News
SpaceX Starlink, Starship programs crush funding goals, raise $2 billion
On the heels of a successful ~$350 million fundraising round, SpaceX has crushed its own expectations of a second, far more ambitious fundraiser, likely ensuring stable Starship and Starlink development for years to come.
First reported by Bloomberg on July 23rd, SpaceX’s second investment round of 2020 initially pursued $1 billion in funding, boosting the company’s valuation to $44 billion. Less than four weeks later, an August 18th SEC filing revealed that SpaceX had more than doubled its offering after it received overwhelming interest from prospective investors.
According to the regulatory document, SpaceX has now secured an incredibly $1.9 billion of a $2.06 billion of new funding for its Starlink and Starship programs, likely guaranteeing the health of both expensive development programs for 12-18+ months. Alternatively, the company could feasibly speed up either or both programs by a substantial amount with such a massive capital injection, shrinking the time required for Starship to reach orbit and begin operational launches and for Starlink to begin serving customers and generating revenue.
Prior to August 2020, SpaceX had raised a total of ~$3.4 billion over ~12 years of major funding rounds. In 2015, Google and Fidelity invested $1 billion in SpaceX – a round that remained the company’s biggest until now. Once again primarily driven by Fidelity, if SpaceX successfully closes the $2 billion series it kicked off last month, the company’s funding to date will jump nearly 60% in a single round.
Very few companies in history can claim to have closed an oversubscribed $2 billion funding round, making it easy to say that SpaceX is currently one of the hottest private investment opportunities in the world. There are several likely reasons that help explain why.
The track record of companies run by Elon Musk likely plays a huge role in investor confidence. Against all odds and in the face of hordes of detractors and naysayers, Tesla has shaped itself into the world’s premier electric vehicle (EV) manufacturer and managed to do so while still becoming a profitable (or at least sustainable) company. As a result, the value of $TSLA has exploded in 2019 and 2020, turning it into one of the most lucrative investments in years.
SpaceX has proven itself to be just as disruptive – if not more so – in the aerospace industry, designing, building, and fielding industry-leading rockets and spacecraft that are years ahead of “competition” and doing so with cost efficiency that competitors and national space agencies did not believe was possible. As a result, SpaceX now owns a vast majority of the global commercial launch market, is the only entity on Earth operating orbital-class reusable rockets, and is the only company capable of both building and launching its own satellite constellations.
From an investment perspective, the commercial launch market likely makes most eyes glaze over. Starlink, however, has the potential to tap into a large portion of a global communications market worth hundreds of billions to more than a trillion dollars. Building a satellite constellation large and capable enough to do so is an extraordinarily expensive ordeal no matter how efficient SpaceX is, but once it’s even partially complete, it could almost effortlessly magnify the company’s annual revenue by 5-10x.
Once Starlink is able to serve millions of customers, it could easily become self-sustaining. With tens of millions of customers, it could become a veritable cash cow, generating >$6 billion in annual revenue on annual upkeep and operating costs of $1-2 billion at most (conservatively estimating 24 Starlink launches per year for $50 million each).
This doesn’t even account for Starship, which could effectively create whole new markets for space access if SpaceX is able to achieve its ambitious design goals. For Starlink, though, Starship would be equally game-changing by making constellation deployment at least ~7 times more cost-effective than Falcon 9 (~400 vs. ~60 satellites per launch).
Regardless, with at least $1.9 billion soon to be in the bank, it should be clear that any doubt that SpaceX has the resources it needs to sustain its Starlink and Starship development programs for one or several more years is woefully misplaced.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
