SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has reiterated plans for Starship to take over Starlink launches, eventually fully replacing Falcon 9’s role in the constellation.
Since dedicated Starlink launches began in May 2019, Musk, COO and President Gwynne Shotwell, and a few other SpaceX officials and executives have made it clear that the company would ultimately transition the task of launching and maintaining the Starlink constellation from Falcon 9 to Starship. Barring major surprises, Starship is being designed to be fully and rapidly reusable from the ground up, nominally making the system far cheaper to launch.
After Musk announced a radical redesign that replaced carbon composite structures with simple steel, Starship may even be far cheaper to build than Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy – despite being several times larger, heavier, more powerful, and more capable. Despite its relative shortcomings, though, Falcon 9 has become an extraordinarily reliable and available workhorse for SpaceX and has completed 28 operational Starlink launches – delivering ~1670 satellites to orbit – since November 2019.
However, while Falcon 9 has done and continues to do an extraordinary job of routinely launching satellites and astronauts, Starship promises to blow it out of the water. It might be several years before Starship is deemed safe and reliable enough to launch humans but SpaceX could feasibly start launching Starlink satellites on the rocket almost as soon as it begins orbital flight tests.
Thanks to the low cost of each Starlink satellite, likely now around ~$250,000, it would be surprising if SpaceX didn’t include at least a few dozen satellites in the early phases of orbital Starship flight tests – even if success is far from guaranteed. At some point, though, and perhaps quite quickly, Starship will safely make it to orbit, reenter, and touch down beside a Super Heavy booster a few times in a row, effectively demonstrating fitness to launch (uncrewed) payloads.
It could take a bit more proof to convince paying customers with satellites worth tens to hundreds of millions of dollars to entrust launch contracts to Starship but SpaceX itself – likely to be the builder and owner of the world’s largest satellite constellation for the indefinite future – has more flexibility to tailor its appetite for caution. With the capabilities Starship could feasibly offer, SpaceX might also be hard-pressed to just sit and wait.
Speaking at a conference in October 2019, Gwynne Shotwell revealed that a single Starship would be able to launch up to 400 Starlink satellites (~106,000 kg/230,000 lb) at a time – equivalent to more than six and a half dedicated Falcon 9 missions. Unofficial renders imagining the payload have made it clear that more than 300 satellites could fit inside Starship’s truly cavernous fairing with ease.
Simply put, even if early Starship launches somehow end up being five times more costly than a partially expendable Falcon 9 (i.e. >$75M), the per-satellite launch cost of Starlink missions would be no worse than Falcon while simultaneously delivering several times more satellites to orbit. In reality, unless SpaceX has to expend an entire ship, booster, and ~35 Raptor engines, the total cost of a Starship launch could already be cheaper than Falcon 9 even before factoring in the cost per Starlink satellite.
Even with a downright tranquil monthly launch cadence, a year of 300-satellite Starlink mission on Starship would more than double what Falcon 9 has managed with 28 launches in the last ~20 months. SpaceX is unlikely to be ready to support truly operational Starship Starlink launches or risk ~$75-100 million of satellites until sometime next year but it’s safe to say that the wait will be worth it.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner in Los Angeles dominated the company’s global usage rankings after just one year, proving the concept is more than just a one-off novelty location that will fade away.
The performance could incite the company to build more locations, something that CEO Elon Musk has hinted at for some time.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner delivered 21.2 GWh of energy in its first year of operation, the company’s head of Charging, Max de Zegher, revealed on X. Of the top 10 most utilized Supercharger locations in Tesla’s global infrastructure, the Diner in Los Angeles was the most used by drivers, and it wasn’t particularly close:
Tesla Diner opened exactly 1 year ago. Inspiring that futuristic places like this exist.
It’s our highest usage Supercharger in the world: 21.2 GWh delivered in a year, 1.6k sessions/day.
Top 10 Superchargers by energy delivered: https://t.co/9YvJ8lw696 pic.twitter.com/koB3AUJHws
— Max (@MdeZegher) July 21, 2026
On its launch day one year ago, nobody was too sure what the Tesla Diner would be about. It seemed like an interesting concept, and considering it had been in the works for years, it was a highly anticipated launch that many were looking forward to.
Based on its success, we could see additional Diners with Superchargers built throughout the United States, and potentially beyond. Musk has said on several occasions that the company would be willing to bring the Diner idea to more markets.
Tesla makes major change at Supercharger Diner amid epic demand
Of the markets that Musk has mentioned, both Palo Alto and Austin have come to be perceived as ideal selections. However, there are no concrete plans as of now to build new Supercharger Diners anywhere; the location on Santa Monica Boulevard will remain the exclusive spot to pick up Tesla-inspired eats, at least for the time being.
Tesla short sellers won big following the company’s massive fall on Wall Street after it reported subpar Earnings on Wednesday.
Tesla short sellers collected about $4.12 billion in single-day profits on Thursday, according to Bloomberg. Shares fell as much as 15 percent during Thursday’s session. It closed as one of the worst days for Tesla on Wall Street in the past three years.
Investors sold off the stock after Tesla said it would aggressively direct its spending toward AI and its Optimus robot project. The company had record revenues, which were driven by one of the strongest quarters in terms of vehicle deliveries in company history.
However, it missed EPS estimates by reporting just $0.33, a far cry from the $0.53 analysts expected.
S3 Partners reported that about 3 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock is sold short. Managing Director at S3, Ihor Dusaniwsky, provided the short seller’s potential profit, as well as another figure: shorts have likely had paper gains of $8.92 billion this year, as Tesla shares are down 30 percent in 2026.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla has burned short sellers many times in the past, but the company’s latest Earnings Call was a chance for those skeptics to taste some payback. Although the company gave some very transparent information regarding future projects, the rollout of Robotaxi, Optimus, and Semi, many investors took their profits on Thursday.
Notable short sellers like Michael Burry have been transparent about their skepticism around Tesla shares. Burry just revealed three weeks ago that he had opened up a new short on the stock, stating he shorted Tesla shares at $416.22. “Happy it jumped back to this level,” he said in a blog post.
At the time of publication, Tesla shares were down about 3 percent and the stock was trading at $309.92.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner probably just secured more locations
Tesla short sellers win big after shares fall after earnings
