News
SpaceX COO offers harsh critique of Falcon 9, Starlink, and Starship’s competitors
SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell says that the company’s Starlink internet constellation is years ahead of competition from OneWeb and Amazon. A step further, the executive also voiced several unprecedently harsh critiques of Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin and Boeing and Lockheed Martin (ULA).
SpaceX President and Chief Operating Officer Gwynne Shotwell has been as busy as ever and has attended numerous major events over the last few weeks, often speaking with an unprecedented level of candor. The famous SpaceX executive repeatedly indicated that competitors have over-promised and under-delivered and, as a result, are years behind SpaceX’s own Starlink constellation. SpaceX has already launched 60 prototype satellites and has hundreds more on the way as part of a bid to kick off a busy period of “v1.0” satellite.
SpaceX intends to launch has many as 24 dedicated Starlink missions next year, equating to 60 satellites launched every two or so weeks. Meanwhile, the company is in the late stages of preparing to mass-produce “user terminals” and ground stations with the hope of delivering internet service to customers internet as early as mid-2020.

Starlink, OneWeb, and Project Kuiper
Shotwell was especially critical of megaconstellation competitors OneWeb and Amazon, the latter of which began hiring just a few months ago for a several-thousand-satellite constellation known as Project Kuiper. During an October 25th Q&A session with billionaire Ron Baron at the Baron Fund’s annual Investment Conference, Shotwell was uncharacteristically candid about the spaceflight industry outside of SpaceX’s doors, pointing to Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin and the United Launch Alliance as prime examples of the many pitfalls of traditional aerospace methods.
Shotwell, on SpaceX's competitors and why other companies haven't built and landed orbital rockets: "Boeing and Lockheed like their cushy situation."— Michael Sheetz (@thesheetztweetz) October 25, 2019
She responded by crediting the hard work of SpaceX engineers and the often ambitious timelines set forth by company CEO Elon Musk, stating that, “I don’t think there’s a motivation or a drive there.” She explained that she believes that “engineers think better when they’re pushed hardest to do great things in a very short period of time, with very few resources. Not when you have twenty years.” This is a bit of a brutal take given that SpaceX is infamous for offering an often brutally hostile work environment and some of the worst salaries in the industry, but it’s nearly impossible to deny that SpaceX’s list of achievements is essentially unrivaled.
Baron: Why hasn't Bezos been doing this? He's spending lots of money.
Shotwell: They're two years older than us and they've yet to reach orbit. They get $1 billion of "free money" each year but I think engineers work better when they're pushed.— Michael Sheetz (@thesheetztweetz) October 25, 2019
Discussing Blue Origin, Shotwell pulled no punches, stating that “they’ve got a ton of money and they’re not doing a lot.” While both companies – SpaceX and Blue Origin – have remained private and exist in large part thanks to their wealthy owners, SpaceX has pursued commercial relevance and become wildly successful. On the other hand, Blue Origin – despite being two years older – would likely lose all forward momentum or fold outright if owner Jeff Bezos were to cease bankrolling the spaceflight company.
Blue Origin is currently developing a large, reusable, orbital-class rocket known as New Glenn and could eventually become SpaceX’s only serious competition, but the rocket’s first launch is unlikely to occur before H2 2021 or 2022.

Simultaneously, Amazon recently revealed Project Kuiper, a slightly modified version of SpaceX’s Starlink constellation that is being lead by ex-Starlink executives fired by Elon Musk in June 2018. Project Kuiper, however, has only just begun and is likely at least 3-5 years away from beginning orbital testing, let alone providing any sort of service to customers.
Shotwell also addressed a new competitor in the large-scale satellite constellation market, OneWeb. During her talk with Baron, Shotwell bluntly warned potential investors to steer clear of the company. She boasted about SpaceX’s Starlink satellites, stating that they are “17 times better per bit”, a reference to Starlink’s greater per-satellite bandwidth, and cautioned that “if you’re thinking about investing in OneWeb, I would recommend strongly against it. They fooled some people who are going to be pretty disappointed in the near term.”

OneWeb later provided a follow up to CNBC reporter Michael Sheetz stating “we are not in the business of commenting on competitors. OneWeb’s satellites and constellation design are tested, market leading and we are excited to start our monthly launches soon and to start delivering much needed connectivity to people everywhere.” In reality, OneWeb and executives like Greg Wyler comment on competitors all the time, they just rarely put all their cards on the table.
Regardless, Shotwell’s streak of candor appears to have no end in sight. It remains to be seen whether her move towards uncharacteristically vitriolic public comments is a smart strategy, but she is undoubtedly making waves.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Investor's Corner
Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
News
Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.