Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who is also the new owner and CEO of Twitter, bashed Apple this week after claiming the company has threatened to remove the Twitter app from its App Store, accusing the company of hating “free speech.”
The Twitter app is still available for iOS devices, and there’s no sign that the popular social media app is at real risk of getting booted by Apple.
The Tesla CEO’s furious tweets recall how Musk has long taken shots at Apple, and highlighted just how much power the tech juggernaut still has over the world’s richest person.
Meanwhile, Apple as a company never engages in public trash talk toward Musk or Tesla, and has even avoided taking veiled shots at them, as opposed to the frequent oblique criticisms aimed at Facebook.
Behind all the attacks, Musk has great admiration for Apple’s original founder, Steve Jobs. Musk has even begun working with Steve Jobs’ biographer, Walter Isaacson, on his own official biography.
A one-way war of words
Musk’s latest spate of Apple insults began last week. This week, Musk claimed in a tweet that Apple had mostly stopped advertising on the Twitter platform.
He tried to provoke Apple CEO Tim Cook into a public discussion about the reduction in advertising on Twitter, asking him if Apple hates “free speech in America” and “what’s going on here.” Cook did not respond.
Apple is not alone in reducing its campaigns on the social media platform since Musk took over.
After Musk closed a leveraged buyout deal on Oct. 28 and appointed himself CEO, a spike of anti-Black racist and antisemitic hate speech flooded the platform, partly because of raids that were coordinated by users on online chat platform 4chan.
Musk also began making steep cuts to Twitter’s workforce, gutting sales teams, teams responsible for measuring Twitter performance metrics and content moderation teams, among others.
Twitter has been losing advertisers and ad revenue ever since, with civil rights groups and previous advertisers on the platform pressuring Musk to prove that his much smaller team can responsibly manage content moderation, ad campaigns, cybersecurity and more.
Whether accurate or not, Musk’s allegation that Apple has “threatened to withhold” Twitter from its App Store may resonate with other developers.
Apple is notorious for providing few details when notifying app makers that their apps are at risk of suffering delayed updates or removal from the App Store. Responses inside Apple’s App Store Connect platform are terse, usually citing a rule, but not elaborating on what specifically an app maker should do to fix the problem — for example, Apple might say the app has a “metadata problem” or uses a banned application programming interface.
Musk also chafes under Apple’s platform fees, which are between 15% and 30% of total digital sales, like the $8 Twitter Blue subscription that Musk has said could be a major product for the company. Musk said it was a “de facto global tax” on the internet before he took over Twitter, but in his new role as an app owner, he has attacked it with increasing vigor.
This week, he tweeted and deleted a meme that suggested he would rather “go to war” than pay 30% to Apple.
Apple earlier this week declined to comment on the alleged threat of suspension or Apple’s ad spend with Twitter.
A long history of competition
Tesla and Apple are neighbors in the San Francisco Bay Area, which means that they have competed for talent for more than a decade. Now that competition has extended into Texas.
Both companies need mechanical engineers, industrial designers, materials science and battery experts, and skilled software engineers.
Apple has also invested heavily in developing its own electric autonomous vehicle technology. If the so-called “Apple Car” ever came to market, Tesla and Apple would be direct competitors.
In that context, early examples of Musk tweaking Apple could be seen as friendly rivalry.
When Tesla was still an underdog and upstart, Musk used to call Apple the “Tesla graveyard,” according to multiple former Tesla employees who spoke with CNBC. Internally, he would encourage unhappy Tesla workers to go apply for a cushy job at Apple.
He eventually brought this up in a public interview, saying that Apple hired people who were fired from Tesla.
In 2018, dozens of former Tesla employees landed at Apple, including some who were laid off and others who simply jumped ship from Tesla. At that time, the EV maker’s North American PR team told CNBC, “Tesla is the hard path. We have 100 times less money than Apple, so of course they can afford to pay more.”
Last summer, Musk laid out some of his problems with the way Apple does business on a Tesla earnings call, although he was careful not to name the company at first.
He started by criticizing the amount of cobalt, a mineral linked to human rights abuses, which Apple uses to make batteries in its devices. In 2018, Musk pledged to eliminate Tesla’s use of cobalt in its production entirely. Tesla has shifted a significant portion of its vehicles to a type of battery called an LFP, or lithium iron phosphate battery. However, it has not managed to eliminate need of cobalt completely yet.
