News
SpaceX’s Starship Moon lander under fire yet again as Blue Origin sues NASA
Less than three weeks after the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) categorically denied protests from Blue Origin and Dynetics over NASA’s decision to award SpaceX a Moon lander development contract, the former company has sued the space agency.
First reported by The Verge, Blue Origin filed its lawsuit against NASA with the US Court of Federal Claims on Monday, August 16th and continues to spout the same kind of rhetoric that GAO wholeheartedly refuted on July 30th. Namely, the office explicitly upheld the procurement process and reasoning behind NASA’s decision to award SpaceX – and SpaceX alone – a contract to develop a crewed Moon lander.
Thus far, the central argument put forth by Blue Origin and Dynetics is that NASA effectively invalidated the entire Human Landing System (HLS) “Option A” procurement when it didn’t award two HLS development contracts. Option A refers to a limited portion of the HLS program focused on funding the development of crewed Moon landers and the completion of two crucial flight tests – one uncrewed and one with NASA astronauts aboard.
Program-wise, HLS is quite similar to NASA’s Commercial Crew Program (CCP), which began as a series of smaller contracts focused on capability demonstrations that culminated in a major competition to ferry NASA astronauts to and from the International Space Station (ISS). Ultimately, NASA selected Boeing and SpaceX and the rest is now history (SpaceX flourished; Boeing floundered) and despite unsurprising delays, the program has been an extraordinary success and a financial bargain.
As part of the major Commercial Crew Transportation Capability contracts SpaceX and Boeing won, both companies were tasked with designed, building, and qualifying crewed spacecraft to NASA specifications. The centerpiece of those contracts was a pair of full-up demonstration flights to and from the ISS – one uncrewed and the other with two NASA astronauts. NASA then separately purchased “post-certification missions” – operational crew transport flights – from both companies a few years into development.
The corollaries between Commercial Crew and HLS are clear and unsurprising. However, unlike the Commercial Crew Program, NASA has been able to structure HLS with the benefits of hindsight. This time around, already faced with a Congressional funding shortfall even worse than years of half-funding that directly delayed CCtCap, NASA used a different procurement ‘vessel’ for HLS and repeatedly warned competitors that while it wanted two Moon lander providers, the ability to award two contracts would be entirely dependent on funding availability.
In other words, NASA had learned an important lesson from the Commercial Crew Program and wasn’t about to trap itself with contractual obligations that far outmatched recent Congressional funding trends. Intentionally or not, NASA structured HLS in such a way that it only awarded major Option A lander contracts after Congress had already appropriated its FY2021 funding. As it turned out, Congress ultimately provided a pathetic 25% of the full $3.4 billion NASA had requested, leaving the agency no choice but to downselect to just a single provider – SpaceX. Put simply, NASA has assumed that Congress will continue to supply just a tiny fraction of the funding it would need to develop two landers on time and SpaceX’s Starship proposal was just cheap enough to make any Option A award possible.
The fixed-price contract will cost NASA $2.9B over four or so years – narrowly within the space agency’s reach if Congress continues to appropriate around $850M annually ($3.4B over four years). The numbers are very simple. As GAO notes, the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) vehicle NASA used for its HLS Option A procurement also strictly allows the agency to select as many or as few proposals as it wants, including none at all. In the lead-up to proposal submission, official NASA documents repeatedly cautioned as much, warning that the agency might not even award one contract depending on funding or the quality of proposals it received.
For Blue Origin’s lawsuit to succeed, the increasingly desperate company will have to convince a federal judge that basic realities and longstanding precedents of federal procurement – not just NASA’s HLS award to SpaceX – are flawed and need to be changed. The odds of success are thus spectacularly low. However, if the presiding judge allows the case to proceed and awards Blue Origin an injunction against NASA, it could force the space agency to cease work on SpaceX’s HLS contract for months and potentially freeze SpaceX’s access to the $300M NASA recently disbursed.
News
Tesla discloses interesting collaboration partner for Supercharging
This BOXABL collaboration would be a great way to add a rest stop to a rural Supercharging location, and could lead to more of these chargers across the U.S.
Tesla disclosed an interesting collaboration partner in an SEC filing, which looks like an indication of a potential project at Supercharger sites.
Tesla said on Tuesday in the filing that it was entering an agreement with BOXABL to design and build a Micromenity structure. Simply put, this is a modular building, usually a few hundred square feet in size, and it has been seen at Superchargers in Europe.
In Magnant, France, Tesla opened a small building at a Supercharger that is available to all EV owners. There are snacks and drinks inside, including ice cream, coffee, a gaming console, and restrooms. It gives people an opportunity to get up and out of their cars while charging.
This building was not built by BOXABL, but instead by bk World Lounges. It is likely the final Supercharging stop before people get to Paris, as it is located 250 kilometers, or 155 miles, from the City of Light.
Voir cette publication sur Instagram
Magnant has 56 stalls, so it is a large Supercharging stop compared to most. The building could be a sign of things to come, especially as Tesla has opened up larger Supercharger stations along major roadways.
It is for just a single building, as the Scope of Work within the filing states “a comprehensive package for one Micromenity building.”
NEWS: BOXABL, a company that creates modular, prefabricated buildings, has entered into an agreement with @Tesla.
This is Tesla formally contracting BOXABL to design, engineer, and build a pilot “Micromenity” structure, a compact, modular building unit.
While some info in the… pic.twitter.com/RabJczGpEp
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) December 9, 2025
Superchargers are commonly located at gas stations, shopping centers, and other major points of interest. However, there are some stops that are isolated from retail or entertainment.
