Selling Cars vs. Earning Profits: Cybercab’s Business Strategy
I read an article about the Tesla Cybercab fleet and found it pretty interesting. In short, if a Tesla Robotaxi fleet could really make money, Tesla would keep it for themselves and wouldn't sell a single one to outsiders.
The article mentions that in 2019, Musk promised that if owners plugged their cars into the Tesla Network, each vehicle could earn up to $30,000 annually in gross margin—a claim of asset appreciation. But reality? You have to pay $15,000 for FSD, and then wait years while no one actually gets the car to drive as a Robotaxi. A Dutch car-rental company called MisterGreen swallowed the pitch, bought over 4,000 Teslas, and bet on both value retention and Robotaxi income. Instead, Tesla slashed prices within two years, and the cars depreciated three times faster than the used-car market average. MisterGreen went bankrupt in December 2025, leaving bondholders out $40 million.
So selling you the Cybercab isn't really offering you an investment—it's offloading risk onto you. Tesla keeps the software, the platform, and the pricing power; you pay the purchase price and eat the depreciation and operating costs. Tesla pockets the software revenue and takes a cut from every ride. It's the same playbook they used to sell FSD promises.
Of course, this brings up an old question: why do big companies keep shifting risk onto minority shareholders or individual investors? The 401k replacing pensions is just the latest version of the same trick. Whether you buy it depends on your own judgment.
To extend the point a little further, Tesla is playing a classic "asset-light" game. They don't want to own a fleet—carrying capital is too expensive and depreciating vehicles eats margins. By getting third parties to buy and run Cybercabs, Tesla shifts the capex and depreciation onto buyers while keeping the high-margin software and service revenue. It's a typical "rentier" model—like the landlord in a platform economy. Uber and Lyft tried similar plays with shared ride-hailing fleets and ultimately chose to operate their own vehicles to control quality and income. If Tesla's Robotaxi network takes off, it would become a massive digital platform controlling every transaction and setting prices, while vehicle owners get pushed into the role of peripheral "asset providers." The model is easy to replicate but carries enormous risk—because the platform can change the rules anytime and leave owners holding the bag. MisterGreen's bankruptcy is a warning: in a lopsided power structure, blindly trusting platform promises tends to end in serious financial losses.
Original: If a Tesla Cybercab fleet were profitable, Tesla wouldn't sell you one