The auto industry saw something historic happen this past week in Germany. In a rare act of unity, the leaders of the country’s big three Automakers; Volkswagen CEO Herbert Diess, Daimler CEO Dieter Zetsche, and BMW CEO Harald Krüger, all agreed that the future of German auto is the electric car. Over the next decade, each CEO would be pushing their respective companies to shift and embrace the idea of an electrified fleet.
No (more) compromises
The deal did not come easy. The Volkswagen CEO caused waves among German automakers and suppliers after he called for the widespread adoption of electric cars and a mass investment in EV charging infrastructure. The VW CEO’s proposal was bold: he wanted the German auto industry to focus solely on EVs, and he warned that he would be “evaporating billions” to do so. The proposal was met with a lot of criticism, from both fellow automakers and suppliers. In response, Volkswagen threatened to leave the industry lobby group Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) because of its refusal to commit to an electric-first strategy.
BMW CEO Harald Krüger was particularly critical of Volkswagen’s proposal, which resulted in what industry insiders described as heated talks between the two executives. Krüger’s reservations are understandable, as Volkswagen’s demands do not favor BMW. One of Diess’ requests called for free charging benefits for electric car owners whose vehicles cost less than 20,000 euros. This benefits Volkswagen, which is aiming to produce an affordable electric car, but not companies like BMW and Daimler, who, on average, make more expensive vehicles.
Despite these headwinds, a short but meaningful call last Wednesday sealed the deal for Das Auto’s electric car initiatives. Insiders from news publication Handelsblatt noted that after ten minutes, the Volkswagen, BMW, and Daimler CEOs were practically on the same page, and by the end of the 40-minute conference call, the three executives have found a middle ground. The representative of the VDA dubbed the meeting as “constructive,” and the lobby group has stated that it’s expecting the three manufacturers to work out a consensus paper in the near future.
Apart from advocating for electromobility, The companies also decided to forego commitments to other forms of alternative propulsion, such as hydrogen fuel cells. In a statement to media publication welt.de, BMW member of the board Klaus Fröhlich mentioned that a breakthrough in hydrogen fuel cell cars is unlikely within the next decade, particularly as charging infrastructure for electric vehicles is growing at a rate where long-distance travel will soon be a non-issue. “The probability of a hydrogen infrastructure developing in parallel is very low,” Fröhlich said.
A LinkedIn post written by the Volkswagen CEO outlined his points as follows. “In order to stop global warming, there is no way around the Paris climate targets. To do this, the car must become cleaner as soon as possible and CO2-free by 2050 at the latest. E-mobility is the only technology that is feasible from today’s perspective. I am convinced that if we concentrate all our energies on the leading technology of electromobility, we will achieve both: the car will become cleaner in the short term and CO2-free in the long term. And the car country Germany will be the world leader in driving the future,” Diess wrote.
All According to the (Master) Plan
While Germany’s commitment to electromobility is undoubtedly impressive, it should be noted that the developments and milestones of the electric motor and electric car batteries over the past years are the catalysts that initiated this change. Electric mobility advocate Auke Hoekstra notes that electric motors are pretty much the only superior alternative to the internal combustion engine today, in the way that they are smaller, lighter, cheaper, practically maintenance-free, and around four times more efficient. It should also be noted that it took the efforts of a daring Silicon Valley electric car company to show the industry that electric mobility is feasible.
Elon Musk has always noted that Tesla exists to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy. Back in 2006, he posted his first Master Plan, which involved the creation of electric cars that are so compelling for car buyers; the behemoth that is traditional auto will start shifting its efforts to electric mobility. Tesla’s first car, the original Roadster, was mostly a proof-of-concept in this sense, as it is a vehicle that simply proved the idea that electric cars can be just as fast, sexy, and desirable as the next Porsche or Ferrari. The Model S and Model X took the company’s mission further, proving that electric cars are not only comparable to their fossil fuel-powered counterparts; they could be far better. Loaded to the teeth with tech, the sedan and crossover (hence the Model “S” and “X” moniker) were successful, but they still only catered to the higher end of the market.
