Investor's Corner
Wired Takes a Tesla Factory Tour with Diarmuid O’Connell
Wired got a tour of the Tesla factory recently in the company of Diarmuid O’Connell, vice president of business development. The tour turned into a discussion of the core values that are the foundation of everything Tesla does.
Wired UK editor Michael Rundle recounts his recent tour of the Tesla factory with Vice President of Business Development, Diarmuid O’Connell. What started off as a jaunt through the factory soon became a deep dive into the philosophy that underpins everything Tesla stands for.
O’Connell was the 50th person hired by Tesla and the first who was not a trained engineer. He is a firm believer in the gospel according to Musk, but he is far from the only one. As reported by Wired UK, one company staffer was overheard during the tour saying the company’s mission is to discomfort “petrodictators.”
O’Connell starts off by telling Rundle that Tesla is not in the business of making automobiles. “Tesla is in the business of inspiring competition. The more electric vehicles the better.” Then he adds, “It would be a fulfillment of our mission if the biggest manufacturer in the US put a mass-market EV on the road. We’re hopeful that they will and frankly that everyone else does.”
He suggests that Tesla is bent on securing the future of “sustainable transport” as a whole, not just making a profit. If it can establish that EVs are viable, more cars, more charging infrastructure, more battery research and development, more greening of the electrical greed, and a reduced dependence on foreign oil will follow, Tesla will make money. But if Tesla loses its bet on the future, not only will it fail, but the environment and the world will lose as well.
For those who criticize the company for being slow to get its products to market, O’Connell has an answer. “If we had been able to produce [the Model S] out of the box 12 years ago, we would have done so. We had no brand, no capital, no manufacturing base and no developed technology,” he says. “This is the classic technology introduction model that has led to the mass market for everything from air travel to cell phones. … This is how you do it if you’re starting from zero.”
Tesla relies too much on government subsidies and the sale of emissions credits, some critics charge. O’Connell has an answer for that too. The oil and gas industries receive “$2 trillion in global subsidies” every year, he points out, but he saves his most severe criticism for “the $25 billion R&D tax credit that Exxon Mobile and some of the other big American gasoline petroleum producers still enjoy 120 years into the development of that technology.” Why doesn’t the press talk about that, he wonders?
Asked about how autonomous cars and ride sharing may affect the environment going forward, he says, “I think what’s important is the emissions profile of any car, whether it’s shared or owned. Big or small. We’re trying to move as quickly as possible where the emissions profile of a vehicle is zero, and the emissions profile of the original electron going into the vehicle is as close to zero as possible.”
As Tesla expands its markets to other countries, it will source as many components as possible from local sources. That includes building more Gigafactories nearby, whether in Europe, China, Japan or any other country. Doing so is only common sense, he argues.
With all the buzz about the Chevy Bolt, new competition from Faraday Future, Atieva, NextEV, BYD and BAIC, O’Connell takes a “What have you done for me lately?” attitude. “The path of getting there — that’s the question. And the promise of doing something two- and three- and four years hence do not impress me,” O’Connell says. “People doing stuff now? That impresses me.”
Finally, O’Connell gets down the bottom line, the real nitty gritty, the foundation Tesla is built on. “[Y]ou also have to put on the table how are we as a society thinking about larger issues, and moving ourselves towards taking other than strictly market oriented actions, to deliver public health benefits,” he says. “Maybe survival [depends] on how you think about carbon intensity and the logical progression of too much carbon in our atmosphere.”
There a lot of people who think a social conscience is not the proper role of business. It’s not the capitalist model they teach in business school. Some would go so far as to say Tesla is foolish for letting such considerations as respect for the earth color its business plans and detract from the quest for profits.
Maybe so, but if you listen to Diarmuid O’Connell, who obviously gets his convictions from Elon Musk himself, someday in the not too distant future, we will find out who is foolish…..and who are really the fools.
Photo credits: Tesla
Investor's Corner
SpaceX’s biggest earnings test yet lands Tuesday, and Tesla shareholders should be watching
SpaceX reports earnings Tuesday as Wall Street watches AI spending, Starlink growth and Tesla merger
SpaceX reports third quarter results after the market closes Tuesday, with a webcast at 4:30 p.m. ET streamed on X, and Tesla follows a day later. Bloomberg consensus, cited by Pepperstone, calls for revenue of $12.89 billion, adjusted EBITDA of $6.62 billion and adjusted EPS near $0.15. That would be about 65% growth from the second quarter and SpaceX’s first profitable quarter since its IPO. Analysts expect roughly $6.4 billion from AI and $4.9 billion from Starlink, which is projected to reach 14.3 million consumer subscribers. Capital spending is forecast at $19.6 billion, leaving free cash flow near negative $11.6 billion.
The numbers matter because SpaceX has spent months trying to win over a skeptical market. It priced its record IPO at $135, spiked to $225.64, then sank near $105 in early August. Friday’s close of $146.03 sits about 28% below the June high. The Q2 report beat on revenue at $7.8 billion and put Starlink at 12 million subscribers, but $18.4 billion of capex hurt the stock. Since then SpaceX reached orbit on Starship Flight 14 with 26 Starlink V3 satellites, agreed to buy 800 MHz spectrum for about $8 billion as part of its Starlink Mobile push, and signed a fourth compute hosting deal in four months worth roughly $13 billion a year from December. Management is targeting more than 2 gigawatts of compute by year end and a $100 billion annualized revenue run rate. Evercore ISI, which raised its target to $275, said the quarter may be judged more on those targets than the reported figures
All of this sits under the Tesla merger question. Barclays analyst Dan Levy expects an all stock deal in which SpaceX buys Tesla at a premium, using reference values of $2.1 trillion and $1.5 trillion, and said an announcement would need to come by late October or early November to be voted on at Tesla’s December 6 annual meeting. Barclays estimates Musk would hold about 37% of the combined company and 56% of the votes. Musk said in July that combining companies cannot be discussed on an earnings call, but an investor question asking when SpaceX will merge with Tesla is sitting on SpaceX’s Q&A platform, and Teslarati has tracked how the Roadster demo revived the talk.
