News
SpaceX’s upgraded Starship set for test flight despite sore NASA contract losers
Within the last week, while SpaceX has been diligently working to ready an upgraded Starship prototype for its first launch, former competitors Blue Origin and Dynetics – both of which recently lost a historic NASA Moon lander contract to SpaceX – have filed “protests” and forced the space agency to freeze work (and funds).
That means that NASA is now legally unable to use funds or resources related to its Human Lander System (HLS) program or the $2.9 billion contract it awarded SpaceX on April 16th to develop a variant of Starship to return humanity to the Moon. However, just like SpaceX has already spent a great deal of its own time and money on Starship development and – more recently – a rapid-fire series of launches, the company appears to have no intention of letting sore losers hamper its rocket factory or test campaign.
Instead, on the same two days Blue Origin and Dynetics loudly filed official protests with the US Government Accountability Office (GAO), SpaceX performed two back-to-back static fire tests with a Starship prototype and Raptor engines outfitted with “hundreds of improvements.” Technical challenges and unsavory weather conditions forced SpaceX to call off a launch planned sometime last week but the company now appears to be on track to launch Starship prototype SN15 as early as Tuesday, May 4th.
In principle, the ability for companies to protest US government contracting decisions is a necessity and (nominally) a net good but it can easily be misused – and often in damaging ways. In the case of Blue Origin and Dynetics, it’s difficult not to perceive both protests as examples of the latter.
Blue Origin effectively disagrees with every single major point made and conclusion drawn by NASA’s Source Selection Authority (Kathy Lueders) and a separate panel of experts – often to the point that the company is strongly implying that it understands NASA’s contracting process better than the space agency itself. Blue Origin partners Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin are both partially or fully responsible for several of their own catastrophic acquisition boondoggles (F-35, Orion, SLS, James Webb Space Telescope, etc.) and are part of the military-industrial complex primarily responsible for turning US military and aerospace procurement into the quagmire of political interests, quasi-monopolies, and loopholes it is today.
The primary argument is generally shared by both protestors. In essence, Dynetics [p. 23; PDF] and Blue Origin [PDF] believe that it was unfair or improper for NASA to select just a single provider from the three companies or groups that competed. They argue that downselecting to one provider in lieu of budget shortfalls changed the procurement process and competition so much that NASA should have effectively called it quits and restarted the entire five-month process. Blue Origin and Dynetics also both imply that they were somehow blindsided by NASA’s concerns about a Congressional funding shortfall.
In reality, NASA could scarcely have been clearer that it was exceptionally sensitive about HLS funding and extremely motivated to attempt to return humans to the Moon by 2024 with or without the full support of Congress – albeit in fewer words. As Lueders herself noted in the HLS Option A award selection statement, the solicitation Blue, Dynetics, and SpaceX responded to states – word for word – that “the overall number of awards will be dependent upon funding availability and evaluation results.”
Additionally, implications that NASA somehow blindsided offerors with its lack of funding are woefully ignorant at best and consciously disingenuous at worse. Anyone with even the slightest awareness of the history of large-scale NASA programs would know that the space agency’s budget is all but exclusively determined by Congress each year and liable to change just as frequently if political winds shift. Short of blackmailing members of Congress or wistfully hoping that other avenues of legal political influence and partnership actually lead to desired funding and priorities appearing in appropriations legislation, NASA knows the future of its budget about as well as anyone else with access to the internet and a rudimentary awareness of history and current events.
It became clear that Congress was likely to drastically underfund NASA’s HLS program as early as November 2020 – weeks before HLS Option A proposals were due. The latest appropriations bill was passed on January 3rd, 2021, providing NASA $850 million of the ~$3.4 billion it requested for HLS. Historically, NASA’s experience with the Commercial Crew Program – public knowledge available to anyone – likely made it clear to the agency that it could not trust Congress to fund its priorities in good faith when half a decade of drastic underfunding ultimately delayed the critical program by several years. That damage was done by merely halving NASA Commercial Crew budget request from 2010 to 2013, whereas Congress had already set itself on a path to provide barely a quarter of the HLS funds NASA asked for in the weeks before Moon lander proposals were due.
