×
autonomous vehicle, a Tesla representative told lawmakers in Washington, DC, on Monday.

“We are in development for a purpose-built, wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle,” Tesla senior policy advisor India Herdman told members of the DC City Council on Monday, during a hearing focused on a controversial bill that could allow robotaxi services to operate in the District. “We know that paratransit can be very difficult, and people who are confined to wheelchairs permanently should still be able to move around freely, so that is an active product being built by Tesla in Texas,” she said.

Tesla didn’t respond to a request for comment. Herdman provided no further details about when a wheelchair-accessible product might be available. The electric automaker often takes several years to manufacture its announced products.

Tesla operates a small fleet of autonomous vehicles in the Texas cities of Austin, Dallas, and Houston and, as of this month, in Miami, Florida. (It also operates a service that uses human drivers in the San Francisco Bay Area.) The limited fleet uses Tesla Model Y, a compact SUV that is not wheelchair accessible.

The company has started to manufacture and test a purpose-built Cybercab, meant exclusively for autonomous driving and without steering wheels or pedals. These Cybercabs are not wheelchair accessible, though Tesla highlighted in an X post this month its accessibility features, including braille lettering on controls and wheelchair-height seating to allow for easier transfers.

Tesla and its CEO, Elon Musk, have hinted previously at a wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle. The company introduced an accessibility tab in its Robotaxi app last fall, though it directs users to other wheelchair-accessible ride providers in the area, rather than to Tesla’s own service. “We are working on accessible rides,” the app says. In response to an X user’s post last fall about Tesla working on accessible rides, Musk responded, “Absolutely.”

No US robotaxi company currently offers fleetwide driverless, wheelchair-accessible rides, including market leader Waymo. At the DC hearing on Monday, Waymo regional head of state and local policy Matt Walsh said, “To date, it’s my understanding that we haven’t been able to identify a platform that is fully wheelchair-accessible while also meeting the unique specifications to retrofit that vehicle with our technology.” He continued: “Now, I don’t want that to sound like a cop-out. We are trying to find that vehicle.”

Waymo has touted the accessibility features of its newest vehicle, the Zeekr-built Ojai, including its flat floor, low step-in height, and grab bars. But it is not wheelchair accessible. Michigan-based Ann Arbor autonomous-vehicle developer May Mobility offers rides in wheelchair-accessible vehicles in some of its markets, with a human operator on board to help deploy necessary ramps.

The Americans With Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in transportation services and requires reasonable modifications to provide equal access. Some but not all US cities require ride-hailing companies to provide wheelchair-accessible services. Many of those companies provide those rides through partnerships with specialized fleets made up of wheelchair-accessible vehicles.

In September 2025, the US Department of Justice sued Uber for “refusing to reasonably modify its policies, practices, or procedures where necessary to avoid discriminating against riders with disabilities.” The case is being litigated.

General Motors’ Cruise introduced a prototype wheelchair-accessible driverless taxi in 2023 and said it intended to roll out the vehicle in its self-driving car service in 2024. But following a collision with a pedestrian, Cruise all but halted national service in 2023. The next year, General Motors stopped funding its self-driving unit entirely.

#Tesla #Building #WheelchairAccessible #Robotaxitesla,disability,accessibility,cars,self-driving cars,autonomous vehicles,elon musk,electric vehicles"> Tesla Says It’s Building a Wheelchair-Accessible RobotaxiTesla is building a wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle, a Tesla representative told lawmakers in Washington, DC, on Monday.“We are in development for a purpose-built, wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle,” Tesla senior policy advisor India Herdman told members of the DC City Council on Monday, during a hearing focused on a controversial bill that could allow robotaxi services to operate in the District. “We know that paratransit can be very difficult, and people who are confined to wheelchairs permanently should still be able to move around freely, so that is an active product being built by Tesla in Texas,” she said.Tesla didn’t respond to a request for comment. Herdman provided no further details about when a wheelchair-accessible product might be available. The electric automaker often takes several years to manufacture its announced products.Tesla operates a small fleet of autonomous vehicles in the Texas cities of Austin, Dallas, and Houston and, as of this month, in Miami, Florida. (It also operates a service that uses human drivers in the San Francisco Bay Area.) The limited fleet uses Tesla Model Y, a compact SUV that is not wheelchair accessible.The company has started to manufacture and test a purpose-built Cybercab, meant exclusively for autonomous driving and without steering wheels or pedals. These Cybercabs are not wheelchair accessible, though Tesla highlighted in an X post this month its accessibility features, including braille lettering on controls and wheelchair-height seating to allow for easier transfers.Tesla and its CEO, Elon Musk, have hinted previously at a wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle. The company introduced an accessibility tab in its Robotaxi app last fall, though it directs users to other wheelchair-accessible ride providers in the area, rather than to Tesla’s own service. “We are working on accessible rides,” the app says. In response to an X user’s post last fall about Tesla working on accessible rides, Musk responded, “Absolutely.”No US robotaxi company currently offers fleetwide driverless, wheelchair-accessible rides, including market leader Waymo. At the DC hearing on Monday, Waymo regional head of state and local policy Matt Walsh said, “To date, it’s my understanding that we haven’t been able to identify a platform that is fully wheelchair-accessible while also meeting the unique specifications to retrofit that vehicle with our technology.” He continued: “Now, I don’t want that to sound like a cop-out. We are trying to find that vehicle.”Waymo has touted the accessibility features of its newest vehicle, the Zeekr-built Ojai, including its flat floor, low step-in height, and grab bars. But it is not wheelchair accessible. Michigan-based Ann Arbor autonomous-vehicle developer May Mobility offers rides in wheelchair-accessible vehicles in some of its markets, with a human operator on board to help deploy necessary ramps.The Americans With Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in transportation services and requires reasonable modifications to provide equal access. Some but not all US cities require ride-hailing companies to provide wheelchair-accessible services. Many of those companies provide those rides through partnerships with specialized fleets made up of wheelchair-accessible vehicles.In September 2025, the US Department of Justice sued Uber for “refusing to reasonably modify its policies, practices, or procedures where necessary to avoid discriminating against riders with disabilities.” The case is being litigated.General Motors’ Cruise introduced a prototype wheelchair-accessible driverless taxi in 2023 and said it intended to roll out the vehicle in its self-driving car service in 2024. But following a collision with a pedestrian, Cruise all but halted national service in 2023. The next year, General Motors stopped funding its self-driving unit entirely.#Tesla #Building #WheelchairAccessible #Robotaxitesla,disability,accessibility,cars,self-driving cars,autonomous vehicles,elon musk,electric vehicles
Tech-news

autonomous vehicle, a Tesla representative told lawmakers in Washington, DC, on Monday.

“We are in development for a purpose-built, wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle,” Tesla senior policy advisor India Herdman told members of the DC City Council on Monday, during a hearing focused on a controversial bill that could allow robotaxi services to operate in the District. “We know that paratransit can be very difficult, and people who are confined to wheelchairs permanently should still be able to move around freely, so that is an active product being built by Tesla in Texas,” she said.

Tesla didn’t respond to a request for comment. Herdman provided no further details about when a wheelchair-accessible product might be available. The electric automaker often takes several years to manufacture its announced products.

Tesla operates a small fleet of autonomous vehicles in the Texas cities of Austin, Dallas, and Houston and, as of this month, in Miami, Florida. (It also operates a service that uses human drivers in the San Francisco Bay Area.) The limited fleet uses Tesla Model Y, a compact SUV that is not wheelchair accessible.

The company has started to manufacture and test a purpose-built Cybercab, meant exclusively for autonomous driving and without steering wheels or pedals. These Cybercabs are not wheelchair accessible, though Tesla highlighted in an X post this month its accessibility features, including braille lettering on controls and wheelchair-height seating to allow for easier transfers.

Tesla and its CEO, Elon Musk, have hinted previously at a wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle. The company introduced an accessibility tab in its Robotaxi app last fall, though it directs users to other wheelchair-accessible ride providers in the area, rather than to Tesla’s own service. “We are working on accessible rides,” the app says. In response to an X user’s post last fall about Tesla working on accessible rides, Musk responded, “Absolutely.”

No US robotaxi company currently offers fleetwide driverless, wheelchair-accessible rides, including market leader Waymo. At the DC hearing on Monday, Waymo regional head of state and local policy Matt Walsh said, “To date, it’s my understanding that we haven’t been able to identify a platform that is fully wheelchair-accessible while also meeting the unique specifications to retrofit that vehicle with our technology.” He continued: “Now, I don’t want that to sound like a cop-out. We are trying to find that vehicle.”

Waymo has touted the accessibility features of its newest vehicle, the Zeekr-built Ojai, including its flat floor, low step-in height, and grab bars. But it is not wheelchair accessible. Michigan-based Ann Arbor autonomous-vehicle developer May Mobility offers rides in wheelchair-accessible vehicles in some of its markets, with a human operator on board to help deploy necessary ramps.

The Americans With Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in transportation services and requires reasonable modifications to provide equal access. Some but not all US cities require ride-hailing companies to provide wheelchair-accessible services. Many of those companies provide those rides through partnerships with specialized fleets made up of wheelchair-accessible vehicles.

In September 2025, the US Department of Justice sued Uber for “refusing to reasonably modify its policies, practices, or procedures where necessary to avoid discriminating against riders with disabilities.” The case is being litigated.

General Motors’ Cruise introduced a prototype wheelchair-accessible driverless taxi in 2023 and said it intended to roll out the vehicle in its self-driving car service in 2024. But following a collision with a pedestrian, Cruise all but halted national service in 2023. The next year, General Motors stopped funding its self-driving unit entirely.

#Tesla #Building #WheelchairAccessible #Robotaxitesla,disability,accessibility,cars,self-driving cars,autonomous vehicles,elon musk,electric vehicles">Tesla Says It’s Building a Wheelchair-Accessible Robotaxi

Tesla is building a wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle, a Tesla representative told lawmakers in Washington, DC, on Monday.

“We are in development for a purpose-built, wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle,” Tesla senior policy advisor India Herdman told members of the DC City Council on Monday, during a hearing focused on a controversial bill that could allow robotaxi services to operate in the District. “We know that paratransit can be very difficult, and people who are confined to wheelchairs permanently should still be able to move around freely, so that is an active product being built by Tesla in Texas,” she said.

Tesla didn’t respond to a request for comment. Herdman provided no further details about when a wheelchair-accessible product might be available. The electric automaker often takes several years to manufacture its announced products.

Tesla operates a small fleet of autonomous vehicles in the Texas cities of Austin, Dallas, and Houston and, as of this month, in Miami, Florida. (It also operates a service that uses human drivers in the San Francisco Bay Area.) The limited fleet uses Tesla Model Y, a compact SUV that is not wheelchair accessible.

The company has started to manufacture and test a purpose-built Cybercab, meant exclusively for autonomous driving and without steering wheels or pedals. These Cybercabs are not wheelchair accessible, though Tesla highlighted in an X post this month its accessibility features, including braille lettering on controls and wheelchair-height seating to allow for easier transfers.

Tesla and its CEO, Elon Musk, have hinted previously at a wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle. The company introduced an accessibility tab in its Robotaxi app last fall, though it directs users to other wheelchair-accessible ride providers in the area, rather than to Tesla’s own service. “We are working on accessible rides,” the app says. In response to an X user’s post last fall about Tesla working on accessible rides, Musk responded, “Absolutely.”

No US robotaxi company currently offers fleetwide driverless, wheelchair-accessible rides, including market leader Waymo. At the DC hearing on Monday, Waymo regional head of state and local policy Matt Walsh said, “To date, it’s my understanding that we haven’t been able to identify a platform that is fully wheelchair-accessible while also meeting the unique specifications to retrofit that vehicle with our technology.” He continued: “Now, I don’t want that to sound like a cop-out. We are trying to find that vehicle.”

Waymo has touted the accessibility features of its newest vehicle, the Zeekr-built Ojai, including its flat floor, low step-in height, and grab bars. But it is not wheelchair accessible. Michigan-based Ann Arbor autonomous-vehicle developer May Mobility offers rides in wheelchair-accessible vehicles in some of its markets, with a human operator on board to help deploy necessary ramps.

The Americans With Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in transportation services and requires reasonable modifications to provide equal access. Some but not all US cities require ride-hailing companies to provide wheelchair-accessible services. Many of those companies provide those rides through partnerships with specialized fleets made up of wheelchair-accessible vehicles.

In September 2025, the US Department of Justice sued Uber for “refusing to reasonably modify its policies, practices, or procedures where necessary to avoid discriminating against riders with disabilities.” The case is being litigated.

General Motors’ Cruise introduced a prototype wheelchair-accessible driverless taxi in 2023 and said it intended to roll out the vehicle in its self-driving car service in 2024. But following a collision with a pedestrian, Cruise all but halted national service in 2023. The next year, General Motors stopped funding its self-driving unit entirely.

#Tesla #Building #WheelchairAccessible #Robotaxitesla,disability,accessibility,cars,self-driving cars,autonomous vehicles,elon musk,electric vehicles

Tesla is building a wheelchair-accessible autonomous vehicle, a Tesla representative told lawmakers in Washington, DC,…

TechCrunch Mobility!

I am back from vacation. What did I miss? Turns out, quite a lot — including the end of the Uber-Waymo partnership in Phoenix. Uber and Waymo still have robotaxi service partnerships in Atlanta and Austin. The question is not if, but when will these agreements end? But that isn’t the most intriguing question, in my opinion. I am far more intrigued by how these two companies will behave once the remaining partnerships end. 

There is already tension with Uber executives taking not-so-subtle shots at Waymo. I expect that once the partnerships end, these thinly veiled barbs will be replaced with more direct action. One battleground will be policy, specifically markets where robotaxi companies are angling to get access. 

This week, we saw another interesting development in the autonomous vehicle industry on the federal stage. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration administrator Jonathan Morrison issued a directive to autonomous vehicle developers, stating that it is unacceptable for their vehicles to interfere with first responders or law enforcement.

The money quote: “Let me be clear: the inability to detect and appropriately respond to such situations represents a functional insufficiency. Emergency scenes are not rare or extreme ‘edge cases.’ As such, NHTSA is today issuing a call to action for AV developers and operators to immediately focus their resources on fixing this issue.”

Morrison’s letter never calls out any one robotaxi company and it was sent to every AV developer listed in the Department of Transportation’s Standing General Order. But it sure seems like Morrison is directing the agency’s ire at Waymo.

