Investor's Corner
Auto experts reveal why Tesla’s batteries hold a comfortable lead in range
One of the reasons why the narrative of the “Tesla Killer” has effectively died is due to the pervading lead that Tesla holds over the competition in terms of range. Amidst the long-predicted entrance of competing vehicles from established automakers including Audi, Jaguar, and Porsche, Tesla’s vehicles have proven to be vastly superior in range, as evidenced by the Model S Long Range, which can last 370 miles in between charges.
Take Tesla’s very first car, the original Tesla Roadster. The vehicle featured Tesla’s efforts at creating a desirable all-electric sports car, and it showed in the Roadster’s robust 245-mile range. There weren’t even Superchargers when the Roadster was released, but the car proved that EVs could comfortably go beyond the 200-mile mark, and then some more. Interestingly, even modern EVs from veteran carmakers are finding it hard to match the Roadster’s 245-mile EPA range. The Audi e-tron, for example, just has 204 miles of range per charge, while the award-winning I-PACE has an EPA rating of 234 miles per charge.
This, according to veteran auto experts Sandy Munro and Mark Ellis of Munro & Associates, has a lot to do with Tesla’s all-electric platform and the company’s proprietary battery tech. Tesla is only 16 years old, and thus, it only has a fraction of the experience that its rivals in the auto market has. Yet in the EV segment, Tesla is among the veterans, having worked solely on electric cars since Day One.

All-Electric
As such, vehicles that Tesla releases such as the Model S, Model X, and Model 3, are designed as EVs from the get-go. In contrast, carmakers such as Mercedes-Benz and Audi opted to convert existing platforms for EV production. This reduces costs, but it is a double-edged strategy in the EV segment, which is starting to gain serious ground in several key markets. “If you’re designing something radically different, or if you want to have something that’s going to be a world-beater in the marketplace, that parts bin is the worst thing imaginable,” Munro said.
This could be seen in the difference between the Porsche Taycan and a vehicle such as the Mercedes-Benz EQC. Porsche opted to design the Taycan from a clean sheet, and the result was an all-electric sports car that can attack the track just as aggressively as the next 911. It even has a frunk like a Tesla, albeit smaller. Mercedes, on the other hand, opted to base the EQC on its existing GLC platform, and the result is an EV that still has echoes of its internal combustion roots. Between the two vehicles, it is easy to see which carmaker put more effort, and it shows. Today, it appears that the non-Tesla EV community is far more excited about the Taycan than they are for the EQC.
Mark Ellis, a senior master of lean design and battery consultant, notes that this is a key advantage that is inherent in Tesla. “One of Elon Musk’s big advantages is, basically, that the vehicle is designed to be an electric car. Musk designed every aspect of this car to be as efficient as possible,” he said.

The Secret Sauce
Apart from their all-electric design, Tesla’s secret sauce for its vehicles lies in their batteries, from the design of the pack to the chemistry of the cells themselves. Comparing the Model 3’s battery pack to those found in other EVs such as the Chevrolet Bolt EV, Nissan Leaf, Jaguar I-PACE, and BMW i3, Ellis stated that Tesla’s battery pack is superior, especially with regards to the placement of battery cells in relation to the current collectors. “It’s the best design of any battery pack I’ve seen so far,” he said.
But this is not all. Ellis added that Tesla’s cylindrical cells have inherent advantages compared to the prismatic or pouch cells used by the competition. Prismatic cells, for one, expand and contract as they charge and discharge, which means that manufacturers using them have to design their battery packs with the necessary parts to handle the expansion and contraction process of the cells. These add unnecessary weight to a battery, which Tesla’s packs don’t have to deal with.
Ultimately, Ellis explained that Tesla’s battery cells simply have a higher energy density than those utilized by its competition. Tesla was able to achieve this because its batteries have superior chemistry, the consultant said. Part of the reason behind this is the fact that Tesla as a company does not really stop innovating. Tesla’s Automotive President Jerome Guillen hinted at this in a previous interview, when he said that the company’s batteries are never frozen since they are always in a state of improvement. “We are improving the design of the cell. The design of the cell is not frozen. It evolves, and we have a nice roadmap of technology improvements for the coming years,” Guillen said.
Range is something that is one of the most important factors consumers consider when purchasing an electric car. With the number of EV charging stations not yet on par with the number of gas stations on the road, it is pertinent for customers for many car buyers to acquire a vehicle that can go the distance. Tesla’s long-range vehicles, together with the company’s Supercharger Network, are a perfect fit for these types of customers.
Investor's Corner
NASA taps SpaceX to launch the telescope that could unlock new worlds
NASA’s Roman Space Telescope heads to orbit this August aboard SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with massive scientific ambitions.
SpaceX is set to play a central role in one of NASA’s most anticipated science missions in years. The company’s Falcon Heavy rocket, currently the most powerful operational launch vehicle in the world, will carry the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope into orbit on August 30 from Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Roman is now in final preparations inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility, where on June 26 technicians used a crane to lift the observatory into a specialized stand for fueling and pre-launch testing.
Roman is named after Nancy Grace Roman, NASA’s first chief of astronomy, whose career helped shape how the agency approaches space science.
NASA chose SpaceX Falcon Heavy because of Roman’s needs to reach a specific orbit far from Earth, well beyond where a standard Falcon 9 can deliver it. The Falcon Heavy, which first flew in 2018, has since become NASA’s go-to option for missions that need serious muscle without the cost and complexity of older launch systems.