This BOXABL collaboration would be a great way to add a rest stop to a rural Supercharging location, and could lead to more of these chargers across the U.S.
Tesla has done a lot of really great things for Supercharging this year.
Along with widespread expansion, the company launched the “Charging Passport” this week, opened the largest Supercharger in the world in Lost Hills, California, with 168 chargers, opened the Tesla Diner, a drive-in movie restaurant in Los Angeles, and initiated access to the infrastructure to even more automakers.
Elon Musk
Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms Robotaxi safety monitor removal in Austin: here’s when
Musk has made the claim about removing Safety Monitors from Tesla Robotaxi vehicles in Austin three times this year, once in September, once in October, and once in November.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirmed on Tuesday at the xAI Hackathon that the company would be removing Safety Monitors from Robotaxis in Austin in just three weeks.
This would meet Musk’s timeline from earlier this year, as he has said on several occasions that Tesla Robotaxis would have no supervision in Austin by the end of 2025.
On Tuesday, Musk said:
“Unsupervised is pretty much solved at this point. So there will be Tesla Robotaxis operating in Austin with no one in them. Not even anyone in the passenger seat in about three weeks.”
Musk has made the claim about removing Safety Monitors from Tesla Robotaxi vehicles in Austin three times this year, once in September, once in October, and once in November.
In September, he said:
“Should be no safety driver by end of year.”
The safety driver is just there for the first few months to be extra safe.
Should be no safety driver by end of year.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 4, 2025
On the Q3 Earnings Call in October, he said:
“We are expecting ot have no safety drivers in at least large parts of Austin by the end of this year.”
Finally, in November, he reiterated the timeline in a public statement at the Shareholder Meeting:
“I expect Robotaxis to operate without safety drivers in large parts of Austin this year.”
Currently, Tesla uses Safety Monitors in Austin in the passenger’s seat on local roads. They will sit in the driver’s seat for highway routes. In the Bay Area ride-hailing operation, there is always a Safety Monitor in the driver’s seat.
Three weeks would deliver on the end-of-year promise, cutting it close, beating it by just two days. However, it would be a tremendous leap forward in the Robotaxi program, and would shut the mouths of many skeptics who state the current iteration is no different than having an Uber.
Tesla has also expanded its Robotaxi fleet this year, but the company has not given exact figures. Once it expands its fleet, even more progress will be made in Tesla’s self-driving efforts.
News
SpaceX reportedly mulling IPO, eyeing largest of all time: report
“I do want to try to figure out some way for Tesla shareholders to participate in SpaceX. I’ve been giving a lot of thought to how to give people access to SpaceX stock,” Musk said.
SpaceX is reportedly mulling an initial public offering, eyeing what would be the largest valuation at the time of availability of all time, a new report from Bloomberg said on Tuesday.
It is one of many reports involving one of Elon Musk’s companies and a massive market move, as this is not the first time we have seen reports of an IPO by SpaceX. Musk himself has also dispelled other reports in the past of a similar nature, including an xAI funding round.
SpaceX and Musk have yet to comment on the report. In the past, untrue reports were promptly replied to by the CEO; this has not yet gained any response, which is a good sign in terms of credibility.
However, he said just a few days ago that stories of this nature are inaccurate:
“There has been a lot of press claiming SpaceX is raising money at $800B, which is not accurate. SpaceX has been cash flow positive for many years and does periodic stock buybacks twice a year to provide liquidity for employees and investors. Valuation increments are a function of progress with Starship and Starlink and securing global direct-to-cell spectrum that greatly increases our addressable market. And one other thing that is arguably most significant by far.”
There has been a lot of press claiming @SpaceX is raising money at $800B, which is not accurate.
SpaceX has been cash flow positive for many years and does periodic stock buybacks twice a year to provide liquidity for employees and investors.
Valuation increments are a…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 6, 2025
Musk has discussed a potential IPO for SpaceX in recent months, as the November 6 shareholder meeting, as he commented on the “downsides” of having a public company, like litigation exposure, quarterly reporting pressures, and other inconveniences.
Nevertheless, Musk has also said he wants there to be a way for Tesla shareholders to get in on the action. At the meeting in early November, he said:
“I do want to try to figure out some way for Tesla shareholders to participate in SpaceX. I’ve been giving a lot of thought to how to give people access to SpaceX stock.”
Additionally, he added:
“Maybe at some point., SpaceX should become a public company despite all the downsides of being public.”
Musk has been historically reluctant to take SpaceX public, at times stating it could become a barrier to colonizing Mars. That does not mean it will not happen.
Bloomberg’s report cites multiple unidentified sources who are familiar with the matter. They indicate to the publication that SpaceX wants to go public in mid-to-late 2026, and it wants to raise $30 billion at a valuation of around $1.5 trillion.
This is not the first time SpaceX has discussed an IPO; we reported on it nine years ago. We hope it is true, as the community has spoken for a long time about having access to SpaceX stock. Legendary investor Ron Baron is one of the lucky few to be a SpaceX investor, and said it, along with Tesla, is a “lifetime investment.”
Tesla bull Ron Baron reveals $100M SpaceX investment, sees 3-5x return on TSLA
The primary driver of SpaceX’s value is Starlink, the company’s satellite internet service. Starlink contributes 60-70 percent of SpaceX’s revenue, meaning it is the primary value engine. Launch services, like Falcon 9 contracts, and the development of Starship, also play supporting roles.
Tesla discloses interesting collaboration partner for Supercharging
Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms Robotaxi safety monitor removal in Austin: here’s when
