News
SpaceX is in no rush for a Starlink IPO and that should terrify competitors
SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell says that the Starlink satellite internet business is in no rush to become a separate company and pursue an IPO, and that relaxed demeanor should terrify competitor constellations and ISPs like OneWeb and Comcast.
Announced in January 2015, SpaceX has been developing a massive constellation of satellites capable of delivering high-quality broadband internet anywhere on Earth for half a decade. Known as Starlink, SpaceX launched its first dedicated satellite prototypes – known as Tintin A and B – in February 2018, serving as a very successful alpha test for the myriad technologies the company would need to master to realize the constellation’s goals. 15 months later, SpaceX launched its first batch of 60 radically-redesigned Starlink satellites – packed flat to fit in an unmodified Falcon 9 payload fairing.
Less than nine months after that first ‘v0.9’ mission, SpaceX has completed another three dedicated launches and made Starlink – now some 235 operational satellites strong – the world’s largest private satellite constellation by a huge margin. Now just two days away from its fifth Starlink launch, SpaceX’s second-in-command has revealed that the company will likely split Starlink off into its own separate company, enabling an IPO without sacrificing SpaceX’s broader freedom. However, Shotwell also made it clear that SpaceX is in no rush to do so, and that fact should strike fear into the hearts of Starlink’s many potential competitors.
Bloomberg first broke the news with a snippet revealing that SpaceX COO and President Gwynne Shotwell had told a private investor event that Starlink could eventually IPO as an independent company. While undeniably important, a SpaceX source – after confirming the news – also told Reuters reporter Joey Roulette that it would be “several years” before the company might kick off the process of a Starlink IPO.
While a seemingly small piece of information at face value, the fact that SpaceX is years away from a potential Starlink IPO implies that the company is incredibly confident in where it stands today. Given that SpaceX only started ramping up its Starlink production rates and launch cadence a handful of months ago, that apparent confidence – assuming SpaceX’s respected President and COO isn’t lying to the faces of prospective investors – is no small feat.
Thanks to that production and launch cadence ramp, SpaceX is likely in the midst of one of the most capital-straining periods its Starlink program will ever experience. As a private company, SpaceX’s balance sheets are a black box to the public, but it’s safe to say that the it’s going through – or has already gone through – a phase of “production hell” similar to what Tesla experienced when it began building Roadsters, Model S/Xs, and Model 3s.
Building satellites like cars
In less than 12 months, SpaceX has effectively gone from manufacturing zero satellites to mass-producing something like 2-4 Starlink spacecraft every single day, almost without a doubt smashing any records previously held in the industry. It’s possible that companies like Planet (now the owner of the second-largest private constellation) or Spire have built more spacecraft in a given period, but SpaceX’s satellites are at least an order of magnitude larger, on average.
Around 260 kg (570 lb) apiece, SpaceX has built and launched a total of 240 spacecraft – together weighing more than 60 metric tons (135,000 lb) – in less than nine months. Furthermore, the company not only intends to crush that average but wants (if not needs) to do so for several years without interruption.
-
Back in May 2019, CEO Elon Musk confidently stated that he believes SpaceX already has all the capital it needs “to build an operational [Starlink] constellation”, likely referring to at least ~1500 operational communications satellites – launches included. This is why competitors should be moderately terrified that SpaceX isn’t even privately pushing for an IPO sooner than later. Perhaps the single biggest reason modern companies pursue IPOs is to raise substantial capital – usually far more than can be practically (or quickly) raised while private when executed successfully.
A step further, “several years” should mean titanic changes for SpaceX’s Starlink constellation if everything goes as planned. In 2020, SpaceX has publicly stated that it will attempt as many as 20-24 dedicated Starlink launches, an achievement that would translate to a constellation more than 1600 satellites strong by the end of the year. SpaceX says that 24 launches (20 if the first four missions are subtracted) is enough to offer global coverage and plans to begin serving customers in the northern US and Canada as early as this summer.
