News
NASA head calls out SpaceX CEO Elon Musk over Starship event in bizarre statement
Roughly 24 hours before SpaceX CEO Elon Musk was scheduled to present an update on the company’s Starship launch vehicle development, NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine tweeted a bizarre and wholly unprovoked statement on the subject.
Seemingly equating SpaceX’s recent Crew Dragon delays with the distribution of Elon Musk’s public attention, the NASA administrator’s comment was almost universally criticized by the spaceflight community at large – and rightfully so.
First, some context. Created in 2010 and first supported with serious funding some 12-24 months later, NASA’s Commercial Crew Program (CCP) exists to replace the astronaut transport capabilities once offered by Space Shuttle and now achieved with contracts for seats on Russian Soyuz launches. Primarily the result of inept bureaucracy in NASA and Congress, the Space Shuttle was “retired” in 2011 in full knowledge that the US would have to rely on Russia to get NASA astronauts to the ISS until 2015 (at the absolute earliest).
Congress shut down multiple 2010 proposals to continue Shuttle flights until the late 2010s, choosing instead to kill the Shuttle and divert its associated funding to the expendable Ares V rocket (now the Space Launch System, SLS) and Orion crew capsule. More on that later...
Retweeted by Bridenstine’s official Twitter account, above is the absolute best-case interpretation of the NASA administrator’s comment. Although Eric Berger means well, the interpretation gives NASA far too much credit. Specifically, Bridenstine (or whoever fed him the statement) went out of his way to make it entirely one-sided in its focus on SpaceX. By all appearances, it would have never been posted if not for Elon Musk’s plans to present on Starship. Bridenstine additionally notes that “Commercial Crew is years behind schedule” and indicates that “NASA expects to see the same level of enthusiasm focused on [its] investments”.
Altogether, it’s simply impossible to interpret it as anything less than Bridenstine scolding SpaceX – and SpaceX alone – for not falling to the floor, kissing NASA’s feet, and pretending that Crew Dragon and Falcon 9 are the only things in existence. Absent from Bridenstine’s criticism was NASA’s other (and even more delay-complicit) Commercial Crew Partner, Boeing, who has yet to complete a pad abort or orbital flight test of its Starliner spacecraft. SpaceX completed Crew Dragon’s pad abort in 2015 and completed a flawless orbital flight test in March 2019.
In essence, Bridenstine is publicly implying that SpaceX needs to stop being (or appearing to be) distracted by Starship and focus 100% on Crew Dragon. Boeing was not mentioned, despite being a minimum of six months behind SpaceX and dramatically more ‘distracted’ in the Bridenstine-style interpretation of the word. For reference, Boeing is a publicly-traded company with 150,000 employees, annual revenue of more than $100B, and a market cap of $206B. Boeing has 14 subsidiaries, a handful of which are involved in spaceflight, and has no less than one or two dozen products that are each more fiscally important to shareholders and board members than Starliner.
Compared to Boeing’s annual ~$100B revenue, the entirety of the Starliner development program – from the drawing board in 2010 to crewed, orbital spaceflight sometime in 2020 – is ~$4.8B. On the scale of corporate focus, Starliner has likely been a blip at most in 2019, with the company probably far more focused on the systematic organizational failures that lead to the deaths of hundreds of people in two near-identical 737 MAX crashes. Alas, NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine did not release a statement publicly implying that Boeing needs to devote the “same level of enthusiasm” to Starliner after the second fatal 737 MAX crash in March 2019. Nor did Bridenstine release a statement charging Boeing with a lack of focus after continuous reports of issues with the company’s KC-46 Pegasus tanker program, nor Boeing’s recent $9.2B US Air Force trainer jet contract, or myriad other corporate focuses.
On the other hand, as Musk noted in his relatively subtle September 28th responses to Bridenstine’s implicitly derisive comment, something like 50-80% of the entirety of SpaceX’s workforce and resources are focused on Crew Dragon, the Falcon 9 rockets that will launch it, or a combination of both. At present, Starship is – at most – a side project, even if its strategic importance to SpaceX is hard to exaggerate. The same is largely true for Starlink, SpaceX’s ambitious internet satellite constellation program. It may be true that Starship will eventually make Crew and Cargo Dragon (as well as Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy) wholly redundant, but that is likely years away and SpaceX will support NASA – as it is contractually required to – for as long as the space agency has vested interest in using Crew Dragon.
