Category: Auto Industry

Elon Musk Wins Shareholder Approval for Tesla’s Historic $1 Trillion Pay Package
Elon Musk speaking at the 2025 Tesla shareholder meeting. ·© Tesla.com
Stock Widget
Tesla TSLA -2.85% ▼ shareholders approved a record-setting pay package for Chief Executive Elon Musk, a plan designed to motivate the world’s richest man with as much as $1 trillion in additional stock.

Flanked by dancing humanoid robots on a stage bathed in pink and blue light at the electric-vehicle maker’s Austin, Texas, headquarters, Musk thanked the crowd of shareholders who supported the pay package with more than 75% of the votes cast.
“What we’re about to embark upon is not merely a new chapter of the future of Tesla but a whole new book,” Musk said. “I guess what I’m saying is hang onto your Tesla stock,” he added later.
The measure was hotly debated, with some large shareholders taking opposing sides. The voting was largely seen as a referendum on the company’s longtime leader and his vision to shift Tesla’s focus to humanoid robots and artificial intelligence.
Musk, who is also CEO of SpaceX and xAI, had threatened on social media to leave Tesla if the measure had been rejected. He is already Tesla’s biggest shareholder, with a roughly 15% stake.
Musk had said he wanted a big enough ownership stake in Tesla to be comfortable that the “robot army” he was developing didn’t fall into the wrong hands, but not so large that he couldn’t be fired if he went “crazy.”
On another proposal that would authorize the Tesla board to invest in Musk’s artificial-intelligence company, xAI, Tesla General Counsel Brandon Ehrhart said more shares had been voted for the proposal than against, but there were many abstentions. He said the board would consider its next steps.
Musk had publicly endorsed the idea as he seeks to catch up in the AI race.
The new pay package, which includes 12 chunks of stock, could give Musk control over as much as 25% of Tesla if he hits a series of milestones and expands the company’s market capitalization to $8.5 trillion over the next 10 years. Its market cap is now around $1.5 trillion.
Tesla’s board described the package as pay for performance, designed to motivate Musk to transform the company with new products such as autonomous vehicles, robotaxis and humanoid robots.
“Having worked with him now for 11 years, I can say what motivates him is doing things that others can’t do or haven’t been able to do,” Tesla Chair Robyn Denholm said in an interview last week.
Tesla struggled to keep Musk’s attention earlier this year as he spent time in Washington running the Department of Government Efficiency. Tesla’s vehicle sales fell more than 13% in the first half of the year. After Musk left Washington in May, he turned his focus to his startup xAI and the development of its chatbot Grok, The Wall Street Journal reported.
The new pay package was opposed by several proxy advisers and institutional investors including the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, various New York City retirement systems, and Norges Bank Investment Management, which is the sixth-largest institutional shareholder with a 1.2% stake.
Institutional Shareholder Services, one of the proxy advisers that urged passive funds to vote down the compensation package, said it had concerns about the magnitude and design of the “astronomical” stock award.
Charles Schwab, which has a Tesla stake of about 0.6%, said Tuesday it would vote in favor of the package. “We firmly believe that supporting this proposal aligns both management and shareholder interests,” it said in a statement.
Huge stock awards tied to ambitious targets—sometimes called “moonshot” pay packages—are cast by proponents as a high-octane incentive for outstanding performance. Critics say they are often doubly flawed: overly expensive if targets prove easier than predicted; and counterproductive if the targets become unattainable and executives see little reason to stick around.
Musk’s new package is divided into 12 tranches. He could reach the first tranche if Tesla’s market cap grows to $2 trillion from around $1.5 trillion today, combined with an operational goal such as selling 11.5 million new vehicles, on top of the 8.5 million vehicles on the road.
More challenging milestones include selling one million robots to paying customers and maintaining an adjusted Ebitda of $400 billion. Last year, Tesla posted an adjusted Ebitda of $16 billion.
For each tranche he unlocks, Musk would receive equity equivalent to about 1% of Tesla’s current shares. Once he earns a tranche, he could vote those shares but wouldn’t be able to sell them until they vest, in either 7.5 years or 10 years.
Musk’s 2018 pay package, the most valuable on record before the 2025 package, is tied up in a dispute at the Delaware Supreme Court. Tesla is appealing a lower-court decision to rescind the 2018 pay package after a judge ruled in January 2024 that Tesla’s directors were beholden to Musk and the approval process for that package was tainted and lacked transparency.
Here is a breakdown of Musk’s current Tesla ownership:
November 7, 2025
Former Tesla Executive Takes Aim at Musk’s Management Style
Stock Widget
Tesla’s TSLA -4.75% ▼ 2025 has been forgettable, to say the least.

Deliveries dropped hard in Q2, tanking nearly 14% year-over-year, marking Tesla’s worst quarterly sales drop in over a decade.
