Connect with us

News

Can Lucid overtake Tesla as the best EV brand?

Credit: Lucid Motors

Published

on

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.

Credit: Lucid Motors

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

(Credit: Volkswagen)

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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!

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

Lifestyle

NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story

The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.

Published

on

By

The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.

Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot

Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.

The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.

The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.

The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Lucid denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

Advertisement

Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”

Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”

Napoli said:

“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.

Advertisement

As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.

We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.

My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.

I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”

Advertisement

It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.

Advertisement

Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.

Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.

The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.

One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.

These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.

To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.

At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.

Advertisement

Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line

By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.

The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.

Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

Advertisement

It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.

The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.

In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.

Advertisement
Continue Reading