At the same time, NASA has explicitly and publicly chosen to prioritize safety over schedule with the Commercial Crew Program, accepting the possibility of delays and cost overruns to ensure that SpaceX and Boeing can build the safest spacecraft possible.
In a September 28th interview with CNN, Musk bluntly noted that the hardware was – at this point in time – more or less ready for flight and will be on-site at SpaceX’s Pad 39A Florida launch site within the next two months. According to Musk, from then on, any additional launch delays can almost entirely be attributed to the paperwork and reviews NASA must complete before giving SpaceX the go-ahead. If Bridenstine wants SpaceX to launch astronauts sooner, one – and possibly the only – solution is to tackle the roadblocks created by NASA’s own self-enforced red tape. The question, then, is whether Bridenstine wants to cut away red tape that may (or may not) be there for good reason.
When the pot calls the kettle black
Detached from whining about a contractor’s CEO presenting about a non-NASA program, complaining about Commercial Crew delays is at least slightly more reasonable. Originally intended to launch as early as 2015, Congress systematically underfunded the Commercial Crew Program by more than 50% for over half a decade, dispersing $2.4B of the $5.8B NASA requested from 2011 to 2016. Unsurprisingly, this completely upended Boeing and SpaceX development schedules. By September 2014, SpaceX aimed to have Crew Dragon certified by NASA for astronaut transport before the end of 2017, but even then, NASA already saw that schedule as overly optimistic.
It would be another two years before Congress began to seriously fund Commercial Crew at its requested levels, beginning in FY2016. In response to Bridenstine, former NASA deputy administrator Lori Garver noted that over the ~5 years Congress consistently withheld hundreds of millions of dollars of critical funds from Commercial Crew, NASA’s SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft were just as consistently overfunded above and beyond their budget requests. From 2011 to 2016 alone, SLS and Orion programs requested $11B and received an incredible $16.3B (148%) from Congress, while Commercial Crew requested $5.8B and received $2.4B (41%).
Ironically, despite literally receiving almost seven times as much funding as Crew Dragon and Starliner, SLS and Orion are arguably just as – if not more – delayed than their commercial brethren. Originally intended to launch an uncrewed test flight in 2017, there is now little to no chance that that mission (known then as EM-1 and now as Artemis-1) will launch before 2022, a delay of roughly half a decade. The cost of the SLS/Orion program recently crested $30B, a figure likely to grow to ~$40B before it has conducted a single launch. Of that funding, approximately a third has gone to Boeing, the primary contractor responsible for NASA’s comically-delayed SLS Core Stage – the orange booster pictured above.
The Commercial Crew development program will likely cost NASA $8B total over 9-10 years and produce two clean-sheet, high-performance, (relatively) low-cost crewed spacecraft. After their demonstration launches are completed, NASA will transition to fixed-price service contracts with SpaceX and Boeing to routinely send astronauts to the ISS several times per year.
Put simply, if Bridenstine actually cared about defending “the investments of the American taxpayer” more than wielding their sanctity as a political weapon, he wouldn’t have folded like a house of cards at the slightest resistance to his attempts to cull SLS/Orion delays and cost overruns, and he certainly wouldn’t be wasting breath complaining about what SpaceX’s CEO is or isn’t talking about.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
Tesla Supercharger for Business exposes jaw-dropping ROI gap between best and worst locations
Tesla’s new Supercharger for Business calculator reveals an eye-opening all-in cost and location-based ROI projections.
Tesla has launched an online calculator for its Supercharger for Business program, giving property owners their first transparent look at what it really costs to install Superchargers on site and what kind of return they can expect.
The program itself launched in September 2025, allowing businesses to purchase and operate Supercharger hardware on their own property while Tesla handles installation, maintenance, software, and 24/7 driver support. As Teslarati reported at launch, hosts also get their logo placed on the chargers and their location integrated into Tesla’s in-car navigation, meaning drivers are actively routed there. The stalls are open to all EVs, not just Teslas.