As of now, SpaceX has performed three 60-satellite Starlink launches total in the last three months – two in January 2020 alone – and Starlink V1 L4 (the fourth v1.0 launch and fifth launch overall) is scheduled to lift off just two days from now on February 15th. If Musk and Shotwell are correct and SpaceX can launch at least one or two thousand satellites without raising any additional capital, the constellation – potentially reaching those numbers by early to mid-2021 – may already have hundreds of thousands of customers by the time more funding is needed. 2000 Starlink v1.0 satellites, for reference, would theoretically offer enough collective bandwidth for more than 500,000 users to simultaneously stream Netflix content in 1080p.
As of early 2019, SpaceX had raised a total of $2B in venture capital, investments, and debt. Thus, even in the unlikely event that 100% of that funding goes to Starlink, the company would ultimately have to spend $500-700M annually from 2018 to the end of 2021 to run that large pool of capital dry by the time 1000-2000 satellites are in orbit.
500,000 customers paying $50-100 per month by the end of 2021 would conservatively allow Starlink to generate $300-600M in annual revenue, excluding the likely possibility of even more lucrative government or commercial contracts. In other words, if SpaceX can accumulate an average of 20,000 paying subscribers per month between now and the end of 2021, Starlink could very well become self-sustaining at its current rate of growth – or close to it – by the time SpaceX is hurting for more funding. In a worst-case scenario, it thus appears all but certain that “several years” from now, SpaceX’s Starlink program will have at least a few thousand high-performance satellites in orbit, an extensive network of ground stations, and a large swath of alpha or beta customers by the time IPO proceedings begin.
Given that all that potential infrastructure would easily be worth at least $1-2B purely from a capital investment standpoint, Starlink’s ultimate IPO valuation – under Shotwell’s patient “maybe one day” approach – could be stratospheric.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
-
Lemonade has expanded its innovative Autonomous Car insurance program to Tennessee, giving Tesla owners in the state a substantial discount on Full Self-Driving (FSD) miles. Announced on August 3, the product offers 50 percent off every mile driven with FSD activated, positioning the digital insurer as a leader in pricing insurance around autonomous technology.
The program, marketed as Lemonade Autonomous Car insurance, uses a direct connection via Tesla’s Fleet API (with customer permission) to automatically distinguish FSD-engaged miles from manual driving. Policyholders pay a low base rate when the vehicle is stationary and a few cents per mile when moving, with the 50 percent reduction applied specifically to FSD miles.
If you’re driving a Tesla in Tennessee, FSD miles now cost 50% less to insure with Lemonade. Autonomous Car is now live in TN.https://t.co/4CDTuhyORi pic.twitter.com/QZk4LBIs6f
— Lemonade (@Lemonade_Inc) August 3, 2026
Coverage includes standard protections such as liability, collision, comprehensive, roadside assistance, and Tesla-specific benefits like access to certified repair shops and emergency crash services. Eligible vehicles require Hardware 4, as well as recent firmware.
Lemonade first unveiled the product on January 21 of this year, describing it as a first-of-its-kind offering designed for self-driving cars, starting with Tesla FSD. It began rolling out in Arizona on January 26, followed by Oregon about a month later. Subsequent expansions brought it to Indiana in early June 2026 and Colorado later that month.
Tennessee marks the fifth state.
Tesla Full Self-Driving gets outrageous insurance offer with insanely cheap rates
The discount rests on Lemonade’s strong belief in the safety of Tesla’s FSD system. The company cites Tesla’s data showing that FSD-driven miles are twice as safe as those driven manually, or associated with roughly a 50 percent crash reduction.
Lemonade Co-founder and President Shai Wininger has emphasized this distinction: “Traditional insurers treat a Tesla like any other car, and AI like any other driver. But a car that sees 360 degrees, never gets drowsy, and reacts in milliseconds can’t be compared to a human.”
He added that “Teslas driven with FSD are involved in far fewer accidents” and committed that as FSD software improves and becomes safer, Lemonade’s prices will drop further.
Tesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
This approach leverages Lemonade’s existing pay-per-mile technology and AI-driven risk models, which analyze nuanced vehicle data including software version and sensor performance. The company expects the model to reward higher FSD usage with greater savings while supporting mixed households that include both Tesla and non-Tesla vehicles under one policy. Bundling with home, renters, or pet insurance can yield additional discounts.
