $37 billion, which was far above the roughly $22 billion analysts had modeled, alongside fourth-quarter capital-expenditure plans of $35 billion to $40 billion focused on AI compute infrastructure at sites including Memphis and Southaven.
SpaceX delivers blockbuster Q3 results as Super Intelligence segment booms
Management targets 2.5 to 3 gigawatts of nameplate compute capacity by year-end and discussed pathways to 13 gigawatts or more by the end of 2027. Musk described relentless demand from hyperscalers and other customers, with compute pricing supporting payback periods of less than a year and potentially as short as six months.
Additional highlights included Starship’s recent orbital success and V3 satellite deployment, Starlink pricing and enterprise momentum, rapid Grok Bot adoption, spectrum expansion plans, and the formation of special committees to explore a possible combination with Tesla.
These elements prompted a wave of price-target increases:
- JPMorgan more than doubled its target to $500 from $240 while maintaining an Overweight rating.
- Cantor Fitzgerald lifted its target to $345 from $246 (Overweight).
- Barclays raised its target to $300 from $254 (Overweight).
- Citi increased its target to $240 from $200 (Buy),
- UBS moved to $230 from $210 (Buy), and
- TD Cowen raised its target to $224 from $200 (Buy).
- Morgan Stanley held an Overweight rating with a $300 target.
- Other firms also adjusted higher, including Wells Fargo (to $274 from $214) and Clear Street (to $248 from $217). Analysts broadly cited the strong quarterly print, accelerating AI compute expansion, Starlink progress, and Starship milestones as drivers of higher long-term growth and earnings power.
Shares, which closed at $147.79 on October 20, jumped roughly 8 percent in early premarket trading on October 21 as investors digested the results and the newly elevated Street targets.
The average analyst price target has moved higher, which reflects greater conviction in SpaceX’s trajectory across launch, connectivity, and the Super Intelligence business, even as elevated spending remains a point of focus.
Tesla reports Q3 Earnings today: here’s what to expect
SpaceX confirms Starship 15 launch window with massive ambitions
