News
Tesla Semi faces new wave of skepticism from diesel veterans
There is very little doubt that the Model S, Model X, and Model 3 have disrupted their respective segments since they were released. Tesla aims to accomplish the same thing with its all-electric Semi truck, but the vehicle’s target is a lot more ambitious — it aims to disrupt the trucking industry.
The trucking industry is vast, and it is still growing. Long-haul trucking stands is the lifeblood of the US economy, handling the transportation of up to 71% of food, retail goods, construction supplies, and other cargo delivered every day. The American Trucking Associations’ American Trucking Trends 2018 report revealed that the US trucking industry generated $700.3 billion in economic activity in 2017, representing a 3.5% increase compared to 2016 when the trucking market generated $676.6 billion. This is the market that Tesla is aiming to tap into with the Semi.
One of the Tesla Semi’s main selling points is that it’s an environmentally-friendly vehicle. Being all-electric, the Semi is a zero-emissions truck. This is an advantage over conventional diesel trucks, which are a significant source of air pollution in the United States. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, greenhouse gases from medium and heavy-duty trucks were found to have increased by 85% between 1990 to 2016, accounting for about 23% of carbon emissions from transportation in 2016. This is despite the fact that diesel engines are getting steadily cleaner. The EPA estimates that emissions from current engines are about 85% lower than before 2007 when the US rolled out new standards.
The Tesla Semi has several features that make it a viable alternative to diesel-powered long-haulers, from its four Model 3-derived electric motors, its comparable Class 8 hauling capacity, and its superior speed. That said, it appears that America’s diesel veterans would not give up without a fight. In a statement to Bloomberg, Jon Mills, a spokesman for engine maker Cummins Inc. noted that electric trucks have a long way to go before they could be considered competition for diesel trucks.
“Right now, we don’t think it’s viable. Electric trucks are more viable where you have shorter routes, less loads and you’re able to recharge,” he said.
Cummins Inc. is one of America’s premier engine-makers, supplying engines for consumer trucks, fire engines, and heavy-duty long-haulers. Most of the company’s engines run on diesel, though they are also making some that operate on natural gas. Mills noted that Cummins is developing electric motors as well, but the company does not expect a lot of demand for them anytime soon.
Mills did admit that electric trucks would contribute to reducing pollution. Nevertheless, the Cummins Inc. spokesman noted that the trucking industry is likely not ready to switch to electric, mainly since vehicles like the Tesla Semi have limited range. Considering that some truck drivers are paid by the mile, they would likely lose money while waiting for their vehicles’ batteries to recharge.
-
“Diesel will be the primary option for heavy duty trucking markets, long haul especially, for a decade or more,” Mills said.
Elon Musk wants to initiate the transition sooner. When unveiling the Tesla Semi’s specs, Musk noted that the electric long-hauler would be cheaper to operate than comparable diesel-powered trucks. Musk noted that the Semi could cost operators $1.26 per mile to run, less than the standard $1.51 per mile that diesel-powered vehicles cost. That said, Allen Schaeffer, executive director of the Diesel Technology Forum trade group, is skeptical of Musk’s claims, noting that there is little need for a new entrant in the shipping industry.
“It’s easy if you’re just coming into this market to say ‘they’re $1.50 per mile and we can do it for $1.20. But where’s the proof? I haven’t seen it. Diesel is the benchmark for energy efficiency. Diesel dominates the entire sector,” he said.
Amidst continued reservations from veterans in the trucking industry, Tesla is nonetheless pushing through with further development of the Semi. The company has been conducting real-world tests of the Semi since the vehicle was unveiled, and during the Q2 2018 earnings call, Elon Musk noted that improvements to the truck are being made. Thus, when the Tesla Semi enters production, the long-hauler would be an even more viable alternative to diesel-powered trucks.
“We’ve made significant improvements to the design since the unveiling that we had, and it’s really even better than what we talked about,” Musk said.
In a new note to investors on Tuesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco said that Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors regarding its Robotaxi rollout, Full Self-Driving software, and Optimus.
Percoco said in the note that, for the most part, investors are still very positive about the direction the company is headed. However, there are some things the firm would like to see, and they have to do with financials.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla bulls are more than convinced that the company’s Full Self-Driving software is proof it can develop physical AI. Financially, however, there are still some questions, especially on elevated spending, which CEO Elon Musk said would occur as the company works to roll out Robotaxi faster and continue developing its Optimus robot.
The latter two are where Tesla will have to prove progress to investors, as Percoco writes that both projects “will require clearer evidence that Robotaxi is scaling and more tangible Optimus proof points to support the ROI on elevated capex.”
Percoco said the second quarter earnings call did not change his long-term thesis of where Tesla is positioned in the AI race, which is out in front. However, there are concerns that weaker gross margins and higher R&D spend will stress financials, and that has “sharpened our (and investors’) focus on measurable progress across Robotaxi and Optimus.”
Additionally, Robotaxi still needs to be proven with more operation in existing cities while maintaining safety but improving how many rides it gives in any given time, he said. For Optimus, Percoco wrote that he is “still looking for evidence beyond commentary around SOP.”
-
Morgan Stanley put Percoco in charge of covering Tesla after long-time analyst Adam Jonas transitioned to the automotive side.
Currently, Morgan Stanley has a $415 price target on Tesla and a ‘Hold’ rating on the stock. It is trading at around $330 at the time of publication, which was 2:30 P.M. on the East Coast.
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.
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.
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
