News
Tesla’s resilience is forcing veteran automakers to draw the battle lines on diesel
There are probably very few companies in the market that have attracted the same amount of skepticism as Tesla. Since it started producing its first vehicle, the original Tesla Roadster, more than a decade ago, the “impending” death of the company has been foretold. Despite this, the small, disruptive electric car maker has stubbornly refused to die, and it continues to grow despite the noise. Today, Tesla is bigger than ever before, and the impending completion of a third Gigafactory 3 in China could signal yet another period of incredible growth for the company.
The inevitable electric age
The rise of Tesla did not only prove that electric cars need not be boring, glorified golf carts. The rise of Tesla also showed that consumers from various walks of life are willing to pay top dollar for well-designed electric vehicles, simply because they are superior to internal combustion cars. By proving these points, Tesla was able to force the hand of veteran automakers, pushing them to come up with their own battery-powered vehicles. Today, most of the world’s most notable carmakers are looking into electrification. Some brands such as Porsche have even decided to abandon diesel altogether, aiming instead to push the development of both all-electric and hybrid cars.
It’s not just Porsche either. Other automakers such as Jaguar even beat the German automaker’s Taycan to market with its I-PACE, which it started delivering last year. Daimler rushed to join the fray with the EQC, and Audi, not to be left behind in the emerging EV race, brought out the rather unfortunately-named e-tron, which was received warmly nonetheless. Even mass-market automakers such as Kia and Hyundai have come up with their own bang-for-your-buck electric cars in the form of the Niro EV and Kona Electric. Volkswagen recently made a splash with the debut of the ID.3 as well. Even British-bred MG, which has been reborn as a Chinese-owned hyper-budget brand, is preparing to attack the lower end of the market with the MG ZS EV.
Learning from Tesla
Amidst this transition, it is starting to become evident which carmakers are dead serious about their transition to the electric age. This became notable in Germany, when Volkswagen, Daimler, and BMW came together last March to call for the widespread adoption of EVs. Volkswagen CEO Herbert Diess was at the helm of the radical stance, at one point practically butting heads with BMW CEO Harald Krüger and the industry lobby group Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) due to his push for widespread electric car adoption. Audi boss Bran Schot, in a recent interview with Manager Magazin, reiterated this point, noting that “electric is the core” of the automaker’s “new strategy.”
Audi is currently attempting to ramp the production of the e-tron SUV, its first all-electric vehicle, but things have not exactly been easy. Due to factors such as reported battery constraints from supplier LG Chem, as well as other incidents such as a workers’ strike in one of its plants earlier this year, the e-tron has been delayed. Yet, Schot noted that the company remains focused on pushing more electric cars. During the interview, Schot candidly admitted that Audi is behind other automakers such as Tesla, not only “in the electric cars” themselves, “but also at the pace with which they solve some software issues.”
Schot noted that he was recently “driven once again a Tesla,” and he came away impressed by the experience. “That was fun,” he said, later admitting that “No question, we are learning from Tesla.” Learning from the leader in electric mobility is an excellent strategy for Audi, as it would allow the company to develop vehicles that mix the best of veteran auto’s experience and Tesla’s tech mastery. In a way, Audi has already taken steps towards this goal with its e-tron GT sedan, a vehicle built on the same platform as the Porsche Taycan. The Taycan stands apart from other EVs from veteran auto in the way that it’s built from the ground up to be an electric car, making it the last thing from a compliance vehicle.
Commitments to diesel and a denial of EVs
While companies like Porsche have found it easy to commit to electrification and abandon things like diesel, other carmakers are not having such an easy time relinquishing their ties with oil. The most recent source of this shock was Jaguar Land Rover CEO Ralf Speth, who recently spoke with Automotive News Europe sister publication Automobilwoche’s publisher in an interview. When asked about the company’s powertrain strategy amid a decline in demand for diesels and V8 gasoline engines, the CEO was candid.
“According to industry forecasters, a global share of 20 percent to 30 percent for electrified vehicles is expected by 2025. When you turn this around, it means that 70 percent to 80 percent of all vehicles around the world will have conventional engines. Let me add that today’s diesels, (which) are absolutely CO2-efficient and clean,” he said.
When asked by the publication why electric mobility is still not important to consumers, the CEO noted that “On one hand, the products are still too expensive. On the other hand, the infrastructure is still too inconvenient and unreliable, so electric cars tend to be for people with deep pockets.” These are rather surprising to hear from the Speth, whose company produced the I-PACE, which has pretty much swept awards left and right since its debut last year.