A previous TechCrunch investigation found that Waymo — which operates the largest robotaxi fleet in the United States, with vehicles in cities such as Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Francisco — has had repeated run-ins with first responders. And just this week, San Francisco supervisor Bilal Mahmood said he plans to submit a letter of inquiry to examine how autonomous vehicles affected public transit services and emergency responders following a July 4 fireworks show that resulted in massive gridlock. Local news outlets reported that numerous Waymo robotaxis had to be towed after running out of power during the lengthy traffic jam.

Morrison’s letter has gravitas. But will there be substantive consequences for AV developers? It’s hard to tell at this point. For now, the NHTSA has demanded companies present the agency with “solutions” by the end of the month.

One more news item from the feds. Take a look at the new 2026 Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda, which was updated last week. It contains a long list of proposed changes to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) requirements, which govern vehicle design and equipment requirements. These proposed changes could help autonomous vehicle companies like Tesla and Zoox, which are developing vehicles without steering wheels, pedals, or other features required on human-driven cars.

A little bird

TechCrunch Mobility: A robotaxi ultimatum | TechCrunch Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility, your hub for the future of transportation and now, more than ever, how AI is playing a part. To get this in your inbox, sign up here for free — just click TechCrunch Mobility! I am back from vacation. What did I miss? Turns out, quite a lot — including the end of the Uber-Waymo partnership in Phoenix. Uber and Waymo still have robotaxi service partnerships in Atlanta and Austin. The question is not if, but when will these agreements end? But that isn’t the most intriguing question, in my opinion. I am far more intrigued by how these two companies will behave once the remaining partnerships end.  There is already tension with Uber executives taking not-so-subtle shots at Waymo. I expect that once the partnerships end, these thinly veiled barbs will be replaced with more direct action. One battleground will be policy, specifically markets where robotaxi companies are angling to get access.  This week, we saw another interesting development in the autonomous vehicle industry on the federal stage. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration administrator Jonathan Morrison issued a directive to autonomous vehicle developers, stating that it is unacceptable for their vehicles to interfere with first responders or law enforcement. The money quote: “Let me be clear: the inability to detect and appropriately respond to such situations represents a functional insufficiency. Emergency scenes are not rare or extreme ‘edge cases.’ As such, NHTSA is today issuing a call to action for AV developers and operators to immediately focus their resources on fixing this issue.” Morrison’s letter never calls out any one robotaxi company and it was sent to every AV developer listed in the Department of Transportation’s Standing General Order. But it sure seems like Morrison is directing the agency’s ire at Waymo. A previous TechCrunch investigation found that Waymo — which operates the largest robotaxi fleet in the United States, with vehicles in cities such as Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Francisco — has had repeated run-ins with first responders. And just this week, San Francisco supervisor Bilal Mahmood said he plans to submit a letter of inquiry to examine how autonomous vehicles affected public transit services and emergency responders following a July 4 fireworks show that resulted in massive gridlock. Local news outlets reported that numerous Waymo robotaxis had to be towed after running out of power during the lengthy traffic jam. Morrison’s letter has gravitas. But will there be substantive consequences for AV developers? It’s hard to tell at this point. For now, the NHTSA has demanded companies present the agency with “solutions” by the end of the month. One more news item from the feds. Take a look at the new 2026 Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda, which was updated last week. It contains a long list of proposed changes to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) requirements, which govern vehicle design and equipment requirements. These proposed changes could help autonomous vehicle companies like Tesla and Zoox, which are developing vehicles without steering wheels, pedals, or other features required on human-driven cars. A little bird Image Credits:Bryce Durbin Got a tip for us? Email Kirsten Korosec at kirsten.korosec@techcrunch.com or my Signal at kkorosec.07, or email Sean O’Kane at sean.okane@techcrunch.com. Deals! Image Credits:Bryce Durbin We usually focus on venture deals, but this week I wanted to highlight Rivian and the sale of 86.25 million Class A common shares priced at .50 each (that includes an added 11.25 million in additional shares that underwriters opted to buy). In all, Rivian said it expects to raise .32 billion in new capital. The raise comes at a notable time for the EV maker. The company started delivering its new R2 SUV last month and recently raised its sales forecast for 2026. The company said it now expects to deliver between 65,000 and 70,000 vehicles after outperforming its own expectations in the second quarter due to robust growth quarter-over-quarter in EDV and R1, coupled with the introduction of R2 deliveries.  The company didn’t explain the reason for the raise. But as a reminder, Rivian is not yet profitable and scaling up production of the R2 — or any vehicle for that matter — isn’t cheap! Other deals that got my attention … Bidbus, a Los Angeles-based startup that built a digital marketplace where multiple dealers can bid on a car, raised million in a Series A funding round led by Ibex Investors. Mucker Capital, FJ Labs, Motley Fool Ventures, Data Point Capital, Walter Ventures, and the Car Dealership Guy’s Yossi Levi also participated. Lyft said it plans to acquire Serveo’s bike-share business in Spain. Terms weren’t disclosed, but the ride-hailing company said it is expected to close this year. TaiSan, a U.K. battery startup, raised £4.65 million in a seed funding round co-led by Eos Advisory and the Midlands Engine Investment Fund II. InnoEnergy, AFI Ventures, EverQuest Capital Partners, Exergon, Heartfelt Ventures, Adeline Arts & Science, Techmind, angel investor François Badelon, and matched funding from Innovate UK also participated. Notable reads and other tidbits Image Credits:Bryce Durbin AssuranceAmerica, a U.S. insurance provider, confirmed a data breach that affected the personal information and driver’s license numbers of 6.9 million people, making it the largest known spill of Americans’ driver’s license information this year. Beta Technologies, the electric vehicle takeoff and landing developer, completed operational flights conducted under the U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration’s new eVTOL Integration Pilot Program. The flights covered about 275 nautical miles covering Virginia and Maryland.  Longtime followers of Tesla will remember the heady days when Elon Musk battled various short sellers of the company’s stock. Musk is more polarizing than ever, and one exchange-traded fund creator has found a way to tap into that negative sentiment with two new anti-Elon exchange-traded funds.  GM brand Chevrolet built an all-American EV truck. Senior reporter Tim De Chant asks, Why is nobody buying it?  Manna Aero, the Ireland-based autonomous drone delivery startup, is scaling up in the United States with a factory and operations center in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that it says will employ 1,000 in the next few years.  Slate Auto teamed up with Crayola to offer its EV truck and SUV customers vehicle wraps in five crayon colors. (Reminder: The basic Slate EV vehicle isn’t painted. Instead, it comes in a gray composite material that can be customized with a vehicle wrap. The company has hundreds of options to choose from.) One more thing … TechCrunch podcast Build Mode just launched its third season, and it’s a banger. Build Mode is hosted by Isabelle Johannessen, who heads TechCrunch’s Startup Battlefield program. Unlike Equity — the TC podcast I co-host along with Anthony Ha and Sean O’Kane — Build Mode is designed to help early-stage founders.  The new season kicks off with Precursor Ventures founder and managing partner Charles Hudson, who talks about what early-stage founders need to know before raising their first institutional round. Check it out: The new rules of early-stage fundraising with Charles Hudson. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#TechCrunch #Mobility #robotaxi #ultimatum #TechCrunchElon Musk,Uber,Waymo,Rivian,robotaxi,techcrunch mobility
Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

Got a tip for us? Email Kirsten Korosec at kirsten.korosec@techcrunch.com or my Signal at kkorosec.07, or email Sean O’Kane at sean.okane@techcrunch.com.

Deals!

money the station
Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

We usually focus on venture deals, but this week I wanted to highlight Rivian and the sale of 86.25 million Class A common shares priced at $15.50 each (that includes an added 11.25 million in additional shares that underwriters opted to buy).

In all, Rivian said it expects to raise $1.32 billion in new capital. The raise comes at a notable time for the EV maker. The company started delivering its new R2 SUV last month and recently raised its sales forecast for 2026. The company said it now expects to deliver between 65,000 and 70,000 vehicles after outperforming its own expectations in the second quarter due to robust growth quarter-over-quarter in EDV and R1, coupled with the introduction of R2 deliveries. 

The company didn’t explain the reason for the raise. But as a reminder, Rivian is not yet profitable and scaling up production of the R2 — or any vehicle for that matter — isn’t cheap!

Other deals that got my attention …

Bidbus, a Los Angeles-based startup that built a digital marketplace where multiple dealers can bid on a car, raised $15 million in a Series A funding round led by Ibex Investors. Mucker Capital, FJ Labs, Motley Fool Ventures, Data Point Capital, Walter Ventures, and the Car Dealership Guy’s Yossi Levi also participated.

Lyft said it plans to acquire Serveo’s bike-share business in Spain. Terms weren’t disclosed, but the ride-hailing company said it is expected to close this year.

TaiSan, a U.K. battery startup, raised £4.65 million in a seed funding round co-led by Eos Advisory and the Midlands Engine Investment Fund II. InnoEnergy, AFI Ventures, EverQuest Capital Partners, Exergon, Heartfelt Ventures, Adeline Arts & Science, Techmind, angel investor François Badelon, and matched funding from Innovate UK also participated.

Notable reads and other tidbits

Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

AssuranceAmerica, a U.S. insurance provider, confirmed a data breach that affected the personal information and driver’s license numbers of 6.9 million people, making it the largest known spill of Americans’ driver’s license information this year.

Beta Technologies, the electric vehicle takeoff and landing developer, completed operational flights conducted under the U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration’s new eVTOL Integration Pilot Program. The flights covered about 275 nautical miles covering Virginia and Maryland. 

Longtime followers of Tesla will remember the heady days when Elon Musk battled various short sellers of the company’s stock. Musk is more polarizing than ever, and one exchange-traded fund creator has found a way to tap into that negative sentiment with two new anti-Elon exchange-traded funds. 

GM brand Chevrolet built an all-American EV truck. Senior reporter Tim De Chant asks, Why is nobody buying it? 

Manna Aero, the Ireland-based autonomous drone delivery startup, is scaling up in the United States with a factory and operations center in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that it says will employ 1,000 in the next few years. 

Slate Auto teamed up with Crayola to offer its EV truck and SUV customers vehicle wraps in five crayon colors. (Reminder: The basic Slate EV vehicle isn’t painted. Instead, it comes in a gray composite material that can be customized with a vehicle wrap. The company has hundreds of options to choose from.)

One more thing …

TechCrunch podcast Build Mode just launched its third season, and it’s a banger. Build Mode is hosted by Isabelle Johannessen, who heads TechCrunch’s Startup Battlefield program. Unlike Equity — the TC podcast I co-host along with Anthony Ha and Sean O’Kane — Build Mode is designed to help early-stage founders. 

The new season kicks off with Precursor Ventures founder and managing partner Charles Hudson, who talks about what early-stage founders need to know before raising their first institutional round.

Check it out: The new rules of early-stage fundraising with Charles Hudson.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#TechCrunch #Mobility #robotaxi #ultimatum #TechCrunchElon Musk,Uber,Waymo,Rivian,robotaxi,techcrunch mobility"> TechCrunch Mobility: A robotaxi ultimatum | TechCrunch Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility, your hub for the future of transportation and now, more than ever, how AI is playing a part. To get this in your inbox, sign up here for free — just click TechCrunch Mobility! I am back from vacation. What did I miss? Turns out, quite a lot — including the end of the Uber-Waymo partnership in Phoenix. Uber and Waymo still have robotaxi service partnerships in Atlanta and Austin. The question is not if, but when will these agreements end? But that isn’t the most intriguing question, in my opinion. I am far more intrigued by how these two companies will behave once the remaining partnerships end.  There is already tension with Uber executives taking not-so-subtle shots at Waymo. I expect that once the partnerships end, these thinly veiled barbs will be replaced with more direct action. One battleground will be policy, specifically markets where robotaxi companies are angling to get access.  This week, we saw another interesting development in the autonomous vehicle industry on the federal stage. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration administrator Jonathan Morrison issued a directive to autonomous vehicle developers, stating that it is unacceptable for their vehicles to interfere with first responders or law enforcement. The money quote: “Let me be clear: the inability to detect and appropriately respond to such situations represents a functional insufficiency. Emergency scenes are not rare or extreme ‘edge cases.’ As such, NHTSA is today issuing a call to action for AV developers and operators to immediately focus their resources on fixing this issue.” Morrison’s letter never calls out any one robotaxi company and it was sent to every AV developer listed in the Department of Transportation’s Standing General Order. But it sure seems like Morrison is directing the agency’s ire at Waymo. A previous TechCrunch investigation found that Waymo — which operates the largest robotaxi fleet in the United States, with vehicles in cities such as Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Francisco — has had repeated run-ins with first responders. And just this week, San Francisco supervisor Bilal Mahmood said he plans to submit a letter of inquiry to examine how autonomous vehicles affected public transit services and emergency responders following a July 4 fireworks show that resulted in massive gridlock. Local news outlets reported that numerous Waymo robotaxis had to be towed after running out of power during the lengthy traffic jam. Morrison’s letter has gravitas. But will there be substantive consequences for AV developers? It’s hard to tell at this point. For now, the NHTSA has demanded companies present the agency with “solutions” by the end of the month. One more news item from the feds. Take a look at the new 2026 Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda, which was updated last week. It contains a long list of proposed changes to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) requirements, which govern vehicle design and equipment requirements. These proposed changes could help autonomous vehicle companies like Tesla and Zoox, which are developing vehicles without steering wheels, pedals, or other features required on human-driven cars. A little bird Image Credits:Bryce Durbin Got a tip for us? Email Kirsten Korosec at kirsten.korosec@techcrunch.com or my Signal at kkorosec.07, or email Sean O’Kane at sean.okane@techcrunch.com. Deals! Image Credits:Bryce Durbin We usually focus on venture deals, but this week I wanted to highlight Rivian and the sale of 86.25 million Class A common shares priced at .50 each (that includes an added 11.25 million in additional shares that underwriters opted to buy). In all, Rivian said it expects to raise .32 billion in new capital. The raise comes at a notable time for the EV maker. The company started delivering its new R2 SUV last month and recently raised its sales forecast for 2026. The company said it now expects to deliver between 65,000 and 70,000 vehicles after outperforming its own expectations in the second quarter due to robust growth quarter-over-quarter in EDV and R1, coupled with the introduction of R2 deliveries.  The company didn’t explain the reason for the raise. But as a reminder, Rivian is not yet profitable and scaling up production of the R2 — or any vehicle for that matter — isn’t cheap! Other deals that got my attention … Bidbus, a Los Angeles-based startup that built a digital marketplace where multiple dealers can bid on a car, raised million in a Series A funding round led by Ibex Investors. Mucker Capital, FJ Labs, Motley Fool Ventures, Data Point Capital, Walter Ventures, and the Car Dealership Guy’s Yossi Levi also participated. Lyft said it plans to acquire Serveo’s bike-share business in Spain. Terms weren’t disclosed, but the ride-hailing company said it is expected to close this year. TaiSan, a U.K. battery startup, raised £4.65 million in a seed funding round co-led by Eos Advisory and the Midlands Engine Investment Fund II. InnoEnergy, AFI Ventures, EverQuest Capital Partners, Exergon, Heartfelt Ventures, Adeline Arts & Science, Techmind, angel investor François Badelon, and matched funding from Innovate UK also participated. Notable reads and other tidbits Image Credits:Bryce Durbin AssuranceAmerica, a U.S. insurance provider, confirmed a data breach that affected the personal information and driver’s license numbers of 6.9 million people, making it the largest known spill of Americans’ driver’s license information this year. Beta Technologies, the electric vehicle takeoff and landing developer, completed operational flights conducted under the U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration’s new eVTOL Integration Pilot Program. The flights covered about 275 nautical miles covering Virginia and Maryland.  Longtime followers of Tesla will remember the heady days when Elon Musk battled various short sellers of the company’s stock. Musk is more polarizing than ever, and one exchange-traded fund creator has found a way to tap into that negative sentiment with two new anti-Elon exchange-traded funds.  GM brand Chevrolet built an all-American EV truck. Senior reporter Tim De Chant asks, Why is nobody buying it?  Manna Aero, the Ireland-based autonomous drone delivery startup, is scaling up in the United States with a factory and operations center in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that it says will employ 1,000 in the next few years.  Slate Auto teamed up with Crayola to offer its EV truck and SUV customers vehicle wraps in five crayon colors. (Reminder: The basic Slate EV vehicle isn’t painted. Instead, it comes in a gray composite material that can be customized with a vehicle wrap. The company has hundreds of options to choose from.) One more thing … TechCrunch podcast Build Mode just launched its third season, and it’s a banger. Build Mode is hosted by Isabelle Johannessen, who heads TechCrunch’s Startup Battlefield program. Unlike Equity — the TC podcast I co-host along with Anthony Ha and Sean O’Kane — Build Mode is designed to help early-stage founders.  The new season kicks off with Precursor Ventures founder and managing partner Charles Hudson, who talks about what early-stage founders need to know before raising their first institutional round. Check it out: The new rules of early-stage fundraising with Charles Hudson. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#TechCrunch #Mobility #robotaxi #ultimatum #TechCrunchElon Musk,Uber,Waymo,Rivian,robotaxi,techcrunch mobility
Tech-news

