Investor's Corner
“We Need To Be Evangelists,” Tesla Tells FTC
Tesla general counsel Todd Maron told the FTC this week that traditional auto dealers have a basic conflict of interest with selling electric cars.
At the Federal Trade Commission panel discussion on Wednesday, Tesla general counsel Todd Maron made this opening statement:
“Any discussion of why Tesla sells directly comes back to our mission. Our mission is quite specific. It is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable transportation. You can say we’re true believers and it wouldn’t be an unfair characterization. That’s our mission because we fervently believe that transitioning to electric vehicles is critical to the health of our planet and simply because we believe that electric vehicles are superior vehicles to their gas-powered counterparts. They’re higher-performing, they’re more efficient and they’re safer than gas-powered cars.”
The FTC has indicated it favors direct sales, despite determined opposition from franchise dealers in several states. Maron used the panel discussion to expand on why Tesla does not think dealers are the best way to get the message about electric cars out to potential customers. It takes a lot of effort to explain new technology to people, he said. Dealers are interested in moving as many cars as possible in the shortest possible time.
Usually, most of the discussion that takes place between a dealer and customer revolves around price, not educating the consumer. You can’t expect a dealer to do your evangelizing for you, Maron said. Tesla doesn’t want or need sprawling sales lots brimming with hundreds of cars. Tesla builds each car for a specific customer. It doesn’t stockpile inventory the way traditional dealers do. It also doesn’t play pricing games with its customers. Maron thinks most dealers would have no idea how to do business the Tesla way.
With margins on new cars razor thin, most dealers are focused on making money from repairs and service. “We can’t offer that to any franchised dealer, because we only profit in one way: new car sales and new car sales alone. We can’t make money from service, because our cars have far less parts than gas-powered cars. There are no regular service visits for engine tune-ups and oil changes. We don’t have an engine. We don’t have oil.”
Maron indicated dealers have a basic conflict of interest with the Tesla mission, according to Autoblog. Tesla believes that gas-powered vehicles should “be replaced entirely” by electric vehicles. “Even if you wanted to outsource the responsibility of communicating this message, it would be impossible for traditional dealers to convey this adequately,” he said. “This isn’t a knock on them. Dealers are not fundamentally convinced of the mission of EVs as we are. They make 99 percent of their revenue off gas-powered cars.”
Maron is not the only one who thinks traditional dealers are road blocks on the pathway to electric cars. The Institute of Transportation Studies at UC Davis also claims most dealers don’t want to be bothered with selling EVs. People who go to a dealer to buy an electric car report that sales representatives are poorly trained and often try to switch them to conventional cars rather than take the time to educate them about the advantages of electric cars.
At the hearing in Washington, FTC chair Edith Ramirez said that, “The automobile marketplace may be on the precipice of dramatic change.” Was that a hint that regulators may be considering new rules that would permit direct sales of motor vehicles to consumers? So far, the FTC has tried to stay above the fray, but there was a sense at these hearings that changes are coming and may be imminent.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just filed for the IPO everyone was waiting for
SpaceX filed its public S-1, revealing $18.7 billion in revenue and billions in losses.
SpaceX publicly filed its S-1 registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2026, making its financial details available to the public for the first time ahead of what could be the largest IPO in history.
An S-1 is the formal document a company must submit to the SEC before going public. It includes audited financials, risk factors, business descriptions, and how the company plans to use the money it raises. Companies are required to file one before selling shares to the public, and it must be published at least 15 days before the investor roadshow begins. SpaceX had already submitted a confidential draft to the SEC in April, which allowed regulators to review the filing privately before it went public.
The S-1 reveals that SpaceX generated $18.7 billion in consolidated revenue in 2025, driven largely by its Starlink satellite internet division, which posted $11.4 billion in revenue, growing nearly 50% year over year. Despite that growth, the company lost about $4.9 billion in 2025 and has burned through more than $37 billion since its founding.
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
A significant portion of those losses trace back to xAI, Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, which was recently merged into SpaceX. SpaceX directed roughly 60% of its capital spending in 2025 to its AI division, totaling around $20 billion, yet that division lost billions and grew revenue by only about 22%.
SpaceX plans to list its Class A common stock on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX, with Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America leading the offering. The dual-class share structure means going public will not meaningfully reduce Musk’s control, as Class B shares he holds carry 10 votes per share compared to one vote for public Class A shares.
The company is targeting a raise of around $75 billion at a valuation of roughly $1.75 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO ever. The investor roadshow is reportedly planned for June 5.
