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.
Stay ahead of the curve, the most important EV trends every week.
We give our take on the biggest news stories of the week and everything you need to know as a Teslarati Superfan.
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.
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
