There were a number of notable events that transpired in the electric vehicle sector in the past few days. Tesla rolled out a minor $1,000 limited-time discount for the Model Y crossover until the end of February. And this Sunday, BMW, Volkswagen, and KIA aired their respective advertisements for the BMW i5, VW ID.Buzz, and the KIA EV9 at Super Bowl LVIII.
The Super Bowl is the United States’ biggest sporting event, reaching nearly 100 million people every year since Super Bowl 44 in 2010, as per ratings agency Nielsen. It is then no surprise that ad spots for the premier sporting event are sold at a premium, with Automotive News noting that a 30-second advertisement for this year’s Super Bowl costs about $7 million on average.
Now, $7 million is definitely not a small amount, but it does help a company reach 100 million people. That’s invaluable, and likely well worth it for automakers looking to highlight their electric vehicle offerings. This was evident in BMW’s star-studded ad with actor Christopher Walken, Volkswagen’s nostalgic advertisement for the ID.Buzz, and KIA’s heartwarming commercial for the EV9. And as per Wall Street veteran and Tesla bull Gary Black, Tesla could have easily benefitted from a Super Bowl ad this year.
At $7M for a 30 second Super Bowl ad, $TSLA would have to sell 875 incremental cars (@$8k gross profit per car) to justify the cost of the ad. And the follow up interest from TSLA paying for a Super Bowl ad would be huge. Instead $TSLA cuts price by $1,000 per Model Y in the US… https://t.co/ZrqxUpRCcB— Gary Black (@garyblack00) February 12, 2024
As explained by Black in a post on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, a $7 million Super Bowl ad for Tesla would result in massive follow-up interest in the electric vehicle maker. Black also highlighted that at $7 million, Tesla would only have to sell 875 incremental cars at $8,000 gross profit per unit to justify the cost of a 30-second Super Bowl advertisement.
In comparison, Tesla’s $1,000 discount for the Model Y, which is generally unknown to conventional car buyers outside X and the EV community, will cost Tesla about $40 million, Black estimated. What’s worse is that avid Tesla critic Dan O’Dowd, who is on a crusade to ban Full Self-Driving on public roads, is paying for two Super Bowl ads. Thus, not only will Super Bowl viewers not see an ad supporting Tesla during the premier sporting event. They will instead see two ads encouraging them to boycott the company’s products.
Do you think @Tesla spending $7 million on a 30 second Super Bowl ad would be a good investment for the company?
Explain your reasoning below.— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) February 11, 2024
What is interesting is that Tesla has a ton of advertisements that could have worked for the Super Bowl as well. Tesla’s Cybertruck commercials alone would be very interesting, such as the company’s 60-second “all-features” ad or the vehicle’s dedicated Basecamp advertisement. One could even argue that some fan-made Tesla commercials that have been created by enthusiasts over the years are good enough for such an event.
It was thus unsurprising that numerous EV fans and TSLA investors supported Black’s suggestion. After all, a good number of car buyers are still very unfamiliar with Tesla’s vehicles, such as the fact that they start below $40,000, that they are the safest cars on the road, or that they are the most American-made, among others. This was quite evident in a poll that was posted on X which asked users if Tesla would benefit from a Super Bowl ad. While those who support and those who do not support the idea are pretty much equal, one cannot deny the fact that the voices calling for Tesla to advertise are getting notably louder.
Check out BMW, Volkswagen, and KIA’s EV ads for Super Bowl LVIII below.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