Also, the U.S. EV market share dropped to 38% in August, the first time it has fallen below 40% since 2017, with legacy automakers and new players closing in.
Moreover, the stock has been on a rollercoaster.
After its market cap peaked near $1.24 trillion in February, Tesla’s market cap plunged to $916 billion by March, erasing a whopping $300 billion in value before clawing back. Also, shares remain flat year-to-date, lagging broader market gains in the tech space.
Then there’s the incredible reputational damage. Political firestorms, product delays, and a stream of high-level exits continue to test investor patience.
2025 Tesla Cybertruck. © Greg Pajo|Car/Driver
Now, another senior executive is out, and his exit has been far from quiet. His blunt criticism of leadership sharpens concerns that Tesla’s challenges aren’t just cyclical, but also structural.
Senior engineer’s exit adds to Tesla leadership strain
Tesla’s leadership churn just had another spotlight moment.
Senior engineer Giorgio Balestrieri, who joined the EV pioneer in 2017 and was involved in its Autobidder energy-trading platform, announced his departure on LinkedIn this week, putting Elon Musk squarely at the center of it.
Balestrieri wrote on LinkedIn:
“All this being said, I do need to address the elephant in the room: The main reason I’m leaving is that I think Elon has dealt huge damage to Tesla’s mission (and to the health of democratic institutions in several countries).
“Beyond that, Elon’s leadership and decision making seem seriously compromised. Given his huge (and growing, inexplicably) stake in Tesla, I can’t convince myself anymore that this is the right place to be.”
For context, after his stake dipped to 12.7% to 13% post-Twitter sales, Tesla’s August stock award of a whopping $29 billion could lift his holding to over 15%.
Additionally, the board also floated a “$1 trillion” performance package, which could potentially boost his voting power toward 25% over time.
Tesla’s stock has weathered a ton of criticism from Musk, but steady departures of long-tenured engineers raise a ton of questions for investors.
Leadership credibility matters critically in advanced energy platforms, and when insiders question it, the cost of capital and talent retention become major long-term issues.
More exits pile up as the Tesla brand takes a hit
The Balestrieri departure isn’t an isolated event.
Over the past year, we’ve seen at least eight senior leaders walk, spanning sales, software, robotics, and service.
Some of the recent high-profile exits over the past 12 months include:
- Troy Jones, VP sales/service/delivery (North America): Left July 15, 2025
- Piero Landolfi, director of service (North America): Departed Aug. 11, 2025
- Omead Afshar, head of sales & manufacturing (NA/EU): Exited late June 2025
- Milan Kovac, head of Optimus (humanoid robot): Announced his exit on June 6, 2025
- David Lau, VP of software engineering: Stepped down in April 2025
Also notable in 2025 were key exits of personnel such as Vineet Mehta in batteries, David Imai in design, and Pete Bannon, who led Tesla’s Dojo supercomputer project.
These developments should be troubling for Tesla investors, as this isn’t just about swapping nameplates. It involves losing institutional memory across sales, service, and next-gen platforms.
In markets where talent and trust are paramount, frequent senior departures slow recruiting flywheels, denting a company’s reputation in the process.
These effects rarely show up in a single quarter, but are likely to compound over time in valuation multiples.
September 13, 2025
Volvo Brake Failure Leads to Recall After Mountain Incident
Video provided by the owner.
Stock Widget
What should have been a peaceful drive down a scenic California mountain road turned into a harrowing life-or-death struggle for 69-year-old retired radiologist Dr. Peter Rothschild, whose Volvo XC90 plug-in hybrid suddenly lost its ability to brake. With dashcam footage capturing every moment of the escalating crisis, the terrifying incident is now at the center of a nationwide recall affecting nearly 12,000 Volvo vehicles — and raising serious questions about the automaker’s safety practices and software deployment. Volvo VOLV -4.10% ▼

On a steep descent along Corona Road in Carmel Highlands, Rothschild’s Volvo — equipped with Volvo’s latest software version 3.5.14 — began to accelerate uncontrollably, defying the driver’s repeated attempts to brake. As his vehicle gained speed, Rothschild made a split-second decision that likely saved his life: he steered into an embankment, intentionally crashing the vehicle to avoid flying off the mountainside.
“The last thing you want to do is panic, but this was a scary road and without brakes it’s very scary,” Rothschild told The Wall Street Journal. “This wasn’t my fault. This was Volvo’s fault.”
A Preventable Catastrophe
Video provided by the owner. © WSJ
Unbeknownst to Rothschild — or the dealership that recently serviced his vehicle — his XC90 had been affected by a serious software flaw introduced in a prior update. The issue, tied to regenerative braking systems and use of “B-mode” or “One Pedal Drive,” could cause a complete loss of braking function after coasting downhill for over 90 seconds.
According to Volvo Cars USA, the problem arose when a recall for a rearview camera defect was bundled with other system updates — updates which inadvertently introduced a new critical braking bug.