In its most recent Impact Report, Tesla wrote, “we expect our absolute cobalt demand to increase over the coming years because our vehicle and cell production growth rate is forecasted to outpace the overall rate of cobalt reduction on a per cell basis.”
On the charging front, Tesla is experimenting with ways to give other EV drivers access to its network. But the company hasn’t opened up charging on a mainstream basis yet.
Later in the earnings call, Musk criticized Apple’s “walled garden” business model when answering a question about when Tesla chargers might be able to charge other vehicle makes.
“I think we do want to emphasize that our goal is to support the advent of sustainable energy,” Musk said. “It is not to create a walled garden and use that to bludgeon our competitors, which is used by some companies.”
In case anybody missed the reference to Apple’s App Store, which Apple maintains as the exclusive way to distribute apps to its devices, Musk then faked a cough and said, “Apple.”
Musk also has used Apple’s name to generate buzz. In September, when Apple announcedsatellite connectivity in its new iPhone 14 models (with satellites being operated by GlobalStar) Musk suggested that Apple had looked into using Starlink, which uses different technology.
“We’ve had some promising conversations with Apple about Starlink connectivity,” Musk tweeted, complimenting the iPhone team. Apple has never acknowledged any negotiations or even discussion with SpaceX.
Cook and Musk
Have Apple CEO Tim Cook and Musk ever spoken in depth?
According to Cook, the answer is no.
The Apple chief said in a 2021 podcast that he has “great admiration and respect” for Tesla, but that he had never spoken with Elon Musk. The two were photographed feet apart with other business leaders at a 2016 meeting with former President Donald Trump at Trump Tower.
But Musk claims that Apple declined his proposal to acquire Tesla years ago, when the EV maker’s market cap stood at a fraction of its current value.
“During the darkest days of the Model 3 program, I reached out to Tim Cook to discuss the possibility of Apple acquiring Tesla (for 1/10 of our current value). He refused to take the meeting,” Musk tweeted in 2020.
Another version of the story comes from “Power Play: Tesla, Elon Musk, and the Bet of the Century,” a book by business journalist Tim Higgins.
Around 2016, according to the book, Musk and Cook spoke about Apple potentially acquiring Tesla. It was struggling with high costs and issues shipping its Model 3 car at the time. Apple, with its expertise in manufacturing and large amounts of cash, would have been a perfect acquirer.
Except, in Higgins’ telling, Musk had one condition: He wanted to become CEO of the combined Apple-Tesla.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella speaks at the Axel Springer building in Berlin on Oct. 17, 2023. He received the annual Axel Springer Award.
Ben Kriemann | Getty Images
Among the thousands of Microsoft employees who lost their jobs in the cutbacks announced this week were 830 staffers in the company’s home state of Washington.
Nearly a dozen game design workers in the state were part of the layoffs, along with three audio designers, two mechanical engineers, one optical engineer and one lab technician, according to a document Microsoft submitted to Washington employment officials.
There were also five individual contributors and one manager at the Microsoft Research division in the cuts, as well as 10 lawyers and six hardware engineers, the document shows.
Microsoft announced plans on Wednesday to eliminate 9,000 jobs, as part of an effort to eliminate redundancy and to encourage employees to focus on more meaningful work by adopting new technologies, a person familiar with the matter told CNBC. The person asked not to be named while discussing private matters.
Scores of Microsoft salespeople and video game developers have since come forward on social media to announce their departure. In April, Microsoft said revenue from Xbox content and services grew 8%, trailing overall growth of 13%.
In sales, the company parted ways with 16 customer success account management staff members based in Washington, 28 in sales strategy enablement and another five in sales compensation. One Washington-based government affairs worker was also laid off.
Microsoft eliminated 17 jobs in cloud solution architecture in the state, according to the document. The company’s fastest revenue growth comes from Azure and other cloud services that customers buy based on usage.
CEO Satya Nadella has not publicly commented on the layoffs, and Microsoft didn’t immediately provide a comment about the cuts in Washington. On a conference call with analysts in April, Microsoft CFO Amy Hood said the company had a “focus on cost efficiencies” during the March quarter.
