News
Tesla Giga Berlin seems on track to start Model Y production later than Giga Texas
In a recent statement to German media, Brandenburg Economics Minister Jörg Steinbach stated that he expects the final approval for Tesla’s Gigafactory Berlin facility to be released sometime in the fourth quarter of 2021. If this comes to pass, Model Y production in the facility would be starting several months or so later than expected, which may not seem like too much of a delay. It may, however, result in Gigafactory Texas, a facility that started its buildout several months after the Germany-based factory, starting its Model Y production earlier than its Germany-based sibling.
As per a report from Berlin.de, Steinbach stated that the principle of quality over speed applies in the approval process of Gigafactory Berlin. “The principle of quality over speed clearly applies in the approval process. The top priority is that the decision of the State Office for the Environment is ultimately legally secure. And the factory can only be opened once a positive approval decision has been made,” the minister said.
If the State Environment Agency refuses to grant Gigafactory Berlin’s final approval, Tesla would have to dismantle all the structures it has built on the massive Grünheide complex, which includes a plant designed to produce the Tesla Model Y. Tesla would also have to replace the monoculture forest that it cut down in the area. Steinbach, however, noted that he considers a final veto from the Environmental Agency to be practically impossible. “This is not about the approval of a new nuclear power plant,” he said.
Inasmuch as Giga Berlin is supported by the Economics Minister, there is no denying that the project is meeting a substantial amount of pushback from local entities. Legal challenges from the Naturschutzbund (Nabu) and the Green League over Giga Berlin’s latest early approval aside, Tesla is also being investigated by the Brandenburg’s State Environment Agency for allegedly constructing a refrigerant tank (which may still be empty) without permission. The complaints about Giga Berlin’s alleged “illegal” tanks were filed by the two environmental groups, and are cruelty being handled by the Berlin-Brandenburg Higher Administrative Court (OVG).
Similar issues have so far not plagued Gigafactory Texas. Since its announcement on the Q2 2020 earnings call, Giga Texas’ construction has been relatively smooth. It’s been roughly 350 days since the massive Texas-based facility was announced, and so far, trial runs for parts of the plant’s Model Y production line are already underway. Elon Musk even noted on Twitter back in April that limited production of the Model Y would begin in Gigafactory Texas this year, with volume production hitting its pace in 2022.
What is quite interesting is that Gigafactory Texas’s footprint exceeds that of Gigafactory Berlin. Tesla adopted a different pattern for Giga Texas by building large sections of the full factory immediately, and so far, such a strategy seems to be working well. However, what truly differentiates the Texas plant from its Germany-based counterpart is the amount of pushback against the project as a whole. While Giga Berlin could barely move these days without encountering loud complaints and legal actions from the Naturschutzbund (Nabu) and the Green League — or local news agencies for that matter — Giga Texas has so far been met with support.
This is quite an unfortunate situation overall, as Gigafactory Berlin actually started out strong. Following its initial announcement in November 2019, Giga Berlin’s first months showed a lot of progress, so much so that it seemed like the facility may be built faster than Gigafactory Shanghai, whose Model 3 factory was built and launched in less than a year. But just like Giga Texas, Gigafactory Shanghai was also constructed without much drama. Since its groundbreaking in January 2019, Tesla’s China-based facility has grown steadily, and today, it is already poised to export the Made-in-China Model Y to European territories.
Tesla opened orders for the Model Y in Europe recently, and the all-electric crossovers would likely be coming from Giga Shanghai. One could almost assume that Tesla opted for this strategy due to the delays in Giga Berlin. The Grünheide facility, after all, was initially expected to start Model Y production sometime in the latter half of 2021. But if Brandenburg’s Economics Minister optimistically believes that Giga Berlin’s final approval would be granted in the fourth quarter, then having Giga Shanghai’s Made-in-China Model Ys pick up the slack may indeed be a good idea.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Investor's Corner
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
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.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
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.
News
Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y
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.
