News
NIO’s electric car battery swapping station looks to pick up where Tesla left off
NIO continues to push forward on battery swapping technology that’s aimed at getting its electric cars fueled up in less time than it takes to pump gasoline into a standard internal combustion engine vehicle. NIO owners can use the company’s compact battery swapping stations located in parking lots and other locations for a delay-free power supply for their vehicles. Drivers enter a swap station and wait while an autonomous robot removes a vehicle’s drained battery and replaces it with a completely charged one. With such an option available for quick access to EV power, NIO clearly intends to embrace customer convenience as part of its plan to win over its target customer base.
According to NIO’s IPO last year, this battery exchange service – called “Power Swap” – has been rolled out in nine cities around China, including Beijing and Shanghai. Plans call for 40 to 80 swap stations in place by the end of December. The company announced the completion of its battery swap network along the Chinese G2 Expressway (from Beijing to Shanghai) in early January this year.
NIO is offering a subscription model that’s priced at $200 per month wherein customers can utilize company-provided batteries rather than owning the actual battery that’s attached to their vehicle. If a customer doesn’t own the battery, swapping it out is a mere formality rather than a question of whether their replacement battery is the same quality as the one given up after purchase.
Despite its advantages, NIO’s battery swap plan has given investors pause, and for good reason. This style of recharging concept has gained some closet skeletons in the recent past, particularly via Better Place, the Israeli-based electric car company that gained a pie-in-the-sky reputation trying to become what Tesla ultimately became but went bankrupt instead. Better Place was known for its swap stations, thus wrapping the entire autonomous recharging solution in with Better Place’s downfall, fair or not. The current environment for EVs might change investors’ tune in the near future, though, especially given NIO’s native country’s push for companies just like theirs to exist.
NIO and other electric companies have a unique position with the Chinese government that may help them succeed where others have struggled or failed. Namely, government-driven subsidies and charging infrastructure investments have been offered to China’s customers to encourage the speedy production and expansion of electric car presence. This direct support could be key to NIO’s ability to scale up and profit from its battery swapping business. That, and Tesla’s incredible impact on the demand for electric vehicles and proven ability to implement battery charging networks to ease range anxiety deserves a significant effort.
Tesla has given its own attempt at battery swapping a shot after first demonstrating the capability shortly after Better Place closed up shop. A battery swapping station opened up near the Harris Ranch Supercharger station in Coalinga, CA with appointments available beginning in 2014 as a pilot program. The station appeared to be closed as of 2016, however, and Tesla has only shown an interest in offering the service again via a 2017 patent application for a battery swapping technology after investing its primary resources into developing its Supercharger network. Tesla’s application received a Notice of Allowance for this application from the US Patent and Trademark Office on February 6, 2019, meaning the company has continued to pursue the technology rights and the full patent should issue soon.
NIO opened its doors in 2014 and currently offers two all-electric production vehicles: the ES6 and ES8, both SUVs. Dubbed the “Tesla of China”, the startup successfully delivered 10,000 made-to-order vehicles last year and has made overtaking Tesla in China one of its major goals. Significant investments have been made into branding NIO as a lifestyle company, including exclusive owner clubs and social network opportunities along with customer convenience offerings like the battery swap stations, mobile power vans, and app-based services similar to those offered by Tesla. It remains to be seen whether NIO can successfully revive the battery swap concept, but considering the brave new world of EVs that did not exist a mere few years ago, their hopes certainly don’t seem to be too far fetched.
Watch the below video to see NIO’s battery swapping tech in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmTePwW5HOQ&feature=youtu.be
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
