News
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk explains why Blue Origin’s Starship lawsuit makes no sense
For the first time since SpaceX competitor Blue Origin took NASA to federal court after losing a Moon lander contract to Starship and a protest over that loss, unsealed documents have finally revealed the argument Jeff Bezos’ space startup is focusing on in court.
After the details broke in new court documents filed on Wednesday, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk weighed in on Twitter to offer his take on why the arguments Blue Origin has hinged its lawsuit on make very little sense.
While one seemingly significant portion of the main complaint claiming to reveal “additional substantial errors” in SpaceX’s Starship HLS proposal was almost fully redacted, most of the opening argument is legible. In short, Blue Origin appears to have abandoned the vast majority of arguments it threw about prior to suing NASA and the US government and is now almost exclusively hinging its case on the claim that SpaceX violated NASA’s procurement process by failing to account for a specific kind of prelaunch review before every HLS-related Starship launch.
For NASA’s HLS competition, SpaceX proposed to create a custom variant of Starship capable of serving as a single-stage-to-orbit crewed Moon lander with the help of the rest of the Starship fleet – including Super Heavy boosters, cargo/tanker Starships, and a depot or storage ship. SpaceX would begin a Moon landing campaign by launching a (likely heavily modified) depot Starship into a stable Earth orbit. Anywhere from 8 to 14 Starship tanker missions – each carrying around 100-150 tons of propellant – would then gradually fill that depot ship over the course of no more than six or so months. Once filled, an HLS lander would launch to orbit, refill its tanks from the depot ship, and make its way to an eccentric lunar orbit to rendezvous with NASA’s Orion spacecraft and three Artemis astronauts.
As Blue Origin has exhaustively reminded anyone within earshot for the last five months, SpaceX’s Starship Moon lander proposal is extremely complex and NASA is taking an undeniable risk (of delays, not for astronauts) by choosing SpaceX. Nevertheless, NASA’s Kathy Lueders and a source evaluation panel made it abundantly clear in public selection statement that SpaceX’s proposal was by far the most competent, offering far a far superior management approach and technical risk no worse than Blue Origin’s far smaller, drastically less capable lander.
The bulk of Blue Origin’s argument appears to be that its National Team Lander proposal was drastically disadvantaged by the fact that SpaceX may or may not have incorrectly planned for just three ‘flight readiness reviews’ (FRRs) for each 16-launch HLS Starship mission. While heavily redacted, Blue Origin wants a judge to believe that contrary to the US Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) fair assessment that such a small issue is incredibly unlikely to have changed the competition’s outcome, it would have “been able to propose a substantially lower price” for its lander. To be clear, a flight readiness review is an admittedly important part of NASA’s safety culture, but it ultimately amounts to paperwork and doublechecks over the course of a day or two of meetings.
All else equal, the need to complete an FRR before a launch is incredibly unlikely to cause more than a few days of delays in a worst-case scenario and would have next to no cost impact. There is no reasonable way to argue that being allowed to complete some launches without an FRR would have singlehandedly allowed Blue Origin to “[engineer] and [propose] an entirely different architecture.” Nevertheless, that’s exactly what the company attempts to argue – that it would have radically and completely changed the design it spent more than half a billion dollars sketching out if it had only been able to skip a few reviews.
Curiously, Blue Origin nevertheless does make a few coherent and seemingly fact-based arguments in the document. Perhaps most notably, it claims that when NASA ultimately concluded that it didn’t have funds for even a single award (a known fact) and asked SpaceX – its first choice – to make slight contract modifications to make the financial side of things work, NASA consciously chose to waive the need for an FRR before every HLS Starship launch. Only via purported cost savings from those waived reviews, Blue Origin claims, was NASA able to afford SpaceX’s proposal – which, it’s worth noting, was more than twice as cheap as the next cheapest option (Blue Origin).
