News
SpaceX COO says Starlink had cash-flow-positive quarter in 2022
President and COO Gwynne Shotwell says that SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet program had a “cash flow positive quarter” in 2022 and “will make money” in 2023.
The update is major news for a program that SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has stated should be considered a success if it merely avoids bankruptcy. Several companies have attempted to build businesses around the concept of a low Earth orbit (LEO) internet satellite constellation. All have failed or gone bankrupt. Motorola pursued a concept called Celestris in the 1990s but eventually gave up and invested in Teledesic. Teledesic eventually went bankrupt and shut down in 2003 after spending the equivalent of $1.85 billion in 2022 dollars. In 2020, OneWeb – the closest to a true Starlink competitor – filed for bankruptcy despite having raised $3.4 billion and begun launching satellites. It was only saved by a $1 billion bailout led by the British government.
Despite pursuing the largest and most ambitious LEO constellations ever proposed, only SpaceX’s Starlink program has managed to avoid bankruptcy. SpaceX began developing Starlink in earnest in the mid-2010s and launched its first satellite prototypes in March 2018 and May 2019. Operational launches followed in November 2019, and SpaceX has since launched an unprecedented ~3540 working satellites on 70 Falcon 9 rockets. More importantly, just two years after opening orders, SpaceX has secured more than a million Starlink internet subscribers.
Adding to its impressive list of achievements, Gwynne Shotwell – a SpaceX executive known for being an excellent manager and voice of reason – says that Starlink has already had its first cash-flow-positive quarter.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
According to Shotwell, that milestone happened sometime in 2022. Thanks to a productive 2021 and the accelerated launch of new Starlink satellites in 2022, continuously expanding network capacity, SpaceX’s subscriber count more than quadrupled between March and December. If Starlink truly did have a cash-flow-positive quarter last year, it likely happened in Q4. However, the nature of cash flow and the ambiguity in Shotwell’s statement are worth some amount of skepticism.
Crucially, cash flow should account for fundraising, which SpaceX does a lot of. In 2022, it closed a $1.7B venture round in May and a $250M private equity round in July, offering opportunities to negate otherwise negative cash flow in Q2 and Q3. If Shotwell means that Starlink had a positive cash flow quarter without accounting for fundraising, the achievement would be highly impressive and indicate that Starlink’s financial health is surprisingly good.
It’s also ambiguous if Shotwell meant that Starlink had a cash-flow-positive quarter in 2022 or if she was referring to the company as a whole. Earlier in her panel at the FAA’s annual Commercial Space Transportation Conference, Shotwell noted that SpaceX’s main product – Falcon rocket and Dragon spacecraft operations – “makes money.” She also said that “the cash flow from those operations basically pay for [Starlink and Starship] development.” External funds are then raised to supplement SpaceX’s profits from Falcon and Dragon.
The ambiguity leaves room for Shotwell’s statement to be interpreted a bit less positively. If SpaceX or Starlink’s cash-flow-positive quarter was contingent upon raising almost $2 billion in one calendar year, Starlink would arguably still be in a financially precarious position. A positive quarter in that context would be more indicative of decent accounting than good financial health.
However, Shotwell’s confident statement that “Starlink will make money” in 2023 was much less ambiguous and suggests that a positive interpretation of her “positive cash flow” comment could be more accurate. For Starlink to “make money” in 2023, the implication is that SpaceX expects annual revenue to exceed expenses – and possibly exceed expenses and external funding inputs.
Either outcome would be excellent. As long as Starlink’s revenue matches or exceeds expenses, the constellation could likely survive even if SpaceX’s access to external capital was partially or fully disrupted. It also bodes well for Starlink’s profit potential. If the Starlink Gen1 constellation is almost sustainable or profitable, the pending introduction of SpaceX’s next-gen Starship rocket and upgraded Gen2/V2.0 satellites could turn Starlink into a money printer.
In November 2021, CEO Elon Musk outright stated that SpaceX faced a “genuine risk of bankruptcy” if it couldn’t start launching Starship and Starlink V2.0 satellites “once every two weeks” by the end of 2022. Fifteen months later, Starship’s first launch is tracking towards March 2023, and there’s a nonzero chance the rocket won’t launch a single Starlink V2.0 satellite this year. Despite falling miles short of Musk’s target, Starlink is instead on the verge of becoming a sustainable business in the mind of SpaceX’s less hyperbolic leader.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