Elon Musk
Tesla ditches India after years of broken promises
Tesla has ditched its plans to build a factory in India after years of failed negotiations.
Tesla’s long-running effort to establish a manufacturing presence in India is officially over. India’s Minister of Heavy Industries H.D. Kumaraswamy confirmed on May 19, 2026 that Tesla has informed authorities it will not proceed with a manufacturing facility in the country.
Tesla first signaled serious interest in India around 2021, when it began hiring local staff and lobbying the Indian government for lower import tariffs. The ask was straightforward: reduce duties enough for Tesla to test the market with imported vehicles before committing capital to a local factory. India’s position was equally firm, with an ask of Tesla to commit to manufacturing first, then receive tariff relief. Neither side moved, and the talks quietly collapsed.
Tesla to open first India experience center in Mumbai on July 15
India had offered a policy that would reduce import duties from 110% down to 15% on EVs priced above $35,000, provided companies committed at least $500 million toward local manufacturing investment within three years. Tesla declined to participate. The tariff standoff was only part of the problem. Analysts pointed to significant gaps in India’s local supply chain, inadequate industrial infrastructure, and a mismatch between Tesla’s premium pricing and the purchasing power of India’s automotive market as additional factors that made the investment difficult to justify.
First signs of an unraveling relationship came in April 2024, when Musk abruptly cancelled a planned trip to India where he was set to meet Prime Minister Modi and announce Tesla’s market entry. By July 2024, Fortune reported that Tesla executives had stopped contacting Indian government officials entirely. The government at that point understood Tesla had capital constraints and no plans to invest.
The more fundamental issue is that Tesla’s existing factories are currently operating at approximately 60% capacity, making a commitment to building new manufacturing capacity in a new market difficult to defend to investors. Tesla will continue selling imported Model Y vehicles through its existing showrooms in Mumbai, Delhi, Gurugram, and Bengaluru, but local production is no longer part of the plan.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon just joined forces for one reason: Starlink is winning.
America’s three largest wireless carriers, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon, announced on On May 14, 2026 that they had agreed in principle to form a joint venture aimed at pooling their spectrum resources to expand satellite-based direct-to-device (D2D) connectivity across the United States in what can be seen as a direct response to SpaceX’s Starlink initiative. D2D, in plain terms, is technology that lets a standard smartphone connect directly to a satellite in orbit, the same way it connects to a cell tower, with no extra hardware required.
The alliance is widely seen as a means to slow Starlink’s rapid expansion in the satellite internet and mobile markets. SpaceX’s Starlink Mobile service launched commercially in July 2025 through a partnership with T-Mobile, starting with messaging before expanding to broadband data. SpaceX secured access to valuable wireless spectrum through its $17 billion deal with EchoStar, paving the way for significantly faster satellite-to-phone speeds.
SpaceX was not shy about its reaction. SpaceX president and COO Gwynne Shotwell responded on X: “Weeeelllll, I guess Starlink Mobile is doing something right! It’s David and Goliath (X3) all over again — I’m bettin’ on David.” SpaceX’s VP of Satellite Policy David Goldman went further, flagging potential antitrust concerns and asking whether the DOJ would even allow three dominant competitors to coordinate in a market where a new rival is actively entering.
Weeeelllll, I guess @Starlink Mobile is doing something right! It’s David and Goliath (X3) all over again — I’m bettin’ on David 🙂 https://t.co/5GzS752mxL
— Gwynne Shotwell (@Gwynne_Shotwell) May 14, 2026
Financial analysts at LightShed Partners were blunt, saying the announcement showed the three carriers are “nervous,” and pointed to the timing: “You announce an agreement in principle when the point is the announcement, not the deal. The timing, weeks ahead of the SpaceX roadshow, was the point.”
As Teslarati reported, SpaceX’s next generation Starlink V2 satellites will deliver up to 100 times the data density of the current system, with custom silicon and phased array antennas enabling around 20 times the throughput of the first generation. The carriers’ JV, which has no definitive agreement, no financial structure, and no deployment timeline yet, will need to move quickly to matter.
Elon Musk’s SpaceX is targeting a Nasdaq listing as early as June 12, aiming for what would be the largest IPO in history. With Starlink now serving over 9 million subscribers across 155 countries, holding 59 carrier partnerships globally, and now powering Air Force One, the carriers’ joint venture announcement landed at exactly the wrong time to look like anything other than a defensive move.
Elon Musk called it Epic: The full story of SpaceX’s Starship Flight 12
Zuckerberg’s Meta taps Musk’s Tesla for massive clean energy project
