News
The strategy behind the state selection of the Tesla Gigafactory
By now, everyone who has any interest at all in Tesla Motors has heard about their plans for a Gigafactory. Since the plan was introduced in February, the discussion groups and forums have been filled with thoughts on the implications of the huge battery making installation. Four potential sites were named: New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona and Texas.
Speculation about how this would change things became rampant. Nicolas Zart asked how it would affect Tesla’s long-standing relationship with Panasonic, who provides the batteries being used in the Model S and that will likely be used in the upcoming Model X. Yet a more persistent question in the peanut gallery has been why Tesla would choose the states it mentioned as candidates for the factory.
To be straightforward, there was a lot of strategic thinking that went behind the choice of the four states mentioned, and there’s a good reason that a couple of those states, deemed as “Tesla-unfriendly,” are on the list.
Logistics
The states chosen are all within a specific logistical area. They’re warm weather states, have little seismic activity, are within easily-accessed and well-established transportation corridors (trains, highways, etc.), have low-cost land available, and have a surplus of most energy types.
This means that transport of materials and finished products to and from each of these locations is relatively easy and requires minimal work to customize. All of them are in sunny locations (a primary requirement for a solar farm as large as Tesla proposes) and they all have access to low-cost energy at surplus should the wind and solar plans take longer to establish or not perform as expected.
-->Costs and Baskets of Eggs
Each of the four states named also have highly conducive political environments for business. California, love it or hate it, is one of the worst places in the nation to attempt to start a manufacturing business in terms of bureaucracy, costs, and red tape. Choosing California would also mean Tesla would be putting all of their eggs into one basket, as it were, geographically and politically. This would directly affect our next point. We’ll discuss that in a moment.
All four of the states listed have low or no corporate income tax, have relatively low property taxes (even for industrial use), and are about as business-friendly as a state’s government can be without giving away the farm. Nevada and Arizona also have corporate-friendly incorporation laws, should Tesla need to use them.
Leverage
Now for the real meat of it. Tesla has already leveraged California for about everything it can in terms of concessions and breaks. California would likely be willing to do a lot to help Musk get his Gigafactory built, but it’s just as likely that the other candidates would do just as much on top of their already-friendly atmosphere, industry-wise.
Further, two of these states (do we need to name them?) have been less than friendly to Tesla during the dealership vs direct sales battles. Dangle the “create a green factory and employ a lot of your citizens” carrot, though, and suddenly the discussion might begin to change a little.
You don’t have to be Richard Nixon to see that the prospect of one of the world’s largest automotive battery factories being located in your state will have a hundred benefits to every loss you might politically incur for turning your back on your friends at the auto dealer’s association. Especially if you’re a governor with hopes of getting into the White House (ahemRickPerryahem). It’s things like the Gigafactory that can build legacies for those with the savvy to utilize the PR potential.
-->Strategically Speaking
Putting it together, the strategy behind the Gigafactory’s geographic location is very astute. Musk and Co gain more by naming enemies in their list of potentials than they would going the relatively safe route of staying in their west coast comfort zone.
News
Tesla Model 3 named New Zealand’s best passenger car of 2025
Tesla flipped the switch on Full Self-Driving (Supervised) in September, turning every Model 3 and Model Y into New Zealand’s most advanced production car overnight.
The refreshed Tesla Model 3 has won the DRIVEN Car Guide AA Insurance NZ Car of the Year 2025 award in the Passenger Car category, beating all traditional and electric rivals.
Judges praised the all-electric sedan’s driving dynamics, value-packed EV tech, and the game-changing addition of Full Self-Driving (Supervised) that went live in New Zealand this September.
Why the Model 3 clinched the crown
DRIVEN admitted they were late to the “Highland” party because the updated sedan arrived in New Zealand as a 2024 model, just before the new Model Y stole the headlines. Yet two things forced a re-evaluation this year.
First, experiencing the new Model Y reminded testers how many big upgrades originated in the Model 3, such as the smoother ride, quieter cabin, ventilated seats, rear touchscreen, and stalk-less minimalist interior. Second, and far more importantly, Tesla flipped the switch on Full Self-Driving (Supervised) in September, turning every Model 3 and Model Y into New Zealand’s most advanced production car overnight.
FSD changes everything for Kiwi buyers
The publication called the entry-level rear-wheel-drive version “good to drive and represents a lot of EV technology for the money,” but highlighted that FSD elevates it into another league. “Make no mistake, despite the ‘Supervised’ bit in the name that requires you to remain ready to take control, it’s autonomous and very capable in some surprisingly tricky scenarios,” the review stated.