TechCrunch Mobility!

I am back from vacation. What did I miss? Turns out, quite a lot — including the end of the Uber-Waymo partnership in Phoenix. Uber and Waymo still have robotaxi service partnerships in Atlanta and Austin. The question is not if, but when will these agreements end? But that isn’t the most intriguing question, in my opinion. I am far more intrigued by how these two companies will behave once the remaining partnerships end. 

There is already tension with Uber executives taking not-so-subtle shots at Waymo. I expect that once the partnerships end, these thinly veiled barbs will be replaced with more direct action. One battleground will be policy, specifically markets where robotaxi companies are angling to get access. 

This week, we saw another interesting development in the autonomous vehicle industry on the federal stage. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration administrator Jonathan Morrison issued a directive to autonomous vehicle developers, stating that it is unacceptable for their vehicles to interfere with first responders or law enforcement.

The money quote: “Let me be clear: the inability to detect and appropriately respond to such situations represents a functional insufficiency. Emergency scenes are not rare or extreme ‘edge cases.’ As such, NHTSA is today issuing a call to action for AV developers and operators to immediately focus their resources on fixing this issue.”

Morrison’s letter never calls out any one robotaxi company and it was sent to every AV developer listed in the Department of Transportation’s Standing General Order. But it sure seems like Morrison is directing the agency’s ire at Waymo.

A previous TechCrunch investigation found that Waymo — which operates the largest robotaxi fleet in the United States, with vehicles in cities such as Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Francisco — has had repeated run-ins with first responders. And just this week, San Francisco supervisor Bilal Mahmood said he plans to submit a letter of inquiry to examine how autonomous vehicles affected public transit services and emergency responders following a July 4 fireworks show that resulted in massive gridlock. Local news outlets reported that numerous Waymo robotaxis had to be towed after running out of power during the lengthy traffic jam.

Morrison’s letter has gravitas. But will there be substantive consequences for AV developers? It’s hard to tell at this point. For now, the NHTSA has demanded companies present the agency with “solutions” by the end of the month.

One more news item from the feds. Take a look at the new 2026 Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda, which was updated last week. It contains a long list of proposed changes to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) requirements, which govern vehicle design and equipment requirements. These proposed changes could help autonomous vehicle companies like Tesla and Zoox, which are developing vehicles without steering wheels, pedals, or other features required on human-driven cars.

A little bird

TechCrunch Mobility: A robotaxi ultimatum | TechCrunch Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility, your hub for the future of transportation and now, more than ever, how AI is playing a part. To get this in your inbox, sign up here for free — just click TechCrunch Mobility! I am back from vacation. What did I miss? Turns out, quite a lot — including the end of the Uber-Waymo partnership in Phoenix. Uber and Waymo still have robotaxi service partnerships in Atlanta and Austin. The question is not if, but when will these agreements end? But that isn’t the most intriguing question, in my opinion. I am far more intrigued by how these two companies will behave once the remaining partnerships end.  There is already tension with Uber executives taking not-so-subtle shots at Waymo. I expect that once the partnerships end, these thinly veiled barbs will be replaced with more direct action. One battleground will be policy, specifically markets where robotaxi companies are angling to get access.  This week, we saw another interesting development in the autonomous vehicle industry on the federal stage. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration administrator Jonathan Morrison issued a directive to autonomous vehicle developers, stating that it is unacceptable for their vehicles to interfere with first responders or law enforcement. The money quote: “Let me be clear: the inability to detect and appropriately respond to such situations represents a functional insufficiency. Emergency scenes are not rare or extreme ‘edge cases.’ As such, NHTSA is today issuing a call to action for AV developers and operators to immediately focus their resources on fixing this issue.” Morrison’s letter never calls out any one robotaxi company and it was sent to every AV developer listed in the Department of Transportation’s Standing General Order. But it sure seems like Morrison is directing the agency’s ire at Waymo. A previous TechCrunch investigation found that Waymo — which operates the largest robotaxi fleet in the United States, with vehicles in cities such as Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Francisco — has had repeated run-ins with first responders. And just this week, San Francisco supervisor Bilal Mahmood said he plans to submit a letter of inquiry to examine how autonomous vehicles affected public transit services and emergency responders following a July 4 fireworks show that resulted in massive gridlock. Local news outlets reported that numerous Waymo robotaxis had to be towed after running out of power during the lengthy traffic jam. Morrison’s letter has gravitas. But will there be substantive consequences for AV developers? It’s hard to tell at this point. For now, the NHTSA has demanded companies present the agency with “solutions” by the end of the month. One more news item from the feds. Take a look at the new 2026 Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda, which was updated last week. It contains a long list of proposed changes to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) requirements, which govern vehicle design and equipment requirements. These proposed changes could help autonomous vehicle companies like Tesla and Zoox, which are developing vehicles without steering wheels, pedals, or other features required on human-driven cars. A little bird Image Credits:Bryce Durbin Got a tip for us? Email Kirsten Korosec at kirsten.korosec@techcrunch.com or my Signal at kkorosec.07, or email Sean O’Kane at sean.okane@techcrunch.com. Deals! Image Credits:Bryce Durbin We usually focus on venture deals, but this week I wanted to highlight Rivian and the sale of 86.25 million Class A common shares priced at .50 each (that includes an added 11.25 million in additional shares that underwriters opted to buy). In all, Rivian said it expects to raise .32 billion in new capital. The raise comes at a notable time for the EV maker. The company started delivering its new R2 SUV last month and recently raised its sales forecast for 2026. The company said it now expects to deliver between 65,000 and 70,000 vehicles after outperforming its own expectations in the second quarter due to robust growth quarter-over-quarter in EDV and R1, coupled with the introduction of R2 deliveries.  The company didn’t explain the reason for the raise. But as a reminder, Rivian is not yet profitable and scaling up production of the R2 — or any vehicle for that matter — isn’t cheap! Other deals that got my attention … Bidbus, a Los Angeles-based startup that built a digital marketplace where multiple dealers can bid on a car, raised million in a Series A funding round led by Ibex Investors. Mucker Capital, FJ Labs, Motley Fool Ventures, Data Point Capital, Walter Ventures, and the Car Dealership Guy’s Yossi Levi also participated. Lyft said it plans to acquire Serveo’s bike-share business in Spain. Terms weren’t disclosed, but the ride-hailing company said it is expected to close this year. TaiSan, a U.K. battery startup, raised £4.65 million in a seed funding round co-led by Eos Advisory and the Midlands Engine Investment Fund II. InnoEnergy, AFI Ventures, EverQuest Capital Partners, Exergon, Heartfelt Ventures, Adeline Arts & Science, Techmind, angel investor François Badelon, and matched funding from Innovate UK also participated. Notable reads and other tidbits Image Credits:Bryce Durbin AssuranceAmerica, a U.S. insurance provider, confirmed a data breach that affected the personal information and driver’s license numbers of 6.9 million people, making it the largest known spill of Americans’ driver’s license information this year. Beta Technologies, the electric vehicle takeoff and landing developer, completed operational flights conducted under the U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration’s new eVTOL Integration Pilot Program. The flights covered about 275 nautical miles covering Virginia and Maryland.  Longtime followers of Tesla will remember the heady days when Elon Musk battled various short sellers of the company’s stock. Musk is more polarizing than ever, and one exchange-traded fund creator has found a way to tap into that negative sentiment with two new anti-Elon exchange-traded funds.  GM brand Chevrolet built an all-American EV truck. Senior reporter Tim De Chant asks, Why is nobody buying it?  Manna Aero, the Ireland-based autonomous drone delivery startup, is scaling up in the United States with a factory and operations center in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that it says will employ 1,000 in the next few years.  Slate Auto teamed up with Crayola to offer its EV truck and SUV customers vehicle wraps in five crayon colors. (Reminder: The basic Slate EV vehicle isn’t painted. Instead, it comes in a gray composite material that can be customized with a vehicle wrap. The company has hundreds of options to choose from.) One more thing … TechCrunch podcast Build Mode just launched its third season, and it’s a banger. Build Mode is hosted by Isabelle Johannessen, who heads TechCrunch’s Startup Battlefield program. Unlike Equity — the TC podcast I co-host along with Anthony Ha and Sean O’Kane — Build Mode is designed to help early-stage founders.  The new season kicks off with Precursor Ventures founder and managing partner Charles Hudson, who talks about what early-stage founders need to know before raising their first institutional round. Check it out: The new rules of early-stage fundraising with Charles Hudson. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#TechCrunch #Mobility #robotaxi #ultimatum #TechCrunchElon Musk,Uber,Waymo,Rivian,robotaxi,techcrunch mobility
Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

Got a tip for us? Email Kirsten Korosec at kirsten.korosec@techcrunch.com or my Signal at kkorosec.07, or email Sean O’Kane at sean.okane@techcrunch.com.

Deals!

money the station
Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

We usually focus on venture deals, but this week I wanted to highlight Rivian and the sale of 86.25 million Class A common shares priced at $15.50 each (that includes an added 11.25 million in additional shares that underwriters opted to buy).

In all, Rivian said it expects to raise $1.32 billion in new capital. The raise comes at a notable time for the EV maker. The company started delivering its new R2 SUV last month and recently raised its sales forecast for 2026. The company said it now expects to deliver between 65,000 and 70,000 vehicles after outperforming its own expectations in the second quarter due to robust growth quarter-over-quarter in EDV and R1, coupled with the introduction of R2 deliveries. 

The company didn’t explain the reason for the raise. But as a reminder, Rivian is not yet profitable and scaling up production of the R2 — or any vehicle for that matter — isn’t cheap!

Other deals that got my attention …

Bidbus, a Los Angeles-based startup that built a digital marketplace where multiple dealers can bid on a car, raised $15 million in a Series A funding round led by Ibex Investors. Mucker Capital, FJ Labs, Motley Fool Ventures, Data Point Capital, Walter Ventures, and the Car Dealership Guy’s Yossi Levi also participated.

Lyft said it plans to acquire Serveo’s bike-share business in Spain. Terms weren’t disclosed, but the ride-hailing company said it is expected to close this year.

TaiSan, a U.K. battery startup, raised £4.65 million in a seed funding round co-led by Eos Advisory and the Midlands Engine Investment Fund II. InnoEnergy, AFI Ventures, EverQuest Capital Partners, Exergon, Heartfelt Ventures, Adeline Arts & Science, Techmind, angel investor François Badelon, and matched funding from Innovate UK also participated.

Notable reads and other tidbits

Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

AssuranceAmerica, a U.S. insurance provider, confirmed a data breach that affected the personal information and driver’s license numbers of 6.9 million people, making it the largest known spill of Americans’ driver’s license information this year.

Beta Technologies, the electric vehicle takeoff and landing developer, completed operational flights conducted under the U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration’s new eVTOL Integration Pilot Program. The flights covered about 275 nautical miles covering Virginia and Maryland. 

Longtime followers of Tesla will remember the heady days when Elon Musk battled various short sellers of the company’s stock. Musk is more polarizing than ever, and one exchange-traded fund creator has found a way to tap into that negative sentiment with two new anti-Elon exchange-traded funds. 

GM brand Chevrolet built an all-American EV truck. Senior reporter Tim De Chant asks, Why is nobody buying it? 

Manna Aero, the Ireland-based autonomous drone delivery startup, is scaling up in the United States with a factory and operations center in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that it says will employ 1,000 in the next few years. 

Slate Auto teamed up with Crayola to offer its EV truck and SUV customers vehicle wraps in five crayon colors. (Reminder: The basic Slate EV vehicle isn’t painted. Instead, it comes in a gray composite material that can be customized with a vehicle wrap. The company has hundreds of options to choose from.)

One more thing …

TechCrunch podcast Build Mode just launched its third season, and it’s a banger. Build Mode is hosted by Isabelle Johannessen, who heads TechCrunch’s Startup Battlefield program. Unlike Equity — the TC podcast I co-host along with Anthony Ha and Sean O’Kane — Build Mode is designed to help early-stage founders. 

The new season kicks off with Precursor Ventures founder and managing partner Charles Hudson, who talks about what early-stage founders need to know before raising their first institutional round.

