Day 2: asking @elonmusk to reconsider. There is clear demand for the @cybertruck , as stated in his own words: xitter.gq/elonmusk/status/211969…
Cybertruck shouldn't be viewed as competition to the Cybercab. There is no reason to throw the Cybertruck out to increase Cybercab production.
If anything, form Cybertruck Inc. and separate it from @Tesla and @SpaceX in order to keep Tesla/SpaceX focused on Cybercab and pure autonomous driving. Let Cybertruck Inc. continue to produce the most advanced truck in the world.
Part of being an American is doing things we want to do. It’s likely X times safer to NOT eat pizza, we do it because we like it. This will never change. The American culture of driving cars will never change.
Cybercab is the right solution for American mass transportation, but mass transportation will NEVER be all transportation in the U.S.
If a car can drive itself and is ~7× safer than a human driver, there's literally no point in humans driving car
21
The claim that Cybertruck carries an opportunity cost against Cybercab relies on a false premise: zero-sum manufacturing capacity. Opportunity cost only applies when production inputs—like floor space, capital, or engineering talent—are strictly capped. If the Cybertruck is profitable, Tesla can simply expand footprint on dedicated lines (or build a new facility entirely - like in Florida where you won't face liberal backlash) to scale both. Without an active manufacturing constraint, producing Cybertruck doesn't cost you a single Cybercab.
The Cybertruck order rate far exceeds our production rate. We will try to make as many as possible before shutting down the line in about 8 months, but will have to return deposits for a lot of people.
This is not a case of Cybertruck being unprofitable, as has been misreported by legacy media, but rather that the opportunity cost of the complexity of Cybertruck is vastly outweighed by the value of incremental Cybercab production.
43
Day 1 of asking @elonmusk to reconsider the current Cybertruck drawdown. There are dozens of other ways to keep it around and not have it be a drag on the @Tesla or future @SpaceX P&L or go counter to your vision for autonomy.
Hey @elonmusk I know this is a crazy idea but… it’s time to create a new entity (“Cybertruck, Inc.” or similar) that owns the brand, establish specialized tooling/line at Giga Florida (safe from crazy leftist attacks), and the product roadmap. Elon you’d retain majority ownership (and control). Tesla licenses the core vehicle architecture, software stack, battery/powertrain, and FSD to the new company on commercial terms, supplies key components, and can take a minority stake or preferred supply agreement.
The new company runs as a low-volume, high-ARPU specialty platform: mandatory or multi-year prepaid FSD + connectivity, commercial/work-focused variants, capped production (15-30k/year), and explicit autonomy-data contribution. It can raise outside capital at a different multiple, pursue niche markets or government/fleet deals Tesla won’t prioritize, and no longer sits inside Tesla’s automotive gross-margin and capacity numbers. Tesla stops carrying the fixed-cost drag and capacity conflict with Cybercab; the sunk investment has a cleaner path to recovery or write-down outside the core P&L.
Send me a DM and let’s chat!