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang in Taipei, Taiwan, on June 2, 2024.
Ann Wang | Reuters
Nvidia’s Blackwell Ultra chips, the company’s next-generation graphics processor for artificial intelligence, have been commercially deployed at CoreWeave, the companies announced on Thursday.
CoreWeave has received shipments of Dell-built shipments based around Nvidia’s GB300 NVL72 AI systems, Dell said on Thursday. It’s the first cloud provider to install systems based around Blackwell Ultra.
The Blackwell Ultra is Nvidia’s latest chip, expected to ship in volume during the rest of the year. The systems that CoreWeave is installing are liquid-cooled and include 72 Blackwell Ultra GPUs and 36 Nvidia Grace CPUs. The systems are assembled and tested in the U.S., Dell said.
CoreWeave shares rose 6% during trading on Thursday, Dell shares were up about 2% and Nvidia rose less than 2%.
The announcement is a milestone for Nvidia.
Read more CNBC tech news
AI developers still clamor for the latest Nvidia chips, which have improvements that make them better for training and deploying models.
Nvidia said Blackwell Ultra can produce 50 times more AI content than its predecessor, Blackwell.
Investors closely watch how Nvidia manages the transition when it announces new AI chips to see if there are production issues or delays. Nvidia CFO Colette Kress said in May that Blackwell Ultra shipments would start in the current quarter.
It’s also a win for CoreWeave, a cloud provider that rents access to Nvidia GPUs to other clouds and AI developers. Although CoreWeave is smaller than the cloud services operated by Amazon, Google, and Microsoft, its ability to offer Nvidia’s latest chips first give it a way to differentiate itself.
CoreWeave historically has a close relationship with Nvidia, which owns a stake in the cloud provider. CoreWeave went public earlier this year, and the stock price has quadrupled since its IPO.
Jeremy Allaire, CEO and co-founder of Circle Internet Group, the issuer of one of the world’s biggest stablecoins, and Circle Internet Group co-founder Sean Neville react as they ring the opening bell, on the day of the company’s IPO, in New York City, U.S., June 5, 2025.
NYSE
For over three years, venture capital firms have been waiting for this moment.
Tech IPOs came to a virtual standstill in early 2022 due to soaring inflation and rising interest rates, while big acquisitions were mostly off the table as increased regulatory scrutiny in the U.S. and Europe turned away potential buyers.
Though it’s too soon to say those days are entirely in the past, the first half of 2025 showed signs of momentum, with June in particular producing much-needed returns for Silicon Valley’s startup financiers. In all, there were five tech IPOs last month, accelerating from a monthly average of two since January, according to data from CB Insights.
Highlighting that group was crypto company Circle, which more than doubled in its New York Stock Exchange debut on June 5, and is now up sixfold from its IPO price for a market cap of $42 billion. The stock got a big boost in mid-June after the Senate passed the GENIUS Act, which would establish a federal framework for U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoins.
Venture firms General Catalyst, Breyer Capital and Accel now own a combined $8 billion worth of Circle stock even after selling a fraction of their holdings in the offering. Silicon Valley stalwarts Greylock, Kleiner Perkins and Sequoia Capital are set to soon profit from Figma’s IPO, after the design software vendor filed its public prospectus on Tuesday. Since its $20 billion acquisition agreement with Adobe was scrapped in late 2023, Figma has been one of the most hotly anticipated IPOs in startup land.
It’s “refreshing and something that we’ve been waiting for for a long time,” said Eric Hippeau, managing partner at early-stage venture firm Lerer Hippeau, regarding the exit environment. “I’m not sure that we are confident that this can be a sustained trend yet, but it’s been very encouraging.”
Another positive sign for the industry the past couple months was the performance of artificial infrastructure provider CoreWeave, which went public in late March. The stock was relatively stagnant for its first month on the market but shot up 170% in May and another 47% in June.
For venture firms, long considered the lifeblood of risky tech startups, IPOs are essential in order to generate profits for the university endowments, foundations and pension funds that allocate a portion of their capital to the asset class. Without handsome returns, there’s little incentive for limited partners to put money into future funds.
