Tesla’s bold bet on the Cybertruck has produced one of the most jarring reversals in recent automotive history: a multibillion dollar battery supply agreement that has been revised down to a figure that barely registers on a corporate balance sheet. A contract once valued at 3.83-trillion won, or $2.67-billion, is now effectively worth just $6,776, turning what was supposed to be a cornerstone of Tesla’s next growth chapter into a cautionary tale about overpromising and underdelivering. The collapse of that deal is rippling through suppliers, investors, and the broader electric vehicle narrative that Elon Musk spent years constructing.
From $2.67 billion dream to $6,776 reality
The original Cybertruck battery agreement was designed as a long term pipeline of revenue and scale, locking in a 3.83-trillion won, or $2.67-billion, commitment for advanced cell materials tied directly to Tesla’s futuristic pickup. On paper, that kind of volume signaled confidence that the Cybertruck would not just launch, but become a sustained hit that justified a massive dedicated supply chain. Instead, tepid demand and production challenges left the truck far short of those expectations, and the contract has now been revised down to a token $6,776, a figure that underscores how little material Tesla is currently willing to guarantee.
The scale of that collapse is not just a rounding error, it is a near total erasure of projected business that had been booked and planned for years in advance. The supplier had oriented its investment strategy around the $2.67 promise, only to see the Cybertruck’s underperformance force a renegotiation that stripped away virtually all of the value. For Tesla, the revision exposes how far reality has diverged from the early Cybertruck narrative, while for the partner it turns a flagship contract into a painful write down that will take years to digest.
The South Korean supplier left holding the bag
Behind the abstract numbers sits a specific company in South Korea that built capacity, hired workers, and raised capital on the assumption that Tesla’s order book would materialize. L&F Co., a battery materials specialist, publicly disclosed that its 3.83-trillion won arrangement with Tesla had been gutted, confirming that the $2.67-billion pipeline it once touted had shrunk to almost nothing. The firm had been a key part of Tesla’s push to secure cathode materials for its next generation cells, and the sudden reversal has forced it to confront the risk of relying so heavily on a single high profile customer.
The damage is not limited to lost future revenue. L&F Co. must now reassess the value of facilities and equipment that were justified by the original contract, and investors are recalibrating their expectations for growth in the wake of the Cybertruck’s flop. The episode highlights how a glamorous partnership with a global EV leader can quickly turn into a liability when product plans change, as the South Korean supplier’s experience with the Cybertruck flop has now made painfully clear.
How a flagship Cybertruck deal shrank to almost zero
The contract’s descent from billions to a few thousand dollars did not happen overnight, but the final revision is stark enough to feel like a cliff. Tesla and its partner had structured the agreement around expected Cybertruck volumes that never arrived, leaving warehouses and production lines underutilized as unsold trucks sat in lots instead of rolling out to customers. As it became clear that the original projections were unrealistic, the two sides renegotiated the terms, ultimately slashing the Cybertruck Battery Supplier Contract Slashed value to Almost nothing and effectively acknowledging that the original business case had evaporated.
For the supplier, the write down is a public admission that the anticipated flow of orders will not materialize at anything like the promised scale. For Tesla, the move trims a long term obligation that no longer matches its actual needs, but it also signals to the market that its once hyped pickup is not delivering the kind of sustained demand that would justify a 3.83-trillion won pipeline. The revised agreement, described as being cut to almost zero, shows how quickly a marquee deal can be unwound when a product fails to live up to its billing, as detailed in coverage of the Cybertruck Battery Supplier Contract Slashed to Almost nothing.
Cybertruck’s stumble and the 4680 “holy grail” problem
The Cybertruck was supposed to be the showcase for Tesla’s 4680 cell, a format that executives had framed as a breakthrough capable of cutting costs and enabling new vehicle designs. For years, Tesla promoted the 4680 as the key to unlocking a $25,000 electric car and making EVs truly mainstream, a narrative that raised expectations for both the Cybertruck and the broader lineup. Instead, the truck’s slow ramp and quality concerns have exposed how difficult it has been to scale the new cell, leaving the company with a technology that is still more promise than reality.
As the 4680 supply chain has come under strain, partners have begun to reassess their own commitments, with at least one major player writing down its deal and signaling that the economics no longer add up. The collapse of that supply chain has raised questions about whether Tesla can deliver on its long stated goal of a mass market $25,000 model, given that the same cell was supposed to underpin that affordable car as well as the Cybertruck. Reporting on how Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses underscores that the Cybertruck’s troubles are intertwined with deeper technical and manufacturing challenges.