As autonomous driving technology advances, Lemonade’s state-by-state expansion of usage-based pricing that directly reflects real-world safety data represents a notable shift in how insurers evaluate risk.
Tesla owners in the five available states – Arizona, Oregon, Indiana, Colorado, and now Tennessee – can obtain quotes quickly through the Lemonade app or website, potentially lowering the overall cost of ownership for vehicles equipped with advanced driver-assistance systems. Further states are expected as regulatory approvals progress.
Tesla has continued to flex the strength, rigidity, and robustness of its all-electric pickup, the Cybertruck. In fact, since 2019, Cybertruck’s ability to avoid dents, dings, and even gunfire has been one of the main selling points Tesla has used to attract buyers who are looking for a vehicle that can handle the most intense challenges.
But that does not mean Tesla is not still actively trying to make it even better.
In a new hardware update, Tesla has decided to change the material of the Cybertruck’s underbody panels from aluminum to carbon fiber, a move that aims to not only increase pricing efficiency but also improve strength.
RELATED:
Cybertruck Lead Engineer Wes Morrill confirmed the change was made to the Cybertruck recently after it was spotted by Coleton Guerin of Out of Spec. This particular trim level was a Cyberbeast, but it is being applied to all trims to keep supply chain efficiency high and have less variance across trim levels.
Morrill said that Tesla tested different materials for the underbody panel protection, and carbon fiber performed better than aluminum, which is what the company was using since its first deliveries in 2023.
Additionally, there are some efficiency improvements because Tesla can better form the areas around the bolts to keep underbody airflow cleaner than previously.
good eye – it’s a new material. Testing showed it to be more durable than the aluminum while being lower weight and cost. Also slight efficiency improvement since we can better form the areas around the bolts to keep the underbody airflow cleaner than what stamped aluminum allows
— Wes (@wmorrill3) July 30, 2026
Carbon fiber is traditionally lighter and more durable than aluminum, which is why it is such a popular material among luxury automakers, and EV makers will utilize some of the materials around battery packs to save weight.
This is the first instance of Tesla utilizing carbon fiber on the Cybertruck’s exterior to help with overall performance and strength. As previously mentioned, Tesla used aluminum to protect the underside of the body, but it is pretty typical for the company to continue making engineering changes that will improve the car in the future.
Tesla released Full Self-Driving version 14.3.7 yesterday, and after about 90 miles of testing today, it is evident there are some definite fixes from version 14.3.6, which I wrote about last week and called a regression.
Within the first 40 minutes of my drive on v14.3.7, it saved me from getting into an accident with an unaware Dodge Charger driver, and some of the things Tesla seemed to miss in v14.3.6 were definitely improved. All in all, the release so far has some really great performance, and I’m looking forward to testing it further.
For now, here’s everything I noticed with v14.3.7:
Overall Improvement
Just generally speaking from a ride perspective, this was a really great experience. A lot of the hesitancy I experienced on v14.3.6 was gone. There were no instances of brake-stabbing, wheel-jerking, or any uncertain or unconfident movements. It was void of anything that I felt made it timid with v14.3.6.
The one thing I do hope to see down the road is a smaller need to adjust Speed Profiles so often. Because Tesla calls FSD “Supervised,” I’m okay with needing to hit the scroll wheel a few times a drive.
However, I hope that things can be incrementally improved upon with speed. Sometimes it’s too fast; other times it’s too slow. It’s a difficult thing to hone in and refine, but I hope it eventually gets there.
I didn’t notice any significant left lane camping or any behaviors that were completely out of line. I am hopeful that this opinion does not change, but after driving a few days with this version and putting it in a variety of different situations, you are exposed to more behaviors, some of which are not necessarily what I’d prefer.
The big things to notice, at least in my experience thus far, are that the major issues with previous versions — meaning the braking stabbing and wheel jerking — simply weren’t there. That’s enough to already consider this progress compared to .6.