Tesla shook the auto industry with the Model 3, a vehicle that practically took the company and its CEO inches away from ruin. Elon Musk described the Model 3 ramp as one of the most painful periods of his career, and objectively speaking, he was correct. Musk bet Tesla’s entire future in the Model 3, and if it wasn’t for his own willingness to sacrifice his own comfort (Musk returned to sleeping under a table in Tesla’s Fremont factory at the height of the Model 3’s “production hell”), clever, out-of-the-box solutions from remarkable executives like current President of Automotive Jerome Guillen (who came up with the idea of creating another Model 3 assembly line inside a sprung structure), and the insane efforts of Tesla’s workers across the board, the company would have fallen. Months later, the Model 3 would become the United States’ best-selling luxury vehicle of 2018, and within the first quarter of 2019, the electric sedan would begin to take over Europe and China. At this point, it is no exaggeration to state that the Model 3, with its track-capable motors and battery, is pretty much the gold standard of electric vehicles today.
A Mission Achieved
With the behemoth that is German Auto now awakened and committing itself fully towards electric mobility, will Tesla finally be trampled under the giants’ feet? Not necessarily. Tesla still functions like a Silicon Valley startup, moving fast, making mistakes, and fixing errors on the go. The result of this work culture, coupled with extensive experience with the electric motor and batteries, is a carmaker that moves incredibly fast. Thus, by the time the German automakers come up with vehicles that can challenge the Model 3 in its current iteration in terms of tech, features, and specs, Tesla would probably have improved its vehicles further. It’s incredible to see traditional automakers finally commit to electric cars, but in terms of beating Tesla, it would suffice to say that it would be very difficult to trample a company that stubbornly refuses to stay still.
When asked by 60 Minutes host Lesley Stahl if he would be open to other carmakers beating Tesla at its own game, Elon Musk candidly stated that as long as the world’s shift to electric transportation is secured, he would be able to sleep well at night. “If somebody comes and makes a better electric car than Tesla and it’s so much better than ours that we can’t sell our cars, and we go bankrupt, I still think that’s a good thing for the world,” Musk said, to the surprise of the veteran host. This is one of the things that is fascinating about Tesla and Elon Musk. Both the company and its CEO are fighting tooth and nail every day to meet its next ridiculously difficult target; but beyond these struggles, Musk and Tesla are fully aware that the fight is much bigger than them. A future that is not dependent on fossil fuels is a far bigger cause.
It took a while before Germany’s biggest car conglomerates saw the writing on the wall. Now that they have, it would not be surprising at all if the auto industry does start a full embrace of electric mobility. China is already waist-deep in its EV initiatives, and with Germany doing the same, it would be difficult for the internal combustion engine to remain relevant in the decades to come. One could only hope that the United States’ big three, Ford, GM, and Fiat-Chrysler, will follow. Tesla is already based in the US, and its patents are open-sourced. At this point, the writing is now in big, bold letters, and it would be foolish to insist that electric mobility is “not yet ready” or “not feasible.” As for Tesla, one can only hope that the company had learned its lessons with the Model 3 as it attempts to produce the Model Y, an even more ambitious vehicle that will compete in one of the world’s most lucrative markets.
Elon Musk said today on X that Teslas will start to learn your individual preferences. This is something that he seemed to hint toward earlier this month when he said parking was by far the biggest reason drivers intervene with Full Self-Driving.
Musk made the comment in response to notable Tesla influencer Whole Mars, who said that his vehicle will sometimes disobey the settings he has enabled for his car. He responded to the post, stating that “The car will start to remember your specific interventions and match each person’s individual preferences.”
The car will start to remember your specific interventions and match each person’s individual preferences
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 18, 2026
This is something that could be perhaps one of the biggest ways Tesla could minimize or even work closer toward eliminating interventions altogether. While FSD does a lot of things really well, many people intervene a vast majority of the time not due to major or critical safety errors.
Instead, many take over because the car is doing something that they do not like as a preference; it might park in a parking spot that is not preferred by the driver, it might linger too long in the left lane on the highway (a personal favorite), or it could even take a route that the driver does not like.
