News
Tesla and NIO sales suffer in China as bumpy economic conditions continue
It’s no secret that the tensions between the US and China are high, but now it appears to be affecting the rapidly-growing country’s EV market. Don’t get me wrong, China’s EV sales still put the US to shame, more than 45,197 all-electric vehicles in sold April alone. But the more notable portion of that news? Pure EV sales fell 4% compared to the stellar 2018 sales (I’m excluding plug-in hybrids on purpose).
There are a couple of reasons for the speed bump in EV sales growth. First, are the massive changes happening to Chinese NEV (new energy vehicles, which includes plug-in hybrids) subsidies. Second, as mentioned above, the macroeconomic effects from US-Chinese relations. The system for Chinese NEV subsidies is incredibly complex, and I’m not going to pretend to know all the system’s ins and outs. But it’s worth pointing out a few differences from more traditional tax rebates or credits. Tesla doesn’t currently earn any subsidies from their sales in China, their future Chinese-built Model 3s would be eligible for subsidies.*
Only cars made in China are eligible for these subsidies. Tesla has never had access to them.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 3, 2019
One of the major differences between the US’ federal tax rebate system and Chinese subsidies lies with the redemption process, or lack thereof. Rather than putting the responsibility on consumers, the Chinese government requires all manufacturers to factor in subsidies into sales prices, then request payment from the government. This process is incredibly beneficial to consumers, allowing them to realize the price reduction immediately, but causes many automotive companies troubles. The subsidy request process in China can take up to a year for automakers to be reimbursed, straining their balance sheets and hurting their cash flow.
This subsidy request process doesn’t cause a huge threat to large established companies, who have strong cash flows from their ICE sales (see, BYD). But for small companies like Tesla and NIO, these sort of subsidy structures can put them at a disadvantage compared to their peers. In fact, NIO’s VP of Quality, Feng Shen, recently told me that he believed that the reduction of subsidies will help NIO in the long term. Tesla’s Musk has echoed this premise with US subsidies (ZEV credits and consumer tax credits)— allowing all companies to compete on a more equal playing field.
While Shen might be right, NIO and Tesla’s sales appear to be taking a hit in part to subsidy reductions. NIO reported only 1,124 sales of the ES8 in April, with a total of 5,113 in the first four months of 2019. However, NIO stated that the ES8 has outsold the Tesla Model X 2:1 in the same four months, indicating ~2,500 sales (foreign-built vehicles aren’t required to report sales figures). While Tesla doesn’t report regional sales figures, NIO’s statements about the ES8’s lead over the Model X hints at the increasing competition in China’s premium all-electric SUV segment.
It’s nearly impossible to tell if macroeconomic conditions or subsidies are playing a bigger role here, but I’d say its safe to assume its a mix of the two are hurting NIO’s sales (Tesla’s US-built vehicles aren’t eligible for subsidies). I wouldn’t say this slump in EV sales is an indicator of long-term demand in the world’s largest automotive market, but both Tesla and NIO have placed large bets on huge demand. Tesla’s Shanghai Gigafactory is well under construction and the company is expecting huge demand for their lower-cost Model 3, which is priced at RMB 328,000 (~$47,400).
But for NIO, the company is feeling the pressure. Unlike Tesla, China is the company’s sole market and they are burning cash quickly ($390M in Q1). To cut their cash burn NIO has been remarkably reactive, cutting costs by an impressive (obviously not to some) 25% in Q1 and focusing on launching their second (lower-cost) vehicle, the ES6. The company isn’t ready to revise its 2019 guidance (35-40K vehicles) yet, but is cautiously watching the Chinese market.
With the world’s largest auto market hitting a speed bump, the entire industry is on pins and needles, watching and waiting for a recovery. When do you think the Chinese EV market will bounce back? Do you think Tesla and NIO are over-investing in China?
*Update: An earlier version of this article indicated that Tesla’s vehicles were eligible for China’s NEV subsidies. Only NEVs built in China are eligible for these subsidies and Tesla may benefit from them in the future with their Chinese-built Model 3.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
News
Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Elon Musk
Another Tesla SpaceX merger prediction by ARK Invest has Elon Musk talking
Elon Musk again denies a Tesla China split as new SpaceX merger speculation resurfaces quickly.
Elon Musk restated that Tesla has no plans to separate its China business from the rest of the company, responding to a new round of merger speculation from ARK Invest.
On the firm’s “Brainstorm” podcast, Cathie Wood’s team, including chief futurist Brett Winton and research director Nick Grous, argued a Tesla and SpaceX combination remains likely, with an announcement possible before the end of the year even if the deal itself would not close that quickly. Winton called Tesla’s Shanghai operations a “small ish wrinkle” for a merger rather than a real obstacle, since SpaceX’s national security work with the U.S. government sits uneasily next to Tesla’s manufacturing base in China.
Musk pushed back on the framing directly. “China is awesome. I strongly encourage people to visit,” he wrote on X. He also repeated language he first used in late July, when the Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla executives had been told to prepare for a possible spinoff, sale, or closure of the China business ahead of a SpaceX tie up. Musk called that report “absurdly fake news” at the time, adding that a separation had “never even come up in a discussion ever,” a line he echoed again this week.
The repeated denial has not settled the underlying question, because Shanghai’s role in Tesla’s business is exactly what makes a merger complicated. Gigafactory Shanghai still ships more than half of Tesla’s global deliveries and functions as the company’s main export hub for Europe and Asia. Teslarati previously reported on Musk’s initial denial, and the merger conversation itself has been building since SpaceX’s IPO gave it public shares to use as acquisition currency.
Wedbush’s Dan Ives has pegged the odds of a Tesla SpaceX merger at 80 to 90 percent by early 2027, and ARK’s prediction of a year end announcement adds another data point to that timeline, even as Musk keeps rejecting the specific mechanics reporters have described. Neither position rules out the other. Musk can deny a China spinoff was ever discussed while analysts still expect some form of combination to move forward, since ARK and Ives are both describing convergence at the corporate level, not necessarily the internal restructuring the Journal described in July.
For now, Tesla’s China business remains intact, and Musk’s comments this week make clear he has no interest in publicly walking that position back, no matter how often the merger question resurfaces.

