What’s going on here?

General Motors (GM) became the latest carmaker to buddy up with Tesla last week.

What does this mean?

Ford announced only a few weeks ago that it was cozying up to Tesla and accessing the OG EV maker’s sprawling charging network. And now GM’s jumping on the electrified bandwagon, signing a similar deal and planning to adapt its cars for Tesla’s chargers. That’s some trio: Ford, GM, and Tesla are the three biggest US players in the space, making up around 70% of the country’s EV sales. Tesla, then, has effectively cemented itself as the industry standard for electric charging, which could convince more carmakers to join the club. So if any petrol heads have been put off by sparse compatible charging spots, this all-star network could be enough to make them see the LED light.

Why should I care?

The bigger picture: Lucky for some.

Tesla will be thanking its pricey decision to deploy fast-charging stations across North America, while rivals left that to third-party companies. See, analysts reckon the Ford and GM deals alone could buoy Tesla’s revenue up $3 billion over the next few years. And while some pundits worry that Tesla’s charging stations could get backed up, the firm can always build more. Just spare a thought for companies that make their bread and butter from charging tech: ChargePoint Holdings and Evgo’s shares dropped after the news.

For markets: Shh, whisper it.

Investing guru Cathie Wood says Tesla’s self-driving and robotaxi tech makes the firm today's biggest AI play. Thing is, that excitement might already be priced into the stock: Tesla’s up 130% this year, and its price-to-earnings ratio – a key valuation metric – is more than seven times higher than the likes of Ford, and even sits around 40% higher than AI darling Nvidia. So sure, Tesla might change the way the world drives, but it’s certainly not your under-the-radar secret trade.

What’s going on here?

The UK government gave oil and gas companies a break – or at least, a chance at one – on Friday.

What does this mean?

The UK government introduced a “windfall tax” for oil and gas companies last year, a bid to cushion the roughly $30 billion it spent subsidizing household bills. After all, war in Europe had sent energy prices skyward – and while everyday folk suffered, energy firms cashed in. Naturally, the big-buck brigade protested the tax, which flew from 40% to 75%, claiming it made investing in the energy industry less appealing and turned banks off funding projects. And scared of job losses and the sector faltering, the UK’s now shaking hands: that tax rate will drop back to 40% if energy prices fall below their long-term average for two straight quarters.

Why should I care?

For markets: Empty promises, empty tanks.

Oil and gas prices are almost back down to their pre-war levels, so you can hardly blame the sector for kicking up a fuss. But it might be kicking for a while: even the government’s own forecasts don’t expect that two-quarter fall to happen anytime soon, so it’s unlikely the tax cut will be triggered before 2028 – and that’s when the windfall tax is due to end anyway. Of course, plushy global demand might end up pulling prices below the cutoff, but if not, the British energy sector may stay running on empty.

The bigger picture: Inside job.

The UK can’t be too ballsy here. The country’s oil and gas production has tumbled 70% over the past two decades, and you can expect another similar drop before 2050. And while that might sound like a win for Mother Nature, it’ll only pan out in practice if there’s enough green energy to plug the gap. Otherwise, the UK will be stuck importing even dirtier fossil fuel from overseas, racking up a carbon footprint big enough to rival Bigfoot.