News
SpaceX worth $33B after raising more than $1B for Starlink and Starship
Since April 2018, SpaceX has successfully raised more than $1.24 billion through the sale of equity, likely sold to investors by extrapolating the company’s current record of success to include the potential of its next two products, Starlink and Starship.
Thanks to SpaceX’s successful streak of fundraising, the company is now valued at $33.3 billion according to sources that spoke with CNBC reporter Michael Sheetz. The same source indicated that demand for SpaceX equity remains strong as the company seeks to continue extremely expensive development and production programs. Most notably, SpaceX is simultaneously building two full-scale orbital Starship prototypes at separate facilities in Texas and Florida, readying an earlier Starhopper testbed for serious test flights, and is in the midst of ramping up its Starlink satellite production to levels unprecedented in the history of spaceflight.
Put simply, with SpaceX’s Starship and Starlink programs simultaneously entering into capital-intensive phases of development and production, the company has a huge amount of work on its plate. Most of that work involves testing prototypes with technologies that are frequently unprecedented, as well as refining those designs into something final and worthy of serious production. In the case of Starship, a great deal of integrated testing and design finalization lies ahead before SpaceX can even think about starting serial production of its ~50m (160 ft) tall steel Starships or ~60m (200 ft) Super Heavy boosters.
Although large-scale aerospace development programs already tend to be very expensive, SpaceX (led by CEO Elon Musk) has structured its Starship/Super Heavy development program to be extremely hardware-rich. This is another way to say that prototypes are constantly being built, designs are ever-changing, and hardware is constantly being severely damaged (or even destroyed) during fast-paced testing. SpaceX (and Musk) have often been famous for preferring development programs that move fast and break things, delivering knowledge and optimizing designs through lessons learned (often the hard way). SpaceX also values “scrappiness” in its programs, although that sadly ends up coming at the cost of employee pay (below industry standards) and benefits (scarce bonuses, no 401K-matching, extreme hours, minimal work-life balance).
Put it all together and the results of SpaceX-style development programs have frequently defied cemented industry expectations and beliefs. SpaceX has built – from scratch – entire launch vehicles (Falcon 9 V1.0) and spacecraft (Cargo Dragon) 5-10 times cheaper than NASA believed possible. SpaceX has successfully developed a commercially viable style of reusable rockets and took just ~30 months to go from its first attempted landing to a successful booster recovery and less than 15 months after that to reuse its first booster on a commercial, orbital-class launch. Competitors that vehemently denied that SpaceX would succeed are now 5-10 years behind with disinterested responses to the reusable titan that is Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy.
Still, while SpaceX’s record of commercial and technical spaceflight success is second-to-none since the Apollo Program and the early days of the Space Shuttle, even its extraordinarily cost-effective development style requires major funding in the face of ambitions as grand as Starship and Starlink.
Starlink races ahead
On May 23rd, SpaceX completed an extraordinarily ambitious Starlink launch debut, placing sixty “v0.9” spacecraft into low Earth orbit (LEO). Weighing no less than 16.5 tons (~36,000 lb), SpaceX’s first dedicated Starlink mission also became the heaviest payload the company has ever launched by at least ~30%. Aside from the spectacular statistics associated with the mission, SpaceX also debuted an exotic and largely unprecedented satellite form factor, stacking each flat, rectangular ~230 kg (510 lb) spacecraft like a deck of cards. With Starlink, SpaceX has also flown the first krypton-powered ion thrusters, replacing the traditional xenon to cut as much as $100,000 (or even more) from the cost of each satellite.
“We continue to track the progress of the Starlink satellites during early orbit operations. At this point, all 60 satellites have deployed their solar arrays successfully, generated positive power and communicated with our ground stations. Most are already using their onboard propulsion system to reach their operational altitude and have made initial contact using broadband phased array antennas. SpaceX continues to monitor the constellation for any satellites that may need to be safely deorbited. All the satellites have maneuvering capability and are programmed to avoid each other and other objects in orbit by a wide margin.” — SpaceX, May 31st
~20 days after launch, all 60 satellites are in contact with SpaceX ground controllers and all but 3-4 have managed to successfully begin raising their orbits from ~450 km to 550 km (280-340 mi). Roughly two dozen have already passed 500 km and most should reach their final orbits within 1-2 weeks.
By far the most significant news, however, was CEO Elon Musk’s confidence that SpaceX already has “sufficient capital to build an operational constellation”, likely referring to a constellation of 750-1500 spacecraft capable of either covering the entire US or offering “decent global coverage”. Of note, Musk made this comment days before SpaceX – via SEC filings – effectively announced that it has already raised more than $1B in 2019. A large portion – if not all – of that funding is thus likely bound for Starlink as the program’s shockingly small team of ~400 prepares to aggressively ramp up production.
According to both COO Gwynne Shotwell, Musk, and SpaceX, the company hopes to conduct an additional 1-5 launches of 60 Starlink satellites this year, potentially leaving SpaceX with a constellation of more than 400 satellites – with a total bandwidth of 7 terabits per second (tbps) – after just eight months of launches. Equally significant, SpaceX’s official Starlink.com website states that SpaceX wants to offer real internet service to an unspecified number of US and Canada consumers after just six launches. In other words, SpaceX could deliver the first (possibly alpha or beta) taste of consumer Starlink internet service by the end of 2019.
If SpaceX can deploy the constellation soon and Starlink reaches its cost, performance, and longevity targets, it’s safe to say that SpaceX’s private investors are going to be extraordinarily happy with their financial decision.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
