They are likely including xAI and the massive training costs that entails in order to make it sound like all their ventures are losing money.

Cockroaches everywhere: starlink revenue won't be enough to fund constellation sustainment. Refurbishment costs for Falcon 9 make the reusability economics dubious. And xAI is just a disaster. So is Twitter.

In fact lumping xAI in that to cause a loss likely provides some tax benefits vs putting it with Twitter/X itself

I mean, either a company is profitable or it is not. You don't get to say "if you ignore the massive pile of burning money in our parking lot, we are profitable". Or, well, I suppose you can _say_ that (see WeWork), but you can't expect analysts to be too impressed with it.

The S-1 will be interesting; I wonder if they'll try going with a bulllshit metric like WeWork did ("Community Adjusted EBITDA", which was, seemingly, pretty much "profit, if you exclude basically all costs").