Check it out: The new rules of early-stage fundraising with Charles Hudson.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#TechCrunch #Mobility #robotaxi #ultimatum #TechCrunchElon Musk,Uber,Waymo,Rivian,robotaxi,techcrunch mobility">TechCrunch Mobility: A robotaxi ultimatum | TechCrunch

Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility, your hub for the future of transportation and now, more than ever, how AI is playing a part. To get this in your inbox, sign up here for free — just click TechCrunch Mobility!

I am back from vacation. What did I miss? Turns out, quite a lot — including the end of the Uber-Waymo partnership in Phoenix. Uber and Waymo still have robotaxi service partnerships in Atlanta and Austin. The question is not if, but when will these agreements end? But that isn’t the most intriguing question, in my opinion. I am far more intrigued by how these two companies will behave once the remaining partnerships end. 

There is already tension with Uber executives taking not-so-subtle shots at Waymo. I expect that once the partnerships end, these thinly veiled barbs will be replaced with more direct action. One battleground will be policy, specifically markets where robotaxi companies are angling to get access. 

This week, we saw another interesting development in the autonomous vehicle industry on the federal stage. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration administrator Jonathan Morrison issued a directive to autonomous vehicle developers, stating that it is unacceptable for their vehicles to interfere with first responders or law enforcement.

The money quote: “Let me be clear: the inability to detect and appropriately respond to such situations represents a functional insufficiency. Emergency scenes are not rare or extreme ‘edge cases.’ As such, NHTSA is today issuing a call to action for AV developers and operators to immediately focus their resources on fixing this issue.”

Morrison’s letter never calls out any one robotaxi company and it was sent to every AV developer listed in the Department of Transportation’s Standing General Order. But it sure seems like Morrison is directing the agency’s ire at Waymo.

A previous TechCrunch investigation found that Waymo — which operates the largest robotaxi fleet in the United States, with vehicles in cities such as Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Francisco — has had repeated run-ins with first responders. And just this week, San Francisco supervisor Bilal Mahmood said he plans to submit a letter of inquiry to examine how autonomous vehicles affected public transit services and emergency responders following a July 4 fireworks show that resulted in massive gridlock. Local news outlets reported that numerous Waymo robotaxis had to be towed after running out of power during the lengthy traffic jam.

Morrison’s letter has gravitas. But will there be substantive consequences for AV developers? It’s hard to tell at this point. For now, the NHTSA has demanded companies present the agency with “solutions” by the end of the month.

One more news item from the feds. Take a look at the new 2026 Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda, which was updated last week. It contains a long list of proposed changes to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) requirements, which govern vehicle design and equipment requirements. These proposed changes could help autonomous vehicle companies like Tesla and Zoox, which are developing vehicles without steering wheels, pedals, or other features required on human-driven cars.

A little bird

TechCrunch Mobility: A robotaxi ultimatum | TechCrunch Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility, your hub for the future of transportation and now, more than ever, how AI is playing a part. To get this in your inbox, sign up here for free — just click TechCrunch Mobility! I am back from vacation. What did I miss? Turns out, quite a lot — including the end of the Uber-Waymo partnership in Phoenix. Uber and Waymo still have robotaxi service partnerships in Atlanta and Austin. The question is not if, but when will these agreements end? But that isn’t the most intriguing question, in my opinion. I am far more intrigued by how these two companies will behave once the remaining partnerships end.  There is already tension with Uber executives taking not-so-subtle shots at Waymo. I expect that once the partnerships end, these thinly veiled barbs will be replaced with more direct action. One battleground will be policy, specifically markets where robotaxi companies are angling to get access.  This week, we saw another interesting development in the autonomous vehicle industry on the federal stage. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration administrator Jonathan Morrison issued a directive to autonomous vehicle developers, stating that it is unacceptable for their vehicles to interfere with first responders or law enforcement. The money quote: “Let me be clear: the inability to detect and appropriately respond to such situations represents a functional insufficiency. Emergency scenes are not rare or extreme ‘edge cases.’ As such, NHTSA is today issuing a call to action for AV developers and operators to immediately focus their resources on fixing this issue.” Morrison’s letter never calls out any one robotaxi company and it was sent to every AV developer listed in the Department of Transportation’s Standing General Order. But it sure seems like Morrison is directing the agency’s ire at Waymo. A previous TechCrunch investigation found that Waymo — which operates the largest robotaxi fleet in the United States, with vehicles in cities such as Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Francisco — has had repeated run-ins with first responders. And just this week, San Francisco supervisor Bilal Mahmood said he plans to submit a letter of inquiry to examine how autonomous vehicles affected public transit services and emergency responders following a July 4 fireworks show that resulted in massive gridlock. Local news outlets reported that numerous Waymo robotaxis had to be towed after running out of power during the lengthy traffic jam. Morrison’s letter has gravitas. But will there be substantive consequences for AV developers? It’s hard to tell at this point. For now, the NHTSA has demanded companies present the agency with “solutions” by the end of the month. One more news item from the feds. Take a look at the new 2026 Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda, which was updated last week. It contains a long list of proposed changes to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) requirements, which govern vehicle design and equipment requirements. These proposed changes could help autonomous vehicle companies like Tesla and Zoox, which are developing vehicles without steering wheels, pedals, or other features required on human-driven cars. A little bird Image Credits:Bryce Durbin Got a tip for us? Email Kirsten Korosec at kirsten.korosec@techcrunch.com or my Signal at kkorosec.07, or email Sean O’Kane at sean.okane@techcrunch.com. Deals! Image Credits:Bryce Durbin We usually focus on venture deals, but this week I wanted to highlight Rivian and the sale of 86.25 million Class A common shares priced at .50 each (that includes an added 11.25 million in additional shares that underwriters opted to buy). In all, Rivian said it expects to raise .32 billion in new capital. The raise comes at a notable time for the EV maker. The company started delivering its new R2 SUV last month and recently raised its sales forecast for 2026. The company said it now expects to deliver between 65,000 and 70,000 vehicles after outperforming its own expectations in the second quarter due to robust growth quarter-over-quarter in EDV and R1, coupled with the introduction of R2 deliveries.  The company didn’t explain the reason for the raise. But as a reminder, Rivian is not yet profitable and scaling up production of the R2 — or any vehicle for that matter — isn’t cheap! Other deals that got my attention … Bidbus, a Los Angeles-based startup that built a digital marketplace where multiple dealers can bid on a car, raised million in a Series A funding round led by Ibex Investors. Mucker Capital, FJ Labs, Motley Fool Ventures, Data Point Capital, Walter Ventures, and the Car Dealership Guy’s Yossi Levi also participated. Lyft said it plans to acquire Serveo’s bike-share business in Spain. Terms weren’t disclosed, but the ride-hailing company said it is expected to close this year. TaiSan, a U.K. battery startup, raised £4.65 million in a seed funding round co-led by Eos Advisory and the Midlands Engine Investment Fund II. InnoEnergy, AFI Ventures, EverQuest Capital Partners, Exergon, Heartfelt Ventures, Adeline Arts & Science, Techmind, angel investor François Badelon, and matched funding from Innovate UK also participated. Notable reads and other tidbits Image Credits:Bryce Durbin AssuranceAmerica, a U.S. insurance provider, confirmed a data breach that affected the personal information and driver’s license numbers of 6.9 million people, making it the largest known spill of Americans’ driver’s license information this year. Beta Technologies, the electric vehicle takeoff and landing developer, completed operational flights conducted under the U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration’s new eVTOL Integration Pilot Program. The flights covered about 275 nautical miles covering Virginia and Maryland.  Longtime followers of Tesla will remember the heady days when Elon Musk battled various short sellers of the company’s stock. Musk is more polarizing than ever, and one exchange-traded fund creator has found a way to tap into that negative sentiment with two new anti-Elon exchange-traded funds.  GM brand Chevrolet built an all-American EV truck. Senior reporter Tim De Chant asks, Why is nobody buying it?  Manna Aero, the Ireland-based autonomous drone delivery startup, is scaling up in the United States with a factory and operations center in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that it says will employ 1,000 in the next few years.  Slate Auto teamed up with Crayola to offer its EV truck and SUV customers vehicle wraps in five crayon colors. (Reminder: The basic Slate EV vehicle isn’t painted. Instead, it comes in a gray composite material that can be customized with a vehicle wrap. The company has hundreds of options to choose from.) One more thing … TechCrunch podcast Build Mode just launched its third season, and it’s a banger. Build Mode is hosted by Isabelle Johannessen, who heads TechCrunch’s Startup Battlefield program. Unlike Equity — the TC podcast I co-host along with Anthony Ha and Sean O’Kane — Build Mode is designed to help early-stage founders.  The new season kicks off with Precursor Ventures founder and managing partner Charles Hudson, who talks about what early-stage founders need to know before raising their first institutional round. Check it out: The new rules of early-stage fundraising with Charles Hudson. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#TechCrunch #Mobility #robotaxi #ultimatum #TechCrunchElon Musk,Uber,Waymo,Rivian,robotaxi,techcrunch mobility
Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

Got a tip for us? Email Kirsten Korosec at kirsten.korosec@techcrunch.com or my Signal at kkorosec.07, or email Sean O’Kane at sean.okane@techcrunch.com.

Deals!

money the station
Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

We usually focus on venture deals, but this week I wanted to highlight Rivian and the sale of 86.25 million Class A common shares priced at $15.50 each (that includes an added 11.25 million in additional shares that underwriters opted to buy).

In all, Rivian said it expects to raise $1.32 billion in new capital. The raise comes at a notable time for the EV maker. The company started delivering its new R2 SUV last month and recently raised its sales forecast for 2026. The company said it now expects to deliver between 65,000 and 70,000 vehicles after outperforming its own expectations in the second quarter due to robust growth quarter-over-quarter in EDV and R1, coupled with the introduction of R2 deliveries. 

The company didn’t explain the reason for the raise. But as a reminder, Rivian is not yet profitable and scaling up production of the R2 — or any vehicle for that matter — isn’t cheap!

Other deals that got my attention …

Bidbus, a Los Angeles-based startup that built a digital marketplace where multiple dealers can bid on a car, raised $15 million in a Series A funding round led by Ibex Investors. Mucker Capital, FJ Labs, Motley Fool Ventures, Data Point Capital, Walter Ventures, and the Car Dealership Guy’s Yossi Levi also participated.

Lyft said it plans to acquire Serveo’s bike-share business in Spain. Terms weren’t disclosed, but the ride-hailing company said it is expected to close this year.

TaiSan, a U.K. battery startup, raised £4.65 million in a seed funding round co-led by Eos Advisory and the Midlands Engine Investment Fund II. InnoEnergy, AFI Ventures, EverQuest Capital Partners, Exergon, Heartfelt Ventures, Adeline Arts & Science, Techmind, angel investor François Badelon, and matched funding from Innovate UK also participated.

Notable reads and other tidbits

Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

AssuranceAmerica, a U.S. insurance provider, confirmed a data breach that affected the personal information and driver’s license numbers of 6.9 million people, making it the largest known spill of Americans’ driver’s license information this year.

Beta Technologies, the electric vehicle takeoff and landing developer, completed operational flights conducted under the U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration’s new eVTOL Integration Pilot Program. The flights covered about 275 nautical miles covering Virginia and Maryland. 

Longtime followers of Tesla will remember the heady days when Elon Musk battled various short sellers of the company’s stock. Musk is more polarizing than ever, and one exchange-traded fund creator has found a way to tap into that negative sentiment with two new anti-Elon exchange-traded funds. 

GM brand Chevrolet built an all-American EV truck. Senior reporter Tim De Chant asks, Why is nobody buying it? 

Manna Aero, the Ireland-based autonomous drone delivery startup, is scaling up in the United States with a factory and operations center in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that it says will employ 1,000 in the next few years. 

Slate Auto teamed up with Crayola to offer its EV truck and SUV customers vehicle wraps in five crayon colors. (Reminder: The basic Slate EV vehicle isn’t painted. Instead, it comes in a gray composite material that can be customized with a vehicle wrap. The company has hundreds of options to choose from.)

One more thing …

TechCrunch podcast Build Mode just launched its third season, and it’s a banger. Build Mode is hosted by Isabelle Johannessen, who heads TechCrunch’s Startup Battlefield program. Unlike Equity — the TC podcast I co-host along with Anthony Ha and Sean O’Kane — Build Mode is designed to help early-stage founders. 

The new season kicks off with Precursor Ventures founder and managing partner Charles Hudson, who talks about what early-stage founders need to know before raising their first institutional round.

Check it out: The new rules of early-stage fundraising with Charles Hudson.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#TechCrunch #Mobility #robotaxi #ultimatum #TechCrunchElon Musk,Uber,Waymo,Rivian,robotaxi,techcrunch mobility

Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility, your hub for the future of transportation and now, more…

International news

{"_id":"6a394564740db5446c041605","slug":"x-suffers-major-global-outage-thousands-of-users-reported-issues-2026-06-22","type":"feature-story","status":"publish","title_hn":"X हुआ ठप: भारत समेत कई देशों में हजारों यूजर्स परेशान, नहीं लोड हो रहा…

$160.95, up 19%.

There has been heavy trading volume, as expected. Robinhood said it has seen “record-breaking traffic on its trading platform in the hours after SpaceX’s historic public markets debut.

SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell was interviewed by CNBC on Friday and among the many interesting comments she made, here is one that might get the attention of Tesla shareholders. At one point in the interview, Shotwell said a “merger between SpaceX and Tesla might make Elon’s life a little easier.”

Among the winners are the banks, which have brought in about $500 million in total fees. The big winners are Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, per the WSJ.

Musk took to X, the social media company he owns, to share his appreciation of SpaceX employees as the stock rose. “I love the incredible people of SpaceX beyond words,” he wrote Friday afternoon. He also reposted a number of SpaceX IPO related posts, including a photo of insiders all wearing green shoes in what appears to be a nod to “the green shoe option.” This is a provision in an IPO underwriting agreement that lets underwriters to sell up to 15% more shares than originally planned if demand is strong.

To get a deeper look into what happened today, and all the far-ranging implications of SpaceX now being a publicly traded company, Senior Reporter Sean O’Kane and AI Editor Russell Brandom sat down for a special episode of our Equity podcast, which you can listen to right here or via your podcast player of choice, or queue it up on YouTube here.

How to track the SpaceX IPO

With an offering this large, there is a lot of financial machinery operating behind the scenes — so the first question is just when the stock makes it to the market to start trading. SpaceX is debuting on Nasdaq and you can see the official Nasdaq listing here, which will have the price of record as soon as there is one. Nasdaq also has video of the SpaceX crew ringing the bell, if that’s your thing.

