Connect with us

Investor's Corner

Tesla shorts drive Pulitzer-winning journalist off Twitter after glowing review of Model 3 Performance

Published

on

The Tesla Model 3 recently got its first professional review from a veteran auto journalist. In an article published in the Wall Street Journal, Pulitzer-winning journalist Dan Neil gave the Model 3 performance a glowing review, stating that the car is a “magnificent” piece of automotive engineering that is “representative of the next step in the history of autos.”

Tesla is currently offering test drives for the Model 3 Performance in selected showrooms across the United States. Key publications such as CNET‘s Roadshow also posted teasers about an upcoming review of the vehicle. Based on Neil’s report, the Model 3 Performance is being touted as one of the electric car company’s best vehicles as of date — one that can push Tesla to new heights.

Dan Neil’s review of the Model 3 Performance was largely positive. Though he stated that the car would have performed better had it been equipped with better tires, and he likened the vehicle’s 15-inch touchscreen as the “broken flower pot on Mona Lisa’s head,” Neil was nonetheless impressed by the electric sedan. Neil noted in his WSJ article that while Tesla as a company has its own fair share of issues, including those fueled by CEO Elon Musk’s actions on Twitter, the Model 3 Performance is a star, considering its speed, raw power, and handling. Neil’s observations about the car’s performance mirrored some of the conclusions of Sandy Munro, who conducted a teardown of the Long Range RWD Model 3. Just like Neil, Munro gave a positive review of the vehicle’s capabilities, even stating that whoever designed and tuned the Model 3’s suspension could easily be an “F1 Prince.”

Neil’s positive review did not sit well with Tesla’s staunchest critics. His Twitter feed, for one, was quickly filled with vitriol. The comments section of his Model 3 Performance review in the Wall Street Journal were filled with much of the same criticism as well. Neil defended himself on both places, and on Twitter, he ended up crossing tweets with some notable Tesla short-sellers, including Mark Spiegel and the vocal MontanaSkeptic1, who recently debated Tesla bull Galileo Russell on the Quoth the Raven podcast. Over the weekend, and amidst what appeared to be an overwhelming amount of negativity from Tesla shorts, Neil opted to delete his Twitter account. Fellow automotive reporter Urvaksh Karkaria posted a tweet later on claiming that Neil decided to let his Twitter account go because of the responses to his Model 3 Performance review.

Advertisement
-

Screenshots of Neil’s final hours on Twitter were captured by members of the Tesla Motors Club, and from what could be seen in the images, the Pulitzer-winning journalist was engaging Spiegel and the MontanaSkeptic1 before he deleted his account. Both Tesla shorts seemed to have taken issue about why Neil has not reviewed the Jaguar I-PACE yet, as well as the $35,000 Standard Range RWD Model 3. One of Neil’s responses to Spiegel also gave the impression that the Tesla short was suggesting the vehicle given to the journalist was “prepped” especially for him (a notion that Neil described as having “no possibility”).

Dan Neil’s Twitter feed, filled with responses to Tesla shorts, before he deleted his account. [Source: Twitter]

Overall, it is unfortunate to see journalists of Dan Neil’s caliber be subjected to criticism simply because he wrote down his opinions about the Tesla Model 3 Performance. Neil, after all, might be friendly with Musk, but he is never one to shy away from questioning the CEO’s statements. Back in 2011 alone, Neil made a bet with Musk about when the company could start producing the Model S. In an article in the Los Angeles Times, Neil described Musk’s timetable for the all-electric sedan as an “audacious timeline that makes many in the car industry roll their eyes.”

Tesla might be controversial amidst Elon Musk’s occasional Twitter outbursts and the company’s tendency to meet its target timelines later than expected, but at the end of the day, the vehicles it produces ultimately speak for themselves. After all, professional reviewers like Neil, who are veterans of the auto industry, are praising the Model 3 Performance not because of Elon Musk’s rockstar status, but because of its own merits. And that, ultimately bodes well for Tesla.

Advertisement
-

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk breaks his silence on the Starlink impact to Ukraine drones

Musk says the US military and president set Starshield limits, not SpaceX, amid Ukraine complaints.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk says the speed limit cutting out Ukraine’s military Starlink terminals is not SpaceX’s decision. In a post on X Wednesday, Musk wrote that “Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.” He added that Starlink is a commercial service limited to civilian or defensive activities and “cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.”

He was replying to Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s former defense minister, who had thanked Musk for restoring connectivity at speeds up to 160 km/h and said removing the Starshield limit entirely is “now critical for Ukraine’s defense.”

The complaint started Tuesday night, when Ukrainian officials said military terminals began losing service above roughly 100 mph. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said the defense forces got no warning and several missions were disrupted, as Teslarati reported earlier Wednesday. The 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at speeds well below the limit, which made drones harder to control. Poland’s foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asked Musk on X whether he is “playing politics with your products again.”

Advertisement
-

That is why the Starlink and Starshield distinction matters. SpaceX introduced Starshield in 2022 as the government version of Starlink, with an initial focus on Earth observation, communications and hosted payloads. It won a Space Force contract in 2023 with a $70 million ceiling. In December 2024, the Pentagon moved Ukraine’s terminals onto Starshield, covering about 3,000 units across two contracts. Ukraine’s military connections therefore run through a service that Musk now says sits under Washington’s control.

