Musk's Boring Company Is Even Dumber Than You Think

Overview

The video argues that Elon Musk’s The Boring Company is far less competent—and far less innovative—than its hype suggests, and that its recent large funding announcement is likely another speculative attempt rather than a real solution to urban transportation.

Origins: hype vs. early results

• Founding and promise (2017): The Boring Company was founded with the stated goal of revolutionizing urban transit through underground tunnel networks.
• Early marketing attention (2018): The video highlights the 2018 “flamethrower” marketing push.
• Tunnel showcase mismatch (2021): The video claims the first showcased tunnel did not live up to the earlier CGI vision.
• Limited public progress (2012–2025): The narrator suggests Musk may have “moved on” due to what they see as little verifiable advancement.
• Reversal with funding reveal (2026): This narrative is framed as being disrupted by a major 2026 funding announcement.

2016–2026: big promises repeatedly outpace delivery

The video recaps Musk’s early pitch, including a CGI concept of tunnels designed for:

• Single-lane, one-car-at-a-time movement
• Cars moved by electric carts
• Potential use for robo-taxi style operations

Why the CGI approach is said to fail in practice

The video argues that the CGI grid concept is engineering- and safety-complex, citing issues such as:

• Soil stress
• Spacing constraints
• Requirements for ramps, ventilation, and emergency exits

The “bricks from excavated soil” claim is portrayed as implausible

The video challenges the idea of offsetting tunnel costs by selling “bricks” made from excavated soil:

• “Bricks” are described as inferior pressed earth blocks compared to fired clay bricks
• Soil is said to be cheap; real costs are portrayed as concentrated in:
  • Labor
  • Equipment
  • Stabilizers
  • Drying
  • Transportation
• The video states there is no evidence that the brick business produced or sold bricks over many years.

Examples of stalled or limited projects

Hawthorne test tunnel (2018)

• Described as a short test tunnel near SpaceX
• Musk’s promotion is presented as a signal of future transit that did not materialize as claimed

Chicago airport tunnel proposal

• Reportedly supported by city government
• Promised quick, self-funded construction
• The video says construction never began

Las Vegas Convention Center Loop (2019–2021)

• $49M contract for 1.7 miles under the convention center
• The video emphasizes:
  • It is not autonomous
  • It does not allow private cars
  • It operates at relatively low speeds (~30–40 mph)
• This is contrasted with earlier claims of:
  • ~125 mph autonomous systems
  • “Elevator-connected” integration with surface travel

The video also argues some later “airport” framing was misleading:

• The “active station” at the airport is portrayed as primarily a ride drop-off
• Tesla employees and surface driving reportedly cover much of the trip
• Any claimed tunnel extensions toward the Strip and the airport are said to have moved very slowly as of 2026

Questioning the “breakthrough” continuous tunneling technology

A significant portion of the video targets Steve Davis’s explanation of The Boring Company’s continuous drilling concept (“Proofrock”).

Continuous drilling is claimed to predate The Boring Company

The video argues continuous drilling is not uniquely invented by The Boring Company:

• It credits Herrenknecht (a German company) with providing continuous dual-shield tunneling systems for years—at least since 2015—including for soft ground
• It distinguishes challenges between:
  • Hard rock drilling
  • Soft soil drilling
• The video suggests The Boring Company’s narrative rests on an overstated understanding of what’s technically difficult and how prior systems work

Performance comparisons are said to be “stacked”

The video claims comparisons are arranged to make The Boring Company look superior:

• It contrasts progress rates:
  • Herrenknecht: ~16 m/day
  • The Boring Company: ~7.5 m/day
• It notes that The Boring Company’s tunnels are smaller in diameter
• The video argues tunneling becomes harder at larger diameters, which further undermines the “genius breakthrough” framing

Funding as validation without substance

The video points to earlier fundraising to show investor confidence—without, in their view, technical proof.

• 2022 funding: The Boring Company raised $675M, led by Sequoia
• Sequoia is cited as calling it a “tipping point”
• The video frames this as driven by Musk’s broader success (Tesla/SpaceX), not by demonstrated superior technology

2026 UAE funding: a repeat pattern

• On September 10, 2026, The Boring Company announced a $3 billion funding round
• The video claims it is led largely by the UAE government
• It argues investment depends on:
  • Starting operations in the UAE
  • Planning 93 miles of tunnels
• The video portrays the UAE as having a bad track record with similar speculative transport schemes

Comparison to Hyperloop

The video draws parallels to Virgin Hyperloop / Hyperloop One:

• UAE-related backing via DP World
• $165M (2016–2019) investment
• Later cessation with no revenue, resulting in a loss

The narrator predicts The Boring Company will likely fail similarly, arguing both ideas share an “Elon Musk-origin” mindset and speculative overreach.

Overall conclusion

The video’s central position is that The Boring Company’s public story—faster, cheaper, transformative tunnels—is repeatedly contradicted by:

• technical realities
• limited/slow deployments
• questionable business plans

It also suggests major funding (including the 2026 UAE round) may reflect optimism rather than demonstrable breakthroughs.

Presenters / contributors

• Elon Musk (referenced throughout)
• Steve Davis — CEO of The Boring Company (interviewed excerpt)
• The video narrator/host (“Wall Street Millennial”)
• Herrenknecht (company referenced)
• Bloomberg (source referenced)
• Wall Street Millennial (channel/host branding)