Investor's Corner
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s love-hate relationship with ‘the media’
Negative media coverage is a fact of life for any company, large or small. However, as it does in so many areas, Tesla approaches this problem quite differently than most firms do. Conventional wisdom has long been that companies shouldn’t respond to attacks in the media, but Elon Musk never got that memo. He responds quickly, bluntly and often colorfully.
Lately, the anti-Tesla stories have been spewing forth like fastballs from a pitching machine – so quickly that you might think poor Elon has time to do little else than bat them away.
When a media outlet offers constructive criticism, Tesla often responds in a constructive way. When Consumer Reports announced that it wouldn’t recommend Model 3 because of the new EV’s poor performance in a braking test, Elon Musk immediately promised to look into the matter. Within a week Tesla had improved Model 3’s braking via an over-the-air software update, and CR awarded the coveted Recommended rating.
On the other hand, the Iron Man has never been shy about calling BS when he feels Tesla has been portrayed unfairly. To take just one example, Business Insider has been a frequent purveyor of anti-Tesla pieces, including one that claimed Model 3 production was producing an “insane amount” of scrap at Gigafactory 1, and another that accused the company of cutting corners by skipping a “critical” braking test.
In the first case, inside information was provided to Business Insider by a Tesla employee, Martin Tripp, who is now being sued by Tesla for sabotaging the company’s manufacturing software and stealing trade secrets (Tripp claims he is not a saboteur, but a whistleblower).
Above: Track testing the Model 3 at Tesla’s Fremont factory (Source: @TeslaClubBE)
Both of these hit pieces were written by Business Insider’s Linette Lopez, whom Elon Musk has accused of acting “as an inside trading source for one of Tesla’s biggest short-sellers” (apparently a reference to super-Tesla bear Jim Chanos) and “bribing” Mr. Tripp. The Twitter exchanges between Musk and Lopez have now degenerated into an undignified flame war.
So, cui bono from the flinging of all this mud and FUD? Obviously, media outlets, of both the respectable and gutter varieties, profit from the huge appetite for Tesla news of any kind. However, it would be hard to deny that, despite the best efforts of its critics, Tesla benefits from the endless controversies in the form of “free publicity that just raises the company’s profile and drives demand for its cars,” as Brooke Crothers writes in a recent Forbes article.
Tesla has been turning media lemons into publicity lemonade since the beginning. A 2008 snarky review of the Roadster and a 2012 turd-in-the-punchbowl article in the New York Times both evolved into media coups for Tesla (in the first case, the publicity was far from free – Tesla laid out a huge sum in legal costs). Both stories are told in detail in a certain book about Tesla.
In fact, Mr Crothers thinks the frequent media clashes have become “pretty predictable and pretty boring.” The Musk vs media trope has now evolved into what you might call “meta-coverage” – that is, media coverage about media coverage, for example, recent articles in the Times and CNBC.
Above: CNBC’s “Fast Money” crew discuss Elon Musk taking on the media (Youtube: CNBC Television)
Journalists who engage in sketchy reporting don’t damage Tesla’s brand, says Crothers. “In the end, it serves Musk’s cause to expose the media as hacks out to get him.”
When the custom-forged monoblock aluminum wheels hit the road, what matters is not the scare stories about fires, Autopilot crashes, cobalt, production problems, red ink, union-busting (we could go on, but you get the idea), but rather the quality of Tesla’s vehicles, and here even the company’s most ardent critics have little to say. The evil media, from mainstream car mags to amateur offerings on YouTube, overflows with rave reviews. The real winners in this battle would seem to be car buyers.
===
Note: Article originally published on evannex.com by Charles Morris
Investor's Corner
Tesla price targets drop in shock move from three Wall Street firms
Despite Tesla not being an automotive company exclusively, the Wall Street firms and analysts covering its shares are widely dialed in on its performance regarding quarterly deliveries. While it holds some importance, Tesla, from an internal perspective, is more focused on end-to-end AI, Robotaxi, self-driving, and its Optimus robot.
Tesla price targets (NASDAQ: TSLA) have received several cuts over the past few days as Wall Street firms are adjusting their forecast for the company’s stock following a miss in quarterly delivery figures for the first quarter.
Despite Tesla not being an automotive company exclusively, the Wall Street firms and analysts covering its shares are widely dialed in on its performance regarding quarterly deliveries. While it holds some importance, Tesla, from an internal perspective, is more focused on end-to-end AI, Robotaxi, self-driving, and its Optimus robot.