After a record year in 2021, which saw 155 U.S. venture-backed IPOs raise $60.4 billion, according to data from University of Florida finance professor Jay Ritter, every year since has been relatively dismal. There were 13 such offerings in 2022, followed by 18 in 2023 and 30 last year, collectively raising $13.3 billion, Ritter’s data shows.
The slowdown followed the Federal Reserve’s aggressive rate-hiking campaign in 2022, meant to slow crippling inflation. As the lower-growth environment extended into years two and three, venture firms faced increasing pressure to return cash to investors.
‘Backlog of liquidity’
In its 2024 yearbook, the National Venture Capital Association said that even with a 34% increase in U.S. VC exit value last year to $98 billion, that number is 87% below the 2021 peak and less than half the average for the four years from 2017 through 2020. It’s a troubling dynamic for the 58,000 venture-backed companies that have raised a total of $947 billion from investors, according to the annual report, which is produced by the NVCA and PitchBook.
“This backlog of liquidity drought risks creating a ‘zombie company’ cohort — businesses generating operational cash flow but lacking credible exit prospects,” the report said.
Other than Circle, the latest crop of IPOs mostly consists of smaller and lesser-known brands. Health-tech companies Hinge Health and Omada Health are valued at about $3.5 billion and $1 billion, respectively. Etoro, an online trading platform, has a market cap of just over $5 billion. Online banking provider Chime Financial has a higher profile due largely to a years-long marketing blitz and is valued at close to $11.5 billion.
Meanwhile, the highest valued private companies like SpaceX, Stripe and Databricks remain on the sidelines, and AI highfliers OpenAI and Anthropic continue to raise massive amounts of cash with no intention of going public anytime soon.
Still, venture capitalists told CNBC that there are plenty of companies with the financial metrics to be public, and that more of them are readying for the process.
“The IPO market is starting to open and the VC world is cautiously optimistic,” said Rick Heitzmann, a partner at venture firm FirstMark in New York. “We are preparing companies for the next wave of public offerings.”
There are other ways to make money in the meantime. Secondary sales, a process that involves selling private shares to new investors, are on the rise, allowing early employees and investors to get some liquidity.
And then there’s what Mark Zuckerberg is doing, as he tries to position his company at the center of AI innovation and development.
Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive officer of Meta Platforms Inc., during the Meta Connect event on Wednesday, Sept. 25, 2024.
Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Last month, Meta announced a $14 billion bet on Scale AI, taking a 49% stake in the AI startup in exchange for poaching founder Alexandr Wang and a small group of his top engineers. The deal effectively bought out half of the stock owned by investors, leaving them with the opportunity to make money on the rest of their holdings, should a future acquisition or IPO take place.
The deal is a big win for Accel, which led Scale AI’s Series A round in 2017, and is poised to earn more than $2.5 billion in the transaction. Index Ventures led the Series B in 2018, and Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund led the Series C the following year at a valuation of over $1 billion.
Investors now hope the Federal Reserve will move toward a rate-cutting campaign, though the central bank hasn’t committed to one. There’s also ongoing optimism that regulators will make going public less burdensome. Last week, Reuters reported, citing sources familiar with the matter, that U.S. stock exchanges and the SEC have discussed loosening regulations to make IPOs more enticing.
Mike Bellin, who heads consulting firm PwC’s U.S. IPO practice, said he anticipates a diversity of IPOs across sectors in the second half of the year. According to data from PwC, pharma and fintech were among the most active sectors for deals through the end of May.
While the recent trend in IPO activity is an encouraging sign for investors, potential roadblocks remain.
Tariffs and geopolitical uncertainty delayed IPO plans from companies including Klarna and StubHub in April. Neither has provided an update on when they plan to debut.
FirstMark’s Heitzmann said the path forward is “not at all clear,” adding that he wants to see a strong quarter of economic stability and growth before confidently saying that the market is wide open.
Additionally, other than CoreWeave and Circle, recent tech IPOs haven’t had big pops. Hinge Health, Chime and eToro have seen relatively modest gains from their offer price, while Omada Health is down.
But virtually any activity beats what VCs were experiencing the last few years. Overall, Hippeau said recent IPO trends are generally encouraging.
“There’s starting to be kind of light at the end of the tunnel,” Hippeau said.