News
Musk calls out SpaceX rival for receiving billion dollar subsidy, ULA head fires back
Following an intriguing SpaceX testimony before Senate committees in Washington D.C., Musk took to Twitter to share some thoughts on the state of the launch marketplace and SpaceX’s place within it. It didn’t take long for him to relate a somewhat common critique of the United Launch Alliance, SpaceX’s only American competition.
Sorry. That is simply not true. There is no "billion dollar subsidy". Amazing that this myth persists.
— Tory Bruno (@torybruno) July 14, 2017
Other orgs shd also develop reusable orbital rockets. If an airplane co had reusable airplanes, buying single use airplanes wd seem crazy. pic.twitter.com/OJotlGmPHt
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 13, 2017
Tory Bruno, President and Chief Executive of ULA, responded with gloves off just a few hours later, deeming the implied existence of such a subsidy nothing more than a “[persistent] myth”. He spent fifteen or so minutes replying to skeptical and inquisitive followers on Twitter, stating that the Wikipedia paragraph on the subject was incorrect. Bruno was steadfast in his response saying that he had publicly testified on the public procurement process before Congress (he did, and he did not defer on the term “subsidy”), and he adamantly refused to back down on his statement that such a subsidy only existed in mythology.
For better or for worse, Bruno is correct to a large extent. In fact, he published a full editorial on the controversial subject in the canonical SpaceNews Magazine. The ELC (EELV (Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle) Launch Contract) is the source of this controversy, and while not quite a full billion dollars, the FY2016 ELC contract was for $860 million.
SpaceX has admittedly been chronically doubted and mistreated in the realm of government contracting, and ULA has been less than perfectly civil in the past. Simply by existing, SpaceX in effect disrupted what was a American launch industry monopoly held between Boeing and Lockheed Martin. Those two companies merged their space endeavors approximately 11 years ago and have since been the United Launch Alliance. For reasons that do make a bit of sense but are still mildly obtuse, the United States Air Force chose to purchase ULA launch vehicles and the services that make the launch of those vehicles possible separately. The main given reason for this choice, as explored in Bruno’s editorial, is to give the Air Force added flexibility.
As discussed in the 2016 ELC contract itself, another large need for this type of funding lies in the maintenance of a large workforce, and the constant depreciation of both the Atlas and Delta families of launch vehicles. The Delta family, known mainly for the large Delta IV Heavy, is almost never utilized at this point in time, with Atlas being both more cost effective and more reliable. Regardless, due to contracting, ULA is required to maintain both the workforce and facilities necessary to produce and launch Delta vehicles, in spite of having nearly no “business” thanks to Atlas V. Maintaining a workforce and set of facilities that is in part or whole redundant is not efficient or cost-effective, but it is contractually required. So, while the ELC contract Musk deemed a nearly pointless subsidy does have some major flaws, inefficiencies, and illogical aspects, it is not technically correct to label it a subsidy.
- Operated by the same company responsible for the F-35, Atlas 5 is a highly reliable and equally expensive rocket. (ULA)
- Delta IV Heavy, the only current American heavy lift launch vehicle in service. Once operational, Falcon Heavy will be capable of launching nearly double the payload to GTO. (USAF/ULA, 2013)
Without the actual contract information, it is also difficult to know if ULA would still receive this contractual payment in lieu of conducting actual launches. Bruno frames it in such a way that it sounds like the U.S. government modifies the payment size based on the number and type of required launches for a given year. If the multi-year agreement means that launches delayed many months or more can still be swapped out at no additional charge, then this does indeed make a certain amount of sense. The array of discussion on the subject nevertheless fails to explore the consequences of launch provider-side issues, the likes of which ULA and Atlas 5 experienced earlier this year, resulting in some amount of delays.
We do that too, but for free
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 13, 2017
While there can be no doubt that the actual gritty details of the ELC contracts deal explicitly with such possible outcomes, the lack of transparency (be that as a result of publicly inaccessible contract details or highly obtuse and lingo-heavy contract language) ultimately frames ELC contracts and the vehemence with which ULA defends them as a wasteful, overly complex, and unnecessary alternative to simply offering a fixed product with services inherently included, as SpaceX does.
News
Tesla China delivery centers look packed as 2025 comes to a close
Needless to say, it appears that Tesla China seems intent on ending 2025 on a strong note.
Tesla’s delivery centers in China seem to be absolutely packed as the final days of 2025 wind down, with photos on social media showing delivery locations being filled wall-to-wall with vehicles waiting for their new owners.
Needless to say, it appears that Tesla China seems intent on ending 2025 on a strong note.
Full delivery center hints at year-end demand surge
A recent image from a Chinese delivery center posted by industry watcher @Tslachan on X revealed rows upon rows of freshly prepared Model Y and Model 3 units, some of which were adorned with red bows and teddy bears. Some customers also seem to be looking over their vehicles with Tesla delivery staff.
The images hint at a strong year-end push to clear inventory and deliver as many vehicles as possible. Interestingly enough, several Model Y L vehicles could be seen in the photos, hinting at the demand for the extended wheelbase-six seat variant of the best-selling all-electric crossover.
