News
Stealth EV startup Rivian adds McLaren and Nike execs to lead development
Rivian, the stealthy, Michigan-based electric vehicle (EV) startup, is taking large steps forward in their new vehicle development program. The company recently added two new executives, Mark Vinnels and Rob Williams.
Mark Vinnels joined Rivian in November as Executive Director of Engineering and Programs, and oversees the development of Rivian’s vehicle platform. Vinnels was formerly the Executive Director of Product Development and Programme Director at McLaren Automotive. Vinnels joined McLaren in 2004 to lead the development of McLaren’s first road car since the infamous F1. Before joining McLaren, Vinnels was head of Lotus’s new vehicle programs and oversaw the Elise, Exige, and Europa new vehicle lines. Vinnels is also credited for his instrumental role in the development of GM’s Family 1 engine program.

Mark Vinnels, Rivian’s new Executive Director of Engineering & Programs at Rivian Automotive. (Credit McLaren Automotive)
While at McLaren, Vinnels helped the company grow its engineering division from roughly 50 engineers to 550 and significantly increased its vehicle lineup.
Rivian’s team also includes another former McLaren executive, Anthony Sheriff, who joined Rivian’s Board of Directors in 2016. Sheriff was the Managing Director of McLaren Automotive from 2003-2013, a period in which McLaren created a road car division in addition to the company’s rich history in the automotive racing arena. Sheriff was an executive at Fiat before his tenure at McLaren and also sits on the Board of Directors for electric supercar manufacturer Rimac.
Also joining Rivian is Rob Williams as Chief Creative Officer. Williams carries experience from both the automotive industry and the footwear industry. He was most recently a Senior Design Director of Footwear at Nike and spent four-and-a-half years at Chrysler. During his time as a product designer at Chrysler, he led several designs of Chrysler SUVs and Dodge Trucks.
Williams joins Jeff Hammoud, Director of Vehicle Design. Hammoud has extensive experience at Fiat-Chrysler and left the company as Chief of Design of the Jeep Brand. Hammoud joined Rivian in May 2017, followed by Williams in June.
Based on a combination of the design team’s backgrounds and patents released by Rivian last summer, it appears that Rivian’s first vehicle could be some sort of SUV. An in-depth analysis of Rivian’s design team members’ LinkedIn profiles reveals that nearly half of the team has experience with Fiat Chrysler Automotive (Formerly Chrysler), with many specializing in SUV/Truck designs.

Rivian’s Patent for “Reconfigurable Electric Vehicles”. It’s worth noting that patents do not usually reflect a vehicle’s actual planned design, rather the mechanism that the company is patenting. (Credit: Public Patent Filing)
Rivian currently has 225 employees, up from 115 at the start of the year. Other notable additions to Rivian’s team include 15 former Faraday Future employees. Faraday Future is nearly defunct after it continued to miss its wildly ambitious goals and saw its main financier’s global expansion fall apart. Most of the team from Faraday is working on Rivian’s autonomous driving technology or other highly technical roles.
The timeline for Rivian’s massive 2.6 million-square-foot manufacturing facility on the west side of Normal is still unknown. Rivian purchased the factory in January 2017 for $16 million, including all of the contents in the factory.
While Rivian hasn’t revealed many details about the development of its all-electric vehicle platform, the company revealed today that it has received a large strategic investment from New York-based Sumitomo Corporation of Americas (SCOA).
Rivian’s CEO RJ Scaringe couldn’t comment directly on the details of the investment, but did say the following to AdaptBN: “We are honored and excited to have Sumitomo as a strategic investor. Their global reach, expertise, and network in the automotive sector will help us in executing our vision. This investment reflects the result of our team’s hard work in developing our technology and products.”
Due to the level of mystery surrounding Rivian’s plans and product line, local residents and officials have begun comparing it to the likes of “Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory.” But only time will tell if Rivian holds a golden ticket to the future.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
News
Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Elon Musk
Another Tesla SpaceX merger prediction by ARK Invest has Elon Musk talking
Elon Musk again denies a Tesla China split as new SpaceX merger speculation resurfaces quickly.
Elon Musk restated that Tesla has no plans to separate its China business from the rest of the company, responding to a new round of merger speculation from ARK Invest.
On the firm’s “Brainstorm” podcast, Cathie Wood’s team, including chief futurist Brett Winton and research director Nick Grous, argued a Tesla and SpaceX combination remains likely, with an announcement possible before the end of the year even if the deal itself would not close that quickly. Winton called Tesla’s Shanghai operations a “small ish wrinkle” for a merger rather than a real obstacle, since SpaceX’s national security work with the U.S. government sits uneasily next to Tesla’s manufacturing base in China.
Musk pushed back on the framing directly. “China is awesome. I strongly encourage people to visit,” he wrote on X. He also repeated language he first used in late July, when the Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla executives had been told to prepare for a possible spinoff, sale, or closure of the China business ahead of a SpaceX tie up. Musk called that report “absurdly fake news” at the time, adding that a separation had “never even come up in a discussion ever,” a line he echoed again this week.
The repeated denial has not settled the underlying question, because Shanghai’s role in Tesla’s business is exactly what makes a merger complicated. Gigafactory Shanghai still ships more than half of Tesla’s global deliveries and functions as the company’s main export hub for Europe and Asia. Teslarati previously reported on Musk’s initial denial, and the merger conversation itself has been building since SpaceX’s IPO gave it public shares to use as acquisition currency.
Wedbush’s Dan Ives has pegged the odds of a Tesla SpaceX merger at 80 to 90 percent by early 2027, and ARK’s prediction of a year end announcement adds another data point to that timeline, even as Musk keeps rejecting the specific mechanics reporters have described. Neither position rules out the other. Musk can deny a China spinoff was ever discussed while analysts still expect some form of combination to move forward, since ARK and Ives are both describing convergence at the corporate level, not necessarily the internal restructuring the Journal described in July.
For now, Tesla’s China business remains intact, and Musk’s comments this week make clear he has no interest in publicly walking that position back, no matter how often the merger question resurfaces.
