> SpaceX's valuation only makes sense if

It’s funny, I hear the exact same phrasing used when justifying Tesla’s valuation. “It only makes sense if…” … if you ignore what the actual, physical business does today, and picture it doing something entirely different, beyond its current capabilities (robotaxis, androids, etc)

The difference with this pie-in-the-sky ambition (Mars Colony) is that I don’t even understand how it would be profitable if achieved. What do you get from a Mars colony? What on earth (no pun intended) could you extract from it that would command that amount of value? This isn’t like colonization of the americas, where there was a trove of readily available natural resources to extract and sell back to the mainland markets - nothing is going to get shipped back from Mars any time soon. A Mars colony could only be supported through significant public investment - so is the valuation justified via the expectation that SpaceX will be the primary vehicle for public investment in Mars exploration, or through the centuries-long payback period of founding a self-sustaining civilization? Or both?

▲

khriss 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Uh, how exactly would SpaceX make money from a Mars colony?

▲

tristanj 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

My belief is that Mars will be colonized for ideological reasons, not for profit. A Mars colony won't be profitable. But it will be colonized, mostly for prestige, and also because of overcrowding & pollution, which will become bigger issues in the coming decades.

▲

jaccola 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

But why? We’ve not colonised either of the poles of our own planet in any real way out of a sense of prestige. Heck there’s huge areas in Canada and Russia uninhabited and these are all a dream to live in compared to Mars.

Turns out the real overpopulation is in places people want to live.

	▲	tristanj 38 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Because I don't believe our species should be trapped this planet forever. If we don't become multiplanetary now, then when? And there is an incredibly short window for us to become multiplanetary. We currently live in a golden era of abundance that will not last, and we must make the most of this time period. I think most people don't realize how inherently unstable our society is, and how quickly civilization can devolve. Nuclear war is a huge issue. We've had three conflicts this decade that could have led to a nuclear war. All of which are still unresolved.
	▲	tehlike 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Redundancy is the answer.

▲

consp 33 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The ecological cost of moving the amount of people to even put a tiny dent in the earth's population would kill more and adjust the number that way than the actual moving would.

▲

HerbManic 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I say it will not be colonized based on problems of cosmic radiation, not because of lack of ambition or funds.

▲

kraf 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

But why did you invest on those grounds? Is profit not your goal here?