Ultimately, the protests filed by Blue Origin and Dynetics are packed to the brim with petty axe-grinding, attempts to paint SpaceX in a negative light, and a general lack of indication that either company is operating in good faith. Instead, their protests appear all but guaranteed to fail while simultaneously forcing NASA to freeze HLS work and delay related disbursements for up to 100 days. Given that SpaceX is now technically working to design, build, qualify, and fly an uncrewed Lunar Starship prototype by 2023 and a crewed demonstration landing by 2024, 100 days represents a full 7-10% of the time that’s available to complete that extraordinary task.
Ironically, the protests made by Blue Origin and Dynetics have already helped demonstrate why NASA’s decision – especially in light of unambiguous budgetary restrictions – to sole-source its HLS Moon lander contract to SpaceX was an astute one. Had a victorious Blue Origin or Dynetics been in a similar position to SpaceX, it’s almost impossible to imagine either team continuing work to a significant degree in lieu of NASA funding or direction. SpaceX, on the other hand, hasn’t missed a beat and looks set to continue Starship development, production, and testing around the clock regardless of NASA’s capacity to help.
In other words, with a little luck, the actual schedule impact of a maximum 100-day work and funding freeze should be a tiny fraction of what it could have been if NASA had selected an HLS provider more interested in profit margins and stock buybacks than creating a sustainable path for humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.
News
SpaceX and Google mull massive partnership on Musk’s orbital data dream: report
The two companies are currently in talks for a rocket launch deal to support the placement of data centers in orbit as part of their push into space-based computing.
SpaceX and Google are in the process of ironing out the details of a potential partnership, a new report from the Wall Street Journal says. The two companies are currently in talks for a rocket launch deal to support the placement of data centers in orbit as part of their push into space-based computing.
In a move that blends cutting-edge AI demands with the final frontier of space exploration, Google is in exclusive talks with Elon Musk’s SpaceX for a rocket launch deal to deploy data centers in orbit. The Wall Street Journal is now reporting today, May 12, that the discussions mark Google’s aggressive expansion into space-based computing, addressing the exploding energy needs of artificial intelligence that terrestrial infrastructure can no longer sustain.
Exclusive: Google is in talks with SpaceX for a rocket launch deal as the search giant expands its own efforts to put orbital data centers in space https://t.co/QUCD3cPjxi
— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) May 12, 2026
SpaceX, nor Google, have commented on the report.
The catalyst for a potential deal is clear: AI’s voracious appetite for electricity. Global data centers consumed about 415 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity in 2024—roughly 1.5 percent of worldwide usage—according to the International Energy Agency. That figure is projected to more than double to around 945 TWh by 2030, with AI-focused servers growing at 30 percent annually, outpacing overall electricity demand growth by more than four times.
Some forecasts peg data center consumption exceeding 1,000 TWh by 2026, equivalent to Japan’s entire national electricity use. A single large AI training facility can draw as much power as 100,000 homes. On Earth, this translates to grid overloads, skyrocketing costs, land shortages, and massive water demands for cooling—constraints that threaten to throttle AI progress.
Orbital data centers promise a radical workaround. In space, satellites can harness constant, unobstructed sunlight for power—solar panels generate roughly five times more energy in orbit than on the ground, with no night cycle or atmospheric interference.
Excess heat radiates harmlessly into the vacuum of space, eliminating energy-intensive cooling systems and water usage. No terrestrial land or power grid is required, freeing operations from regulatory and environmental bottlenecks.
Musk has long championed the concept, framing it as inevitable. “Space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale,” he wrote on SpaceX’s site following the xAI merger. “Global electricity demand for AI simply cannot be met with terrestrial solutions… In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale.”
He has repeatedly highlighted solar advantages: “Space has the advantage that it’s always sunny,” and “any given solar panel is going to give you about five times more power in space than on the ground.”
Musk predicted in early 2026 that “in 36 months but probably closer to 30 months, the most economically compelling place to put AI will be space,” adding that within five years, annual space-launched AI compute could surpass Earth’s cumulative total. “SpaceX will be doing this,” he declared when discussing scaled-up Starlink satellites with high-speed laser links for orbital data transfer.
