Investor's Corner
Tesla shorts drive Pulitzer-winning journalist off Twitter after glowing review of Model 3 Performance
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.”
Thanks Dan, you are a tough reviewer, so this means a lot coming from you. Please lmk even smallest nuance that can be improved. https://t.co/eRuPyN1p7I
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 19, 2018
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.
so #teslatwitter ran @Danneilwsj off Twitter. humans are so overrated. a damn shame, really.
— Urvaksh (@Urvaksh) July 20, 2018
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.
Elon Musk
California snubs Tesla in its newly passed EV incentive that favors Rivian and Lucid
California passed a $135 million EV incentive that rewards Rivian and Lucid while sidelining Tesla
California just drew a line in the EV incentive sand to put Tesla on the wrong side of it. The state recently passed a $135 million program offering first-time electric vehicle buyers a direct incentive with no application required, but the rules were written in a way that leaves Tesla at a structural disadvantage compared to Rivian and Lucid.
The program caps eligible vehicles at $50,000 for new EVs and $25,000 for used ones. That pricing threshold rules out a significant portion of Tesla’s lineup, though some lower-priced Model 3 and Model Y configurations would still qualify. California-based automakers are exempt from the price cap entirely, regardless of what their vehicles cost. Rivian, headquartered in Irvine, and Lucid, based in the San Francisco Bay Area, both benefit from that exemption. Rivian’s R2 starts at roughly $45,000 but has versions above the cap. Lucid’s Air and Gravity start at $70,990 and $79,990 respectively, well above any threshold a non-California company would face.
California hits Tesla Cybercab and Robotaxi driverless cars with new law
Tesla built its reputation and a significant portion of its early market share in California, where EV adoption has consistently led the nation. The company operates its original factory in Fremont, California, and the state was home to Tesla’s headquarters for most of its existence. That changed in 2021 when Tesla moved its corporate headquarters to Austin, Texas. Since then, the relationship between the company and California Governor Gavin Newsom has been openly adversarial, with Musk and Newsom trading public criticism on multiple occasions.
California’s EV incentive landscape has shifted repeatedly in recent years, and Tesla has previously lost eligibility for state-level programs as its vehicles exceeded income-adjusted price thresholds. The federal $7,500 EV tax credit, which Tesla models have qualified for and lost depending on policy cycles, is no longer available after it expired without renewal, making state-level programs more meaningful to buyers than they have been in years.
The practical impact for buyers is more nuanced than the headline suggests. California residents purchasing a Tesla under $50,000 for the first time can still access the incentive. But the exemption written for California-based manufacturers is a structural advantage that rewards where a company plants its headquarters flag rather than where it builds its products, and Tesla moved that flag to Texas.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s newest logo confirms everything about what it’s become
SpaceX officially absorbed xAI under the SpaceXAI brand, completing the largest private merger in history.
SpaceX made its corporate transformation official in May 2026 when Elon Musk posted on X that xAI would cease to exist as a standalone company. “xAI will be dissolved as a separate company, so it will just be SpaceXAI, the AI products from SpaceX,” he wrote.
A new SpaceXAI logo was announced today, visually embedding the xAI letters inside the SpaceX identity, which can be seen as a deliberate design choice that signals the merger is not a partnership but a full absorption and XAi a core function of the same company. The same way Starlink is not a separate brand but a SpaceX product. The announcement closed the loop on a process that began February 2, 2026, when SpaceX acquired xAI in the largest private merger in history, valued at $1.25 trillion. SpaceX at $1 trillion and xAI at $250 billion.
We are now @SpaceXAI. pic.twitter.com/ema66xDWC9
— SpaceXAI (@SpaceXAI) July 6, 2026
The reason SpaceX bought xAI was stated plainly by Musk at the time of the deal: to build orbital data centers. SpaceX had simultaneously filed with the FCC to launch up to one million satellites designed to function as AI compute nodes in low Earth orbit, escaping what Musk described as the energy constraints limiting AI development on Earth.
xAI provided the AI software stack, with Grok, the X platform, and the Colossus supercomputer infrastructure in Memphis with over 220,000 NVIDIA GPUs, while SpaceX provided the rockets, Starlink, and the capital base to fund it. The two companies needed each other. xAI was burning $2.5 billion in losses on $250 million in revenue. SpaceX was generating an estimated $8 billion in profit on $15 billion in revenue and needed an AI narrative to command the valuation it was targeting for its IPO.
What SpaceX has done, regardless of how the orbital AI vision ultimately plays out, is walk into a public market as something no company has been before: a rocket manufacturer, satellite internet provider, AI software company, social media platform, and supercomputer operator under one ticker. Whether that combination is worth $2 trillion depends entirely on which of those businesses you believe in most.
Investor's Corner
Tesla challenges startups to score a gig inside its most advanced European factory
Tesla is challenging startups to bring their best battery tech directly to Gigafactory Berlin.
Tesla has issued an open challenge to startups across Europe, inviting them to bring their best battery technology directly to the floor of Gigafactory Berlin. The program, called the JUNI x Tesla Battery Cell Giga Challenge, opened applications this month with a deadline of July 24, 2026, and is targeting startups with solutions that can make battery cell manufacturing faster, cheaper, safer, and more scalable at an industrial level.
The timing of the challenge is directly tied to Tesla’s most aggressive European battery investment yet. On May 12, 2026, Giga Berlin plant manager André Thierig announced a $250 million investment to scale the factory’s annual 4680 cell production capacity from 8 GWh to 18 GWh, more than doubling the previous target set just months earlier in December 2025. Thierig confirmed the expansion on X, saying the investment “will enable 18 GWh of annual 4680 cell production and create more than 1,500 new jobs.” Combined with a previously announced battery investment at the Grunheide site now approaches $1.2 billion.
Today, we announced a $ 250m investment for our Giga Berlin Cell factory. This will enable 18GWh of annual 4680 cell production and create more than 1500 new jobs. Good news during challenging times for the German industry. pic.twitter.com/ou4SWMfWh9
— André Thierig (@AndrThie) May 12, 2026
The challenge is looking specifically for startups with proven solutions across five categories: materials, equipment, operations, automation, and artificial intelligence. Applications are screened directly by Tesla’s cell manufacturing team in Grunheide, and the strongest submissions move through technical discussions, a pitch day in front of Tesla stakeholders, and potentially a paid pilot project with the cell team. Tesla is not looking for ideas at concept stage. The program requires applicants to demonstrate working prototypes, test data, or prior pilots before being considered.
The historical context matters here. Elon Musk first announced plans for what he called the world’s largest battery cell production facility alongside the Giga Berlin car factory back in 2020, targeting up to 250 GWh of annual capacity. Those plans were shelved in 2022 when Tesla shifted its battery investment focus to the United States to take advantage of Inflation Reduction Act incentives. The revival of cell production at Giga Berlin, now backed by over $1 billion in committed capital, represents a return to an ambition that was set aside for three years. As Teslarati has reported, the 4680 format is central to Tesla’s long-term cost reduction strategy across vehicles, energy storage, including the Tesla Semi and Cybercab.
By opening the challenge to outside startups, Tesla is acknowledging that reaching 18 GWh at Grunheide will require technology it does not currently have in-house, and it is willing to pay for the right solutions. For a startup in the battery supply chain, a paid pilot with Tesla’s European cell team is as close to a direct commercial path as the industry offers.



