Investor's Corner
Tesla Semi-truck: What will be the ROI and is it worth it?
Elon Musk’s announcement that a Tesla Semi will be arriving as early as September is the first step to what will eventually be a reinvention of an entire industry. We’ve discussed before what, exactly, that means, but given that the man in charge of the Tesla truck program is Jerome Guillen who has a history with Daimler (specifically Freightliner) and large Class 8 semi-trucks, it’s not hard to see where Tesla plans to go with this. That leaves only the question of how far, literally, they plan to take it. In tractor-trailer operations, there are two basic types of freight moving: short-haul and long-haul.
We’re going to look at each of these types of freight hauling and how the return on investment (ROI) for a battery-electric rig (such as that we expect Tesla to unveil) would be. If there is any. We’ll also consider what type of equipment this might entail, in a broad sense, and how that compares to current paradigms in tractor-trailer freight hauling.
Before we dive into that, a few words on what the trucking industry is like are needed. About 69.5 percent of the freight moved in the United States is moved on a commercial truck. The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) also says that a staggering 92 percent of prepared foods are moved by trucks and 82.7 percent of agricultural products are moved by truck, as are 65 percent of pharmaceuticals. However you measure it, that’s a lot of goods being moved on highways and surface roads nationally.
Currently, the trucking industry is seeing a lot of change, internally, as technology improves the way that freight hauling operates. The Internet and faster communications, for example, has begun to erode the traditional consignee-broker-hauler paradigm in which someone with goods to haul contacted a freight broker who then contracted a freight hauler to move the goods, skimming a percentage off the top for the connection. The middleman is often cut out in today’s trucking, with many trucking companies having load brokers on staff.
Electronics and global positioning have also changed how trucks operate, with computers more efficiently organizing load and truck movements to minimize empty movement. The USDOT says that about 29 percent of all truck movement is pulling an empty trailer to or from a freight drop-off point, costing about $30 billion annually. That number, while high, has been dropping for some time and drops exponentially as networks of computers get more efficient at organizing trucking and trucking companies consolidate into larger and larger fleets.
Finally, we should note that the longer the average trip (load to delivery) is for a tractor-trailer, the faster the truck’s ROI for the owner. Shorter hauls have higher per-mile maintenance costs than do longer hauls. Even discounting the cost of fuel, that becomes true as equipment maintenance costs beyond engine and fuel are still higher with shorter distances. There are several reasons for this, including how often brakes are used, how much time is spent not working (idling or sitting), and higher incidences of accidents. To name a few. Many short-haul operations are undertaken on less than ideal roads and in areas where any kind of breakdown, including a flat tire, can mean hours wasted waiting for repair.
Knowing those things, we can look at potential ROI for both short-haul and long-haul Tesla electric semi-trucks.
Short Haul
Conventionally, short-haul operations are defined as being tractor-trailer shipments moving 250 miles or less and long-haul is defined as being those same types of shipments moving more than 250 miles. Each of these has sub-categories, of course, but in the main, those are the two major markets for large Class 8 semi-trucks pulling freight. It should be noted that the overlap between short-haul and long-haul is large, as many short-haul shipments are being carried to a distribution location where it’s reassembled for longer distance hauling.
Of the two operations, short-haul has the most diversity in terms of machines used and types of freight carried. It’s in this category that we find items as aggregate as grain freshly harvested from fields to stones to specialized equipment being carried. Sometimes by the same truck and driver over the course of a year’s work. It’s also in this category that we find specialized rigs meant for entering pit mines, climbing steep grades on primitive dirt roads, moving overweight and outsized items, and so forth. For the most part, trucks in this category are “day cabs” meaning they have no sleeper unit attached for the driver to use as a rest quarters when not at the wheel.
So far, the electrified Class 8 vehicles we’ve seen actually enter the market have nearly all fallen into the short-haul category. These have included battery-electric, hydrogen fuel cell, and hybrid units working as “yard dogs” moving trailers around a dock area, as portage trucks moving containers and freight out of port to staging areas or local distribution centers, and local area urban and suburban delivery vehicles. Currently, there is a large push in California to make all port vehicles (including container-moving trucks) as zero-emissions as possible.
The good news for battery-electric truck makers and those who aspire to become them is that, according to the USDOT, about half of all of the shipments (by value) is moved less than 250 miles. That accounts for about 80 percent of the weight being moved around the country. The bad news is that in this segment, less is paid per ton for that freight to be moved and, according to the American Transportation Research Institute, this segment only accounts for about 25 percent of the trucks on the road. Equipment age also tends to be higher in this category, with trucks being used for more years (and generally fewer miles) than compared to long-haul trucks.
In terms of cost, outside of maintenance, the most expensive items for a tractor-trailer, whether short- or long-haul, are fuel (38 percent), driver wages and benefits (34 percent), and truck-trailer lease payments and insurance (14 percent). These costs are about the same no matter what the truck is used for in most conventional operations, short-haul or long. Maintenance is about six percent higher in short-haul operations when compared to long-haul and insurance is usually a bit higher(1.5 percent), but not by so much that it can’t be averaged between them without skewing the numbers.
