News
SpaceX Falcon Heavy launch contracts reach double digits after latest NASA win
For the third time in seven months, NASA has contracted SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket to launch a high-value scientific spacecraft, raising the number of active contracts for the world’s most powerful rocket into the double digits.
In a twist that has become increasingly unsurprising, a spokesperson from SpaceX competitor United Launch Alliance (ULA) says that the company – the only other competitor for the contract – withdrew its bid because it had no more Atlas V rockets available. ULA announced earlier this year that it had officially stopped selling Atlas V launches, leaving a total of 29 more launches – all already reserved for specific customers – before the rocket is fully retired. Unfortunately for ULA, the Vulcan Centaur rocket it’s been developing to replace Atlas V and Delta IV since 2013 or 2014 is years behind schedule.
Somewhat inexplicably, even though ULA bid Vulcan to launch a high-value NASA payload in Q4 2024 as recently as this year, the company apparently didn’t feel that its next-gen rocket would be ready to launch a different payload in Q2 2024. In response, NASA’s only option to launch the GOES-U geostationary weather satellite was SpaceX’s offering, guaranteeing it the contract when ULA backed out of the competition.
Part of an 18-satellite fleet dating back to the 1970s, GOES-U will be the fourth and (as of now) final satellite in a modern extension of the GOES (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite) program contracted by NASA for NOAA in 2008. In 2013, GOES-T and GOES-U were added to the original GOES-R and GOES-S, nominally resulting in four satellites built by Lockheed Martin for an average of ~$350M each.
ULA or ULA-heritage rockets have launched all 18 GOES satellites to date and there was little reason to believe that wouldn’t continue until the end of the GOES-R series. However, as a result of ULA’s major Vulcan development delays, it appears that the company now finds itself temporarily incapable of competing for launch contracts. That makes it hard to judge whether SpaceX would have won GOES-U without ULA’s withdrawal, though it’s difficult to imagine ULA could have beat Falcon Heavy’s $153M contract price.
In one of the most unequivocal signs of SpaceX’s immense impact on even the launch contracts it lost, ULA’s first two GOES-R-series Atlas V launch contracts were each valued at $261M in 2021 dollars when they were awarded in 2013. In 2019, NASA again awarded ULA a contract to launch GOES-T on an identical Atlas V 541 rocket – but this time for just $177M (2021).
It’s unclear what kind of configuration Falcon Heavy will be in for its April 2024 GOES-U launch. For ULA’s GOES-R and GOES-S launches, Atlas V has delivered each ~5200 kg (~11,500 lb) weather satellite to an “optimized geosynchronous transfer orbit [GTO].” A bit like a middle ground between an elliptical GTO launch and a direct-to-geostationary-orbit (GEO) launch, both missions required Atlas V’s Centaur upper stage to perform three separate burn – and one after a three-hour coast. In theory, Falcon Heavy should be able to easily launch GOES-U to a similar orbit while allowing SpaceX to recover all three boosters, though it’s possible that safety margins will mean the center core is expended.
Regardless, Falcon Heavy continues to more than prove that SpaceX made the right choice by investing significantly more than $500M of its own money to develop the rocket. In 2021 alone, the rocket has secured three NASA launch contracts worth around $660M. In 2020, SpaceX won another ~$120M Falcon Heavy launch contract from NASA. All told, the rocket has now earned the company ten active launch contracts, including four or five in 2022 alone: ViaSat-3, USSF-52, NASA’ Psyche, USSF-67, and perhaps an Inmarsat commsat. In 2023, Falcon Heavy could launch Astrobotic’s first Griffin Moon lander with NASA’s VIPER rover, followed by GOES-U, Europa Clipper, and (though delays are very likely) two parts of NASA’s Gateway lunar space station.
-
Including USSF-44 (scheduled to launch next month) and assuming Inmarsat’s I-6 F2 commsat ends up on Falcon Heavy, the rocket now has ten launch contracts after winning GOES-U. Additionally, while the program appears to be in limbo, NASA did technically announce plans for SpaceX to launch at least two Dragon XL spacecraft on Falcon Heavy to resupply the lunar Gateway station – a total of 12 missions if those plans turn into tangible contracts.
In a new note to investors on Tuesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco said that Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors regarding its Robotaxi rollout, Full Self-Driving software, and Optimus.
Percoco said in the note that, for the most part, investors are still very positive about the direction the company is headed. However, there are some things the firm would like to see, and they have to do with financials.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla bulls are more than convinced that the company’s Full Self-Driving software is proof it can develop physical AI. Financially, however, there are still some questions, especially on elevated spending, which CEO Elon Musk said would occur as the company works to roll out Robotaxi faster and continue developing its Optimus robot.
The latter two are where Tesla will have to prove progress to investors, as Percoco writes that both projects “will require clearer evidence that Robotaxi is scaling and more tangible Optimus proof points to support the ROI on elevated capex.”
Percoco said the second quarter earnings call did not change his long-term thesis of where Tesla is positioned in the AI race, which is out in front. However, there are concerns that weaker gross margins and higher R&D spend will stress financials, and that has “sharpened our (and investors’) focus on measurable progress across Robotaxi and Optimus.”
Additionally, Robotaxi still needs to be proven with more operation in existing cities while maintaining safety but improving how many rides it gives in any given time, he said. For Optimus, Percoco wrote that he is “still looking for evidence beyond commentary around SOP.”
Morgan Stanley put Percoco in charge of covering Tesla after long-time analyst Adam Jonas transitioned to the automotive side.
Currently, Morgan Stanley has a $415 price target on Tesla and a ‘Hold’ rating on the stock. It is trading at around $330 at the time of publication, which was 2:30 P.M. on the East Coast.
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
