Connect with us

News

SpaceX COO says Starlink had cash-flow-positive quarter in 2022

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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.

SpaceX completed 27 commercial launches in 2022, potentially generating $2-3 billion in revenue. (Richard Angle)

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.

Advertisement

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.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla Semi’s official battery capacity leaked by California regulators

A California regulatory filing just confirmed the exact battery size inside each Tesla Semi variant.

Published

on

By

A regulatory filing published by the California Air Resources Board in April 2026 has put official numbers on what Tesla Semi owners and fleet buyers have long wanted confirmed: the exact battery capacities of both the Long Range and Standard Range Semi truck variants. CARB is California’s independent air quality regulator, and it certifies zero-emission powertrains before they can be sold or operated in the state. When a manufacturer submits a vehicle for certification, the resulting executive order becomes a public document, making it one of the most reliable sources for confirmed production specs on any EV.

The document lists two certified powertrain configurations. The Long Range Semi carries a usable battery capacity of 822 kWh, while the Standard Range version comes in at 548 kWh. Both use lithium-ion NCMA chemistry and share the same peak and steady-state motor output ratings of 800 kW and 525 kW respectively. Cross-referencing Tesla’s published efficiency figure of approximately 1.7 kWh per mile under full load, the 822 kWh pack supports roughly 480 miles of real-world range, which aligns closely with Tesla’s advertised 500-mile figure for the Long Range trim. The 548 kWh Standard Range pack works out to approximately 320 miles, again consistent with Tesla’s stated 325-mile target.

Here is a direct comparison of the two versions based on the CARB filing and published specs:

Tesla Semi Spec Long Range Standard Range
Battery Capacity 822 kWh 548 kWh
Battery Chemistry NCMA Li-Ion NCMA Li-Ion
Peak Motor Power 800 kW 525 kW
Estimated Range ~500 miles ~325 miles
Efficiency ~1.7 kWh/mile ~1.7 kWh/mile
Est. Price ~$290,000 ~$260,000
GVW Rating 82,000 lbs 82,000 lbs

The timing of this certification is not incidental. On April 29, 2026, Semi Programme Director Dan Priestley confirmed on X that high-volume production is now ramping at Tesla’s dedicated 1.7-million-square-foot facility in Sparks, Nevada. A key advantage of the Nevada location is vertical integration: the 4680 battery cells powering the Semi are manufactured in the same complex, eliminating the supply chain bottleneck that had delayed the program for years.

Tesla’s long-term goal is to reach a production capacity of 50,000 trucks annually at the Nevada factory, which would represent roughly 20 percent of the entire North American Class 8 market. With CARB certification now in hand and the production line running, the regulatory and manufacturing groundwork for that target is in place.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla crushes NHTSA’s brand-new ADAS safety tests – first vehicle to ever pass

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla became the first company to pass the United States government’s new Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) testing with the Model Y, completing each of the new tests with a passing performance.

In a landmark announcement on May 7, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) declared the 2026 Tesla Model Y the first vehicle to pass its newly ADAS benchmark under the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP).

Model Y vehicles manufactured on or after November 12, 2025, met rigorous pass/fail criteria for four newly added tests—pedestrian automatic emergency braking, lane keeping assistance, blind spot warning, and blind spot intervention—while also satisfying the program’s original four ADAS requirements: forward collision warning, crash imminent braking, dynamic brake support, and lane departure warning.

NHTSA administration Jonathan Morrison hailed the achievement as a milestone:

“Today’s announcement marks a significant step forward in our efforts to provide consumers with the most comprehensive safety ratings ever. By successfully passing these new tests, the 2026 Tesla Model Y demonstrates the lifesaving potential of driver assistance technologies and sets a high bar for the industry. We hope to see many more manufacturers develop vehicles that can meet these requirements.”

The updates to NCAP, finalized in late 2024 and effective for 2026 models, reflect growing recognition that ADAS features are no longer optional luxuries but essential tools for preventing crashes.

