SpaceX is valued at that revenue multiple because of its expected revenue growth rate.

This deal is part of that revenue growth. So the new revenue would be already partially or even fully priced-in.

Perhaps it reduces uncertainty around the growth rate, but expectations were already sky-high, as shown by the multiple!

▲

matthewdgreen 28 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

SpaceX's S-1 says they're going to make more than $320bn by 2030 at a 74% expected profit margin. That implies they're going to succeed at selling high-value AI services, not compute, which is a competive business with typical profit margins at or below 30%.

▲

TheOtherHobbes 27 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A cynic might wonder given Musk's implausible trajectory and questionable associations whether the X project is primarily a grift and/or money laundering project that happens to do high-profile tech, and the primary aim is to pump the stock and hope some other opportunity to pump it further arrives in the future.

Otherwise a dump works too. There's plenty of money to be made from carefully timed shorting.

The entire AI field has been plagued by circular financing deals, so this is not new. But it's new in aerospace, and the market institutions appear complicit.

Otherwise, why is this IPO getting such unique treatment on such flimsy fundamentals?

▲

zdragnar 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

As an ignoramus to these things.... there are only just so many Googles though. Having made a significant jump, are they really expected to continue that growth?

▲

benl 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The bet is that demand for AI tokens will continue to grow exponentially. And that SpaceX will be able to deploy and rent out GPUs to serve those tokens faster than anyone else.

The wrinkle is that they are planning to deploy those GPUs in space. That’s what people are most skeptical about, I think!

▲

Alive-in-2025 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Space data centers need years of time to design, build, and deploy, 5-10 at least, and that's after they solve their multiple very difficult or impossible problems. How will they cool them? There are just simple ideas like giant structures to radiate the heat away, but you say you need to put lots of mass in orbit?

Like fsd, will take decades to figure things out.

	▲	benl an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Well yes it will be hard, and hence maybe not economical, and that’s why many people are skeptical of the business case (myself included btw). But satellite cooling already exists (Starlink v2 satellites dissipate heat at over a kilowatt I believe), so that’s why other people find it plausible.
	▲	XorNot an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		They also need Starship at minimum, which is now a 10+ year old project still exploding regularly. Starship is at minimum a 2030 project at this point. And even producing the volume of chips needed for the type of growth space data centers would need to have to justify this would be another decade if construction started now on those fabs.

▲

wrsh07 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Google and friends continue to see increased demand for their wares. The bet is probably that SpaceX is one of the best-placed companies to deliver incremental compute. They've shown they can build data centers fast.