News
How other industries see Tesla Motors
This what industry players are having a hard time seeing, how a startup focuses on vision instead of cash flow profit and the mundane.
I caught my second glimpse of Elon’s Roadster at a car event where I saw the charging cord daisy chain here.
The latest wild swings in the Tesla news fueled by New Jersey’s infamous closing of its doors on allowing the company to sell directly, has had greater repercussions than anticipated. Our original $5B Gigafactory and how Tesla will disrupt more than carmakers article, written on March 4th on how disruptive its Gigafactory will be, has gained a lot of traction. Since then, the investment world seems to take Tesla Motors a little more seriously, even the articles on Seeking Alpha are becoming favorable to the company. We are happy to see the specialized press also acknowledging the potential Tesla is, not just as a cheerleader for electric cars, with GreenCarReports writing about how much more than a carmaker the company is. And yes, Panasonic is not the only battery maker wondering where this whole Gigafactory is going and what it means to their business model. I wrote a similar article on CarNewsCafe.
Tesla Motors is.. a lifestyle statement!
Tesla Motors really boils down to two fundamental trends. It is part of the answer many want to see, a different future than the one presented by most companies and what mainstream carmakers are satisfied with. It’s also about one entrepreneur’s vision of wanting a fun electric car to drive, Elon Musk. Doing only what an entrepreneur does best with a startup, it begins with a clean slate. It is extremely nimble and capable of tackling far greater changes than an established company. Tesla Motors has never been, will never be and can never be defined as a carmaker. It is much more than that with Superchargers, soon a battery factory, an indirect solar energy company, and much more. This is what traditional carmakers and investors were having a hard time understanding, the whole picture and how out of the box the Tesla business model is.
This is the day my gearhead friend finally saw the light with EVs
If we are blessed and cursed with ADD and always wanting more, this can be a great fuel for innovations, but it can also frighten companies focused on keeping a steady cash flow. Startups need to continuously innovate and at some point, they too become established companies, see Apple and Google, for example. Certain established companies rekindled their original drive and unique DNA, such as IBM going back to consulting, dropping manufacturing out of the equation. That is the only way for a startup to survive in the long run, leaving the rest to linger.
Tesla will continue to innovate, as long as it keeps focusing on what matters. What matters is what we all want, a change, a real change away from the mundane. Tesla answers this and will continue to disrupt more than carmakers, as we noted in our March 4th article.
Solar City and the challenges it faces
Solar City is one of the outlets where Tesla Motors can surprise us the next few years. The company made solar panels a household name, but it faces the entrepreneur’s dilemma, how to go forward and continue innovating.
Solar City is good at one thing, leasing photovoltaic (PV) panels with a promise to cut your electric bill by at least $25. Since then, it has done little more than that. Today, Solar City virtually sits on most rooftops, making it one of the biggest energy maker in the U.S. It will need to move beyond the leasing model, which really isn’t that economical for the long term. Solar City, through Elon Musk’s vision should be where the next Tesla Motors saga will reveal its next strategic move. The Gigafactory will use solar energy and should indirectly motivate Solar City to move beyond simply leasing. It could morph into an energy management company. This is what happened to Coulomb Technology as it spun off its manufacturing process to ChargePoint and got into the management aspects of the business, much like IBM. Solar City is the last company Elon Musk hasn’t reworked yet. It is fully poised to reap the benefits of its energy management before the government runs out of patience with it. With the Superchargers in place, this juggernaut has a complete portfolio for energy management.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
