News
Tesla won’t be ‘king of the hill’ forever, but it will be for the foreseeable future
Tesla is the “king of the hill” in the electric vehicle sector, former company board member Steve Westly said on CNBC’s Power Lunch yesterday. However, Westly, who joined Tesla in 2007 and left several years later, doesn’t believe the automaker will remain at the helm of the EV industry forever. Driven by growing competition from both low-end and high-end automakers, Westly says Tesla’s time at the top is dependent on its competition, because other markets, like Europe, have pushed Tesla to the wayside in favor of other companies.
While it is safe to say Tesla won’t be at the top of the EV industry “forever,” it is certainly also safe to say that they will lead the sector for a considerable amount of time. With legacy automakers dragging their feet and releasing electric vehicle models for the first time in 2021 and beyond, they sit years behind Tesla, whose only focus is building sustainable, high-performance battery electric vehicles. Meanwhile, companies like Ford and GM continue to drag their feet in the mission of developing a lineup of EVs, and European car companies face issues related to production, transitioning away from ICE, and software. Volkswagen is the automaker that comes to mind with the latter issue.
Westly cited GM going all-electric by 2035, Volkswagen indicating that they’re “all in” on EVs, and Volvo, who announced an all-EV lineup by 2030, as indicators that Tesla won’t be the king forever.
But what have any of these car companies done to prove that Tesla won’t be on the top in 2030? 2035? 2050, even?
It is true that Tesla has fallen a tad in terms of European EV sales figures, but it’s not for no reason. Tesla has not yet started the operation of Giga Berlin, its introductory European production facility that could bring at least 500,000 cars to the market every year. Refusing to export Model Y variants from the United States or China, Europe is stuck with the Model S, Model X, and the Model 3, but only for a few months as Giga Berlin is set to begin production during Summer 2021.
While it is true that Tesla is facing competition from both economical EV brands and luxury manufacturers, this fact alone is a testament to the wide range of EVs that the company is able to offer. Not only is Tesla manufacturing the Model 3 and Model Y, which are more than affordable to many families across the world, but it is also making a point to continue the production and sale of its two, more luxurious models: the Model S and Model X. Not necessarily a huge contributor to the company’s yearly production and delivery targets, both of the vehicles were put off as “sentimental” projects by Elon Musk several years ago. However, a recent refresh to both of these cars seems to indicate that the flagship Tesla vehicles are not going anywhere anytime soon.
In the United States, Tesla reigns supreme with the Model 3 and Model Y. In China, the only car to dethrone the Model 3 is an inexpensive, low-range GM project known as the Wuling HongGuang Mini EV that boasts between 80 and 110 miles of range per charge. In Europe, Tesla was once the “King of the Hill.” But, the lack of a production facility ultimately dethroned the company’s title as the highest-selling EV brand on the continent most thirsty for electric powertrains. When Giga Berlin begins production, this will likely change, and Tesla will reopen its potential to compete with the brands that have ruled the European EV sector for the last few years.
-
Tesla has continued to grow and expand its footprint through a few challenging years, which indicates that, despite the proven adversity that will likely always exist, the company is robust enough to deflect most of the challenges that come its way. Despite production bottlenecks in 2017 with the Model 3, continued issues in 2018, and the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, Tesla has sustained a growth pattern that most automotive startups can only dream about. The point that Westly made about Tesla not being “King of the Hill” forever is true, but the foreseeable future belongs to Tesla. Until a company comes along and proves otherwise, Elon Musk’s EV company will remain at the helm, as long as it continues to develop a series of mind-blowing EV products that offer range, performance, and aesthetics that are unmatched by any car company within the last decade.
What do you think? Let us know in the comments below, Tweet me or e-mail me.
https://youtu.be/eeizzrlFaZM
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.
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.
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.
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
