News
Tesla VP Grace Tao explains China’s Model 3 and Model Y price reductions
After a challenging December, Tesla China adopted a number of strategies designed to improve its vehicle sales in the country. Among these was a price reduction on the domestically-produced Model 3 sedan and Model Y crossover. Recent comments from Tesla VP Grace Tao have now provided some insights into these price adjustments.
In a recent interview with local Chinese media, Tao was asked about Tesla China’s rather volatile pricing strategy. Similar to Tesla in the United States, Tesla China saw a number of price adjustments over the past year. This has resulted in some netizens in the country stating that Tesla’s pricing strategy is “too casual.”
Addressing the inquiry, Grace Tao explained that the pricing strategy of Tesla China’s vehicles is “actually a forecast of the company’s cost changes in the next period of time.” She also explained that the landscape had changed now, at least compared to the last year due to the end of the pandemic.
“The biggest difference between 2023 and last year is that the epidemic is basically over, and we believe that the supply chain has largely returned to normal and will not experience the various unpredictable shortages of materials that have occurred in previous years, leading to uncertainty in costs. In my personal opinion, price adjustments reflect our good planning for the supply chain to a certain extent. We expect what the vehicle cost will be approximately and then make such adjustments according to this expectation,” the executive said.
The Tesla VP also addressed the issue of some consumers in China who were upset that they bought vehicles before the recent round of price reductions took effect. So notable were the reactions of some consumers that protests were reportedly held in a number of Tesla stores.
“Maybe some consumers say that ‘I bought it yesterday, and you can’t suddenly change the cost overnight,’ but the fact is that no company calculates the cost every day, but rather calculates it on a time period. At the same time, the price of industrial products cannot be immediately reflected in the terminal products. Some raw materials may still be contracted a few months ago, so it actually has a certain lag.
“In addition, the price of a product is not only affected by its own cost, but also by the market demand and competition. If there is a change in the market demand or competition, it will also affect the price of the product. Therefore, the price adjustment of a product is not a simple matter. It is a comprehensive consideration of the enterprise’s own cost, market demand and competition,” the executive said.
Overall, the executive clarified that Tesla China’s price adjustments are not casual at all. Instead, they are done with a clear understanding of the company’s costs, demand in the market, and competitors. So far, however, Grace Tao noted that Tesla China has not had to change its strategy due to market demand or competition, which bodes well for the company’s footing in the country’s auto market. The executive also highlighted that after this recent round of price reductions, the cost of the domestically-produced Model 3 and Model Y should become more stable.
“In the past, Tesla has made several larger price adjustments due to external factors that have had an impact on costs. For example, when we became a domestic car(maker), the price naturally decreased compared to a pure import, at least the tariff was saved by 15%. For example, after our supply chain stabilized, it would definitely be lower than before when it was shipped from abroad. Tesla’s supply chain localization rate is now 95%, so theoretically, there is not much room for improvement. Therefore, I think after this price adjustment, the price should be relatively stable.
“Tesla’s logic is very simple. When the cost is calculated to have changed, such as changing raw materials, we will immediately increase or decrease the price. Actually, Tesla’s logic is very simple. Consumers seem to think that the price drop was relatively large compared to last month, but in fact, the price rose last month, and compared to the costs before the price increase, the difference is not large,” she said.
The Teslarati team would appreciate hearing from you. If you have any tips, contact me at maria@teslarati.com or via Twitter @Writer_01001101.
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