Manual Signal Override is More Responsive
On .6, I had quite a few issues with FSD ignoring my manually input turn signals. If Tesla wants to call it “Supervised,” then the car should not ignore any input the driver gives. If I touch the accelerator on FSD, the car speeds up.
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.7 obeying manual turn signals https://t.co/6eqToXpQfC pic.twitter.com/vHBlFQ4PDV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
The car did a great job of obeying my turn signals when I wanted it to change lanes, which is welcome.
Parking Lot Performance
Before .6, I traditionally took over in nearly every parking lot my car entered, because I knew it would not park somewhere that I wanted, and usually, it was just a tad too timid in this setting.
The one bright spot of .6 was how well it handled parking lots. This continued with v14.3.7:
I’m always really happy to see progress at all, but once parking preferences come to FSD, as long as this performance is still around, that could potentially be the biggest improvement I’ve seen in FSD in the year I’ve been using it personally on a daily basis.
Full Self-Driving Averts Disaster
A Dodge Charger changed into my lane without checking if I was there, running me off the road. FSD made the initial avoidance maneuver; I grabbed the wheel out of instinct, looked in my side mirror to ensure I had nobody following closely behind, hit the brake, and straightened the car back up to avoid a curb:
🚨 Guys this is why you all NEED to stay vigilant behind the wheel, even on Tesla Full Self-Driving
Human drivers are UNHINGED and have no idea what they’re doing anymore. This was a kid obviously younger than 20 years old with zero awareness.
First drive with v14.3.7 https://t.co/1vTbCMpCn8 pic.twitter.com/lz7KKEF6bj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
There have been quite a few responses to this video stating that I should never have grabbed the wheel. To be honest, I really wish I had not done so, because I do believe FSD would have avoided any sort of collision with anything, including the car or the curb.
However, this was the first time I had ever been this close to being hit while using FSD. My natural reaction was to take over. I think if I had had something like this happen before, my reaction might have been different.
Hitting the brake avoided hitting the curb, while FSD swerved to avoid the car. My concern after the car was clear of my front end was the curb. All in all, I’m really happy with how things turned out, and I think anyone could be a critic of how I handled it. I only had a split second to really make a decision, and thankfully, any damage was avoided.
It is clear FSD managed to avoid the car coming down before I was able to. I truly credit FSD for avoiding the collision.
What Needs to Improve
Better Recognition of Potholes, Uneven Roads, Sharp Changes in Roadway/Bumps
On Friday, my Fianceè and I were in the car, and FSD was driving us. We crossed over a roadway that has a traffic light, and FSD was traveling at 40 MPH on Standard, 5 MPH over the speed limit. Everything was more than reasonable.
However, the road we were crossing at the light has a major bump both as you start and finish crossing it. Without a speed reduction, your car can go airborne. The Tesla did just this on Friday on v14.3.6; it was an uncomfortable bounce that pretty much confirmed I would not ever let FSD go over again unless we were sitting at that intersection when there is a red light.
I even tried scrolling down into Sloth quickly, but I ended up just taking over:
This is that big bounce that I mentioned in the quoted post.
It’s just a tad too drastic to take at the speed FSD wants to go over it. You can see me quickly swipe down into Sloth, but I intervened. https://t.co/K20PK9ysBg pic.twitter.com/81Oc82ZJcZ
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
A few people have said it remains related to the vision-based approach and its difficulty comprehending 3D. This is a huge issue because this can cause serious damage at certain speeds.
Navigation
Nothing new here. I still turn off “Online Routing” quite frequently to get the car to take logical routes from time to time.
Auto Wipers
Auto Wipers are just plain bad. I really hope Tesla just uses a rain sensor. I thought they had improved at one point, but I still get dry wipes, Speed 4 on a drizzle, and Speed 2 on a steady rain. In reality, these should be switched.
You can watch our full review of Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.7 below:
🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.7 saved me from an accident! FULL REVIEW: https://t.co/1vTbCMpCn8 pic.twitter.com/9mHmKVoMVA
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
Tesla Full Self-Driving insurance program with heavy discount expands
Tesla quietly made the Cybertruck even stronger