Meanwhile, Google has been quietly advancing a similar vision under Project Suncatcher, its internal “moonshot” initiative. CEO Sundar Pichai has described plans to launch two prototype satellites equipped with Tensor Processing Units (TPUs) by early 2027 for testing thermal management and reliability in orbit. In interviews, Pichai has called orbital computing a potential “normal way to build data centers” within a decade, enabled by launch cost reductions.
SpaceX is uniquely positioned to make this reality. The company recently filed with the FCC to launch up to one million satellites dedicated to orbital data centers at altitudes between 500 and 2,000 kilometers, projecting capacity for 100 gigawatts of AI compute.
These talks align with SpaceX’s broader ambitions, including a potential IPO where orbital infrastructure features prominently in investor pitches.
FCC accepts SpaceX filing for 1 million orbital data center plan
Challenges remain formidable, as is expected with a project with expectations so lofty. Radiation-hardened hardware, laser-based inter-satellite and Earth-downlink communications, launch economics, and orbital debris management are key hurdles.
Yet early movers like Starcloud (which trained the first large language model in orbit in late 2025) and Google’s prototypes signal accelerating momentum. Rivals, including Amazon and Blue Origin, are exploring similar paths, but SpaceX’s Starship and Starlink heritage give it a launch cadence edge.
This partnership could redefine AI infrastructure, turning the skies into the next data center frontier. As Earth’s power limits loom, Musk’s vision, combined with Google’s ambition, could position space not as sci-fi, but as the scalable solution for humanity’s computational future.
Investor's Corner
Legendary investor Ron Baron says Tesla and SpaceX stock buys will continue
In a wide-ranging appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box on May 12, legendary investor Ron Baron, founder, CEO, and portfolio manager of Baron Capital, reaffirmed his deep conviction in Elon Musk’s two flagship companies.
Legendary investor Ron Baron says he will continue buying stock of both Tesla and SpaceX, as he continues his support behind CEO Elon Musk, who he says is a special person and “brilliant.”
In a wide-ranging appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box on May 12, legendary investor Ron Baron, founder, CEO, and portfolio manager of Baron Capital, reaffirmed his deep conviction in Elon Musk’s two flagship companies.
With assets under management approaching $55–56 billion, Baron detailed his firm’s substantial holdings, outlined plans for the anticipated SpaceX IPO, and painted an exceptionally optimistic picture for both Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) and SpaceX, framing them as generational opportunities that will reshape industries and deliver extraordinary long-term returns.
Baron Capital’s position in SpaceX has grown dramatically since the firm began investing around 2017. What started as roughly $1.7 billion has ballooned to more than $15 billion, making it the firm’s largest holding.
Tesla ranks second, valued at approximately $5 billion in the portfolio. Together with stakes in xAI and related Musk-led ventures, these investments account for roughly one-third of Baron Capital’s $60 billion in lifetime profits since 1992. Baron emphasized that the growth stems from Musk’s singular ability to execute ambitious visions—from reusable rockets to global satellite internet and beyond.
The centerpiece of the discussion was SpaceX’s expected initial public offering, targeted for mid-2026 following a confidential S-1 filing. Baron announced plans to purchase an additional $1 billion in shares at the IPO.
Ron Baron said today that he plans on buying an additional $1 billion of SpaceX stock during the upcoming IPO:
“At the IPO price, I’ve got an order for $1 billion. I want to buy more stock at the IPO. I don’t know if we’re going to get filled, but we’re going to try. I believe… pic.twitter.com/KOv1HvYcZ0
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) May 12, 2026
He described the company’s trajectory in sweeping terms: “This is going to become the largest company on the planet.”
He highlighted Starlink’s expansion of high-speed internet to every corner of the globe, the revolutionary economics of reusable rockets, and Starship’s potential to enable massive space-based data centers and interplanetary infrastructure.
Baron sees SpaceX not merely as a rocket company but as a platform poised for exponential scaling once it goes public, with post-IPO appreciation potentially reaching 10- to 20- or even 30-times current levels over the next decade or more.
On Tesla, Baron struck an equally enthusiastic note, declaring that “now is Tesla’s moment.” He projected the stock could reach $2,000 to $2,500 per share within 10 years—implying a market capitalization near $8.3 trillion and roughly 5–6 times upside from recent levels. While Tesla remains a major holding, Baron’s optimism centers on its evolution beyond electric vehicles into an AI, robotics, autonomous-driving, and energy platform.
