News
Here’s what SpaceX’s first Starlink satellite rideshare mission looks like [photo]
By way of customer Planet, SpaceX has published the first view of its inaugural Starlink satellite rideshare mission, revealing three mini fridge-sized Earth imaging satellites perched on a stack of dozens of Starlink spacecraft.
Scheduled to launch no earlier than (NET) 5:21 am (09:21 UTC) on June 13th, SpaceX’s eighth launch of Starlink v1.0 satellites (Starlink V1 L8) could usher in a revolutionary new way for smallsat operators to get their spacecraft in orbit. The company’s first Starlink rideshare customer has become a vocal supporter in the days before the first launch, praising unprecedentedly low launch costs SpaceX is able to offer. In fact, executives of Planet – now the world’s second most prolific satellite launcher after SpaceX – were so surprised at the prices the launch company was charging that they “could not believe what [they] were looking at”.
To account for the mass added by three Planet SkySats (~350 kg or 770 lb), SpaceX revealed earlier today that it had removed two Starlink satellites – each weighing ~260 kg (570 lb) – from the original stack of 60 spacecraft. Aside from confirming that Falcon 9 is balancing at the very edge of its performance envelope to launch ~16 metric tons (~35,000 lb) of satellites while still enabling booster recovery, the removal of two Starlink satellites to make way for rideshare payloads hints at an incredible level of flexibility available to SpaceX.
For customers of the fledgling small satellite rideshare program interested in procuring launch services directly, Planet’s SkySats are almost perfectly sized to extract the most bang for the buck from SpaceX’s current pricing system. Planet likely spent a bit more to have SpaceX build it a custom adapter and deployment mechanism for two launches, but the company’s launch costs for six SkySats – split between two June 2020 Starlink missions – could be as low as $6 million based on SpaceX’s own calculator. Due to the general secrecy of launch prices, it’s hard to accurately compare, but Planet would have had to pay upwards of $40 million – almost seven times as much – to launch six SkySats on dedicated Rocket Lab Electron rockets.
In return for $5-30+ million dollars in savings, Planet’s six new SkySats will have to work to raise their orbits from around 300 to 450 kilometers (190-280 mi) after deploying from SpaceX’s Starlink satellite stack. That work will expend a significant portion of their propellant reserves, likely cutting several months (up to several years) off of their operational lifespans. Believed to cost around $3-5 million each, however, the money Planet has saved by launching SkySats with SpaceX could potentially pay for an entirely new batch of six more satellites (or more).
With cost savings like that at hand, it’s no wonder that Planet’s Mike Safyan – Vice President of Launch – described SpaceX’s Starlink rideshare program as “incredibly competitive” and “one of the more significant programs for the smallsat industry”. Having overseen the launch of hundreds of Planet’s Dove and SkySat satellites over the last nine years, it would be hard to find a more qualified industry voice on the subject. Indeed, the rest of the smallsat industry is also responding positively to SpaceX’s new offering, with dozens of commercial spacecraft already assigned to future rideshare launches.
At this point, SpaceX plans to offer rideshare opportunities on Starlink missions every month for the indefinite future, all while charging as little as a $1 million per slot. Thanks to third-party launch services companies like Spaceflight and Exolaunch, much smaller cubesats and nanosats will also have ways to get into orbit on SpaceX rockets for much less than the company’s base price. Meanwhile, scheduled to launch no earlier than June 22nd, SpaceX’s very next Starlink launch – V1 L9 – is expected to include three more Planet SkySats and two similar BlackSky imaging satellites.
If SpaceX can maintain the impressive inertia of its Starlink launch and rideshare efforts, it’s safe to say that the company is going to be a towering presence in the smallsat launch industry for the foreseeable future.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
