Bloomberg reports that SpaceX has approached Goldman Sachs in hopes of arranging a $500M leveraged loan, potentially opening up an entirely new avenue of capital for the company as it approaches inflection points in its two largest development programs, the Starlink internet satellite constellation and its next-generation BFR rocket and spaceship.
In the United States, the market for leveraged loans (a form of debt capital) has experienced unprecedented growth in 2018, soaring past $1.3 trillion total. Unlike borrowers typically pursuing leveraged loans, SpaceX has little to no debt to speak of and is likely either financially stable or even healthily profitable.
The fact that SpaceX is not already heavily leveraged (i.e. lots of debt) indicates that the company’s interest in this type of loan – versus something more like traditional equity sales – arises from the need for capital to fund major one-time investments that are likely to peak within the next 2-3 years, if not sooner. Leveraged loans are typically classified as riskier investments due to the tendency for borrowers to already have plenty of debt: in the case of SpaceX, it’s clear that that risk derives more from the fundamentally risky nature of space-related endeavors.
Success is not guaranteed even if SpaceX has plenty of funds to invest in satellite constellation or rocket R&D, while major one-time expenditures like the construction of a new launch pad and test facility for BFR also carry the risk of potentially catastrophic destruction in the event of a vehicle failure during testing or launch, one case that was proven out during the September 2016 on-pad failure of a Falcon 9 rocket, multiple times smaller than BFR. Leveraged loans still are likely to work in SpaceX’s favor, drawing in investors already willing to accept that inherent risk when the potential rewards of success are immense.
“The benefits of this maiden voyage [into leveraged loan borrowing] are clear: SpaceX should have ample funding needs for many years to come as it keeps Mars in its sights. Crucially for Musk, loans are more private than most other forms of capital raising — and very hard to short.”
Starlink
While the exact status of SpaceX’s major development programs is not public, it can be reasonably intuited that the company’s Starlink constellation is likely in the process of restructuring an R&D-centered experimental wing into something closer to a factory. Such a factory will be an absolute necessity if SpaceX intends to mass-produce high-performance smallsats at a truly unprecedented scale: ~4500 satellites make up the first wave of the constellation alone, while nearly ~7500 more would eventually follow to allow Starlink to truly blanket the world with fast internet access.
-
- SpaceX’s first two Starlink prototype satellites are pictured here before their inaugural Feb. 2018 launch, showing off a utilitarian design. (SpaceX)
-
- One of the first two prototype Starlink satellites separates from Falcon 9’s upper stage, February 2018. (SpaceX)
BFR
SpaceX’s Big F____ Rocket – deemed Big Falcon Rocket (BFR) in public statements – is no less capital-hungry. Aside from major investments in tooling and the lengthy and return-free process of designing such a large, complex, and advanced launch vehicle, SpaceX is in the process of preparing a site for a dedicated BFR factory at Port of Los Angeles. Currently housed in a huge temporary tent, it’s already clear that spaceship prototype fabrication could benefit greatly from workspace expansions and a more controlled environment. Long-term, such a factory will be a basic necessity for SpaceX to begin true serial production of BFR boosters and spaceships.
In South Texas, SpaceX is also beginning the expensive process of constructing some combination of a launch pad and testing facility dedicated to the BFR program. Most recently, two massive propellant storage tanks have arrived at a nearby facility at the same time as construction is beginning in earnest on the circa-2014 site of SpaceX’s proposed launch pad.
-
- SpaceX’s initial BFR work is being performed in a giant temporary tent located at Port of LA. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- Yusaku Maezawa stands on the first BFR composite tank/fuselage section prior to his Sept. 17 announcement. (Yusaku Maezawa)
-
- SpaceX’s massive BFR mandrel, used to mold its composite structures. (SpaceX)
Ultimately, the company could benefit immensely from an infusion of free capital, if for no other reason than to expedite critical infrastructure investments that will become the foundation for Starlink and BFR.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
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