Volvo now admits that around 11,500 vehicles out of more than 400,000 updated units may have been affected by the glitch.
“We are treating this issue very seriously and doing everything we can to update all impacted vehicles as soon as possible,” the company said in a statement.
Photos and video provided to © Carscoops by the owner.
The Horror Caught on Camera
Dashcam footage reviewed by Carscoops shows Rothschild’s Volvo XC90 speeding uncontrollably down a narrow road. Despite visible brake pedal application — confirmed later through vehicle data logs — the SUV accelerates, passing the one-minute-and-forty-second mark without slowing down.
Data from the vehicle’s onboard recorder shows that brake input was consistent, and no throttle was applied. However, the vehicle did not respond. Faced with a fatal drop just ahead, Rothschild drove the SUV into a dirt embankment. The side airbags deployed, and the front suspension and wheel were shattered on impact. The wheel itself split into pieces, according to post-crash photos.
Fortunately, no one was injured, but the psychological toll was real.
“I don’t think I would’ve made the next curve and would’ve gone off the side,” Rothschild said. “I’ve driven Volvos since the 1980s, spent close to a million dollars on them over the years. But I’m done.”
More Than Just One Incident
Rothschild’s terrifying ride isn’t the only one. Carscoops confirmed at least three similar reports of brake loss under similar conditions, all tied to software version 3.5.14 — the same update Rothschild received just hours before his crash. In another case, a California driver (referred to as “Max”) experienced nearly identical circumstances in his two-month-old XC90 Recharge.
“I was forced to steer off the road into the side of a hill to avoid going over a cliff,” Max said.
After inspecting Max’s vehicle, a forensic crash reconstruction engineer found “no throttle input, full brake input, increasing speed — the brakes were clearly not functioning.” The post-crash analysis left little room for doubt: the failure was systemic.
In June, Volvo initially warned owners of nine different models not to use B-mode or One Pedal Driving — driving modes typically associated with enhanced regenerative braking and energy efficiency.
Affected models (2020–2026): XC90, XC60, XC40, S60, V60, S90, EX40, EC40, C40
By July, the automaker escalated its warning, urging all affected vehicle owners to visit a dealer immediately to receive the fixed software — or risk losing braking altogether.
As of this week, Volvo said roughly 600 vehicles still haven’t been updated. Owners are being told not to use certain driving modes until the patch is installed.
Yet critics argue Volvo’s handling of the issue has been slow and opaque. Despite Carscoops’ repeated inquiries, Volvo has not provided a full incident chronology, nor explained why the software was distributed without more rigorous testing.
Brand Reputation at Risk
Volvo has built its legacy on safety innovation — from pioneering the three-point safety belt to its much-lauded commitment to zero fatalities in new Volvo cars. But this latest software snafu could tarnish that brand trust, especially among loyalists like Rothschild.
“We almost died and they don’t even say they’re sorry,” Max said. “It’s a lame response from a company that built its name on protecting people.”
Rothschild echoed the sentiment. “This isn’t just about fixing a car. This is about trust. You expect a Volvo to protect you, not betray you.”
Volvo says that a software fix is already available and urges customers to update immediately. The fix can be installed over-the-air or at authorized dealerships.
Until those answers are provided — and all affected cars are fixed — Volvo’s crisis may continue to deepen.
Rothschild, who once proudly passed his love of Volvo on to his children, says he’s now shopping for a Tesla instead.
“Safety shouldn’t be a gamble,” he said. “This isn’t a minor bug. This was nearly a death sentence.”
What to Do If You Own an Affected Volvo
If you own a 2020–2026 Volvo plug-in hybrid or EV, check whether your vehicle is part of the recall using the NHTSA Recall Lookup Tool or contact your local dealer. If your car is running software version 3.5.14, avoid B-mode and One Pedal Drive until the fix is installed.
August 3, 2025
Delta Air Lines Confirms to U.S. Legislators That It Will Not Personalize Ticket Prices with AI
ATLANTA, GA — Delta Air Lines is facing mounting scrutiny over its adoption of artificial intelligence in airfare pricing, following sharp criticism from U.S. lawmakers who raised concerns about potential “personalized pricing” — a practice where AI could tailor fares based on a customer’s individual data or perceived willingness to pay.
In a letter sent Friday to three Democratic senators — Ruben Gallego (AZ), Mark Warner (VA), and Richard Blumenthal (CT) — Delta firmly denied any intent to use AI in that manner, stating:
“There is no fare product Delta has ever used, is testing or plans to use that targets customers with individualized prices based on personal data. Our ticket pricing never takes into account personal data.”
The issue surfaced after the senators expressed alarm at comments made by Delta President Glen Hauenstein in December, when he said that Delta’s AI pricing system can predict “the amount people are willing to pay for the premium products related to the base fares.” The lawmakers interpreted this to mean Delta could eventually implement AI tools that price tickets based on individual “pain points” — essentially, the maximum price a specific person might accept.
