News
SpaceX receives first major Starship Moon lander funding from NASA
SpaceX has received its first major funding from NASA for the development of a crewed Starship Moon lander meant to return humans to the surface of Earth’s nearest neighbor as early as 2024.
Ordinarily, funding disbursement is just a routine, mundane part of government contracting. However, soon after NASA revealed that it had selected SpaceX – both the most technically sound proposal and cheapest option by half – alone to return humanity to the Moon, former competitors Dynetics and Blue Origin both filed protests complaining about the space agency’s conclusions. As a direct result, NASA was forced to freeze work on SpaceX’s brand new Human Landing System (HLS) contract and collaboration between both partners was strictly limited until both protests could be evaluated.
Technically, the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) tasked with those reviews had 100 days from the date the protests were filed (April 26th) to complete the process. On July 30th, 95 days later, GAO announced that it had firmly denied both Dynetics’ and Blue Origin’s protests. As it turns out, likely just hours after GAO released its decision, NASA sent SpaceX its first major HLS Starship milestone payment.
As part of the $2.9 billion contract SpaceX won to develop a crewed Starship lander and perform at least two major test flights of the vehicle, one uncrewed and one crewed, NASA wasted no time at all sending SpaceX its first milestone payment of $300 million. In one fell swoop, NASA has thus doubled the amount of money it’s invested to date in SpaceX’s next-generation, fully-reusable Starship launch vehicle.
Per GAO’s July 30th decision document, NASA reportedly only had ~$350 million left to fund its FY2021 HLS Option A awardee(s) – almost all of which has now been sent to SpaceX. Despite the fact that the Dynetics and Blue Origin protests all but completely prevented NASA from making progress on HLS, they didn’t prevent SpaceX from continuing work at a breakneck pace. Notably, even with that $300M payment and a ~$140M HLS requirements contract Starship received in 2020, NASA has still disbursed less HLS funding to SpaceX than Blue Origin’s National Team, which received almost $480M to develop its own lander before SpaceX was crowned.
In fact, SpaceX simply continued as if those protests and their associated obstructions didn’t exist. In early May, for the first time ever, SpaceX successfully launched a full-scale Starship prototype to 10 km (~6.2 mi) and gently landed the massive rocket in one piece. The Starship tankers SpaceX’s HLS lander missions will require will ultimately rely on the exact same exotic recovery approach – an approach that SpaceX has now unequivocally proven works.
Around the same time, SpaceX began assembling a skyscraper-sized ‘launch tower’ that will be tasked with fueling Starship and eventually catching Super Heavy boosters. A few days before GAO denied the HLS Option A protests and allowed NASA to get back to work, SpaceX stacked that launch tower to its final ~145m (~475 ft) height, completing the basic structure. Plenty of outfitting remains, including the installation of the giant arms that will hopefully one day catch and fuel Starship stages, but that work is also progressing quickly.
In the three months NASA’s HLS program has been frozen in place, SpaceX also built, proof tested, and static fired a ~69m tall (~227 ft) Super Heavy booster (B3) for the first time, more or less completed the first orbital-class Starship prototype (S20), nearly finished another full-scale Super Heavy (B4), collectively installed 35 Raptors on both vehicles in about two days, and briefly stacked Ship 20 atop Booster 4 – creating the largest, tallest rocket ever assembled.
-
In short, even with no guarantee that it would ever receive any of the $2.9 billion NASA awarded it, SpaceX continued Starship development at a breakneck pace and – according to Elon Musk – could technically be ready for the rocket’s first orbital launch attempt “in a few weeks.” In the background, SpaceX also almost certainly completed a great deal of paperwork and deliverables that NASA was finally able to accept and review once unshackled. Ever the optimist, despite the hurdles, CEO Elon Musk still believes that SpaceX will not only deliver its Starship Moon lander – and thus NASA astronauts to the lunar surface – on time, but “probably sooner” than the 2024 target.
-
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) reported a beat in revenues and EBITDA in its first earnings call report while also minimizing losses as its business continues to gain momentum.
After its IPO in July, SpaceX saw some tough losses on Wall Street due to a major selloff after a delay in its 13th Starship test flight. The ship launched later that week and completed what was arguably the most successful IFT operation in the Starship program’s history.