In a notable shift underscoring mounting caution on Wall Street, three prominent investment banks slashed their price targets on Tesla Inc. shares over the past two weeks following the electric-vehicle giant’s disappointing first-quarter 2026 delivery numbers. The revisions highlight softening EV sales figures and, according to some, execution challenges.
Tesla delivered 358,023 vehicles in the January-to-March period, a 14 percent sequential decline and a miss versus consensus forecasts of roughly 365,000 to 370,000 units.
Production hit 408,000 vehicles, yet the delivery shortfall, paired with limited updates on autonomous-driving progress and new-model timelines, rattled investors. Shares fell about 8.7 percent since April 1.
Wall Street analysts are now adjusting their forecasts accordingly, as several firms have made adjustments to price targets.
Goldman Sachs
Goldman Sachs cut its target from $405 to $375 while maintaining a Hold rating. Analyst Mark Delaney pointed to soft EV sales trends and margin pressures.
Truist Financial followed on April 2, lowering its target from $438 to $400 (Hold unchanged), with analyst William Stein citing misses in both auto deliveries and energy-storage deployments, plus a lack of fresh details on AI initiatives and upcoming vehicles.
It is a strange drop if using AI initiatives and upcoming vehicles as a justification is the primary focus here. Tesla has one of the most optimistic outlooks in terms of AI, and CEO Elon Musk recently hinted that the company is developing something for the U.S. market that will be good for families.
Baird
Baird’s Ben Kallo made a very modest trim, reducing its target from $548 to $538, keeping and maintaining the ‘Outperform’ rating it holds on shares. Kallo said the price target adjustment was a prudent recalibration tied to near-term risks.
Truist
Truist analyst William Stein pointed to deliveries and energy storage missing expectations, and cut his price target to $400 from $438. He maintained the ‘Hold’ rating the firm held on the stock previously.
JPMorgan
Adding to the bearish tone on Monday, April 6, JPMorgan’s Ryan Brinkman reiterated an Underweight (Sell) rating and $145 price target, implying roughly 60 percent downside from recent levels.
Brinkman highlighted a “record surge in unsold vehicles” that adds to free-cash-flow woes, with inventory swelling to an estimated 164,000 units.
Tesla’s comfort level taking risks makes the stock a ‘must own,’ firm says
He lowered his Q1 2026 EPS estimate to $0.30 from $0.43 and full-year 2026 EPS to $1.80 from $2.00, both below consensus. Brinkman noted that expectations for Tesla’s performance have “collapsed” across financial and operating metrics through the end of the decade, yet the stock has risen 50 percent, and average price targets have increased 32 percent.
This disconnect, he argued, prices in an unrealistic sharp pivot to stronger results beyond the decade, while near-term realities remain materially weaker.
He advised investors to approach TSLA shares with a “high degree of caution,” citing elevated execution risk, competition, and valuation concerns in lower-price, higher-volume segments.
The revisions have pulled the overall consensus lower. Aggregators show the average 12-month price target now ranging from approximately $394 to $416 across roughly 32 analysts, with a prevailing Hold rating and a mixed split of Buy, Hold, and Sell recommendations.
Brinkman’s $145 target stands as a notable outlier on the bearish side.
Not Everyone Has Turned Bearish on Tesla Shares
Not all firms turned more pessimistic. Wedbush Securities held its bullish $600 target, stressing that AI and full self-driving technology represent the core value drivers, with current delivery softness viewed as temporary.
These moves reflect a broader Wall Street recalibration: near-term EV demand faces pressure from high interest rates, intensifying competition, especially from lower-cost Chinese rivals, and slower adoption.
At the same time, many analysts continue to see Tesla’s technology leadership in software-defined vehicles, autonomy, robotaxis, and energy storage as pathways to outsized long-term gains once macro conditions ease and new models launch.
With Tesla’s first-quarter earnings report due later this month, upcoming details on cost discipline, Cybertruck ramp-up, and AI roadmaps will likely shape whether these target adjustments prove prescient or overly cautious. Investors remain divided between immediate delivery realities and the company’s ambitious vision.
Tesla shares are trading at $348.82 at the time of publishing.
Elon Musk
SpaceX to launch military missile tracking satellites through new Space Force contract
SpaceX wins a $178.5M Space Force contract to launch missile tracking satellites starting in 2027.
The U.S. Space Force awarded SpaceX a $178.5 million task order on April 1, 2026 to launch missile tracking satellites for the Space Development Agency. The contract, designated SDA-4, covers two Falcon 9 launches beginning in Q3 2027, one from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida and one from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. The satellites, built by Sierra Space, are designed to bolster the nation’s ability to detect and track missile threats from orbit.