In a joint statement last week, the senators warned that such a practice would “likely mean fare price increases up to each individual consumer’s personal ‘pain point.’” The phrase sparked public backlash, fueling concerns over digital price discrimination in a sector where pricing transparency is already murky.
While Delta clarified that it is not using AI to set fares on a per-person basis, it acknowledged that it will expand AI-powered dynamic pricing systems to cover 20% of its domestic network by the end of 2025, in collaboration with Israeli startup Fetcherr, which specializes in AI-driven pricing models.
Delta reiterated that this technology is intended to streamline conventional pricing systems based on aggregate market factors — such as demand, fuel prices, and competition — not consumer behavior or identity.
Delta emphasized that dynamic pricing has been used across the airline industry for over 30 years, long before the arrival of advanced machine learning tools. Historically, ticket prices have fluctuated based on broad variables like demand spikes during holidays, competitor pricing, or regional economic trends.
In the letter to lawmakers, Delta wrote:
Open letter
“Given the tens of millions of fares and hundreds of thousands of routes for sale at any given time, the use of new technology like AI promises to streamline the process by which we analyze existing data and the speed and scale at which we can respond to changing market dynamics.”
In other words, AI would merely optimize what was already a complex pricing algorithm — not personalize it.
Still, lawmakers remain unconvinced. Senator Gallego responded to Delta’s letter, stating:
“Delta is telling their investors one thing, and then turning around and telling the public another. If Delta is in fact using aggregated instead of individualized data, that is welcome news — but we need clarity.”
Delta’s assurances came amid broader industry and regulatory unease. American Airlines CEO Robert Isom voiced his own concerns during an earnings call last week:
“This is not about bait and switch. This is not about tricking. Talk about using AI in that way — I don’t think it’s appropriate. And certainly from American, it’s not something we will do.”
At the legislative level, Representatives Greg Casar (TX) and Rashida Tlaib (MI) introduced a bill last week that would ban the use of AI for pricing or wage decisions based on personal data. The bill directly references potential scenarios such as airlines raising ticket prices after detecting a consumer searching for a family obituary — a hypothetical scenario designed to illustrate emotional exploitation through algorithmic targeting.
The bill comes after the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released a January staff report warning that companies increasingly use personal information — such as location, demographics, and even mouse movements — to adjust prices for goods and services.
According to the FTC:
“Retailers frequently use people’s personal information to set targeted, tailored prices… A consumer profiled as a new parent could be intentionally shown higher-priced baby thermometers.”
Delta’s partnership with Fetcherr and its AI revenue management strategy signals a broader trend in the travel and transportation sector. Airlines are exploring AI to help navigate volatile fuel prices, shifting post-pandemic demand patterns, and ongoing labor shortages.
Fetcherr’s AI pricing platform is designed to mimic stock market dynamics, adjusting prices in real-time based on numerous market variables — from macroeconomic indicators to real-time seat availability. While powerful, such models inevitably raise transparency and fairness concerns.
Despite the controversy, investors have reacted with cautious optimism. Delta shares (NYSE: DAL) rose 1.4% Friday following the company’s public response, reflecting investor confidence in Delta’s ability to manage AI implementation without triggering regulatory blowback.
Industry analysts, however, remain split.
Morgan Stanley aviation analyst Richard Hill commented:
“AI will inevitably change airline economics. But companies must tread carefully. Crossing the line into personal pricing is a reputational and legal minefield — and Congress is watching.”
While Delta has now publicly pledged not to use personal data for individualized fares, pressure from lawmakers and consumer advocates shows no sign of abating.
Expect greater regulatory scrutiny in the coming months, as AI tools proliferate across industries. For now, the travel sector remains a key battleground in the growing debate over algorithmic fairness, data ethics, and the power of artificial intelligence to reshape market behavior.
August 3, 2025
Ford’s “Made in America” Approach Backfires Amid Trump’s Tariffs
President Donald Trump’s aggressive new trade policies—designed to bolster domestic manufacturing—are hitting Ford Motor Company harder than many anticipated. Despite building roughly 80% of the vehicles it sells in the U.S. domestically, Ford is projecting a net $2 billion tariff-related drag on earnings for 2025, up from a prior estimate of $1.5 billion.
Big Three Automakers Earnings Loss – 3D Chart
Big Three to Lose $7 Billion in Earnings
Ford, GM, and Stellantis—the so-called Big Three—now expect a combined $7 billion earnings hit this year

3D column chart showing earnings losses for Big Three automakers: Ford $2 billion, GM $3.5 billion, Stellantis $1.5 billion, totaling $7 billion in losses.

Despite its domestic-heavy production footprint, Ford isn’t insulated. It reported an $800 million tariff hit in Q2, contributing to a net loss of $36 million, and revised its full‑year earnings forecast to $6.5 billion–$7.5 billion, down from previous guidance of $7.0 billion–$8.5 billion.
Made-in-America Isn’t Enough
Even though Ford produces nearly four in five U.S.-sold vehicles locally, much of its parts and materials—like steel, aluminum, and EV components—are sourced internationally. Under the White House’s new trade regime:
Foreign-made vehicle imports face new 25% tariffs, while automakers allied with USMCA countries can benefit from reduced levies as long as supplier sourcing meets content rules.
Ford continues to face steep tariffs on materials and parts—particularly aluminum and steel—which squeeze margins despite local assembly.
Ford Motor Co. CEO Jim Farley poses next to a new 2021 Ford F-150 pickup truck at the Rouge Complex in Dearborn, Michigan, U.S. September 17, 2020. © REUTERS/Rebecca Cook/File Photo
CEO Jim Farley warned the tariffs could “blow a hole in the U.S. industry” and force difficult choices in product planning and pricing strategy.
Thanks to trade agreements with the EU, Japan, and South Korea, many foreign automakers now pay only 15% tariffs, significantly less than the 25% levied on imports from Canada and Mexico or on non‑compliant parts.
Stellantis CEO Antonio Filosa noted that 8 million of the 16 million vehicles sold annually in the U.S.—made in Mexico or Canada with many U.S. components—now face higher tariffs than fully compliant imports from abroad.
Stellantis North America COO and Jeep CEO Antonio Filosa speaks during the Stellantis press conference at the Automobility LA 2024 car show, Los Angeles, California, U.S., Nov. 21, 2024. © AFP Photo
In Q1 2025, Ford’s revenue declined 5% to $40.7 billion but still beat expectations, and net income dropped from $1.3 billion to $471 million.
- Offset strategies include:
  - Transporting compliant vehicles from Mexico through bonded channels to avoid tariffs
  - Halting exports to China
  - Implementing internal cost reductions totaling about $1 billion planned for 2025
As of late July, Ford reinstated full‑year guidance, projecting $6.5 billion–$7.5 billion in adjusted EBIT, and affirmed $2 billion in tariff-related costs for the year.
Big Three Carmakers Earnings – Accurate Data
Analysts predict lower earnings at the Big Three carmakers
General Motors
Ford
Stellantis

Bar chart showing Big Three automakers’ net income from 2018 to 2026, with actual data through 2023 and analyst forecasts for 2024-2026.

A recent study estimates the entire auto industry could incur up to $108 billion in tariff costs, with the Big Three alone losing roughly $41.7 billion in 2025. Bernstein analysts forecast up to a 60% decline in free cash flow for the trio, due to rising production costs and shrinking margins.
Consumer pricing will likely rise: average new vehicle prices could increase by 4–8% by year-end, with some models seeing hikes up to $2,000, driven by imported parts tariffs and material cost inflation.
US Car Sales by Assembly Location
On average only half the cars sold in America are made there
US car sales by country of assembly % (US companies starred)
US
Canada/Mexico
Imported
0 20 40 60 80 100
Horizontal stacked bar chart showing percentage of US car sales by assembly location for different manufacturers. US companies are marked with asterisks.

Ford’s commitment to “Made in America” now looks paradoxical. The company is suffering disproportionately from a tariff regime meant to favor U.S. businesses—because its deep integration with global parts supplies exposes it to amplified cost burdens. Farley’s characterization of Ford as “the most American company with a $2 billion liability” captures the irony and urgency of the moment.
Unless Washington revises or harmonizes its trade policies—particularly with key neighbors Mexico and Canada—the pain for Ford and its peers could deepen. Meanwhile, international competitors may seize market share just as consumer prices edge upward.
August 1, 2025
Elon Musk’s ‘retro-futuristic’ Tesla Diner opens in Hollywood, featuring Optimus robots and Cybertruck-themed food boxes
Elon Musk’s Optimus robots greeted hungry fans as the mogul’s long-awaited Tesla Diner finally opened its “retro-futuristic” doors along the famed Hollywood strip.
The all-night drive-in offers “80 V4 Supercharger stalls” and two giant entertainment screens — where Tesla’s humanoid Optimus robots handed out popcorn to customers who showed up for Monday’s debut.
The location opened up for orders at 4:20 p.m. local time Monday – Musk’s favorite marijuana-themed reference.
People wait in line during the opening of the Tesla Diner and Drive-In restaurant and Supercharger on Santa Monica Blvd in the Hollywood neighborhood Los Angeles, California on July 21, 2025. © AFP via Getty Images
The Tesla CEO shared a number of posts touting the Tesla Diner’s features and urged customers to “try it out.”
“Aiming to be a fun experience for all, whether Tesla owners or not. Will keep improving,” Musk wrote on X.
The menu features a number of classic options with locally sourced ingredients, including fried chicken and waffles, a Tesla burger and a Diner club sandwich.
