News
Tesla Cybertruck factory: Tulsa’s underdog campaign is giving Austin’s bid a run for its money
The site of Tesla’s Cybertruck Gigafactory has not been finalized yet, though reports suggest that there are now only two cities under consideration: Austin, Texas and Tulsa, Oklahoma. Between the two cities, it initially appeared that Austin may be a shoe-in for the electric car maker considering Texas’ ties with SpaceX, Musk’s private space venture. But if there is something that has become evident in recent weeks, it is the fact that Tulsa, Oklahoma will not give up its shot to net Tesla’s next factory without a fight.
The final decision about the site of Tesla’s next electric vehicle factory is expected to be related in a few weeks, perhaps during the company’s upcoming second quarter earnings call. As the days count down to the fateful date, the Tulsa vs Austin race is heating up, with the underdog from Oklahoma seemingly gaining some momentum against Austin, which seems to be encountering some speed bumps in its efforts to secure the Cybertruck Gigafactory.
Travis County, which is home to Austin, is expected to vote this week on a portion of 10 year tax rebates that total over $65 million. However, not everything is going smoothly. Similar to its experience in Gigafactory Berlin, Tesla’s impending arrival has received resistance from a number of local groups. Doing a hearing with the Travis County Commissioners Court last week, for example, representatives from local churches, workers groups, and unions, expressed their concerns about the electric car maker and its proposed incentives.
These issues, at least for now, do not seem to be present at Tulsa. As noted in a Reuters report, Oklahoma has signed a nondisclosure agreement about its incentives package for Tesla, though Commerce Secretary Sean Kouplen noted that its bid is comparable and at parts even better than Austin’s. The bid includes business and personal tax breaks, and most of them are already guaranteed under state law. This meant that the approval of the incentives in Tulsa will not require the kinds of public votes that have already caused several delays in Austin.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg. Online, the city’s Big F*cking Field Twitter account is on high gear, and all over Tulsa, Tesla fever has pretty much set in. Tulsa’s famous Golden Driller statue has been fitted with a Tesla logo on its chest and a face that eerily resembles CEO Elon Musk. The city has also secured thousands of signatures from engineers who have pledged to move to Tulsa if Tesla decides to set up shop in the city. Local retailers have caught the Tesla bug as well. In a statement to the publication, Kouplen noted that his children came home the other day with a photo of a Tesla-themed snow cone, and a local pizzeria has pledged to give away free pizzas for the city’s would-be Tesla employees.
“The response here continues to be overwhelming. In the time that we’re in, having something positive to hold on to or grab is really making a difference,” Kouplen said.
Quite interestingly, Tesla appeared to have been set on Austin for the site of its Cybertruck Gigafactory. But following reports last month that the company had purchased land in Texas, CEO Elon Musk clarified that Tesla has not made a final decision yet. With this, Tulsa seemed to have put the pedal to the metal, culminating in Musk actually visiting the city earlier this month and being hosted by Oklahoma officials at a massive field that would be the potential site of the upcoming factory. Pictures of the meeting, which featured the CEO candidly speaking with officials, were shared online by Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt.
Oklahoma officials were scheduled to make their pitch to dozens of Tesla executives in a Zoom call on Monday afternoon. Regardless of the results of this, however, one cannot deny the admirable grassroots push that Tulsa has done to make it this far in the race for the Cybertruck Gigafactory. In a previous comment, Kouplen noted that even if Tulsa loses to Austin this time around, it does not mean that the city will never get a Tesla facility. “This won’t be the last factory they build or the last investment they make. We’re building a relationship with Tesla that will continue regardless of what happens this time,” Kouplen said.
-
In a new note to investors on Tuesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco said that Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors regarding its Robotaxi rollout, Full Self-Driving software, and Optimus.
Percoco said in the note that, for the most part, investors are still very positive about the direction the company is headed. However, there are some things the firm would like to see, and they have to do with financials.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla bulls are more than convinced that the company’s Full Self-Driving software is proof it can develop physical AI. Financially, however, there are still some questions, especially on elevated spending, which CEO Elon Musk said would occur as the company works to roll out Robotaxi faster and continue developing its Optimus robot.
The latter two are where Tesla will have to prove progress to investors, as Percoco writes that both projects “will require clearer evidence that Robotaxi is scaling and more tangible Optimus proof points to support the ROI on elevated capex.”
Percoco said the second quarter earnings call did not change his long-term thesis of where Tesla is positioned in the AI race, which is out in front. However, there are concerns that weaker gross margins and higher R&D spend will stress financials, and that has “sharpened our (and investors’) focus on measurable progress across Robotaxi and Optimus.”
Additionally, Robotaxi still needs to be proven with more operation in existing cities while maintaining safety but improving how many rides it gives in any given time, he said. For Optimus, Percoco wrote that he is “still looking for evidence beyond commentary around SOP.”
Morgan Stanley put Percoco in charge of covering Tesla after long-time analyst Adam Jonas transitioned to the automotive side.
Currently, Morgan Stanley has a $415 price target on Tesla and a ‘Hold’ rating on the stock. It is trading at around $330 at the time of publication, which was 2:30 P.M. on the East Coast.
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