-->At NZ$11,400, FSD is far from cheap, but Tesla also offers FSD (Supervised) on a $159 monthly subscription, making the tech accessible without the full upfront investment. That’s a game-changer, as it allows users to access the company’s most advanced system without forking over a huge amount of money.
News
Tesla starts rolling out FSD V14.2.1 to AI4 vehicles including Cybertruck
FSD V14.2.1 was released just about a week after the initial FSD V14.2 update was rolled out.
It appears that the Tesla AI team burned the midnight oil, allowing them to release FSD V14.2.1 on Thanksgiving. The update has been reported by Tesla owners with AI4 vehicles, as well as Cybertruck owners.
For the Tesla AI team, at least, it appears that work really does not stop.
FSD V14.2.1
Initial posts about FSD V14.2.1 were shared by Tesla owners on social media platform X. As per the Tesla owners, V14.2.1 appears to be a point update that’s designed to polish the features and capacities that have been available in FSD V14. A look at the release notes for FSD V14.2.1, however, shows that an extra line has been added.
“Camera visibility can lead to increased attention monitoring sensitivity.”
Whether this could lead to more drivers being alerted to pay attention to the roads more remains to be seen. This would likely become evident as soon as the first batch of videos from Tesla owners who received V14.21 start sharing their first drive impressions of the update. Despite the update being released on Thanksgiving, it would not be surprising if first impressions videos of FSD V14.2.1 are shared today, just the same.
-->Rapid FSD releases
What is rather interesting and impressive is the fact that FSD V14.2.1 was released just about a week after the initial FSD V14.2 update was rolled out. This bodes well for Tesla’s FSD users, especially since CEO Elon Musk has stated in the past that the V14.2 series will be for “widespread use.”
FSD V14 has so far received numerous positive reviews from Tesla owners, with numerous drivers noting that the system now drives better than most human drivers because it is cautious, confident, and considerate at the same time. The only question now, really, is if the V14.2 series does make it to the company’s wide FSD fleet, which is still populated by numerous HW3 vehicles.
News
Waymo rider data hints that Tesla’s Cybercab strategy might be the smartest, after all
These observations all but validate Tesla’s controversial two-seat Cybercab strategy, which has caught a lot of criticism since it was unveiled last year.
Toyota Connected Europe designer Karim Dia Toubajie has highlighted a particular trend that became evident in Waymo’s Q3 2025 occupancy stats. As it turned out, 90% of the trips taken by the driverless taxis carried two or fewer passengers.
These observations all but validate Tesla’s controversial two-seat Cybercab strategy, which has caught a lot of criticism since it was unveiled last year.
Toyota designer observes a trend
Karim Dia Toubajie, Lead Product Designer (Sustainable Mobility) at Toyota Connected Europe, analyzed Waymo’s latest California Public Utilities Commission filings and posted the results on LinkedIn this week.
“90% of robotaxi trips have 2 or less passengers, so why are we using 5-seater vehicles?” Toubajie asked. He continued: “90% of trips have 2 or less people, 75% of trips have 1 or less people.” He accompanied his comments with a graphic showing Waymo’s occupancy rates, which showed 71% of trips having one passenger, 15% of trips having two passengers, 6% of trips having three passengers, 5% of trips having zero passengers, and only 3% of trips having four passengers.
The data excludes operational trips like depot runs or charging, though Toubajie pointed out that most of the time, Waymo’s massive self-driving taxis are really just transporting 1 or 2 people, at times even no passengers at all. “This means that most of the time, the vehicle being used significantly outweighs the needs of the trip,” the Toyota designer wrote in his post.
-->Cybercab suddenly looks perfectly sized
Toubajie gave a nod to Tesla’s approach. “The Tesla Cybercab announced in 2024, is a 2-seater robotaxi with a 50kWh battery but I still believe this is on the larger side of what’s required for most trips,” he wrote.
With Waymo’s own numbers now proving 90% of demand fits two seats or fewer, the wheel-less, lidar-free Cybercab now looks like the smartest play in the room. The Cybercab is designed to be easy to produce, with CEO Elon Musk commenting that its product line would resemble a consumer electronics factory more than an automotive plant. This means that the Cybercab could saturate the roads quickly once it is deployed.
While the Cybercab will likely take the lion’s share of Tesla’s ride-hailing passengers, the Model 3 sedan and Model Y crossover would be perfect for the remaining 9% of riders who require larger vehicles. This should be easy to implement for Tesla, as the Model Y and Model 3 are both mass-market vehicles.
Tesla Model 3 named New Zealand’s best passenger car of 2025
Tesla starts rolling out FSD V14.2.1 to AI4 vehicles including Cybertruck