Strong demand in China
Consumer demand for the Model Y and Model 3 in China seems to be quite notable. This could be inferred from the estimated delivery dates for the Model 3 and Model Y, which have been extended to February 2026 for several variants. Apart from this, the Model Y and Model 3 also continue to rank well in China’s premium EV segment.
From January to November alone, the Model Y took China’s number one spot in the RMB 200,000-RMB 300,000 segment for electric vehicles, selling 359,463 units. The Model 3 sedan took third place, selling 172,392. This is quite impressive considering that both the Model Y and Model 3 are still priced at a premium compared to some of their rivals, such as the Xiaomi SU7 and YU7.
With delivery centers in December being quite busy, it does seem like Tesla China will end the year on a strong note once more.
News
Tesla Giga Berlin draws “red line” over IG Metall union’s 35-hour week demands
Factory manager André Thierig has drawn a “red line” against reducing Giga Berlin’s workweek to 35 hours, while highlighting that Tesla has actually increased its workers’ salaries more substantially than other carmakers in the country.
Tesla Giga Berlin has found itself in a new labor dispute in Germany, where union IG Metall is pushing for adoption of a collective agreement to boost wages and implement changes, such as a 35-hour workweek.
In a comment, Giga Berlin manager André Thierig drew a “red line” against reducing Giga Berlin’s workweek to 35 hours, while highlighting that Tesla has actually increased its workers’ salaries more substantially than other carmakers in the country.
Tesla factory manager’s “red line”
Tesla Germany is expected to hold a works council election in 2026, which André Thierig considers very important. As per the Giga Berlin plant manager, Giga Berlin’s plant expansion plans might be put on hold if the election favors the union. He also spoke against some of the changes that IG Metall is seeking to implement in the factory, like a 35-hour week, as noted in an rbb24 report.
“The discussion about a 35-hour week is a red line for me. We will not cross it,” Theirig said.
“(The election) will determine whether we can continue our successful path in the future in an independent, flexible, and unbureaucratic manner. Personally, I cannot imagine that the decision-makers in the USA will continue to push ahead with the factory expansion if the election results favor IG Metall.”
Giga Berlin’s wage increase
IG Metall district manager Jan Otto told the German news agency DPA that without a collective agreement, Tesla’s wages remain significantly below levels at other German car factories. He noted the company excuses this by referencing its lowest pay grade, but added: “The two lowest pay grades are not even used in car factories.”
In response, Tesla noted that it has raised the wages of Gigafactory Berlin’s workers more than their German competitors. Thierig noted that with a collective agreement, Giga Berlin’s workers would have seen a 2% wage increase this year. But thanks to Tesla not being unionized, Gigafactory Berlin workers were able to receive a 4% increase, as noted in a CarUp report.
“There was a wage increase of 2% this year in the current collective agreement. Because we are in a different economic situation than the industry as a whole, we were able to double the wages – by 4%. Since production started, this corresponds to a wage increase of more than 25% in less than four years,” Thierig stated.
News
Tesla is seeing a lot of momentum from young Koreans in their 20s-30s: report
From January to November, young buyers purchased over 21,000 Teslas, putting it far ahead of fellow imported rivals like BMW and Mercedes-Benz.
Tesla has captured the hearts of South Korea’s 20s-30s demographic, emerging as the group’s top-selling imported car brand in 2025. From January to November, young buyers purchased over 21,000 Teslas, putting it far ahead of fellow imported rivals like BMW and Mercedes-Benz.
Industry experts cited by The Economist attributed this “Tesla frenzy” to fandom culture, where buyers prioritize the brand over traditional car attributes, similar to snapping up the latest iPhone.
Model Y dominates among young buyers
Data from the Korea Imported Automobile Association showed that Tesla sold 21,757 vehicles to the 20s-30s demographic through November, compared to BMW’s 13,666 and Mercedes-Benz’s 6,983. The Model Y led the list overwhelmingly, with variants like the standard and Long Range models topping purchases for both young men and women.
Young men bought around 16,000 Teslas, mostly Model Y (over 15,000 units), followed by Model 3. Young women followed a similar pattern, favoring Model Y (3,888 units) and Model 3 (1,083 units). The Cybertruck saw minimal sales in this group.
The Model Y’s appeal lies in its family-friendly SUV design, 400-500 km range, quick acceleration, and spacious cargo, which is ideal for commuting and leisure. The Model 3, on the other hand, serves as an accessible entry point with lower pricing, which is valuable considering the country’s EV subsidies.
The Tesla boom
Experts described Tesla’s popularity as “fandom culture,” where young buyers embrace the brand despite criticisms from skeptics. Professor Lee Ho-geun called Tesla a “typical early adopter brand,” comparing purchases to iPhones.
Professor Kim Pil-soo noted that young people view Tesla more as a gadget than a car, and they are likely drawn by marketing, subsidies, and perceived value. They also tend to overlook news of numerous recalls, which are mostly over-the-air software updates, and controversies tied to the company.
Tesla’s position as Korea’s top import for 2025 seems secured. As noted by the publication, Tesla’s December sales figures have not been reported yet, but market analysts have suggested that Tesla has all but secured the top spot among the country’s imported cars this year.

