Lucid’s unveiling of the Air was impressive; there is no doubt about that. It has all the ingredients for a great electric car: Speed, power, capability, luxuriousness, range, quality engineering, and a team of highly-dedicated engineers who are working to improve upon the already solid foundation that the company has laid down.
Immediately, what thought came to my mind while watching the presentation was, “They’re legit.” It is evident that Lucid was taking things seriously and was not using a bunch of fancy B-roll and suspenseful music to sell a product that wasn’t in production. No way. Lucid was dead serious about their car, and they recognize that until production begins and the Air starts being delivered to consumers, they haven’t accomplished a damn thing.
That’s a refreshing mindset in today’s day and age. To be honest, I understand a lot of companies are coming out and saying that they’re the next big thing. They’re the next Tesla, and their EV platform is the one that is going to solve all the problems.
These claims have come up empty time and time again. But Lucid definitely took a different approach. While describing and laying out the Air piece by piece for viewers to gauge thoughts on, the company’s CEO Peter Rawlinson was vocally supportive of Lucid’s efforts this far. However, he knows that the hard work is far from over. Just ask Elon Musk, who called Model 3 manufacturing “production hell” a few years ago.
That is what is super respectable about Lucid. They know that production is the real test, and it is one that never ends. After manufacturing begins and cars are delivered, there will be room for celebration, and there will be time to look at the accomplishments over the last five years. Until then, it’s hard work and grinding it out.
But it begs the question, can Lucid catch up to Tesla? Is this possible?
This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
Tesla has a considerably-sized head start by a few years over Lucid, and Tesla has already been given the nod that it has a multi-year advantage over some of the biggest companies in the world. Volkswagen and Audi have both admitted it in the past, but their focus has not primarily been on EVs. Gas cars have filled the minds of VW CEOs for years.
Ever since VW has started manufacturing the ID.3 and ID.4, they have been plagued with a variety of issues that have been software related. Volkswagen has fantastic engineering, and the problems they have faced have been hindering the company’s ability to release a quality EV promptly.
Now, VW has an extensive and successful history in automotive manufacturing. While they have only a few years of experience with developing electric cars, they have still stumbled from time to time, and this is after having so many years of manufacturing experience.
Lucid could experience some of those problems when the production of the Air begins. These issues could be a big problem because they may delay the ultimate delivery date of the Dream Edition, which is Spring 2021.
However, there is a chance that Lucid has worked out all of the kinks. Let’s not forget that Lucid didn’t spring up overnight. It was originally Atieva and was founded in 2007. It seems that a lot of the significant work was done when Peter Rawlinson came on, who worked for Tesla and helped with the Model S.
Rawlinson is a seasoned and experienced veteran, and he has done some awe-inspiring things with Lucid thus far. But is there a chance that Lucid can catch up to Tesla? Sure, but what proof is there that they have a chance?
First off, it is the range. 517 miles of range in the Air, which is impressive considering it is only a 113 kWh battery pack. This is an unheard-of amount of traveling distance in an EV and is considerably more than the Model S’ 402-mile rating. Next, the performance of the Air is critical to the company’s competition with Tesla. The Air is faster than the Model S Performance, but will it be faster than the Plaid Mode Model S? It is unknown, but many seem to think that the newly-engineered flagship sedan from Tesla will be the perfect answer to the Air. Whether that becomes a reality or not remains to be seen.
What is ultimately essential with the development of the Air is we can see that real EV manufacturers are coming to light with competitive products. For so long, legacy automakers have pumped out half-hearted attempts at producing an electric car. They throw a low kWh battery pack into a sedan, give it 100 miles of range and call it “the next big thing.” News flash: it isn’t. If you want to compete in this sector, you have to give consumers a reason to want your vehicle over a Tesla, which is really the benchmark at this point, especially since the Model 3 is widely affordable.
Lucid answered a lot of those questions on Wednesday night. They proved that their car is worth it, and they have plenty of things that could be “better” than what Tesla has to offer. But, it might not be for long, because Elon Musk is the master at taking the wind from a competitor’s sails when a new product is launched.
In reality, anything can happen. But the good news is the fact that Tesla now has a real competitor who seems to be serious about EV manufacturing. There is no goal way down the road for production, and their car works and is tested. With the competition, Tesla could see its best days yet, and Lucid could ultimately be another driving force behind widespread EV adoption.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!
Tesla short sellers won big following the company’s massive fall on Wall Street after it reported subpar Earnings on Wednesday.
Tesla short sellers collected about $4.12 billion in single-day profits on Thursday, according to Bloomberg. Shares fell as much as 15 percent during Thursday’s session. It closed as one of the worst days for Tesla on Wall Street in the past three years.
Investors sold off the stock after Tesla said it would aggressively direct its spending toward AI and its Optimus robot project. The company had record revenues, which were driven by one of the strongest quarters in terms of vehicle deliveries in company history.
However, it missed EPS estimates by reporting just $0.33, a far cry from the $0.53 analysts expected.
S3 Partners reported that about 3 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock is sold short. Managing Director at S3, Ihor Dusaniwsky, provided the short seller’s potential profit, as well as another figure: shorts have likely had paper gains of $8.92 billion this year, as Tesla shares are down 30 percent in 2026.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla has burned short sellers many times in the past, but the company’s latest Earnings Call was a chance for those skeptics to taste some payback. Although the company gave some very transparent information regarding future projects, the rollout of Robotaxi, Optimus, and Semi, many investors took their profits on Thursday.
Notable short sellers like Michael Burry have been transparent about their skepticism around Tesla shares. Burry just revealed three weeks ago that he had opened up a new short on the stock, stating he shorted Tesla shares at $416.22. “Happy it jumped back to this level,” he said in a blog post.
At the time of publication, Tesla shares were down about 3 percent and the stock was trading at $309.92.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla short sellers win big after shares fall after earnings
Tesla door handle saga gets its latest chapter and a big change is coming
