Investor's Corner
Inside Tesla’s ‘tent’-based Model 3 line that set a path to profitability
Tesla attracted more headlines than usual when Elon Musk announced on Twitter that the company is introducing a new Model 3 assembly line inside a sprung structure on the grounds of the Fremont factory. Casually dubbed by Elon Musk as a “tent,” the assembly line, dubbed GA4, played a huge part in pushing Tesla towards profitability in the third quarter.
Tesla’s “tent”-based Model 3 assembly line was featured in Elon Musk’s recent segment on CBS’ 60 Minutes. While speaking with correspondent Leslie Stahl, Musk remarked that the assembly line, which took only three weeks to set up, was responsible for boosting Model 3 production by 50%. That was enough to push the company to reach its self-imposed 5,000 Model 3 per week target in the second quarter.
Elon Musk has noted that Tesla is now at a point when it could produce 5,000 Model 3 per week without any problems. Before the company reached this point, though, it had to pass through a period that Musk personally described as “production hell.” During the second quarter, Tesla struggled to ramp Model 3 output using the vehicle’s two assembly lines inside the Fremont factory itself. When it was evident that this could not be achieved, Tesla did the unexpected — it built a third Model 3 line (GA4) to augment its output.
The construction of the “tent”-based line was lauded by the company’s supporters and criticized heavily by Tesla’s skeptics. Inasmuch as the sprung structure was controversial, though, it worked, and it ultimately helped Tesla address the Model 3’s production problems then. When he announced the promotion of Jerome Guillen as Tesla’s new President of Automotive, Musk stated that GA4 was the brainchild of the longtime problem-solver, who was working as the lead of the Tesla Semi program then. Considering how much GA4 helped Tesla reach its production goals, it is not difficult to speculate that the construction of GA4 was one of the reasons behind Jerome Guillen’s promotion to President of Automotive.
CBS correspondent Leslie Stahl noted during the recent 60 Minutes segment that the “tent”-based Model 3 line, contrary to Elon Musk’s initial plans for a fully-automated car factory, is currently filled with human workers. Musk noted during the segment that “People are way better at dealing with unexpected circumstances than robots,” while sharing a laugh with some workers assembling the Model 3.

Speaking with investors back in 2016, Elon Musk noted that Tesla’s electric car factories will be a “machine that builds the machine.” Musk even shared that the codename for the project is “Alien Dreadnought” — a reference to the hyper-advanced extraterrestrial crafts featured in sci-fi films and literature. The CEO initially estimated the dreadnought to be operational by the end of 2018, though the “production hell” that ensued during the Model 3 ramp forced Elon Musk to admit that over-automation was a mistake. Admitting his miscalculation on Twitter, Musk humbly noted that “humans are underrated.”
If there is one lesson that Tesla learned this year, it is that unorthodox solutions such as its “tent”-based Model 3 line — while a step away from Elon Musk’s original vision — are needed for the company to hit its goals. Using a makeshift production line that’s populated with human workers might not be part of Elon Musk’s “Alien Dreadnought,” but it was exactly what Tesla needed to push towards its manufacturing targets. If any, Tesla’s stellar performance in the third quarter, when it surprised Wall Street and skeptics by posting $6.8 billion in revenue, was made possible in no small part by the “tent”-based Model 3 assembly line.
Ultimately, GA4 could serve as a template for the company’s upcoming electric car production facilities, particularly as Tesla is currently setting the stage for Gigafactory 3, which would produce the Model 3 and Model Y for the local Chinese market. Gigafactory 3 is in an extremely aggressive timetable — one which Wall Street even dubbed as “not feasible.” If Tesla can maintain its open-mindedness and its tendency to adopt out-of-the-box solutions, though, even ambitious projects such as Gigafactory 3 would be more than feasible.
Watch 60 Minutes‘ segment on Tesla’s “tent”-based Model 3 assembly line in the video below.
Elon Musk
Tesla stock gets latest synopsis from Jim Cramer: ‘It’s actually a robotics company’
“Turns out it’s actually a robotics and Cybercab company, and I want to buy, buy, buy. Yes, Tesla’s the paper that turned into scissors in one session,” Cramer said.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) got its latest synopsis from Wall Street analyst Jim Cramer, who finally realized something that many fans of the company have known all along: it’s not a car company. Instead, it’s a robotics company.
In a recent note that was released after Tesla reported Earnings in late January, Cramer seemed to recognize that the underwhelming financials and overall performance of the automotive division were not representative of the current state of affairs.
Instead, we’re seeing a company transition itself away from its early identity, essentially evolving like a caterpillar into a butterfly.
The narrative of the Earnings Call was simple: We’re not a car company, at least not from a birds-eye view. We’re an AI and Robotics company, and we are transitioning to this quicker than most people realize.
Tesla stock gets another analysis from Jim Cramer, and investors will like it
Tesla’s Q4 Earnings Call featured plenty of analysis from CEO Elon Musk and others, and some of the more minor details of the call were even indicative of a company that is moving toward AI instead of its cars. For example, the Model S and Model X will be no more after Q2, as Musk said that they serve relatively no purpose for the future.
Instead, Tesla is shifting its focus to the vehicles catered for autonomy and its Robotaxi and self-driving efforts.
