SpaceX files to go public • Hacker News Board

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#281

Post by BurningFrog » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 2:25 AM UTC

afavour wrote: post #217

xenadu02 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have to temper the skepticism a bit though. SpaceX has dramatically lowered the cost of launching things into space. They are still the leader here. They can put a kg into orbit cheaper than anyone, even heavily subsidized state operations (EU and China). Their order book continues to be full. Every single launch vehicle they roll off the line was pre-sold years ago, including its re-use flights. I agree…

> Their order book continues to be full. In 2024 66% of their launches were for Starlink. So it’s not quite correct to suggest there’s a vibrant external market for their product, a lot of it is sort of self dealing.

Starlink is incredibly profitable though.

It's not like they're subsidizing some experimental internal project. Starlink is the majority of their profits and growing fast.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#282

Post by tristanj » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 2:28 AM UTC

7e wrote: post #264

tristanj wrote: post #225

I'm a SpaceX investor, and from reading the comments here, I think most people here are missing why SpaceX has an outrageously high valuation. SpaceX's valuation only makes sense if you buy into their mission of creating a civilization on Mars, and that the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation is the vehicle that creates this future. If SpaceX achieves this, it would be the most valuable company ever created. I…

A civilization on Mars would not create value. It would be a money incinerator. Mars is a shithole with nothing to offer humanity economically or in quality of life. Quite the opposite, in fact.

250 years ago, you could make this exact argument about the British colonization of Australia, and it would be entirely correct. The early colony was a pure fiscal drain on Britain with almost no return.

Yet today it's the 13th largest economy on earth.

Think on a longer time scale.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#283

Post by plaidfuji » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 2:28 AM UTC

tristanj wrote: post #225

I'm a SpaceX investor, and from reading the comments here, I think most people here are missing why SpaceX has an outrageously high valuation. SpaceX's valuation only makes sense if you buy into their mission of creating a civilization on Mars, and that the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation is the vehicle that creates this future. If SpaceX achieves this, it would be the most valuable company ever created. I…

> 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?

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#284

Post by hattmall » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 2:29 AM UTC

triceratops wrote: post #268

tristanj wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not meant to replace terrestrial networks, it's a space-based alternative that serves areas carriers have no financial incentive to cover. Terrestrial cellular towers cost between $150k to $500k per tower, and are not economically feasible in less populated areas. There are also many dead-zones in mountainous regions, since cell signals are blocked by mountains. Starlink Mobile supplements this, it's simply chea…

> it's a space-based alternative that serves areas carriers have no financial incentive to cover In a nutshell: they're serving a market that has less money to spend using more expensive tech than the current industry leaders. Maybe I'm wrong but it doesn't scream "massive profit".

I think Airplanes are going to be pretty profitable. They are sort of running a market cornering operation there. But, there will be competition eventually. Starlink is way faster than the alternatives so most airlines have switched and Starlink has rapidly increased their prices for aviation. Idk if it's enough though, they are definitely running lots of promos for home customers.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#285

Post by Xunjin » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 2:29 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #157

projektfu wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$16B is the top line gross revenue number. You don't count R&D as an expense per GAAP, so... They have claimed $8B in EBITDA, also leaving out the amortization of R&D costs. Those aren't audited numbers, as far as I know.

[flagged]

Care to share more about?

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#286

Post by hattmall » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 2:31 AM UTC

pnw wrote: post #188

panick21_ wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great, but the overwhelming majority of money is made from the place people actually live. Those places are called cities. Only about a few % of earth are built on, and even among those the top 1% is where most people live. Don't get me wrong, that fucking great business, but its not 'replacing terrestrial ISP' level great.

They said the same thing about cell phones vs landlines back in the day. Based on Starlink's revenue doubling year on year, and a six fold increase since 2022, I don't think anyone really knows what the upper bounds for global access is yet. And traditional telcos are usually limited to a region whereas Starlink is global. Just the top 20 global telcos alone are almost $2 trillion in market cap and $1.35 trillion in…

>They said the same thing about cell phones vs landlines

Did they? I don't really remember that tbh.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#287

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 2:34 AM UTC

lokar wrote: post #171

dmoy wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it really about the index though, if the index fund doesn't track that public index? If the index fund is tracking some proxy that is float weighted, isn't that what matters? At least when it comes to people's money.

Index funds track an index, thus the name

[deleted]

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#288

Post by hattmall » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 2:34 AM UTC

pilgrim0 wrote: post #218

> Money raised from a public offering would most likely help SpaceX finance its long-term goals of launching artificial intelligence data centers into orbit, creating a colony on the moon and getting humans to Mars. These are expensive and unproven endeavors that may take years and billions of dollars to achieve. Oh my god. When a journalist writes like any of this is remotely plausible within “years” and “billions”…

What possible reasonable benefit would there be to datacenters in space? Why would that even be a concept at all?

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#289

Post by tombert » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 2:34 AM UTC

tristanj wrote: post #278

fwip wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And having a colony on Mars will be profitable because of...?

Was the British colonization and funding of Canada, New Zealand, and Australia profitable? All three colonies were not profitable for decades after their formation. Yet looking back, colonialism was probably the most profitable venture ever undertaken. All three of them ended up becoming key allies and instrumental trading partners. Think on a longer time scale.

I'm pretty sure that Britain actually had pretty specific goals of profitability from the get-go.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#290

Post by newguytony » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 2:40 AM UTC

tristanj wrote: post #206

panick21_ wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if you make the argument that it will replace terrestrial networks and that's why its worth X trillion $ then yes, you do actually need to cover the 1% of earth surface where the waste majority of people actually spend most of their time. The question is not if its a good business, the question if its a 2 trillion $ business, and if you only cover the 95% of earth without coverage. That more like a couple 100 bi…

I never said it would replace terrestrial networks... you invented that claim yourself and are responding to a strawman. Starlink mobile is for rural areas, and the other 90% of the planet that's not well served by traditional terrestrial networks. And 40% of earth's population live in rural areas, so there is a large market for this kind of service.

In regions like Nigeria or the Philippines, Starlink costs over 100% of the average monthly income. The individual addressable rural market really is closer to 1% than 40%.