We launched Supercharger for Business in 2025 to help companies get charging right. We found simplicity and transparency to be a problem in this industry.
We’re now sharing pricing and a financial calculator to help make informed decisions. The goal is to accelerate investments,…
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) April 8, 2026
The new online calculator, announced by Tesla on Wednesday with the note that “simplicity and transparency” have been a problem in the industry, lets any business enter a U.S. address and get a real cost and revenue model. A standard 8-stall V4 Supercharger site runs approximately $500,000 in hardware and $55,000 per post for installation, bringing an all-in price just shy of $1 million. Tesla charges a flat $0.10 per kWh fee to cover software, billing, and network operations. Businesses set their own retail price and keep the margin above that fee.
Taking a look at Tesla’s Supercharger for Business online calculator, we can see that ROI is not uniform, and the gap between a strong location and a poor one can stretch the breakeven point by several years.
The biggest driver is foot traffic and how long people stay. A busy rest station, hotel, or outlet mall brings in repeat visitors who need to charge while they’re already stopped, pushing utilization numbers higher and shortening payback time.
Tesla Supercharger for Business ROI calculator
Local electricity rates matter just as much on the cost side. Markets like California carry some of the highest commercial electricity rates in the country, which eats into the margin between what a host pays per kWh and what they charge drivers. At the same time, dense urban areas with high EV adoption tend to support higher retail charging prices, which can offset that cost if demand is strong enough. Weather also plays a role. Cold climates reduce battery efficiency and increase charging frequency, but they can also suppress utilization in winter months if drivers avoid stopping in exposed outdoor locations. Suburban and rural sites face a different problem: lower baseline EV traffic, which means a site with cheaper power and lower operating costs can still take longer to pay back simply because the stalls sit idle more often. Tesla’s calculator uses real fleet data to pre-fill utilization estimates by ZIP code, so businesses can run their specific address against these variables rather than relying on averages.
The program has seen real adoption. Wawa, already the largest host of Tesla Superchargers with over 2,100 stalls across 223 locations, opened its first fully owned and branded site in Alachua, Florida earlier this year. Francis Energy of Oklahoma and the city of Alpharetta, Georgia have also deployed branded stations through the program, as Teslarati covered in January.
Tesla now exceeds 80,000 Supercharger stalls worldwide, and the calculator makes the economic case for accelerating that number through private investment rather than company-owned sites alone.
News
Elon Musk drops a bomb regarding Tesla Model S, X inventory
After more than a decade on the road, the original flagship sedan and SUV platforms are effectively at the end of the line. Production of new Model S and Model X vehicles has ceased, and custom orders were quietly halted in early April. What remains are roughly a few hundred factory inventory units scattered across the globe, mostly Plaid variants, and they are disappearing fast.
Elon Musk just dropped a bomb regarding Tesla Model S and X inventory, and as the company is phasing out the flagship vehicles, it sounds like the time to purchase one brand new is almost over.
Musk confirmed on Wednesday that there are “only a few hundred Tesla Model S & X cars left in inventory. Order now if you want one.”
Tesla is running out of units rather quickly.
The message from Musk reads like a final call for two of the company’s most storied vehicles.
Only a few hundred Tesla Model S & X cars left in inventory. Order now if you want one.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 8, 2026
After more than a decade on the road, the original flagship sedan and SUV platforms are effectively at the end of the line. Production of new Model S and Model X vehicles has ceased, and custom orders were quietly halted in early April. What remains are roughly a few hundred factory inventory units scattered across the globe, mostly Plaid variants, and they are disappearing fast.
The news marks the close of a remarkable 14-year chapter. Launched in 2012, the Model S redefined the electric vehicle with blistering acceleration, over-the-air updates, and a luxury interior that embarrassed traditional sedans.
The Model X followed in 2015, turning heads with its Falcon-wing doors and seating for seven.
Together, the Model S and Model X proved EVs could be desirable halo cars, not just eco-friendly commuters. Their departure clears factory space at Tesla’s Fremont plant for something the mass production of the Optimus humanoid robot, which Musk believes will be the greatest contributor to the company’s value.