But the price is just part of the picture. For the most up-to-the-minute information, your best bet is still financial press outlets like Bloomberg and CNBC, both of which have liveblogs running and will have close coverage of any hiccups that happen in getting the stock to market.

The SpaceX IPO, by the numbers

Here we look at some of the bigger numbers, the consequential figures, and the eyewatering amounts that make up the company’s S-1 form. 

For instance, SpaceX lost $4.9 billion on revenues of over $18 billion in 2025. That’s only a fraction of the more than $37 billion lost since SpaceX’s inception. 

As CEO, Elon Musk holds about 85.1% of the company’s voting power. You can read more about that in the next section “Who wins and who doesn’t” — and we’ll continue to drop interesting numbers in here.

Here is another figure that caught our attention… 4,400. That’s the number of SpaceX employees who could become millionaires, according to the NYT.

Elon Musk can’t hear you over the sound of his $1.75 trillion IPO: The Equity podcast weighs in on the IPO.

Who wins and who doesn’t

SpaceX is the world’s largest IPO in history and means a big payday for some investors, employees, and of course, Elon Musk.

Elon Musk becomes the world’s first trillionaire after SpaceX’s historic IPO: The SpaceX IPO has boosted Musk’s paper wealth to more than $1,000,000,000,000 at a time when he is more hated — and powerful — than ever.

How Elon Musk will increase his power through the SpaceX IPO: Musk, who will have more than 50% of the voting power, will have a monarchical grip over the publicly traded version of SpaceX — control that goes far beyond what other tech founders enjoy.

Who will benefit most from SpaceX IPO? Mostly Elon — and a few from his inner circle: Elon Musk has the largest stake in SpaceX by billions of shares, but others also stand to win. Here’s the rundown of who owns what.

SpaceX SPV investors won’t know their true holdings until post-IPO lock-ups lift: After SpaceX makes its public debut, lower-tier SPV investors face hidden fees, lengthy payout delays, and the risk of outright fraud.

What’s in the S-1

The S-1 registration document gave the world an unprecedented look inside SpaceX, including its financials and its various businesses. The S-1 continued to be amended as the IPO date approached, and we were on it. Here is what we found.

The SpaceX IPO filing is filled with AI bets, Starship dreams, and Elon Musk at the center: The contents of the SpaceX IPO details a business dominated by its Starlink satellite internet offering, more than $37 billion in losses, and future business prospects through its xAI division.

Starship’s path to reusability looks murky after SpaceX’s S-1: SpaceX’s IPO and Starship rocket test flight delivered two big data points that offer a realistic vision for the coming years — and one that may disappoint both the company’s boosters and its critics.

SpaceX warns investors of future dilution, adding fuel to Tesla merger rumors: The company added new language to its S-1, a warning to prospective investors that a major dilution could be in the cards after it goes public.

Pre-IPO deals and events

Leading up to the IPO, SpaceX locked in a string of deals, mostly selling off compute to improve its balance sheet.

Anthropic will pay xAI $1.25B per month for compute: Initial coverage of the Anthropic deal on May 20.

How long is Anthropic’s lease with SpaceX? Opinions vary: Elon Musk keeps downplaying the duration of SpaceX’s contract with Anthropic.

Google will pay SpaceX $920M per month for compute: A Google representative described the deal as a short-term deal addressing unexpected demand for its recently launched AI products.

This article originally published at 10 am ET, June 12, 2026. It has been updated with new coverage of the SpaceX IPO, share price, and other related events.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#SpaceX #IPO #Live #updates #TechCrunchElon Musk,IPO,SpaceX,spacex ipo"> SpaceX IPO: Live updates on everything you need to know | TechCrunch SpaceX has captured the attention of media, investors, and the public for years now — interest propelled by the company’s reusable rocket launches, the rise of its Starlink satellite network, and of course, for its founder and CEO Elon Musk. But in its 24-year history, nothing quite compares to this initial public offering. Everyone seems to be interested, and perhaps it’s because of the sheer size of this IPO. The company priced its 555.6 million shares at 5 each to raise billion, making it the largest IPO in history. At this price, the deal also looks set to make Musk the world’s first trillionaire. TechCrunch has followed SpaceX’s start, struggles, and successes from the early days. And we’re here for what happens next too. This article will be continually updated with all of the latest SpaceX IPO news. The latest on the SpaceX IPO SpaceX shares opened at 0 on the Nasdaq public exchange, an 11% pop for the most anticipated debut in history. And it has continued to rise. The shares keep rising too (which we will update here). In midday trading, SpaceX shares soared 30%. SpaceX shares closed at 0.95, up 19%. There has been heavy trading volume, as expected. Robinhood said it has seen “record-breaking traffic on its trading platform in the hours after SpaceX’s historic public markets debut. SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell was interviewed by CNBC on Friday and among the many interesting comments she made, here is one that might get the attention of Tesla shareholders. At one point in the interview, Shotwell said a “merger between SpaceX and Tesla might make Elon’s life a little easier.” Among the winners are the banks, which have brought in about 0 million in total fees. The big winners are Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, per the WSJ. Musk took to X, the social media company he owns, to share his appreciation of SpaceX employees as the stock rose. “I love the incredible people of SpaceX beyond words,” he wrote Friday afternoon. He also reposted a number of SpaceX IPO related posts, including a photo of insiders all wearing green shoes in what appears to be a nod to “the green shoe option.” This is a provision in an IPO underwriting agreement that lets underwriters to sell up to 15% more shares than originally planned if demand is strong. To get a deeper look into what happened today, and all the far-ranging implications of SpaceX now being a publicly traded company, Senior Reporter Sean O’Kane and AI Editor Russell Brandom sat down for a special episode of our Equity podcast, which you can listen to right here or via your podcast player of choice, or queue it up on YouTube here. How to track the SpaceX IPO With an offering this large, there is a lot of financial machinery operating behind the scenes — so the first question is just when the stock makes it to the market to start trading. SpaceX is debuting on Nasdaq and you can see the official Nasdaq listing here, which will have the price of record as soon as there is one. Nasdaq also has video of the SpaceX crew ringing the bell, if that’s your thing. But the price is just part of the picture. For the most up-to-the-minute information, your best bet is still financial press outlets like Bloomberg and CNBC, both of which have liveblogs running and will have close coverage of any hiccups that happen in getting the stock to market. The SpaceX IPO, by the numbers Here we look at some of the bigger numbers, the consequential figures, and the eyewatering amounts that make up the company’s S-1 form.  For instance, SpaceX lost .9 billion on revenues of over  billion in 2025. That’s only a fraction of the more than  billion lost since SpaceX’s inception.  As CEO, Elon Musk holds about 85.1% of the company’s voting power. You can read more about that in the next section “Who wins and who doesn’t” — and we’ll continue to drop interesting numbers in here. Here is another figure that caught our attention… 4,400. That’s the number of SpaceX employees who could become millionaires, according to the NYT. Elon Musk can’t hear you over the sound of his .75 trillion IPO: The Equity podcast weighs in on the IPO. Who wins and who doesn’t SpaceX is the world’s largest IPO in history and means a big payday for some investors, employees, and of course, Elon Musk. Elon Musk becomes the world’s first trillionaire after SpaceX’s historic IPO: The SpaceX IPO has boosted Musk’s paper wealth to more than ,000,000,000,000 at a time when he is more hated — and powerful — than ever.How Elon Musk will increase his power through the SpaceX IPO: Musk, who will have more than 50% of the voting power, will have a monarchical grip over the publicly traded version of SpaceX — control that goes far beyond what other tech founders enjoy. Who will benefit most from SpaceX IPO? Mostly Elon — and a few from his inner circle: Elon Musk has the largest stake in SpaceX by billions of shares, but others also stand to win. Here’s the rundown of who owns what. SpaceX SPV investors won’t know their true holdings until post-IPO lock-ups lift: After SpaceX makes its public debut, lower-tier SPV investors face hidden fees, lengthy payout delays, and the risk of outright fraud. What’s in the S-1 The S-1 registration document gave the world an unprecedented look inside SpaceX, including its financials and its various businesses. The S-1 continued to be amended as the IPO date approached, and we were on it. Here is what we found. The SpaceX IPO filing is filled with AI bets, Starship dreams, and Elon Musk at the center: The contents of the SpaceX IPO details a business dominated by its Starlink satellite internet offering, more than billion in losses, and future business prospects through its xAI division. Starship’s path to reusability looks murky after SpaceX’s S-1: SpaceX’s IPO and Starship rocket test flight delivered two big data points that offer a realistic vision for the coming years — and one that may disappoint both the company’s boosters and its critics. SpaceX warns investors of future dilution, adding fuel to Tesla merger rumors: The company added new language to its S-1, a warning to prospective investors that a major dilution could be in the cards after it goes public. Pre-IPO deals and events Leading up to the IPO, SpaceX locked in a string of deals, mostly selling off compute to improve its balance sheet. Anthropic will pay xAI .25B per month for compute: Initial coverage of the Anthropic deal on May 20. How long is Anthropic’s lease with SpaceX? Opinions vary: Elon Musk keeps downplaying the duration of SpaceX’s contract with Anthropic. Google will pay SpaceX 0M per month for compute: A Google representative described the deal as a short-term deal addressing unexpected demand for its recently launched AI products. This article originally published at 10 am ET, June 12, 2026. It has been updated with new coverage of the SpaceX IPO, share price, and other related events. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#SpaceX #IPO #Live #updates #TechCrunchElon Musk,IPO,SpaceX,spacex ipo
Tech-news

$160.95, up 19%.

There has been heavy trading volume, as expected. Robinhood said it has seen “record-breaking traffic on its trading platform in the hours after SpaceX’s historic public markets debut.

SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell was interviewed by CNBC on Friday and among the many interesting comments she made, here is one that might get the attention of Tesla shareholders. At one point in the interview, Shotwell said a “merger between SpaceX and Tesla might make Elon’s life a little easier.”

Among the winners are the banks, which have brought in about $500 million in total fees. The big winners are Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, per the WSJ.

Musk took to X, the social media company he owns, to share his appreciation of SpaceX employees as the stock rose. “I love the incredible people of SpaceX beyond words,” he wrote Friday afternoon. He also reposted a number of SpaceX IPO related posts, including a photo of insiders all wearing green shoes in what appears to be a nod to “the green shoe option.” This is a provision in an IPO underwriting agreement that lets underwriters to sell up to 15% more shares than originally planned if demand is strong.

To get a deeper look into what happened today, and all the far-ranging implications of SpaceX now being a publicly traded company, Senior Reporter Sean O’Kane and AI Editor Russell Brandom sat down for a special episode of our Equity podcast, which you can listen to right here or via your podcast player of choice, or queue it up on YouTube here.

How to track the SpaceX IPO

With an offering this large, there is a lot of financial machinery operating behind the scenes — so the first question is just when the stock makes it to the market to start trading. SpaceX is debuting on Nasdaq and you can see the official Nasdaq listing here, which will have the price of record as soon as there is one. Nasdaq also has video of the SpaceX crew ringing the bell, if that’s your thing.

But the price is just part of the picture. For the most up-to-the-minute information, your best bet is still financial press outlets like Bloomberg and CNBC, both of which have liveblogs running and will have close coverage of any hiccups that happen in getting the stock to market.

The SpaceX IPO, by the numbers

Here we look at some of the bigger numbers, the consequential figures, and the eyewatering amounts that make up the company’s S-1 form. 

For instance, SpaceX lost $4.9 billion on revenues of over $18 billion in 2025. That’s only a fraction of the more than $37 billion lost since SpaceX’s inception. 

As CEO, Elon Musk holds about 85.1% of the company’s voting power. You can read more about that in the next section “Who wins and who doesn’t” — and we’ll continue to drop interesting numbers in here.

Here is another figure that caught our attention… 4,400. That’s the number of SpaceX employees who could become millionaires, according to the NYT.

Elon Musk can’t hear you over the sound of his $1.75 trillion IPO: The Equity podcast weighs in on the IPO.

Who wins and who doesn’t

SpaceX is the world’s largest IPO in history and means a big payday for some investors, employees, and of course, Elon Musk.

Elon Musk becomes the world’s first trillionaire after SpaceX’s historic IPO: The SpaceX IPO has boosted Musk’s paper wealth to more than $1,000,000,000,000 at a time when he is more hated — and powerful — than ever.

How Elon Musk will increase his power through the SpaceX IPO: Musk, who will have more than 50% of the voting power, will have a monarchical grip over the publicly traded version of SpaceX — control that goes far beyond what other tech founders enjoy.

Who will benefit most from SpaceX IPO? Mostly Elon — and a few from his inner circle: Elon Musk has the largest stake in SpaceX by billions of shares, but others also stand to win. Here’s the rundown of who owns what.

SpaceX SPV investors won’t know their true holdings until post-IPO lock-ups lift: After SpaceX makes its public debut, lower-tier SPV investors face hidden fees, lengthy payout delays, and the risk of outright fraud.

What’s in the S-1

The S-1 registration document gave the world an unprecedented look inside SpaceX, including its financials and its various businesses. The S-1 continued to be amended as the IPO date approached, and we were on it. Here is what we found.

The SpaceX IPO filing is filled with AI bets, Starship dreams, and Elon Musk at the center: The contents of the SpaceX IPO details a business dominated by its Starlink satellite internet offering, more than $37 billion in losses, and future business prospects through its xAI division.

Starship’s path to reusability looks murky after SpaceX’s S-1: SpaceX’s IPO and Starship rocket test flight delivered two big data points that offer a realistic vision for the coming years — and one that may disappoint both the company’s boosters and its critics.

SpaceX warns investors of future dilution, adding fuel to Tesla merger rumors: The company added new language to its S-1, a warning to prospective investors that a major dilution could be in the cards after it goes public.

Pre-IPO deals and events

Leading up to the IPO, SpaceX locked in a string of deals, mostly selling off compute to improve its balance sheet.

Anthropic will pay xAI $1.25B per month for compute: Initial coverage of the Anthropic deal on May 20.

How long is Anthropic’s lease with SpaceX? Opinions vary: Elon Musk keeps downplaying the duration of SpaceX’s contract with Anthropic.

Google will pay SpaceX $920M per month for compute: A Google representative described the deal as a short-term deal addressing unexpected demand for its recently launched AI products.

This article originally published at 10 am ET, June 12, 2026. It has been updated with new coverage of the SpaceX IPO, share price, and other related events.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#SpaceX #IPO #Live #updates #TechCrunchElon Musk,IPO,SpaceX,spacex ipo">SpaceX IPO: Live updates on everything you need to know | TechCrunch

SpaceX has captured the attention of media, investors, and the public for years now — interest propelled by the company’s reusable rocket launches, the rise of its Starlink satellite network, and of course, for its founder and CEO Elon Musk.