Pedestrian automatic emergency braking, for instance, targets one of the fastest-rising causes of roadway fatalities, while blind spot intervention and lane keeping assistance address common sources of side-swipes and run-off-road incidents. By incorporating objective, performance-based evaluations rather than mere presence of the technology, NHTSA aims to give buyers clearer data on real-world effectiveness.

This milestone arrives at a pivotal moment when vehicle autonomy is transitioning from science fiction to everyday reality.

Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) software and the impending rollout of robotaxis underscore a broader industry shift toward higher levels of automation. Yet regulators and consumers remain cautious: safety data must keep pace with technological ambition.

The Model Y’s perfect score on these ADAS benchmarks validates that current driver-assist systems—when engineered rigorously—can dramatically reduce human error, which still accounts for the vast majority of crashes.

For Tesla, the result reinforces its long-standing claim of building the safest vehicles on the road. More importantly, it signals to the entire auto sector that meeting elevated federal standards is achievable and expected.

As autonomy edges closer to Level 3 and beyond, where drivers may disengage more fully, such independent verification becomes critical. It builds public trust, informs purchasing decisions, and accelerates the development of systems that could one day eliminate tens of thousands of annual traffic deaths.

In an era when software-defined vehicles promise transformative mobility, the 2026 Model Y’s NHTSA triumph is more than a manufacturer accolade—it is a regulatory green light that autonomy’s future must be built on proven, testable safety foundations. The bar has been raised. The industry, and the roads we share, will be safer for it.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla to fix 219k vehicles in recall with simple software update

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is going to fix the nearly 219,000 vehicles that it recalled due to an issue with the rearview camera with a simple software update, giving owners no need to travel to a service center to resolve the problem.

Tesla is formally recalling 218,868 U.S. vehicles after regulators discovered a software glitch that can delay the rearview camera image by up to 11 seconds when drivers shift into reverse.

The affected models include certain 2024-2025 Model 3 and Model Y, as well as 2023-2025 Model S and Model X vehicles running software version 2026.8.6 and equipped with Hardware 3 computers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) determined the lag violates Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 111 on rear visibility and could increase crash risk.

Yet this is no ordinary recall. Owners do not need to schedule a service-center visit, hand over keys, or wait for parts.

Tesla fans call for recall terminology update, but the NHTSA isn’t convinced it’s needed

Tesla identified the issue on April 10, halted further deployment of the faulty firmware the same day, and began pushing a corrective over-the-air (OTA) software update on April 11.

By the time the NHTSA posted the recall notice on May 6, more than 99.92 percent of the affected fleet had already received the fix. Tesla reports no crashes, injuries, or fatalities linked to the glitch.

The episode underscores a deeper problem with regulatory language. For decades, “recall” meant hauling a vehicle to a dealership for hardware repairs or replacements. That definition no longer fits software-defined cars. When a fix arrives wirelessly in minutes — identical to an iPhone update — the term evokes unnecessary alarm and misleads the public about the actual risk and remedy.

Elon Musk has repeatedly called for exactly this change. After earlier NHTSA actions, he stated plainly: “The terminology is outdated & inaccurate. This is a tiny over-the-air software update.” On another occasion, he added that labeling OTA fixes as recalls is “anachronistic and just flat wrong.”

Musk’s point is simple: regulators must evolve their vocabulary to match the technology. Traditional recalls involve physical intervention and downtime; OTA updates do not. Retaining the old label distorts consumer perception, inflates perceived defect rates, and slows the industry’s shift to faster, safer software iteration.

Tesla’s rapid, remote remedy demonstrates the safety advantage of over-the-air capability. Problems that once required weeks of dealer appointments are now resolved in hours, often before most owners notice. As more automakers adopt software-first designs, the entire regulatory framework needs to catch up.

Updating “recall” terminology would align language with reality, reduce public confusion, and recognize that modern vehicles are no longer static hardware — they are continuously improving computers on wheels.

For the 219,000 Tesla owners involved, the process is already complete. The camera works, the car is safe, and no one left their driveway. That is the new standard — and the vocabulary should reflect it.

Continue Reading