News
Tesla’s battery supply constraint is ending, price parity with gas cars is at hand
Tesla’s Semi is coming, and it will be here sooner than expected. But the production of the vehicle could be pointing to one thing: Tesla is no longer battery constrained.
Past the face value portion of the story, something much bigger is happening. While the Semi entering a “volume production” phase is big news, the development of the commercial vehicle comes at a time where battery production for Tesla seems to be the main focus of the electric automaker.
In Q3 2019, CEO Elon Musk indicated that a shortage of battery cells primarily drove the Semi’s delay. If Tesla wanted to start producing the Semi, the company would have to make cells available for it. That would mean one thing: cutting back on cells utilized for Tesla’s mass-market vehicles, which at the time was the Model 3.
Building the Semi before a sufficient battery production and supply chain was established would have been detrimental to the company’s long-term plans. Of course, the Model 3 has been Tesla’s most popular vehicle since it started deliveries in 2017. Its affordability has helped Tesla reach a new market, which was all apart of Elon’s original Master Plan.
With the Model Y now being produced in Fremont, Tesla now has two mass-market vehicles that are affordable by a vast segment of the population. Ultimately, this means that Tesla needed to levy a majority of its available lithium-ion cells for the Model 3 and Model Y. Unfortunately, the Semi just was not a priority over those two cars. Why would it be? The Model 3 (and Model Y now) are Tesla’s two top sellers. Therefore, the battery needs pointed toward the 3 and the Y, with Semi production being dependent on the availability of battery cells.
If we think about Musk’s statement from Q3, he indicated that the Semi production would be based on when Tesla could manufacture the appropriate amount of lithium-ion batteries to power the Class 8 vehicle. Although demand for the 3 and the Y continues to increase, so is Tesla’s production rate, and it could be indicative that the Silicon Valley-based electric car maker is pumping out enough batteries to produce all of its vehicles without any worries of possible cell shortages.
Ultimately, this idea could lead to another significant development in the EV world as a whole, and that is price parity.
For a long time, analysts have pinpointed the electric vehicle movement’s price parity at $100/kWh for battery cell production. This means that when cells are produced at a high enough rate, batteries will be lower in cost. Then, electric cars will be the same price as gas-powered machines, making the argument of “EVs are too expensive” obsolete.
The Tesla Model 3 Performance utilizes a 75 kWh battery pack. If battery production is at $120/kWh, this would mean that the Model 3 Performance’s battery pack costs $9,000 to produce. The car’s $54,990 price tag, hypothetically at $120 per kWh, is made up of a battery pack that costs about $9,000.
If Tesla could produce batteries at a high enough rate where the cost per kWh could come down to $100, the battery pack would only cost $7,500 to build, meaning an additional $1,500 comes off the price of the vehicle altogether. Tesla’s goal is to produce enough battery cells to justify this pricing point for its cars. Also, $100/kWh is just the price parity point, and not where the cost will ultimately end up. If demand continues to increase and battery cell production keeps growing, the cost could get even lower.
If Tesla has enough batteries to justify producing mass quantities of the Model 3 and Model Y, along with the sizable battery packs of the Semi, parity could be coming sooner than expected. Most analysts indicated 2023 as the year when battery production would be on a level where EV prices could compete with their petrol-powered counterparts.
However, if the Semi is ready for a production run now, Tesla may have enough cells to introduce a more affordable pricing model for its vehicles. This could, in turn, lead to even higher production numbers, increased demand, and a sharp increase in the company’s delivery numbers.
The announcement of the Tesla Semi meant much more than the company producing its commercial vehicle. It means batteries are no longer in restricted amounts, the technology is improving, and the prices of the company’s vehicles could be coming down soon. With this, it appears that Elon Musk’s endgame with his Master Plan may be getting closer to reality.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
