News
The NJ mafia puts contract hit on Tesla
Elon Musk is always one step away from pushing the envelope further. Is calling New Jersey the mafia state enough of a wake up call?
Governor Chris Christie exemplifies modern politics clichés by turning around his previous decision legally working with Tesla Motors to follow suit with Texas and Arizona. Is there a pattern? Far from engaging in politics at Teslarati, we can’t help but wonder why those states known for their free markets ideals turned their back on the rhetoric? Where is competition and free market these days?
Does anybody remember freedom of choice?
Elon’s post rightfully reminds us of the disconnect between politicians and their constituents by saying: “the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, composed of political appointees of the Governor, ended your right to purchase vehicles at a manufacturer store within the state” on his post. Governor Christie promised to put a vote to Tesla selling directly, but once the very big, and very powerful auto dealer lobby voiced their concerns, a backroom deal was cut, thus circumventing the legal process. Essentially, the auto dealer association pressures Chris Christie to force anyone buying a new vehicle through middlemen in New Jersey.
Essentially, Elon Musk accuses the Administration and the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission of: “going beyond their authority to implement the state’s laws at the behest of a special interest group looking to protect its monopoly at the expense of New Jersey consumers.”
Automotive Dealerships is a humongous lobby.
We’ll let you gauge how powerful the National Automotive Dealership Association is. Last year, there were 17,600 dealers of new cars and trucks in the US, yielding over $676 billion of sales, accounting for about 15 percent of all US retail activities. The automotive dealership is a substantial part of the country’s economy and its $86.8 million of dealership monies continuously spends $57 million funneled on state election across the country since 2003.
A few days back, we wrote about how the inevitable has to happen, bringing back our country to its foundation of freedom of choice. Dealerships don’t have the best reputation, and certainly very few people praise their services. Is it any wonder they push for an old, worn out self-serving business model? Tesla’s model is so modern, answers the needs of our current era and reflects a very real demand for freedom of choice. Simply put, dealerships do not offer the added services they once did, and are not able to change that quickly. Sounds familiar? Carmakers feel the same. Tesla Motors creeps under Detroit’s car manufacturers’ skin. They feel the inevitable, that change is a constant and you cannot turn around a big corporation instantly. Does that mean we don’t need car dealerships? Certainly not.
Tesla Motors is about now.
If we put everything into perspective, we find Tesla Motors answers our urgent need for elegant performance cars that run on an efficient energy means, electricity. Carmakers are left in the less enviable position of making petroleum derivative powered cars that pollute, smell bad and make awful noises. What truly isn’t fair is to expect these big carmaker and their dealerships to turn on a dime and start manufacturing batteries and electric motors. They are not tooled for this, and the investments would be gargantuan.
The Tesla stores frighten auto dealerships.
Why wouldn’t they be frightened by the Tesla stores, conveniently located inside malls, at the mercy of any onlooker? If you are relegated to the outskirts of the city, next to other car dealerships, knowing how people dread going to look for that new car, carefully maneuvering pushy salesmen, deciphering the unintelligible jargon and financing pitfalls, wouldn’t you fear Tesla? What do you do against a Tesla store that has a list of Model S drivers who will let you ride and sometimes drive their personal car? Know anyone who that with the internal combustion engine (ICE) drivers? Neither do we. But, why would you fight this marvelous system?
In the meantime, it’s hard not to feel sorry for politicians seeing constituents losing faith and car dealership lobbies facing better business models. Would you be frightened, or would you take the opportunity to change and adapt, once and for all?
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