We can safely assume that a battery-electric semi-truck will have a higher price tag than its diesel-powered counterpart, which itself averages about $150,000 new. How much larger the electric truck would be is mostly conjecture, but we can probably be considered conservative to say it’s up-front costs will be at least 50 percent higher ($225,000) due to the expense of the batteries. Morgan Stanley’s report on electric and autonomous trucking assumed $75,000 for 500 kWh of battery storage, translating to roughly 150 or so miles of range in a fully loaded (80,000 pound) semi-truck. Given the current lithium crunch and the likelihood that economies of scale will take a lot of time to come to fruition, it’s easy to predict that more than half the Tesla Semi’s cost would be in batteries should it aim for a 250-mile range.
Over time, of course, that larger up-front price tag would be returned with fuel savings. In short-haul operations, about four years (250,000 miles) would be required to pay off $100,000 in battery premium with fuel savings. There are, however, other costs that would rise with the higher price of the rig. A higher-priced rig will have higher lease payments and higher insurance costs for replacement. This would stretch the ROI of the short-haul truck, by roughly another year, making it a five year investment return. If the truck stays in operation for the typical usage cycle in this segment, however, that would mean the truck pays for itself in about two thirds (70 percent) of its intended lifespan. Some percentage of the maintenance would also be lower in cost due to the nature of the electric truck, but much of it (tires, drivetrain, brakes, etc.) remains stagnant, further whittling at that ROI timeframe.
By and large, most forward-thinking fleet managers would jump at that. With one point of caution: by nature of their business and the long timeframes involved, most fleet managers are averse to change on a large scale. A few EV trucks here and there to prove out the technology and make the suits and ties happy are one thing. Jumping whole hog into the change is quite another. It would take some time (likely years) for fleet managers of short-haul fleets to decide that battery-electric trucks (or any type of unconventional powertrain) is a healthy decision. That, more than anything, will be the major delay towards adoption of something like a Tesla Semi.
Long-Haul Operations
Assuming that a Tesla Semi could be capable of hauling freight for 500-1,000 miles on a charge (the average long-haul trip is 600 miles per day), it would jump into a segment of trucking that accounts for more ton-miles than any other type of freight movement and that is growing faster than any other segment of commercial transportation in terms of both value and weight being moved. Further, the average turnover for a tractor in the long-haul business is 6.6 years (ATRI numbers) and the average mileage is over 110,000 miles per year per truck. ROI is typically faster as well, given the lower costs versus the miles driven.
Coming up with an ROI for a long-haul electric semi-truck is much trickier here and may be nearly impossible without knowing more about the EV truck to be used. At this stage, a battery-electric Tesla Semi would be nearly impossible for long-haul given the size and thus weight of the batteries required. So something involving very fast charging, battery swapping, or similar would be required. That adds costs to the equation that we cannot easily quantify without knowing what those logistics are.
What we can easily project is that the cost-benefit for a Tesla Semi in a long-haul scenario would not likely be nearly as compelling as it is for a short-haul fleet manager. A typical over-the-road truck sees about a million miles during its lifespan with a cost of about $400,000 in fuel and $100,000 in maintenance (ATRI) during that time. Most fleets own the truck for about seventy percent that time (700,000 miles), on average. So the cost of a truck, in terms of purchase price, fuel, and maintenance over its expected fleet lifespan is about half a million dollars ($280,000 fuel + $70,000 maintenance + $150,000 purchase = $500,000). This might begin to look very close to break even on a higher-priced EV truck by comparison, which would very likely save on fuel but would have higher up-front costs in balance. Further, those fuel savings might not be as good given the likelihood that logistics like battery swapping or more frequent stops for plugging in would be required.
Conclusion
A Tesla Semi would likely have a good return on investment for any fleet manager who is willing to look over the long-term and consider the cost-benefit. For the short-haul manager, however, the potential ROI is far more provocative than it would be for the long-haul manager. We can see a clear business case for a Tesla Semi for a large proportion of the short-haul industry, though we do caution that it will likely take some time for those in the industry to cast anything but a dubious eye towards an unconventional powertrain.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Investor's Corner
Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Investor's Corner
Lucid denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop
Electric vehicle maker Lucid Group has denied rumors of an imminent bankruptcy after a report from this morning sent the stock on a dramatic drop on Wall Street, seeing losses of more than 40 percent during trading hours.
Lucid’s Director of Communications, Nick Twork, responded to the report from Eletric-Vehicles.com, which stated the company’s restructuring advisor, AlixPartners, was asked to review two decisions: taking Lucid shares private or filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
The report also claims AlixPartners told the Lucid board to “concentrate on Gravity production while improving its quality, and to temporarily hold back the Lucid Air, the sedan that has defined the company since its launch.”
Twork said:
$LCID The rumors are completely false. The company has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year, as recently published in its last quarterly filings, and it has not formed any special Board committee to explore the scenarios reported today. Our focus is…
— Nick Twork (@ntwork) July 14, 2026
Shares rebounded after the response to the report, halving its losses as the trading day neared 3 p.m. Eastern.
Lucid has struggled to get its sales off the ground and into more respectable numbers, but the company is in its early years, when things are hard to begin with. It is also backed by several notable investors, including the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF), which has nearly limitless money and likely would not ditch an investment of this size so soon.
Lucid shares were down just 14 percent at the time of publication, a far cry from the 55 percent its losses topped out at during the day.

