News
The Boring Company’s unveiling showed another Musk-driven disruption in the making
Before the opening party for the Hawthorne test tunnel began, Elon Musk gave a rather straightforward presentation about The Boring Company’s technology to members of the media. The discussion provided a number of pertinent updates and new information about the tunneling startup’s activities, several of which were reiterated when Musk took the stage to open the unveiling event.
As the Tesla and SpaceX CEO lightheartedly discussed the updated concepts of The Boring Company’s tunneling technology, it quickly became evident that Tuesday’s event could very well be the start of yet another Elon Musk-driven disruption.
Every single company that Elon Musk started, or played a part in starting, has gone on to be a disruptor of an established industry. In his 20s, Musk and his brother Kimbal shook up the widely established Yellow Pages industry with Zip2. Musk later took on traditional banking with X.com, which eventually merged with PayPal, one of the internet’s most established financial services that are still widely used today. Tesla, an electric car startup Musk backed in its very early days, is now an automaker forcing legacy carmakers to design and release compelling EVs. SpaceX, a company that could be considered as the culmination of Musk’s childhood dreams of interplanetary travel, is becoming more and more prevalent in the US space industry.
Man vs. Traffic pic.twitter.com/UDDE7oucKM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 19, 2018
In a way, Musk’s penchant for disruption results from his tendency to look at problems and adopt unconventional strategies to arrive at breakthrough results. In the case of SpaceX, for example, it was the company’s capability to reuse rockets that is allowing it to compete in the space industry. Electric vehicles existed before Tesla too, but the company made itself different by creating EVs that were desirable in both design and performance. This same thinking was evident when Musk presented his ideas for The Boring Company. The startup didn’t necessarily reinvent the wheel when it came to tunneling, but the company did employ a number of novel solutions that allowed it to make tunneling a lot faster, for a far lower price.
At the core of The Boring Company’s concepts are its smaller tunnel designs, which feature roughly half the diameter of conventional tunnels. This, according to the startup, reduces costs by 3-4 times. The Boring Company is also aiming to develop ways to increase the speed of its Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs). Traditional TBMs are notable for their slow speed, and Elon Musk has lightly noted that a snail is effectively 14 times faster than a boring machine. As such, the Boring Co. aims to develop TBMs that can actually keep pace with a snail. The Hawthorne test tunnel provides a glimpse of the cost savings associated with the company’s tunnel design as well, as the 1.14-mile project was completed with just $10 million of funding. Musk notes that conventional tunneling projects, which use larger tunnels and slower machines, can balloon to up to $1 billion per mile.
A shrine to the late Gary who inspired it all. Pineapple gummies to celebrate. pic.twitter.com/ZFTbui6TcC
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 19, 2018
Musk has mentioned that The Boring Company has been working on improving the capabilities of its TBMs. For its next-gen machine, Musk stated that the tunneling startup had developed a new TBM cutter head that operates faster, allowing it to process and move dirt in a more efficient manner. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO further noted that The Boring Company is developing a system that will enable reinforcement segments to be created and set up on site. The company is even planning on using the dirt from the cutter head as material for tunnel reinforcements. Such a system would allow the tunneling startup to increase its digging speeds even further, especially considering that conventional tunneling practices usually involve only 10% of actual digging, with 90% of operations usually being consumed by the laying of tunnel reinforcements.
Being a company started by Elon Musk, The Boring Company is in a constant state of innovation. This was evident in the updates to the electric skates design that were initially planned for the Loop system. Concepts of the high-speed tunnels involved vehicles traveling on electric skates. On Tuesday, though, Musk noted that “There won’t be a skate. The vehicle is the skate.” Such a system was adopted in the Hawthorne tunnel’s test rides, where a Model X fitted with electric skates on its front wheels was used to transport passengers through the tunnel. Even the garage-elevator that would be used to lift vehicles back onto the road is created with efficiency in mind, being pre-fabricated and constructed off-site.
Just like his other ventures, The Boring Company has the potential to be a disruptor. With its ultra-high-speed tunnels, the startup might actually help solve the problem of traffic congestion. The Boring Company’s tunnels could even be a stepping stone towards the eventual creation of Hyperloop transportation, which involves pods traveling inside low-pressure tubes at speeds of up to 700 mph. The Boring Company’s disruption might not only be limited to transportation, either, as the startup is also poised to release the Boring Bricks, which are blocks made from tunneling rock that could be used for low-cost housing. Permits for the creation of The Brick Store, a physical outlet where these blocks are set to be sold, have also been.
The Boring Company might be a fun startup, complete with Not-a-Flamethrowers, pet snails, sharp-tongued French knights, and a Monty Python-style watchtower made of Boring Bricks, but beneath all the unveiling event’s fun atmosphere was the sense that there is another disruption in the making — one that could complement the innovations being pushed by SpaceX and Tesla.
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