Explaining his conservative stance on electric vehicles further, the Jaguar CEO argued that “When it comes to electric vehicles, the question isn’t how many cars I can build but rather how many batteries I can buy. The demand for batteries is so great that there will be a limited ability to deliver them over the next few years. And, unlike some others, I expect continually rising battery prices – at least for the next two to three years.”
Quite interestingly, the Jaguar Land Rover CEO’s concerns about electric cars have long been addressed by Tesla. When it came to charging infrastructure, the California-based carmaker developed and aggressively rolled out its Supercharger Network, which currently have over 12,000 stations across the globe. The company has also ironed out the supply of its vehicles’ batteries, thanks to a massive investment in facilities such as Gigafactory 1 in Nevada.
The transition to the electric age will be difficult for carmakers, and it would require massive investments just to get well-designed all-electric cars ready for the market. If these developments are any indication, it appears that in the next few years, the battle lines will be drawn between veteran automakers that are willing to go all-in on electric mobility, and veteran carmakers who will steadfastly hold on to oil and the internal combustion engine.
Investor's Corner
Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet
Tesla opens its Q3 earnings Q&A, and Cybercab, Robotaxi, Optimus and regulators loom over October 21.
Tesla has opened its shareholder question portal for the Q3 2026 earnings call, with the Say Q&A page already listing questions. Investors have until 4:00 p.m. EDT on October 20 to submit and vote on what management should answer.
The call is set for Wednesday, October 21. Tesla will post results after the market closes, with a live webcast at 4:30 p.m. CT, or 5:30 p.m. ET, through its investor relations site.
Say ranks questions by the number of shares behind the votes, which gives institutional holders extra weight over the retail crowd.
Ahead of Q2, retail investors asked why Robotaxi growth had stalled, when Cybercab would start customer rides, and where the Optimus Gen 3 ramp stood, while an institutional holder asked how Tesla and SpaceX would split Terafab duties. Cybercab has since answered one of those. Tesla said last week it has 300 plus Cybercabs serving Austin, up eightfold in 30 days, with Dallas named as the next city. The questions now are likely to move from when to how fast.
There is also a regulatory question hanging over the call. NHTSA has demanded sworn answers on how the pedal free Cybercab was certified against federal safety standards, with responses due October 30, nine days after the call. Whether an analyst raises it live is unknown, but it is the kind of exposure that tends to find its way into a Q&A.
The numbers will not be the main draw. Tesla already reported 486,532 deliveries and 13.7 GWh of storage for the quarter. Consensus sits around 43 to 45 cents per share on roughly $27.8 billion in revenue, according to Zacks, after a Q2 report that missed on EPS. Goldman Sachs, which holds a Neutral rating and a $360 target, argues the outlook for Robotaxi, FSD and Optimus will matter more to the stock than the quarter itself.
The call also lands six days after the rescheduled Roadster event, which Tesla will stream on X on Thursday, October 15, at 7:55 p.m. CT. If the Roadster shows up with a production date or a SpaceX thruster package, expect it to climb the voting list before the deadline.
Elon Musk
Ukraine says Starlink is cutting out its military drones as Poland calls out Elon Musk
Ukrainian officials allege SpaceX limited military Starlink speeds, disrupting drone missions; SpaceX has not commented.
Ukrainian officials are accusing SpaceX of placing a speed limit on the military version of Starlink that their forces use to fly drones, but SpaceX has not confirmed that any change was made. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said in a Telegram post on Wednesday that Starshield terminals have begun losing service when they move faster than about 100 miles per hour, according to a Reuters report. “Our defense forces did not receive a warning about this limitation, and this led to the disruption of several missions,” he wrote.
Ukraine’s 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters that connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at just 68 to 75 mph, which made the drones harder to control. Volunteer Serhiy Sternenko, citing military reports, said the dropouts are now starting at 37 to 43 mph. These accounts come from Ukrainian officials and military sources and have not been independently verified. Regular civilian terminals were reportedly not affected, according to EUalive.
.@POTUS: We told Zelensky, ‘You can do whatever you want to Russia, but don’t hit the refineries because that’s a world problem.’ And what does he do? He goes and hits the diesel fuel. He better damn well stop. https://t.co/CdRlMcPlKr
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) October 10, 2026
SpaceX has not publicly commented or explained what, if anything, changed. Beskrestnov and other Ukrainian officials believe the issue is intentional and point to the timing. Washington has been pressing Kyiv to stop long range strikes on Russian oil refineries after President Trump called for an “energy ceasefire,” and Musk posted on Saturday that “Zelensky has gone too far.” EUalive noted that neither Ukrainian nor Polish officials have presented evidence that the limit was ordered by Washington or by SpaceX, so the link to politics remains an allegation. Other explanations, such as a technical or policy change affecting fast moving terminals, have not been ruled out.