Some diners received their food in “Cybertruck”-themed boxes resembling Tesla’s stainless steel pickup trick. Cups and cartons of fries featured a distinctive Tesla lightning bolt logo.
If the original diner concept is successful, Musk said in separate post that Tesla would “establish these in major cities around the world, as well as Supercharger sites on long distance routes.”
Musk has teased his diner concept online for several years.
Tesla Cybertruck food boxes were given to customers. © AFP via Getty Images
Tesla Cybertruck food boxes were given to customers. © AFP/Getty Images
Tesla’s Optimus robots greeted customers and handed out popcorn. © Tesla Club- SoCal / SWNS
In 2023, Tesla gained approval to move forward with construction on Santa Monica Blvd.
Customers are able to watch movies on the diner’s giant screens or in their own vehicles by accessing the Tesla diner app.
Tesla shares were up about 1% in trading Tuesday.
Musk has refocused his efforts on Tesla after stepping back from President Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency.
The Tesla Diner was described as a retrofuturistic experience. © ZUMAPRESS.com
The two had a public falling-out over the president’s “Big Beautiful Bill,” with Musk even declaring plans to launch his own political party.
Meanwhile, Tesla is looking to reverse a recent vehicle sales slump.
Musk has touted the long-term prospects of the company’s technology, especially its Optimus robots and self-driving Robotaxi fleet, which recently debuted in Austin, Texas.
July 22, 2025
Cockpit recording from Air India suggests the captain cut fuel to the engines before the crash, source says
A cockpit recording of dialogue between the two pilots of the Air India flight that crashed last month supports the view that the captain cut the flow of fuel to the plane’s engines, said a source briefed on U.S. officials’ early assessment of evidence.
The first officer was at the controls of the Boeing 787 and asked the captain why he moved the fuel switches into a position that starved the engines of fuel and requested that he restore the fuel flow, the source told Reuters on condition of anonymity because the matter remains under investigation.
The U.S. assessment is not contained in a formal document, said the source, who emphasized the cause of the June 12 crash in Ahmedabad, India, that killed 260 people remains under investigation.
There was no cockpit video recording definitively showing which pilot flipped the switches, but the weight of evidence from the conversation points to the captain, according to the early assessment.
The Wall Street Journal first reported similar information on Wednesday about the world’s deadliest aviation accident in a decade.
A police officer stands in front of the wreckage of an Air India aircraft, bound for London’s Gatwick Airport, which crashed during take-off from an airport in Ahmedabad, India June 12, 2025. (REUTERS/Adnan Abidi/File Photo)
India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), which is leading the investigation into the crash, said in a statement on Thursday that “certain sections of the international media are repeatedly attempting to draw conclusions through selective and unverified reporting.” It added the investigation was ongoing and it remained too early to draw definitive conclusions.
Most air crashes are caused by multiple factors, and under international rules, a final report is expected within a year of an accident.
A preliminary report released by the AAIB on Saturday said one pilot was heard on the cockpit voice recorder asking the other why he cut off the fuel and “the other pilot responded that he did not do so.”
Investigators did not identify which remarks were made by Captain Sumeet Sabharwal and which by First Officer Clive Kunder, who had total flying experience of 15,638 hours and 3,403 hours, respectively.
The AAIB’s preliminary report said the fuel switches had switched from “run” to “cutoff” a second apart just after takeoff, but it did not say how they were moved.
Almost immediately after the plane lifted off the ground, closed-circuit TV footage showed a backup energy source called a ram air turbine had deployed, indicating a loss of power from the engines.
The London-bound plane began to lose thrust, and after reaching a height of 650 feet, the jet started to sink.
The fuel switches for both engines were turned back to “run”, and the airplane automatically tried restarting the engines, the report said.
But the plane was too low and too slow to be able to recover, aviation safety expert John Nance told Reuters.
The plane clipped some trees and a chimney before crashing in a fireball into a building on a nearby medical college campus, the report said, killing 19 people on the ground and 241 of the 242 on board the 787.
No safety recommendations
In an internal memo on Monday, Air India CEO Campbell Wilson said the preliminary report found no mechanical or maintenance faults and that all required maintenance had been carried out.
The AAIB’s preliminary report had no safety recommendations for Boeing or engine manufacturer GE.
After the report was released, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing privately issued notifications that the fuel switch locks on Boeing planes are safe, a document seen by Reuters showed and four sources with knowledge of the matter said.
The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board has been assisting with the Air India investigation and its Chair Jennifer Homendy has been fully briefed on all aspects, a board spokesperson said. That includes the cockpit voice recording and details from the flight data recorder that the NTSB team assisted the AAIB in reading out, the spokesperson added.
“The safety of international air travel depends on learning as much as we can from these rare events so that industry and regulators can improve aviation safety,” Homendy said in a statement. “And if there are no immediate safety issues discovered, we need to know that as well.”
The circumstantial evidence increasingly indicates that a crew member flipped the engine fuel switches, Nance said, given there was “no other rational explanation” that was consistent with the information released to date.
Nonetheless, investigators “still have to dig into all the factors” and rule out other possible contributing factors which would take time, he said.
The Air India crash has rekindled debate over adding flight deck cameras, known as cockpit image recorders, on airliners.
Nance said investigators likely would have benefited greatly from having video footage of the cockpit during the Air India flight.
July 18, 2025
Tesla Set to Launch in India With Planned Showroom Opening
Tesla Inc. TSLA –.–%
Mumbai, India – Tesla Inc. is set to make its long-awaited debut in India next week, officially entering the world’s third-largest automobile market with the opening of its first showroom in Mumbai.
The U.S. electric vehicle (EV) pioneer will unveil its new Tesla Experience Center on July 15, located at the upscale Maker Maxity Mall in the Bandra Kurla Complex (BKC), Mumbai’s premier business district. According to an event invitation obtained by The NY Budgets, the launch event will run for approximately 90 minutes, marking a significant milestone for the company and Indian EV enthusiasts alike.
The new Experience Center will showcase Tesla’s flagship EVs, including the Model 3 and Model Y, and serve as a hub for direct sales, test drives, and customer engagement. Tesla is expected to begin direct sales in India immediately following the launch, offering a fully digital ordering process through its official website and showroom network.
This is Tesla’s first official presence in India after years of anticipation, regulatory hurdles, and discussions about tariffs and factory investments.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has long expressed interest in the Indian market. The company’s momentum picked up after a high-profile virtual meeting between Musk and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in April. The two reportedly discussed cooperation in technology, renewable energy, and innovation.
During the same month, Tesla’s Chief Financial Officer noted the company had been “very careful” in timing its India entry, signaling strategic caution given India’s complex regulatory and competitive landscape.
Despite India’s population of over 1.4 billion and growing middle class, EV adoption has been slow due to infrastructure challenges, high upfront costs, and limited availability of premium EVs.
Tesla will not manufacture locally in India, at least initially. Vehicles sold in India will be imported from its Shanghai Gigafactory in China and the Gigafactory Berlin-Brandenburg in Germany. This means Indian buyers may face import duties of up to 70%, making Tesla’s cars significantly more expensive compared to domestic EVs.
India has offered incentives to reduce the import duty to 15% — but only for companies that invest $500 million or more in local manufacturing. However, according to Indian Minister of Heavy Industries, H.D. Kumaraswamy, Tesla currently has “no interest” in setting up a local plant.
This stance may evolve if demand in India proves strong enough to justify local assembly or a full-scale Gigafactory.
Tesla’s entry into India will put it in direct competition with major players in the local EV scene:
BYD (Build Your Dreams), the Chinese EV giant, already operates in India with its Atto 3 electric SUV and E6 MPV. Tata Motors, a dominant domestic automaker, leads the Indian EV market with its affordable and widely accepted models like the Nexon EV and Tigor EV. Mahindra Electric and MG Motor India are also expanding their EV portfolios aggressively.
While Tesla brings brand prestige and advanced software like Autopilot, its premium pricing may be a hurdle in a price-sensitive market.
Tesla is already staffing up in India. According to LinkedIn job postings, Tesla is hiring in Mumbai for positions such as:
India’s EV market is growing rapidly. According to industry estimates, EV sales in India surged 160% year-over-year in 2024, reaching over 1.5 million units. However, premium EVs make up less than 5% of total EV sales, indicating Tesla will initially be playing to a niche demographic.
Still, India’s push for clean energy, rapid urbanization, and growing affluence in metro cities make it a potentially lucrative long-term market. Government-backed incentives under the FAME II scheme (Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of Electric Vehicles in India) have also been expanded to encourage adoption.
If Tesla successfully navigates India’s tariff structure, infrastructure limitations, and price sensitivity, it could unlock a vast market with significant upside in the coming years.
July 11, 2025
Ford is still struggling to secure enough rare-earth magnets due to a supply shortage
Detroit, MI – Ford Motor Co. is facing a persistent supply shortage of rare-earth magnets—critical components for EV motors and various automotive systems—despite a recent U.S.–China agreement intended to ease export restrictions. The situation remains dire, forcing Ford into a “hand-to-mouth” rhythm to keep its production lines running.
Last May, Ford halted production of its Explorer SUV at the Chicago Assembly plant for several days after its magnet supplier ran dry. These powerful rare-earth magnets—made from metals like neodymium, dysprosium, and terbium—are essential not only for EV motors but also for braking, steering, and seating systems.
Lisa Drake, Ford’s VP of Industrial Planning for EVs, remarked that the company “still needs to move things around” to avert fresh shutdowns, admitting the operation remains “hand to mouth”. CEO Jim Farley echoed the concern in a recent Bloomberg interview: “It’s day-to-day… We have had to shut down factories. It’s hand-to-mouth right now.”