The award falls under the National Security Space Launch Phase 3 Lane 1 program, which Space Force uses to move payloads to orbit on faster timelines and at more competitive prices. “Our Lane 1 contract affords us the flexibility to deliver satellites for our customers, like SDA, more easily and faster than ever before to all the orbits our satellites need to reach,” said Col. Matt Flahive, SSC’s system program director for Launch Acquisition, in the official press release.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
The SDA-4 contract is the latest in a long string of national security wins for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported last month, the Space Force recently shifted a GPS III satellite launch from ULA’s Vulcan rocket to SpaceX’s Falcon 9 after a significant Vulcan booster anomaly grounded ULA’s military missions indefinitely. That move made it four consecutive GPS III satellites transferred to SpaceX after contracts were originally awarded to its competitor.
This didn’t come without a fight and dates back years. SpaceX originally had to sue the Air Force in 2014 for the right to compete for national security launches, at a time when United Launch Alliance held a near monopoly on the market. Since then, the company has steadily displaced ULA as the dominant provider, and last year the Space Force confirmed SpaceX would handle approximately 60 percent of all Phase 3 launches through 2032, worth close to $6 billion.
With missile defense satellites now part of its launch manifest alongside GPS, communications, and reconnaissance payloads, SpaceX is giving hungry investors something to chew on before its imminent IPO.
Investor's Corner
Tesla reports Q1 deliveries, missing expectations slightly
The figure, however, fell short of Wall Street’s consensus estimate of 365,645 units, reflecting ongoing headwinds in the global EV market.
Tesla reported deliveries for the first quarter of 2026 today, missing expectations set by Wall Street analysts slightly as the company aims to have a massive year in terms of sales, along with other projects.
Tesla delivered 358,023 vehicles in the first quarter of 2026, marking a 6.3 percent increase from 336,681 vehicles in Q1 2025.
The figure, however, fell short of Wall Street’s consensus estimate of 365,645 units, reflecting ongoing headwinds in the global EV market. Production reached approximately 362,000 vehicles, with Model 3 and Model Y accounting for the vast majority. The results come as Tesla navigates softening demand, intensifying competition in China and Europe, and the expiration of key U.S. federal tax incentives.
🚨 BREAKING: Tesla delivered 358,023 vehicles in Q1 2026
Tesla also reported record energy deployments of 8.8 GWh
Wall Street had delivery consensus estimates of 365,645 pic.twitter.com/EVNAu5L3UT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 2, 2026
Energy storage deployments provided a bright spot, hitting a record 8.8 GWh in Q1. This underscores the accelerating momentum in Tesla’s energy segment, which has become a critical growth driver even as automotive volumes stabilize.
Year-over-year, the energy business continues to outpace vehicle sales, with analysts noting strong backlog demand for Megapack systems amid rising grid-scale needs for renewables and AI data centers.
Looking ahead, analysts project full-year 2026 vehicle deliveries in the range of 1.69 million units—a modest 3-5% rise from roughly 1.64 million in 2025.
Growth is expected to accelerate in the second half as production ramps and new incentives emerge in select markets. However, risks remain: persistent high interest rates, price competition from legacy automakers and Chinese EV makers, and potential margin pressure could cap upside.
Tesla has not issued official full-year guidance, but executives have signaled confidence in sequential quarterly improvements driven by cost reductions and refreshed lineups.
By the end of 2026, Tesla plans several major product launches to reignite momentum. The refreshed Model Y, including a new 7-seater variant already rolling out in select markets, is expected to boost family-oriented sales with updated styling, efficiency gains, and interior enhancements.
Autonomous ambitions remain central to Tesla’s mission, and that’s where the vast majority of the attention has been put. Volume production of the Cybercab (Robotaxi) is targeted to begin ramping in 2026, potentially unlocking new revenue streams through unsupervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) deployment.
A next-generation affordable EV platform, possibly under $30,000, is also in advanced planning stages for 2026 or 2027 introduction. On the energy front, the Megapack 3 and larger Megablock systems will drive further deployment scale.
While Q1 highlights transitional challenges in autos, Tesla’s diversified roadmap, spanning refreshed consumer vehicles, commercial trucks, Robotaxis, and explosive energy growth, positions the company for a stronger second half and beyond. Investors will watch Q2 closely for signs of sustained recovery, especially with new vehicles potentially on the horizon.
Tesla price targets drop in shock move from three Wall Street firms
Tesla Full Self-Driving feature probe closed by NHTSA