Elon Musk’s $25,000 EV promise collides with reality
Elon Musk has spent years telling investors and customers that Tesla would build a $25,000 electric car, a price point that would dramatically expand the company’s addressable market. That vision depended heavily on cheaper, higher density cells like the 4680, along with streamlined manufacturing that could bring costs down without sacrificing margins. The Cybertruck and its dedicated battery deal were part of that broader strategy, a way to prove out the technology at scale before applying it to a smaller, more affordable vehicle.
The near total collapse of the Cybertruck battery contract, however, suggests that the underlying assumptions about cost, volume, and demand were far too optimistic. If Tesla cannot reliably scale the 4680 for a high priced halo product, it becomes even harder to imagine it underpinning a truly affordable $25,000 car in the near term. Analysts now see the revised contract, which has lost roughly 99 percent of its value, as a tangible sign that Musk’s timeline for a mass market EV is slipping, a concern echoed in coverage of how Elon Musk promised for years that Tesla would deliver a $25,000 car.
Wall Street reads another red flag for TSLA
Investors have been forced to reassess Tesla’s growth story as the Cybertruck’s missteps pile up, and the battery contract revision has become a fresh data point in that reevaluation. The company’s stock, traded under the ticker TSLA, has already been under pressure from intensifying competition and questions about demand for its aging lineup. News that a South Korean partner has effectively written off a multibillion dollar Cybertruck related deal adds to the perception that Tesla’s once unassailable momentum is fading.
Market commentators now describe the Cybertruck as a drag rather than a catalyst, with the contract collapse framed as another red flag for Tesla heading into the next year. The fact that a South Korean supplier felt compelled to disclose such a dramatic downgrade has sharpened concerns about how many other quiet adjustments might be happening behind the scenes. Coverage of how Tesla’s (TSLA) troubles with the Cybertruck are weighing on sentiment captures the mood among shareholders who once assumed that every new product would be a runaway success.
Why the 4680 setback hits more than just the Cybertruck
The 4680 cell was never meant to be a niche technology confined to a single model, it was pitched as the backbone of Tesla’s future lineup. That is why the Cybertruck’s struggles and the associated contract collapse resonate far beyond one vehicle program. The same cell architecture is used primarily in the Cybertruck but was also expected to support other products, including the long discussed affordable car that would target a relatively inexpensive $25,000 price point.
As doubts grow about the viability of the 4680 at scale, the implications extend to Tesla’s entire product roadmap. If the company has to fall back on older cell formats or more expensive supply arrangements, the economics of its planned models become harder to justify, especially in a market where rivals are cutting prices. Analysts have noted that the 4680 is also used in other applications, and that its underperformance is not helping matters for Tesla’s broader ambitions, a point underscored in analysis of why Tesla stock dipped as concerns about the 4680 and the $25,000 car mounted.
Inside the $6,776 Cybertruck Battery Deal Is Now Worth Just
The revised Cybertruck Battery Deal Is Now Worth Just $6,776, a figure so small relative to the original $2.67 commitment that it reads almost like a rounding error. Yet that number is now the official value attached to what was once a headline grabbing partnership, and it reflects the minimal volume of materials Tesla is currently prepared to lock in. The contract’s new terms effectively acknowledge that the Cybertruck is not consuming anywhere near the battery capacity that had been forecast when the deal was first signed.
For observers, the $6,776 figure has become a shorthand for the gap between Tesla’s rhetoric and its execution on the Cybertruck. It encapsulates how a program that was supposed to redefine the pickup segment has instead forced suppliers to tear up their spreadsheets and start over. Detailed breakdowns of how Tesla’s $2.67B Cybertruck Battery Deal Is Now Worth Just $6,776 have turned the contract into a symbol of the risks that come with betting too heavily on a single, unproven product.
What the contract collapse signals for Tesla’s next chapter
The implosion of the Cybertruck battery agreement is more than an embarrassing footnote, it is a stress test of Tesla’s ability to manage complex supply chains while pushing the boundaries of design and technology. The company has long prided itself on vertical integration and aggressive scaling, but the 3.83-trillion won contract shows what happens when those ambitions collide with the realities of manufacturing and market demand. Suppliers that once saw Tesla as a guaranteed growth engine are now weighing concentration risk more carefully, and some may demand stricter protections before committing to similar deals.
For Tesla, the path forward will likely involve a mix of recalibrated expectations and renewed efforts to stabilize its battery strategy, whether through alternative chemistries, different partners, or a slower rollout of the 4680 across its lineup. The Cybertruck’s underperformance and the $6,776 contract revision have punctured the aura of inevitability that once surrounded every new Tesla launch, forcing investors and partners to scrutinize the company’s projections with more skepticism. How Tesla responds to this moment, and whether it can still deliver on the long promised $25,000 car, will determine whether the Cybertruck saga is remembered as a temporary stumble or the start of a more fundamental shift in the company’s trajectory.
More from Wilder Media Group: