| ▲ | WarmWash 6 hours ago |
| Yeah, but is SpaceX actually worth $1T or does Elon just think that because of how Tesla investors value Tesla? |
|
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| > is SpaceX actually worth $1T Actually irrelevant to an index calculation. If your index manufacturer is taking this into account at any level, they're actively managing. S&P predates the modern active-versus-passive dichotomy, but it functions within it in practice, and despite being a leader of committee-based indexing philosophy, they've broadly found success by also being champions of passive management. And part of doing that is rejecting judgement over how the market is weighing this or that. |
| |
| ▲ | movedx01 7 minutes ago | parent [-] | | If someone is trying to bend the rules of my passively managed index fund to their will, are they trying to actively manage my passively managed index ETF ? |
|
|
| ▲ | queuebert 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Historically a $1T market cap with a PE of 20.0 would be achievable with a $50B/yr profit. That seems easily achievable eventually for SpaceX, as it has actual hardware and services and IP. |
| |
| ▲ | ncallaway 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Historically a $1T market cap with a PE of 20.0 would be achievable with a $50B/yr profit. That seems easily achievable eventually for SpaceX, as it has actual hardware and services and IP. It seems crazy to me to make a comparison between a company being valued on it's current profit and then to say it's reasonable for another company to have the same market cap because it could eventually have the same profit. | |
| ▲ | SwellJoe 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's years away from $50B/year profit, if it ever gets there. The IPO valuation is insane. | | |
| ▲ | duttish 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Plus they now also have to compensate for the giant money fire called xai and the nazi cuddle huddle X/Twitter. The valuation is insane and the very low float plus short timeframe for actual price discovery just seems built to extract money from index investors. They can follow the same rules as everyone else. |
| |
| ▲ | acdha 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It does have real hardware, but it’s not in wild growth areas. They’re making their most consistent money from Starlink, which is a solid product but has growth limited by competitors from conventional ISPs with far-superior fiber networks, and the space launch business is similarly not the kind of thing where you get Google/Facebook-level growth curves. That’s not a slight, it’s just different industries: advertising companies can grow rapidly because scaling customers is so much easier than launching cargo into orbit. The wildcard there is AI, and that seems especially dangerous to project long-term revenue from their current performance: xAI is barely in the market except renting capacity to Anthropic, so you’re gambling that they’ll continue to pay $1¼B/month for what is largely a commodity offering. Even if you’re bullish on Anthropic, that doesn’t mean xAI gets part of their profits, and given the way they blindsided the local authorities there’s a substantially greater than zero chance that they’ll get a major setback if the neighbors win their lawsuits. That doesn’t mean they’re doomed, but anyone estimating their future performance has to factor in some real risks. | |
| ▲ | Spooky23 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yet, I, a relative peasant financially has been hit by 3 different brokers that I'm eligible to participate in the offering. I would hazard a guess they are not getting the uptake in institutional money they were hoping for. |
|
