News
SpaceX waits in the wings as NASA risks maiming Jupiter probe to pinch pennies
SpaceX and its Falcon Heavy rocket continue to wait in the wings as NASA risks maiming its ‘Europa Clipper’ Jupiter probe by pinching the wrong pennies.
For the second time, NASA has performed “continuation/termination reviews” of three of the Europa Clipper spacecraft’s scientific instruments after budget overruns on the order of no more than a few tens of millions of dollars. Thankfully, no instruments were canceled, unlike the “ICEMAG” magnetometer that was functionally killed last year. Still, a NASA program scientist casually noted that the space agency would tolerate launching without one of two cameras and would offer no more funding to a mass spectrometer instrument (MASPEX), raising the risk of instrument failure during the challenging mission.
For any scientific spacecraft or rover, the instruments carried along are effectively the entire reason for their existence: if those instruments are faulty (or even removed before launch), the mission is effectively rendered pointless. Further, due to the sheer complexity and challenges posed by the act of getting to the destination and surviving after arrival, the actual instruments most scientific spacecraft carry represent a tiny fraction of the overall mission cost and mass. It’s not easy to readily imagine a better way to signal inept program management than by singularly focusing on that tiny, lifeblood-esque portion of a spacecraft’s budget. Undeterred, that is exactly what NASA appears to be doing with Europa Clipper – penny-wise, perhaps, but undoubtedly pound-foolish.
It’s not always true that only a small portion of an exploratory spacecraft’s budget is spent on scientific instruments but it absolutely is when it comes to Europa Clipper. Originally hoped to cost as little as $2 billion in 2013, Europa Clipper’s budget allocation has ballooned to $4.5 billion over the life of the program. Of that $4.5 billion, as little as $110M was dedicated to nine scientific instruments assigned to the spacecraft – a ratio of ~41:1. Even if instrument cost ballooned by 100% to ~$220 million, it would still be a measly 20:1. The space environment around Jupiter is admittedly one of the most challenging in the Solar System, warranting some imbalance, but either ratio is still exceptionally bad as far as most exploratory missions go.
Designed to create detailed maps of Europa’s theorized water oceans, ICEMAG, for example, jumped from a $30 million cost estimate to $45 million before NASA abruptly killed it. A Clipper planetary scientist called ICEMAG “a critical instrument that’s been central to Europa science forever”. MASPEX, meanwhile, is a mass spectrometer that will be used to analyze possible chemicals captured by flying through Europa’s transient atmosphere (or, even better yet, plumes from vast ocean geysers). In other words, the instrument most likely to be hobbled next by NASA is also the only instrument on Europa Clipper capable of potentially detecting signs of life by directly sampling material ejected by Europa’s plumes.
Even just with ICEMAG removed, the value proposition of a $4.5 billion mission to an ocean moon of Jupiter becomes much hazier. With ICEMAG removed and MASPEX at risk of being thrown to the wolves, Europa Clipper’s purpose becomes even weaker. Of course, seven valuable instruments remain – some of which partially overlap with MASPEX’ goals – and MASPEX could still technically make it to the finish line in its original handicap-free state, but the tides are definitely not moving in an encouraging direction.
The worst part is that excluding the extraordinarily expensive spacecraft that will host instruments worth ~3-5% its cost, Congress has been dead-set on forcing Europa Clipper to launch on NASA’s chronically-delayed, over-budget Space Launch System (SLS) rocket. SLS has yet to launch once despite more than a decade of development and almost $30 billion spent on the rocket alone, and it would take a miracle for an SLS rocket to be ready to launch Clipper before 2025 or 2026. Europa Clipper is working towards a launch no earlier than 2024, meaning that the spacecraft would have to be stored indefinitely at a cost of at least $125 million per year.
Intrepid readers may note that the cost of simply waiting a single year for SLS to be ready for launch is higher than the cost of all of Europa Clipper’s scientific instruments at their original $110 million budget. The actual cost to NASA for a single SLS launch is expected to $1.5 billion at the absolute minimum, while $2-2.5 billion is far more reasonable. With a little effort and some moderate cruise stage tweaks, Ars Technica has already reported that an expendable SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket augmented with an off-the-shelf kick stage could send Europa Clipper to Jupiter in 5-6 years, compared to ~3 with SLS.
Ironically, that means that if Falcon Heavy was ready to launch Europa Clipper when the spacecraft is expected to be ready in 2024, it would actually arrive at the same time (or close) if it launched on SLS – once a minimum two-year launch vehicle delay is accounted for. A Falcon Heavy would also save NASA at least $1-2 billion, while it would directly save the Europa Clipper program the ~$250 million it would otherwise need to spend to store the spacecraft while waiting years for an SLS rocket. That $250 million alone – an inevitable add-on cost if SLS is chosen – could easily double the budget of every single Europa Clipper science instrument, adding plenty of breathing room, reinstating ICEMAG, and likely improving the science they output – data-gathering quite literally being the whole purpose of the mission.