SpaceX pitches subscription model for Trump’s Golden Dome

While Musk’s post describes who holds authority, it does not infer that anyone ordered the limit, and neither SpaceX nor the US government has confirmed who set it. Ukrainian officials have pointed to the timing, which follows President Trump’s push for an energy ceasefire and Musk’s Saturday post that “Zelensky has gone too far.” The BBC noted Trump denied threatening to restrict intelligence sharing with Kyiv, and no evidence has been presented that Washington requested the cap.

The episode also revives a promise from 2025. After Poland accused him of threatening Ukraine’s access, Musk said Starlink “will never turn off its terminals” and would not be used as a bargaining chip. Poland has since supplied more than 29,000 terminals to Ukraine. Teslarati also covered Kyiv’s search for Starlink alternatives in 2025, and the latest dispute gives that search new urgency.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet

Tesla opens its Q3 earnings Q&A, and Cybercab, Robotaxi, Optimus and regulators loom over October 21.

Published

on

By

Tesla has opened its shareholder question portal for the Q3 2026 earnings call, with the Say Q&A page already listing questions. Investors have until 4:00 p.m. EDT on October 20 to submit and vote on what management should answer.

The call is set for Wednesday, October 21. Tesla will post results after the market closes, with a live webcast at 4:30 p.m. CT, or 5:30 p.m. ET, through its investor relations site.

Say ranks questions by the number of shares behind the votes, which gives institutional holders extra weight over the retail crowd.

Ahead of Q2, retail investors asked why Robotaxi growth had stalled, when Cybercab would start customer rides, and where the Optimus Gen 3 ramp stood, while an institutional holder asked how Tesla and SpaceX would split Terafab duties. Cybercab has since answered one of those. Tesla said last week it has 300 plus Cybercabs serving Austin, up eightfold in 30 days, with Dallas named as the next city. The questions now are likely to move from when to how fast.

There is also a regulatory question hanging over the call. NHTSA has demanded sworn answers on how the pedal free Cybercab was certified against federal safety standards, with responses due October 30, nine days after the call. Whether an analyst raises it live is unknown, but it is the kind of exposure that tends to find its way into a Q&A.

The numbers will not be the main draw. Tesla already reported 486,532 deliveries and 13.7 GWh of storage for the quarter. Consensus sits around 43 to 45 cents per share on roughly $27.8 billion in revenue, according to Zacks, after a Q2 report that missed on EPS. Goldman Sachs, which holds a Neutral rating and a $360 target, argues the outlook for Robotaxi, FSD and Optimus will matter more to the stock than the quarter itself.

Advertisement
-

The call also lands six days after the rescheduled Roadster event, which Tesla will stream on X on Thursday, October 15, at 7:55 p.m. CT. If the Roadster shows up with a production date or a SpaceX thruster package, expect it to climb the voting list before the deadline.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

FAA kicks off review of SpaceX’s bid to fly Starship nearly every day

FAA is reviewing SpaceX’s plan for 456 Starship launches a year, up from 25 today.

Published

on

By

Rendering of Elon Musk overlooking a Starship fleet (Credit: Grok)

The FAA said Tuesday that it will prepare an environmental impact statement on SpaceX’s proposal to run as many as 456 Starship launches and 912 landings a year from Starbase, Texas. SpaceX is currently authorized for 25 launches and 50 landings annually, which makes the request roughly 18 times the existing ceiling. The notice of intent is set to publish in the Federal Register on Wednesday.

The plan comes in two phases. Phase 1 would allow up to 100 launches and 200 landings a year, on any day and at any hour. Phase 2, which the FAA says could arrive within several years, would raise the limit to the full 456 launches, still at any hour but only on weekdays. The agency noted that 912 landings is the upper limit for the Texas facility no matter where a given mission begins, and that Starship and Super Heavy could come down at the launch site or in the Gulf and open ocean.

A draft statement will be released for public comment at a later date, and the FAA has not said when. According to the Federal Registar, written comments are due November 30 on regulations.gov under docket FAA-2026-12808, with in person scoping meetings on November 17 in Brownsville and November 19 in Port Isabel, plus a virtual session on November 18. The review will weigh air quality, wildlife, coastal resources, water, noise, and aviation, and the FAA said any increase beyond this proposal would need its own separate review.

The numbers look large next to what Starbase has actually done. Starship has flown three times from Texas this year, including Flight 14 on September 28, the first orbital flight, which deployed 26 Starlink V3 satellites. Bloomberg reported that Starbase has never launched more than five times in a calendar year. The current cap of 25 comes from an FAA approval in May 2025. In February, the agency also approved up to 44 Starship launches a year from Launch Complex 39A in Florida, so Phase 1 in Texas alone would more than double that allowance.

Musk has said Starship could eventually fly more than once per hour within less than a decade, per Bloomberg. The nearer term target is Flight 15. Musk said on October 10 that it is hopefully four to six weeks away and will try to catch the ship with the tower, as Teslarati covered. That flight still runs under the existing 25 launch limit, and so would every Starbase launch for as long as the new review takes.

Advertisement
-

As of mid morning Pacific time on Tuesday, SpaceX had not posted about the filing on its own account.

Continue Reading