These all lead to interventions, but they are not triggered by a major safety issue. Instead, it’s just preference.
READ OUR REVIEW OF TESLA’S LATEST FSD VERSION:
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.5 Early Impressions: new features and early performance
If Teslas could start to learn the personal preferences of the person who owns them, interventions will truly begin to be less frequent. Some of this is already pretty evident, in my opinion. Teslas use a neural network to learn behaviors and accumulate data to improve performance.
For months now, we’ve tracked FSD’s performance at “Except Right Turn” stop signs, something that is very common in Pennsylvania, but many of our readers located in other parts of the U.S. have never heard of. FSD handles one Except Right Turn stop sign very well, one that I travel past frequently. Others that I do not navigate through as often do not have as confident a performance. It seems like the cars might already be doing this to an extent.
🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3 proceeds through an Except Right Turn Stop Sign pic.twitter.com/YemRSlens7
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 8, 2026
That example is also for something that is a street sign and not necessarily a driver preference; however, I still feel it is worth mentioning because it only handles that commonly passed Except Right Turn stop sign with true confidence. Others it still seems to struggle with.
This could be one of Tesla’s big moves toward full autonomy, and it could be a pathway to truly unsupervised driving. Every day, millions of cars on the road travel at a human driver’s personal preferences with no incident. Why can’t autonomous vehicles still cater to a passenger’s preferences while being autonomous? Tesla seems to have the idea that it would be possible.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has sharply criticized legacy media outlets for what he describes as selective and biased reporting on vehicle accidents involving Tesla. In a recent X post, DeSantis questioned why headlines routinely spotlight the Tesla brand in crash stories, even when human error is the clear cause, while similar incidents with other automakers often receive generic treatment.
A prime example is the June 19, 2026, fatal crash in Katy, Texas. A Tesla Model 3 driven by Michael Butler struck a brick home at high speed, killing 76-year-old Martha Avila inside. Initial reports and headlines prominently featured “Tesla crash” and referenced the driver’s claim that an automated driving-assistance system was engaged.
Many outlets quickly speculated that Full Self-Driving or Autopilot were the cause of the crash, immediately blaming the suites for the accident shortly after it happened.
However, Tesla responded shortly after the accident with vehicle data that showed Butler manually overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100 percent, reaching 73 MPH in a residential area, more than double the speed limit. The accelerator remained floored after impact.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) later confirmed these findings, and Butler now faces manslaughter charges. His phone searches also included queries like “Tesla FSD too timid,” suggesting he may have intervened aggressively. Despite this, many headlines continued to center Tesla’s technology rather than the driver’s actions.
DeSantis highlighted a Washington Post headline, which was labeled, “Newly released photo shows wreckage of Tesla crash that killed grandmother.”
Do legacy media outlets typically use headlines involving the make of a car in a crash or is that only for Tesla?
It would be one thing if the self-driving malfunctioned but the crash was purely human-induced.
Seems like these outlets want to associate Tesla with crashes as… pic.twitter.com/EmfyeYiuv6
— Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) July 17, 2026
The subheadline noted the driver overrode assistance and floored the accelerator, yet the brand name dominated the framing. He asked whether legacy outlets typically name the make of a car in routine crashes or reserve that treatment for Tesla to push a narrative.
This pattern appears widespread. Crashes involving Ford, Chevrolet, or Toyota vehicles frequently appear as “pickup truck slams into home” or “fatal car crash kills pedestrian” without brand specifics, especially absent new technology angles.
High-profile Ford F-150 or Chevy Silverado incidents tied to large sales volumes often escape brand-callout scrutiny. In contrast, Tesla stories consistently lead with the manufacturer, amplifying perceptions of risk despite data showing strong overall safety performance:
🚨 Why do Tesla Owners get so defensive over the narrative of crashes involving Teslas? https://t.co/aX7ogtjTCR pic.twitter.com/KO4QWaLOKl
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 24, 2026
Tesla’s own 2025 Impact Report indicates vehicles using FSD logged 0.19 major incidents per million miles, roughly eight times fewer than the U.S. average. Models like the Model Y also rank among the safest in IIHS and NHTSA testing for occupant protection. Critics argue disproportionate coverage ignores these statistics and driver behavior factors, such as younger or more aggressive Tesla owners in some studies.