Of course, the odds that NASA actually steps out from under the political shadow of SLS and stops playing penny wise and pound foolish with the extraordinarily expensive science missions it shepherds is unlikely. But still, the possibility (and hope) remains. Most recently, a very slight change in the wording of a proposed law (bill) could give the Europa Clipper program the legal wiggle room it needs to sidestep Congress’ desire to force it to launch on SLS. Of course, the senators and representatives with parochial attachment to the rocket will continue to fight tooth and nail to legally force it upon NASA at every possible turn, but there is now at least a chance of a sane outcome.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
Tesla Earnings: financial expectations and what we should to hear about
In terms of discussions, Tesla earnings calls are usually a great time to get some clarification on the company’s outlook for its current and future projects.
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) will report its earnings for the first quarter of 2026 this evening after the market closes, and analysts have already put out their expectations from a financial standpoint for the company’s first three months of the year.
Additionally, there will be plenty of things that will be discussed, including the recent expansion of the Robotaxi program, the Roadster unveiling, and Full Self-Driving (Supervised) approvals across the globe.
Financial Expectations
Wall Street consensus expectations put Tesla’s Earnings Per Share (EPS) at $0.36, while revenues are expected to come in around $22.35 billion.
This would compare to an EPS of $0.27 and $19.34 billion compared to Tesla’s Q1 2025. Last quarter, EPS came in at $0.50 on $29.4 billion of revenue.
Tesla beat analyst expectations last quarter, but the next trading day, the stock fell nearly 3.5 percent. We never quite can gauge how the market will respond to Tesla’s earnings; we’ve seen shares rise on a miss and fall on a beat.
It really goes on the news, and investor consensus, it seems.
What to Expect
In terms of discussions, Tesla earnings calls are usually a great time to get some clarification on the company’s outlook for its current and future projects. Right now, the big focus of investors is the Robotaxi program, the Roadster unveiling, and what the outlook for Full Self-Driving’s expansion throughout Europe and the rest of the world looks like.
Robotaxi
Tesla just recently expanded its unsupervised Robotaxi program to Dallas and Houston, joining Austin as the first cities in the U.S. to have access to the company’s ride-hailing suite.
Tesla expands Unsupervised Robotaxi service to two new cities
Some saw this move as a quick effort to turn attention away from a delivery miss and an anticipated miss on earnings. However, we’ve seen Tesla be more than deliberate with its expansion of the Robotaxi suite, so it’s hard to believe the company would make this move if it were not truly ready to do so.
The company is also working to expand its U.S. ride-hailing service outside of Texas and California, and recently filed paperwork to build a Robotaxi-exclusive Supercharger stall.
Expansion is planned for Florida, Nevada, and Arizona at some point this year, with more states to follow.
Roadster Unveiling
The Roadster unveiling was slated for April 1, and then pushed back (once again) to “probably late April,” according to Elon Musk.
It does not appear that the Roadster unveiling will happen within that time frame, at least not to our knowledge. Nobody has received media or press invites for a Roadster unveiling, and given the lofty expectations set for the vehicle by Musk and Co., it seems like something they’d want to show off to the public.
The Roadster has become a truly frustrating project for Tesla and its fans; evidently, there is something that is not up to the expectations Musk and others have. Meanwhile, fans are essentially waiting for something that is six years late.
At this point, also given the company’s focus on autonomy, it almost seems more worth it to just cancel it, remove any and all timelines and expectations, and surprise people with something crazy down the line, maybe in two or three years. There should be no talk of it.
Full Self-Driving Global Expansion
We expect Musk and Co. to shed some details on where it stands with other European government bodies, as it recently was able to roll out FSD (Supervised) to customers in the Netherlands.
Spain is also working with Tesla to assess FSD’s viability as a publicly available option for owners.
With that being said, there should be some additional information for investors as they listen to the call; no talk of it would be a pretty big letdown.
Optimus
There will likely be a date set for the Gen 3 Optimus unveiling, and we’re hopeful Tesla can keep that date set in stone and meet it. Not reaching timelines is a relatively minor issue, but a company can only do this for so long before its fans and investors start to lose trust and disregard any talk about dates.
It seems this is happening already.
Optimus has been pegged as Tesla’s big money maker for the future. The goals and expectations are high, but it is a privilege to have that sort of pressure when investors know the company’s capability.
News
Tesla just unlocked sales to 50,000+ government agencies
It marks a significant step in expanding Tesla’s presence in the public sector, where procurement processes have traditionally slowed electric vehicle adoption.