Ultimately, it thus appears that Blue Origin may have a case to make that NASA awarded SpaceX the HLS Option A contract despite a handful of errors that violated contracting rules and the HLS solicitation. Relative to just about any other possible issue, though, it’s hard not to perceive the problems Blue Origin may or may have correctly pointed out as anything more than marginal and extraordinarily unlikely to have changed the outcome in Blue’s favor had they been rectified before the award. Most importantly, even if Blue Origin’s argument is somehow received favorably and a judge orders NASA to overturn its SpaceX HLS award and reconsider all three proposals, it’s virtually inconceivable that even that best-case outcome would result in Blue Origin receiving a contract of any kind.
News
Tesla UK sales see 14% year-over-year rebound in June: SMMT data
The SMMT stated that Tesla sales grew 14% year-over-year to 7,719 units in June 2025.
Tesla’s sales in the United Kingdom rose in June, climbing 14% year-over-year to 7,719 units, as per data from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT). The spike in the company’s sales coincided with the first deliveries of the updated Model Y last month.
Model Y deliveries support Tesla’s UK recovery
Tesla’s June performance marked one of its strongest months in the UK so far this year, with new Model Y deliveries contributing significantly to the company’s momentum.
While the SMMT listed Tesla with 7,719 deliveries in June, independent data from New AutoMotive suggested that the electric vehicle maker registered 7,891 units during the month instead. However, year-to-date figures for Tesla remain 2% down compared to 2024, as per a report from Reuters.
While Tesla made a strong showing in June, rivals are also growing. Chinese automaker BYD saw UK sales rise nearly fourfold to 2,498 units, while Ford posted the highest EV growth among major automakers, with a more than fourfold increase in the first half of 2025.
Overall, the UK’s battery electric vehicle (BEV) demand surged 39% to to 47,354 units last month, helping push total new car sales in the UK to 191,316 units, up 6.7% from the same period in 2024.
EV adoption accelerates, but concerns linger
June marked the best month for UK car sales since 2019, though the SMMT cautioned that growth in the electric vehicle sector remains heavily dependent on discounting and support programs. Still, one in four new vehicle buyers in June chose a battery electric vehicle.
SMMT Chief Executive Mike Hawes noted that despite strong BEV demand, sales levels are still below regulatory targets. “Further growth in sales, and the sector will rely on increased and improved charging facilities to boost mainstream electric vehicle adoption,” Hawes stated.
Also taking effect this week was a new US-UK trade deal, which lowers tariffs on UK car exports to the United States from 27.5% to 10%. The agreement could benefit UK-based EV producers aiming to expand across the country.
News
Tesla Model 3 ranks as the safest new car in Europe for 2025, per Euro NCAP tests
Despite being on the market longer than many of its rivals, the Tesla Model 3 continues to set the bar for vehicle safety.
The Tesla Model 3 has been named the safest new car on sale in 2025, according to the latest results from the Euro NCAP. Among 20 newly tested vehicles, the Model 3 emerged at the top of the list, scoring an impressive 359 out of 400 possible points across all major safety categories.
Tesla Model 3’s safety systems
Despite being on the market longer than many of its rivals, the Tesla Model 3 continues to set the bar for vehicle safety. Under Euro NCAP’s stricter 2025 testing protocols, the electric sedan earned 90% for adult occupant protection, 93% for child occupant protection, 89% for pedestrian protection, and 87% for its Safety Assist systems.
The updated Model 3 received particular praise for its advanced driver assistance features, including Tesla’s autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system, which performed well across various test scenarios. Its Intelligent Speed Assistance and child presence detection system were cited as noteworthy features as well, as per a WhatCar report.
Other notable safety features include the Model 3’s pedestrian-friendly pop-up hood and robust crash protection for both front and side collisions. Euro NCAP also highlighted the Model 3’s ability to detect vulnerable road users during complex maneuvers, such as turning across oncoming traffic.