Nevertheless, the company is continuing on and reported some encouraging financials while also promoting what appears to be a robust outlook moving forward in its Space, AI, and Connectivity divisions.
SpaceX to report first-ever earnings today: here’s what to expect
Earnings Results
- Revenues: $7.8 billion reported vs. $6.7 billion expected
- Adjusted EBITDA: $3.5 billion vs. $2 billion expected
- Net loss of $541 million, an improvement of $467 million from net loss of $1.0 billion
Additionally, CFO Bret Johnsen had these comments:
“2026 has been a momentous year so far, and the second quarter demonstrated the true power of SpaceX. Revenue growth accelerated across all our business segments and we delivered strong operating leverage, with significant margin expansion led by our new AI compute agreements. Our unparalleled leadership in launch, Starlink subscriber growth, new enterprise and government partnerships, and best-in-class AI infrastructure underscore our ability to drive meaningful scale and deliver attractive returns. As a newly public company, we are delighted to welcome our broad base of shareholders and bondholders. We ended the second quarter with $100 billion of cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities, and $47.5 billion in backlog. This financial strength gives us substantial capacity to invest in Starship, Starlink Broadband and Mobile satellites, and our AI platform, while maintaining a disciplined long-term capital allocation framework.”
Space Business Highlights
SpaceX shared some of its biggest Space Business Highlights for Q2:
- Space revenues grew 55% sequentially and 29% year-over-year to $962 million, driven by a higher number of large customer launches and a favorable customer shift compared to the prior year
- Total costs and expenses for the Space segment were up by $389 million year-over-year, as we continued to accelerate R&D investments in our Starship program, which we believe will reduce the cost to orbit by 99% or more relative to the historical average, and unlock significant revenue potential across all business segments
- Leading launch provider for the world with 78 launches and 1,041 metric tons of mass to orbit deployed over the six months ended June 30, 2026, primarily allocated to Connectivity for the deployment of our Starlink constellation
- Starship V3 development continued to advance towards full and rapid reusability:
- Completed Starship V3’s first suborbital mission in May, Flight 12, which achieved a successful lift off from our new Starbase pad, a precision landing of Starship’s upper stage, and deployment of modified V2 Starlink satellites
- Subsequent to the second quarter, completed Starship Flight 13 in July, which achieved all flight objectives including deploying 20 production V3 satellites, demonstrating in-space relight of a Raptor engine, and executing the softest ever splashdown of Starship, providing critical views of an intact heatshield
SpaceX will report its earnings today at 4:30 P.M. EDT.
Elon Musk issued a second pointed warning to SpaceX short sellers on Tuesday, just hours before the company was set to release its first quarterly earnings as a publicly traded firm. Responding to a report highlighting elevated short interest, Musk wrote on X: “I try to warn them, but they just double down …”
The comment came as data from S3 Partners showed roughly 95 percent of available SPCX shares to borrow were on loan, translating to about 34 percent short interest as a percentage of the float. The stock has traded under pressure since its record-breaking IPO in June 2026, declining significantly from early peaks.
I try to warn them, but they just double down … 🤷♂️
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 4, 2026
This marks the second such message from Musk in under three weeks.
On July 17, amid post-IPO volatility, he stated: “The survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low.” At that time, SPCX had fallen roughly 30 percent from its peak above a $2.6 trillion valuation, with short sellers reportedly realizing gains of about $8.7 billion.
Musk’s warning aligned with optimistic analyses projecting that Starship-driven cost reductions could enable a multi-trillion-dollar space economy through applications such as orbital solar power, asteroid mining, data centers, and Mars-related projects, positioning SpaceX as critical infrastructure.
SpaceX is scheduled to report second-quarter results after the market close later today, followed by a webcast. Analysts anticipate revenue near $6.9 billion, reflecting growth in Starlink, launch services, and AI-related segments. The earnings release precedes a major lockup expiration on August 6 that could free hundreds of millions of insider shares.
Musk has a long track record of confronting short sellers, particularly regarding Tesla, where he has argued that persistent bearish positions underestimate transformative technologies. Critics view his optimism as overly ambitious given near-term stock fluctuations, while supporters see temporary dips as opportunities in a longer-term expansion of the space economy.
