News
Hey, Toyota: Tesla may not have a ‘Chef,’ but at least their food doesn’t suck
At some point or another, most of us have cooked a meal for others. If you did a reasonably good job making a meal, someone may say: “You should have been a Chef.” Whether it is a hobby in your spare time or you spent multiple years at a culinary institute, cooking is one of the few things in life that everyone has to experience at some point or another. It could be stovetop ramen or a fine piece of beef with a slice of foie gras. Whatever it is, you do it to your liking, and you usually think you did it well.
However, having the title of “Chef” does not insinuate that someone is good at cooking. Some people study things for several years, and they unfortunately just do not have a knack for it. Most of us have gone to fine dining restaurants at some point or another in our lives, and we prepare ourselves to fully commit and make ourselves vulnerable to the culinary works of whoever is commanding the kitchen that evening. But sometimes, the food simply isn’t to our liking, and you say to yourself, “How could this person ever be considered a Chef?”
Toyota seems to forget that “Chef” doesn’t mean you can cook. In this case, being the head of an automotive company doesn’t mean you’re innovative, good for the job, or even right for the job.
Yet, Akio Toyoda, the President of Toyota, runs his grandfather’s business and was bold enough to cast some stones at Tesla and Elon Musk.
Toyota CEO attempts Tesla analogy and fails: ‘They aren’t really making something that’s real’
“We are losing when it comes to the share price. But when it comes to products, we have a full menu that will be chosen by customers,” Toyoda said. “They aren’t really making something that’s real, people are just buying the recipe. We have the kitchen and chef, and we make real food.”
As if comparing cooking to automotive wasn’t confusing enough, Toyoda actually thinks that Tesla is inferior to his company, even though they don’t have a pure EV in their lineup. They do have a Plug-In Hybrid EV with the Prius PHEV. Still, the company didn’t make any pure EVs because it believes hybrids are “a better bridge between ICE vehicles and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles,” according to a 2019 article from Car and Driver.
Even still, Toyoda’s apparent attempt to derail and discredit Tesla’s automotive domination through 2020 was weak.
Your meal this evening will be prepared by Chef Elon Musk
Elon Musk probably doesn’t cook very often for the family. He’s spending his many waking hours trying to figure out what moves will take Tesla to the next level. He likely doesn’t have time to whip up a full dinner for his kids or his partner, Grimes.
Instead, Musk’s full focus is on Tesla. Because of his full-fledged obsession with “accelerating the world’s transition to sustainable energy,” Musk has often said that Tesla’s real competitors are those who refuse to adapt to electrification, and not entities who are embracing the EV revolution, like Volkswagen, for example. Even still, Musk hasn’t gone out of his way to attack CEOs or Presidents of automotive companies that are not willing to build an EV, or a lineup of them, for that matter. Instead, his efforts are solving manufacturing, making cars more affordable, and ensuring the company’s customers that his products are fun to operate.
The Appetizer
Toyota once had an electric car: The RAV4 EV, but it was discontinued in 2014, according to its website. However, the brand has stated that it will produce six new EV models that will launch over the next five years, citing “global demand” as the reason for the embrace of sustainable transportation. However, unveiling three vehicles that are eerily similar to the Smart Car wasn’t exactly what consumers had planned. Therefore, the company will begin to go after the U.S., Europe, and China: three locations with an unquenchable thirst for electric transportation. They will likely enter China before any other market.
The thing is, Toyota doesn’t seem to have a plan, as of now, to transition to a fully electric lineup. Perhaps this is what Toyoda meant by “we have a full menu.”
Like the fiery and passionate Gordon Ramsay, some chefs would say having a “full menu” is not necessarily a good thing. Having a concentration and focusing on one style of food is advantageous for not only the chefs but also for the customers.
Cars are no different. Trying to build a lineup of ICE cars, PHEVs, Hybrids, EVs, and Hydrogen Fuel Cell vehicles will have Toyota in a scenario where they are trying to balance so many different power sources. If Toyota plans to attack each subsection of a vehicle with 5-7 models, there is going to be a lot of different strategies going on, and it could spell confusion. Floyd Mayweather once used this to insult SportsCenter anchor Brian Kenny, stating he was “a Man of many traits, but a Master of Nothing.”
It might be easier to focus on one style of car, maybe two. Not five, Toyota.
The Main Course
Tesla and Toyota both have a track record of success. While Toyota’s is longer and more reputable than Tesla’s, just because of a longer existence, Tesla has influenced an entire industry to transition from what they are familiar with. Many car companies focused on creating fast, efficient, and affordable passenger cars powered by fossil fuels. Now that Tesla has come along and proven that EVs are fun, affordable, and good for the environment, massive brands like Ford and Volkswagen are committing themselves to electrification in the future. While some have more ambitious plans than others, there is nothing wrong with taking your time. As long as a company plans to transition away from gas and diesel and into EVs, it will have some backing from sustainability supporters.
The Dessert
Unlike most desserts, this one isn’t going to be very sweet.
Listening to the head of one of the largest car companies in the world cast stones at Tesla and Elon Musk is quite shocking. “They wanna see you do good, but never better than them” comes to mind here. At one point, Toyoda may have been hoping Tesla could introduce an EV that would give the company some inspiration. In fact, as a company, Toyota may have wanted someone else to dive into EVs so that it could learn from someone else’s mistakes. However, Tesla has had plenty of those mistakes, but its resiliency, which was highlighted by Elon Musk in a series of Tweets earlier this week, has made it the most valuable car company in the world.
Who is Number 2? Toyota.
Check, please.
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
