News
Tesla is looking to eliminate contracts for faster vehicle delivery process
In what appears to be yet another initiative to deliver as many of its electric cars as possible to customers, Elon Musk has announced that Tesla is trying to get rid of paper contracts completely. According to Musk, Tesla’s delivery process should be as simple as a tap on a screen. Under the system, returns for Tesla’s vehicles should be a lot simpler as well.
Musk’s Twitter update came as a response to Tesla enthusiast JD Mankovsky, who noted that his sister-in-law has been in a delivery center for hours waiting for her all-electric SUV’s contracts to be finished. Mankovsky stated that there was a backlog in the delivery center’s contract/legal approval level, causing handovers to be delayed. In classic fashion, Musk promptly responded with an idea in tow.
We’re trying to get rid of contracts completely. Should just be “tap here & you get your car”. Then, if you don’t like it for any reason, just return it like any other product.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 23, 2018
If Tesla does employ what could pretty much be described as a tap and drive system, it would be yet another way for the company to separate itself from the conventions of the traditional auto industry. Issuing and signing contracts, after all, are a well-known, time-consuming aspect of the vehicle delivery process, and it is one practice that Tesla still engages in today. By getting rid of paper contracts, Tesla will separate itself even more from traditional auto sales practices. Such a practice will also make the buying experience of Tesla’s vehicles more similar to consumer tech products than conventional cars.
In a way, using a digital signing system for its vehicles is a strategic move for Tesla. The use of digital contracts, after all, has only been growing over the years. In the United States alone, digital signatures are an option for filing tax returns over the internet, and that is valid in every state today. Tesla would likely need to adapt to additional regulations if or when it starts using digital contracts, but the transition could be done.
Elon Musk’s statement about returning vehicles if customers are not satisfied further emphasizes the idea that Tesla’s vehicles are more like computers on wheels than regular vehicles. Elon Musk has, over the years, underscored the idea that Tesla is a different breed of carmaker, not only in terms of its products but also in terms of its business practices. Returning cars to the company in a manner similar to returning an iPhone to Apple definitely falls under that category. Returned vehicles could even give the company a considerable revenue. Apple, for one, usually uses returned units to be sold later on as refurbished devices. Tesla could employ a similar strategy, opening a lineup between its brand new and CPO offerings.
Looking at Elon Musk’s tweet in the short-term, the removal of traditional paper contracts seems to be yet another way for Tesla to increase its delivery figures. The company, after all, is currently pushing for profitability this third quarter. For Tesla to do this, it would have to deliver as many cars as it can to customers, particularly higher-margin vehicles like the Model 3 Performance, the Model S P100D, and the Model S P100D. Such a system ties in perfectly with the company’s new 5-Minute Sign & Drive system for Model 3 deliveries as well.
In a way, Tesla’s efforts to expedite the deliveries of its vehicles are in the best interests of the company’s customers. Earlier this month, Tesla announced that it had sold its 200,000th electric car in the United States, triggering the phase-out period for the $7,500 tax credit granted to its customers. The tax credit is set to decrease over the next quarters and fully expire by December 2019. Thus, from this point until the end of next year, it would be up to Tesla to deliver as many vehicles as possible to ensure that its customers qualify for a federal tax credit.
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
