News
Tesla Cybertruck comes in dead last against GM, Ford and Rivian in consumer survey
A recent consumer survey comparing the Tesla Cybertruck to the Ford F-150 Electric, the Rivian R1T, and GM’s unreleased, unannounced electric pickup truck has rendered rather interesting results. Based on the results of the study, which was conducted by Autolist.com, it appears that consumers prefer EV trucks over incumbents like GM and Ford. Consumers specifically mentioned their preference for Rivian and Tesla vehicles. The Cybertruck, with its radical styling, ended up ranking dead last in the survey’s overall rankings.
Among the respondents of Autolist.com’s survey, 50% have never owned a pickup before, while 49% have owned or currently own a truck. One percent of the study’s respondents stated that they were “unsure.” Around ~1,100 respondents were selected for the study between late November and early December, with each one being asked which all-electric pickup they prefer and why.
Interestingly, GM’s unannounced, unconfirmed all-electric pickup was the respondents’ top choice, with the still-unknown vehicle grabbing 29% of the vote. The Ford F-150 Electric came in second with 27% of the vote, while the Rivian R1T came in at a respectable third place with 24%. At the bottom was the Tesla Cybertruck, which was deemed as the top EV pickup choice by 20% of respondents.
While the overall results of the consumer survey seem unfavorable to the Tesla Cybertruck, a look at the study’s detailed results shows something very notable about the upcoming vehicle. Respondents in the survey were asked to pick three reasons why they selected a particular all-electric truck. The reasons selected for the Cybertruck by the respondents were notably different compared to the other vehicles in the survey.
For GM’s unannounced electric pickup, 62% of respondents listed their trust in the GM brand as their reason behind their preference, while 41% listed the expected reliability of the upcoming vehicle. The expected performance of the truck was listed by 37% of respondents as a priority as well. These results mirror that of the Ford F-150 Electric, with respondents’ trust in the Ford brand receiving 54% of the votes, expected reliability getting 52%, and expected performance getting 38%.
These results are very different compared to those gathered for the Rivian R1T and Tesla Cybertruck. For the R1T, it appears that its exterior styling is its biggest draw, as shown by 75% of respondents listing its look as a reason why they would choose the vehicle. Expected vehicle size and performance both were listed by 35% of respondents, and expected practicality and features received 30% of the vote.
In this sense, the Cybertruck’s results are a league of their own, with respondents seemingly prioritizing the vehicle’s entire ecosystem and Tesla’s classic performance. Fifty percent of respondents listed the Cybertruck’s expected performance as a reason they would choose the vehicle, while expected efficiency and Autopilot received a nod from 44% of respondents. Tesla’s Supercharger Network was also listed by 29% of respondents. This, if any, shows that those who prefer the Cybertruck are already familiar with EV ownership, as evidenced by their mention of charging infrastructure and advanced driver-assist systems as key priorities.
In a way, these results show that buyers who are considering the Tesla Cybertruck have preferences that do not necessarily mirror that of usual pickup customers. A part of this discrepancy may be due to a notable difference among respondents who have owned a truck and those that have never owned a pickup before. Respondents who have owned pickups before seemed the most averse to the Cybertruck, with 35% choosing GM’s electric truck as their top choice, 28% choosing the F-150 Electric, 23% opting for the Rivian R1T, and only 14% selecting the Cybertruck. Among respondents who were non-truck owners, the results were flipped, with the Cybertruck being most popular with 25.8% of respondents’ vote, the Rivian R1T getting 24.8%, and the two EV trucks from Ford and GM receiving 24.7% each.
Chase Disher, an analyst at Autolist.com, explained that the results of its survey are actually favorable for all the electric pickups and their respective makers. It shows that the veteran automakers can find a loyal customer base for their all-electric trucks, and it also reveals that an entirely new pickup market could be opened, pushed by vehicles like the Cybertruck. “Frankly, these results are good for all four brands. It shows that Ford and GM can leverage their considerable — and existing — truck followings to boost interest in their EV models. Meanwhile, it shows that Tesla and Rivian could be poised to grab a meaningful share of a crucial new growth segment,” he said.
The full results of Autolist.com’s study could be accessed here.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Investor's Corner
NASA taps SpaceX to launch the telescope that could unlock new worlds
NASA’s Roman Space Telescope heads to orbit this August aboard SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with massive scientific ambitions.
SpaceX is set to play a central role in one of NASA’s most anticipated science missions in years. The company’s Falcon Heavy rocket, currently the most powerful operational launch vehicle in the world, will carry the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope into orbit on August 30 from Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Roman is now in final preparations inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility, where on June 26 technicians used a crane to lift the observatory into a specialized stand for fueling and pre-launch testing.
Roman is named after Nancy Grace Roman, NASA’s first chief of astronomy, whose career helped shape how the agency approaches space science.
NASA chose SpaceX Falcon Heavy because of Roman’s needs to reach a specific orbit far from Earth, well beyond where a standard Falcon 9 can deliver it. The Falcon Heavy, which first flew in 2018, has since become NASA’s go-to option for missions that need serious muscle without the cost and complexity of older launch systems.
Celebrating SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy Tesla Roadster launch, seven years later (Op-Ed)
Roman will carry a field of view at least 100 times wider than the Hubble Space Telescope, meaning it can photograph enormous swaths of the universe in a single shot rather than the narrow slices Hubble captures. That difference in scale is significant. While Hubble reshaped our understanding of the cosmos over 30 years, Roman is built to work faster and wider, surveying hundreds of millions of galaxies at once.
One of Roman’s most compelling capabilities is its potential to discover and photograph planets orbiting stars outside our solar system, and with enough precision to directly image planets that would otherwise be lost. That means scientists could study the atmosphere and surface characteristics of distant worlds rather than simply confirming they exist. Combined with Roman’s sweeping field of view, the telescope could detect thousands of exoplanets, and some of those planets may be in habitable zones where liquid water could exist. No telescope currently in operation has this level of power and capability. That capability alone could change what we know about other worlds, and perhaps finally answer the question: are we the only intelligent lifeforms in existence?
What Roman actually finds once it reaches orbit is an open question, and that is exactly what makes this launch worth watching.
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
Tesla analyst says Full Self-Driving is about to have its iPhone moment