But in its 24-year history, nothing quite compares to this initial public offering. Everyone seems to be interested, and perhaps it’s because of the sheer size of this IPO. The company priced its 555.6 million shares at $135 each to raise $75 billion, making it the largest IPO in history. At this price, the deal also looks set to make Musk the world’s first trillionaire.

TechCrunch has followed SpaceX’s start, struggles, and successes from the early days. And we’re here for what happens next too. This article will be continually updated with all of the latest SpaceX IPO news.

The latest on the SpaceX IPO

SpaceX shares opened at $150 on the Nasdaq public exchange, an 11% pop for the most anticipated debut in history. And it has continued to rise. The shares keep rising too (which we will update here). In midday trading, SpaceX shares soared 30%. SpaceX shares closed at $160.95, up 19%.

There has been heavy trading volume, as expected. Robinhood said it has seen “record-breaking traffic on its trading platform in the hours after SpaceX’s historic public markets debut.

SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell was interviewed by CNBC on Friday and among the many interesting comments she made, here is one that might get the attention of Tesla shareholders. At one point in the interview, Shotwell said a “merger between SpaceX and Tesla might make Elon’s life a little easier.”

Among the winners are the banks, which have brought in about $500 million in total fees. The big winners are Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, per the WSJ.

Musk took to X, the social media company he owns, to share his appreciation of SpaceX employees as the stock rose. “I love the incredible people of SpaceX beyond words,” he wrote Friday afternoon. He also reposted a number of SpaceX IPO related posts, including a photo of insiders all wearing green shoes in what appears to be a nod to “the green shoe option.” This is a provision in an IPO underwriting agreement that lets underwriters to sell up to 15% more shares than originally planned if demand is strong.

To get a deeper look into what happened today, and all the far-ranging implications of SpaceX now being a publicly traded company, Senior Reporter Sean O’Kane and AI Editor Russell Brandom sat down for a special episode of our Equity podcast, which you can listen to right here or via your podcast player of choice, or queue it up on YouTube here.

How to track the SpaceX IPO

With an offering this large, there is a lot of financial machinery operating behind the scenes — so the first question is just when the stock makes it to the market to start trading. SpaceX is debuting on Nasdaq and you can see the official Nasdaq listing here, which will have the price of record as soon as there is one. Nasdaq also has video of the SpaceX crew ringing the bell, if that’s your thing.

But the price is just part of the picture. For the most up-to-the-minute information, your best bet is still financial press outlets like Bloomberg and CNBC, both of which have liveblogs running and will have close coverage of any hiccups that happen in getting the stock to market.

The SpaceX IPO, by the numbers

Here we look at some of the bigger numbers, the consequential figures, and the eyewatering amounts that make up the company’s S-1 form. 

For instance, SpaceX lost $4.9 billion on revenues of over $18 billion in 2025. That’s only a fraction of the more than $37 billion lost since SpaceX’s inception. 

As CEO, Elon Musk holds about 85.1% of the company’s voting power. You can read more about that in the next section “Who wins and who doesn’t” — and we’ll continue to drop interesting numbers in here.

Here is another figure that caught our attention… 4,400. That’s the number of SpaceX employees who could become millionaires, according to the NYT.

Elon Musk can’t hear you over the sound of his $1.75 trillion IPO: The Equity podcast weighs in on the IPO.

Who wins and who doesn’t

SpaceX is the world’s largest IPO in history and means a big payday for some investors, employees, and of course, Elon Musk.

Elon Musk becomes the world’s first trillionaire after SpaceX’s historic IPO: The SpaceX IPO has boosted Musk’s paper wealth to more than $1,000,000,000,000 at a time when he is more hated — and powerful — than ever.

How Elon Musk will increase his power through the SpaceX IPO: Musk, who will have more than 50% of the voting power, will have a monarchical grip over the publicly traded version of SpaceX — control that goes far beyond what other tech founders enjoy.

Who will benefit most from SpaceX IPO? Mostly Elon — and a few from his inner circle: Elon Musk has the largest stake in SpaceX by billions of shares, but others also stand to win. Here’s the rundown of who owns what.

SpaceX SPV investors won’t know their true holdings until post-IPO lock-ups lift: After SpaceX makes its public debut, lower-tier SPV investors face hidden fees, lengthy payout delays, and the risk of outright fraud.

What’s in the S-1

The S-1 registration document gave the world an unprecedented look inside SpaceX, including its financials and its various businesses. The S-1 continued to be amended as the IPO date approached, and we were on it. Here is what we found.

The SpaceX IPO filing is filled with AI bets, Starship dreams, and Elon Musk at the center: The contents of the SpaceX IPO details a business dominated by its Starlink satellite internet offering, more than $37 billion in losses, and future business prospects through its xAI division.

Starship’s path to reusability looks murky after SpaceX’s S-1: SpaceX’s IPO and Starship rocket test flight delivered two big data points that offer a realistic vision for the coming years — and one that may disappoint both the company’s boosters and its critics.

SpaceX warns investors of future dilution, adding fuel to Tesla merger rumors: The company added new language to its S-1, a warning to prospective investors that a major dilution could be in the cards after it goes public.

Pre-IPO deals and events

Leading up to the IPO, SpaceX locked in a string of deals, mostly selling off compute to improve its balance sheet.

Anthropic will pay xAI $1.25B per month for compute: Initial coverage of the Anthropic deal on May 20.

How long is Anthropic’s lease with SpaceX? Opinions vary: Elon Musk keeps downplaying the duration of SpaceX’s contract with Anthropic.

Google will pay SpaceX $920M per month for compute: A Google representative described the deal as a short-term deal addressing unexpected demand for its recently launched AI products.

This article originally published at 10 am ET, June 12, 2026. It has been updated with new coverage of the SpaceX IPO, share price, and other related events.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#SpaceX #IPO #Live #updates #TechCrunchElon Musk,IPO,SpaceX,spacex ipo

SpaceX has captured the attention of media, investors, and the public for years now —…

we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Starships #path #reusability #murky #SpaceXs #TechCrunchElon Musk,SpaceX,Starlink,Starship"> Starship’s path to reusability looks murky after SpaceX’s S-1 | TechCrunch SpaceX’s recent IPO and Starship rocket test flight delivered two big data points that offer a realistic vision for the coming years — and one that may disappoint both the company’s boosters and its critics. Hidden behind the fantastic expectations for AI enterprise profits and plans for a moon base is a more grounded reality: An expendable Starship could keep SpaceX in business, but doesn’t achieve the cost reductions — or frontier business models — Elon Musk is betting on. SpaceX is many businesses, but right now only one is producing significant revenue. Starlink, its satellite communications network, is the tent pole of the firm’s public offering. The top line is fairly incredible; SpaceX’s connectivity business generated .4 billion in revenue last year, the bulk of the company’s earnings. But underneath, you can see the capital expenditure treadmill that scared previous entrepreneurs away from this model. SpaceX needs to replace about a fifth of its satellites every year just to maintain its current level of service. It has invested more in its satellite business (.4 billion) since the beginning of 2023 than it has building Starship and its launch infrastructure (.4 billion). SpaceX’s S-1 filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission predicts costs will continue growing, but expects that improvements to its technology will allow it to reduce them as a percentage of its revenue. Musk has said that Starship is the key to keeping Starlink’s costs under control, even saying that SpaceX could go bankrupt without the vehicle’s ability to replace those satellites cheaply. In that context, a note that stood out in SpaceX’s S-1 was the first acknowledgment that full reusability of Starship isn’t necessary to launch the new generation of Starlink satellites. But without full reusability, the cost will go up, making the business less attractive. “If this reusability is not achieved then the cost of launch on Starship may not be much lower than Falcon 9, even if the full 100 ton capability is realized (which is by no means a foregone conclusion),” satellite market analyst Tim Farrar wrote in a note to clients last week. “The cost per launch may be as much as 0M (i.e. 00 per kg) while tempo remains constrained by the rate at which second stages can be manufactured and first stages can be refurbished.” Last week’s test flight of the third version of Starship and its booster bore those concerns out. The newest rocket’s maiden flight saw issues with a key capability for reusability — relighting the Raptor rocket engines on both the booster and Starship in order to make a controlled return to Earth. Starship did, however, deploy a set of dummy satellites and two test vehicles in space. That helps square SpaceX’s prediction that it will begin launching a new generation of higher-throughput Starlink satellites 60 at a time, a twentyfold increase in capacity compared to a single Falcon 9 launch, later this year. At first glance a classic example of Musk’s timelines, it may actually be an expectation that initial launches will expend the Starship. If so, SpaceX might not be able to count on as much free satellite cash as expected, and its plans to launch space data centers will become untenable until the rocket is reusable. Starlink growth slows At the same time, SpaceX’s S-1 shows that Starlink’s growth is slowing. SpaceX’s total addressable market calculation is based on its ability to offer service to every fixed-broadband subscriber or mobile handset in the world. That’s unlikely, though, because Starlink isn’t competing on price with terrestrial fiber. The rest of the document suggests SpaceX continues to see direct-to-device as a complement, rather than a replacement, for terrestrial mobile providers. Starlink has just over 10 million subscribers, more than any other satellite communications network. But Farrar notes the rate of user growth fell over the course of the first quarter of 2026. Quilty Space, a space consulting firm, projected earlier this year that SpaceX would end the year with 16.8 million subscribers. That would require the company’s quarterly growth rate to roughly double from where it is now, which may be difficult after recent price increases. Growth matters for SpaceX because its new Starlink users are paying less than previous ones. Starlink’s average revenue per user has fallen from in 2023 to in the first quarter of 2026 — a change propelled by its expansion into new international markets where it can’t charge as much as it does in developed economies. Without a fast-growing user base, each new satellite launched is making less money. Increased competition also threatens Starlink. Amazon’s Leo network is approaching the scale required to put pressure on SpaceX, although it is waiting for the Federal Communications Commission to extend a deadline that requires it to launch 1,600 internet satellites by July. Data in the SpaceX filing presents a gloomy growth forecast for the company as well as rivals like Blue Origin. Farrar says that if SpaceX — much further ahead than any other company — is seeing slowing demand, that may signal the market for space broadband is smaller than the players anticipated. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#Starships #path #reusability #murky #SpaceXs #TechCrunchElon Musk,SpaceX,Starlink,Starship
Tech-news

we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Starships #path #reusability #murky #SpaceXs #TechCrunchElon Musk,SpaceX,Starlink,Starship">Starship’s path to reusability looks murky after SpaceX’s S-1 | TechCrunch

SpaceX’s recent IPO and Starship rocket test flight delivered two big data points that offer a realistic vision for the coming years — and one that may disappoint both the company’s boosters and its critics.

Hidden behind the fantastic expectations for AI enterprise profits and plans for a moon base is a more grounded reality: An expendable Starship could keep SpaceX in business, but doesn’t achieve the cost reductions — or frontier business models — Elon Musk is betting on.

SpaceX is many businesses, but right now only one is producing significant revenue. Starlink, its satellite communications network, is the tent pole of the firm’s public offering. The top line is fairly incredible; SpaceX’s connectivity business generated $11.4 billion in revenue last year, the bulk of the company’s earnings.

But underneath, you can see the capital expenditure treadmill that scared previous entrepreneurs away from this model. SpaceX needs to replace about a fifth of its satellites every year just to maintain its current level of service. It has invested more in its satellite business ($11.4 billion) since the beginning of 2023 than it has building Starship and its launch infrastructure ($8.4 billion).

SpaceX’s S-1 filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission predicts costs will continue growing, but expects that improvements to its technology will allow it to reduce them as a percentage of its revenue.

Musk has said that Starship is the key to keeping Starlink’s costs under control, even saying that SpaceX could go bankrupt without the vehicle’s ability to replace those satellites cheaply. In that context, a note that stood out in SpaceX’s S-1 was the first acknowledgment that full reusability of Starship isn’t necessary to launch the new generation of Starlink satellites. But without full reusability, the cost will go up, making the business less attractive.

“If this reusability is not achieved then the cost of launch on Starship may not be much lower than Falcon 9, even if the full 100 ton capability is realized (which is by no means a foregone conclusion),” satellite market analyst Tim Farrar wrote in a note to clients last week. “The cost per launch may be as much as $100M (i.e. $1000 per kg) while tempo remains constrained by the rate at which second stages can be manufactured and first stages can be refurbished.”

Last week’s test flight of the third version of Starship and its booster bore those concerns out. The newest rocket’s maiden flight saw issues with a key capability for reusability — relighting the Raptor rocket engines on both the booster and Starship in order to make a controlled return to Earth. Starship did, however, deploy a set of dummy satellites and two test vehicles in space.

That helps square SpaceX’s prediction that it will begin launching a new generation of higher-throughput Starlink satellites 60 at a time, a twentyfold increase in capacity compared to a single Falcon 9 launch, later this year. At first glance a classic example of Musk’s timelines, it may actually be an expectation that initial launches will expend the Starship. If so, SpaceX might not be able to count on as much free satellite cash as expected, and its plans to launch space data centers will become untenable until the rocket is reusable.

At the same time, SpaceX’s S-1 shows that Starlink’s growth is slowing.

SpaceX’s total addressable market calculation is based on its ability to offer service to every fixed-broadband subscriber or mobile handset in the world. That’s unlikely, though, because Starlink isn’t competing on price with terrestrial fiber. The rest of the document suggests SpaceX continues to see direct-to-device as a complement, rather than a replacement, for terrestrial mobile providers.

Starlink has just over 10 million subscribers, more than any other satellite communications network. But Farrar notes the rate of user growth fell over the course of the first quarter of 2026. Quilty Space, a space consulting firm, projected earlier this year that SpaceX would end the year with 16.8 million subscribers. That would require the company’s quarterly growth rate to roughly double from where it is now, which may be difficult after recent price increases.

Growth matters for SpaceX because its new Starlink users are paying less than previous ones. Starlink’s average revenue per user has fallen from $99 in 2023 to $66 in the first quarter of 2026 — a change propelled by its expansion into new international markets where it can’t charge as much as it does in developed economies. Without a fast-growing user base, each new satellite launched is making less money.

Increased competition also threatens Starlink. Amazon’s Leo network is approaching the scale required to put pressure on SpaceX, although it is waiting for the Federal Communications Commission to extend a deadline that requires it to launch 1,600 internet satellites by July.

