News
Tesla Cybertruck to be ‘Elon Musk’s first disaster,’ according to Jim Cramer
Since November 2019, arguably the most frequently-discussed electric vehicle coming to the market has been the Tesla Cybertruck. The first pickup from Elon Musk’s electric car company shocked nearly everyone who tuned in to the live event streamed nearly two years ago as the Tesla frontman and the company’s Chief Designer Franz von Holzhausen rolled out the Cyberpunk-inspired pickup onto the stage in Hawthorne, California. However, despite having over 1.2 million pre-orders thus far, the truck is not making everyone turn their heads and throw $100 down to reserve one. One of those people is Tesla investor and Musk fan Jim Cramer, who said that the truck is bound to be Musk’s “first disaster.”
While fielding questions regarding Tesla’s AI Day last week during an interview on Wall Street, Cramer averted commenting very much on the Tesla Bot that Elon Musk said the company would bring in 2022 in a prototype form and instead focused on the Cybertruck. His comments were unfavorable toward the all-electric pickup, with Cramer recommending that consumers opt for a more traditional pickup style in the Ford F-150 Lightning as the Cybertruck is “ugly.”
“I saw the actual pickup truck,” Cramer said when speaking about the Cybertruck. “Go buy an F-150. I mean, this thing is not just ugly…You have got to love Tesla to get this thing,” Cramer added.
There is no doubt that the Cybertruck has an unorthodox and “polarizing” look, as many people have described the truck. Still, this was the point of the design. One of the first portions of Musk’s presentation in November 2019 had to do with the traditional automakers and how their pickups stood apart from others. Taking manufacturer badges away from the truck makes it more difficult to tell each model apart. The traditional design has been broken down to a rectangular driver’s cabin and a bed, with relatively the same shapes and angles shared amongst the major pickup truck designs in the United States.
This is where Tesla decided that an orthodox pickup may not be the best option. Instead, Tesla went with a futuristic design, covered in ultra-strength stainless steel alloy and equipped with resilient glass and, potentially, solar panels on the tonneau for additional range.
Tesla Cybertruck’s Solar Panel Tonneau Cover comes to life in new patent
Cramer is still a Tesla supporter, he says, especially as the automaker has avoided massive failures with its product. Specifically mentioning the recent Chevrolet Bolt EV recall due to faulty batteries, Cramer believes Tesla is one of the major players in the sector, especially in terms of autonomous driving. “I still like Tesla because I think it’s been unfair the way their autonomous driving has been handled. There are many more accidents from drunk drivers. But I recognize…I think this pickup truck is going to be a disaster, his first disaster.”
Interestingly, Cramer and Musk share a similar but not an identical point of view on the Cybertruck. While Cramer is undoubtedly convinced the Cybertruck will fall flat, Musk has stated in the past that the truck could be a flop due to its unfamiliar design. However, 1.2 million reservations for the truck say differently.
The Ford F-150 Lightning will be the company’s second EV to the market, following the Mustang Mach-E. The truck has already amassed an impressive 120,000 pre-orders, according to Ford’s Q2 2021 Earnings Call. Sporting a traditional pickup design, the two options on the market may be the perfect recipe for accelerating the transition to sustainable energy as the traditional and unorthodox designs should cater to consumers and what they’re looking for in a new vehicle.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with tips! Email us at tips@teslarati.com, or you can email me directly at joey@teslarati.com.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
