News
Tesla Top 5 Week in Review: Model 3 “Founders Series”, a test drive gone wrong, Tesla insurance, and more
The news this week out of Tesla focused a lot on the Q4 earnings call and the 2016 annual financial report, with overall good numbers and analyst reactions. Part of that confidence came from the anticipated production of the new Model 3, which will be released to employees first as part of a feedback loop. In other areas, an overnight test drive program for prospective buyers turned bad when a driver behind a P100D lost control and crashed. Generally, Teslas score in the highest levels of automotive safety, which is why Tesla may be considering offering customers a package where purchase costs, insurance, and maintenance are bundled together. And, finally, more good news poured out of Nevada, where the Tesla Gigafactory is under construction. All that and more: read on, Teslarati fans….
Tesla beats Wall St. estimates: $7 billion revenue; record Model S, X orders; Model 3 production starts in July
Tesla released its 2016 Q4 financial results and shareholders letter as well as its annual 2016 overall financial report. With Q4 earnings loss of $.69 per share, Tesla came in at the lower end of the estimate spectrum. Revenue was $2.28 billion versus an estimate of $2.13 billion. For the full year 2016, revenues were up 73% from 2015 at $7 billion. Q4 Model S and X vehicles came in at record high sales numbers. In the days prior to the financial announcement, Tesla stock values had soared to nearly all-time highs.
Tesla Model 3 Design Studio expected in June, “Founders Series” will go to employees first
The Tesla Model 3 configurator is about three or four months away, according to Tesla CEO Elon Musk. Model will be released incrementally for testing and feedback. First deliveries will be offered to employees as part of an internal “feedback loop” to generate information before customers experience the car. Following the employee offering, west coast Tesla owners with geographic proximity to the Fremont factory will have the next opportunity to experience the Model 3. After that, the geographical expansion will continue to other regions and other lucky new Tesla customers.
Tesla’s “overnight test drive” program ends badly for one P100D driver
Last summer, a registration form appeared on the Tesla website in which prospective buyers could apply for an overnight test drive program. A prospective customer near Canmore, Alberta was behind the wheel of a P100D, which is Tesla’s fastest production car, when it crashed into guardrails. Authorized Tesla body shop Contemporary Coachworks declined to release background information regarding the incident, including the Tesla’s speed at the time of impact. Pictures taken afterward do seem to show significant damage, which leads one to wonder what insurance costs will look like for the test run. Maybe the next top featured story of the week isn’t just coincidence….
Tesla looks to bundle insurance policy into the purchase of a car
In Asia, Tesla offers a package to customers that includes the costs of purchase, insurance, and maintenance. That’s a model that Tesla would like to bring to the U.S., according to company information provided this week. This package may be offered in conjunction with external insurance providers or as in-house option. Providing insurance, in addition to other essential coverage, would be another way that Tesla would disrupt a business-as-usual set of practices from top automakers. The company has the capacity to offer this bundled package because Teslas have a strong safety record, which underlies the usual perils inherent in car insurance.
Nevada official says Tesla Gigafactory has over 1,000 workers and is hiring 150-200 more each month
At at time when the talk of the nations is jobs, jobs, Tesla’s job creation numbers at its Gigafactory in northern Nevada are one bright moment in an otherwise stagnant employment scene across the country. With hiring levels at about 150 to 200 more every month, Executive Director Steve Hill told the Senate Finance Committee last week during a budget review meeting that the California-based electric carmaker and energy company may be able to have 3,200 workers by March, 2018. Job creation at the Gigafactory reinforces Tesla’s original commitments when Nevada provided a $1.3 billion tax incentive package to Tesla at a time when the company’s name recognition was quite low.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
