News
SpaceX preps second $500M fundraiser as Starlink & Starship make progress
According to regulatory documents seen by Prime Unicorn Index, SpaceX finished a $500M funding round begun in December 2018 and kicked off a second campaign seeking an additional $500M earlier this month.
Altogether, SpaceX appears to be on track to secure $1 billion in fresh capital in the last six months alone, a trend that that may well continue as the company pushes forth into new and capital-intensive phases of Starlink and Starship development. In Boca Chica, a flood of SpaceX engineers and technicians have descended on the area to build the first full-scale steel prototypes of Starship and the major facilities needed to support the vehicles, all from scratch. Across the West Coast of the US, a separate SpaceX team has simultaneously transitioned from prototyping and developing satellites to building a factory to mass-produce them and may be less than six weeks away from launching the first operational batch of Starlink spacecraft.
Giant rockets, giant funding
Both massive, perilous, and largely unprecedented ventures in their own right, Starship (formerly BFR) and Starlink also happen to be extremely capital-intensive, a more or less fundamental consequence of the stages of their development and expansion. Both spent many years in pure research and development phases, tinkering and experimenting with different ideas and technologies on the ground in an effort to conceptualize what exactly their final forms ought to be. This aspect of the BFR program has been extremely visible over the last three years as SpaceX and CEO Elon Musk’s goals underwent continuous semi-annual changes, often intentionally broadcasted to the public in
After appearing to finally settle on the quasi-final form of BFR (renamed to Starship/Super Heavy), SpaceX has actually begun to build and test the first full-scale, integrated prototype of the spacecraft (Starhopper) and is simultaneously building what aims to be the first orbital Starship prototype. At the same time, its propulsion system of choice – known as Raptor – has entered into serial production back at SpaceX’s Hawthorne factory, while also supporting the first Starhopper hop test in early April and preparing to continue separate ground testing.
Thousands of satellites, billions of dollars
In February 2018, SpaceX successfully launched its first Starlink satellites, two prototypes meant to test a bevy of technologies the company was attempting to build (or at least utilize) for the first time. Despite hints and reports of some problems on orbit, SpaceX firmly holds that both satellites were extremely successful in their task of proving out new technologies like electric thrusters and phased-array antennas and are still safely operating today. Just four months after those prototypes launched, CEO Elon Musk took the extraordinary step of flying to Redmond, Washington to personally challenge a number of executives he believed were operating far too sluggishly. According to secondhand reports, many of them refused to expedite the program as Musk wanted them to, resulting in their immediate firings. The challenge that triggered the organizational upheaval: launch the first operational batch of Starlink satellites before the end of June 2019, twelve months away at the time.
Five months after Musk’s challenge, SpaceX submitted a request to the FCC to modify its original Starlink constellation license, halving the orbit of the first thousand or so satellites to 550 km (340 mi) and significantly simplifying the technology on the first several dozen to be launched. As a result of the strategic changes made, SpaceX is already planning to launch its first group of Starlink satellites as early as mid-May, with perhaps one or several additional launches on the books for 2019. To an extent, the first 75 Starlink satellites and their six ground stations will be a nearly full-fidelity second prototype. Instead of a minimalist development platform like Tintin A and B, the first 75 satellites should offer opportunities to actually test the operations of a large constellation of spacecraft while also demonstrating something close to the internet connectivity the full constellation is meant to offer.
Development to production
That SpaceX is attempting to raise huge amounts of capital should come as no surprise. For almost any commercial venture on Earth that is attempting to introduce a real product from nothing, the process of going from concept, design, and testing to building a final product at scale is both extraordinarily difficult and extremely expensive. Tesla famously went through “manufacturing hell” to go from Model 3 prototypes to a mass-producible finished product, while countless other ventures don’t even make it that far (i.e. vaporware). By far the most challenging aspect of this transition is moving from a phase focused predominately on development to one focused predominately on production.
Due to an extremely unorthodox approach to building the first steel Starship and Super Heavy prototypes, quite literally choosing to do so outside and without shelter, the BFR program is probably less extreme for the time being. However, the transformation needed for Starlink to progress is intense, requiring the satellite team to essentially build a factory from scratch and begin mass-producing high-performance satellites as quickly as possible. The 75-satellite buffer should ease the pain a bit and offer a sort of trial run as SpaceX makes that major transition, but the fact remains that an unprecedented number (thousands) of satellites will need to be built and launched at an equally unprecedented pace and cost-per-unit.
The $500M raised since December 2018 will likely be a major help for SpaceX’s often-
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