Data in the SpaceX filing presents a gloomy growth forecast for the company as well as rivals like Blue Origin. Farrar says that if SpaceX — much further ahead than any other company — is seeing slowing demand, that may signal the market for space broadband is smaller than the players anticipated.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Starships #path #reusability #murky #SpaceXs #TechCrunchElon Musk,SpaceX,Starlink,Starship

SpaceX’s recent IPO and Starship rocket test flight delivered two big data points that offer…

reported by The Wall Street Journal. The company lost over $4.9 billion last year, with capital expenditures soaring to $20.7 billion last year, a leap from $11.2 billion in 2024, as reported by The New York Times. xAI, which recently merged with SpaceX, lost billions last year, while growing revenue by 22 percent, according to TechCrunch.

For months, rumors have swirled that SpaceX was preparing a historic market debut, with whispers of a $1.75 trillion valuation and a record-shattering $75 billion raise. Now that the paperwork is public, we finally have our first real look at the financials behind the company that normalized reusable rockets, built a space internet monopoly, and absorbed Musk’s xAI and the dredges of Twitter into its orbit.

Several of our anticipated market opportunities, including certain AI, orbital, lunar, and interplanetary transportation and industrial activities, are still emerging and evolving or do not currently exist, and such markets may not develop as we expect, or at all.

It also says its “substantial level of indebtedness could materially adversely affect our financial condition.”

According to the WSJ, Musk’s supervoting shares will give him 85 percent control over the company. In addition to Musk, SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell, and CFO Bret Johnson, the SEC filing lists several other members of SpaceX’s board of directors, including Google executive Donald Harrison, Tesla board member Ira Ehrenpreis, as well as investors Randy Glein, Antonio Gracias, Steve Jurvetson, and Luke Nosek.

SpaceX describes its mission to investors as:

Our mission is to build the systems and technologies necessary to make life multiplanetary, to understand the true nature of the universe, and to extend the light of consciousness to the stars. To do this, we have formed the most ambitious, vertically integrated innovation engine on (and off) Earth with unmatched capabilities to rapidly manufacture and launch space-based communications that connect the world, to harness the Sun to power a truth-seeking artificial intelligence that advances scientific discovery, and ultimately to build a base on the Moon and cities on other planets.

SpaceX currently leads the industry in commercial space launches, with its massive Starship V3 rocket scheduled for flight on Thursday following a delay. The document repeatedly brings up establishing “orbital AI compute” by putting servers in space as a massive opportunity for revenue and one that it is uniquely positioned to deliver. In January, SpaceX asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to launch one million data center satellites into space to support a growing AI buildout.

It’s telling investors that SpaceX believes it has “identified the largest actionable total addressable market (TAM) in human history,” potentially worth $28.5 trillion, with $370 billion from space, $1.6 trillion in connectivity with Starlink Broadband and Starlink Mobile, and $26.5 trillion in AI, which includes AI infrastructure, subscriptions, advertising, and $22.7 trillion in enterprise applications.

#SpaceX #filed #biggest #IPOBusiness,Elon Musk,News,Science,Space,SpaceX,Tech"> SpaceX just filed for what could be the biggest IPO everSpaceX generated .67 billion in revenue in 2025, driven largely by its Starlink satellite internet service, which brought in more than billion, as reported by The Wall Street Journal. The company lost over .9 billion last year, with capital expenditures soaring to .7 billion last year, a leap from .2 billion in 2024, as reported by The New York Times. xAI, which recently merged with SpaceX, lost billions last year, while growing revenue by 22 percent, according to TechCrunch.For months, rumors have swirled that SpaceX was preparing a historic market debut, with whispers of a .75 trillion valuation and a record-shattering billion raise. Now that the paperwork is public, we finally have our first real look at the financials behind the company that normalized reusable rockets, built a space internet monopoly, and absorbed Musk’s xAI and the dredges of Twitter into its orbit.Several of our anticipated market opportunities, including certain AI, orbital, lunar, and interplanetary transportation and industrial activities, are still emerging and evolving or do not currently exist, and such markets may not develop as we expect, or at all.It also says its “substantial level of indebtedness could materially adversely affect our financial condition.”According to the WSJ, Musk’s supervoting shares will give him 85 percent control over the company. In addition to Musk, SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell, and CFO Bret Johnson, the SEC filing lists several other members of SpaceX’s board of directors, including Google executive Donald Harrison, Tesla board member Ira Ehrenpreis, as well as investors Randy Glein, Antonio Gracias, Steve Jurvetson, and Luke Nosek.SpaceX describes its mission to investors as:Our mission is to build the systems and technologies necessary to make life multiplanetary, to understand the true nature of the universe, and to extend the light of consciousness to the stars. To do this, we have formed the most ambitious, vertically integrated innovation engine on (and off) Earth with unmatched capabilities to rapidly manufacture and launch space-based communications that connect the world, to harness the Sun to power a truth-seeking artificial intelligence that advances scientific discovery, and ultimately to build a base on the Moon and cities on other planets.SpaceX currently leads the industry in commercial space launches, with its massive Starship V3 rocket scheduled for flight on Thursday following a delay. The document repeatedly brings up establishing “orbital AI compute” by putting servers in space as a massive opportunity for revenue and one that it is uniquely positioned to deliver. In January, SpaceX asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to launch one million data center satellites into space to support a growing AI buildout.It’s telling investors that SpaceX believes it has “identified the largest actionable total addressable market (TAM) in human history,” potentially worth .5 trillion, with 0 billion from space, .6 trillion in connectivity with Starlink Broadband and Starlink Mobile, and .5 trillion in AI, which includes AI infrastructure, subscriptions, advertising, and .7 trillion in enterprise applications.#SpaceX #filed #biggest #IPOBusiness,Elon Musk,News,Science,Space,SpaceX,Tech
Tech-news

reported by The Wall Street Journal. The company lost over $4.9 billion last year, with capital expenditures soaring to $20.7 billion last year, a leap from $11.2 billion in 2024, as reported by The New York Times. xAI, which recently merged with SpaceX, lost billions last year, while growing revenue by 22 percent, according to TechCrunch.

For months, rumors have swirled that SpaceX was preparing a historic market debut, with whispers of a $1.75 trillion valuation and a record-shattering $75 billion raise. Now that the paperwork is public, we finally have our first real look at the financials behind the company that normalized reusable rockets, built a space internet monopoly, and absorbed Musk’s xAI and the dredges of Twitter into its orbit.

Several of our anticipated market opportunities, including certain AI, orbital, lunar, and interplanetary transportation and industrial activities, are still emerging and evolving or do not currently exist, and such markets may not develop as we expect, or at all.

It also says its “substantial level of indebtedness could materially adversely affect our financial condition.”

According to the WSJ, Musk’s supervoting shares will give him 85 percent control over the company. In addition to Musk, SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell, and CFO Bret Johnson, the SEC filing lists several other members of SpaceX’s board of directors, including Google executive Donald Harrison, Tesla board member Ira Ehrenpreis, as well as investors Randy Glein, Antonio Gracias, Steve Jurvetson, and Luke Nosek.

SpaceX describes its mission to investors as:

Our mission is to build the systems and technologies necessary to make life multiplanetary, to understand the true nature of the universe, and to extend the light of consciousness to the stars. To do this, we have formed the most ambitious, vertically integrated innovation engine on (and off) Earth with unmatched capabilities to rapidly manufacture and launch space-based communications that connect the world, to harness the Sun to power a truth-seeking artificial intelligence that advances scientific discovery, and ultimately to build a base on the Moon and cities on other planets.

SpaceX currently leads the industry in commercial space launches, with its massive Starship V3 rocket scheduled for flight on Thursday following a delay. The document repeatedly brings up establishing “orbital AI compute” by putting servers in space as a massive opportunity for revenue and one that it is uniquely positioned to deliver. In January, SpaceX asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to launch one million data center satellites into space to support a growing AI buildout.

It’s telling investors that SpaceX believes it has “identified the largest actionable total addressable market (TAM) in human history,” potentially worth $28.5 trillion, with $370 billion from space, $1.6 trillion in connectivity with Starlink Broadband and Starlink Mobile, and $26.5 trillion in AI, which includes AI infrastructure, subscriptions, advertising, and $22.7 trillion in enterprise applications.

#SpaceX #filed #biggest #IPOBusiness,Elon Musk,News,Science,Space,SpaceX,Tech">SpaceX just filed for what could be the biggest IPO ever

SpaceX generated $18.67 billion in revenue in 2025, driven largely by its Starlink satellite internet service, which brought in more than $11 billion, as reported by The Wall Street Journal. The company lost over $4.9 billion last year, with capital expenditures soaring to $20.7 billion last year, a leap from $11.2 billion in 2024, as reported by The New York Times. xAI, which recently merged with SpaceX, lost billions last year, while growing revenue by 22 percent, according to TechCrunch.

For months, rumors have swirled that SpaceX was preparing a historic market debut, with whispers of a $1.75 trillion valuation and a record-shattering $75 billion raise. Now that the paperwork is public, we finally have our first real look at the financials behind the company that normalized reusable rockets, built a space internet monopoly, and absorbed Musk’s xAI and the dredges of Twitter into its orbit.

Several of our anticipated market opportunities, including certain AI, orbital, lunar, and interplanetary transportation and industrial activities, are still emerging and evolving or do not currently exist, and such markets may not develop as we expect, or at all.

It also says its “substantial level of indebtedness could materially adversely affect our financial condition.”

According to the WSJ, Musk’s supervoting shares will give him 85 percent control over the company. In addition to Musk, SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell, and CFO Bret Johnson, the SEC filing lists several other members of SpaceX’s board of directors, including Google executive Donald Harrison, Tesla board member Ira Ehrenpreis, as well as investors Randy Glein, Antonio Gracias, Steve Jurvetson, and Luke Nosek.

SpaceX describes its mission to investors as:

Our mission is to build the systems and technologies necessary to make life multiplanetary, to understand the true nature of the universe, and to extend the light of consciousness to the stars. To do this, we have formed the most ambitious, vertically integrated innovation engine on (and off) Earth with unmatched capabilities to rapidly manufacture and launch space-based communications that connect the world, to harness the Sun to power a truth-seeking artificial intelligence that advances scientific discovery, and ultimately to build a base on the Moon and cities on other planets.

SpaceX currently leads the industry in commercial space launches, with its massive Starship V3 rocket scheduled for flight on Thursday following a delay. The document repeatedly brings up establishing “orbital AI compute” by putting servers in space as a massive opportunity for revenue and one that it is uniquely positioned to deliver. In January, SpaceX asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to launch one million data center satellites into space to support a growing AI buildout.

It’s telling investors that SpaceX believes it has “identified the largest actionable total addressable market (TAM) in human history,” potentially worth $28.5 trillion, with $370 billion from space, $1.6 trillion in connectivity with Starlink Broadband and Starlink Mobile, and $26.5 trillion in AI, which includes AI infrastructure, subscriptions, advertising, and $22.7 trillion in enterprise applications.

#SpaceX #filed #biggest #IPOBusiness,Elon Musk,News,Science,Space,SpaceX,Tech

SpaceX generated $18.67 billion in revenue in 2025, driven largely by its Starlink satellite internet…

hollywood copy - alina watson

Jimmy Kimmel torched Elon Musk after the Tesla CEO had a meltdown over Christopher Nolan…

decision to reject Elon Musk’s lawsuit against the other founders of OpenAI and Microsoft confirmed what we saw in the courtroom: Musk’s case was a weak one, in part because he waited so long to file it.

Watching the closing arguments last week, OpenAI’s attorneys detailed point-by-point how the law was on their client’s side, while the plaintiffs team focused on Sam Altman’s apparent lack of credibility and expressed disbelief that anyone would disagree with Musk’s accusations.

The final effect was that, after the verdict, some found it hard to believe Musk had lost — including the man himself. In a post he later deleted, Musk called Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers a “terrible activist Oakland judge,” then announced his plans to appeal, declaring “there is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity.”

But Altman and Brockman weren’t the only figures who benefitted from OpenAI’s non-profit investments. As much as Musk and his legal team tried to make the trial about Altman, the proceedings revealed just as much about Musk himself.

One incident that came out in court showed Musk benefiting from OpenAI in an uncomfortably familiar way. Greg Brockman testified that in 2017, Musk asked him to bring a team of OpenAI researchers down to Tesla’s headquarters to help with the autopilot team for a few weeks. “It was pretty clear that was not something we could say no to,” Brockman said.

Brockman described taking a team of leading scientists, including Andrej Karpathy, Ilya Sutskever, and Scott Grey, to consult with the “demoralized” Tesla workers. They helped come up with ideas to improve the vehicle’s self-driving technology, with Sutskever telling the team that if they could find 10,000 images of a tricky corner case, they would be able to fix their software. Musk even asked Brockman to recommend employees to fire, which he declined to do.

Another person familiar with the episode confirmed Brockman’s account, and said Tesla did not reimburse OpenAI for the time and effort of its employees. Musk’s family office, Excession, didn’t reply to a request for comment.

The heart of Musk’s case is that Altman, Brockman and OpenAI committed a “breach of charitable trust” — that Musk donated funds for a specific charitable purpose, and his cofounders instead used them for something else. He also accuses them of “unjust enrichment” due stock and other benefits from OpenAI’s for-profit.

In the case of the OpenAI scientists parachuting into Tesla, Musk’s charitable donations were intended to hire scientists focused on securing the benefits of AGI. Instead, he had them work for free at his for-profit company.

Dorothy Lund, a Columbia Law School professor and the co-host of the Beyond Unprecedented podcast, told TechCrunch that this arrangement wouldn’t be legal, calling it “a bit rich for Musk to be suing for breach of a charitable trust, when he appears to have been redirecting assets in a way that was inconsistent with that mission.”

It’s true that the self-driving work involved artificial intelligence, but witnesses for Musk emphasized that Tesla’s self-driving project was very different from OpenAI’s research agenda. That’s in part because Karpathy left OpenAI for Tesla shortly after this incident. OpenAI’s attorneys portrayed the departure as Musk violating his duty to the lab, where he was co-chair of the board, by recruiting one of its key researchers to his own company.

The other fact that no doubt influenced the jury was the amount of time Musk spent trying to gain sole control of a potential OpenAI for-profit affiliate in 2017. Musk deployed good cop, bad cop tactics in an attempt to convince his cofounders to let him have total control of OpenAI’s for-profit affiliate — giving them free Teslas, and threatening to withhold his donations.

His efforts put his attorneys in a tricky spot, facing a need to convince the jury there was a significant difference between what Musk envisioned, and the for-profit that was ultimately created. They suggested a “small adjunct” for-profit would be permissible, though OpenAI’s witnesses showed non-profits with large commercial arms are common.

