Tesla bear Gordon Johnson appeared on a live debate with Tesla Daily’s Rob Maurer on September 3rd. Johnson is a notable skeptic of Tesla and its electric vehicles and holds a $19 price target for the company’s stock. Arguably the most controversial of Johnson’s points during the debate was that Tesla does not have a technological advantage in terms of its batteries, and its range ratings are misleading.
The point Johnson made came from the thought that Tesla’s batteries, which are manufactured by Panasonic, LG Chem, and CATL, are obtainable by any automaker. Interestingly, Maurer countered with the point that if the cells were available for any other automaker, how were other car companies not able to match Tesla’s technological advantage in terms of EV range.
Johnson’s rebuttal was simple: Tesla’s advantage does not exist.
“There’s been a number of articles, one of which was written in the Washington Post, that suggests if you actually go out and test their cars, their range is far less than what they say,” Johnson said.
Tesla has held the reputation of having significantly more range than any other electric car that is currently available on the market. The Model S currently holds the highest EPA-estimated range rating for an electric vehicle with 402 miles. With over a million Tesla vehicles sold, it would be difficult to imagine that the company is fabricating its range ratings as an excuse to sell more cars.
While other automakers, like Lucid, have been given EPA ratings that are far greater than the Model S rating of 402 miles, those cars are not available on the market yet. The Lucid Air was given a 517-mile rating recently, but the company has not unveiled the vehicle yet. The Air will be revealed during an online event on September 9th.
“When you go out and actually test the cars versus what they [Tesla] state, the mileage isn’t what it seems,” Johnson added.
While EPA rated vehicle mileage is subjected to certain conditions and is not identical to real-world driving, it is relatively accurate in terms of how many miles an owner would get per charge. When being assessed, the EPA requires a vehicle to travel at different speeds while utilizing features, like air conditioning, that could reduce range during operation.
However, real-world owners have proven that Tesla vehicles do maintain and sometimes exceed the range ratings they were given. A test from Model S owner Sean Mitchell showed that the Performance variant of Tesla’s flagship sedan achieved greater range than expected.
Tesla has also put a substantial focus on its cars, having a sufficient range rating. Recently, Elon Musk announced that the company was scrapping plans for a Standard Range configuration of the Model Y because its range would be below 250 miles. “Range would be unacceptably low (< 250 mile EPA),” Musk detailed.
Tesla’s technology lead is not only evident through its vehicles’ performance, but government-regulated entities like the EPA have also proven it. The company has held a sizeable lead in terms of EV tech and continues to maintain a considerable advantage in terms of the technological developments of its cars. This has been admitted to by numerous CEOs of other car companies.
Rob Maurer‘s debate with Gordon Johnson is available below.
Elon Musk
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX’s initial comment
As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X.
Incident and aftermath
Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.
Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.
Investor's Corner
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers.
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Analysts highlight autonomy progress
During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.
The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report.
Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”
Street targets diverge on TSLA
While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.
Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements.
Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Version 3 booster crumples in early testing
Photos of the incident’s aftermath suggest that Booster 18 will likely be retired.
SpaceX’s new Starship first-stage booster, Booster 18, suffered major damage early Friday during its first round of testing in Starbase, Texas, just one day after rolling out of the factory.
Based on videos of the incident, the lower section of the rocket booster appeared to crumple during a pressurization test. Photos of the incident’s aftermath suggest that Booster 18 will likely be retired.
Booster test failure
SpaceX began structural and propellant-system verification tests on Booster 18 Thursday night at the Massey’s Test Site, only a few miles from Starbase’s production facilities, as noted in an Ars Technica report. At 4:04 a.m. CT on Friday, a livestream from LabPadre Space captured the booster’s lower half experiencing a sudden destructive event around its liquid oxygen tank section. Post-incident images, shared on X by @StarshipGazer, showed notable deformation in the booster’s lower structure.
Neither SpaceX nor Elon Musk had commented as of Friday morning, but the vehicle’s condition suggests it is likely a complete loss. This is quite unfortunate, as Booster 18 is already part of the Starship V3 program, which includes design fixes and upgrades intended to improve reliability. While SpaceX maintains a rather rapid Starship production line in Starbase, Booster 18 was generally expected to validate the improvements implemented in the V3 program.
Tight deadlines
SpaceX needs Starship boosters and upper stages to begin demonstrating rapid reuse, tower catches, and early operational Starlink missions over the next two years. More critically, NASA’s Artemis program depends on an on-orbit refueling test in the second half of 2026, a requirement for the vehicle’s expected crewed lunar landing around 2028.
While SpaceX is known for diagnosing failures quickly and returning to testing at unmatched speed, losing the newest-generation booster at the very start of its campaign highlights the immense challenge involved in scaling Starship into a reliable, high-cadence launch system. SpaceX, however, is known for getting things done quickly, so it would not be a surprise if the company manages to figure out what happened to Booster 18 in the near future.
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
