Investor's Corner
The Tesla Killer’s death and Elon Musk’s long-term play on batteries, vertical integration
At a press conference last year at Volkswagen’s global headquarters in Wolfsburg, Germany, VW Chairman of the Board Herbert Diess stated that “anything that Tesla can do, we can surpass.” The VW boss even noted that its dedicated MEB electric car architecture would give the company cost advantages at a scale that’s out of Tesla’s reach.
This year, the Tesla Model 3 is steadily making its presence known in the United States auto market. In September alone, the Model 3 was listed as the 4th best-selling passenger car in the US, beating the ubiquitous Toyota Corolla Family. Tesla also finished Q3 on a strong note, manufacturing a total of 80,142 electric cars including 53,239 Model 3, as well as delivering a total of 83,500 vehicles, comprised of 55,840 Model 3, 14,470 Model S, and 13,190 Model X. This Q4, Tesla seems poised to deliver and produce an even more impressive number of vehicles.
For years, Tesla skeptics have pointed at upcoming competition from legacy automakers as a reason for the impending fall of the electric car maker. Just like Herbert Diess, many of Tesla’s critics pointed out that legacy auto’s years of experience, as well as their network of factories, should allow them to leapfrog Tesla in the electric car market as soon as they decide to enter the electric car market.
As companies like Mercedes-Benz, Audi, Jaguar, and Porsche are learning today, though, it is not so simple to build a compelling electric car that’s capable of challenging Tesla’s premium vehicles in their respective segments. Mercedes-Benz, for one, has announced that the EQC — its plush competitor for the Model X — will adopt a gradual rollout due to possible warranty concerns over the vehicle’s battery and other electric car components. German news agency Bild am Sonntag recently noted that the Audi e-tron would be released later than expected as well, due to a software issue and ongoing discussions with its battery provider, LG Chem, which is allegedly adjusting the price of the vehicle’s batteries.
Even legacy carmakers that seem to be fully embracing the transition to electrified transport seem to be learning a lesson in designing and producing electric cars. Jaguar, for one, recently confirmed that the I-PACE has a range of 234 miles per charge, lower than the company’s initial estimates for the vehicle. Porsche, on the other hand, is preparing to build the Taycan, but even workers at its plant in Stuttgart, Germany have to pitch in to make the car a reality. Porsche head of production Albrecht Reimold, for one, noted that employees at the Taycan’s upcoming factory would not have regular salary increases for the next few years as the Taycan’s factory gets constructed.
With legacy automakers revealing their highly-anticipated Tesla competitors, and with each company running into challenges of their own, analysts are starting to retire myth of the “Tesla Killer.” Last month, Toni Sacconaghi of Bernstein, a known skeptic of the electric car maker, stated that the Model 3 faces “no credible competition” from legacy auto until at least 2020. More recently, Berenberg analyst Alexander Haissl reiterated a Buy rating on TSLA stock with a $500 price target, stating that fears over competition from legacy automakers are overblown. Haissl further noted that Tesla’s driving ranges and vehicle efficiencies are well ahead of the competition.
Perhaps the most notable death knell on the Tesla Killer myth came from known TSLA short-seller-turned-long Andrew Left of Citron Research; who pointed out that “there is NO Tesla killer. Competition is nowhere to be found, and no electric vehicle is slated to launch at the Model 3 price point until 2021.”
Ultimately, Tesla’s prominent lead in the electric car market is the culmination of Elon Musk’s long-term play on electric car batteries and the company’s vertical integration. Since Tesla is producing its own battery cells from Panasonic’s lines in Gigafactory 1, the company is saving itself from any of the issues currently being faced by Audi as it struggles to reach a deal with LG Chem for the e-tron’s batteries, or Mercedes-Benz as it deals with uncertainties over the EQC’s battery warranty. The deep integration of Tesla’s hardware and software also creates a unified user experience that is not unlike Apple, allowing the company’s electric cars to perform at their best and preventing issues such as those being faced by Jaguar with regards to the I-PACE’s apparent inefficiency.