DeSantis frames this as part of a broader political agenda against innovative American companies like Tesla. By consistently naming Tesla while downplaying others, media outlets risk eroding public trust and shaping perceptions detached from the evidence of human error in most cases.
As autonomous technology evolves across the industry, consistent and factual reporting will be essential to separate real safety concerns from narrative-driven coverage.
Tesla entered two new markets this week by advancing its presence in Latvia (Europe) and officially launching operations in Uruguay (South America), marking a rapid dual-continent expansion.
These moves underscore the company’s strategy to tap into emerging EV markets with supportive policies, renewable energy grids, and growing demand for sustainable transport.
Latvia: Strengthening the Baltic Footprint
In Latvia, Tesla has built on its earlier registration of Tesla Latvia SIA in late 2025 with recent steps toward full operations, including job postings for a service center and representation in Riga. This aligns with broader Baltic expansion following Lithuania’s model of pop-up stores and service centers.
Coming to Latvia https://t.co/XNkQQJ2O6a pic.twitter.com/yS9kpcNky1
— Tesla Europe, Middle East & Africa (@teslaeurope) July 17, 2026
EV penetration in Latvia stands at around 7 percent for BEVs in new passenger car registrations. 2025 data showed 1,602 BEVs out of about 22,500 total, or 7.1 percent, with combined plug-ins nearing 19 percent. Growth has been steady but below the European average, supported by government subsidies and infrastructure development. Tesla models like the Model 3 lead local EV registrations.
Vehicles for the Latvian market will likely be sourced from Gigafactory Berlin or Gigafactory Shanghai. Charging infrastructure is robust for the region as well, with over 400- 2,000 public points, with Tesla Superchargers in Riga, Jūrmala, and along Via Baltica routes offering up to 250 kW.
Uruguay: Third South American Country
Tesla teased its Uruguay arrival with “Estamos llegando,” or, “We are arriving,” on social media, followed by an official presentation scheduled for mid-July.
Hola Uruguay 🇺🇾
Nuestros Model 3 y Model Y están cada vez mas cerca! pic.twitter.com/FR41fsA7um
— Tesla Latinoamérica (@Tesla_LatAm) June 30, 2026
The company established Tesla Uruguay SAS, homologated Model 3 and Model Y (three versions each), and appointed local leadership. This makes Uruguay Tesla’s third official South American market after Chile and Colombia.
Uruguay boasts one of Latin America’s highest EV penetrations, with battery-electric vehicles exceeding 20 percent market share recently, driven by tax incentives, high fuel prices, and a nearly 95-100 percent renewable electricity grid. Hundreds of Teslas already operate via grey imports, but official sales bring warranties, service, and support.
Vehicles will be imported from Gigafactory Shanghai, enabling competitive pricing for Model 3 and Model Y. Charging plans include Supercharger development alongside existing infrastructure, leveraging the country’s green energy advantage for affordable operation.
Tesla Superchargers follow Model 3 and Model Y to South American country
Tesla’s Dual Continent Expansion
Tesla’s simultaneous push into Latvia and Uruguay demonstrates efficient scaling: prioritizing service and infrastructure first, then direct sales in high-potential niches. In Europe, it fills Baltic gaps; in Latin America, it counters Chinese dominance while leveraging renewables.
This dual move signals Tesla’s ambition to accelerate global EV adoption amid varying regional paces. By addressing local needs, like subsidies in Latvia or incentives and green grids in Uruguay, Tesla not only boosts volumes but advances its mission of sustainable energy.
For investors and consumers, it highlights resilience and opportunity in diverse markets, potentially paving the way for further growth in underserved regions. With strong fundamentals in both, these entries could yield long-term gains as EV transitions mature worldwide.
Elon Musk says your Tesla will start to learn your individual preferences
Ron DeSantis calls out media bias in Tesla crash coverage