Indeed, there’s a very plausible counter-factual where Musk took one of the offers his cofounders made to split their equity more evenly, and finds himself today as one of OpenAI’s largest shareholders — just not the controlling one. But several times during the trial, Musk’s associates testified that he refuses to invest in any business he could have sole control over.

The failure of Musk’s claims because he filed them too late has been cited as a technicality, but the statute of limitations has substance behind it: People and businesses make important decisions and spend resources based on their understanding that what they are doing is permissible. If someone like Musk waits too long to sue, then the cost of unravelling all those decisions can outweigh a just reimbursement.

No members of the jury have spoken about how they arrived at their verdict. However, they were asked to consider if, before Aug. 5, 2021, Musk should have known that OpenAI was spending resources outside its mission or launching for-profit affiliate. The answer to that is clear: Musk himself was doing those things.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Elon #Musk #Sam #Altman #stole #nonprofit #trial #showed #similar #aims #TechCrunchElon Musk,OpenAI,sam altman,Tesla"> Elon Musk said Sam Altman “stole” a non-profit — but the trial showed he had similar aims | TechCrunch The jury’s speedy decision to reject Elon Musk’s lawsuit against the other founders of OpenAI and Microsoft confirmed what we saw in the courtroom: Musk’s case was a weak one, in part because he waited so long to file it. Watching the closing arguments last week, OpenAI’s attorneys detailed point-by-point how the law was on their client’s side, while the plaintiffs team focused on Sam Altman’s apparent lack of credibility and expressed disbelief that anyone would disagree with Musk’s accusations. The final effect was that, after the verdict, some found it hard to believe Musk had lost — including the man himself. In a post he later deleted, Musk called Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers a “terrible activist Oakland judge,” then announced his plans to appeal, declaring “there is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity.” But Altman and Brockman weren’t the only figures who benefitted from OpenAI’s non-profit investments. As much as Musk and his legal team tried to make the trial about Altman, the proceedings revealed just as much about Musk himself. One incident that came out in court showed Musk benefiting from OpenAI in an uncomfortably familiar way. Greg Brockman testified that in 2017, Musk asked him to bring a team of OpenAI researchers down to Tesla’s headquarters to help with the autopilot team for a few weeks. “It was pretty clear that was not something we could say no to,” Brockman said. Brockman described taking a team of leading scientists, including Andrej Karpathy, Ilya Sutskever, and Scott Grey, to consult with the “demoralized” Tesla workers. They helped come up with ideas to improve the vehicle’s self-driving technology, with Sutskever telling the team that if they could find 10,000 images of a tricky corner case, they would be able to fix their software. Musk even asked Brockman to recommend employees to fire, which he declined to do. Another person familiar with the episode confirmed Brockman’s account, and said Tesla did not reimburse OpenAI for the time and effort of its employees. Musk’s family office, Excession, didn’t reply to a request for comment. The heart of Musk’s case is that Altman, Brockman and OpenAI committed a “breach of charitable trust” — that Musk donated funds for a specific charitable purpose, and his cofounders instead used them for something else. He also accuses them of “unjust enrichment” due stock and other benefits from OpenAI’s for-profit. In the case of the OpenAI scientists parachuting into Tesla, Musk’s charitable donations were intended to hire scientists focused on securing the benefits of AGI. Instead, he had them work for free at his for-profit company. Dorothy Lund, a Columbia Law School professor and the co-host of the Beyond Unprecedented podcast, told TechCrunch that this arrangement wouldn’t be legal, calling it “a bit rich for Musk to be suing for breach of a charitable trust, when he appears to have been redirecting assets in a way that was inconsistent with that mission.” It’s true that the self-driving work involved artificial intelligence, but witnesses for Musk emphasized that Tesla’s self-driving project was very different from OpenAI’s research agenda. That’s in part because Karpathy left OpenAI for Tesla shortly after this incident. OpenAI’s attorneys portrayed the departure as Musk violating his duty to the lab, where he was co-chair of the board, by recruiting one of its key researchers to his own company. The other fact that no doubt influenced the jury was the amount of time Musk spent trying to gain sole control of a potential OpenAI for-profit affiliate in 2017. Musk deployed good cop, bad cop tactics in an attempt to convince his cofounders to let him have total control of OpenAI’s for-profit affiliate — giving them free Teslas, and threatening to withhold his donations. His efforts put his attorneys in a tricky spot, facing a need to convince the jury there was a significant difference between what Musk envisioned, and the for-profit that was ultimately created. They suggested a “small adjunct” for-profit would be permissible, though OpenAI’s witnesses showed non-profits with large commercial arms are common. Indeed, there’s a very plausible counter-factual where Musk took one of the offers his cofounders made to split their equity more evenly, and finds himself today as one of OpenAI’s largest shareholders — just not the controlling one. But several times during the trial, Musk’s associates testified that he refuses to invest in any business he could have sole control over. The failure of Musk’s claims because he filed them too late has been cited as a technicality, but the statute of limitations has substance behind it: People and businesses make important decisions and spend resources based on their understanding that what they are doing is permissible. If someone like Musk waits too long to sue, then the cost of unravelling all those decisions can outweigh a just reimbursement. No members of the jury have spoken about how they arrived at their verdict. However, they were asked to consider if, before Aug. 5, 2021, Musk should have known that OpenAI was spending resources outside its mission or launching for-profit affiliate. The answer to that is clear: Musk himself was doing those things. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#Elon #Musk #Sam #Altman #stole #nonprofit #trial #showed #similar #aims #TechCrunchElon Musk,OpenAI,sam altman,Tesla
Tech-news

decision to reject Elon Musk’s lawsuit against the other founders of OpenAI and Microsoft confirmed what we saw in the courtroom: Musk’s case was a weak one, in part because he waited so long to file it.

Watching the closing arguments last week, OpenAI’s attorneys detailed point-by-point how the law was on their client’s side, while the plaintiffs team focused on Sam Altman’s apparent lack of credibility and expressed disbelief that anyone would disagree with Musk’s accusations.

The final effect was that, after the verdict, some found it hard to believe Musk had lost — including the man himself. In a post he later deleted, Musk called Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers a “terrible activist Oakland judge,” then announced his plans to appeal, declaring “there is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity.”

But Altman and Brockman weren’t the only figures who benefitted from OpenAI’s non-profit investments. As much as Musk and his legal team tried to make the trial about Altman, the proceedings revealed just as much about Musk himself.

One incident that came out in court showed Musk benefiting from OpenAI in an uncomfortably familiar way. Greg Brockman testified that in 2017, Musk asked him to bring a team of OpenAI researchers down to Tesla’s headquarters to help with the autopilot team for a few weeks. “It was pretty clear that was not something we could say no to,” Brockman said.

Brockman described taking a team of leading scientists, including Andrej Karpathy, Ilya Sutskever, and Scott Grey, to consult with the “demoralized” Tesla workers. They helped come up with ideas to improve the vehicle’s self-driving technology, with Sutskever telling the team that if they could find 10,000 images of a tricky corner case, they would be able to fix their software. Musk even asked Brockman to recommend employees to fire, which he declined to do.

Another person familiar with the episode confirmed Brockman’s account, and said Tesla did not reimburse OpenAI for the time and effort of its employees. Musk’s family office, Excession, didn’t reply to a request for comment.

The heart of Musk’s case is that Altman, Brockman and OpenAI committed a “breach of charitable trust” — that Musk donated funds for a specific charitable purpose, and his cofounders instead used them for something else. He also accuses them of “unjust enrichment” due stock and other benefits from OpenAI’s for-profit.

In the case of the OpenAI scientists parachuting into Tesla, Musk’s charitable donations were intended to hire scientists focused on securing the benefits of AGI. Instead, he had them work for free at his for-profit company.

Dorothy Lund, a Columbia Law School professor and the co-host of the Beyond Unprecedented podcast, told TechCrunch that this arrangement wouldn’t be legal, calling it “a bit rich for Musk to be suing for breach of a charitable trust, when he appears to have been redirecting assets in a way that was inconsistent with that mission.”

It’s true that the self-driving work involved artificial intelligence, but witnesses for Musk emphasized that Tesla’s self-driving project was very different from OpenAI’s research agenda. That’s in part because Karpathy left OpenAI for Tesla shortly after this incident. OpenAI’s attorneys portrayed the departure as Musk violating his duty to the lab, where he was co-chair of the board, by recruiting one of its key researchers to his own company.

The other fact that no doubt influenced the jury was the amount of time Musk spent trying to gain sole control of a potential OpenAI for-profit affiliate in 2017. Musk deployed good cop, bad cop tactics in an attempt to convince his cofounders to let him have total control of OpenAI’s for-profit affiliate — giving them free Teslas, and threatening to withhold his donations.

His efforts put his attorneys in a tricky spot, facing a need to convince the jury there was a significant difference between what Musk envisioned, and the for-profit that was ultimately created. They suggested a “small adjunct” for-profit would be permissible, though OpenAI’s witnesses showed non-profits with large commercial arms are common.

Indeed, there’s a very plausible counter-factual where Musk took one of the offers his cofounders made to split their equity more evenly, and finds himself today as one of OpenAI’s largest shareholders — just not the controlling one. But several times during the trial, Musk’s associates testified that he refuses to invest in any business he could have sole control over.

The failure of Musk’s claims because he filed them too late has been cited as a technicality, but the statute of limitations has substance behind it: People and businesses make important decisions and spend resources based on their understanding that what they are doing is permissible. If someone like Musk waits too long to sue, then the cost of unravelling all those decisions can outweigh a just reimbursement.

No members of the jury have spoken about how they arrived at their verdict. However, they were asked to consider if, before Aug. 5, 2021, Musk should have known that OpenAI was spending resources outside its mission or launching for-profit affiliate. The answer to that is clear: Musk himself was doing those things.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Elon #Musk #Sam #Altman #stole #nonprofit #trial #showed #similar #aims #TechCrunchElon Musk,OpenAI,sam altman,Tesla">Elon Musk said Sam Altman “stole” a non-profit — but the trial showed he had similar aims | TechCrunch

The jury’s speedy decision to reject Elon Musk’s lawsuit against the other founders of OpenAI and Microsoft confirmed what we saw in the courtroom: Musk’s case was a weak one, in part because he waited so long to file it.

Watching the closing arguments last week, OpenAI’s attorneys detailed point-by-point how the law was on their client’s side, while the plaintiffs team focused on Sam Altman’s apparent lack of credibility and expressed disbelief that anyone would disagree with Musk’s accusations.

The final effect was that, after the verdict, some found it hard to believe Musk had lost — including the man himself. In a post he later deleted, Musk called Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers a “terrible activist Oakland judge,” then announced his plans to appeal, declaring “there is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity.”

But Altman and Brockman weren’t the only figures who benefitted from OpenAI’s non-profit investments. As much as Musk and his legal team tried to make the trial about Altman, the proceedings revealed just as much about Musk himself.

One incident that came out in court showed Musk benefiting from OpenAI in an uncomfortably familiar way. Greg Brockman testified that in 2017, Musk asked him to bring a team of OpenAI researchers down to Tesla’s headquarters to help with the autopilot team for a few weeks. “It was pretty clear that was not something we could say no to,” Brockman said.

Brockman described taking a team of leading scientists, including Andrej Karpathy, Ilya Sutskever, and Scott Grey, to consult with the “demoralized” Tesla workers. They helped come up with ideas to improve the vehicle’s self-driving technology, with Sutskever telling the team that if they could find 10,000 images of a tricky corner case, they would be able to fix their software. Musk even asked Brockman to recommend employees to fire, which he declined to do.

Another person familiar with the episode confirmed Brockman’s account, and said Tesla did not reimburse OpenAI for the time and effort of its employees. Musk’s family office, Excession, didn’t reply to a request for comment.

The heart of Musk’s case is that Altman, Brockman and OpenAI committed a “breach of charitable trust” — that Musk donated funds for a specific charitable purpose, and his cofounders instead used them for something else. He also accuses them of “unjust enrichment” due stock and other benefits from OpenAI’s for-profit.

In the case of the OpenAI scientists parachuting into Tesla, Musk’s charitable donations were intended to hire scientists focused on securing the benefits of AGI. Instead, he had them work for free at his for-profit company.

Dorothy Lund, a Columbia Law School professor and the co-host of the Beyond Unprecedented podcast, told TechCrunch that this arrangement wouldn’t be legal, calling it “a bit rich for Musk to be suing for breach of a charitable trust, when he appears to have been redirecting assets in a way that was inconsistent with that mission.”

It’s true that the self-driving work involved artificial intelligence, but witnesses for Musk emphasized that Tesla’s self-driving project was very different from OpenAI’s research agenda. That’s in part because Karpathy left OpenAI for Tesla shortly after this incident. OpenAI’s attorneys portrayed the departure as Musk violating his duty to the lab, where he was co-chair of the board, by recruiting one of its key researchers to his own company.

The other fact that no doubt influenced the jury was the amount of time Musk spent trying to gain sole control of a potential OpenAI for-profit affiliate in 2017. Musk deployed good cop, bad cop tactics in an attempt to convince his cofounders to let him have total control of OpenAI’s for-profit affiliate — giving them free Teslas, and threatening to withhold his donations.

His efforts put his attorneys in a tricky spot, facing a need to convince the jury there was a significant difference between what Musk envisioned, and the for-profit that was ultimately created. They suggested a “small adjunct” for-profit would be permissible, though OpenAI’s witnesses showed non-profits with large commercial arms are common.

Indeed, there’s a very plausible counter-factual where Musk took one of the offers his cofounders made to split their equity more evenly, and finds himself today as one of OpenAI’s largest shareholders — just not the controlling one. But several times during the trial, Musk’s associates testified that he refuses to invest in any business he could have sole control over.

The failure of Musk’s claims because he filed them too late has been cited as a technicality, but the statute of limitations has substance behind it: People and businesses make important decisions and spend resources based on their understanding that what they are doing is permissible. If someone like Musk waits too long to sue, then the cost of unravelling all those decisions can outweigh a just reimbursement.

No members of the jury have spoken about how they arrived at their verdict. However, they were asked to consider if, before Aug. 5, 2021, Musk should have known that OpenAI was spending resources outside its mission or launching for-profit affiliate. The answer to that is clear: Musk himself was doing those things.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Elon #Musk #Sam #Altman #stole #nonprofit #trial #showed #similar #aims #TechCrunchElon Musk,OpenAI,sam altman,Tesla

The jury’s speedy decision to reject Elon Musk’s lawsuit against the other founders of OpenAI…