The death of the Tesla Killer and the improvements in Tesla’s Model 3 ramp, together with the announcement that the Q3 2018 earnings call would happen on Wednesday, appear to have improved investor sentiment for the company’s stock. On Tuesday, Tesla stock (NASDAQ:TSLA) rose $33.19, ending the day at $294.14, up 12.72% from Monday’s close.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just got the green light Starship has waited years for
The FAA has cleared Starship Flight 14, setting up SpaceX’s first orbital attempt on Monday.
SpaceX has cleared the last regulatory hurdle standing between Starship and its first trip to orbit. The Federal Aviation Administration issued the launch license for Starship Flight 14 late Saturday, keeping the mission on track for liftoff Monday, September 28, from Pad 2 at Starbase, Texas.
The 75 minute launch window opens at 7:15 a.m. Central, and Boca Chica Beach closures are also scheduled for September 29 and 30 as backup dates. This will be Starship’s first revenue generating mission.
The license was the missing piece after SpaceX completed a full wet dress rehearsal with Booster 21 and Ship 41 on September 24. At the time, the company said the flight remained on track pending regulatory approval. Because Flight 14 flies an orbital profile, the FAA had to sign off on a modified license that met its safety, payload and financial responsibility requirements.
Observers combing through the new FAA paperwork also noticed that lightning no longer appears among Starship’s listed launch hazards. If that holds, it matters more for where Starship is headed than for Monday’s attempt. Florida and Louisiana, home to LC-39A and the planned Starbase Louisiana site, see some of the most frequent lightning in the United States.
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
Flight 14 is the mission SpaceX has been building toward for months. Ship 41 will carry 26 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational V3 units to be deployed, and attempt roughly six orbits at about 275 kilometers over a flight lasting just under 10 hours. SpaceX says the ship will only perform its orbital insertion burn after flight controllers confirm enough hardware redundancy remains for the deorbit burn at the end of the mission. Ship 41 is targeting a splashdown in the Pacific west of Chile, while Super Heavy will return to the Gulf of Mexico.
The date carries some symbolism as well. A Monday launch would come 10 years and one day after Elon Musk first presented the Interplanetary Transport System, the design that became Starship, at the International Astronautical Congress in Guadalajara, Mexico.
SpaceX has not announced what comes next, but air traffic planning slides reported this week, list Flight 15 no earlier than October 19 and a first Starship launch from LC-39A in Florida no earlier than October 30. Both dates depend on how Monday goes.
Investor's Corner
Tesla Optimus Gen 3 shows off a cleaner, factory-ready design in new app discovery
Renders hidden inside Tesla’s Android app show Optimus Gen 3’s design before any official reveal.
Tesla may have accidentally given a first look at its newest Optimus Gen 3 humanoid robot when photos were found in the Tesla smartphone app.
Design files tucked inside a recent Android version of the Tesla app appear to show the third generation humanoid robot next to the older Gen 2.5 prototype. The assets were extracted from the app package by Tesla community member @wholemars, who posted the renders on X late Tuesday night before deleting them. The Tesla Newswire reshared the side by side comparison on Wednesday, and the images have circulated widely since.

Tesla Optimus Gen 2.5 vs Gen 3 comparison via @WholeMars on X
The files are labeled “gen3” and were built as models for Tesla app’s own interface, as validated directly by Grok to be official.
The comparison shows a robot that looks built for a factory line rather than a lab bench. Gen 2.5’s exposed mechanical linkages and gold plating on the knees and shins are gone. In their place, Gen 3 uses matte black fairings on the lower legs, paired with a more contoured champagne gold body. Flexible covers now seal the joint where the torso meets the upper thighs, keeping bearings and moving parts sealed from debris and unnecessary contact.
The body panels fit more tightly, and the hands, which Tesla has said carry 22 degrees of freedom, look far more refined than those on earlier units.