Musk has repeatedly signaled that Tesla’s future lies beyond passenger cars. Resources once devoted to low-volume flagships are shifting toward autonomy, Robotaxis, and AI hardware. Optimus, the company’s general-purpose robot, is expected to handle manufacturing, household chores, and eventually complex labor.
In the short term, the scarcity has already driven prices on remaining inventory up by about $15,000, turning the last Model S and X into instant collector’s items.
Tesla uses Model S and X ‘sentimental’ value to enforce massive pricing move
The announcement underscores Tesla’s relentless pivot. While the Model Y continues to hold strong sales, the legacy S and X represented an earlier era of pure performance luxury.
The future has been paved by Tesla and Musk’s focus on autonomy, at least in the United States. Customers continue to call for a large SUV, which might be on the way after a recent nudge from Musk on X.
However, whatever the future holds, it has been forged by Tesla’s two flagship vehicles.
Once these final cars are gone, the Model S and Model X will live on only in driveways, forums, and the rear-view mirror of automotive history.
News
Tesla Cybercab production ignites with 60 units spotted at Giga Texas
Designed exclusively for unsupervised Full Self-Driving, the Cybercab promises to deliver safe, affordable, on-demand mobility without human drivers. Early units with temporary controls allow engineers to refine hardware and software in controlled settings before full autonomous fleets hit the roads.
Tesla Cybercab production at Giga Texas seems to have ignited, as 60 units were spotted outside of the production facility on Wednesday, with speculation hinting the all-electric ride-hailing vehicle could be headed to the lineup sooner rather than later.
Interestingly, they were also spotted with steering wheels, which Tesla said the car would be void of.
Giga Texas observer and drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer shared on X a new post that revealed approximately 60 Cybercabs parked in two organized groups in the factory’s outbound lot—the largest concentration observed to date.
Happy 8 April (Wednesday) at Giga Texas, especially for those wanting an update on Cybercabs … I saw about 60 of them in two groups in the outbound lot today … the largest grouping yet!
Also, looks like at least some of these have white seats and most still have clearly… pic.twitter.com/mZbKH96bA7
— Joe Tegtmeyer 🚀 🤠🛸😎 (@JoeTegtmeyer) April 8, 2026
Tegtmeyer noted white seats inside several vehicles and clearly visible steering wheels on most. These are not yet the final steering-wheel-free production versions unveiled in 2024, but early units are likely undergoing validation testing for new features and real-world robotaxi operations across the country.
The timing could not be more symbolic. Tesla has consistently affirmed that mass manufacturing of the Cybercab would begin this month.
CEO Elon Musk has reiterated the April 2026 target multiple times, emphasizing that while initial output will be slow, following the classic S-curve of new-vehicle ramps, the Giga Texas line is being prepared to produce hundreds of units per week.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk outlines expectations for Cybercab production
The first Cybercab already rolled off the line in February, but April marks the official shift to volume production of this purpose-built, pedal- and steering-wheel-free autonomous vehicle.
These 60 Cybercabs signal far more than parked prototypes. They represent tangible proof that Tesla is executing on its ambitious robotaxi roadmap.
Designed exclusively for unsupervised Full Self-Driving, the Cybercab promises to deliver safe, affordable, on-demand mobility without human drivers. Early units with temporary controls allow engineers to refine hardware and software in controlled settings before full autonomous fleets hit the roads.
As production scales, Giga Texas, already home to Cybertruck production, will become the epicenter of Tesla’s autonomous revolution, targeting millions of vehicles annually in the years ahead.
For Tesla and its investors, this sighting underscores manufacturing excellence and timeline discipline. It counters skepticism about the company’s ability to deliver on next-generation vehicles amid a competitive autonomous landscape.
Broader implications are profound: lower transportation costs, reduced emissions, and safer roads as robotaxis proliferate. Musk’s vision of a future where Cybercabs operate 24/7, generating revenue for owners and riders alike, is now visibly underway.
With mass production officially ramping in April, today’s images are not just a snapshot of parked vehicles; they are the first frames of a mobility transformation. Tesla is not only meeting its commitments; it is accelerating toward an era where autonomy reshapes daily life. The Cybercab era has begun.
Tesla Supercharger for Business exposes jaw-dropping ROI gap between best and worst locations
Elon Musk drops a bomb regarding Tesla Model S, X inventory