He pointed to robotaxis, Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology, Optimus humanoid robots, energy storage, and the vast real-world data advantage from Tesla’s global fleet as catalysts that will fundamentally alter the company’s revenue model and valuation multiples. Baron views these developments as transformative, shifting Tesla from a traditional automaker to a high-margin technology and infrastructure powerhouse.
Throughout the interview, Baron’s admiration for Musk was unmistakable. He has likened the entrepreneur to a modern Leonardo da Vinci for his artistic, multidisciplinary approach to solving humanity’s biggest challenges.
Baron’s personal commitment mirrors this confidence: he has repeatedly stated he does not expect to sell a single share of his own Tesla or SpaceX holdings in his lifetime, positioning himself as the “last one out” after his clients. This stance underscores a philosophy of patient, long-term ownership rather than short-term trading.
Baron’s comments arrive at a time of heightened anticipation around SpaceX’s public debut, which could rank among the largest IPOs in history and potentially value the company at $1.5–2 trillion or more at listing.
For investors, his message is clear: the Musk ecosystem—spanning electric vehicles, autonomy, robotics, satellite communications, and space exploration—represents one of the most compelling secular growth stories of the era. While short-term volatility in tech and EV stocks may persist, Baron sees these as buying opportunities for those who share his multi-decade horizon.
In summarizing his outlook, Baron reinforced that the combination of technological breakthroughs, massive addressable markets, and Musk’s leadership creates asymmetric upside that few other investments can match.
For Baron Capital’s clients and long-term Tesla and SpaceX shareholders alike, the investor’s latest CNBC remarks serve as both validation and a call to remain patient through the inevitable ups and downs. As Baron sees it, the best days for both companies—and the returns they can deliver—are still ahead.
Elon Musk
Trump’s invite for Elon just reshuffled Tesla’s big Signature Delivery Event
Tesla rescheduled its final Model S farewell to May 20 after Musk joined Trump in China.
Tesla has rescheduled its Model S and Model X Signature Edition delivery event to Wednesday, May 20, 2026, after abruptly calling off the original May 12 celebration. The event will take place at Tesla’s factory at 45500 Fremont Boulevard in Fremont, California, the same location where the Model S first rolled off the line in 2012. Invitees received a follow-up email asking them to reconfirm attendance and download a new QR code ticket, with Tesla noting that all travel and accommodation expenses remain the buyer’s responsibility.
The reason behind the original cancellation came into focus the same day it was announced. President Trump invited Elon Musk, Apple’s Tim Cook, BlackRock’s Larry Fink, Boeing’s Kelly Ortberg, and executives from Goldman Sachs, Blackstone, Citigroup, and Meta to join his trip to China this week for a summit with President Xi Jinping. The agenda covers trade, artificial intelligence, export controls, Taiwan, and the Iran war, following weeks of escalating friction between Washington and Beijing over AI technology, sanctions, and rare earth exports. Trump wrote on Truth Social, “I am very much looking forward to my trip to China, an amazing Country, with a Leader, President Xi, respected by all.”
Tesla launches 200mph Model S “Gold” Signature in invite-only purchase
The vehicles at the center of all this are the last Model S and Model X units Tesla will ever build. Priced at $159,420 each, the 250 Model S and 100 Model X Signature Edition units come finished in Garnet Red with a one-year no-resale agreement, giving Tesla right of first refusal if the owner decides to sell. As Teslarati reported, the Model S defined Tesla’s early identity as a serious luxury automaker, and the Fremont factory line that built it is now being converted to manufacture Optimus humanoid robots.
Musk’s inclusion in the China delegation drew attention given his very public relationship with Trump, and the invitation signals the two have moved past and past grievances. Trump originally brought Musk on to lead the Department of Government Efficiency following his inauguration, and despite a sharp public dispute in mid-2025, the two have appeared together repeatedly in recent months. A seat on the China trip, the most diplomatically consequential visit of Trump’s current term, puts Musk back at the table on U.S. economic policy at a moment when Tesla’s China revenue remains one of the company’s most important financial pillars.
SpaceX and Google mull massive partnership on Musk’s orbital data dream: report
Legendary investor Ron Baron says Tesla and SpaceX stock buys will continue