Cramer recognizes this:
“…we got results from Tesla, which actually beat numbers, but nobody cares about the numbers here, as electric vehicles are the past. And according to CEO Elon Musk, the future of this company comes down to Cybercabs and humanoid robots. Stock fell more than 3% the next day. That may be because their capital expenditures budget was higher than expected, or maybe people wanted more details from the new businesses. At this point, I think Musk acolytes might be more excited about SpaceX, which is planning to come public later this year.”
He continued, highlighting the company’s true transition away from vehicles to its Cybercab, Optimus, and AI ambitions:
“I know it’s hard to believe how quickly this market can change its attitude. Last night, I heard a disastrous car company speak. Turns out it’s actually a robotics and Cybercab company, and I want to buy, buy, buy. Yes, Tesla’s the paper that turned into scissors in one session. I didn’t like it as a car company. Boy, I love it as a Cybercab and humanoid robot juggernaut. Call me a buyer and give me five robots while I’m at it.”
Cramer’s narrative seems to fit that of the most bullish Tesla investors. Anyone who is labeled a “permabull” has been echoing a similar sentiment over the past several years: Tesla is not a car company any longer.
Instead, the true focus is on the future and the potential that AI and Robotics bring to the company. It is truly difficult to put Tesla shares in the same group as companies like Ford, General Motors, and others.
Tesla shares are down less than half a percent at the time of publishing, trading at $423.69.
Elon Musk
Tesla to a $100T market cap? Elon Musk’s response may shock you
There are a lot of Tesla bulls out there who have astronomical expectations for the company, especially as its arm of reach has gone well past automotive and energy and entered artificial intelligence and robotics.
However, some of the most bullish Tesla investors believe the company could become worth $100 trillion, and CEO Elon Musk does not believe that number is completely out of the question, even if it sounds almost ridiculous.
To put that number into perspective, the top ten most valuable companies in the world — NVIDIA, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, TSMC, Meta, Saudi Aramco, Broadcom, and Tesla — are worth roughly $26 trillion.
Will Tesla join the fold? Predicting a triple merger with SpaceX and xAI
Cathie Wood of ARK Invest believes the number is reasonable considering Tesla’s long-reaching industry ambitions:
“…in the world of AI, what do you have to have to win? You have to have proprietary data, and think about all the proprietary data he has, different kinds of proprietary data. Tesla, the language of the road; Neuralink, multiomics data; nobody else has that data. X, nobody else has that data either. I could see $100 trillion. I think it’s going to happen because of convergence. I think Tesla is the leading candidate [for $100 trillion] for the reason I just said.”
Musk said late last year that all of his companies seem to be “heading toward convergence,” and it’s started to come to fruition. Tesla invested in xAI, as revealed in its Q4 Earnings Shareholder Deck, and SpaceX recently acquired xAI, marking the first step in the potential for a massive umbrella of companies under Musk’s watch.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
Now that it is happening, it seems Musk is even more enthusiastic about a massive valuation that would swell to nearly four-times the value of the top ten most valuable companies in the world currently, as he said on X, the idea of a $100 trillion valuation is “not impossible.”
It’s not impossible
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 6, 2026
Tesla is not just a car company. With its many projects, including the launch of Robotaxi, the progress of the Optimus robot, and its AI ambitions, it has the potential to continue gaining value at an accelerating rate.
Musk’s comments show his confidence in Tesla’s numerous projects, especially as some begin to mature and some head toward their initial stages.
Elon Musk
Tesla director pay lawsuit sees lawyer fees slashed by $100 million
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
The Delaware Supreme Court has cut more than $100 million from a legal fee award tied to a shareholder lawsuit challenging compensation paid to Tesla directors between 2017 and 2020.
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
Delaware Supreme Court trims legal fees
As noted in a Bloomberg Law report, the case targeted pay granted to Tesla directors, including CEO Elon Musk, Oracle founder Larry Ellison, Kimbal Musk, and Rupert Murdoch. The Delaware Chancery Court had awarded $176 million to the plaintiffs. Tesla’s board must also return stock options and forego years worth of pay.
As per Chief Justice Collins J. Seitz Jr. in an opinion for the Delaware Supreme Court’s full five-member panel, however, the decision of the Delaware Chancery Court to award $176 million to a pension fund’s law firm “erred by including in its financial benefit analysis the intrinsic value” of options being returned by Tesla’s board.
The justices then reduced the fee award from $176 million to $70.9 million. “As we measure it, $71 million reflects a reasonable fee for counsel’s efforts and does not result in a windfall,” Chief Justice Seitz wrote.
Other settlement terms still intact
The Supreme Court upheld the settlement itself, which requires Tesla’s board to return stock and options valued at up to $735 million and to forgo three years of additional compensation worth about $184 million.
Tesla argued during oral arguments that a fee award closer to $70 million would be appropriate. Interestingly enough, back in October, Justice Karen L. Valihura noted that the $176 award was $60 million more than the Delaware judiciary’s budget from the previous year. This was quite interesting as the case was “settled midstream.”
The lawsuit was brought by a pension fund on behalf of Tesla shareholders and focused exclusively on director pay during the 2017–2020 period. The case is separate from other high-profile compensation disputes involving Elon Musk.