This most recent leak fills a gap Tesla has left open for most of the year. Elon Musk said on March 31 that Optimus 3 was walking around but needed “some finishing touches” before it could be shown, a delay Teslarati covered when Tesla missed its first quarter reveal target. Musk later said Tesla would hold the design back until closer to production, partly to keep competitors from copying it. No reveal date has been announced.
The app itself has been preparing for Optimus for months. In July, code in the Tesla app pointed to a dedicated robot phone key, a consent screen for collecting video and spatial data while Optimus works inside a home, and an alert system for low battery and mechanical faults. Finished 3D models of Gen 3 suggest the interface owners will eventually use is moving past placeholder code toward something Tesla intends to ship.
Manufacturing is moving in parallel. Tesla tore out the original Model S and Model X lines at Fremont this summer to make room for Optimus production, with a planned capacity of one million robots a year. At Giga Texas, the steel frame of a dedicated Optimus factory is nearing completion ahead of a targeted 2027 start, with Musk pointing to an eventual output of 10 million units annually.
Elon Musk
X changed how everyone gets paid, and this lawsuit shows why
X sued a Bitcoin account network over fake payouts as its creator pay model shifts
Elon Musk’s X has taken a Bitcoin-focused engagement ring to court, and the case doubles as a receipt for how differently the platform pays creators today. The company filed suit in the High Court of England and Wales against Vivek Kumar Sen and Zamyang Sherpa, alleging the pair ran six accounts, including @Vivek4real_, @Bitcoin_Teddy and @TrendingBitcoin, as one coordinated operation to fake the kind of engagement that used to translate directly into money.
According to the filing, first reported by Gizmodo, the accounts posted near identical “BREAKING” crypto headlines seconds apart, in one case 11 seconds, then had three more handles like, reply to and repost the material to manufacture what X called “a false appearance of genuine, human communication and interaction.” X says the scheme pulled in at least £207,384, about $278,000, and pegs its own investigation and remediation costs at another £75,000. The accounts were suspended August 18. X general counsel James Burnham announced the case on X last weekend, writing that the company “will act forcefully to protect our platform and the earnings of genuine creators.” Musk’s own reaction, posted shortly after, was three words: “Don’t mess with 𝕏.”
Don’t mess with 𝕏 https://t.co/HSmd5hL6aQ
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 21, 2026
The timing lines up with a a recent update to how X pays its creators. The program these accounts allegedly gamed, Creator Revenue Sharing, launched in mid 2023 and paid out based on how much a post got engaged with. Originality was never part of the formula, which is exactly how the platform ended up flooded with recycled clips, copy pasted “BREAKING” posts and replies engineered purely to farm reactions from paying subscribers.
X tried patching the model more than once, including an April cut to aggregator payouts and a March regional weighting change that Musk personally paused hours after it was announced. X retired Creator Revenue Sharing for good on September 7 and opened its replacement, Original Content Rewards, the next day.
Today, we’re launching Original Content Rewards.
The reality is that Revenue Sharing had reached a point where its incentives were misaligned. Creators should be focused on bringing net new content to the platform instead of maximizing payouts. We could have kept adding more… pic.twitter.com/VJIxqlPrjm
— Allegra Jacchia (@allegrajacchia) August 7, 2026
The new math is stricter. Payouts now come only from qualified impressions, meaning unique Home Timeline views from Premium subscribers where at least half the post is visible, and replies no longer count toward eligibility at all. Copied posts, reuploaded media and reposts without meaningful changes are explicitly excluded. Allegra Jacchia, senior product manager for Creators at SpaceXAI, which now runs X’s product and AI work following xAI’s acquisition of the platform, put it bluntly, saying the goal is to reward creators who bring original ideas and perspective, “not those who have become best at gaming the system.”
Read that way, the lawsuit isn’t really about six crypto accounts. It’s X putting a dollar figure on what the old incentive structure cost, then suing to collect it right as the new one goes live. For live updates on how the case and the new rewards program shake out, follow @Teslarati on X.