Euro NCAP’s Autopilot caution
While the Model 3’s safety scores were impressive across the board, Euro NCAP did raise concerns about driver expectations of Tesla’s Autopilot system. The organization warned that some owners may overestimate the system’s capabilities, potentially leading to misuse or inattention behind the wheel. Even so, the Model 3 remained the highest-scoring vehicle tested under Euro NCAP’s updated criteria this year.
The Euro NCAP’s concerns are also quite interesting because Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised, which is arguably the company’s most robust safety suite, is not allowed for public rollout in Europe yet. FSD Supervised would allow the Model 3 to navigate inner city streets with only minimal human supervision.
Other top scorers included the Volkswagen ID.7, Polestar 3, and Geely EX5, but none matched the Model 3’s total score or consistency across categories. A total of 14 out of 20 newly tested cars earned five stars, while several models, including the Kia EV3, MG ZS, and Renault 5, fell short of the top rating.
Elon Musk
Why Tesla’s Q3 could be one of its biggest quarters in history
Tesla could stand to benefit from the removal of the $7,500 EV tax credit at the end of Q3.
Tesla has gotten off to a slow start in 2025, as the first half of the year has not been one to remember from a delivery perspective.
However, Q3 could end up being one of the best the company has had in history, with the United States potentially being a major contributor to what might reverse a slow start to the year.
Earlier today, the United States’ House of Representatives officially passed President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill,” after it made its way through the Senate earlier this week. The bill will head to President Trump, as he looks to sign it before his July 4 deadline.
The Bill will effectively bring closure to the $7,500 EV tax credit, which will end on September 30, 2025. This means, over the next three months in the United States, those who are looking to buy an EV will have their last chance to take advantage of the credit. EVs will then be, for most people, $7,500 more expensive, in essence.
The tax credit is available to any single filer who makes under $150,000 per year, $225,000 a year to a head of household, and $300,000 to couples filing jointly.
Ending the tax credit was expected with the Trump administration, as his policies have leaned significantly toward reliance on fossil fuels, ending what he calls an “EV mandate.” He has used this phrase several times in disagreements with Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
Nevertheless, those who have been on the fence about buying a Tesla, or any EV, for that matter, will have some decisions to make in the next three months. While all companies will stand to benefit from this time crunch, Tesla could be the true winner because of its sheer volume.
If things are done correctly, meaning if Tesla can also offer incentives like 0% APR, special pricing on leasing or financing, or other advantages (like free Red, White, and Blue for a short period of time in celebration of Independence Day), it could see some real volume in sales this quarter.
You can now buy a Tesla in Red, White, and Blue for free until July 14 https://t.co/iAwhaRFOH0
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 3, 2025
Tesla is just a shade under 721,000 deliveries for the year, so it’s on pace for roughly 1.4 million for 2025. This would be a decrease from the 1.8 million cars it delivered in each of the last two years. Traditionally, the second half of the year has produced Tesla’s strongest quarters. Its top three quarters in terms of deliveries are Q4 2024 with 495,570 vehicles, Q4 2023 with 484,507 vehicles, and Q3 2024 with 462,890 vehicles.
Tesla UK sales see 14% year-over-year rebound in June: SMMT data
Tesla Model 3 ranks as the safest new car in Europe for 2025, per Euro NCAP tests
Why Tesla’s Q3 could be one of its biggest quarters in history
-
Elon Musk4 days agoTesla investors will be shocked by Jim Cramer’s latest assessment
-
News1 week agoTesla Robotaxi’s biggest challenge seems to be this one thing
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoFirst Look at Tesla’s Robotaxi App: features, design, and more
-
News2 weeks agoSpaceX and Elon Musk share insights on Starship Ship 36’s RUD
-
News2 weeks agoWatch Tesla’s first driverless public Robotaxi rides in Texas
-
News1 week agoWatch the first true Tesla Robotaxi intervention by safety monitor
-
News2 weeks agoTesla has started rolling out initial round of Robotaxi invites
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla to launch in India in July with vehicles already arriving: report