News
Tesla Model 3 has an important upper middle class audience to please
As Elon Musk continues to focus on his top 3 priorities for Tesla, emphasis on preparing for Model 3 production – arguably the most important vehicle in the company’s history – couldn’t be more pertinent.
The Model 3 will be emblematic of Tesla’s capacity to offer a highly safe and efficient means of transport for a middle to upper middle class segment that largely depends on vehicle reliability in order to commute. It looks like these upwardly mobile folks are buying into that Tesla promise (pun intended): by October 2016, nearly 400,000 reservations had already been placed on the Tesla Model 3.
Starting at $35,000 before incentives, the Model 3 will achieve a minimum of 215 miles of range per charge and has been designed to attain the highest safety ratings in every category. According to the Tesla website, “The Model 3 combines real world range, performance, safety, and spaciousness into a premium sedan that only Tesla can build.” Potential Model 3 buyers make a reservation through the company’s website by putting down a $1000 deposit. The Model 3 has a starting price of about half the base price of the flagship Tesla Model S and has the size and stance of the Mazda 3.
Jessica Caldwell, an Edmunds.com analyst, argues that, if Tesla Motors wants “to bring the EV to the mass market, they need the Model 3 to be successful.”
The Model 3 will be a sedan, although other versions may one day include a Model Y compact SUV. Base rear-wheel-drive Model 3 vehicles are expected to achieve at least 215-miles of range; all-wheel drive will be offered, and a larger battery capacity with longer range is expected. Tesla’s Full Self-Driving Capability is also expected to be a standard offering.
“This is their chance to prove that they are not just a specialized niche automaker, but actually a long-term volume automaker,” said Karl Brauer, an analyst at Kelley Blue Book. “They have to establish that they can build a high-quality volume vehicle.”
Being upper middle class is a swirling confluence of financial comfort, identity, dreams, and lifestyle options. The Tesla Model 3 may very well become one of the most significant markers of status stability, with its associated components of having a college education, white-collar work, economic security, and home ownership. Soon, many upwardly mobile consumers will be adding “owning a Tesla” to that definition. Indeed, fewer than 5% of reservation holders are likely to choose a minimalist entry level Model 3 car. By contrast, close to 7% say they intend to check every available check box in the Model 3 Design Configurator once it becomes available.
If there’s an option available, the future upscale Tesla Model 3 audience will get it, as the number of options will be new indicators of levels of wealth and class.
Of course, these soon-to-be Tesla owners will have high expectations for all aspects of the Tesla process. First production of Model 3 is still scheduled for mid 2017, while delivery estimates for new reservations are expected to take place mid 2018 or later. Musk admitted that Tesla had hubris in designing and engineering the complicated Model X. As a result, Tesla learned a lot about selling, building, and delivering, which it applied to the Model 3 with much greater production streamlining. “With any new technology, it takes multiple iterations and economies of scale before you can make it affordable,” Musk has said. A mass-market car “was only possible to do . . . after going through the prior steps.”
The Model 3 is the next step in the learning process, but Tesla has done the preparation.
The Model 3 was unveiled in March of 2016 with operational prototype cars. In anticipation of much higher delivery numbers associated with the Model 3, Tesla hired former Audi executive Peter Hochholdinger as its Vice President of Vehicle Production. Hochholdinger had been in charge of production for the A4, A5, and Q5 vehicles, with around 400,000 vehicles per year under his watch. He should be a key asset as Tesla looks to roll out Model 3s in quantities that far exceed the number of cars the company has made to date.
Tesla has dealt lately with some supplier issues and has brought production of some components in-house. Other components, however, continue to be manufactured by established companies. For example, reports indicate that the Model 3’s center touchscreen will be supplied by LG Display.
By spring 2017, Model 3 photos and videos — shot both by bystanders and insiders — should start to circulate. Eventually, too, the government will need to ascertain the safety of Model 3 via crash-testing, and resulting reports will have a big impact on eventual delivery dates.
The Model 3 sedan will use some of the same glass technology that the company is using for its solar roof tiles, which should introduce an upper middle class audience to new ways of thinking about residential energy systems. The Model 3 is said to accelerate with an alluring still rush. It is just that rush— as well as zero-emissions and self-driving capability— that the upper middle class market has been awaiting.
Elon Musk
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.
ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.
The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.
Additionally, ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.
The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.
Elon Musk
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.
The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.
Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):
“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”
Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.
Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:
“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”
This is before supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 19, 2026
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges
Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.
Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.
Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.
Elon Musk
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.
NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.
Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.
Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.
The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.
The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.
Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.
The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