Poland’s foreign minister, Radosław Sikorski, responded on X by quote tweeting a Kyiv Independent report and writing: “Hey, @elonmusk, big man, are you playing politics with your products again? As your European customers, we are watching you.” Poland is the largest funder of Ukraine’s Starlink service, having supplied more than 29,000 terminals and covering operating costs Sikorski has put at roughly $50 million a year. The wording echoes their 2025 clash, when Musk told Sikorski to “be quiet, small man.” At the time of writing, neither Musk nor SpaceX had responded to the claims.
Hey, @elonmusk, big man, are you playing politics with your products again?
As your European customers, we are watching you.— Radosław Sikorski 🇵🇱🇪🇺 (@sikorskiradek) October 14, 2026
The dispute sits on top of a long history. Musk confirmed in February 2022 that Starlink was active in Ukraine after a request from a Ukrainian minister. That October, SpaceX asked the Pentagon to share the bill and Musk said the cost was approaching $20 million a month, before he reversed course and said SpaceX would keep paying. In December 2024 the Pentagon moved some of those terminals onto the Starshield service, the government version now at the center of the complaints.
SpaceX has also changed how its network treats certain terminals in Ukraine before, and that time it was with Kyiv’s cooperation. In February, Ukrainian officials confirmed that terminals believed to be used by Russian troops were disabled after coordination with SpaceX, a step that Ukrainian commanders later said hurt Russian assaults. Whether anything similar is behind the latest reports is unclear, which is why Kyiv is asking for answers.
Ukraine is already looking at backups. Defense tech company Stetman is developing its own satellite system, UASAT-NANO, and officials in Europe have discussed alternatives to Starlink since early 2025, though none match its scale yet.
Elon Musk
FAA kicks off review of SpaceX’s bid to fly Starship nearly every day
FAA is reviewing SpaceX’s plan for 456 Starship launches a year, up from 25 today.
The FAA said Tuesday that it will prepare an environmental impact statement on SpaceX’s proposal to run as many as 456 Starship launches and 912 landings a year from Starbase, Texas. SpaceX is currently authorized for 25 launches and 50 landings annually, which makes the request roughly 18 times the existing ceiling. The notice of intent is set to publish in the Federal Register on Wednesday.
The plan comes in two phases. Phase 1 would allow up to 100 launches and 200 landings a year, on any day and at any hour. Phase 2, which the FAA says could arrive within several years, would raise the limit to the full 456 launches, still at any hour but only on weekdays. The agency noted that 912 landings is the upper limit for the Texas facility no matter where a given mission begins, and that Starship and Super Heavy could come down at the launch site or in the Gulf and open ocean.
A draft statement will be released for public comment at a later date, and the FAA has not said when. According to the Federal Registar, written comments are due November 30 on regulations.gov under docket FAA-2026-12808, with in person scoping meetings on November 17 in Brownsville and November 19 in Port Isabel, plus a virtual session on November 18. The review will weigh air quality, wildlife, coastal resources, water, noise, and aviation, and the FAA said any increase beyond this proposal would need its own separate review.
The numbers look large next to what Starbase has actually done. Starship has flown three times from Texas this year, including Flight 14 on September 28, the first orbital flight, which deployed 26 Starlink V3 satellites. Bloomberg reported that Starbase has never launched more than five times in a calendar year. The current cap of 25 comes from an FAA approval in May 2025. In February, the agency also approved up to 44 Starship launches a year from Launch Complex 39A in Florida, so Phase 1 in Texas alone would more than double that allowance.
Musk has said Starship could eventually fly more than once per hour within less than a decade, per Bloomberg. The nearer term target is Flight 15. Musk said on October 10 that it is hopefully four to six weeks away and will try to catch the ship with the tower, as Teslarati covered. That flight still runs under the existing 25 launch limit, and so would every Starbase launch for as long as the new review takes.
As of mid morning Pacific time on Tuesday, SpaceX had not posted about the filing on its own account.
Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet
Ukraine says Starlink is cutting out its military drones as Poland calls out Elon Musk
FAA kicks off review of SpaceX’s bid to fly Starship nearly every day
The Pentagon taps Elon Musk to design the battlefield of the future
SpaceX reveals how its 1 Million AI satellite network will work and prevent space collisions