Celebrating SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy Tesla Roadster launch, seven years later (Op-Ed)
Roman will carry a field of view at least 100 times wider than the Hubble Space Telescope, meaning it can photograph enormous swaths of the universe in a single shot rather than the narrow slices Hubble captures. That difference in scale is significant. While Hubble reshaped our understanding of the cosmos over 30 years, Roman is built to work faster and wider, surveying hundreds of millions of galaxies at once.
One of Roman’s most compelling capabilities is its potential to discover and photograph planets orbiting stars outside our solar system, and with enough precision to directly image planets that would otherwise be lost. That means scientists could study the atmosphere and surface characteristics of distant worlds rather than simply confirming they exist. Combined with Roman’s sweeping field of view, the telescope could detect thousands of exoplanets, and some of those planets may be in habitable zones where liquid water could exist. No telescope currently in operation has this level of power and capability. That capability alone could change what we know about other worlds, and perhaps finally answer the question: are we the only intelligent lifeforms in existence?
What Roman actually finds once it reaches orbit is an open question, and that is exactly what makes this launch worth watching.
Elon Musk
California snubs Tesla in its newly passed EV incentive that favors Rivian and Lucid
California passed a $135 million EV incentive that rewards Rivian and Lucid while sidelining Tesla
California just drew a line in the EV incentive sand to put Tesla on the wrong side of it. The state recently passed a $135 million program offering first-time electric vehicle buyers a direct incentive with no application required, but the rules were written in a way that leaves Tesla at a structural disadvantage compared to Rivian and Lucid.
The program caps eligible vehicles at $50,000 for new EVs and $25,000 for used ones. That pricing threshold rules out a significant portion of Tesla’s lineup, though some lower-priced Model 3 and Model Y configurations would still qualify. California-based automakers are exempt from the price cap entirely, regardless of what their vehicles cost. Rivian, headquartered in Irvine, and Lucid, based in the San Francisco Bay Area, both benefit from that exemption. Rivian’s R2 starts at roughly $45,000 but has versions above the cap. Lucid’s Air and Gravity start at $70,990 and $79,990 respectively, well above any threshold a non-California company would face.
California hits Tesla Cybercab and Robotaxi driverless cars with new law
Tesla built its reputation and a significant portion of its early market share in California, where EV adoption has consistently led the nation. The company operates its original factory in Fremont, California, and the state was home to Tesla’s headquarters for most of its existence. That changed in 2021 when Tesla moved its corporate headquarters to Austin, Texas. Since then, the relationship between the company and California Governor Gavin Newsom has been openly adversarial, with Musk and Newsom trading public criticism on multiple occasions.
California’s EV incentive landscape has shifted repeatedly in recent years, and Tesla has previously lost eligibility for state-level programs as its vehicles exceeded income-adjusted price thresholds. The federal $7,500 EV tax credit, which Tesla models have qualified for and lost depending on policy cycles, is no longer available after it expired without renewal, making state-level programs more meaningful to buyers than they have been in years.
The practical impact for buyers is more nuanced than the headline suggests. California residents purchasing a Tesla under $50,000 for the first time can still access the incentive. But the exemption written for California-based manufacturers is a structural advantage that rewards where a company plants its headquarters flag rather than where it builds its products, and Tesla moved that flag to Texas.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s newest logo confirms everything about what it’s become
SpaceX officially absorbed xAI under the SpaceXAI brand, completing the largest private merger in history.
SpaceX made its corporate transformation official in May 2026 when Elon Musk posted on X that xAI would cease to exist as a standalone company. “xAI will be dissolved as a separate company, so it will just be SpaceXAI, the AI products from SpaceX,” he wrote.
A new SpaceXAI logo was announced today, visually embedding the xAI letters inside the SpaceX identity, which can be seen as a deliberate design choice that signals the merger is not a partnership but a full absorption and XAi a core function of the same company. The same way Starlink is not a separate brand but a SpaceX product. The announcement closed the loop on a process that began February 2, 2026, when SpaceX acquired xAI in the largest private merger in history, valued at $1.25 trillion. SpaceX at $1 trillion and xAI at $250 billion.
We are now @SpaceXAI. pic.twitter.com/ema66xDWC9
— SpaceXAI (@SpaceXAI) July 6, 2026
The reason SpaceX bought xAI was stated plainly by Musk at the time of the deal: to build orbital data centers. SpaceX had simultaneously filed with the FCC to launch up to one million satellites designed to function as AI compute nodes in low Earth orbit, escaping what Musk described as the energy constraints limiting AI development on Earth.
xAI provided the AI software stack, with Grok, the X platform, and the Colossus supercomputer infrastructure in Memphis with over 220,000 NVIDIA GPUs, while SpaceX provided the rockets, Starlink, and the capital base to fund it. The two companies needed each other. xAI was burning $2.5 billion in losses on $250 million in revenue. SpaceX was generating an estimated $8 billion in profit on $15 billion in revenue and needed an AI narrative to command the valuation it was targeting for its IPO.
What SpaceX has done, regardless of how the orbital AI vision ultimately plays out, is walk into a public market as something no company has been before: a rocket manufacturer, satellite internet provider, AI software company, social media platform, and supercomputer operator under one ticker. Whether that combination is worth $2 trillion depends entirely on which of those businesses you believe in most.