Connect with us

News

Tesla's battery acquisitions are paying off in spades, and giving rivals a lot of pain

(Credit: Tesla)

Published

on

There was a time, not too long ago, when Tesla skeptics questioned the company’s focus in designing and producing its own batteries with a dedicated partner like Panasonic and a facility like Gigafactory 1 in Nevada. Batteries, after all, are available off-the-shelf from companies like LG Chem, and it seemed pretty futile for Tesla to insist that it needs its own battery supply for its future business. 

Fast forward to 2020, and Tesla’s extreme focus on battery development is paying off in spades. Over the years, Tesla has acquired multiple companies that have, in some way, enabled the company to accelerate or improve its products’ batteries. Included among these are Grohmann Automation, whose machines are the bread and butter in Gigafactory 1, Maxwell Technologies, and more recently, HIBAR systems

At this point, Tesla’s batteries have pretty much become the gold standard for EVs, and the company appears to be well on its way towards releasing vehicles that have a range of 400 miles or more. The Plaid Model S and X will likely be the first of these, as well as the next-gen Roadster, which will have 620 miles of range. Even the reasonably-priced Cybertruck tops out at over 500 miles of range per charge. Massive battery developments are needed to achieve these, and Tesla seems to have done it, or at least is well on its way. 

This does not appear to be true for other OEMs attempting to enter the electric vehicle market. As veteran companies unveiled their EVs, and as none have really managed to hold a candle to Tesla’s flagship Model S in terms of range, it is becoming evident that the electric car maker’s investments in batteries may have actually been the right strategy all along. Daimler, for one, seems to be feeling this inconvenient truth, with works council chief Michael Brecht explaining during a recent interview with Manager Magazin that Tesla’s battery-related acquisitions are actually having an effect on Germany’s EV efforts. 

Advertisement

Daimler launched its first EV, the Mercedes-Benz EQC, in 2018, and it has not really lived up to the hype. Despite being dubbed at some point as a potential “Tesla Killer” due to its pedigree and excellent German build quality, the all-electric SUV has faced battery shortages and low sales. Registrations in Germany for the vehicle only show about 55 units sold to date despite all the ad campaigns dedicated to the SUV. Battery supply shortages have also forced Daimler to cut the annual production target of the EQC by 50% from 60,000 to just 30,000.

Quite interestingly, Brecht partly blames Tesla for some of the challenges facing the EQC today. Explaining his points to the publication, he argued that one of the reasons Daimler is struggling with battery demand is because Tesla bought Grohmann Engineering, which has valuable technology that could be used for battery-related developments and activities. Brecht also mentioned that Grohmann was actually hired by Mercedes-Benz to build up its own battery manufacturing capacity. 

Brecht’s statements are notable since it is quite rare to see a veteran car manufacturer actually point the finger at Tesla to explain the dire condition of its own EV program. One can only hope that perhaps, the EQC would be a lesson that Daimler could learn from. After all, Daimler, among German automakers, would likely have no issues tapping into Tesla’s established technologies, batteries and powertrains alike, as the two companies have already worked together in the past. Elon Musk has stated that eventually, Tesla may be open to selling its batteries and powertrains with other OEMs. If this were to happen, it would be wise for Daimler to wait right in front of the line to avoid another EQC-sized flop.

Advertisement

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling

ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.

Published

on

By

ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.

The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.

Additionally,  ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.

SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise

The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.

The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise

Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.

Published

on

elon-musk-jim-farley-tesla-ford

Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.

The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.

Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):

“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”

Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.

Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:

“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”

Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.

Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges

Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.

Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.

Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch

NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.

Published

on

By

NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.

Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.

Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.

SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket

Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.

The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.

The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.

Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.

The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.

Continue Reading