News
Tesla’s Cybertruck is not a bet-the-company vehicle, and it should scare TSLA critics
The Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) Cybertruck’s unveiling event could have easily gone better, with the vehicle’s disruptive specs and pricing pretty much getting pushed to the background by media coverage of the pickup’s less-than-stellar Armor Glass demonstration. Cracked windows aside, the fact remains that the Cybertruck starts at $39,990, a price that’s as aggressive as the vehicle’s almost brutalist design. It’s also a price that shows that Tesla is at a point where it actually can experiment and be bolder than usual. This should scare TSLA critics.
The Cybertruck is a massive vehicle, as long as a Ford F-150 and far more powerful as teased by the company’s tug-of-war demo that it briefly showed during the pickup’s unveiling. It’s also unapologetically futuristic, with a 17″ landscape infotainment screen that’s not found in any of Tesla’s other vehicles. It has pop-out door handles that are directly inspired by the premium-priced Model S as well. And these are just the tip of the iceberg, as the Cybertruck has a ton of other features and capabilities that make it a great vehicle for work and play.
Yet, the monster of a truck that Tesla unveiled starts at a price that’s just slightly above the base price of the Model 3 sedan. There was a reason why gasps could be heard at the vehicle’s unveiling when the Cybertruck’s pricing was revealed. Elon Musk has noted during his interview with Tesla owner-enthusiast Ryan McCaffrey last June that the Cybertruck will start at $49,000 at the most. Absolutely no warning was given that Tesla was going for a far more aggressive starting price, especially considering the vehicle’s built-in tech such as its adaptive suspension and basic Autopilot capabilities.
The fact that the Cybertuck is designed in such a polarizing manner suggests that Tesla has some funding to spare. By releasing such a vehicle, the electric car maker has shown the auto market that it is at a point where it can be bold and take ridiculous risks such as releasing a truck that looks nothing like a conventional pickup. Elon Musk has admitted as much, noting during an appearance at veteran tech journalist Kara Swisher’s Recode Decode podcast that if the Cybertruck were to fail, Tesla will make a more conventional truck. Musk’s words then, spoken over a year ago, rings true today.
“I’m personally super-excited by this pickup truck. It’s something I’ve been wanting to make for a long time. And I’ve been iterating sort of designs with Franz. If there’s only a small number of people that like that truck, I guess we’ll make a more conventional truck in the future. I think this is the kinda thing the consumer would want to buy, even if they don’t normally buy a pickup truck. So, anyway, that’s personally I’m most excited about. But like I said, it could be just like, okay, I weirdly like it and other people don’t. That’s possible. But we’re gonna make it anyway, and then we will just have a niche audience, I don’t know. But if it does, then we’ll make a more conventional pickup truck,” Musk said.
Tesla has, for the most part over the years, operated with limited resources. Elon Musk is a risk-taker, and some of these were so notable that they were considered as “bet-the-company” situations. The Model 3 was one of these, with Musk noting that if the all-electric sedan were had failed, it would have likely ruined Tesla for good. Considering the bold direction that the company took with the Cybertruck, as well as Elon Musk’s statements last year, it definitely appears that the all-electric monster pickup that Tesla just unveiled is not a bet-the-company vehicle. It is a truck that would be great if it succeeded, but it is also a vehicle that could be replaced if it were to fail.
This should be a chilling thought for Tesla critics, particularly those who feverishly wait for the next quarter’s numbers in their excitement to see TSLA stock drop. After all, if the Cybertruck were to fail and if Tesla were to make a conventional pickup truck, there is a good chance that the company’s more traditional truck would be even more aggressively priced. Such a pickup would likely outperform diesel-powered rivals as well in classic Tesla fashion as well. Such a truck, combined with Tesla’s ever-growing charging infrastructure and its ever-evolving Autopilot system, would have the potential to clean house in a manner that is not as kind as the Cybertruck, which will always be polarizing.
Tesla is a resilient company, one that weathered one of the worst financial crises in recent history, and it’s led by a man that’s hell-bent on pushing sustainable transportation by proving that electric cars are better in every way than fossil fuel-powered vehicles. It’s best to note that a Tesla with limited resources has proven that it can still disrupt established industries with well-designed, safe, and feature-rich electric cars. A Tesla with resources to spare? That’s a downright frightening idea if one is a TSLA critic.
Disclosure: I have no ownership in shares of TSLA and have no plans to initiate any positions within 72 hours.
-
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
