News
Tesla’s more experienced rivals are strangely making way for the Model Y
Something strange is happening in the crossover EV segment. Despite beating the Tesla Model Y to the market, European all-electric SUVs appear to be making way for the Silicon Valley-made disruptor. This shows that while Tesla may be entering the lucrative crossover segment later than its rivals, it will be doing so with a vehicle that does not seem to have a lot of willing challengers.
It should be noted that the Model Y is designed to compete in the auto industry’s most cutthroat segment. Dominated by iconic, hyper-reliable vehicles like the Honda CR-V and the Toyota RAV-4, the crossover market is as lucrative as it is competitive. In a way, crossovers are usually bang-for-the-buck cars: larger and more spacious than sedans, and at a price point that does not break the bank.
The Model Y is all these things. With 75% of the vehicle being the same as the Model 3 sedan, the Model Y is coming to the market with all of Tesla’s experience in production and tech that it learned over the past years. Its performance is second to none, with its quickest variant hitting 60 mph in just 3.5 seconds. It’s also quite larger than its Model 3 siblings, as it’s capable of seating seven passengers instead of five (provided that the two people on the rear seats are small, of course).
There is no doubt that the Model Y will likely capture a lot of the EV market. Tesla is such a strong force in the EV segment that its entry in the crossover market may be embraced just as well, if not better, than the Model 3. If one were to prepare for the arrival of a competitor then, it would be a great idea to get the jump on the Model Y, beating it to the market and saturating Tesla’s target demographic before the vehicle gets released.
In this sense, Tesla’s rivals somewhat succeeded. Jaguar unveiled the I-PACE way before the wraps were taken off the Model Y. The same was true for the Audi e-tron 55. Each vehicle was released to the market before sightings of Model Y release candidates became the norm. Yet, despite the hype generated for each vehicle and their actual merits, none of these all-electric SUVs put a dent on the US’ all-electric market.
And it’s not for lack of recognition either. The Jaguar I-PACE was so well received that it literally got over 60 awards, making it one of the most highly-decorated production cars in history. The Audi e-tron got its own fair share of fans too. Consumer Reports’ initial impressions of the e-tron were highly-positive, with the organization praising the vehicle for its posh interior and its looks. CR Deputy Content Editor Jon Linkov even remarked that that contrary to the snap of acceleration in Tesla’s electric cars like the Model S, the Audi e-tron has “more of an elegant pull-away.”
Yet, despite these, both the I-PACE and the e-tron have seemingly hit a ceiling. Estimates point to Jaguar selling 2,418 I-Pace in the US this year through November, and Audi selling 4,623 e-tron SUVs. The Tesla Model 3? Around 111,650 in the same period, as per Bloomberg. These sales figures were so stark that recently, Mercedes-Benz announced that the EQC’s release in the US will be delayed by a year. In a way, it appears that two Model Y challengers failed against the Model 3, and one seemed to be all-too-willing to give way for the upcoming vehicle.
This may end up being a costly mistake, especially on Mercedes-Benz’s part. By the time the EQC arrives in the US, the Model Y will likely be on the roads. And if the Model 3’s dominance of the electric car segment is any indication, Tesla might very well be poised to come out on top once more. With Elon Musk and Tesla seemingly being more cautious, understated vehicles like the Model Y, which have so much potential but seemingly receive so little attention, are the most dangerous for competitors.
Granted, one could argue that the I-PACE, the e-tron, and the EQC are more of the more expensive Model X’s competitors considering their prices. While this is true, all three vehicles are actually closer in size to the Model Y than the Model X. Even their interior space are smaller than the X, making them more of a Model Y rival in terms of features and spaciousness.
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