As SpaceX opens its books to public scrutiny for the first time, the high short interest and Musk’s repeated cautions set the stage for heightened market attention on the results and management’s commentary.
Tesla’s AI lead Ashok Elluswamy doubled down on the company’s strategy regarding Full Self-Driving’s speed settings, and owners are definitely confused.
Earlier versions of Full Self-Driving allowed owners to set a max speed that the vehicle could travel while operating under the semi-autonomous driver assistance platform. This allowed more customization for the driver, giving them the ability to experience FSD’s robust performance with their own personal preferences.
Speed is massively important for obvious reasons — it’s not only a question of keeping the vehicle occupants comfortable by traveling at a safe speed, but it’s also something that could contribute to a ticket or infraction from law enforcement.
With the release of FSD v14 last year, Tesla removed the ability to set a max speed and instead opted for five Speed Profiles, ranging from “Sloth,” the most conservative, to “Mad Max,” the most aggressive and spirited. These profiles not only control speed, but also how frequently the vehicle will execute passes, perform lane changes, and other contributing factors.
The removal of the Max Speed setting was a major complaint amongst the Tesla community because it left owners scrambling for a way to experience suitable behaviors while traveling at an appropriate speed. Most felt the driving profiles would be a good indicator of the behaviors, while speed would still be left up to the discretion of the driver.
Instead, Tesla’s Speed Profiles determine both, and the constant tinkering of how they behave has been a major bottleneck and point of confusion for both owners and the company. From update to update, the Speed Profiles will change, sometimes more drastically than others. Some owners have complained that the “Standard” profile is too fast, while others have experienced “Mad Max” traveling below the speed limit:
What has happened to Mad Max?
At one point it was going 32 in a 35. Traffic ahead had pulled away considerably https://t.co/bjKvaMVTNX pic.twitter.com/aaZSWmLu5v
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 24, 2026
These things change with each update, but the big complaint is that owners are on the hook for any tickets that come from FSD’s infractions; that’s the caveat of the suite being named FSD (Supervised). It ultimately means the driver is responsible, and the automaker has no liability when it comes to speeding tickets or general traffic infractions.
It is the driver’s responsibility to take over or adjust based on this.
Elluswamy essentially confirmed that there are no plans to bring back Max Speed control, because it is what he referred to as “an anti pattern.” He then echoed something that CEO Elon Musk has started to really push with FSD, and that’s the idea that Tesla is really honing in on the preferences of the driver.
Max speed control is an anti pattern.
We are working on better learning of user’s implied preferences.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) August 3, 2026
Owners were confused by Tesla’s decision, stating that there must be a better way, especially considering disengagements for incorrect speeds are common:
This…. is not the way
— Kyle Conner (@itskyleconner) August 4, 2026
😭 I appreciate this mentality ! But currently the no.1 reason I disengage in Australia is incorrect speed zones.
— Ryan’s Model Y (@ryanjaycowan) August 3, 2026
This is fine but you need to start accepting liability for speeding tickets then. https://t.co/lyCgdA83gQ
— Jeremy Judkins (@jeremyjudkins_) August 4, 2026
Okay https://t.co/nOvoXQkNg1 pic.twitter.com/jGRtF2xtox
— Chad Moran (@ChadMoran) August 3, 2026
From personal experience and using FSD for over 72 percent of my driving miles since v14 was released late last year, I make Speed Profile adjustments constantly. If FSD is traveling a tad too quickly, I will scale it back, and if it’s too conservative, I’ll make it more aggressive.
I don’t complain about making the Speed Profile changes too frequently, but it would certainly be nice to have it happen less frequently. There are far too many times I am concerned about getting a ticket, even in Standard mode.
The biggest issue for me, personally, which seems to be echoed throughout the community, is the fact that Tesla’s goal is to minimize disengagements. Many drivers are stating that speed is a major reason for disengagements.
However, Tesla is not willing to bring back this one level of input because it would technically be a regression.
Whether it’s right or wrong in your opinion, it is what Tesla is going with, and it seems like it has pivoted quite a bit from its other strategies for minimizing interventions by pushing its AI to behave in a way that would fit the occupant’s personal preferences.
SpaceX reports beat in first earnings while minimizing losses
Elon Musk sends second warning to SpaceX shorts ahead of first earnings