If a deal happens, Tuesday’s result would effectively set the price Tesla holders would receive. Their shares would convert into SpaceX stock, along with exposure to a company with a heavy investment on AI, while Tesla itself expects 2026 capex above $25 billion. A strong quarter and calmer spending would make that exchange easier to sell. Another round of heavy capex and a falling stock would make it harder.
Investor's Corner
Tesla’s flying Roadster just revealed something bigger than the car
Analysts say the Roadster demo puts a Tesla and SpaceX merger back on the table.
The Roadster unveiling near Waco ended Thursday night, and by Friday morning much of the investor reaction had less to do with the car than with who owns the rocket technology inside it.
Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said the event “puts the Tesla/SpaceX relationship on the table in a tangible way,” pointing to the propulsion, pressure vessel and control hardware sitting on a Tesla product. Gene Munster of Deepwater Asset Management called the demo “a ridiculous display of engineering” with “no commercial value” beyond embarrassing traditional automakers, though he said it showed Musk wants the two companies together.
The more specific forecast came a day earlier from Barclays. Analyst Dan Levy told clients a deal could be announced before Tesla’s annual meeting, which must happen by December 6, and that an announcement in late October or early November could make shareholder approval harder. Barclays expects SpaceX to be the buyer in an all stock deal, with Tesla holders receiving SpaceX shares at a premium, based on market values of roughly $2.1 trillion for SpaceX and $1.5 trillion for Tesla. If nothing lands around the meeting, the bank still sees an announcement within 6 to 12 months.
The Roadster demo just added more weight to merger speculations. Tesla’s demo used cold gas thrusters and pressure tanks of the kind SpaceX uses on Falcon 9, and Musk described the car as a collaboration between Tesla and SpaceX engineers, as we mentioned in our breakdown of the three Roadster configurations.
Musk has not publicly addressed a deal since the event, as far as we have seen. His most direct answer remains the one he gave at the All In Summit, when he said that with so much collaboration, “who can imagine what action one might take” without ruling anything out. Ives has held to a 2027 timeline since his March note, and Musk pushed back on the China piece of the speculation when ARK floated a year end announcement in August.
The next test is Tesla’s third quarter earnings call on October 21. However, we recall in July that Musk told analysts, “we can’t talk about combining companies and that kind of thing on an earnings call,” so a clear answer wouldn’t be expected.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk breaks his silence on the Starlink impact to Ukraine drones
Musk says the US military and president set Starshield limits, not SpaceX, amid Ukraine complaints.
Elon Musk says the speed limit cutting out Ukraine’s military Starlink terminals is not SpaceX’s decision. In a post on X Wednesday, Musk wrote that “Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.” He added that Starlink is a commercial service limited to civilian or defensive activities and “cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.”
He was replying to Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s former defense minister, who had thanked Musk for restoring connectivity at speeds up to 160 km/h and said removing the Starshield limit entirely is “now critical for Ukraine’s defense.”
Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.
Starlink is a commercial service owned and controlled by SpaceX. Usage of Starlink is limited to civilian or defensive activities and cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 14, 2026
The complaint started Tuesday night, when Ukrainian officials said military terminals began losing service above roughly 100 mph. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said the defense forces got no warning and several missions were disrupted, as Teslarati reported earlier Wednesday. The 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at speeds well below the limit, which made drones harder to control. Poland’s foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asked Musk on X whether he is “playing politics with your products again.”
That is why the Starlink and Starshield distinction matters. SpaceX introduced Starshield in 2022 as the government version of Starlink, with an initial focus on Earth observation, communications and hosted payloads. It won a Space Force contract in 2023 with a $70 million ceiling. In December 2024, the Pentagon moved Ukraine’s terminals onto Starshield, covering about 3,000 units across two contracts. Ukraine’s military connections therefore run through a service that Musk now says sits under Washington’s control.
While Musk’s post describes who holds authority, it does not infer that anyone ordered the limit, and neither SpaceX nor the US government has confirmed who set it. Ukrainian officials have pointed to the timing, which follows President Trump’s push for an energy ceasefire and Musk’s Saturday post that “Zelensky has gone too far.” The BBC noted Trump denied threatening to restrict intelligence sharing with Kyiv, and no evidence has been presented that Washington requested the cap.
The episode also revives a promise from 2025. After Poland accused him of threatening Ukraine’s access, Musk said Starlink “will never turn off its terminals” and would not be used as a bargaining chip. Poland has since supplied more than 29,000 terminals to Ukraine. Teslarati also covered Kyiv’s search for Starlink alternatives in 2025, and the latest dispute gives that search new urgency.
SpaceX’s biggest earnings test yet lands Tuesday, and Tesla shareholders should be watching
SpaceX’s Gwynne Shotwell just made a quiet gesture toward Tesla
Tesla Roadster owners to get “Flying Stunt Mode” and looping track access
SpaceX reveals how its 1 Million AI satellite network will work and prevent space collisions
Tesla Roadster: Three configs, one can fly, 0-60 in 0.8 seconds
