News
SpaceX’s Mr. Steven crosses Panama Canal on 5000 mile journey to Florida
Iconic SpaceX vessel Mr. Steven has completed a successful transit of the Panama Canal as of February 7th, leaving the fairing recovery ship approximately 3-4 days from arrival at its new home in Port Canaveral, Florida.
Mr. Steven’s move from the West Coast to the East Coast comes shortly after a series of controlled fairing recovery tests – dropped by helicopter before deploying a parafoil – brought the vessel closer than ever before to successfully snagging a Falcon fairing out of the air. Thanks to webcams at the landmark, Mr. Steven’s trip through the Panama Canal also revealed that his arms were uninstalled for the coast swap, while two fairing halves – covered in tarps – stood out on the ship’s large deck.
Aaaaand the grand finale, a gif of Mr. Steven’s transit through the Panama Canal’s first western lock (Miraflores). Probably the last we’ll see of him until Port Canaveral, with an ETA around ~4 days from now 🙂#SpaceX pic.twitter.com/DIus6K5hK5
— Eric Ralph (@13ericralph31) February 7, 2019
Although the presence of two fairing halves could be a sign of something else, it could indicate that SpaceX has plans to continue its controlled fairing drop/recovery tests, albeit this time in the Atlantic Ocean. Thanks to a sharp-eyed local observer, it can be observed that, while topped with tarps and safely secured, the fairing halves aboard Mr. Steven had no additional protection against sea spray and the elements over the course of a 5000+ mile (~8000 km) journey at a cruising speed of roughly 20 mph (~32 km/h). In other words, they are most certainly not going to be reused.
If not for reuse, then the only reason Mr. Steven would need to bring fairings to Florida is if there is some need for fairing recovery development hardware (halves that can be abused without opportunity cost), either for more basic mechanical and interface tests with fairings and nets or to continue SpaceX’s program of experimental drop testing.
Is your #MrSteven here in Panama @elonmusk and @SpaceX ? pic.twitter.com/GvTNGYQU9K
— Hugo Tello (@soyhugotello) February 6, 2019
-
-
Intriguingly, although SpaceX released a second video of “one” of Mr. Steven’s final West Coast catch tests, some basic sleuthing can easily determine that the test shown in the January 29th video probably occurred more than two weeks earlier, on January 10th. This means that one final helicopter drop test was performed (January 26th) before SpaceX departed Port of LA for Florida on the 29th. Some might conclude, then, that SpaceX’s latest drop tweet was more than a little coy, perhaps indicating that the results of the Jan 26 test may have been appreciably different than the extreme near-miss experienced on the 10th.
While the company’s history – combined with CEO Elon Musk’s welcome tendency of sharing good news almost as soon as he hears it – suggests that the Jan 26 test was probably not a success, SpaceX could be playing its development cards close to its chest when it comes to fairing recovery.
One of Mr. Steven’s final West Coast fairing recovery tests before shipping out for the East Coast. Wait for it… pic.twitter.com/A7q37Gpllu
— SpaceX (@SpaceX) January 30, 2019
Regardless, SpaceX clearly has no plans to end its experimental fairing recovery program with success so agonizingly within reach. Mr. Steven’s move to Florida sets the vessel up for a dramatic increase in available post-launch fairing recovery attempts at the same time as Falcon fairings likely still cost around $3 million apiece and continue to pose the same conundrum Musk raised in mid-2017.
“Imagine if we had a $6 million pallet of cash falling through the sky. Would we try to catch it? I think the answer is yes.” – Elon Musk, July 2017
Although the cost of SpaceX’s fairing recovery program is probably several tens of millions of dollars at this point, it seems probable that Musk would still stand behind his thought experiment. Assuming SpaceX can cost-effectively reuse fairings once recovery is assured, a development program costing upwards of $50-100M could be entirely recouped after just 10-20 dual fairing recoveries, compared to the 21 fairings SpaceX flew in 2018 alone. As long as Falcon 9 and Heavy are likely to continue operating for several more years (all but guaranteed), fairing recovery should still prove worthwhile if SpaceX can close the recovery gap within the next 6-12 months.
-
Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes!
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