Since April, China—which dominates 90% of global rare-earth magnet refinement—has enforced stricter export licensing rules on these metals, requiring detailed disclosures and slowing approval processes, WSJ reported.
Although a temporary six-month agreement was struck in June to accelerate exports, affected automakers—including Ford—report little meaningful relief. Many export licenses continue to dribble in, primarily favoring larger, state-affiliated firms.
Ford’s stock slipped nearly 1% on news of the supply disruptions—though year-to-date gains remain near 7%. At the same time, domestic mining and processing firms like MP Materials (NYSE: MP) and Freeport-McMoRan (NYSE: FCX) enjoyed surging stock prices as investors bet on a long-term shift toward U.S. production of critical minerals.
Ford’s CFO recently disclosed that design improvements could cut annual rare-earth usage by up to 500,000 pounds, and the new hybrid systems already consume 50% less neodymium per vehicle. While the automaker is mapping raw-material sourcing directly back to mines, those efforts will take years to offset immediate shortages.
Analyst Michelle Krebs of AutoForecast Solutions warns, “Every OEM assumed they could scale battery production linearly. The rare-earth situation proves how quickly geopolitical factors can disrupt those plans”.
Continued supply volatility; potential further single-shift delays or plant pauses if authorization backlogs persist. Push for non-Chinese magnet sources (Canada, Australia, U.S.) and increased recycling, but industrial-scale capacity remains 2–3 years off. Deep investment in domestic mining and refining will diminish supply chain chokepoints—but remains a strategic and political challenge.
Ford remains committed to its 2 million EVs-per-year goal by 2026, but acknowledges that resolving this bottleneck is crucial for meeting that target.
The magnet logjam is more than an automotive hiccup—it’s a flashpoint in global industrial policy. “China’s dominance in rare earths is a geopolitical weapon,” says an analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “There’s no quick fix—this is a wake-up call”.
Even with diplomatic progress and asset-light design pivots, Ford remains locked in a daily scramble for magnets that may define its EV production trajectory—and automobile manufacturing’s broader global supply resilience.
July 1, 2025
Xiaomi’s stock price has reached new highs following a strong reception for its new electric vehicle, which is priced to compete aggressively with Tesla
Hong Kong-listed shares of China’s Xiaomi surged over 5% to hit a record high on Friday, a day after its electric car drew a strong response from customers.
The consumer electronics company, a relatively newer player in the EV market, took aim straight at rival Tesla with its new electric luxury vehicle, YU7. The SUV’s pricing starts at 253,500 yuan ($35,322), CEO Lei Jun said Thursday, pointing out that the vehicle was 10,000 yuan cheaper than Tesla’s Model Y, which starts at 263,500 yuan in China.
The YU7 received more than 200,000 orders within just three minutes of its launch, Xiaomi said.
Prior to the official price announcement, a Citi report had listed expectations that the YU7 SUV would be priced around 250,000 yuan to 320,000 yuan ($34,800 to $44,590), forecasting monthly sales of about 30,000 units. Once the pace picks up, Citi predicts annual sales of 300,000 to 360,000 units.
Xiaomi’s company’s SU7 sedan launched last year was also priced below Tesla’s Model 3.
Lei on Thursday claimed the YU7 beat Tesla’s Model Y on a range of metrics, but still came short on driver assist. The YU7 comes with driver-assist software, the most advanced version of which is powered by Nvidia’s Thor chip. Pre-sales start at 10 p.m. on Thursday, with deliveries expected within one to five weeks.
Xiaomi had initially said it would launch its YU7 in July. The earlier event takes place amid an intensifying electric car price war.
Xiaomi revealed its YU7 SUV in late May, less than a year after launching its first electric car, and claimed the vehicle would have a driving range of at least 760 kilometers (472 miles) on a single charge.
That’s well above the 719 kilometers advertised for Tesla’s extended-range Model Y. Driving range has been a selling point for consumers worried about frequent battery charging.
While Xiaomi has not promoted its artificial intelligence as much as other consumer brands, Thursday’s launch event showcased several AI car features, such as allowing drivers to change a song using hand motions, or ask a phone app to describe where the car is parked.
The YU7 also supports Apple Car Play and Apple Music, Lei said.
The Chinese smartphone and home appliance company launched several other products on Thursday, including highly-anticipated artificial intelligence-connected glasses.
The AI glasses, which rival Meta’s Ray Bans smart offering, can change the tint of the lenses and scan a QR code to make payments, mimicking China’s mobile smartphone apps. Xiaomi also announced similar features to those of the Meta glasses, such as being able to take photos and videos, as well as use interactive AI to identify a flower or translate text.
Xiaomi’s AI glasses start at 1,999 yuan ($279). A Xiaomi spokesperson said there were currently no plans to sell the glasses overseas. Meta’s version isn’t officially sold in China.
June 26, 2025