Tesla just unlocked sales to over 50,000 government agencies by entering a new agreement with Sourcewell, a purchasing cooperative.
Tesla entered a new master purchasing agreement with Sourcewell, the largest government purchasing cooperative in the U.S. This will enable streamlined sales of its EVs to more than 50,000 U.S. public entities. Tesla entered Designated Contract 0813525-TES, and the agreement covers Model 3, Model Y, and Cybertruck, and potentially other vehicles the company could release.
It marks a significant step in expanding Tesla’s presence in the public sector, where procurement processes have traditionally slowed electric vehicle adoption.
The deal allows eligible agencies, including cities, school districts, state governments, and higher-education institutions, to purchase Tesla vehicles directly through Sourcewell without conducting their own lengthy competitive bidding or request-for-proposal (RFP) processes.
Pricing is pre-negotiated and capped, providing transparency and predictability. Agencies simply register for a Sourcewell account online or by phone and place orders under the existing contract. This cooperative model aggregates demand across thousands of members, reducing administrative costs and time while ensuring compliance with public procurement rules.
For Tesla, the agreement removes major barriers to government fleet sales. Public-sector procurement cycles often stretch 12 to 18 months due to bidding requirements and committee reviews.
Tesla buyers in the U.S. military can get $1,000 off Cybertruck purchases
By securing the master contract, Tesla gains immediate, simplified access to a massive customer base that previously faced friction in adopting EVs. The company highlighted in its announcement that the partnership will help these 50,000-plus agencies “save thousands of $$$ in operating costs for their vehicle fleet over time” through lower maintenance, energy efficiency, and the elimination of tailpipe emissions.
The initial four-year term runs through November 13, 2029, with options for up to three one-year extensions, offering long-term stability for both parties.
Sourcewell’s role is central to execution. As a cooperative purchasing organization, it negotiates and manages vendor contracts on behalf of its members, then makes them available nationwide. Participating entities contact Tesla’s dedicated fleet team or Sourcewell representatives to complete purchases, bypassing redundant paperwork.
This structure accelerates fleet electrification while maintaining fiscal accountability—agencies receive pre-vetted pricing and terms without reinventing the wheel for each vehicle order.
The partnership positions Tesla to capture a larger share of the public fleet market, where total cost of ownership often favors electric vehicles once procurement hurdles are removed.
For government buyers, it translates to faster deployment of sustainable fleets, reduced long-term expenses, and alignment with environmental mandates. As more agencies transition, the contract could contribute to broader EV infrastructure growth and taxpayer savings across the country.
Elon Musk
How much of SpaceX will Elon Musk own after IPO will surprise you
SpaceX’s IPO filing confirms Musk will maintain his voting power to make key decisions for the company.
Elon Musk will retain dominant voting control of SpaceX after it goes public, according to the company’s IPO prospectus that was filed with the SEC. The filing reveals a dual-class equity structure giving Class B shareholders 10 votes each, concentrating power with Musk and a handful of other insiders, while Class A shares sold to public investors carry one vote.
Musk holds approximately 42% of SpaceX’s equity and controls roughly 79% of its votes through super-voting shares. He will simultaneously serve as CEO, CTO, and chairman of the nine-member board after the listing. Beyond that, the filing includes provisions that may limit shareholders’ influence over board elections and legal actions, forcing disputes into arbitration and restricting where they can be brought.
The case for Musk holding this level of control is grounded in SpaceX’s actual history. The company’s most important bets, from reusable rockets to a global satellite internet constellation, were decisions that ran against conventional aerospace thinking and would likely have faced resistance from a board accountable to investor gains. Fully reusable rockets were considered economically irrational by established industry players for years. Starlink, which now generates over $4 billion in annual operating profit, was widely dismissed as financially unviable when it was proposed. The argument for concentrated founder control seems straightforward, and the decisions that built SpaceX into what it is today required someone willing to ignore consensus and absorb years of losses.
SpaceX files confidentially for IPO that will rewrite the record books
For context, Musk’s position is significantly more dominant than Zuckerberg’s at Meta. The comparison with Tesla is also worth noting. When Tesla did its IPO in 2010, it did not issue dual-class shares. Musk has only recently pushed for enhanced voting protection, proposing at least 25% control at Tesla in 2024 after selling shares to fund his Twitter acquisition left him with around 13%.
SpaceX has clearly learned from that experience and structured the IPO differently by planning to allocate up to 30% of shares to retail investors, roughly three times the typical norm for a large offering. The roadshow is expected to begin the week of June 8, with a Nasdaq listing rumored to be a $1.75 trillion valuation and a $75 billion raise.
Tesla Earnings: financial expectations and what we should to hear about
Why SpaceX just made a $60 billion bet on AI coding ahead of historic IPO
