Ford announced earlier this week that it would delay or completely cancel several electric vehicle models in an effort to align with consumer trends and hone in on a more profitable business after losing billions chasing Tesla.
While it may not be the most ideal thing, it is the best strategy for Ford right now, as it will shift more toward hybrids, leaning on current EV offerings and stopping the bleeding on financials.
Ford was arguably the most committed when it came to legacy automakers. It had put forth a solid investment plan that would see it expand its EV offerings over the course of a decade, bringing exciting offerings to each market based on its needs.
Ford’s love affair with EVs softens as profitability and consumer trends take focus
However, being the most committed does not always mean the most successful. Ford had suffered tremendous losses in 2023 because of its overwhelming commitment to EVs, so much so that CEO Jim Farley admitted at one point that it was on the lower end of its investment range for electrification moving forward.
“We’ll probably be on the low end of that range,” Farley said earlier this year about the $8 billion to $9 billion investment range. “And we’re being very consistent about our discipline on profitability.”
But now, things have totally changed.
-
Earlier this week, Ford all but admitted that it simply did not have the time or the money to keep going with its EV commitment. It was costing it billions, and instead of chasing after Tesla, it did what it should do: chase after money to keep it afloat. As Van Wilder’s dad said in the movie, “Sometimes in life, you have to realize a poor investment and cut your losses.”
Ford made the right choice. It was going along with the EV goals too far and too hard. Honda’s executives said recently that you simply cannot force people to buy something they don’t want. Right now, Teslas are what people want, at least in the United States, as the automaker, despite a growing number of competitors, continues to hold a sizeable lead in market share over competitors.
The lack of a truly competitive EV offering that appeals to consumers is what the issue is. There needs to be a product that truly outperforms Tesla in every way. That’s how people will switch, and that’s how EVs will be worth it. This goes for all companies, not just Ford.
To be the best, you have to beat the best.
“We’re committed to creating long-term value by building a competitive and profitable business,” Ford’s Vice Chair and CFO John Lawler said earlier this week as the company announced its softening EV stance. “With pricing and margin compression, we’ve made the decision to adjust our product and technology roadmap and industrial footprint to meet our goal of reaching positive EBIT within the first 12 months of launch for all new models.”
It will still bring forward a variety of new models, including a new truck, in the coming years. But for now, it is best that Ford does what it needs to do: scale back its commitment to EVs and continue to rely and lean on the Mustang Mach-E, F-150 Lightning, and E-Transit for the time being. The truth is that Ford simply did not and did not have enough of a consumer base that is interested in EVs, thus not justifying its mass commitment, and it might have cost them their business if it kept up the shtick.
From left to right: Ford’s F-150 Lightning, E-Transit van, and Mustang Mach-E (Credit: Ford)
Tempering its EV push and bringing new models as people want them is going to help Ford maintain capital while also softening the negative effects EVs have had on its financials. Ford has lost money on every EV it’s ever delivered to a customer, although it may not be the best thing for it to continue acting like things are all okay.
But in the meantime, Ford can do a few things to help consumers: offer affordable vehicles that cater to needs and develop a vehicle lineup that truly makes consumers on a massive scale consider things other than Tesla.
-
Leaning on classic names like the Mustang and F-150 and electrifying them might have won some people over. But it seems, especially with the popularity of the Bronco and Bronco Sport, Ford is missing a huge opportunity by not even hinting toward an EV version of the vehicle.
I think a lot of people might be disappointed, but this announcement seemed like it was coming sooner rather than later. As someone who has driven Fords and still owns one, I was hoping to make my next vehicle an electric Bronco. I have talked highly about the F-150 Lightning. But it is evident that it is still making a lot of its money selling the gas-powered F-Series and its other tried and true vehicle models.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
In a new note to investors on Tuesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco said that Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors regarding its Robotaxi rollout, Full Self-Driving software, and Optimus.
Percoco said in the note that, for the most part, investors are still very positive about the direction the company is headed. However, there are some things the firm would like to see, and they have to do with financials.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla bulls are more than convinced that the company’s Full Self-Driving software is proof it can develop physical AI. Financially, however, there are still some questions, especially on elevated spending, which CEO Elon Musk said would occur as the company works to roll out Robotaxi faster and continue developing its Optimus robot.
The latter two are where Tesla will have to prove progress to investors, as Percoco writes that both projects “will require clearer evidence that Robotaxi is scaling and more tangible Optimus proof points to support the ROI on elevated capex.”
Percoco said the second quarter earnings call did not change his long-term thesis of where Tesla is positioned in the AI race, which is out in front. However, there are concerns that weaker gross margins and higher R&D spend will stress financials, and that has “sharpened our (and investors’) focus on measurable progress across Robotaxi and Optimus.”
Additionally, Robotaxi still needs to be proven with more operation in existing cities while maintaining safety but improving how many rides it gives in any given time, he said. For Optimus, Percoco wrote that he is “still looking for evidence beyond commentary around SOP.”
-
Morgan Stanley put Percoco in charge of covering Tesla after long-time analyst Adam Jonas transitioned to the automotive side.
Currently, Morgan Stanley has a $415 price target on Tesla and a ‘Hold’ rating on the stock. It is trading at around $330 at the time of publication, which was 2:30 P.M. on the East Coast.
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
-
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
-
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
-
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
